Forum IV: The Ex-Premie Forum
Archive: 12
From: Sat, Nov 20, 1999 To: Fri, Dec 10, 1999 Page: 2 Of: 5


Forum Admin -:- Handles -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:02:08 (EST)
__ Runamok -:- Re: Handles -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 02:33:58 (EST)
__ The artist now known as ~#*/@¬¬£ -:- Re: Handles -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:27:06 (EST)
__ __ Katie -:- Re: Handles -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:33:11 (EST)
__ __ __ Ana T -:- Re: Handles -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 23:37:05 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Joey -:- Re: Handle THIS...Mary McGraw -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:09:18 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ SisterMaryTerrence -:- Re: Handle THIS...Mary McGraw -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:01:07 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Handel -:- Joey, good job at naming that tune -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:15:08 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joey -:- Re: Joey, good job at naming that tune -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:25:02 (EST)
__ __ Forum Admin -:- Re: Handles -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:30:37 (EST)
__ __ __ Maharaji -:- No way! -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 21:28:20 (EST)

Jim -:- My mistake (but fuck anonymity) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:06:49 (EST)
__ selene -:- Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 12:26:31 (EST)
__ Katie -:- Thank you, Jim -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:40:53 (EST)
__ Ben Lurking -:- Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:33:58 (EST)
__ __ selene -:- Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 12:32:59 (EST)
__ __ __ Ben Lurking -:- Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 20:26:16 (EST)
__ __ Katie -:- Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:52:17 (EST)
__ __ __ selene -:- an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:29:10 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Katie -:- Re: an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:44:29 (EST)
__ __ __ __ madman -:- Re: an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:34:59 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ selene -:- Re: an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:22:00 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Major Fanny de Selene -:- Re: an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:01:34 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ selene -:- Re: an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:20:36 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Major Fanny -:- Re: an observation -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:33:08 (EST)
__ __ Jim -:- Yes, there's always that risk -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:48:41 (EST)
__ __ __ Mickey the Pharisee -:- Re: Yes, there's always that risk -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:53:01 (EST)
__ __ __ __ nigel -:- Believe me, it's safe!!! -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 20:40:08 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Who's afraid of what? -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:24:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- It's safe for Maharaji too -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 21:05:18 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ nigel -:- But he'll crash and burn, soon enough... -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 21:33:57 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Grace -:- Re: But he'll crash and burn, soon enough... -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 22:20:14 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ nigel -:- Lotus feet turned to feet of clay... -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 09:13:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ octopus -:- Re: feet of clay -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 10:39:10 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- Guess I need a bigger dictionary... -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 14:52:08 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- Re: Guess I need a bigger dictionary... -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 16:38:01 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mickey the..er Michael -:- Re: Guess I need a bigger dictionary... -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 18:10:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ nigel -:- Perhaps I am an anti-antinomian -:- Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:34:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ bb -:- Re: But he'll crash and burn, soon enough... -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 00:48:16 (EST)

Happy -:- Totapuri -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 09:18:20 (EST)
__ Jean-Michel -:- Re: Totapuri -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:42:37 (EST)
__ __ Happy -:- Re: and articles -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:26:40 (EST)
__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- About his RS relation denial -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:39:17 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jack -:- The Lord as Guru denial -:- Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:53:20 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- That's a bad analogy, Jack -:- Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 14:04:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Sawan Singh -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:05:45 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Sawan Singh it was! -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:05:31 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Squid Vicious -:- or Kirpal Tunnel Singh Drome -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 01:12:15 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Squid V -:- No, It Was Sawan Wap -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:59:13 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: No, It Was Sawan Wap -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:02:15 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- Re: No, It Was Sawan Wap -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:02:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ elmer fudd -:- Re: No, It Was Sawan Wap -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:21:41 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Woops -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:09:19 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- Re: -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:00:12 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Happy -:- I've found your address -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:12:16 (EST)

JHB -:- Invitation -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:29:55 (EST)

Cynthia -:- Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!! -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 18:12:29 (EST)
__ Are you really stupid, Cynthia.. -:- Re: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!! -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:15:53 (EST)
__ __ Ana T -:- Re: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!! -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 23:38:27 (EST)
__ __ __ Ana T -:- Lost my post... here it is again. -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 00:40:12 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Ana T -:- Re: Lost my post... here it is again. -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 00:41:58 (EST)
__ __ Katie -:- Are you really as obnoxious as you seem, or... -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:41:43 (EST)
__ __ __ Who really knows -:- To Katie and Ana T -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:00:58 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Joey -:- Re: Who really knows and Ana T -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:27:53 (EST)
__ __ __ Ana T -:- Re: Are you really as obnoxious as you seem, or... -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 23:41:30 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Joey -:- To Mary McGraw...Are you really as obnoxious as you seem, or... -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:34:19 (EST)
__ bbum -:- Re: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!! -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 23:20:53 (EST)

ANY premie -:- Rodney Halstead -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 13:34:55 (EST)
__ AJW -:- Re: Rodney Halstead -:- Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 11:04:15 (EST)
__ Katie -:- Re: Rodney Halstead -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:26:08 (EST)
__ __ JHB -:- Re: Editing Journeys -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:15:27 (EST)
__ __ __ Katie -:- oops! should have said 'formatting' -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:27:00 (EST)
__ Robyn -:- Re: Rodney Halstead -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 19:04:25 (EST)
__ __ ANY premie -:- Rodney - Father Love -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:12:22 (EST)
__ __ __ Monmot -:- Re: Rodney - Father Love -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:16:38 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Rodney - Father Love -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:42:11 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- Re: Rodney - Father Love -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:56:16 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Rodney - Father Love -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:34:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Monmot -:- Re: Rodney - Father Love -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:45:13 (EST)

