Forum III: Archive 14 Page 1 Of 5

Ex-Premie.Org

Forum III Archive # 14

From: Jun 23, 1998

To: Jun 30, 1998

Page: 1 Of: 5

Brian -:- New Journeys entry -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:27:05 (EST)
__Katie -:- New Journeys entry -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:49:37 (EST)
____Scott T. -:- New Journeys entry -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 07:48:25 (EST)
____VP -:- New Journeys entry -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 12:10:26 (EST)
______VP -:- One more thing...glass box -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 12:19:28 (EST)
__Judex -:- New Journeys entry -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 01:05:42 (EST)
__Joy -:- New Journeys entry -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 02:03:53 (EST)
____Scott T. -:- Multilingual -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:05:12 (EST)
__Jim -:- Yes, thanks TD -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:50:06 (EST)
__Selena -:- New Journeys entry -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:29:04 (EST)

Judex -:- Friends & shadows -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 20:15:41 (EST)
__seymour -:- Friends & shadows -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:26:05 (EST)
____Judex -:- Friends & shadows -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:31:19 (EST)
______seymour -:- Friends & shadows -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:45:53 (EST)
__Richard -:- Friends & shadows -:- Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 08:08:43 (EST)
__Robyn -:- Friends & shadows -:- Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 13:19:55 (EST)

seymour -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:45:15 (EST)
__Passing thru -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:43:39 (EST)
____red heart -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 01:45:26 (EST)
______Scott T. -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:29:10 (EST)
______Rick -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 10:14:55 (EST)
______seymour -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:28:10 (EST)
__premieJi -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:47:32 (EST)
____Scott T. -:- The 'dialectic' -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 11:27:26 (EST)
____seymour -:- The 'dialectic' -to premieji -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:42:20 (EST)
____Anon -:- Nick seymour Jones -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:13:53 (EST)
______premieJi -:- Nick seymour Jones -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:40:11 (EST)
______jethro -:- Nick seymour Jones -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 03:34:11 (EST)
________Anon -:- Nick seymour Jones -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:28:30 (EST)
__________Joy -:- Nick seymour Jones -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:53:47 (EST)

Scott T. -:- Jim's few thoughts. -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:22:47 (EST)
__Jim -:- Now, Scott, is that fair? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:39:42 (EST)
__Emile -:- Jim's few thoughts. -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:12:37 (EST)
____Scott T. -:- Brainwashed? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:28:29 (EST)
____Rick -:- Jim's few thoughts. -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:50:22 (EST)
______Emile -:- Jim's few thoughts. -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 02:22:09 (EST)
________Rick -:- Jim's few thoughts. -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:46:42 (EST)
__Sir Cheese-Whiz -:- Jim's few thoughts. -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:29:00 (EST)
____Scott T. -:- Is that fair? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:32:52 (EST)

seymour -:- What's it all about, Jim? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:25:48 (EST)
__Katie -:- What's it all about, Jim? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:42:13 (EST)
____Sir David -:- Yawn, yawn, yawn - God! -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:30:19 (EST)
______Scott T. -:- Conquest of the southern cone -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 17:07:36 (EST)
________Sir David -:- Conquest of the southern cone -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:45:16 (EST)
____seymour -:- What's it all about, Jim? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:37:28 (EST)
______Scott T. -:- What's it all about, Jim? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:53:02 (EST)
________Jim -:- Easy to say, Scott -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:05:37 (EST)
______Katie -:- What's it all about? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:07:03 (EST)
______Judex -:- A rose by any other name -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:04:08 (EST)
________Judex -:- 'Rose' post out of sequence -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:08:52 (EST)
__________Katie -:- 'Rose' post out of sequence -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:03:14 (EST)
____________Judex -:- 'Rose' post out of sequence -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:46:17 (EST)
__Jim -:- a few thoughts -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:01:13 (EST)
____G-s mom -:- have a great time... -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:22:56 (EST)
____Rick -:- falls asleep -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:25:33 (EST)
______Jim -:- Don't blame me! -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:30:50 (EST)
________Rick -:- Kudos Jim -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:29:57 (EST)
________VP -:- Maharaji Party -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 13:32:55 (EST)
__________Jim -:- Maharaji Party -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:24:57 (EST)
______Scott T. -:- falls asleep -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:59:20 (EST)
______Shicksabelle -:- Shlub? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:10:22 (EST)
________Rick -:- Shlub? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:54:49 (EST)
__________Shicksabelle -:- Shlub? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 15:02:41 (EST)
____________Rick -:- Shlub? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 15:13:47 (EST)
__________Scott T. -:- Slubs, a goyish question. -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 15:48:45 (EST)
____________Rick -:- Slubs, a goyish question. -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:25:46 (EST)
__________Peter -:- ready for stand-up -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:34:46 (EST)
____________Robyn -:- ready for stand-up -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 09:26:28 (EST)
____seymour -:- a few thoughts -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:38:35 (EST)
____Judex -:- a few thoughts -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:54:28 (EST)
____Mickey the Producer -:- a few thoughts -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:46:57 (EST)
______seymour -:- a few thoughts -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:14:09 (EST)
________Scott T. -:- a few thoughts -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 09:07:15 (EST)
______VP -:- Mickey the Producer-off topic -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 12:48:51 (EST)

premieJi -:- Question to Jean-Michel -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 09:37:14 (EST)
__bftb -:- Question to Jean-Michel -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 17:18:01 (EST)
____Nigel -:- Question to Jean-Michel -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:20:15 (EST)
______premieJi -:- jean-michel=Mr EX? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:38:50 (EST)
________Judex -:- tp premiJi -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:52:33 (EST)
__________Judex -:- tp premiJi /2 -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:56:26 (EST)
__________red heart -:- a rest? you want a rest? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 16:49:27 (EST)
________Brian -:- premieJi = thinker ?? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:49:23 (EST)
__________premieJi -:- premieJi = thinker ?? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:56:05 (EST)
____________Brian -:- premieJi = thinker ?? -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 08:05:36 (EST)
__VP -:- premieji-a minor point -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 17:28:51 (EST)
____VP -:- premieji-and another thing... -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 17:33:09 (EST)
______Jean-Michel -:- Rumors & other things -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:02:18 (EST)
________VP -:- Whoa, was that for me??? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:05:16 (EST)
__________Jean-Michel -:- No!!! not for You -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:17:53 (EST)
____________VP -:- Shoo, I'm glad! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:27:35 (EST)
________Scott T. -:- Rumors & other things -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 20:48:41 (EST)
________premieJi -:- NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:38:06 (EST)
__________Jim -:- NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:46:14 (EST)
____________premieJi -:- NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 03:02:25 (EST)
__________Gail MacDougall -:- NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 16:40:34 (EST)
____________premieJi -:- GAIL, Jean-Michel -:- Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 00:25:28 (EST)
______premieJi -:- JM still Mr EX VP and Jude -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 23:37:09 (EST)
________VP -:- from the mouths of horses, pj -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 00:55:04 (EST)
__________VP -:- I almost forgot... -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:08:43 (EST)
________Jim -:- I love this one -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:21:27 (EST)
__________premieJi -:- I love this one -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 02:58:03 (EST)
____________Jean-Michel -:- Answer to Premieji -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 06:52:33 (EST)
______________premieJi -:- Answer to Premieji -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 10:59:12 (EST)
____________Goofy Jean-Michel -:- Real answer to premieji! -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:25:48 (EST)
______________premieJi -:- Real answer to premieji! -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:04:00 (EST)
________________Jean-Michel -:- Real answer to premieji! -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 12:47:47 (EST)
____________Jim -:- Hey, pj, call me an idiot -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:36:15 (EST)
________Katie -:- Pseudonyms and anonymity -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:30:48 (EST)
__________Becky -:- Entertainment -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:12:57 (EST)
____________Jean-Michel -:- Entertainment & fun! -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 10:24:24 (EST)
__________premieJi -:- Pseudonyms and anonymity -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:09:31 (EST)
____________Jean-Michel -:- No valid excuse premieji! -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:11:42 (EST)
______________premieJi -:- very good excuse, Jean-Michel -:- Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 00:37:29 (EST)

Jean-Michel -:- Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 03:55:53 (EST)
__Anon -:- Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:40:27 (EST)
____Jethro -:- Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 01:41:11 (EST)
______Jethro -:- Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 03:17:20 (EST)
____Jean-Michel -:- Prmies SHOULD read HYP! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 17:28:06 (EST)
__bb -:- Thank you JM -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 23:54:15 (EST)
__Jim -:- Can't wait! -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 19:27:44 (EST)
____Jean-Michel -:- Can't wait!OK -:- Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 04:21:41 (EST)

Carol -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 03:26:11 (EST)
__Judex -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 04:36:53 (EST)
____Katie -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 09:51:30 (EST)
______seymour -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:36:03 (EST)
__Scott T. -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:24:17 (EST)
__Peter -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:33:14 (EST)
__Jim -:- Read THIS thread, Maharaji -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:13:51 (EST)
__Carol -:- Next day! -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 17:10:59 (EST)
____Anon -:- Heartening story -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 20:02:12 (EST)
__Gail -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:32:14 (EST)
____Selena -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:59:19 (EST)
______Robyn -:- True Story/My brother and I -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 19:16:16 (EST)

Peter -:- Boycott Jim -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 02:46:53 (EST)
__Judex -:- Boycott Jim -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 04:46:20 (EST)
____Sir David -:- Boycott Jim -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 06:39:00 (EST)
______Judex -:- Jet picnic -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 08:18:03 (EST)
________Scott T. -:- Jet picnic -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:46:07 (EST)
__________Sir David -:- Jet picnic -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:56:28 (EST)
____________carol -:- Jet picnic -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:33:35 (EST)
______________Sir David -:- Jet picnic -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:25:22 (EST)
______Peter -:- futile arguments -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:12:58 (EST)
________Sir Cheese Whiz -:- futile arguments -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:59:48 (EST)
__________Katie -:- Cheesehead? -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:15:37 (EST)
____________Sir David -:- Cheesehead? -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 04:29:45 (EST)
______________Katie -:- Cheesehead? (off topic) -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 09:30:23 (EST)
________Scott T. -:- Cheese Whiz -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:41:21 (EST)
__Katie -:- More about Jim -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:30:15 (EST)
____G's mom -:- up to you..agree with Katie -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:06:54 (EST)
______Jim -:- me too -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:20:40 (EST)
__Sanctimonious Pip -:- Jim arshole bully bastard -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:28:17 (EST)
____nigel -:- Jim arshole bully bastard -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:32:03 (EST)
____Peter -:- Please stop! -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:12:21 (EST)
______Stephen Harris -:- Please stop! -:- Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 22:36:54 (EST)
______Anon -:- Please stop! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:14:28 (EST)
________Scott T. -:- Please stop! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 10:35:59 (EST)
________Scott T. -:- Please stop! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 11:03:58 (EST)
________Peter -:- Now you've gone and done it! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 14:51:55 (EST)
__________Jim -:- Now you've gone and done it! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:35:32 (EST)
__________Anon -:- JIM! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 20:12:13 (EST)
____________JW -:- OH GOD! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:33:22 (EST)
______________VP -:- OH GOD! -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:43:39 (EST)
________________JIm -:- Me too, kind of -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 22:54:19 (EST)
__________________JW -:- To Jim and Anon -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:23:03 (EST)
____________________JW -:- And -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:28:00 (EST)
______________________Scott T. -:- And -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:06:31 (EST)
________________________JW -:- And -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:07:53 (EST)
____________________Jim -:- Hey, that's MY mystique, fella -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:43:31 (EST)
______________________JW -:- Hey, that's MY mystique, fella -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 15:15:10 (EST)
________________________Jim -:- Hey, that's MY mystique, fella -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 15:59:43 (EST)
____________Peter -:- you made me like it -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:53:09 (EST)
____________Katie -:- Anon's humor -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 22:11:03 (EST)
____________Judex -:- Imp -:- Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 22:50:23 (EST)
______________Anon -:- Imp -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:09:05 (EST)
________________Jim -:- ADAT -- off what topic? -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:25:39 (EST)
______________Katie -:- Dappled things -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:16:27 (EST)
__Becky -:- Anger -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:00:37 (EST)
____Peter -:- Anger -:- Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 12:06:31 (EST)

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:27:05 (EST)
From: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: Everyone
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
I uploaded an new Journeys entry this evening. It's from an Australian ex, and he/she (name is TD) gives some interesting insight into the mindset of some of the Australian premies who post here. There's lots of revisionism down under. I especially loved the part where a premie told him/her that Maharaji was very bright - and had even invented things!!! MJ has certainly invented a new past for himself. Thanks, TD.

Click here to read the new entry.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:49:37 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: petkat@mail.trib.net
To: Brian
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
It's a great entry and I'd like to thank TD for writing it. I highly recommend reading it. TD is quite perceptive and non-judgemental, and s/he can write too.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 07:48:25 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
Katie:

I especially liked her expectation that when she got in the darshan line she was going to shake his hand and say 'thankyou.' Very funny. Like an executive receiving line.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 12:10:26 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
I got completely creeped out when TD talked about the wailing in the darshan line. It made me literally sick to my stomach. Also when this person's ex-partner misled him/her and then finally TD went to do some service and learned so much of the inside scoop. That really hit home for me. Reading it was like confronting the facts all over again myself. Strange how the experiences are so different, yet so similar on a level.

I also noticed that TD has a collection of videos. I agree with you that TD is a very good writer. Wouldn't it be fun to read a review or two by him/her? Great story, TD. Thanks for sharing it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 12:19:28 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: all
Subject: One more thing...glass box
Message:
I also wanted to mention that the analogy that TD gives about K and M being the glass box/cage within the room was very meaningful to me. (I would say that I would symbolize my life as bigger than a room, so I would put my glass cage in the middle of a field, maybe, but the meaning is the same.) Great thought, TD :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 01:05:42 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Brian
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
Thank you Brian, thank you TD! A cracker allright - clear, insightful and so true.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 02:03:53 (EST)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Brian
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
Wow, yes, dynamite. Seems like it doesn't take some folks that long to figure it out; others, like me, took a good ten years.

Was also delighted to see, while at the Home Page, the French section, and the French forum (didn't know half you guys spoke French!). Jean-Michel has done an amazing job. Hope it's joined by Spanish and Hindi versions in the future. Just want to add a little note of thanks here to those who put in so much hard work and so much of their own private time to making the Forum and web site what it is (Brian, Jean-Michel, and Katie). You guys are great!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:05:12 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Joy
Subject: Multilingual
Message:
Joy:

Here's a little joke I heard recently from a Japanese friend.

A: What do you call somone who speaks two languages?
B: Bilingual?
A: Right.

A: What do you call someone who speaks three languages?
B: Trilingual?
A: Right.

A: What do you call someone who speaks only one language?
B: Monolingual?
A: No, American.

JM's site is almost enough motivation to learn French.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:50:06 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Brian
Subject: Yes, thanks TD
Message:
TD,

Your entry is so nicely considered and written. Thanks from all the Maharaji haters in this houslehold anyway. Listen, would it be too much of a compromise of your identity to mention whether or not you know Bruce. And if you do, could you please write an imaginary Journey's entry for him too? Have him leave the cult after discovering what an asshole he'd become or something? Just for fun, you know.

Naw, I'm kidding. But do you know him?

Again, thanks a bunch.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:29:04 (EST)
From: Selena
Email: None
To: TD
Subject: New Journeys entry
Message:
Hi
Thanks so much for that entry. One of the things that really stuck out to me was when you said:
felt really let down as I�d believed that I could rely on �going to that place inside� to get me through the bad times. What is even weirder is that the problems that triggered this �bad time� weren�t that major, it was my now inability to cope with such problems that sent me into such a tailspin.

I can't tell you, TD, how often I have seen this in other premies, and how much I have had to deal with this in my own life. I very recently went through a hard time, still am dealing with it actually. One of the things that I am seeing is how my coping skills need to be relearned or need to be exercised from lack of use. And some other premies I know very well could use about 8 years of that kind of exercise. It's one of the bigger tragedies of involvement with M., the inability to problem solve and their overly passive-aggressive approach to life. At least that is what I have observed, though I know it will be denied. Thank you so much.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 20:15:41 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Friends & shadows
Message:
I wondered if that 'Circle of Friends' post I did a while back had a sus title. Just that the movie was on & I liked the name. Maybe we are all not friends, though, maybe it is different and better than that here? eg Circle of Equals?

Why? Here is some stuff from my 'shadow' book which has been falling open for me to look at it. On the topic of friends here are the subheadings:

Shadows among friends: Envy, Anger and Betrayal

The Loss of the Loyal Friends

Soul Friends/Shadow Friends

Meeting the Other: friends as parents, friends as gods

Women and Men as friends: dangers and delights

Sexual shadows: triangles and loyalty wars

Power shadows:superiority and inferiority

Money Shadows: shame, class and the myth of equality

Racism and Addiction between friends

Redefining successful friendship

(all you ever wanted to know about friends!)

However for those of you who reached the end of this post, here is a nice if fanciful poem by Shelley on the Right stuff:

I am as a spirit who has dwelt
Within his heart of hearts, and I have felt
His feelings, and have thought his thoughts, and known
the inmost converse of his soul, the tone
Unheard but in the silence of his blood,
When all the pulses in their multitude
Image the trembling calm of summer seas.
I have unlocked the golden melodies
of his deep soul, as with a master key,
and loosened them and bathed myself therein -
Even as an eagle in a thunder-mist
Clothing his wings with lightning.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:26:05 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: seymour_t@rocketmail.com
To: Judex
Subject: Friends & shadows
Message:
Hello Judex, I am afraid I did not read you Circle of Friends post
I just can't keep up with the number of posts these days, but I will look it up( it was a film set in Eire written by Maeve Binchy wasn't it?) What is the Shadow book that you mention - it sounds like something that would appeal to me.
Cheers
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:31:19 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: Friends & shadows
Message:
Hi Seymour.The post mentioned was about gratitude to the Forum. I guess it started me thinking about friends - I realise I might make some friends here but everyone doesn't have to be my friend. So then - what are we here (and what is a friend).

I didnt realise Maeve Binche had written the book (I like her work). The film Circle of Friends has Minnie Driver in it & is about betrayal amongst friends (but ultimately, justice).

The book I mentioned is published by HarperCollins 1997 & is called 'Romancing the Shadow - Illuminating the dark side of the soul' by Connie Zweig. I think I should read it again myself.

Enjoy your posts Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:45:53 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: Friends & shadows
Message:
Thanks Judex I will look out for the book.
Cheers
Seymour
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 08:08:43 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: Friends & shadows
Message:
Dear Judex,

Maybe we are all not friends, though, maybe it is different and better than that here? eg Circle of Equals?

I agree profoundly with your thoughts. Maybe we are not merely friends or maybe the term friend itself has a larger compass than we are used to. I think of you as my friend not because we agree but because we tolerate each others views and are prepared to share. Not because there is an equitable transaction between us but because we can grow simply as a result of our interaction.

Judex is a part of my life because we have touched here on the forum. I am changed because of that touch and whenever I have cause to notice that particular change, I will think of Judex who used to be Jude.

Thanks for making me think about that.