Jean-Michel -:- Bublegum's cult -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 12:50:13 (EST)
__ Bublegum -:- A cult or not a cult? -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 15:32:08 (EST)
__ __ The Anti-Maharaji cult is not unlike the -:- ARYA SAMAJ -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:57:07 (EST)
__ __ __ More like -:- the Eagle Scouts -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:52:08 (EST)
__ __ __ Shri Hans was a member of the -:- ARYA SAMAJ -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:12:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Not for Long -:- He was outa there -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:49:58 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Ye soon as he -:- Realised how much he could make being God -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:05:29 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Yeah, driving a Morris Oxford clone -:- the famous 'Somerset' (nt) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:02:26 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Campaign for Real Info -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:34:17 (EST)
__ __ Jean-Michel -:- Re: A cult or not a cult? -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 06:17:19 (EST)
__ __ __ bublegum= -:- =bugle bum(nt anagram) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:13:59 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Who really knows -:- Re: =bugle bum(nt anagram) -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 06:59:07 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Light -:- Re: ='bugle' -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:41:24 (EST)
__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Buble ji's answer: -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:50:06 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- So we now know the real object of Maharaji's envy: the rich televangelist -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:19:32 (EST)
__ __ Jim -:- Another flaming idiot! -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 18:16:18 (EST)
__ __ JHB -:- This post already rebutted below -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 16:18:52 (EST)
__ __ __ Bublegum -:- Re: This post already rebutted below -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 16:46:31 (EST)
JHB -:- Goodbye Bublegum -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 17:23:05 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- me think that Bublegum is Bim Doubtfire (nt) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 03:54:26 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Not so fast, M Roget -:- bublegum=bulge bum(nt anag) -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:59:23 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Who really knows -:- Re: bublegum=bulge bum(nt anag) -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:36:01 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Light -:- Re: 'bulge' -:- Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:31:21 (EST)
__ Sir Dave -:- Re: Bublegum's cult -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 13:07:09 (EST)

Grace -:- Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 12:42:05 (EST)
__ CD -:- Re: Christmas celebration -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:33:01 (EST)
__ JW -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 17:14:13 (EST)
__ __ Grace -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:09:26 (EST)
__ __ __ Susan -:- How old are your children Grace? -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:59:52 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Grace -:- Re: How old are your children Grace? -:- Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:59:39 (EST)
__ __ __ Robyn -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:13:53 (EST)
__ __ Grace -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:00:19 (EST)
__ __ Robyn -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 19:11:08 (EST)
__ __ Mahatma Santananda -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 18:56:10 (EST)
__ __ __ Mahatma Offanand -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 19:03:32 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Nakedananda Bai -:- Re: Premie Children and Christmas -:- Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:05:54 (EST)


Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:02:08 (EST)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Handles
Message:
Can I just remind everyone that the etiquette of this forum is that posters either post under their own name or under a consistent pseudonym. There have been too many examples of both premies and exes posting under different names recently. Such posts may be deleted in future regardless of content.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 02:33:58 (EST)
From: Runamok
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Re: Handles
Message:
Using this guideline can make things smoother when there are more people regularly using the forum (which I think is desirable). People may use extra pseuds for humor, but they also do so for flaming.

Forum admin, I wish you would post guidelines either as a permanent page or with updates and clarifications a little more often. This seems important because you are more than one person and anonymous.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:27:06 (EST)
From: The artist now known as ~#*/@¬¬£
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: Re: Handles
Message:
Does that mean I can't post under the name of ~#*/@¬¬£ any more? Everyone knows my real name here and I thought that ~#*/@¬¬£ had a certain ring to it.

And what are you going to do about Bill Burke???

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:33:11 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: The artist now known as ~#*/@¬¬£
Subject: Re: Handles
Message:
Well, I don't know what the forum admin thinks, but I've ALWAYS recognized your pseudonyms, Sir David. Ditto with Helen (Minnesota Housewife, Tami Rainbow, Lil' Yiddish Grandma), and some other people. I do know that people get confused though, and I know of at least one person who left the forum because of this (someone we all knew and loved, too.)

Take care -
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 23:37:05 (EST)
From: Ana T
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Re: Handles
Message:
Hi Katie,

I'm sticking with Ana T on any occasion I would post over here. I'm trying to stay in Sir Dave's Morning Glory garden area.

Love,
Ana T(hema)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:09:18 (EST)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Ana T
Subject: Re: Handle THIS...Mary McGraw
Message:
You may sticking with 'Ana T', but I'll be adressing you by your real name, your legal name, the name your employer knows you as.

Greetings Mary McGraw!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:01:07 (EST)
From: SisterMaryTerrence
Email: no
To: Joey
Subject: Re: Handle THIS...Mary McGraw
Message:
Jus 'cause some ho' upstaged me, doesn't make me a saint
or not. Damn...if only I could have given up the ghost a
week earlier...i could have been a contenda.com
o' well marble next life.. Shucks dot com
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:15:08 (EST)
From: Handel
Email: None
To: Joey
Subject: Joey, good job at naming that tune
Message:
I think you are correct about Ana T.

Perhaps, she can tell us if she ever received a reply from Maharaji from her heartfelt apology that she posted.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:25:02 (EST)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Handel
Subject: Re: Joey, good job at naming that tune
Message:
I think you are correct about Ana T.

I know I am. She's already let on as much on the ex only forum. Its a fact.

We're dealing with Mary McGraw and she's attempting to pull off one f**k of a deception on this forum and I have the proof.

I'm just waiting for her to present herself.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 19:30:37 (EST)
From: Forum Admin
Email: None
To: The artist now known as ~#*/@¬¬£
Subject: Re: Handles
Message:
Well I have no idea who you are but ~#*/@¬¬£ is fine by me.

Look below and there are conversations taking place using the Name/Alias and subject fields as part of the text of the conversation.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 21:28:20 (EST)
From: Maharaji
Email: None
To: Forum Admin
Subject: No way!
Message:
There's no way I'm going to use my real name here.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:06:49 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: All
Subject: My mistake (but fuck anonymity)
Message:
In a thread below Brian snapped at 'who knows' who'd asked if the ex-premie website 'mastership' included running the forum. In fact, even Katie snalred at 'who knows' a bit (which really surrpised me). I saw that and chimed in that Brian was always like that ('touchy, touchy') and thought little more of it.

Until last night, that is ....

Going to bed I asked Laurie if she'd seen Brian's post and my reply. We got to talking and it was only then that I realized that 'who knows' wasn't who I thought he/she was, i.e. an ex. See, I'd gotten 'Know it all' mixed up with 'Who knows'. I know who 'Know it All' is and, silly me, had somehow forgotten that they are, indeed, two distinct people; 'Know it all', of course, is an ex, while 'Who Knows' is still a premie.

So, I must admit, it was perfectly reasonable for Brian -- and even Katie -- to snap a bit at 'Who Knows' who, after all, has no business getting involved in the business of these sites. That's obvious. Is Brian always 'touchy, touchy' as I said? No, of course not. (snicker /sheesh /snicker).

AAAAANNND, I made a similar mistake the other day. Some stupid premie posted a reply to me suggesting that I didn't know enough about the subject of Knowledge to comment on it. She signed her name 'Annie'. So was it wrong for me to assume that this was, in fact, the same Annie that has posted here on and off for the past two years and who I knew in the ashram? Well I did and, apparently, I was wrong. Different Annie (at least that's what she says).

So yippeee for all this anonymity. First, we've got a bunch of people who think they're in some extended Abbott and Costello routive ('Who's on First? I Dunno Who's on Second'). The whole purpose of that joke was to confuse people. But, for some great reason that escapes me, a bunch of posters here think that's just a great way to talk with one another. Yeah, right.

And then we've got people barely identifying themselves so we're still apt to all be confused. Yipppeeeee on that one too.

Let's face it: the real reason people post anonymously here is because they're afraid of the cult. We should expect that of its members but I, for one, am never convinced that any ex has to feel this way. It's a bit of a bother, now isn't it?

(Now I'm going to get the usual premie idiocy about 'double-standards'. Why was it okay for Brian to snap at a premie but not an ex? Again, that answer's obvious.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 12:26:31 (EST)
From: selene
Email: selene@ocean.ccit.arizona.edu
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity)
Message:
I am not anonymous. I really am me. I can't legally change my name til I inherit a whole bunch of the rest of a whole bunch of +++++. cool huh? I mean I could do it legally now but you know I hate to slow those lawyers down anymore. They are so busy after all.
Jim I have always liked you. You remind me of me a bit (of course you hate that I'm sure) But I do like the way you just come out and say it like it is. Don't understand why you still care so much but then, here I am still. And I never had the ashram hell experience so there is that to consider.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:40:53 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Thank you, Jim
Message:
I couldn't figure out why you thought it was OK for a premie, who obviously has no interest in being the webmaster, to be posting his/her erroneous conclusions about the site. Sheesh!

'Who knows' is the person who found the preliminary set-up for Forum V in the first place, and I guess he/she wanted to make this big revelation again. But, as I said, it's not any big secret, unless someone thinks that the kind of software used on this forum is vitally important.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:33:58 (EST)
From: Ben Lurking
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity)
Message:
As an EX I don't want to experience any devottees 'creaming' me, I live in in a town with a hindu M presence and I don't want to meet them or find the trashed my house or business in 'protecting' thier master. Its happened in the past, premies are wacko and I don't want them ever expressing their wackiness at me in a physical manner.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 12:32:59 (EST)
From: selene
Email: None
To: Ben Lurking
Subject: Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity)
Message:
Oh you must live in Sedona.
Just kidding but that place is the new age cetral these days.
But I guess every town is if the weather is good and it has a pretty setting. Yuck sorry you have to put up with that Ben. I know what it's like!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 20:26:16 (EST)
From: Ben Lurking
Email: None
To: selene
Subject: Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity)
Message:
Well I have never met any of them, its a fear of premies (maybe not valid), I don't want to be known to them. I recieved k when I lived in a different town and migrated here cause my family moved here while I was off trapsing after m. I guess I am somewhat ashamed of having been a follower and had forgoten about it until I found this site a year ago when I was just searching the web for old friends. ah well not to worry.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:52:17 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Ben Lurking
Subject: Re: My mistake (but fuck anonymity)
Message:
Hi Ben -
I think anonymity is OK (whether for exes or premies). My pet peeve is people who use a different pseudonym almost every time they post. I don't even read most of those posts because I don't know who they are from. I wish people would stick to one or two pseudonyms around here (I know - impossible, but I can dream, right?)

BTW, I appreciate the fact that you use the same pseudonym all the time, and I even appreciate the fact that 'who knows' uses the same pseudonym all the time. (Or at least, I think so...)

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:29:10 (EST)
From: selene
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: an observation
Message:
It seems to me you do care a lot about forum administration. Just from the things you post I get that. I mean, I doubt your real interest in hanging out here all this time is PERL and the Apache web server configuration.
So I am curious why you want out? Just being me Katie. You can ignore me. A lot of people have been doing that lately and I am kind of liking it. It's making me tougher.
That which does not kill you, etc......
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:44:29 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: mishkat@gateway.net
To: selene
Subject: Re: an observation
Message:
Hi Selene -
I get ignored too, but mainly by premies :).

Basically, I don't want to administer the forum because then I have the option to NOT read it if I don't want to, don't have time, or am out of town. (Also, I AM administering another forum - the Recent Exes one. You might like that one, actually - e-mail me if you are interested.) I do tend to stick up for the current forum admins, but that's because I've been there - plus I really appreciated it when people stuck up for me when I was there.