Regards

Richard
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 13:19:55 (EST)
From: Robyn
Email: sundogs@hotmail.com
To: Judex
Subject: Friends & shadows
Message:
Dear Judex,
I think we may be, all of us, more than friends. We are connected by similar pasts and want to help those thinking of starting into that life we left and those who like you, are working toward breaking free. We have a group purpose as well as connecting with some more than others based on our personality types. We do have that but there is much more to it than that.
Sorry I haven't read this yet. It is mind boggling to think of catching up with all I've missed but I know how much good stuff there is in there and how much I will benifit from reading all of your(the group's) words, feelings and thoughts.
I have lost a friend in AZ whom I just wrote in hopes of his forwarding adress still being active. I copied your beautiful poem and think I will send it on also.
Thank you dear,
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:45:15 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: Premie_ji
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
Hello again premie ji,
I posted a response to you last week but I wonder if it got lost in the depths. I would like to repeat the question i.e. Do you feel that it is unreasonable to complain to the supplier of a product ( even if it is only advice) when the result is not what it was promised to be?
Is it not asserted by GM and premies that the knowledge is:-
1. a tool with which anyone can solve the really important problems of life
2. a way to realise our potential as human beings( some even say to reach the 'divine')
3. to get wise to the true meaning of life and, after showing us what it is, to give us the strength to 'do the right thing'
4. an end to heartbreak and loneliness
5. an exciting journey on the road to 'bliss' which is our rightful state.
6. many other promises of wonderful things
Would you agree that GM is regarded as the 'perfect master', the 'satguru' or one true teacher who can lead us to the higher level on consciousness ? The problem that some of us have on this site is that, despite giving it our best shot( donating all our money, moving into ashrams, meditating for 2 or more hours a day, attending satsang every night, telling everyone we could about it, not chit-chatting, trying to always remember the 'Holy name'......another endless list!) for a large portion of our lives( some of over 20 years) we felt no better for it - yet every time we questioned why we felt like manic depressives( blissed out for a day, and 'freaked out' for a week) and were having difficulty understanding what the whole thing was a about we were told we were 'in our minds' and that there was nowhere else to go but deeper into satsang, service and meditation.
Of course, having built our whole lives around the practice of knowledge, we really believed there was no alternative way of life so we carried on - even though we knew the product was not working for us. Eventually enough is enough and we got out, although all those years of feeling that you are are the one true path to enlightenment and that if you leave it not only are you the biggest fool but you have snubbed the Lord of Universe who has offered the ultimate gift. Also there was the fear that if you stopped practicing the knowledge it would be like having a ton of rotting vegetables inside you, that the connection with the Supreme being would be severed and could never be repaired and countless other scare stories that sure did put the 'fear of god' into us.
So, although I sympathise with your post, I hope you can understand why some of the ex-premies are a tad bitter and tend to take out their anger on anyone who defends that which caused, what many of see, as a large portion of life encouraged to chase a 'pipe dream' and then having to take up where we left off before hearing about the path of 'knowledge'.
I know that you disagree as you are probably having a blissfull experience in your practice of knowledge and I hope this won't put you off posting to the forum. In fact I would be glad to hear from you or any other premies that take umbrage with the content of this forum in order to indulge in a bit of 'dialectic' if that is not against your principals.
Where's the harm in a bit of rational discourse? The only e-mails I have got recently are asking for the full transcript of Peter Cook monologues not that I mind passing on such enlightened dialogue ( they are on their way Tim)
Adieu
Seymour
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:43:39 (EST)
From: Passing thru
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
Dear Seymour,What can I say other than it's worked for me every day for 25 years. I don't know why some people, who say they have made a sincere effort, don't experience the same simple pleasure of going inside and taking a well earned rest from thinking. I love it and the effect on my life has been profound to say the least. I drop in to this site when I have access to a computor for some friendly banter or if I feel that some of the 'anti M'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 01:45:26 (EST)
From: red heart
Email: None
To: Passing thru
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
wait, first let me look up that word dialectic...oh, intellectual investigation. well, there you have it in a nutshell. Maharaji has explained again and again that this experience and this dynamic of Knowledge/Student/Master cannot be understood by the intellect. This does not mean that the intellect is not a tool used by both Student and Master; it simply means that what the Master is teaching is something much bigger than intellect can contain. It must be experienced in order to be understood. And it cannot be experienced without a number of other dynamics, such as openness, inner thirst, listening, practicing, participation, effort, sincerity, trust (in oneself), and more. it is not for everyone, and it is not for everyone.

and no, to question #1: Maharaji says repeatedly that Knowledge will not 'solve your problems.' Problems are a guarantee in this world. Got a pound of problems, get rid of a pound of problems, and guess what, is replaced by another pound of problems. I have problems, you have problems, he has problems. But what he helps us to understand is that Life is not about problems. Life is about Life. It's too simple. Too simple. And yet cannot be grasped simply by thinking about it. If you were looking to Maharaji and Knowledge to solve your problems, no wonder you are disenchanted!

That said, he has shown me a way to live in this world and deal with my day to day ups and downs and also have my own experience of the universe within which is unchanging yet ever fresh in this constantly changing world.

I love that new song climbing the charts by Madonna. Makes me think so much of what Maharaji has done and is doing for me:

And I Feel
Like I Just Got Home
And I Feel

...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:29:10 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: red heart
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
RH:

Sorry I haven't been paying enough attention to you lately.

RE: wait, first let me look up that word dialectic...oh, intellectual investigation. well, there you have it in a nutshell. Maharaji has explained again and again that this experience and this dynamic of Knowledge/Student/Master cannot be understood by the intellect... And it cannot be experienced without a number of other dynamics, such as openness, inner thirst, listening, practicing, participation, effort, sincerity, trust (in oneself), and more. it is not for everyone, and it is not for everyone.

Thanks. That explains just about everything. Now if I could just determine how to believe in everything I don't understand, like the notion that there's a legitimate connection between the meditation and M. Oh yes, there's that other word: 'Superstition.' I guess that's the 'and more' part, but now if I could figure out what that has to do with trust in oneself. You're right, it's not for everyone.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 10:14:55 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: red heart
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
Red Fart said: Maharaji says repeatedly that Knowledge will not'solve your problems.' Problems are a guarantee in this world. Got a pound of problems, get rid of a pound of problems, and guess what, is replaced by another pound of problems. I have problems, you have problems, he has problems. But what he helps us to understand is that Life is not about problems. Life is about Life. It's too simple. Too simple. And yet cannot be grasped simply by thinking about it. If you were looking to Maharaji and Knowledge to solve your problems, no wonder you are disenchanted!

This is a load of rubbish. Maharaji said, 'Surrender the reigns of your life to me and I will give you peace.' Why don't people have peace? Because they have problems.

Okay, wait, I get it. Ignore your problems, don't allow yourself to be bothered by them, and concentrate on the wonderful experience within inside.

Emotional repression - how quaint.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:28:10 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: red heart
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
Dear Red Heart,
You say that
'this dynamic of Knowledge/Student/Master cannot be understood by the intellect'
and that 'It must be experienced in order to be understood' I used to think I knew what this meant i.e. something similar to the conflict we all have between head and heart. That we do unreasonable things when we are in love yet somehow get away with it.
However the knowledge is not about this is it? Affairs of the heart were frowned upon just as much as affairs of the mind in my day. If you fell in love with another person you were regarded as a 'bongo' or at least as pursuing something trivial rather than what was regarded as the only true love - that of devotion of a disciple for the master.
Even though it is said to be impossible to transmit the taste of an orange to someone who has not tasted one I think it is possible to come pretty close. This, for me, is the joy of art, poetry, literature,music... they can transmit more than the factual and help you to realise more about the human condition. After many years of practicing knowledge I have had many experiences - some good some not so good. What experience are you talking about? Can you at least try to describe it and say why it is so important? These days I do not seek experience but rather self improvement and understanding of my place in a turbulent universe. These are my problems i.e. that I do not understand why there is so much suffering - particularly amongst young children, how I can be strong enough to deal with the sadness that exists through too many people not having the necessary funds to live without pain, through illness, unkindness, famine, disaster...Perhaps you are right when you say 'Knowledge will not 'solve your problems.'
and 'If you were looking to Maharaji and Knowledge to solve your problems, no wonder you are disenchanted!' - it certainly never solved any of my problems and I became very disenchanted. But that is the reason I took knowledge - what other reason is there? Why spend effort doing something that will not help humanity - unless it is just for entertainment, the 'buzz'. I do not think there is anything wrong with seeking personal experience but I am quite happy to accept the experience that comes my way without seeking out any particular one. I suppose I do try and avoid pain wherever possible but sometimes you even have to accept that.
Whatever knowledge is I think it is a shame it is 'not for everyone' and maybe that's why I have stopped practicing it. A good piece of music can be enjoyed by anyone who has hearing if they are helped to appreciate it. I do not want to be a member of an elite group who are the 'chosen' ones.
I could never enjoy getting to heaven if I knew that there were many of my fellow creatures denied that because 'knowledge' was not for them. Especially if I knew that they were unhappy and needed to get out of the world I had left behind. Doesn't this sour the experience?
Anyway thanks for replying to my post.
Cheers
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:47:32 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
Dear seymour light,

Sorry, couldn't resist the joke.

I accidently noticed this post was addressed to me. I wrote
a response but lost it somehow in posting. Have to go now.

I don't spend much time here, but if you really have something to discuss apart from trying to convince me that I'm on the wrong track, Ill try to dialect with you if I have time. Attract my attention!

I'm not trying to be a smart arse, its just that we shouldn't waste our time going over old ground.

Regards
premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 11:27:26 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: The 'dialectic'
Message:
PJ:

I'm not trying to be a smart arse, its just that we shouldn't waste our time going over old ground.

I hope this isn't symptomatic of revisionism.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:42:20 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: The 'dialectic' -to premieji
Message:
Thanks for reply premie ji.
I have no desire to try and convince you that I'm on the wrong track. I'm just after some truth.
If you get time to post I look forward to reading it.
I have replied to Red Heart and I would be pleased to hear your response to that also. Particularly your view on what the experience of knowledge is and why it is so important.
Also do you see Guru Maharaji as an 'enlightened' person or just one of the lads who thought we all might enjoy knowledge so took it upon himself to distribute it - whatever it is.
I too do not get onto this forum too often but I will look out for your post.
Cheers
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:13:53 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Nick seymour Jones
Message:
Premie Ji
Do you know what happened to Nick Seymour Jones? (who we all used to call Nick Seymore light).
I assume you were referring to him (tangentially) in your post.
I remember him from the 'Palace of Peace'in London.He was an architect by profession I recall. Somebody said he went to Australia. He was a fairly regular satsang giver and, with Peter Ponton, was one of the first UK instructor candidates I believe. I think they got the sack pretty quickly for being a bit overkeen. Just my memory of events.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:40:11 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Nick seymour Jones
Message:
Dear Anon,

Nick lives with his family near Brisbane and works pretty much full time as an architect at Ivory's Rock. He's very happy.

Regards,
premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 03:34:11 (EST)
From: jethro
Email: cadbury@compuserve.com
To: Anon
Subject: Nick seymour Jones
Message:
He was the housefather in one of the ashrams I lived in(Kallisier Ave, London). He was boringly religious and married Kate who was at one time a mid-wife.
I personally couldn't stand living in the same house so I 'moved myself' to another ashram(Acton).
This caused a big furora because 'ashram premies don't make decisions like that'.....pardathinand shouted at me for doing such a confusing thing('But mahatmaji...it's really a miserable existance there'.
But charanand said......aaaah you moved from a house of religion to a house of love.

Mind you on my first morning in Acton ahram, the housefather told me that I didn't have to meditate because I was doing service and most of the ashram premies there were doing direct family service....and I had the honour of going out to do the service of helping support the servants of the lord. So in fact I was a servant of the servants of the lord.....wow..man...what can I say.......youknowwarrimean?

Oh yes....I also found a load of books about the Nazis and their philosophy.....it was a timea lso when the Godfather was popular as an example of devotion.(This also happened with the Hare Krishnas, I thik they were machine-gunning each other).

All that from just hearing those magic words 'Nick Seymour Jones'.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:28:30 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: jethro/premie Ji
Subject: Nick seymour Jones
Message:
I lived in various London Ashrams, as well as one's around England. It is a part of my life that I probably do not care to remmeber too much. The lowpoint of my time in London was probably 'Jumbling' out of the back of some moustachiod zealot's truck, when I was an aspirant. That whole experience was very intense, dehumanising and well...strange. Nowonder I am such a sick werdo now. I am glad Nick Seymour Light is still a 'happy' architect. Surely Maharaji's Amaroo site can't provide him with a full time job?! Unless, that is, there are plans to build a small town. Now that would be very traditional. In India, all those early Guru's prided themselves in creating social centres to house their fans I gather. I can see him now, NSJ that is, standing tall above the crowd, nose in the air clutching his latest blue-print for the Amaroo City of Love and Light!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:53:47 (EST)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Nick seymour Jones
Message:
Nick was the housefather in the very first ashram I lived in, in late 1972, in Newcastle England. He and the housemother, Moira Coleman, had a lot of good energy, and didn't take the whole thing too seriously and literally, were very loving, and made my whole transition into ashram life a lot easier. If they'd been gestapo-like, I don't think I would've made it. They boogied off to India on that 747 plane trip just after I got there, and I felt abandoned, so I wrote Glen Whittaker in London and asked him if there was any service for me there, as I didn't like the winters up in Newcastle (being a California girl by birth). How's that for being surrendered two months after you move into the ashram? Lo and behold, his secretary had just deserted ship, so I got called down to London to be Glen and Peter Potter's secretary; for a starry-eyed new premie this was like hitting the jackpot, since the head office was at the time in the Residence in Highgate. I thought I was going to get all kinds of darshan and exposure to the Holy Family, but it was not to be, they shortly moved the office out of the Residence and into another place, and I never got to see BM (how fortunate, in retrospect). The service scene in London at that time was pretty intense, just work, work, work, 7 days a week, every waking hour, we almost never went to satsang, unless BM was going to be there himself, and even then sometimes not.

I do remember Nick fondly, though, and glad he's happy, premie or not.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:22:47 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Jim's few thoughts.
Message:
As I've said many times, there are really only two. Reading any more posts is just redundant. I'll respond to anyone ELSE who wants to discuss things.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:39:42 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Now, Scott, is that fair?
Message:
Scott,

You and I got into a big discussion about Darwinism and Dawkins at one point. I think you were pointing out how much smarrter you are than the latter or something like that. Remember? What happened there? Why'd we let it die? Now THAT was a really good conversation.

Then didn't I get into your dismisall of the Guru Papers? THAT was something we could talk about. I'm sorry I didn't give you the run you were looking for.

Oh well.

Look, if you're really restless, and I'm just not doing it for you, why not take on somethnig really challenging and contribute a few hours of your time weekly to the CD Communication Project? We're always looking for people with a bit of a scientific background.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:12:37 (EST)
From: Emile
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Jim's few thoughts.
Message:
I ve had K since 1973, and I can't relate to all the resentment of M i read in these pages. I practice as much as i want it's up to me. I contribute as much or as little as i please no one seems to be keeping score. Maharaji has always kept-up His end of our agreement. I couldn't be more satisfied with what Knowledge has done for me. Am I brainwashed? I don't think so. Emile
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:28:29 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Emile
Subject: Brainwashed?
Message:
Emile:

I'm not really dealing with those issues right now. You seem to feel you are not brainwashed, but on the other hand why ask the question? I did not FEEL especially pressured to contribute when I was in DLM, but I didn't have ANY money so there was probably a good reason why no one asked me. I felt betrayed because of claims you apparently don't remember very clearly, since the 'party line' has changed considerably since then. No doubt Jim can fill you in on what may be absent from your memory banks. If not, I'll see what I can do.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:50:22 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Emile
Subject: Jim's few thoughts.
Message:
Emile,
Were you asked to surrender the reigns of your life when you received knowledge? Did you agree? Did you do it?

Do you ever use phrases like 'more and more', 'this life', or 'that love'?

Do you think Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord? Do you think he's God in human form? Do you kiss his feet?

When you feel emotions like anger, fear, or sadness do you try to 'go beyond' them and meditate?

Are you blessed to have knowledge and Guru Maharaj Ji in your life?

Have you ever quit a job with inadequate notice or broken any agreements to attend a program/festival?

Do you ever question the Guru? How do you question him? What do you ask yourself? Is the Guru ever wrong?

Do you feel guilty if you don't practice knowledge?

Do you rationalize that people who don't understand knowledge or don't connect to Maharaji aren't 'open'?

Do you connect your experience of knowledge with 'effort'?

You tell us, are you brainwashed?
Rick
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 02:22:09 (EST)
From: Emile
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Jim's few thoughts.
Message:
Whether i would or did or do is irrelevent. I'm still around because of how it makes me feel.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:46:42 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Emile
Subject: Jim's few thoughts.
Message:
Here's the sign of a good con: You feel good while you're getting ripped off.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:29:00 (EST)
From: Sir Cheese-Whiz
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Jim
Subject: Jim's few thoughts.
Message:
Jim; have you been thinking again? How cruel of you, kicking poor little Maharaji in the teeth like that. You big bully you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:32:52 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Sir Cheese-Whiz
Subject: Is that fair?
Message:
Chedder:

In all fairness, M kicked Jim in the teeth first.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:25:48 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: seymour_t@rocketmail.com
To: Jim
Subject: What's it all about, Jim?
Message:
Hello Jim,
I have just been catching up on the weeks forum activity which,as always seems to be the case lately, is busier than ever and couldn't help noticing that there were a few digs at your 'sock it to 'em' attitude.
I'd like to say first that I enjoy your posts and that I tend to agree with most of what you say even though( or perhaps because of the fact) I am not the extrovert type and would not say 'boo' to the preverbial goose.
I do not feel much anger at GM, as I did not go to the back of the cave, for me it has been fear of losing out, sadness and disappointment that have resulted from dropping out plus lately a desire to warn others of going down the same road.
I understand that you gave much more of yourself to following the path of knowledge and that you have every right to be angry.
I do have one question - how much of this is a personal vendetta and how much is the need to speak out against the injustice of those who, however sincerely, mislead others into accepting some superstitious fantasy.
If you feel the latter applies then what about the Pope, the Dalai lama, the thousands of other religious leaders around the world. Are they all wrong?
I am not saying that this is not a possibility - my point is what's the use in criticising them? You will never get a Catholic to become an athiest by having a go at the 'infallible' Pope. I know that you feel mad at GM but why bother picking holes in his divinity?
Personaly I enjoy much more your criticsm of doctrine and 'new age' assumptions but don't let that stop you expressing your often amusing if a tad cruel opinion of personalities.
I just wondered if you were anti-religion/mysticism in general or is it just DLM that you would like to see vanish from the face of the earth? What about respecting the beliefs of others - do we just keep quiet when out dear old Auntie Sybill starts going on about the resurrection, the holy trinity, and how we will never be saved if we don't go to church? She might be dead in few years so what is the point in upsetting her by telling her that she has lived her whole life with her head in the clouds, there is no god and when she dies she will not be going to heaven as she hopes but just cease to exist.
I tend to err on the side of not upsetting folk, but I often feel very cowardly and dishonest because of it.
Mind you when I do get into some radical discourse with a 'believer' I tend to get into the cut and thrust - ending up offending them and feeling guilty because of it.
What's it all about?
Regards,
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:42:13 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: What's it all about, Jim?
Message:
Wotcha Seymour!
I am butting in here to give my own opinion (mostly in response to your Auntie Sybil question - I'll let Jim answer the rest).

When people have different religious/spiritual beliefs than I do, I just tell them how I feel, if the subject comes up. I do this on the forum as well. I don't think it's necessary to tell people that they are wrong if your beliefs differ from them. I live in the US 'Bible Belt' and some of the people where I live get REALLY upset if you tell them that you are not a Christian! Or that you are a vegetarian, or that you think homosexuality is OK, or that you suscribe to other so-called radical ideas (like evolution - I am not kidding!).

So I wouldn't tell Auntie Sybil that she's wrong, I would just tell her that I believe something different than she does. And obviously, I wouldn't even do this if she was on her death-bed or something similar.

I try to do this on the forum as well. When people begin attacking MY feelings and beliefs after I express them, then I might argue with them, or I might not. It usually depends on how strongly I feel about that particular belief.

Take care, Seymour!
Katie
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:30:19 (EST)
From: Sir David
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Anyone
Subject: Yawn, yawn, yawn - God!
Message:
I'm not interested in talking about people on the forum but I did just want to say that atheists are in a minority. All the surveys they've ever don eshow that the majority of people believe that there is such a thing as God and life after death.

Now of course, you can say they're all deluded if you're an atheist. That's beside the point. The fact that that most people, including people here, believe there is a God and an afterlife is a valid point to consider when talking to people. And now I'm going to forget about all this and check out the Italy v Norway game. They were still 0-0 last time I looked.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 17:07:36 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Sir David
Subject: Conquest of the southern cone
Message:
David:

I met Madelaine Murray O'hare in my sister's dorm in 1980. I felt she was a woman of great faith and conviction. Definitely a schlub, however. (I love that word.)

Congratulations on the conquest of at least part of South America! The best is yet to come.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:45:16 (EST)
From: Sir David
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Scott T.
Subject: Conquest of the southern cone
Message:
Thanks Scott. Will it be another Maradonna, 'hand of God' when we play Argentina in a few days? I look forward in anticipation to a desperate battle for supremacy. To be frank though, I feel sorry for the Americans because you're not really a football (soccer) nation and are out of the World Cup.

Mind you, I've tried to follow American Football but I can never figure out what's going on. It looks a bit like Rugby football only everyone is wearing armour and crashing into each other. It's beyond me. I know many American think that soccer doesn't have enough goals but I guess that's the attraction. When we're near to scoring, me and about twenty million other English people are on the edge of our seats shouting and screaming for them to get the ball in the goal.

You'll notice that foorball is a very emotional game. Lots of hugging, kissing and crying and that's the just the players! High emotion and high drama. You're right - the best is yet to come.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:37:28 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: What's it all about, Jim?
Message:
Hello Katie, you are welcome to but in (isn't that rude in America?) anytime.
I understand what you say about the feelings and beliefs of others but what then, apart from telling our woeful tales, is this forum all about. Is it not attacking those who are are now as foolish as we once were? I know there is the valuable aspect of helping people escape the 'fear of god' that trying to leave a cult entails. But what I am saying is what is the difference between what we are doing here than, say an anti-Pope/Catholic site or an anti-Buddhist site?
As I said to Jim, I am not saying that there should or shouldn't be such things but I think it is worth thinking about.
I know that because we have been premies we pick on GM for misleading us by not really knowing where he was taking us, but this path leads to the villifcation of ALL those that do the same and GM is nothing compared to what some of the others are up to.
Also if we feel we know what's real ( although having felt that as a premie and subsequently had to eat my words I am wary of such a feelings) isn't it our duty to tell Aunt Sybil - in the same way that we wanted to tell the world that the Lord had come down from heaven to take us home?
I think it is important to tell it like you see it rather than conform because it makes you or others more comfortable.
Mind you it's easier said than done and I would not like to be the one who caused Aunt Sybil's early demise by getting her all worked up through a heated philosophical debate.
All the best,
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:53:02 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: What's it all about, Jim?
Message:
Seymour:

(Now, that's a name I'm familiar with.)

RE: Is it not attacking those who are are now as foolish as we once were? I know there is the valuable aspect of helping people escape the 'fear of god' that trying to leave a cult entails. But what I am saying is what is the difference between what we are doing here than, say an anti-Pope/Catholic site or an anti-Buddhist site?
As I said to Jim, I am not saying that there should or shouldn't be such things but I think it is worth thinking about.

Some people seem to think that attacks are the sole and only thing that works. In principle, that can't even be a close call. In the words of L. Ron Hubbard (who occasionally says some things that are actually wise, though he probably ripped them off), 'to fundamentally change someone, you have to have affinity.' There is a really complex way of saying this, but I don't really feel that it would get a fair hearing right now. And anyway, I've about worked my little pudgies to the bone.

As for me (and this is just a personal note) I prefer not to be exclusively 'anti' anything. It seems too limited and limiting. (Even some forms of bigotry have been dealt with effectively by a sort of empathetic humor. A fellow named Herb Goldstien in North Carolina used to produce a thoughtful and amusing column that poked fun at redneck social dynamics and anti-Semitism in a way that many saw as kind and understanding. It played an important role in creating the 'New South.') If the site becomes exclusively 'anti' I will move on. There are lots of places to go. The world is opening up.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:05:37 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Easy to say, Scott
Message:
I prefer not to be exclusively 'anti' anything. It seems too limited and limiting.

How big of you! Tell me, Scott, what tack you're going to take showing us a more 'measured' view of Maharaji. On behalf of all the other two-dimensional people I supposedly speak for (you know who you are, I hope), we're dying to hear.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:07:03 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: What's it all about?
Message:
Hi Seymour -
Yes, butting in is considered very rude in the US. It happens all the time though (especially in the Northeast US). In my family, you have to butt in or you won't get a word in edgewise.

You wrote:
I understand what you say about the feelings and beliefs of others but what then, apart from telling our woeful tales, is this forum all about. Is it not attacking those who are are now as foolish as we once were? I know there is the valuable aspect of helping people escape the 'fear of god' that trying to leave a cult entails. But what I am saying is what is the difference between what we are doing here than, say an anti-Pope/Catholic site or an anti-Buddhist site?

I can't really answer your question, but I can tell you how I feel about my participation in the forum and site - I do it because I want to help people who are trying to get out of Maharaji's organization. That's why I almost always don't 'engage' in dialogue with premies. My priority is definitely the ex-premies, or the people who are unhappy with their involvement. I don't even care about Maharaji that much. Other people on the forum have a different attitude.

You also wrote:
I know that because we have been premies we pick on GM for misleading us by not really knowing where he was taking us, but this path leads to the villifcation of ALL those that do the same and GM is nothing compared to what some of the others are up to.

Again, I can't really speak exactly to your statement, because Maharaji's organization is the only one that I have much experience with. Thus I don't generally criticize other movements or organizations, because I don't know all that much about most of them.

You also wrote:
Also if we feel we know what's real ( although having felt that as a premie and subsequently had to eat my words I am wary of such a feelings) isn't it our duty to tell Aunt Sybil - in the same way that we wanted to tell the world that the Lord had come down from heaven to take us home? I think it is important to tell it like you see it rather than conform because it makes you or others more comfortable.

I also think it's important to tell it like you see it (and, believe me, I do do this on other subjects). I think that part of the difference between me and you is that I do NOT feel that I know what's real when it comes to spirituality. I am an agnostic (I don't know, in other words). Thus I am in no position to tell other people 'what's real'. Now, Jim is really sure in his beliefs, and so he does tell other people what he feels is real (although I am not sure he regards this as his duty).

Regards to you, Seymour. Hope this explains my position a little more.

Katie

P.S. Also, I don't believe it's necessary to preach to people on their deathbeds - they're going to know soon enough, right?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:04:08 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: A rose by any other name
Message:
No the point is not to tell Aunt Seymour, the way we told her the Lord had come, unless she asks the question first. That is just doing the same evangelistic thing in a different arena. There was no growth for us when we left 'I don't even know what to call it' presumably, yet presumably there was some when we went in and while we were there - or some false growth; but at least we had the illusion we were going somewhere or being somewhere valuable.However that is not to say someone else is not getting something they need out of it right now.

To be totally honest about this, as I have shared before, I really needed Maharaji or his image when I first listened to him. I did not jump in blindly at all. In fact I made the choice to do therapy at exactly the same time within weeks of first seeing Maharaji in the flesh and realising there may indeed be something holy about this man. I was pretty off the planet but I had a glimpse with my inner eye of a christ-like figure surrounded by disciples, something so sacred.

I felt quite awed and respectful of this presence, this evocation. That is what I worshipped. The awareness that until that point I really knew nothing, because I had never been in the presence of such a feeling before; someone living in the real world who evoked that feeling in me.

At the same time I had grave doubts about how a living man could ever handle taking on that role and how could he not be imperfect, as it would be nearly impossibly not to be 'tempted' and to actually live and have a personality and take the role of 'divine one'.

I felt like Saul on the road to Damascus (my religious teaching in primary school no doubt) and for a moment, I wanted to just drop everything and follow him to the ends of the earth. At the same time, I knew I couldn't (abandon my child, survive that way) and I knew it was inappropriate in this modern world to do that. But I yearned to.

Anyway I chose therapy because stubbornly I wanted to take the hard road, not the seemingly easier road. I didn't trust myself at all. I was also worried about going completely nuts. (I was having a 'nervous breakdown' whatever that is.)

However when you are in the state I was in, as I said when I first came on this Forum I recall, you don't really care about the externals. I just really needed to believe something good. Try living in the drug world for a while to see some darkness. I was so far in the darkness I couldnt' find a way out. Even if it is an illusion. That spiritual desperaton I had, like others have said, was whenI first heard about M. (I now believe my prayers were answered in the most appropriate way for me at the time by a higher power than Maharaji).

Whether or not M was truly what he said, I saw and felt what I needed to then to stay alive. Even if all the rest is bullshit, I will never regret that. It was the greatest gift of my entire life.

So what I am saying is that I got what I needed and now I have moved on because I know it is a fairy-tale. But I didn't know that then. Why I am so grateful to the Forum is it has provided me with a transition, a bridge, helping hands - without which I don't think ---I don't know what would have happened. Let's just say I really really am grateful to everyone and to the Forum. It's easy for me to minimise the trauma of leaving Maharaji because I had the Forum already here for me.

The point is, I don't think there's any right and wrong, do you? Don't you think Aunt Sybil's heaven is the same as everyone else's? (when she gets there?)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:08:52 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: 'Rose' post out of sequence
Message:
The posts seem to be arriving on the Forum out of sequence (Brian knows about it) which is why some of my posts to Jim on the 'Liar' thread seem really weird to because they popped up all over the place except where they were meant to be.

The 'rose by any other name' post is meant to connect to Seymour's post where he talks about telling Aunt Mary there is no heaven. Otherwise it doesn't make sense (and that's strictly otherwise, you guys!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:03:14 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: 'Rose' post out of sequence
Message:
Dear Jude - if you were answering Seymour's second post, your post was NOT out of sequence. As I see it, yours was the third answer (as of this posting) to Seymour's second post. There is also an answer by Jim to one of Scott's answers in the thread.
Is this how you see it too? You have to look at how indented your post is in the thread to which you were replying.

If you were answering Seymour's first post, then things might be out of order. (BTW, I didn't notice that any of your Thief and Liar posts were out of order.) But I have also noticed that NOT changing the title helps if you want to make sure that the post somehow appears to be connected to the one you are answering. It will usually even appear to be closer to it on the screen.

Hope this helps a little (if I'm right, that is!!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:46:17 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: 'Rose' post out of sequence
Message:
Thanks Katie for your help - appreciated.

always trying not to look like an idiot, Judex
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:01:13 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: a few thoughts
Message:
First, I'm not going to be abel to post much today because our band, The X Flies, is finally recording! For me, this is really exciting as you might imagine. Last night we just set up in the studio, partied and jammed, just to break the place in, so to speak. It was a lot of fun, Bill (our producer/engineer) ended up capturing a bunch of it on tape (we're recording on ADAT - digital VHS tapes) and I think, I hope, this is going to sound good. Anyway, I'm really stoked. Also a little hungover. Oh yeah, I guess I'm angry too. Sorry, I almost forgot.

Seymour, I'm not sure how to describe my emotions here. The way people talk about anger here is, I'm sure, convenient in its symbolism but, when it comes right dow to it, pretty misleading too. It's not as if I've got some large, discernable reserve of anger I'm trying to either protect/spread/process or market. To me, to my conscious mind, it's more a matter of playing out the dialogue. Sure, when I'm thinking about Maharaji I often feel no forgiveness, no empathy, no benefit of the doubt, but instead hostility. I picture him smirking more than anything else. I certainly don't picture him smiling with warmth and honest compassion.

Aunt Sybil? I think Aunt Sybil, if she means anything to you, deserves your honest thoughts should the subject arise. Like, I certainly don't think it's right in any way to actually get into the subject of religion and lie for wahtever reason.

But broaching the subject unnecessarily? It depends, I guess. I don't agree with Katie, as you can guess, that peoples' beliefs deserve respect just because of the people that hold them. Affter all, if it weren't for some good, honest folk reaching out to me in the name of truth I never would have heard of Maharaji. (??). No, really, that having happened, I wish more people around me could have taken up the challenge, investigated his roots, thrown some information at me, you know, gotten into it a bit.

I got k in Vancouver in April, 1973. Vancouver, as did so many places, had a thriving 'spiritual/hippie' community then. The biggest guru there then was a guy named Kirpal Singh. I remember leafing through some of his pamphlets and books and thinking 'maybe' and showing some initial interest. What grabbed me about Maharaji down the street was the fact that Maharaji played off what every other guru had to say by emphasizing that he could instantaneously reveal what the rest were talking about.

Now how significant might it have been for me to learn then what I know now which is that Kirpal Singh was just a competing faction head in the same chronically-interneciniary (?) guru lineage that Maharaji was part of? I mean BEFORE I decided to have faith in Maharaji as a conscious undertaking, before I'd committed my mind. I just wish I had more information. Certainly SOME of the info we now have, and some of the arguments now available against Maharaji, would have been a harsh enough wind to blow me off his tee.

So, for me personally, I guess I'm NOT thankful that people keep their religious views to themsleves and don't challenge others.

You say you'll never get a Catholic to become an atheist but I wonder if that's really true. After all, Sir David's comment's notwithstanding, I think that atheism is growing disproportionately to religious belief. Think of it. I'm sure that the percentage of atheists, at least in western society, has certainly skyrocketed since Darwin and the scientific progress of the last 150 years. Oh sure, the pendulum swings a bit, and there are undeniable resurgences of religious fervour BUT, in the big picture, doesn't it look as if people are slowly weaning themselves off superstition and trying to udnerstand life and the world by reason? Reason makes a LOT of 'agnostics' and sometimes, perhaps as a function of personality type or semantics more than anything else, some atheists, too. Now those atheists have to be coming from somewhere. I bet some come straight out of the catholic church.

No, I don't respect the social proscription against discussing religion. In fact, no one else here appears to to either, thankfully. We got into Maharaji because we were at least open to a pitch in that realm. Now we can talk our way right back out again.

Finally, yes, I think the world would be a much better place, WIL be a much better place, if we ever outgrow mysticism. My own personal mission only extends to debating the larger questions in the limited context of this Maharaji question. That is, I DON'T go picking fights with people of other faiths. Too busy. Yesterday I got a flyer from Scientology wherein they're pushing their 'detox therapy' to lawyers for their addicted clients. I thought of calling the number and giving them shit but instead turned back to my computer and asked red heart a polite question. (By the way, red heart, if you read this, you never answered my past question: do you want to have a polite, rational discussion about Maharaji? Also, for you and premieji -- who also never repsonded -- would you tell a long-time follower of Satpal that you're certain he doesn't have the 'real' knowledge?)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:22:56 (EST)
From: G-s mom
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: have a great time...
Message:
Here's to a successful gig with the X files. Break a leg..is that appropriate to say to a band?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:25:33 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: falls asleep
Message:
Jim,
This whole 'Jim Jim Jim' thing is so boring. I couldn't read your whole post... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Why is everyone so obsessed with you? Your smart, but you're a schlub.

One thing that you said though, was accurate... Maharaji smirks. He's a smirker. I don't feel much real anger towards Maharaji but any way I can throw a little shit in his smirking little face, gives me pleasure, even if the closest I can get is cyberspace.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:30:50 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Don't blame me!
Message:
Rick,

I AM a schlub (as you're SO quick to remind me, thank you very much). I DON'T try to make myself the centre of discussion here. I think this time you have to ask Judex and Scott. Or now Peter too, I guess.

Here's the level of attention I really want: I want to be responded to by at least a few people on one of these FEW occasions when I think I've actually contributed something fresh to the discussion. Now, I'm no Phd. or anything, but I say that there are a few moments like that.

I want a little appreciation, or a little feedback at least, when I think I've posted somethnig entertaining (like my Maharaji party) or provocative (like some of the quotes I've found).

I want answers from premies when I argue with them.

That's all the attention I want. Honestly.

How about you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:29:57 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Kudos Jim
Message:
Jim,
Unfortunately, people respond when they think something you've posted is fresh, entertaining or provocotive. It seems like people do give you those reponses often enough.

I think the quotes you've posted are a real asset. That's a lot of work and I appreciate that alot. It backs up all the talk the rest of us do. You do contribute a ton of fresh ideas and I give you credit for that too. I'm not much on lighthearted entertainment here, but you're always right on the button with your imitations and portrayals of the premie world.

As far as wanting answers from premies when you argue with them... are you out of your fucking mind? Jesus man, get with it.

In regards to the attention I want: About the same as you. What I would really, really like is to be a thorn in Guru Fatso's side.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 13:32:55 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Maharaji Party
Message:
Jim,

I'm staying out of this crap except to say that I posted once a long time ago that I didn't think the purpose of this website is to attack your character (or anyone else's except BM's). I participate here for the same reasons that Katie has already stated about supporting people who want to get out of EV or who are trying to.

I did want to say that I laughed really hard when I read your Maharaji party post, but couldn't think of anything funny enough to say in response. It was well written and funny.

That's all, VP
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:24:57 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: VP
Subject: Maharaji Party
Message:
Thanks Veep,

Veep, you're a good guy and have brought a lot of good vibes to this page. If I ever find a true guru I won't forget you.

Jim
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:59:20 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: falls asleep
Message:
Rick:

Schlubs and smirkers. I like that. It's hard to say though. I keep saying slubs asd schmirkers.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:10:22 (EST)
From: Shicksabelle
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Shlub?
Message:
OK, Rick, I have to know. What is a 'schlub'?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:54:49 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Shicksabelle
Subject: Shlub?
Message:
Schicksabelle,
A schlub is like a schlemeel. They go through life, kind of bumping into things and aren't very impressive. They usually look ordinary and act ordinary, although they are capable of making big fools out of themselves, sometimes without even knowing it. Schlubs can actually be very successful but they are way uncool. No matter how hard they try, they can never be awesome or tubular.

The characters Potsi and Ralphy (on Happy Days) were schlubs; Fonsi was not a schlub, but Henry Winkler who played the part became a schlub when the series ended. George Costanza (on Seinfeld) was a schlub. Larry King is a schlub. Rodney Dangerfield is a major schlub.