As far as helping Brian with the site - it's been a great experience. But both of us are kind of burned out on making pages about Maharaji, thus maybe it's time for someone else to take over the job. BTW, if anyone is interested in this job (including you, Selene) - e-mail Brian, cause he doesn't read the forum very much.

Take care -
Love,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:34:59 (EST)
From: madman
Email: None
To: selene
Subject: Re: an observation
Message:
Selene dear -

That which does not kill you, etc......
....makes you crazy!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:22:00 (EST)
From: selene
Email: None
To: madman
Subject: Re: an observation
Message:
Yeah tell me about it. Crazy isn't so bad all the time though.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:01:34 (EST)
From: Major Fanny de Selene
Email: None
To: selene
Subject: Re: an observation
Message:
You can ignore me. A lot of people have been doing that lately and I am kind of liking it. It's making me tougher.
That which does not kill you, etc......

Only certain pompous twits are ignoring you.
Personally, I can't get enough of you!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:20:36 (EST)
From: selene
Email: None
To: Major Fanny de Selene
Subject: Re: an observation
Message:
That, my dear, remains to be seen. They all say that at first.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:33:08 (EST)
From: Major Fanny
Email: None
To: selene
Subject: Re: an observation
Message:
While he who speaks first
Usually ends up being last
If it happens to me
You can kick me in the,
um, er,
abdomen.
That's it.
I have strong stomach muscles.
Even with an ulcer :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:48:41 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Ben Lurking
Subject: Yes, there's always that risk
Message:
Ben,

I'm not saying that's impossible. This is a cult, after all, and we are talking about people who think Maharaji's God. But, at the same time, it's a relatively gentle, wimpy cult. I dunno. I think the risk is so small it's simply not such a big price to pay for the feeling of not succumbing to any cult pressure in any way, direct or not.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:53:01 (EST)
From: Mickey the Pharisee
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Yes, there's always that risk
Message:
Jim you have convinced me to drop the alias; of course, I originally posted under my real name, but once Mili called me a Pharisee I just had to use the handle. Michael is not as interesting a name as Mickey the Pharisee, and I can't post as Mickey since we have the occasional Mickey Moss. But I will post under my real name since so many premies post under aliases.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 20:40:08 (EST)
From: nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Mickey the Pharisee
Subject: Believe me, it's safe!!!
Message:
Well I have been two years on the forum. Same email (or same two email addresses). One email gives away country, city and workplace. I have several times given my name in full (in spite of the middle one being 'Craig') and my work and home phone numbers. It is no big deal, telling others who you are and where you are... Courtesy, really.

As a result, I have had some wonderful email and phone chats. Long may they continue. I have received no unsolicited premie spam or hostile emails - apart from one from 'Petrou' which I never read because he was an incoherent eejit - and a couple from CD who never gets hostile and nobody ever worries about - except in the empathetic sense ... We all worry about Chris, sometimes. And - oh, yeah - I have not been shot dead yet. No fear of EV lawyers, 'coz I have never once lied about the fake lord of all hamsters...

Believe me, it is safe to be who you are and tell it as you see it. As G-mom once put it: 'telling the truth is never libel.'

But I am not sure how safe it is to be a cult leader, nowadays. (That wasn't a covert threat, BTW, your Lardship. I am just saying your status, reputation and track record will be held up to the cold light of day, soon enough. And in public - which is what you fear the most.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 04:24:21 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: nigel
Subject: Who's afraid of what?
Message:
There is no reason not to feel safe here. Nothing ever happened to me, even though I've been posting here for more than 2 years, I'm the webmaster of the EV-DLM Papers under my real name, I have my picture online on my website, and anybody can find my address & phone# in the phone book.

I've never received any threat, only got a few e-mails from pissed off premies, and that's fine.

I'd rather say they are afraid of me, because I've asked some of them to call me - or e-mail me, and they never did!!

Of course you might displease some of you premie friends (or relatives), that's another issue.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 21:05:18 (EST)
From: Sir Dave
Email: david@xyzx.freeserve.co.uk
To: nigel
Subject: It's safe for Maharaji too
Message:
He has nothing to fear but the truth being told. If Maharaji stopped putting on the act and came clean and admitted to all the things we accuse him of, he would have nothing to fear.

Maharaji has a problem. He cannot relate to people. Perhaps we are teaching him a valuable lesson here. Most people here have big hearts and do not bear grudges. Yes, Maharaji messed some of our lives up in a big, big way but then we only want him to understand that, to acknowledge what he has done, that's all.

Does Maharaji ever stop to wonder why he's got all this opposition? It has not sunk in get; the penny hasn't dropped. He is going against the grain of what is considered OK by people. He has been doing this for a long time now. Opposition is inevitable and so shall it continue unless he steps down and comes clean about everything.

But that would be a major turn around and a total revolution in thought by Maharaji. Such revolutions do happen in many of our lives and are part of life's rich tapestry. Perhaps there is still time for him to learn.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 21:33:57 (EST)
From: nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Sir Dave
Subject: But he'll crash and burn, soon enough...
Message:
Agreed, but the hardest lesson for Maharaji to learn is that - if he is not the Lord incarnate - then he is the biggest joke that walked the planet since God designed the ostrich (or, better still, the lungfish). No matter how rich I was, I wouldn't want to begin to consider in later life the possibility that I was a walking, talking, deeply misguided bullshit salesman - let alone how sharing that guru-is-god belief might have wrecked to the lives of others.