Most Jewish guys try very hard to not be schlubs. Sometimes they go overboard fighting it, like Howard Stern. All Jewish guys end up as schlubs, sooner or later. The only Jewish guy, so far, who made it to seventy years old without becoming a schlub is Paul Newman (of course, he's only half Jewish). It happens to Jewish women as well, although they usually aren't described as schlubs. Madeline Albright didn't find out she was Jewish till middle-age, but she is still a schlub, despite her high IQ.

You can tell Jim's a schlub because he beats everything to death. Such behavior usually results in a haphazard expression on one's face, because so much concentration is spent on thinking and debating. This facial expression immediately disqualifies one for coolness. Gentiles mistake this for nerdiness but Jews throughout the world recognize this as a schlub.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 15:02:41 (EST)
From: Shicksabelle
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Shlub?
Message:
Hey Rick - I laughed so hard when I read your post that I woke up my husband in the living room (two rooms away).

Now, I have just one question for you. How come you wrote (to Jim):

I'm not much on lighthearted entertainment here

and then you post stuff like the above?

Thanks for the definition - it's a good word. Just like unga-hitz.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 15:13:47 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Shicksabelle
Subject: Shlub?
Message:
Schicksa,
I think I meant I'm not much on lighthearted humor about the Guruputz or the premies, unless there's a sizable edge to it. Dissing Lardboy is a great joy for me and I need to keep my focus.
Rick
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 15:48:45 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: Slubs, a goyish question.
Message:
Rick:

RE: Madeline Albright didn't find out she was Jewish till middle-age, but she is still a schlub, despite her high IQ.

A HS girlfriend of mine recently discovered that her father's side of the family is Jewish. Since Jewishness is matrilinial (in my understanding) does that mean she will escape being a schlub?

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:25:46 (EST)
From: Rick
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Slubs, a goyish question.
Message:
Scott,
It's true that most Jews only recognize those with Jewish mothers as Jewish but I believe some, like Reform Jews, also recognize those with fathers as the only Jewish parent, as also being Jewish.

Either way, one needn't be Jewish to be a schlub, it just helps alot. Persons of certain nationalities aren't as prone to be schlubs as others. For instance, the English are usually a little too stiff and proper to be schlubs (although they can qualify to be 'nebisches', and the French are usually too cultured. Americans are usually up for 'schlubhood' despite where their families descended from, although African-Americans don't often demonstrate acute 'schlubness'. But, at the end of the day, anyone can earn their way in.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 16:34:46 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Rick
Subject: ready for stand-up
Message:
Great riff, Rick. You are very funny. Made my day.

Just wanted to let you know that you're appreciated.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 09:26:28 (EST)
From: Robyn
Email: sundogs@hotmail.com
To: Peter
Subject: ready for stand-up
Message:
Dear Peter, and Rick,
I love these Jewish words but I want to 'hear' what they sound like. Rick, can you make a list with the pronunciation like in the dictionary? Just kidding.
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:38:35 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: seymour_t@rocketmail.com
To: Jim
Subject: a few thoughts
Message:
Thanks for the response Jim. I have not had time to read it all yet - just the bit about you going into the studio. Is that digital multitrack you are talking about? I would love to hear what you're doing one day - perhaps real audio? I used to work in the 'biz' as an engineer/producer but am probably out of date now.
I certainly never used multitrack digital - only digital stereo mastering. How do you find the time to do music, post eloquent discourses on the forum and hold down a job?
Anyhow I will try and post something back in the near future.
Cheers
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 18:54:28 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: a few thoughts
Message:
Jim thankyou for your thoughts. Food for thought and understanding.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:46:57 (EST)
From: Mickey the Producer
Email: mgdbach@ziplink.net
To: Jim
Subject: a few thoughts
Message:
Hey Jim,
Have a great time in the studio; I always enjoyed my recording sessions even if other members of the band did not. Just remember that it can get expensive and to always do as the producer says, no matter what you believe about your art :-) Don't forget to send me a copy of the finished product.

Spent much of the 1980's in Northern Californian Recording Studios
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:14:09 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: a few thoughts
Message:
Like you I believe that people should always try to be open and honest. If our true desire is to see Auntie Sybil with the knowledge or become a humanist or whatever then, should the conversation turn to esoteric matters, then I think it is only right to be honest about my feelings. I hope that if the roles were reversed those gathered around me in my dotage would not hide their true feelings. It's true, Jim, that if your friends the 'good honest folk' had not told you about knowledge when they did your journey through premieland might have been spared, or at least delayed. The alternative ( that they carried on socialising with you not mentioning GM etc. whilst secretly wishing that you were a premie) is even worse and would lead to a very strange relationship.
As I said before, I rarely get angry, but one of the things that does make my blood boil is the realisation that I have been purposefully manipulated. The discovery of a 'Machievellian' plot (i.e. the attempt to secretly influence events according to some hidden agenda) by someone I trust is the 'unkindest cut of all' as Shakespeare wrote.
I am not as convinced as you are that GM knows what he is doing to people. I still have the feeling that he believes all the satchitanand/perfect master stuff he talks about and that he thinks that practicing the knowledge is the best thing for humanity sinced sliced bread. He may have his doubts sometimes - especially if he ever reads the posts on this forum, but I think he may be sincere.If I thought that he was really a humanist who just pretended to be a spiritual guru in order to achieve his own ends regardless of who he screwed up in the process, then I would definitely be mad.
BTW was the Kirpal Singh that you mentioned the one who gave the same meditation techniques as knowledge?
You say '..the percentage of atheists, at least in western society, has certainly skyrocketed since Darwin and the scientific progress of the last 150 years'
It does seem to be the case. Although I have been reading about the history of humanism by a non-humanist who claims that it has been a 'movement' for the past 300 years, reaching it's peak with the Age of Enlightenment in 18th century France and in decline ever since - but what do these academics know? One of the great humanists was Aristotle who predates the books history by quite a few years and I agree that the belief in religion does not seem to be so predominate in the media or amongst work colleagues/aquaintances etc. as it was even 30 years ago in my apple green days.
As with you, I think if there had been more discussion going on about philosophy, humanism, psychology and all the possible alternatives to joining a cult, meditating and reaching 'nirvana' (I blame the Beatles and the Maharishi for bringing such things to the mass media) then I doubt whether I would have gone through the gruelling process that was then required to receive knowledge.
Anyway, thanks for the 'few thoughts' - I think I can assume from what I have read of your previous posts, they are honest ones.
Good Luck with the X-Flies
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 09:07:15 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: seymour
Subject: a few thoughts
Message:
Seymour:

Am not really questioning whether humanism is on the rise or decline. It is somewhat interesting that the highest proportion of 'believers' is still in the US, which also has had the most advanced state of industrialization, and now post-nidustrialization. This suggests to me that the long term effect of the 'church' was to secularize and humanize (noblesse oblige and all that), whereas the impact of the 'sects' was anti-humanist. While this may complicate the theory a bit, it should be taken into account.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 12:48:51 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: Mickey the Pharisee
Subject: Mickey the Producer-off topic
Message:
What band were you in if you don't mind saying here. What kind of music did you play?

Good luck to the x-flies-I would like to hear something they record.

VP
Designed CD covers, but never recorded CDs
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 09:37:14 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Question to Jean-Michel
Message:
Dear Jean-Michel,

There are rumours around that you are the Mr EX who has posted here in the past, and that you are also the ex-instructor responsible for the information and interview on the ex-premie website.The English one as well as the French.

Would you please state clearly here if these rumours are
false, otherwise people must assume they are true.

Regards,
premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 17:18:01 (EST)
From: bftb
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Question to Jean-Michel
Message:
Rumour has it that you're not playing fair premieji.Posting as I do under a pseudonym I would never dream of asking someone else what their pseudonym is/was/may have been.That would be hypocritical.
The way I see it,the only way that you can ask a question like you've asked is if you post using your real name.Those posters can ask questions like that(doesn't mean they deserve an answer,but they're allowed to ask)but you who post under a pseudonym can ask any question under the sun of anyone.The only area that you don't have a right to question is identities.Unless of course you're willing to reveal yours.

Oh yeah,why do you care anyway?Like....how is it your business who mr.ex is or isn't?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:20:15 (EST)
From: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: bftb
Subject: Question to Jean-Michel
Message:
Spot-on, btfb. Well done.

If I may add one thing (to PJ):

Would you please state clearly here if these rumours are
false, otherwise people must assume they are true

What does this mean, exactly? - otherwise you 'must' continue to spread the rumour, possibly?

Why must anybody assume they are true? The burden of proof, as always, is on the claimant. How many times do you eyeball-squeezers need reminding?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 05:38:50 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Nigel and bftb
Subject: jean-michel=Mr EX?
Message:
hey c'mon guys!

Since when has it ever been any problem for ex-premies to try to blacken M's name with all sorts of outrageous claims, virtually none of which are backed up with proof.

I don't see too many of you people objecting to this behaviour.

Anyway, why wouldn't Jean-Michel be proud to admit responsibility for that stuff on the site? He's prepared to write openly hostile posts to M. here and dislose his name. It would give the site a bit more credibility to the site if the ex-instructor had a name. Otherwise, maybe its just another of Jim's imaginery interviews!

If he's not Mr Ex and the site ex-instructor , it shouldn't be any big deal for him to say so and stop the speculation should it?

I'm premieJi mostly to identify an alternate viewpoint for passers by and droppers in. I'll say who I am if JM admits to being
Mr EX and Jim's interviewee.
Is that fair?

premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:52:33 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: tp premiJi
Message:
Out of interest, are you taking notes for Maharaji or Elan Vital? Is this your service? Cause if it is, then Maharaji is obviously interested in what we are doing here and we can rest assured he is getting our message.

Woud that be right?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 06:56:26 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: tp premiJi /2
Message:
Upon reflection, unless there are so many ex-instructors they are too numerous to count, I suppose you are not here to try and get info for EV.
Does this mean you genuiniely want to know if the info is legitimate? In which case you are still trying to figure out if we are on the level? Just curious.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 16:49:27 (EST)
From: red heart
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: a rest? you want a rest?
Message:
no rest for the wily, i'm afraid.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:49:23 (EST)
From: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: premieJi
Subject: premieJi = thinker ??
Message:
Since when has it ever been any problem for ex-premies to try to blacken M's name with all sorts of outrageous claims, virtually none of which are backed up with proof.

Which M's name isn't already blackened??

Sant Ji Maharaj - sat his eight-year-old butt on a throne and announced that he was Satguru. His big brother, his mother, and the rest of the family seemed to have their doubts about that. You must have known him better.

Guru Maharaj Ji - self-appointed Lord Of The Universe. Heralded the Millennium. Married a 24-year-old neurotic at the age of 16. Wore a pie around Detroit, and became an accessory to assault with intent to kill by hustling a dangerous devotee out of the country. Fought with his family in an Indian Courtroom over the family Guru Business (Divine Light Mission) and lost, being demoted to Lord Of The Western Hemisphere in the process.

Prem Pal Rawat - Wealthy Southern Californian. Exists on handouts and contributions submitted to his alter-ego - Maharaji.

Maharaji - The Master. Video persona who makes public appearances where the press is excluded, makes claims of divinity, suggests that devotees think of him when they die, and other gibberish. Modest little Ex-Lord Of The Universe. Fraud.

Anyway, why wouldn't Jean-Michel be proud to admit responsibility for that stuff on the site? He's prepared to write openly hostile posts to M. here and dislose his name.

Let me guess... The post wasn't accompanied by pictures, so the words baffled you?? Perhaps you should address your question to The Master. Maybe he can help you with the big words.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:56:05 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Brian
Subject: premieJi = thinker ??
Message:
Keep this up Brian,

Your obsessional hatred of M. leaps off the screen.

I just asked JM a simple question. Can't he answer it for himself?

premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 08:05:36 (EST)
From: Brian
Email: brian@ex-premie.org
To: premieJi
Subject: premieJi = thinker ??
Message:
Your obsessional hatred of M. leaps off the screen.

I don't hate Maharaji with an obsession. But I don't obsessionally stand in line to kiss his feet either. Perhaps in your view people who don't do one, must do the other.

I view him as a sad fraud. That people like myself and you were ever taken in by such a greedy incompetent bumbler reflects the low standards we have when it comes to Messiahs.

I just asked JM a simple question.

I don't know if this is a lie or not. Perhaps you're forgetful. Either way, you're mistaken. You said much more than this in your post. Did you read it?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 17:28:51 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: premieji-a minor point
Message:
premiJi, you wrote-'Dear Jean-Michel,
There are rumours around that you are the Mr EX who has posted here in the past, and that you are also the ex-instructor responsible for the information and interview on the ex-premie website.The English one as well as the French.

Would you please state clearly here if these rumours are
false, otherwise people must assume they are true.

Regards,
premieJi'

This post made me smile. I guess this is an open admission that premies read here. Thanks for the honesty. Most premies here say that this site has no impact. Where did you hear this rumor? In your community? At the programs? Is it wide spread, or did one friend discuss it with you? (These questions are rethorical. I don't really think you owe me any answers, but feel free to address them, if you wish). You make it sound as if the rumor is widespread, which makes me think that the premies are watching this thing like a soap opera-following the characters.

At the risk of speaking for JM or Mr Ex, I do want to say one thing that is on my mind. It's a minor point, but why do you think that Jean Micheal or Mr. Ex owe the premie community anything let alone answers about their ID? That just strikes me as really strange. Please remember that they are not members of this cult anymore and do not have to answer to anyone within the premie community or explain their actions or reveal their identities either. If you have some kind of sincere concern for JM (like M is sending a lynching mob to his home) then ok, but otherwise, do you see what I am saying? VP
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 17:33:09 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: premie Ji
Subject: premieji-and another thing...
Message:
Why 'must' everyone assume that the rumors are true? I always assume that a rumor is false unless I was there verify it or unless I heard it from the horse's mouth. To assume makes an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'. Does this make sense?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:02:18 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: VP
Subject: Rumors & other things
Message:
rumors are rumors .... (quoting M) !!

Why do premies need to gossip about those rumors? Disturbing?

Does it change a thing?

Why don't you give your ID?

Mr Rawat is reading this forum. Why doesn't he answer the questions and behave like the mere human he claims to be?

Why do all these PR people monitor the forum, and spend so much time trying to figure out what they're going to answer the press instead of watching videos and meditating? The press people know what's on this site, because it is ex-premies testimonies.
Do you really believe, you PR people of EV, that they'll give any credit to what you say?
They can have information here about Mr Rawat's suits cost and jet's operation. You won't give any!

What is so special about EV and Mr Rawat?
Is this a cult? Who cares about exes names? They are so many!
Who are the enemies Mr Rawat was recently talking about?
Can we have a detailed answer? I never heard Mr Rawat talking about 'enemies' in the past! WHAT HAPPENED ?
Should his enemies be scared?
What is this?
Is he going to have a WAR?
Should his enemies be scared, after all he is supposed to be the ALMIGHTY LORD, with full powers, or I don't remember how many!
That should be scary for premies I guess.
What's going to happen? War?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:05:16 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Whoa, was that for me???
Message:
Was that post addressed to me? I think there is a mistake. I am not one of Rawat's press people.
Thanks, VP
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:17:53 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: VP
Subject: No!!! not for You
Message:
I just read the whole thread, and finally answered some of
premieji's questions!

I'm VERY sorry to give you nightmares, you PR and security premies! really!

So do also most of the other exes who contributed to spread all thoses rumors about maharaji ....

I'm not attacking anybody here, mind you.
Unless you consider talking of what you've been living as an attack against the people living the same situations.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 18:27:35 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Shoo, I'm glad!
Message:
Okay, I get it. My name was in the To: box so I was confused.

'Rumors are rumors.' Well, he didn't get that completely right. He should have said, 'Some rumors can be substantiated and some are rumors.'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 20:48:41 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Rumors & other things
Message:
JM:

I feel like that guy in the sports car as his girlfriend gives the finger to a crowd of Hell's Angels. Just kidding.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:38:06 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M
Message:
Jean-Michel,

When you first posted here you said that Marc Levitt had asked you if you were Mr EX, and you had told him you were not.

So why not just tell me and everyone reading this the same thing,
that you are NOT mr EX?

Why avoid the question, and instead ask me 14 questions?
(I counted them).

Now if you ARE Mr EX, I could understand you being afraid perhaps to admit this. But if you are not, why not say so?

I am not a PR person of EV. I am a person, like you, who would like to know the truth about this. Don't you think that everyone reading this forum deserves to know if you are a credible person or not?

I don't think my identity is so relevant, but if you ADMIT to being
Mr EX, than sure I'll say who I am. I that fair?

So why do you rail against M. for not answering questions, when you yourself will not answer a direct question?

I'm sorry, but I really don' think M. would be wasting his time reading this forum. I'm going to stop soon too. I suspect its rather a waste of time for me. Might head off to South America. Good things brewing there. You are wrong about that too, I'm afraid.

Now, where's Jim when you'd like a nice distracting post?

premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:46:14 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M
Message:
Premieji,

Why do you think JM owes you an answer? Or do you just want one?
At the very least you should put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, and tell us your identity first.

As if any of this matters.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 03:02:25 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M
Message:
Jim,

Nice try, but this is just a diversion. And you know it.

premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 16:40:34 (EST)
From: Gail MacDougall
Email: freedom@gtn.net
To: premieJi
Subject: NOT an ANSWER, Jean-Michel!M
Message:
Good grief! Check out Jean Michel's entry from last Thursday. He spilled his guts last Thursday including his full name, address, and today he gave you his phone number. What do you want? His blood type? A positive!

His rational words and kindness have helped me out and inspired me. Maybe if you start reading his stuff in earnest, it will help you to.

We've told you who we are. Who the hell are you?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 00:25:28 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Gail MacDougall
Subject: GAIL, Jean-Michel
Message:
Dear Gail,

Perhaps if you read the thread more closely, (and without bias if possible) you will see that I was not asking JM who he is. I know who he is obviously. What I originally asked him was if he was the person who used to post here using the pseudonym Mr EX.

mr Ex is I presume also the ex-instructor interviewed on the site pages

All Jean- Michel needed to say was 'No, I'm not' . Instead, he
went on about everything else, and asked me a lot of questions.

Now you are a teacher. So am I. Do children, who are I think generally without guile, ever behave like this? Of course not.
Falsely accuse a child and straight away you get a firm denial.
Nor would such a denial incriminate or expose anyone else.

So this is why JM's beating around the bush to me was a sure indication that he was in fact Mr EX, and did not want to publicly say this.

I can understand this desire for anonymity and was prepared to
not press the matter further.

I now find myself further attacked. I don't have the time or the desire to answer so many questions.

Also I said I'd say who I was IF Jean- Michel admitted to being Mr EX.
He did not do that, whether he is or not, I'm not sure.

Jim, if you are reading this, your questions are ridulous. I've answered the reasonable ones, and I don't want to play your game of 1000 and 1 questions which are only designed to allow you to say want you want to say. Just say what you want. I don't have time for this nonsense.

Jean-Michel, I said I was going sailing. I don't take my computer with me, thank god!

regards premieji
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 23:37:09 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: VP and Jude
Subject: JM still Mr EX VP and Jude
Message:
Dear VP (and Jude)

VP,
You wrote,

I always assume that a rumor is false unless I was there verify it or unless I heard it from the horse's mouth. To assume makes an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'. Does this make sense?

I agree that this is a wise policy. But do you really apply this when it comes to negative rumours about M, or premies?
What about the crazy stuff that bb comes up with quite regularly? How do you know this person is telling the truth or is even sane? How come no one challenges his stories? It seems on the contrary that he is not only believed by ex-prems, but is recommended reading.