Believe me, Prem has got it all to come, and I don't envy him in the least.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 22:20:14 (EST)
From: Grace
Email: None
To: nigel
Subject: Re: But he'll crash and burn, soon enough...
Message:
When you said 'Prem has it all to come, and I don't envy him in the least', do you mean karmically, or in this life in general?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 09:13:33 (EST)
From: nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Grace
Subject: Lotus feet turned to feet of clay...
Message:
Hi Grace,

I don't believe in karma - or any kind of 'just universe', notion. All I mean is there are too many contradictions and broken promises; too much information, formerly hidden, about M and his cult now available to the public; too many exes willing to speak out... His success depends upon public ignorance and media disinterest, alongside constant recruitment to counter the falling numbers. It will crumble when the world starts laughing at his ludicrous pretences. (So, I suspect, might his sanity.)

Assuming Prem lives a long life, I don't believe he will still be playing spiritual leader, say, ten, fifteen, twenty years down the line. At best, he may still have some low-key, internet-based money-making wheeze but I doubt there will still be the personality cult propping up his ego and feathering his nest.

(I'll reply to your last email v. soon, BTW)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 10:39:10 (EST)
From: octopus
Email: None
To: nigel
Subject: Re: feet of clay
Message:
Interesting post, Nigel,

You say '...his success depends upon public ignorance and media disinterest ...'

I guess what bugs me too is the fact that he's profiting under the auspices of being a registered charity (in the UK at least). That's one rug I'd like to see pulled from under him,

Christopher

P.S. Not buying the idea of karma - does that make you an antinomian? (not just a fancy word, but worth looking up)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 14:52:08 (EST)
From: Nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: octopus
Subject: Guess I need a bigger dictionary...
Message:
Well today I already found myself looking up 'recension', 'encomium' and 'aegrotat'. Only 'encomium' was in the paperback OED. (It means 'formal praise', which I guess is like 'Bholeshrisatgurudevmaharajkijai' or something). Now I come to look up 'antinomian' and the closet thing there is 'antimony' which is a 'brittle, metallic, silvery element' (and anyway has the 'n' and the 'm' the wrong way round).

Still, I managed to learn a couple of new words. And yes, EV's charitable status is the one thing that would still suck even if M did a Krishnamurti and renounced his past.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 16:38:01 (EST)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Re: Guess I need a bigger dictionary...
Message:
Nigel:

I've come across that word a few times in my readings, but no matter how many times I look it up, I can't remember it. My handy dandy Webster's Dictionary has this to say about antinomian: Christian Theol. n. a believer in the doctrine that faith alone, not obedience to moral law, is necessary for salvation. --adj. of this doctrine -- antinomianism. Phew! Maybe now that I've typed it out, I'll remember the damn word, but god knows where the hell I'll ever use it.

Antinomy, by the way, means (once again a nod to Webster's) 'a contradiction or inconsistency between two apparently reasonable principles or laws.' Sounds like the jaws of death to me, particularly if you're caught in the legal system. Hope this helps. Pop quiz later...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 18:10:28 (EST)
From: Mickey the..er Michael
Email: None
To: Monmot
Subject: Re: Guess I need a bigger dictionary...
Message:
From 'A Handbook of Theological Terms' by Van A. Harvey:
ANTINOMIANISM On the grounds that the Christian is saved by GRACE and not by works or moral effort, some Christians have claimed that the saved person is free from all moral obligations or principals. The term is applied to this view.

There were some second-century gnostic groups who subscribed to antinomianism and were sexual libertines, which shocked many Romans and contributed to the rumour that the agape meals or love feasts were actually orgies.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 06:34:33 (EST)
From: nigel
Email: nigel@redcrow.demon.co.uk
To: Mickey the..er Michael
Subject: Perhaps I am an anti-antinomian
Message:
Thanks Mickey,

(and answer to octopus: No, I am not an antinomian, I am an atheist).

Antinomianism sounds a bit like radical hedonism with Grace thrown in - or 'having your cake and eating ir...'

But isn't a fundamental difference between Protestant and Catholic doctrines this whole question of salvation being available to those who ask, regardless of past actions, rather than by striving to live a moral life? There was that couplet written by someone around the reformation, I think, that went:

'Between the saddle and the ground
Grace I looked for, Grace I found.'

(Perhaps you know the source.) I realise there is a probably a big difference between sin as a chosen lifestyle option and sin that occurs through human weakness. But there must be a bit of a problem concerning what becomes of an antinomian who deliberately lives an amoral, hell-raisin' life then asks for Grace at the last minute..?

And is there any Grace available for atheists who aspire to moral standards? (just wondered, y'know... :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 00:48:16 (EST)
From: bb
Email: None
To: Grace
Subject: Re: But he'll crash and burn, soon enough...
Message:
he went trough a lot when his mom died although he didnt
end up renouncing the whole guru as lord and master of life idea because he fell back on the idea that the hindu and
buddhists lean on, which is, that there is a oneness that
is not self concious and so a guru plays god so that others
can play devotee and the breath or mantra is the connection
to the oneness. Or something like that.
Hi there Grace, there is a Grace that lives in Conn and
I always think of her when I read your posts.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 09:18:20 (EST)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Anon
Subject: Totapuri
Message:
Anon,
I haven't been reading F4 for a couple of days. Thanks for your post about Totapuri, if he died that early as you claim, it seems impossible that
Sri Hans would ever have met him. Hmmm... I have to dig up my old Hans Ji papers to verify the point that Shri Hans indeed claimed to have been initiated by Totapuri. I remember I found it very amusing when I read it, the point being that Hans Ji used this claim in order to gain credibility among general Hindus, who all regarded Ramakrishna as a satguru. (Then, it is of course also possible that he talked about another Totapuri.) But anyway, I'll check my information.

BTW, I always liked your posts very much, I have loaded down several of them. Very insightful.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:42:37 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Re: Totapuri
Message:
The only place where I've seen his name mentioned was on Rawat's website.

He mentions him as one of his guru's guru's guru's ...

His name should be mentioned in the advait mat' book.