How about the claims made by Brian above. How much of THIS
do you believe?

Look, there is no major rumour. I know a lot of premies and none of them as far as I know read this forum, let alone know of Mr Ex or Jean-Michel. The few that have heard of it are not especially interested and wonder why I bother. Frankly, I am coming to the same conclusion.

A friend who also knows Jean-Michel mentioned to me that he thought JM had been posting here under another name before
he 'came out' and posted as Jean-Michel. It seems logical to guess that since JM is an ex-instructor, perhaps he was previously posting as Mr EX.

So why does it matter? Its a matter of honesty and accountability. The author's of this website have chosen to place this information in a public place, about a real, known public figure, his family. and by association, all premies.People do not have a right to do this anonymously.

Its also about credibility. You will notice that Jean-Michel has responded to the post but HE HAS NOT ANSWERED the question. Did you notice this? Now, I would have thought that if he wasn't Mr EX he could simply say, no premieJi, you're wrong, I'm not Me EX. Bad guess, or whatever.

But since he didn't it, should be fair to imply that he is in fact Mr EX. Now,I just looked back at Jean-Michel's original post. He says he's posting openly for the first time. Also that he told his friend Marc Levitt when asked that he wasn't Mr EX. Now, just what IS the real story?

If Mr EX/Jean-Michel's credibility is in dispute, then what about
EVERYTHING ELSE that he says?

You and who knows how many others are being influenced by these people. How sure are you of their credibility?

Jude,
No, I'm not taking notes for EV or M. officially. I personally believe that the truth gets quite distorted at times here and I'm just doing my bit as a freelance investigator

VP et al, No, I really don't think M. would waste his time reading this forum. Even I wouldn' t bother just reading it.

Regards,
premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 00:55:04 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: from the mouths of horses, pj
Message:
premieji,

Thank you for your response. No,I don't believe everything that I read here. I don't believe a lot of the rumors that people have written about M, but I do believe the things I have seen with my own eyes (expensive suits and other material things, politics in DLM, some miserable premies, etc.) and stories that are told by a first hand witness (someone who was actually there at the time the story took place).

Other than that, I tend to disregard a lot of stuff. This is because M has a certain hold on the information that leaks out about him-It's a cult- so I don't know what to believe and what not to about his personal life, unless of course it is first hand. As for the personal experiences as they are described by the 'horses' mouths here: yes, I believe what people say about their own experiences with K and M. Just as I believe that CD and you are having good experiences with M, if JW or Seymour tells me that they didn't I think it's valid.

As for bb, I have never met him in person, so I think to comment on his sanity or lack thereof would be pretty irresponsible of me. I guess that he is sane until I start receiving email from him via the cellblock of John Hammond Smyth-ha! I do like reading his posts-many are very insightful and thought provoking. I have no context in which to put the claims that he makes about stories of the Rawat family in some of the posts. This is because I don't know whether or not these are first hand or if he is repeating something someone told him. We never talked about it. I figure if he wanted to disclose his ID and how he knew these things about M to me, that is up to him.

I haven't read what Brian said above yet.

I wrote my post BEFORE JM wrote his. Maybe he liked the point I made when I said that he was not required to give the premie communitiy any information. (Of course, the premie community really didn't want any information, you did) Maybe he couldn't believe your audacity. Maybe he is Mr. Ex. Maybe he is me. (Sorry, just having some fun...back to the serious side of things) I noticed that he didn't answer the question. (I notice that lots of posters here don't answer questions, and most of them are premies, BTW) What do you want me to do about it? I personally don't care if they are the same person. I like reading about both of their personal experiences here.

I'm glad that you cleared up the misunderstanding about the rumor. It wasn't really a rumor afterall, it was just a speculation on your part. Are you allowed to speculate anonymously, but criticize if others are doing it? (They speculate about Maharaji and you speculate about JM...) I am confused.

I don't know whether or not Maharaji reads here, I think you have me confused with someone else who posted this (or someone who cares about this-snicker)

One last point, I don't think that if someone posts under a pseudonym, then changes names that their credibility is necessarily in question. I am not saying this happened, but I am saying, what if it did? I don't get what would be so horrible about that. Maybe you can clear that up for me.

I don't know which things Mr. Ex has said that you think would be effected by my knowing his real name. The knowledge techniques as he revealed them, are they incorrect? The aspirant process? This is your chance to tell what he said that you take such issue with.

Thanks for answering, VP
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:08:43 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: I almost forgot...
Message:
You asked me how well I knew these people. Well, I email a few people on this forum and I feel as if I know these individuals pretty well. I will be meeting one of these folks in person very soon and hopefully more before long. Anyway, I give these few even more credibility because they have earned it with me. We don't talk about M in our email either, we talk about our REAL lives. So, to answer your question, yes I do know some of the people here better than just through conversations on the forum. I consider them friends. I know where they live, about their families, what is going on with them, what they believe, etc. I just wanted to make sure that I addressed this point as well.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:21:27 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: I love this one
Message:
Premieji,

I'm having a lof of enjoyment watching you 'try to get to the bottom of this.' Who killed Kenny? Who's JM? Who's the father of Claudia's kids? Who's Maharaji's mistress? Who's premieji? Who did Shri Hans REALLY give the family store to?

These are all great questions. Please, go for it.

I think, though, that to have any credibility at all here you're going to have to answer questions a bit better yourself. First, who are you? Maybe you said more elsewhere but the only explanation I've seen of yours for anonymity is:

I'm premieJi mostly to identify an alternate viewpoint for passers by and droppers in.

Are you suggesting that you need to call yourself 'premie' in order to be known as one? Maybe you do for the REALLY casual passer by, like if someone was running for a plane or something and just happened to glance by the terminal. Anyone else though.... I'm not so sure. Anyway, as you put it, you use that tag to identify yourself to new people. But that's no reason for not telling us now who you really are. Who are you?

Also, while I've got your attention, I asked you a question a few days ago that you ignored. It was about Satpal. You had said:

If [the Satpal devotee] said why not come to see Satpal for yourself, I'd definitely make an effort. I wouln't fly to India or something though. Similarly, I'd invite him to see M. Maybe show him a video with Shri Hans and M. in it.

First of all, I kind of doubt that Maharaji would approve of your going to see his manmot brother, don't you? Would you ask him first or would you just go? If you just went would you think you were kind of sneaking around a bit, behind your master's back? What if you liked Satpal? What if you were sitting there listening to his 'satsang' and you actually kind of liked it? What if he told a joke that made you smile? Would you want to keep that secret from Maharaji? Honestly, premieji, tell me.

Then, there's the question I did ask you but which you ignored:

If the Satpal devotee asked you if you were 'open' to the possibility that he's got the same wonderful 'Knowledge' that you've got, what would you tell him? Yes or no?

You never answered that. Would you now, please?

Thanks,

Sincerely,

Jim

Interviewed an ex-instructor in '97.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 02:58:03 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I love this one
Message:
Jim,

Knew you'd be hanging around somewhere. I reckon you're a question junkie!!!!

You said,

First of all, I kind of doubt that Maharaji would approve of your going to see his manmot brother, don't you? Would you ask him first or would you just go? If you just went would you think you were kind of sneaking around a bit, behind your master's back? What if you liked Satpal? What if you were sitting there listening to his 'satsang' and you actually kind of liked it? What if he told a joke that made you smile? Would you want to keep that secret from Maharaji? Honestly, premieji, tell me.

Are you serious? Surely you can't be. Then again, maybe you are.! Man have you got things twisted! You sick puppy, you.

Then, there's the question I did ask you but which you ignored:

If the Satpal devotee asked you if you were 'open' to the possibility that he's got the same wonderful 'Knowledge' that you've got, what would you tell him? Yes or no?

You never answered that. Would you now, please?

No. I didn't ignore it. You just seemed busy elsewhere.
Look its all a bit hypothetical, but I'd probably say something like
that what I experienced was satisfying to me and I had enjoyed many very powerful confirmatory experiences of M.s
authenticity. Because of this, I didn't feel a drive to drink from another tap particularly for myself, but I was open to the possibility
that other people might find satisfaction in other things, and that if a bigger brighter and shinier tap were to appear, I might take a sip to see if it was better than what I already had.

Having said this though,I would have to add that since I was well aware of the history of Satpal(as a devotee of Prempal) and that Prempal had definitely inherited the power of mastership after Shri Hans, it didn't seem very likely that I could find something more authentic from Satpal. As I said before though, I might go along to see Satpal to check that I wasn't deluding myself.

In the 25 years I've had K. and known M. I've checked lots of things out. Nothing comes close. Just confirms that I'm on the right track. There's NO FEAR in this business, Jim, only what people invent for themselves.

regards, premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 06:52:33 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Answer to Premieji
Message:
Would you please state clearly here if these rumours are
false, otherwise people must assume they are true.

These are really rumors !

Since when has it ever been any problem for ex-premies to try to blacken M's name with all sorts of outrageous claims, virtually none of which are backed up with proof.

The only proof is that many exes have been involved enough (I�ve been anyway) to back up what they are saying. Please read all those �journey�, they speak enough for themselves.
Their testimonies is AS valid as yours. Can you give us details about the aspirant�s process, EV�s finances, �Special Projects�, Amtext business, NSA, etc etc. As long as you don�t give explanations for this, whatever you�ll read on this web site will be as valid as your claims !

I don't see too many of you people objecting to this behaviour.

What do you mean ? Other exes objecting to who�s behavior ?

Anyway, why wouldn't Jean-Michel be proud to admit responsibility for that stuff on the site? He's prepared to write openly hostile posts to M. here and dislose his name. It would give the site a bit more credibility to the site if the ex-instructor had a name.

Why do YOU care for this sites credibility ? It has proven it�s credibility and usefulness for lots of people desintricating from EV�s & m�s grap. If you�ve been monitoring this site and this forum - it looks like you�ve been as you�re able to dig out some old posts - you�d have seen what many people said here. Why don�t you recall TD�s journey, all those thanks posts. I understand you don�t like the site. It�s not aimed at premies or m. It is destined to people wanting to desintricate from a CULT. If it�s useful for those persons, that�s enough.
It�s like for any company : some customers are not satisfied. Listen to them ! Give them their money back. Give ME my money back ! I do have some receipt. Are you going to reimburse me ?

Otherwise, maybe its just another of Jim's imaginery interviews!

Great idea ! Jim, would you interview me ? I think I can back up everything Mr Ex said, plus a few experiences I had myself. That�s a GREAT idea you gave me PremieJi !

If he's not Mr Ex and the site ex-instructor , it shouldn't be any big deal for him to say so and stop the speculation should it?

That will be the end of speculations. Unless Mr Ex manifests and says who he really is !
That�s also a possibility. Then we�ll have TWO ex-instructors testimonies ! GREAT.

I'm premieJi mostly to identify an alternate viewpoint for passers by and droppers in.

I�m sorry premieji : what people want is not your ID, but a trustable testimony. Even anonymous will do. Give us YOUR evidences, please.
I'll say who I am if JM admits to being Mr EX and Jim's interviewee. Is that fair?

No premieji. Mr Ex explained a lot of things I can back up, like other exes already did. You know that, if you�ve been monitoring the forum. I can tell how things happened in France, I know a lot of them, and that will only enhance Mr Exe�s credibility ! Is this what you want ? I think there is already a lot of excellent materials on this web-site, there will be a lot more shortly. We could also use a lot of exes testimonies over special issues, and have excellent articles over a lot of issues. Are you in hurry to see this ?

Now if you ARE Mr EX, I could understand you being afraid perhaps to admit this.

I can understand Mr Ex is afraid to give his name, if he�s heard what Mr Rawat mentioned about his new enemies. Is Mr Rawat so powerful that he could scare anybody ? Why should he ? Could you elaborate and help us exes to heal our paranoia ?

I am not a PR person of EV. I am a person, like you, who would like to know the truth about this. Don't you think that everyone reading this forum deserves to know if you are a credible person or not?

Why do you care for me so much ? Why don�t you give me a call, or come to visit me whilst you�re in Europe ?

So why do you rail against M. for not answering questions, when you yourself will not answer a direct question?

Maybe that�s something I�ve learned from my ex-master after all !

I'm sorry, but I really don' think M. would be wasting his time reading this forum.

How do you know ? Why are you so bothered about this forum that you�ve spent so much time monitoring all this ?

I'm going to stop soon too. I suspect its rather a waste of time for me. Might head off to South America. Good things brewing there. You are wrong about that too, I'm afraid.

What are you going to do there ? Are you on a permanent vacation ? Are you one of Mr Rawat�s instructors ? Can I try to guess ? Elisa ? Diego ?

A friend who also knows Jean-Michel mentioned to me that he thought JM had been posting here under another name before he 'came out' and posted as Jean-Michel. It seems logical to guess that since JM is an ex-instructor, perhaps he was previously posting as Mr EX.

It looks like some premies really bother about me !

So why does it matter? Its a matter of honesty and accountability. The author's of this website have chosen to place this information in a public place, about a real, known public figure, his family. and by association, all premies.People do not have a right to do this anonymously.

Are you going to sue the web-site ? Most of the people here are not anonymous. I perfectly understand why some people don�t give their name. I think you should if you have some love and compassion for people who suffered of M�s deeds. Do you ?

Its also about credibility. You will notice that Jean-Michel has responded to the post but HE HAS NOT ANSWERED the question. Did you notice this? Now, I would have thought that if he wasn't Mr EX he could simply say, no premieJi, you're wrong, I'm not Me EX. Bad guess, or whatever.

Bad guess ! Sorry ! Who are YOU ?

But since he didn't it, should be fair to imply that he is in fact Mr EX. Now,I just looked back at Jean-Michel's original post. He says he's posting openly for the first time. Also that he told his friend Marc Levitt when asked that he wasn't Mr EX. Now, just what IS the real story?

The real story is my life, and I won�t find the time to write a book about it.

If Mr EX/Jean-Michel's credibility is in dispute, then what about
EVERYTHING ELSE that he says?

I can�t wait for Jim�s interview.

You and who knows how many others are being influenced by these people. How sure are you of their credibility?

Like for anything else, my dear friend. Use your mind and intellect. I have received bad words from premies, I must admit, but a lot of thanks from many exes. As many other exes whose testimonies proved to be helpful to other exes. That�s enough of a proof !
This web-site is NOT intended for faithful premies. It is helpful for people wanting to clear their doubts without using meditation or Mr Rawat�s videos.
That should be the conclusion of your investigation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 10:59:12 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Answer to Premieji
Message:
Dear Jean-Michel,

Thanks for your response. You seem to be saying that you are not Mr EX.

I wonder why you did not say this straight away in the beginning.

This would have been a lot more convincing. To me you are not saying strongly enough that you are not Mr EX. Perhaps this is something about language, but no matter.

Mr EX had his reasons for remaining anonymous, so I guess you have your reasons too.

I'm going sailing.

Regards
premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:25:48 (EST)
From: Goofy Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Real answer to premieji!
Message:
Would you please state clearly here if these rumours are
false, otherwise people must assume they are true.

These are really rumors !

Since when has it ever been any problem for ex-premies to try to blacken M's name with all sorts of outrageous claims, virtually none of which are backed up with proof.

The only proof is that many exes have been involved enough (I�ve been anyway) to back up what they are saying. Please read all those �journey�, they speak enough for themselves.
Their testimonies is AS valid as yours. Can you give us details about the aspirant�s process, EV�s finances, �Special Projects�, Amtext business, NSA, etc etc. As long as you don�t give explanations for this, whatever you�ll read on this web site will be as valid as your claims !

I don't see too many of you people objecting to this behaviour.

What do you mean ? Other exes objecting to who�s behavior ?

Anyway, why wouldn't Jean-Michel be proud to admit responsibility for that stuff on the site? He's prepared to write openly hostile posts to M. here and dislose his name. It would give the site a bit more credibility to the site if the ex-instructor had a name.

Why do YOU care for this sites credibility ? It has proven it�s credibility and usefulness for lots of people desintricating from EV�s & m�s grap. If you�ve been monitoring this site and this forum - it looks like you�ve been as you�re able to dig out some old posts - you�d have seen what many people said here. Why don�t you recall TD�s journey, all those thanks posts. I understand you don�t like the site. It�s not aimed at premies or m. It is destined to people wanting to desintricate from a CULT. If it�s useful for those persons, that�s enough.
It�s like for any company : some customers are not satisfied. Listen to them ! Give them their money back. Give ME my money back ! I do have some receipt. Are you going to reimburse me ?

Otherwise, maybe its just another of Jim's imaginery interviews!

Great idea ! Jim, would you interview me ? I think I can back up everything Mr Ex said, plus a few experiences I had myself. That�s a GREAT idea you gave me PremieJi !

If he's not Mr Ex and the site ex-instructor , it shouldn't be any big deal for him to say so and stop the speculation should it?

That will be the end of speculations. Unless Mr Ex manifests and says who he really is !
That�s also a possibility. Then we�ll have TWO ex-instructors testimonies ! GREAT.

I'm premieJi mostly to identify an alternate viewpoint for passers by and droppers in.

I�m sorry premieji : what people want is not your ID, but a trustable testimony. Even anonymous will do. Give us YOUR evidences, please.
I'll say who I am if JM admits to being Mr EX and Jim's interviewee. Is that fair?

No premieji. Mr Ex explained a lot of things I can back up, like other exes already did. You know that, if you�ve been monitoring the forum. I can tell how things happened in France, I know a lot of them, and that will only enhance Mr Exe�s credibility ! Is this what you want ? I think there is already a lot of excellent materials on this web-site, there will be a lot more shortly. We could also use a lot of exes testimonies over special issues, and have excellent articles over a lot of issues. Are you in hurry to see this ?

Now if you ARE Mr EX, I could understand you being afraid perhaps to admit this.

I can understand Mr Ex is afraid to give his name, if he�s heard what Mr Rawat mentioned about his new enemies. Is Mr Rawat so powerful that he could scare anybody ? Why should he ? Could you elaborate and help us exes to heal our paranoia ?

I am not a PR person of EV. I am a person, like you, who would like to know the truth about this. Don't you think that everyone reading this forum deserves to know if you are a credible person or not?

Why do you care for me so much ? Why don�t you give me a call, or come to visit me whilst you�re in Europe ?

So why do you rail against M. for not answering questions, when you yourself will not answer a direct question?

Maybe that�s something I�ve learned from my ex-master after all !

I'm sorry, but I really don' think M. would be wasting his time reading this forum.

How do you know ? Why are you so bothered about this forum that you�ve spent so much time monitoring all this ?

I'm going to stop soon too. I suspect its rather a waste of time for me. Might head off to South America. Good things brewing there. You are wrong about that too, I'm afraid.

What are you going to do there ? Are you on a permanent vacation ? Are you one of Mr Rawat�s instructors ? Can I try to guess ? Elisa ? Diego ?

A friend who also knows Jean-Michel mentioned to me that he thought JM had been posting here under another name before he 'came out' and posted as Jean-Michel. It seems logical to guess that since JM is an ex-instructor, perhaps he was previously posting as Mr EX.

It looks like some premies really bother about me !

So why does it matter? Its a matter of honesty and accountability. The author's of this website have chosen to place this information in a public place, about a real, known public figure, his family. and by association, all premies.People do not have a right to do this anonymously.