You should also check where the other masters he claims fit in this genealogy ....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:26:40 (EST)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Re: and articles
Message:
JM,
Yes, that fits better (guru's guru's guru). I'll look into my old Hans-papers for further references to Totapuri. And, as I said, I personally think the main point in mentioning him in the guru genealogy (as both Hans and Prem Pal have done) really was to prove the existence of 'politically correct' connections. Mentioning Ramakrishna as a satguru clearly shows that Hans did NOT subscribe to the idea that 'satguru-ship' necessarily is a linear decession, going always from guru to an immediate disciple - as he never mentions having direct contact with Ramakrishna himself. Interesting! What are the implications...

Anyway JM, I have spent some time looking into the libraries for 'scientific' articles on DLM/EV, and found some pretty interesting, but slightly old, ones. One from 1990, though. There is usually a publication time lag of a couple of years in scientific journals, so these articles actually describe situations a few year before their publication date:

Price, M. (1979): The Divine Light Mission as a social organization. Sociological Review, 27, 279-296.

DuPertuis, L. (1986): How people recognize charisma: the case of darshan in Radhasoami and Divine Light Mission.
Sociological Analysis, 47, 11-124.

Bjorkqvist, K. (1990): World-rejection, world-affirmation, and goal displacement: Some aspects of change in three new religious movements of Hindu origin. A chapter in N. Holm (ed.), 'Encounter with India: Studies in Neohinduism (pp. 79-99). [describes changes in DLM/EV, TM, and ISKCON]

Also, an apologetic response to the Foss & Larkin 1978-article 'Worshiping the absurd...', by a Jim Keeney from Univ. of Adelaide, obviously at that time still an active premie, to judge from his text.

I'm making photocopies for you and I'll send them off tomorrow. I have a scanner, but I can't get good text out of it myself. Do you (or somebody else) have suggestions for a good scanner (and scanner software) for texts?

Happy

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:39:17 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: About his RS relation denial
Message:
What's also interesting to mention is that he doesn't acknowledge his links with Sawan Singh, when he has been his disciple !

Why ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 12:53:20 (EST)
From: Jack
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: The Lord as Guru denial
Message:
Dear Jean Michel,

According to 'Lord as Guru - Hindi Sants in the Northern Indian Tradition'by Daniel Gold (page 161) Sawan Singh appointed Sardar Bahadur Singh as his successor by legally executed will, in writing and duly witnessed, so as to leave no doubt in the matter.

There were others mentioned as succsessors but alas no mention of Hans. They were all Singhs, although Hindu. I thought that Singh was a Sikh name? I guess Hans had to branch out on his own and become a guru in his own right.

Whatever. It's the experience that's the important thing. You guys are like people from another planet, looking at a swimming pool and doing everything other than swimming in it! Don't let your mind do that to you. I'm off to take a swim!! Jean-Michel, I know you must have experienced 'swimming'. It takes a quite a lot of self dicipline doesn't it?

Jack

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 14:04:03 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jack
Subject: That's a bad analogy, Jack
Message:
It's the experience that's the important thing. You guys are like people from another planet, looking at a swimming pool and doing everything other than swimming in it!

Your analogy sucks as is but we can fix it up a bit, I think. How about starting by making the swimming pool invisible. Some make great claims about it, about how beautiful it is and about their special powers to see it and swim in it but, all the same, it's invisible. Some, in fact, even question its existence.

But then that doesn't work either, because at least with swimming pools we know such things actually do exist somewhere. I think we better change the pool to the 'Fountain of Youth'. Now that's a bit better. Now we've got a body of water that may or may not exist in any form. Sure, once upon a time a whole lot of people took the concept seriously; now it's pretty difficult to find an educated person who still does. That improves the analogy because, as we know, many, many educated people doubt that there even are such 'bodies of water' anywhere. Not just that this particular invisible one might not exist.

But then that doesn't work either. Water, at least, is something we really do know when we experience it. This water, on the other hand, is some sort of ephemeral substance that one can only supposedly access after satisfying all sorts of questionable preconditions. You have to 'prepare' for months and months, sometimes even years, by watching the mind-numbing -- literally mind-numbing, intentionally mind-numbing -- videos of this great 'water' salesman. Then you have to show how much you 'appreciate' him for all the water he's going to give you even before he's given you any. And that's not even beginning to get into all the effort that goes into 'keeping in touch' with this 'great man' and maintaining all that 'appreciation'.

But appreciation for what? This 'water', don't forget, is only accessible on the other side of your mind. That means that you can't possibly use your mind to judge whether or not its water of any kind. Indeed, if your mind questions it, well, you've been warned that that's what your mind's bound to do. It just ends up being proof, after all, that the water's real, right?

So what we've got, Jack, is some invisible substance that might not even exist that you can't use your mind to assess but which you are trained to appreciate from before you even taste it (or swim in it, sorry). That's a far cry from jumping into something as concrete and obvious as a swimming pool, I'd say. Wouldn't you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:05:45 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Re: Sawan Singh
Message:
JM,
I saw a couple of months ago on the ex-satsangi forum a reference to Sawan Singh and it implied that he was a 'bad guru'. Anyway if you ask over there I'm sure yopu'll get an answer.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:05:31 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Sawan Singh it was!
Message:
--

'Advait Mat is different than Radhasoami in terms of lineage (except that the founder may have been at one-time connected to the early leaders of Radhasoami).
Hansji was clearly a follower of Sarupanand of Advait Mat. Hansji is also reported to have received initiation from Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Beas, as reported by Kirpal's personal secretary at Sawan Ashram, Gyanji (who I personally interviewed in July of 1978 on this issue). Hansji's doctrines are clearly reflective of Advait Mat (especially the pressing of the eyeballs, and the shortish hair--versus Beas's Sikh lineage gurus). I visted one of the Advait Mat centers in Delhi. A letter to their headquarters in Guna may reveal more.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 01:12:15 (EST)
From: Squid Vicious
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: or Kirpal Tunnel Singh Drome
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:59:13 (EST)
From: Squid V
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: No, It Was Sawan Wap
Message:
Shri Maharaji knew Sawan Wap, not Sawan Singh. See how easy it is to get these things mixed up!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:02:15 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Squid V
Subject: Re: No, It Was Sawan Wap
Message:
How do you know he didn't know them both?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:02:21 (EST)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Squid V
Subject: Re: No, It Was Sawan Wap
Message:
Yes, it's easy indeed... who was Sawan Wap?? I know about Sawan Singh, and Kirpal Singh, but..
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:21:41 (EST)
From: elmer fudd
Email: None
To: Happy
Subject: Re: No, It Was Sawan Wap
Message:
no, no, no....