Are you going to sue the web-site ? Most of the people here are not anonymous. I perfectly understand why some people don�t give their name. I think you should if you have some love and compassion for people who suffered of M�s deeds. Do you ?

Its also about credibility. You will notice that Jean-Michel has responded to the post but HE HAS NOT ANSWERED the question. Did you notice this? Now, I would have thought that if he wasn't Mr EX he could simply say, no premieJi, you're wrong, I'm not Me EX. Bad guess, or whatever.

Bad guess ! Sorry ! Who are YOU ?

But since he didn't it, should be fair to imply that he is in fact Mr EX. Now,I just looked back at Jean-Michel's original post. He says he's posting openly for the first time. Also that he told his friend Marc Levitt when asked that he wasn't Mr EX. Now, just what IS the real story?

The real story is my life, and I won�t find the time to write a book about it.

If Mr EX/Jean-Michel's credibility is in dispute, then what about
EVERYTHING ELSE that he says?

I can�t wait for Jim�s interview.

You and who knows how many others are being influenced by these people. How sure are you of their credibility?

Like for anything else, my dear friend. Use your mind and intellect. I have received bad words from premies, I must admit, but a lot of thanks from many exes. As many other exes whose testimonies proved to be helpful to other exes. That�s enough of a proof !
This web-site is NOT intended for faithful premies. It is helpful for people wanting to clear their doubts without using meditation or Mr Rawat�s videos.
That should be the conclusion of your investigation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:04:00 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Goofy Jean-Michel
Subject: Real answer to premieji!
Message:
Does this mean that Jean-Michel's answer is DOUBLE TALK?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 12:47:47 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Real answer to premieji!
Message:
That means that I goofed in HTML!

can't you see that the 1st post is almost everything italics, and that the 2nd one is OK?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:36:15 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Hey, pj, call me an idiot
Message:
Are you serious? Surely you can't be. Then again, maybe you are.! Man have you got things twisted! You sick puppy, you.

Or maybe just sick, but, yes, these questions are for real. AND you didn't answer them. Well, maybe you did by implication a bit, but that's not enough. Okay, here they are again:

First of all, I kind of doubt that Maharaji would approve of your going to see his manmot brother, don't you? Would you ask him first or would you just go? If you just went would you think you were kind of sneaking around a bit, behind your master's back? What if you liked Satpal? What if you were sitting there listening to his 'satsang' and you actually kind of liked it? What if he told a joke that made you smile? Would you want to keep that secret from Maharaji?

Would you please just answer them one-by-one?

I take it that you think Maharaji wouldn't give a shit if you went to see Satpal and made up your own mind about him ,etc. Am I right? Is THAT how you remember Maharaji treating the family split, that premies that talked with his mom and two eldest brothers were okay, free to do whatever they wanted? No, you couldn't be serious about that. So, tell me, when do you think Maharzji finally said it was okay to fraternize with Satpal? Take him out for dinner if he was in town? Hey, maybe even give him some money?

Come on, just give me some straight answers here, pj. It's fine for you to say:

In the 25 years I've had K. and known M. I've checked lots of things out. Nothing comes close. Just confirms that I'm on the right track. There's NO FEAR in this business, Jim, only what people invent for themselves.

But I'd like to see if even you think this general statement applies to Satpal as well.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:30:48 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: Pseudonyms and anonymity
Message:
Dear Premie-Ji,
I wanted to say a few words about pseudonyms and anonymity. This does not refer to Mr. Ex, or to Jean-Michel, but to some other anonymous people on the forum.

Several people on the forum use pseudonyms and other identity cloaking devices to hide their real identity. They do this for fear of reprisals by premies. I am not talking lynch mobs here when I speak about reprisals. I am talking about people who have premie friends and family and don't want to lose their friends (yet), or would become embroiled in family problems (child custody, visitation right problems, family feuds) if their identity became known. Also, at least one person who posts here under a pseudonym has a premie aquaintance who became quite violently angry when the pseudonymic person told him that s/he was not a follower of Maharaji anymore.

I know several of these people's true identities. If an anonymous person asked me if one of these person was REALLY 'so and so', I would lie and say no, or 'I don't know' depending on the situation. If this anonymous person persisted and even revealed their OWN identity, I would still lie unless I got the pseudonymic person's permission to reveal their identity. By the way, I don't trust all ex-premies, but I do trust many of the people I have gotten to know via this site and associated e-mail. This includes Jean-Michel.

I'm telling you right now that I would lie to protect these people. I wouldn't feel good about it, but I would feel that I was doing the right thing. I have made a promise to these people, and I will lie to keep that promise, if I have to. If you feel that that puts every word I say in question, then so be it.

Regards,
Katie
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:12:57 (EST)
From: Becky
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Entertainment
Message:
I know this is supposed to be a serious discussion, but it is also very amusing. Thanks for brightening up my lunch hour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 10:24:24 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Becky
Subject: Entertainment & fun!
Message:
I did have a lot of fun too! I wrote premieji's answer whilst having my morning tea at my office.

I must admit that I get bored sometimes, waiting for customers, or after cleaning my cat's litter.

Writing/reading posts can be a lot of fun sometimes.

I find it very healing, that's this forum purpose after all!

We needed someone to replace Mili after all, I think premieji is a good successor.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:09:31 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Pseudonyms and anonymity
Message:
Dear Katie,
Thanks for the input. I have to go now.

Regards,
premieJi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:11:42 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: premieJi
Subject: No valid excuse premieji!
Message:
Thanks for your response. You seem to be saying that you are not Mr EX.

So, why don�t you now say WHO you are ?
Now I should consider you a liar I guess.

I wonder why you did not say this straight away in the beginning.

I don�t see why I should answer everybody�s question here on this forum ! I needed to know you a little bit more. I can now see that you haven�t answered any of the questions I�ve asked, not speaking of Jim�s, and you didn�t keep your promise.
Unless you answer those questions one by one, I don�t see any reason to keep talking to you. Maybe Jim will, I know he enjoys this, I don�t. This is NO communication, your brain has been fucked by Mr Rawat�s techniques, I feel very sorry for you. That�s my diagnosis anyway. I might not be such a good doctor after all.
I know you can get out of this state, I did - like many others. Use your brain, and it�s going to work again. One good way to check your brain would be to ANSWER my questions, or Jim�s.
So please try to honestly do so.

This would have been a lot more convincing. To me you are not saying strongly enough that you are not Mr EX. Perhaps this is something about language, but no matter.

I gave you my reasons. Give me yours ! Give me a call ! (33) 1 42.41.89.14 (home)

Mr EX had his reasons for remaining anonymous, so I guess you have your reasons too.

Katie gave you an excellent answer. If you don�t understand, try to imagine people�s attitude when they are living a group you really consider as a cult, like Scientology. Have you seen those guys answering in TV shows? They usually hide their face, change their voice, can you understand why ? You say EV and K is not a cult, I understand your view. Many people consider it is one, I�m very sorry, and many persons leaving EV & m have that same attitude you�ve seen in other cult�s ex-members.

So, why don�t you now say WHO you are ?
Now I should consider you a liar I guess.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 00:37:29 (EST)
From: premieJi
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: very good excuse, Jean-Michel
Message:
Dear Jean- Michel,

If you read my post you will see that I said that I would disclose my identity IF you admitted that you were Mr EX.

You have not done that, so I don't see why I should say who am.

I also said I was going sailing. Perhaps you could have waited a bit before you criticise me.

I think it is you who needs to use your brain more actually.

Regards,
premieJi
ps
I'll be away for a week or so now, so please, no more questions
and cries of ' premies won't answer'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 03:55:53 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: jmkahn@hol.fr
To: Everyone
Subject: Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh?
Message:
I now have the whole transcript,
checked with another copy in a better shape
than my 'old' one of the 70s.

I can email it as a simple text file (suitable for
any computer), or word95 file.

Ask if you want it!

For those who don't want to give their email,
(I can understand why),
the whole book will be on-line shortly (together with a lot of old materials anymore unavailable - some of which Mr Rawat HIMSELF might not have),
on my new web-site dedicated to that kind of stuff.
Please be patient ....
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:40:27 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh?
Message:
Why would anyone want to wade through that?
It's like inviting ex-premies to a weekend of all-day videos.

:-(
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 01:41:11 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: compuserve.com
To: Anon
Subject: Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh?
Message:
Hi Anon
'Why would anyone want to wade through that?'
I found it useful in understanding where, at least part of, prempals belief system comes from....particularly the part that says something like....'no matter how bad the guru treats, you should continue worshipping him'.

Regards Jethro
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 03:17:20 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: cadbury@compuserve.com
To: Jethro
Subject: Anybody wants Hans Yog Prksh?
Message:
To all,

A couple of choice quotes from the foundation of premppal's belief system(from hans yog prakash):

'There are many gurus in this world who relieve others of their wealth, but not their pain.'

'... when a disciple doesn't mind being insulted left and right,
the people of the world call him a true devotee of his Guru.'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 17:28:06 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Prmies SHOULD read HYP!
Message:
That's really an experience, no need to meditate for 10 days once you've read it, I promise!

Not talking of some even MORE incredible stuff!

That will be the surprise ...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 23:54:15 (EST)
From: bb
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Thank you JM
Message:
Just that.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 19:27:44 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Can't wait!
Message:
JM,

Are you planning to put up a bunch of M's satsangs from the 70s & 80s as well? That would be great. Perhaps people could scan or type in interesting portions of whatever they've got and send it to you. I, personally, think that a concise source of 'M on sex' or 'M on the mind' etc., would be great.

Jim
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Jun 30, 1998 at 04:21:41 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Can't wait!OK
Message:
It's fine with me for having these satsangs on-line (on my site).
Could you please chose excerpts, and email them to me as word files?
We could have some kind of page with an index of the various topics, and 1 page for each satsang, or something like that.
Unless you have some other ideas?
I would also like to have all those posts about ashrams. I've seen them here once or twice, as a very long post, ex-ashram premies complaining, etc
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 03:26:11 (EST)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
This afternoon I was called by my brother's son's wife and invited to come see their baby born last night. So I did. My nephew showed up later. They are a great couple and will be good parents. Unlike his father, my bother, who was never a meanigful part of his son's life, involved in crime and in jail, then absent in another state. My nephew had visited him once when he was 16, but it didn't go well. He talked to him about 4 years ago and told his father,'It's too late to be a father to me,but I'm willing to be friends.' When they talked about keeping in touch with calls and pictures, they both said 'OK, but you do it first.' And they haven't yet.
My nephew asked me tonight when I last talked to him. I said, not for 26 years.(That was when my brother raped me, right after I received knowledge when he visited me after my not seeing him for 4 years, and my nephew was told about it in 1989. He had never abused me before. We had loved eachother as kids and got along very well. My nephew and I have only been seeing eachother since last year.) I asked if he minded if I told him about the baby, and he said he thought I would and it was OK. I said,'Maybe it will get him to call you.'
When I got home, I called my brother for the first time and told him he was a grandpa. Then we talked for almost two hours. He told me he'd stayed away from his son because he did not want to influence him badly. He also admitted to doing what he did to me. He said it took him until just recently to mature, that he had been in that sort of victim state of blaming his life on what others did too him. (He was physically and emotionally abused by our parents, involved in drugs and crime.) He said I'm 56 and I just finally matured.
I told him how I had begun to forgive him for myself several years ago,to heal and get on with my life. And then when I began to feel healing, I prayed for healing for him. I told him that maybe my prayers helped him to heal. He said he thought it was possible. I said I had always loved him but it took until this last year to get over it completely. I asked him how it could have happened. He said that in our whole family only he and I had a soul connection. I said, 'I know, that's why it was so hard on me.' He said it was a combination of detachment and attachment. I can understand what he meant. He had been very depressed and behaving strangely and had had about 2 sixpacks that day on a trip to the beach. He was sick, but it happened to me because he knew I loved him. I told him about the recent discussion on forgiveness on the Forum and about my realization that Maharaji was deluded and I had so strongly believed that he was as Jesus was and was really 100% into it. He said I had gone too far in the direction of goodness and he had gone in the direction of badness and crime.
I encouraged him to call his son to show he cares. I told him to be the more mature one and reach out to be first to communicate and build a bridge. I also told him to call our mother. He said he hadn't because he didn't want to get bad news. I said that he will one day soon, so he'd better talk to her while she was still here and able to talk to him. I feel the I have crossed the threshold and reached complete healing and complete forgiveness. I still love my brother and
he has changed, as I had hoped. I never prayed for anything as much as for this healing to take place for both of us. Love has won.

With Love to you all, and my prayers for your healing the relationships in your life, Carol
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 04:36:53 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
Carol how absolutely wonderful for you and your brother. This makes me feel tears and joy at the same time about this whole life thing. It happens to all of us - good and bad, we do it and we receive it. Thank god there is hope for us all. Thankyou very much for telling the story, hot on the heels of your amazing post 'thankyou ...to Peter' in the thief and liar thread, which says it all.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 09:51:30 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
Carol - thank you for that amazing story. You are a really brave and courageous person - I am sure that it took a lot of strength to call your brother. You are very loving too - I think that your call probably made him feel better about himself. I hope he gets in touch with his son and with you mom. I am really proud of you.

Love from Katie
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:36:03 (EST)
From: seymour
Email: seymour_t@rocketmail.com
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
I would like to add that I agree with Katie. I am very unforgiving and intolerant ( although I try to be polite) and I am amazed at your kindness towards someone who has acted in such a selfish and unkind way towards you.
I have been reading a few of the recent posts on anger and forgiveness which made me wonder what forgiveness really means?
I still don't know what it is to forgive but I can't think of a better example than your attitude to your brother - especially because it's almost impossible to forget betrayal ( I can't imagine that a relationship is ever the same once trust is gone) - and to get over the harm that has been done.
Anyway, you deserve an honour.
Cheers
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:24:17 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
Carol:

The truth is, I was somewhat intimidated by you in the Pettygrove house. I know that may be hard for folks to believe, but she really DID look like Mona Lisa, guys.

My last really serious girlfriend, who lives in Oregon, was under a similar sort of aegis. Not just vaguely similar. Very similar. Growing up, she and her brother were confidantes in a self protecting duo against an enormously abusive family. Later, the brother, who dropped into a life of crime, ended up raping her and worse. (Worse is hard to imagine, I know.) She took a much different route than you. Not to knock her choices at all, but if she were able to learn from your experience her burden might be lighter. (Alas, I don't think she can, though.)

I appreciate, a little, the inner turmoil you must have been through for all these years. Mylo and all the other premies from that era have a really good and courageous friend. And your story has helped me immensely. Thanyou.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:33:14 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
Carol,

That's an amazing story. Thanks for sharing it.

Congratulations on taking all those steps forward to get to this huge step.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:13:51 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: Read THIS thread, Maharaji
Message:
Carol,

That is a really great story. I, too, am really happy to hear it. Now THIS is the type of forgiveness that works. In fact, I'd think you'd agree that the only way you could call your brother was by thinking that maybe, just maybe, he was at a point where he was willing to apologize somehow. Yes, you took the first step and opened the door to communication but he was the one who had to carry that apology through. That's beautiful.

Maharaji, if you really do lurk here at all, read THIS thread, read Carol's post and tell me that doesn't make you want to actually post something to us all. Go ahead, man, make a little history.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 17:10:59 (EST)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Next day!
Message:
Thankyou for your support, I don't think I would have done things just this way had it not been for my discussions here. It has helped me to clarify my thoughts and beliefs and to be true to myself in ways which have furthered my healing. I post it because you were all part of it for me and I hope to give something back by sharing. It sure beats the Jerry Springer Show, or even Oprah!

Today I called the hospital to talk to My nephew or his wife and tell them I had called his dad. She was busy and he had gone to tend to animals so I asked the friend who answered if his dad had called. He did it! I don't know what they talked about, but just his doing it was an important first step towards their reconciliation. I am feeling very good today.
Blessings to you all, Carol
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 20:02:12 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: Heartening story
Message:
Your story is heartening to me. My brother has gone to the opposite extreme with me too. He rejected Maharaji and I, for partly the same reasons I suspect, and has since become more and more antisocial and unhappy. Even though he lives a couple of miles away, he hasn't spoken to me for years (hates me irrationally), and has never met my wife or our two babies. Your reconciliation gives me some hope.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:32:14 (EST)
From: Gail
Email: freedom@gtn.net
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
You are an amazing person. I wish I were even half that forgiving. Thank you for the post.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:59:19 (EST)
From: Selena
Email: None
To: Gail Carol All
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
Not much to say but I did want to congratulate you Carol. That took a lot of courage. I recently had a reconciliation with someone under far less intense cirumstances and even that was hard. Good for you and I am glad the forum helped.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 19:16:16 (EST)
From: Robyn
Email: sundogs@hotmail.com
To: Carol
Subject: True Story/My brother and I
Message:
Dear Carol,
It is so good to hear that the forum and I think MMT has helped you through this pass in your life. This event in your life is an inspiration to us all and illustrates the power of love and positive thinking and the good effects of working toward something hard in your life to make your life better for you. It is so much more gratifying when the other person involved also 'gets it' and grows through the experience as well. This forgiveness is powerful and working toward it in our lives makes us powerful.
Here is a big bear hug for you dear and much love from me,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 02:46:53 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Boycott Jim
Message:
That's not a rallying cry, it's just an idea that came to me as a solution to my own particular situation that I thought might be helpful to some others. My feelings of anger toward how Jim treats people here have been building and the other night I expressed them. Jim responded, so I know he saw the posts, but he didn't actually say anything at all in reply.

The next night I was reading the forum again and went to bed angry (same reason) but when I woke up in the morning I thought, 'Why? There's no point in feeling this way any more.' And there isn't. Anger is an appropriate response to someone's unacceptable behavior toward yourself or others, and expression of anger can help to prevent a recurrence of that unacceptable behavior. That is its function. Well, in this case, neither my expression of anger nor anyone else's has made the slightest dent in Jim's behavior. When someone says that they have a problem with Jim, there are only two possible responses: he ignores them, or he tells them that they are the source of the problem. Techniques learned at the feet of the master.

Well, I don't mind feeling anger if there's a need. And I can't control whether something makes me angry any more than anyone else. But I can avoid being in a situation that I know will cause me to feel pointless anger. So I'm going to stop reading Jim's posts. I've had an occasional laugh there, but no new ideas and lots of aggravation.

For those of you who enjoy Jim, fine. For those of you who don't, but enjoy tangling with him, that's fine too. If anyone else is like me and doesn't enjoy either of the above, taking yourself completely out of the 'Jim loop' might be a good choice.

Peter

P.S.--Sorry, Selena, but I'm not boycotting you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 04:46:20 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Peter
Subject: Boycott Jim
Message:
Thankyou Peter. I was thinking the same thing - wondering why today Jim picked up on my post but hasn't said anything about all the others. I have re-read the whole thread, which took a long time. I feel that what you, Carol and Scott contributed was invaluable to anyone who actually wants to get well and get over Maharaji. I'm not saying it's the whole answer to all of everyone's issues nor would I recommend it necessarily for new exiters in the early stages who need the anger. But in the context of that conversation, the contribution made by you guys was totally illuminating and cannot be described as 'new age' in any way. What you are talking about is liberating to the individual. New age, as someone pointed out, is a system of indoctrination, another belief system.