sawan wap is what you wap those leftovah vegetables in....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:09:19 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: JM
Subject: Re: Woops
Message:
I just remembered the post in the ex-satsangi forum. The poster said that he would never have gone to HansJi because he (Hans) had been initiated by Sawan Singh.
I am sure someoneover there will calrify.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:00:12 (EST)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Jethro/JM/all
Subject: Re:
Message:
If Hans ji acknowledged being indebted to Sawan Singh, the immediate question that follows is, then why did he not stick to the RS line? Because someone else (was it Kirpal Singh?) was appointed as the following guru in line. Obviously, he had to deny his relation to them, again for credibility.
But a much earlier, far off connection to Totapuri is mentioned instead.

Jean-Michel, I've been looking for your address in order to send you the articles, but I seem to have displaced it. Would you mind sending an email, or posting it here? The articles are now polished and photocopied, packed and ready to send off.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:12:16 (EST)
From: Happy
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: I've found your address
Message:
...now, J-M, so no need to send it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:29:55 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: brauns@dircon.co.uk
To: All
Subject: Invitation
Message:
ANY Premie,

As you live in the UK, would you like to join us at the next London exes convivial drinking evening? You are hereby invited. Email me for details.

John Brauns

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 18:12:29 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: cynthia@madriver.com
To: All
Subject: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!!
Message:
Hi Everyone,

Here's a quote I think appropriate for today:

'CAUTIOUS, CAREFUL PEOPLE ALWAYS CASTING ABOUT TO PRESERVE THEIR REPUTATIONS OR SOCIAL STANDARDS NEVER CAN BRING ABOUT REFORM. THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO BE ANYTHING OR NOTHING IN THE WORLD'S ESTIMATION, AND PUBLICLY AND PRIVATELY, IN SEASON AND OUT, AVOW THEIR SYMPATHIES WITH DESPISED IDEAS AND THEIR ADVOCATES, AND BEAR THE CONSEQUENCES.'

Susan B. Anthony, 1873

Thanks to all of you folks who have been trying to communicate with the Idiot known as Bublegum. Is that pronounced like 'bugle' the instrument?

I always liked the above quote because it reminds me of what I might face when I tell the truth. BACKLASH!! That anyone would have the nerve to come here and argue that this is a cult or sect is absolutely deluded! Or playing some stupid mind games.

It's just backlash because for any premie to step outside of m's world is very dangerous. To be faced with the contents of the website and forum must be very triggering. So the retaliaion is that we are another cult! LOLOLOL::::)))

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

Love, Cynthia (LOLOLOL)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:15:53 (EST)
From: Are you really stupid, Cynthia..
Email: or do yo just pretend?
To: Cynthia
Subject: Re: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!!
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 23:38:27 (EST)
From: Ana T
Email: None
To: Are you really stupid, Cynthia..
Subject: Re: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!!
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 00:40:12 (EST)
From: Ana T
Email: None
To: Whoever
Subject: Lost my post... here it is again.
Message:
Use a handle pal.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 00:41:58 (EST)
From: Ana T
Email: None
To: No Handle Person
Subject: Re: Lost my post... here it is again.
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:41:43 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: whoever
Subject: Are you really as obnoxious as you seem, or...
Message:
...do you just act like that on this forum ?

If you want your opinion to count for something, I suggest that you post under your own name or a reasonable pseudonym. I didn't think Cynthia's post was 'stupid' at all, and it appears that you couldn't think of any rebuttal to it except an insult.

From day 1, premies and others have labelled this forum as a 'cult'. Fine, if that's what you want to think - I honestly do not care. In my opinion, calling the forum is a 'red herring' which people use to divert attention away from Maharaji's organization.

My personal opinion is that the forum is not a cult because there is no accepted 'cult leader', there is no accepted way of thinking and feeling, and the ex-premies here feel free to disagree and argue with each other. But what's the use of trying to explain this to someone who won't even post.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:00:58 (EST)
From: Who really knows
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: To Katie and Ana T
Message:
Do you think this person thinks:
1. Cynthia proves herself to be a cult member?
2, Cynthia does not understand that Susan B when she wrote:
'CAUTIOUS, CAREFUL PEOPLE ALWAYS CASTING ABOUT TO PRESERVE THEIR REPUTATIONS OR SOCIAL STANDARDS NEVER CAN BRING ABOUT REFORM. THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO BE ANYTHING OR NOTHING IN THE WORLD'S ESTIMATION, AND PUBLICLY AND PRIVATELY, IN SEASON AND OUT, AVOW THEIR SYMPATHIES WITH DESPISED IDEAS AND THEIR ADVOCATES, AND BEAR THE CONSEQUENCES.' , suggest that one should applaud those who dare to speak against the general opinion in a forum?
3. Cynthia is just plain stupid?
4. Cynthia is just brainwashed?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:27:53 (EST)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Who really knows
Subject: Re: Who really knows and Ana T
Message:
My hunch is that its none of the above.
We're dealing with one f**ck of a deception here and both of you are in on it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 23:41:30 (EST)
From: Ana T
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Re: Are you really as obnoxious as you seem, or...
Message:
Katie,

Who do you suppose this is? I have a strong hunch and it follows a certain pattern I experienced.