That's why I want to have another look at Scott's thing on confict resolution, if I can find it, because it's how we define our terms that causes a lot of problems. I hope Jim can see this is not an attack on him as a human being. It is saying no to the pack mentality. It's saying a lot more, not up to me to define.

Thanks Peter for sharing how you are feeling.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 06:39:00 (EST)
From: Sir David
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Judex
Subject: Boycott Jim
Message:
I think we can take this medium of communication too seriously. One thing about the internet that I don't like is the fact that I'm communicating with people who I'll probably never see or meet. After all, it's just words on a screen isn't it. It's no substitute for real 'live' communication with a person in the flesh.

Did you read my dictum in the thread below? I'm not saying anyone is a fool and it's up to us who we consider fools here. But the dictum holds true for all areas of our lives. Don't get pulled into futile arguments. Neither side benefits.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 08:18:03 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Sir David
Subject: Jet picnic
Message:
Sir David I'm having trouble reading threads at the moment : could you please do me a favour and re-print the dictum.

Yes I know what you mean by meeting people in the flesh. I think we should get a jet immediately, all make friends and resolve all our differences and then jet around and pick everyone up and have a picnic somewhere nice like...help me please....anyone suggest the best site in the world for a picnic?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 11:46:07 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: Jet picnic
Message:
Judex:

Yes I know what you mean by meeting people in the flesh. I think we should get a jet immediately, all make friends and resolve all our differences and then jet around and pick everyone up and have a picnic somewhere nice like...help me please....anyone suggest the best site in the world for a picnic?

The Vale of Kashmir. We'll have to wait til the Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus figure out how to live together, though. It's a bit dangerous at the moment.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:56:28 (EST)
From: Sir David
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Scott T. & Judex
Subject: Jet picnic
Message:
I know an idyllic spot in Warwickshire, England where ababbling brook is forded by an old farm lane. If we make too many sandwiches we can feed the swans and ducks there and if it's a hot day, we can join them in the water.

For a contrast though, St. Agnes Head in north Cornwall has a spectacular view over the Altlanic. Take the rocky walk over the cliffs from Perranporth, past the old tin mines and after a couple of miles or so you'll stumble upon your own private little beach surrounded by towering cliffs. If the tide's in we can sit on the clifftop and watch the suf crashing into the rocks below and if the tide's out, we can carefully walk down the cliff steps and explore the myriad of rock-pools down below.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:33:35 (EST)
From: carol
Email: None
To: Sir David
Subject: Jet picnic
Message:
Will you take us there if we visit? I've never been to Europe except for a stop at the airport on the way to India!
Carol
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:25:22 (EST)
From: Sir David
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: carol
Subject: Jet picnic
Message:
I'd love to take you. What you wrote reminds me of my tip to th US to see Maharaji. I tell people I've been to New York, Atlanta and Orlando. But exept for Orlando, I never stepped beyond the confines of those airports.

On the other hand I have MUCH to say about Florida. Erm, I stayed in a field that grew oranges, erm, they have big grasshoppers, erm, it's flat and quite hot err.. that's it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:12:58 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Sir Cheeze Whiz
Subject: futile arguments
Message:
David,

For me it's not just a question of futile arguments, it's a question of futile anger. Even if I refrain from arguing with or responding to Jim's posts, I can't change the fact that they make me angry. Even if it is just words on a screen. So for me it's better to go a step beyond not arguing to not reading.

Peter

P.S.--In case you don't know, Cheeze Whiz is another Amazing American Food Product. I believe it's officially classified as 'cheese food' rather than 'cheese'. It comes in a jar. But it seemed like a good term for you, since a 'whiz kid' is someone who's really smart.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 12:59:48 (EST)
From: Sir Cheese Whiz
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Peter
Subject: futile arguments
Message:
Wiz-kid? If only. But I do agree that censoring the posts you read is a good idea. Saves wasting a lot of time too. Thanks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 14:15:37 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: petkat@mail.trib.net
To: CheeseWhiz off topic
Subject: Cheesehead?
Message:
Sir David - did you ever get that cheesehead? If not maybe we should make sure I had the right address. It's been two weeks, so maybe I'm not giving the postal services enough time.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 04:29:45 (EST)
From: Sir David
Email: David.Studio57@btinternet.com
To: Katie
Subject: Cheesehead?
Message:
No Katie, I haven't got them yet. I will ask at the sorting office this week if they've forgotten to give me a parcel. But if it's coming by surface mail it could take three weeks anyway.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 09:30:23 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Sir David
Subject: Cheesehead? (off topic)
Message:
I sent it air mail because the guy at the post office said it could take two months by surface mail! It's a large package. Maybe it got held up in customs - I didn't know WHAT to write on the declaration form!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:41:21 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Peter
Subject: Cheese Whiz
Message:
Peter and David:

I believe Cheeze Whiz is basically a latex product. (At least it tastes lke that.) This also might fit??

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 10:30:15 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: all
Subject: More about Jim
Message:
Dear all -
I think it's a good idea for people who feel that their arguments with Jim are going nowhere to discontinue those arguments and refuse to engage him again, as Peter suggested. I also wish Jim wouldn't make the criticism of people's religious and spiritual beliefs a part of his agenda. I've said this a million times before, but this is an EX-PREMIE site, and the ex-premies who post on here are going (and do have) many different beliefs about life. This is acceptable to me. I don't think believing in god makes one more susceptible to Maharaji's trip, and I don't think it's part of the agenda of this site to challenge ALL spiritual and religious beliefs.

BUT, and this is a big 'but', many people have told me that Jim's posts have really helped them free themselves from their dependence on Maharaji. Also, many people have told me that Jim's posts were the first ones they read upon finding the forum. In other words, Jim challenges certain peoples' belief in Maharaji in such a way that they really LOOK at those beliefs for the first time. Thus I think Jim's posts are valuable. However, no posts are meaningful to everyone who reads this site - everyone is going to relate to different people. Thus, I think it's important to have Jim AND Scott AND Jude AND me AND everyone else posting on here. I hope we can all keep posting on the forum together despite our disagreements.

Regards from Katie

P.S. As everyone probably knows, I have gotten into arguments with Jim both on and off the forum. I don't agree with all his viewpoints and tactics, and he can make me really angry and frustrated, as I've demonstrated. However, I still want him to post on the forum. Please understand that by saying this, I am NOT taking sides for or against anyone. I think we can tolerate differences of opinion and style on here. I also recommend that anyone who is really angry and upset with Jim talk to him on the telephone, if possible. I did that once and it really helped me get to know him better, and it also got us out of a big argument that we were in. As David said, communication by typing words onto a keyboard is very incomplete, and we don't really 'know' each other as well as we could.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:06:54 (EST)
From: G's mom
Email: None
To: all
Subject: up to you..agree with Katie
Message:
If people want to boycott him do so. This is not some sort of mini cult. We will not always get along or agree. That if fine, normal, healthy. We are free to think what we want. I really like Jim's posts myself. I see what people are upset with but to me it is SO WHAT? You disagree , fine. He can be very aggressive. There are lots of aggressive people in the world. I think too if people find they are getting really upset by things here it might be time to take a break to get a little perspective. Being an ex-premie should not be one's key point of identity.

Anyway, I ignore some posts by other's here as they always tend to be the same old drivel, I think if someone else wants to ignore someone fine..
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 13:20:40 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: G's mom
Subject: me too
Message:
Hey, I think it's fine if people ignore me. Just so long as they don';t do it when we're actually discussing something. But then no one would like that.

I know Paula, who blasted me because I wasn't properly educated in relativim, deconstructionism and the other great insights of the social sciences, dismissed my posts as too long and boring. I think I thanked her for that and we never spoke to each other since! We're getting along great, as far as I can tell.

No, Peter, you go right ahead and ignore me if you like. I just wonder, does that mean I have to ignore you too? What if I read something really provocative of yours and find that, lo and behold, it 'really forsts my ass', as you say, can I communicate to you through some nuetral party?

No, don't worry about it. I'm sure it will all work out somehow.

In full forgiveness, before, during and after,

Jim
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:28:17 (EST)
From: Sanctimonious Pip
Email: None
To: all
Subject: Jim arshole bully bastard
Message:
I don't think it helps to take Jim's (or any one else's) attacks so personally. I am really scratching my head to imagine how you guys can be so upset with him. (Personally he makes me laugh, and I think it's healthy when a good comedian takes the piss out of people's 'precious' beliefs to the point when they get in a 'huff' especially in an open forum like this. That's his role OK?)

The secret of happiness is to be impartial when criticised, no matter how vicious the attack. That's what grown-up people do. Really. We are talking words here. Little baby words. Not bullet guns or sticks and stones. Peters 'call to arms' for others to boycott Jim sounds like an extremely oversensitive reaction to me.

Maybe some people here want to feel that its a cotton wool, 'luvvy-dovey'environment where they can 'recover' and not be challenged on their beliefs. I don't think that's going to happen. Unless you ban outspoken people like Jim, Rick and me! Seriously though you are getting a little too serious here aren't you? I don't think Jim's a bully , he's just brutally frank and is very demanding that people engage his arguments on his terms. If that is a fault then fine, ignore his demands. Just beg to differ. However to suggest 'boycott' is overkill and bordering on being santimonious. (Something I know a LOT about, believe me).

If one learns not to react to personal attacks so emotionally one has more fun in the playground and doesn't keep being made a fool of.
Also, before I am accused...If you think what I am saying is macho bullshit then you're wrong.. It just sounds that way. I am not like that. I mean look, for example at Robyn.. She got all angry and nasty and 'bingo' it was fun.... We are all friends here. Aren't we for Gods sake????
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 19:32:03 (EST)
From: nigel
Email: None
To: Sanctimonious Pip
Subject: Jim arshole bully bastard
Message:
Well put, Gerry. (?)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 21:12:21 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Please stop!
Message:
Ouch! Anon! Ouch! Stop! Ouch! Ouch! Anon! Ouch! Please stop! Ouch! Okay! I promise not to boycott your posts! Ouch! Stop! I promise!

Seriously, I think you need to read my post again. You did not pass the reading comprehension part of the exam.

Your first paragraph: You say that I am taking Jim's attacks too personally. Well, actually Jim has never attacked me (that's secretly what I'm upset about; why don't I rate?!). Zero points.

Your second paragraph: You refer to my 'call to arms' for others to boycott Jim. Perhaps you skipped over the first sentence, which began (in reference to the title, 'Boycott Jim'), 'This is not a rallying cry....' Zero points again.

Your third paragraph: Well, you don't get anything that I said wrong here, but you don't get it right either. I'll be lenient and give you 15 of 25 points.

Fourth paragraph: Any paragraph that contains the passage, 'what I am saying is [not] macho bullshit...it just sounds that way,' clearly deserves no points.

Final score: 15 of 100. A miserable failure. Didn't they teach you anything at Eton?

Let's try this again. Everything in my original post was very clear that I was not trying to talk people into boycotting Jim, I was just explaining how I felt, why I wasn't going to read Jim's posts any more, and offering the idea to others who may have felt as I felt. Jim has a way of making people feel that they have to argue with him, or they'll look like a fool or a coward. I wanted to counterbalance that with my opinion, which is that it is legitimate to ignore Jim if that's what you want to do.

A few other points:
We are talking words here. Little baby words. Not bullet guns or sticks and stones. Well I never saw Maharaji shoot anyone, but it seems to me that the entire premise of this website is that Maharaji did a lot of damage to a lot of people. How? With words. We are talking about people taking their lives, people cutting themselves off from their friends and their families, people treating other people in ways that they are ashamed of to this day--all at least partially in response to Maharaji's words. And the second premise of the website is that words have the power to help people recover themselves, to heal, to support growth. When you say Little baby words, it strikes me that your understanding of all this is infantile.

The secret of happiness is to be impartial when criticised, no matter how vicious the attack. That's what grown-up people do. Really. By 'grown-up people', you obviously mean Brits. Stiff upper lip and so on. And, by golly, I have to admit that Brits seem to be some of the happiest people in the world. I mean, when I see one coming down the sidewalk, I cross to the other side. I'm afraid he'll break into a spontaneous dance and knock me over, or let loose a belly-laugh and spray me with spittle.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jun 27, 1998 at 22:36:54 (EST)
From: Stephen Harris
Email: mulcyber@pacbell.net
To: Peter
Subject: Please stop!
Message:
I come to praise Ceasar not to bury him.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 08:14:28 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Peter
Subject: Please stop!
Message:
Peter, dear Peter,

You say that I am taking Jim's attacks too personally. Well, actually Jim has never attacked me (that's secretly what I'm upset about; why don't I rate?!). Zero points.

My post was addressed to, and was intended generally for 'All'. Not to you alone.

Your second paragraph: You refer to my 'call to arms' for others to boycott Jim. Perhaps you skipped over the first sentence, which began (in reference to the title, 'Boycott Jim'), 'This is not a rallying cry....' Zero points again.

No I didn't skip it.
Yes, I did refer to 'Peters 'call to arms' for others to boycott Jim'. and not without having read your post quite carefully.
Your thread title was 'Boycott Jim' was it not? You then immediately insert your small mitigating sentence as if to soften the clear 'imperative' that was your initial instruction. Also my dear Peter, at Eton anyway, the word 'Boycott' generally carried the meaning that more than one person was shutting out another from social intercourse of some kind. I believe that your post was effectively a suggestion of that nature despite your frantic denials. At the very least it was somewhat ambiguous.

Your third paragraph: Well, you don't get anything that I said wrong here, but you don't get it right either. I'll be lenient and give you 15 of 25 points.

Thanks. Again, although my post contains a couple of jabs at you, it was not for you alone.

Fourth paragraph: Any paragraph that contains the passage, 'what I am saying is [not] macho bullshit...it just sounds that way,' clearly deserves no points.

Really? Fair enough. I said this because, after one of my former outbursts, someone (not you, Robyn maybe) accused me of exactly that..Macho Bullshit. I was deeply wounded by this as I am quite un-macho and can't bear to so misinterpreted.

'We are talking words here. Little baby words. Not bullet guns or sticks and stones'.
Well I never saw Maharaji shoot anyone, but it seems to me that the entire premise of this website is that Maharaji did a lot of damage to a lot of people. How? With words. We are talking about people taking their lives, people cutting themselves off from their friends and their families, people treating other people in ways that they are ashamed of to this day--all at least partially in response to Maharaji's words. And the second premise of the website is that words have the power to help people recover themselves, to heal, to support growth. When you say Little baby words, it strikes me that your understanding of all this is infantile.

Come on Peter, you are the one who's missed the point here, for sure. My point was that it is our words, on this forum, here amongst ourselves, that should not be taken so seriously. Of course Maharaji's words carried considerable demand which affected our lives much more. Nobody here is pretending to be Satguru are they?

By 'grown-up people', you obviously mean Brits.

Of course I don't.

by golly, I have to admit that Brits seem to be some of the happiest people in the world. I mean, when I see one coming down the sidewalk, I cross to the other side. I'm afraid he'll break into a spontaneous dance and knock me over, or let loose a belly-laugh and spray me with spittle.

Aren't you muddling us up generally with certain Australians in particular their infamous cultural attache, Sir Les Patterson', who is well-known for such disgusting behaviour?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 10:35:59 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Please stop!
Message:
Anon:

I've a friend who never takes these things seriously. He is a very jolly fellow who reacts much like a marshmallow to a pointed advance. By the time he realizes there might be a serious intent to harm behind the merely verbal advance the minor resistance offered by the marshmallow's surface has given way and the barb is deeply embedded. The look of bewilderment on his face is heart-wrenching. I think you've a very selective perspective on what the word 'grown-up' means.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 11:03:58 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Please stop!
Message:
Anon:

I decided to continue this discussion offline, precisely because I don't think it's as superficial or inconsequencial as you suggest. I respect your opinion, and think I can change your mind. You may even be able to change my mind. If it seems appropriate we can provide a synopsis of the dialog to the forum later. Frankly, I'm worn out by the 'display' aspect of what's going on, if you know what I mean.

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 14:51:55 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Now you've gone and done it!
Message:
Anon,

I can't bear it! Not only was Jim not attacking me, but now you weren't either! I'm so hurt!

I think it's time to bring this back to your main point, which is that I and unspecified others are being too sensitive to Little Baby Words on the site (especially Jim's). (By the way, right after you say that we shouldn't take Jim's attacks so personally, you say how much you enjoy it when Jim's attacks get someone 'in a huff.' Isn't this a little inconsistent?) Agreed,, none of us has near as much power to cause damage with words as Maharaji does. Disagreed, that real damage can't or won't happen 'here amongst ourselves.' That's a head-in-the-sand attitude. Especially with Jim consistently displaying a take-no-prisoners gladiator mentality. Disagreed, also, that one should 'not take it personally,' ...'no matter how vicious the attack.' That's stupid. We all, including you, have places where we CAN be hurt, where we WILL take it personally no matter how determined we are not to. And the same for other emotions--they are not under conscious control. I didn't CHOOSE to get angry from reading Jim's posts.

What then? What you are really saying is don't display these emotions. Suppress them. For God's sake, don't overreact and issue a 'call to arms' for everyone to gang up on Jim and soap his doorknobs. Be mature. Act like an adult.

We probably have an irresolvable disagreement there. To me, learning how to not express what you feel is part of emotional maturity, but if that's the only part you learn you're an emotional cripple. The more important part of emotional maturity is not learning to suppress, but learning to express. I know, because I learned suppression growing up and expression much later. Yes, it takes maturity and judgement to decide whether and how to express an emotion. I don't claim to always make the perfect judgement in this regard. But as far as I can see, you're coming from a place where there is virtually no judgement to be made. Just 'follow the rules.' I'm not interested.

So where do Jim and the expression of emotions intersect? Jim's got a lot of anger simmering away in the background of most of his posts which occasionally erupts into condescension and meanness. People who get hit with it often get 'upset'. You think they shouldn't. I think they should. But they do, regardless of should or shouldn't, and nothing you say is going to change that. I suggest that you deal with the world as it is and not as you think it should be. Once they get upset, what should they do? Confronting Jim is a good choice that many have made, sometimes in a mature way, sometimes not, but at least offering a possible path to resolution. But they have found that it's like talking to a brick wall. Jim has almost always felt justified in everything that he said. Doesn't give an inch. Then what? Well, they can continue talking to the brick wall or they can withdraw in some way. Withdrawal seems the smarter choice to me. But hopefully without withdrawing from the Forum. Hence the boycott Jim suggestion. If it helps one person it was worth it. If it causes Jim to reconsider his behavior, well, that would be great too, but I'm not holding my breath.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 15:35:32 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Peter
Subject: Now you've gone and done it!
Message:
Peter,

I'm not sure what it is you're really looking for here. But first, would you please tell me how you underline words? My father once told me of a man in his village who had this power. I never knew if he was just kidding. Now I see you do it and some aprt of me, possible even my heart, cries out, 'me too!'.

Yeah, well thank you in advance for any assistance you may offer in that regard. Sincerely,....

Okay, you wrote:

. People who get hit with it often get 'upset'. You think they shouldn't. I think they should. But they do, regardless of should or shouldn't, and nothing you say is going to change that.

Why are you pessimistic about behavioral adjustment on the other end of things? I mean, let's say there is, for argument's sake, some situation where someone get's upset by something someone else (okay, Jim, if you have to) says but anyone can clearly see taht they SHOULDN'T. Are you saying no one 'should' tell the 'victim', then, to smarten up, take a fresh look, get a life, snap out of it, buck up, bucko, try to see it more fully, admit something or other or maybe just plain ol' get real? Doesn't the norm ever push in that direction?

Okay, that was one question.

Now I want your opinion on something, okay? Right now, as we speak, I'm in conflict with two people, Scott and Judex. Scott, in big block leters (the kind that can REALLY hurt) told me that I've got nothing new to say here and asked why I don't just shut the fuck up. Apparently, I hadn't answered Judex satisfactorily.

Judex at one point said:

If you really wanted some action from Maharaji you would be doing more than just writing letters to Linda Gross. The way you are fooling yourself that what you are saying is legitimate is obvious in so many ways Jim.

Then, when I asked her to explain herself, she wrote:

Can you please not select little parts of my statement and wave them around like evidence, belittling and insulting me with your mind-power and word-use ability? Can you just read it, see if there is anything you agree with or disagree with, tell me about it if you want to, and we can keep discussing it?

What's your advice here? Should I just let it go? What's your advice to Judex, that she doesn't have to back up her own little darts at people if she doesn't want?

Please, Peter, will you help me figure thos out.

Finally, you say I never back down or off or admit I'm wrong or anything. That's not true. Just a couple of days ago I withdrew most of something I'd said in an apology to Katie. And that's not the first time. Well?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 20:12:13 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: JIM!
Message:
NOT SO SERIOUS BIT (just so not to confuse anyone)

Ok Jim.
These guys mean business. It's time to start being a bit nice to people. Take it from a friend. You particularly, are too much upsetting the sensitivities of those who stray unsuspecting into the path of your unrelenting cross-examinations. Damage can be done (I am reliably informed) mainly by the manner in which you deliver your arguments. It is being called 'abuse' not to beat about the bush.

I too have, in the past, been accused of meaness and condescension, and am trying to moderate my behaviour so as to be less offensive to others. It is difficult believe me, but you must try to do the same, or you may become a social outcast. All of your own doing!
Sometimes you have tried to draw me out over some contentious point. I have probably wisely made an excuse and vanished for a while. Thank God your memory isn't that good!

My advice to those who are upset at Jim's (or my) words is :-

If you find him irritating, demanding or abusive..DON'T RISE TO THE BAIT. or if you do...don't flog a dead horse by continuing the argument..Just abandon ship and do something more useful with your time.

Rule One: (yes, Peter, Alas, it would seem I do have a general rule book. NB: My general rules are the result of my judgements and are quite flexible and open to change.)

Don't get too upset. It's not worth it. But don't suppress it either..Go and hit a pillow.I did that once when my girlfriend left me. It seemed to work. That way all your frustration is taken out on a harmless inanimate object and you will avoid internalisang the potentially damaging rage of emotions that will be flooding up from your unconsious.
Other ways of dealing with it are: Have a good swear..Go to therapy..smash a cup.

People like Jim and I are ALWAYS RIGHT so arguing further is futile. We are chronically incapable of being sincerely wrong.(we might say we are wrong or sorry but we're not really!) We are beyond redemption and serve only to rile, challenge and drive sensitive people over the edge with our incessant abuse. If you let us that is. Don't. Do us a favour and don't expect any normal healthy emotional responses from us. We are sick weirdos posing as ego-maniac brainy guys. (That's what we get told, isn't it?)

Peter you're right though. I am sick. If only because I enjoy seeing someone successfully provoke a premie or New-Ager into a huff..I think to myself..Aha! you've lost it now ..where's all your peace and love when you need it? How heartless. I agree. What was it is somebody called people like me..'Shit Stirers' That's it! Very apt.

SERIOUS BIT
OK. I am being serious now.

There are a lot of things about myself that I regret and would wish were different. I have a hard time being tactfull and so, I guess does Jim. My mother said, after I left the Ashram 'You seem harder now' She was right. I used to be a soft loveable, loving, blissfull person. I had become more cynical and critical, wary and disillusioned. Emotionally crippled? Frankly, life has wrung most of the reaction out of me now. You could say I am indeed a bit hardened. I am definately more cynical about God, premies and New Age wishfull thinking, but then I reckon anyone would be after my experiences.
I am not emotionless though. I choose to allow those emotions that I feel are constructive to flow freely. Those destructive one? Well I am not so sure I want to give those free reign. Is that really so healthy?? I actually don't feel repressed about that. I feel that my emotions are just moderated by my common sense. I don't want to spend my life worked up into a froth over all lifes trials and tribulations, and there have been many.

Jim and I may well be examples of people whose reaction to life has so far made us occasionally objectionable in polite society. We seem to both have a learned contempt for hypocrisy and are maybe blind to our own. I don't know. We are probably both obsessively and tiresomely into provocatively aguing, too much for our own good, maybe as an overeaction to being mute and accepting 'listeners' in the past. I probably shouldn't speak for Jim. I suppose I have some sympathy towards his attitude, although I don't feel personally compelled to argue quite so vehemently or aggressively as he.
Finally as I wrote to Scott, I have no wish to take sides over all this. Moreover, I should probably resist the temptation to enjoin the arguments since I confess, I do not read all the relevant posts. (and have no desire to) I may be seen as (or seen to be wanting to be seen as) an occasionally sincere, well-adjusted, intelligent contributor. I am in truth, a very averagely brained and rather maverick person, whose posts are often ill-considered, impulsive and probably of little value other than to exercise my literary pretensions. My contributions very well may be downright troublesome at times. Er..sorry about that.
I admit that often I feel come upon me Edgar Allen Poe's, 'Imp of the Perverse'.
Also it may be asking to much to expect readers of my posts to seperate that which is serious and sincere, from that which is 'impish'. Hence my above experiment in distinguishing my various 'modus operandi'.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:33:22 (EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: OH GOD!
Message:
Well, Anon, thanks for telling us all how 'adjusted' and 'intelligent' you are and that you are a 'brainy guy', even if you do say so yourself. My yes, now it all makes more sense.

But your attempt to state that you and Jim are 'two peas in a pod' fails in one area. You are much, much much MUCH more verbose that Jim.

I would also like to state that I am taking Peter's suggestion and starting a boycott (which, anon, according to the standard definition, CAN consist of just one person). But this boycott will not be of JIM but of any thread of which 'JIM' is the primary subject, of which there have been at least half a dozen in the last few days and intermittent discussion over the past year. This includes threads discussing how Jim argues or doesn't argue, speculation about what he looks like, speculation about his emotional state and his supposed underlying anger or humor, what he eats for breakfast, how emotional people get in relation to him, etc. etc. Frankly, I find that REALLY boring and, and way OFF TOPIC.

Jim is an interesting person, but god, there is a limit!!!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:43:39 (EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: OH GOD!
Message:
'This includes threads discussing how Jim argues or doesn't argue, speculation about what he looks like, speculation about his emotional state and his supposed underlying anger or humor, what he eats for breakfast, how emotional people get in relation to him, etc. etc. Frankly, I find that REALLY boring and, and way OFF TOPIC.

Jim is an interesting person, but god, there is a limit!!!'

THANK YOU, JW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Having said that, what do YOU eat for breakfast? Just kidding.

VP
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 22:54:19 (EST)
From: JIm
Email: None
To: VP
Subject: Me too, kind of
Message:
Hey Joe,

Why're you giving Anon such a hard time? That surprised me a bit, I must say. Sure he's more verbose than I am but it wasn't very sensitive of you to point it out in front of everyone.

As for keeping the focus on Maharaji, not on me, yeah, I'm there too. Honestly. Yes, I have fun (I guess?) scrapping over my many virtues, etc. but even I have a limit. Besides, why talk about little ol' me when we can talk about God in Human Form?

I think what happens, though, is that I, and others (sometimes you, too, he he) challenge certain things and, rather than just debate the point, those challenged get all ad hominem.

We ex's do it too when dealing with certain premies. Sometiems it's just too tempting to want to poke away at the psychology behind the posts. So I guess we're all a little guilty of that here.

Oh what to do? I'm SO beside myself.

Take care,

P.S. Anon, I don't have time for a longer post but will probably email you or post again here more fully. In brief, I appreciate your thoughts, agree with a lot of them and will get back to you further when I've got a bit more time. I've been cooped up in a dark warehouse all day and have about half an hour of sunlight waiting for me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:23:03 (EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: JIm
Subject: To Jim and Anon
Message:
Anon,

Sorry, I think I'm just frustrated with all this discussion about Jim and not about what this forum is supposed to be about. I'm sorry if I took an unfair swipe at you in the process, especially when you were sharing your feelings about yourself, and I don't want you to think that isn't appreciated, because it is.

Jim,

What is all this about you? How come you become the subject of discussion so much? Is it voodoo or spells? How come you get to be the center of attention? Why are all these people so fascinated with you? Sorry, Jim, maybe it's because I've actually met you in person, but...I am not. I mean, I like you and everything, but I've never felt compelled to post messages about you on the forum, unlike a bunch of these other people. Maybe I'm just not as smart as these other people who understand so well your psychological makeup and freely comment upon it.
Go figure.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:28:00 (EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: And
Message:
I also think I am a little out of sorts today. I just came from a parade in downtown San Francisco where 600,000 people watched the mayor march wearing a rainbow suit. I told myself that at least he wasn't wearing leather. It kind of disoriented me.

JW

Once again saw what a politician will do to get votes in '98
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:06:31 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: And
Message:
Joe:

Rainbow suit? Poor San Francisco. I've got no idea what a rainbow suit is about, or even what it looks like. Colorful, I guess. On the other hand, mayors of large cities have often been a bit whacky, so maybe this is normal. Have you ever considered that?

-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 13:07:53 (EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: And
Message:
Scott:

On rainbows: The rainbow motif got big about 1989 and lasted for awhile, and we are now into 'retro-rainbow' in the late 90s.

On Da Mayor: On TV the mayor said he bought the clothes in the Nautical section of Macys (I was shocked he didn't say Wilkes Bashford). Saying they were colorful is an incredible understatement. He was marching in a parade. I know that it's been hot over much of the country, but true to it's reputation for cold summers it was windy and freezing in San Francisco yesterday during the parade. Hence, Da Mayor wore a bright orange jacket adding to the array of colors.

Yes, I of course considered the antics politicians sometimes employ to woo voters and that's why I mentioned that was what he was doing. Whether this behavior is 'normal' depends on where you live.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 01:43:31 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Hey, that's MY mystique, fella
Message:
Sorry JW,

But that's my mystique you're fucking with, eh? [Canadian]

You know, I have no idea why I'm such a lightning rod here. Well, historically, you know, I helped get this thing happening but so what, huh? [American] I also got into some good arguments with a couple of the first premies here, but then so did you. I don't know. A bunch of people think I'm an asshole, you've only got a few of those (like-minded people, I mean). Well, one thing is that, for some reason, a number of premies who've posted here are old cell-mates of mine. Diver Dan, Annie, Jack.... I guess I really lucked out. Where are all YOUR old brothers and sisters, JW? Strange, isn't it? {British?]

Another thing is that I put up some weird shit here, like Marolyn's letter, like my fake interview with Maharaji.

Oh, I know! Of course, I'm an atheist! I mean talk about establishing some 'polarity' (ha ha ha) with some of the folk here.

Also, I'm polite and, ... look, not to say you're not but, well, you ARE an American. I'm a Canadian and yes, I'm polite and people are usually drawn to nice people. What can I say? I try to get along with people.

No, if you can come up with some explanation for someone like Judex announcing her big breakthrough -- 'unjimming' herself, please let me know. Frankly, I find it all a bit embarrassing. And Scott? I don't know. I guess he wanted to spike me a bit because he, too, can't seem to understand why people bother talking about me when, as he said, I don't have a single fucking new thought in my head and only two voices: cute and bully.

Hell, I know a bit more, I tried to turn a bunch of people here on to Dawkins, so that made me the resident evangelical atheist.
That was good for a few threads. (Boy, waht a mistake that was).

Joe, it's all these things. I'd be happy to just talk about Maharaji, you know that. You know that when this thing started I didn't try to divert the conversation to Jim subjects, don't you? Mind you, I have played out a lot of talk that's gone that way but it's not my agenda. Yes, I enjoy it a bit but I'd be happy to let it go.

First, though, Judex owes me an explanation. Aren't you curious what the hell she meant by that stuff?

Blessings to all the ex's,
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 15:15:10 (EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey, that's MY mystique, fella
Message:
Yes, Jim, I guess there are a number of reasons why so many people talk about you:

1. You have been 'out front' from the very beginning, using your name, details of you life, etc. Personally, I admire this a lot. I think it encouraged a lot of people like me to think it really was okay to say publicly what I thought about my involvement with BM, even when I wasn't exactly sure what I felt. I figured if people like you and Scott could be so open about it, so could I.

2. And then there ARE those people from your past who have posted here. Can't say they have much dirt to throw at you, Jim. I guess that towel incident was the most Annie could come up with. I keep thinking some premie who knows me from the past will post some terribly embarrassing thing I said or did as a premie, but so far it hasn't happened. I did know John and Mark, however, but THEY are exs and not premies anymore. I do think that that 'A Premie' guy from a while back knew me. You know, the guy who was REALLY nasty? There was some kind of a personal vendetta going on there, but whoever it was was SO paranoid, that he not only wouldn't give his name, but wouldn't even discuss any particulars about himself that might give some clue. John thought it might have been David Smith because of some of the negative stuff I said about him, but given how flat he was in conversations with you, I ruled that out. Plus, I doubt Smith would disobey agya and post on the internet when he knows BM doesn't like it. Joy thought it was either Joan Apter or Ira Woods. I didn't think so.

3. I think with the Dawkins/atheist stuff you suffer from being an over-acheiver, expressing your viewpoint. You like to talk about it and that gets you into hot water with some people who don't agree/hold on to new age spiritual stuff. I learned early in life to avoid the subjects of politics and religion (or lack thereof) in conversation until you know where the other people are at. So, I avoid that, except for the Maharaji-religion, of course. BTW -- I've read a couple of Dawkins books over the past year, and I must say I agree with most of it, but tell me Jim, how to gay people fit into the theory? I just don't get it. It doesn't seem to promote the selfish gene theory at all. Do you have a theory on that?

4. I think Judex is on your case because she thinks you treated Scott badly and I think she's defending Scott. It's actually kind of a noble thing, like the way Robyn defended Brian. I think the catalyst was that 'ex-premie intervention' post, which was hysterical and brilliant, but if I had been on the receiving end of it, it might not have felt so good either and maybe someone would have come to my defense too.

JW
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 15:59:43 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Hey, that's MY mystique, fella
Message:
Thanks a lot for your kind words, Joe.

Rather than give you my very uninformed, from-the-hip speculation about gayness (Darwin-wise), tell you what I'm gonna do. I'll actually research the subject a bit for you, take a look at a few of the books we've got on evolution and sex. It IS an interesting subject. I'll see what I can find out.

But you know who really knows his evolution stuff here? Besides, Scott, I mean. Nigel. Nige, if you're reading this, care to comment?

Thanks again, Joe.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 21:53:09 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: you made me like it
Message:
Well, Anon, you've put me in a position where there is nothing more I can possibly say. More amazing yet, you made me like it.

Hardness, cynicism, impishness, perversity--all very good qualities, but I hope that you find a reserve of the softer ones somewhere to balance them out. I've been astounded on this site by the things that some have been through and come out the other end once again able to grasp both positive and negative.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 22:11:03 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Anon's humor
Message:
Dear Anon,
I liked your post very much: both the serious and not-so-serious parts. I do want to comment on one thing.
You wrote:
Also it may be asking to much to expect readers of my posts to seperate that which is serious and sincere, from that which is 'impish'. Hence my above experiment in distinguishing my various 'modus operandi'.

I have a VERY hard time trying to separate your sarcasm from your seriously intended words, although I may be the only one who has this problem. As you may recall, I got angry at you once because I thought you were being serious when you were being sarcastic, and you attributed it to the non-translatability of British humor. After reading more of your posts, and those of the other UK guys who post on the forum, I am beginning to think that it's not British humor that I don't understand, it's Anon's humor. This may be due to the limitations of expression in words typed by someone you do not know personally (or it may be due to my excessive literalness). I do appreciate that you made it clear what was what in your post above.

Regards,
Katie

P.S. to Jim. To underline is just like italics or bold, only use a 'u' instead of an 'i' or a 'b'. AND DON'T FORGET TO CLOSE YOUR HTML, please.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 22:50:23 (EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Imp
Message:
What is that poem - Glory be to god for dappled things?

I remember it from primary school.

Thank you for telling so much, so well.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:09:05 (EST)
From: Anon
Email: None
To: My dear buddies
Subject: Imp
Message:
Judex:
Glory be to god for dappled things ! ..and to all other variegations too, and things of plain and dull colour.
Bleary-eyed and bedraggled I stumble yet again from my flea-ridden 'scratcher' (Navy slang for bed) straight to my computer to catch up on the fun and games here with my New Family. (joke)
I am glad my last post served to pour a little oil on troubled water. (I hope it did that a bit, JW seemed a little tetchy this morning ..or was it last night?).
JW: No problem.. water off a duck's bottom.
Katie and Peter: Um....Hallo! friends across the water! Isn't it funny to think of all those fish in between us? Weird.
Jim: I hope your having fun recording the X-Flies. What is ADAT? Sounds weird like you. I'd like to hear the CD though.

OK I shall now go and get on with todays edition of my life.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 11:25:39 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: ADAT -- off what topic?
Message:
Anon,

ADAT's are Alesis' VHS (Video Cassette)- based digital recording technology. You get 8 tracks per tape and you can link them in parallel to get as many tracks as you need.

We put down the beds (rhythm, bass and drums) to 13 tracks, one to redo and one more to go tonight. Then I'll redo all the guitars and try to play it in time this time. Then more guitars, vocals, artwork, mastering and -- voila! -- another Vanity Press Production.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 07:16:27 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Judex
Subject: Dappled things
Message:
Hi Judex -
It's by Gerard Manley Hopkins, who was a Catholic poet who used a lot of alliteration. I think it's a pretty good poem, won't quote it here. I can e-mail it to you if you don't have an decent anthology.

Take care,
Katie
(your poetry connection)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:00:37 (EST)
From: Becky
Email: None
To: Peter
Subject: Anger
Message:
Your definition of anger is interesting. However, I still feel angry about things that don't affect me personally.
I feel very angry with the shallow values of a capitalist society, I feel angry with people who are asleep/selfish/refuse to help others.
I feel angry when someone I care about is hurt. I think its thoughtlessness and taking for granted that really make me angry.

I don't know Jim well enough to comment on your thread.

As for me, I'm not above faults: am blind, stubborn, selfish etc. etc. Anyone who's angry with me, feel free to say so.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 12:06:31 (EST)
From: Peter
Email: None
To: Becky
Subject: Anger
Message:
All those things you mentioned clearly have to do with behavior you consider unacceptable. Toward not only yourself, but toward other people and things that you care about. That's right in line with what I was saying.

Although I can relate to your feelings of anger, I guess I have in a sense 'accepted' many unacceptable things. I don't accept that they're okay, I just accept that they exist and there's not much I can do to change them. That way I'm not feeling useless anger all the time. Kind of like the Serenity Poem or whatever it's called. I do try to make small positive moves like supporting organizations that are working to change those unacceptable things.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index


Ex-Premie.Org	Forum III Archive # 14
From: Jun 23, 1998	To: Jun 30, 1998	Page: 1 Of: 5