Ana T

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:34:19 (EST)
From: Joey
Email: None
To: Ana T
Subject: To Mary McGraw...Are you really as obnoxious as you seem, or...
Message:
Since you've already let on in the ex only forum that Ana T is in fact Mary McGraw, no one should mind if I adress you by that name.
After all,you're quite well known to most of us by that name.

Now Mary why don't you tell us about your 'strong hunch' and lets get to the bottom your deception.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 23:20:53 (EST)
From: bbum
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Re: Backlash! Forum IV a Cult!!!!
Message:
Hi Cynthia,
I respect Susan B.
and of course you also.
I am finding her sentence starting with 'Those...'
To be over my head.
She was in a tough world wasnt she.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 13:34:55 (EST)
From: ANY premie
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Rodney Halstead
Message:
Rodney Halstead, whose story appears in the 'Journeya' section, died a few days ago from a heart attack. I think he was also called 'Father Love.'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Dec 09, 1999 at 11:04:15 (EST)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: ANY premie
Subject: Re: Rodney Halstead
Message:
Rodney called me up just over a year ago. He'd found my 'Journey' at Ex-premie.org and was eager to talk to me. After 'Saph', I was the first 'Ex' Rodney made contact with. He was so happy and relieved to find someone who'd left, who he could talk to about Maharaji and the cult.

He didn't have a computer, but was eager to get his 'Journey' on the net, which he did, via an Internet Cafe. He was really looking forwards to getting online and joining in the forum discussions.

Rodney was a larger than life character. I knew him on and off from the early 70s, when we lived in London. He had a great sense of humour, and a fresh and brave attitude to life, which he lived to full.

We used to compare notes on Sven Hassel books in the 70s, and Rodney once met Herr Hassel himself.

The world will be a quieter, duller place without Rodney. He livened up wherever he went. I can still hear his loud, squeaky laugh.

Good luck to you Rodney, wherever you are.

Your old friend Anth.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:26:08 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: ANY premie
Subject: Re: Rodney Halstead
Message:
Dear Any Premie -
I am very sorry to hear that. I did not know 'Father Love', but worked on editing his journeys entry, which I liked very much. He seemed to be a very loving and generous person.

Take care, and thanks for posting this.
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:15:27 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Re: Editing Journeys
Message:
I did not know 'Father Love', but worked on editing his journeys entry...

Katie,

Before some premie shouts 'censorship', perhaps you could confirm that your editing of exes journeys does not include changing any of the text.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:27:00 (EST)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: oops! should have said 'formatting'
Message:
Thanks, John-
I probably should have said 'formatting' (in other words, putting it into HTML, correcting punctuation, & so forth)! Actually Father Love sent in a Journeys entry that was too long, and he edited it himself to produce the one that's now on-line.

BTW, I have helped people with Journeys entries on occasion, but they always get final approval! (I'm an editor in real life, and that's how it's done there too.)

Take care,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 19:04:25 (EST)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: ANY premie
Subject: Re: Rodney Halstead
Message:
Did you know him? I am sorry to hear of his passing.
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:12:22 (EST)
From: ANY premie
Email: None
To: Robyn
Subject: Rodney - Father Love
Message:
No, I had met him but I didn't know him well but I still cried. A close friend was in contact with him quite a lot, though, so I heard about some of the twists and turns that he took down the final stretch. I know one thing, for sure, he tried very, very hard to be happy throughout his life and tried to make others feel the same. He definitely did it his way. Rather admirable, really.

Goodnight. Robyn,

AP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:16:38 (EST)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: ANY premie
Subject: Re: Rodney - Father Love
Message:
AP:

I read his journey, and he sounded like quite the character, full of talent, energy and adventure. I am sure he will be sorely missed by those who knew him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:42:11 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Monmot
Subject: Re: Rodney - Father Love
Message:
Monmot,

I knew Rodney quite well, although I haven't seen him for several years. He was as you described.
I tried to contact him since I read his journey and he became 'Father Love', but to no avail.

I would have liked to have met up with him again.

Regards Jethro

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:56:16 (EST)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: Rodney - Father Love
Message:
Jethro:

Was he a writer? His journey was so well written (as are so many of the journeys); I laughed out loud at some parts, a very touching journey indeed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:34:03 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Monmot
Subject: Re: Rodney - Father Love
Message:
Monmot(I just love that name)

He was an acupuncturist, homoeopath,did tai chi and kung fu and was involved in various other healing areas. I don't know if he did any writing but it wouldn't surprise me.
He had a great sense of humour and certainly made me laugh.
I know that since the last I saw of him he moved down to the south of England and became an ex as he described in his journey.
I am sure many of the premies there could write stuff about his antics but won't because he became his own person and not rowatt's. I hope that at least one premie will prove me wrong and put a message up here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:45:13 (EST)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: Rodney - Father Love
Message:
Jethro:

I love my name also, a hard-earned and apt moniker. I, too, would like to see some premies' remembrances of his antics, and I would think that, in a situation such as this, death would transcend differences in life, both large and small. Perhaps that's too much to wish for, though.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 12:50:13 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Bublegum's cult
Message:
It looks like I've triggered an interesting discussion.

And again some Rawat's apologists accuse some exes to make a cult!

Why don't they have a look there at the 'ex-cult archive'

General Information about Cults

A Behavioral Definition (of 'cult') (Kevin Crawley)
Identifying a Cult (Jan Groenveld)
Lifton's Criteria for Thought Reform
Conditions for Mind Control (Dr. Margaret Singer)
Totalism & Group Dynamics (Jan Groenveld)
Academic Research into Cults (Jeff Jacobsen)

And tell us how they identify an exe-premies group as a cult!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 15:32:08 (EST)
From: Bublegum
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: A cult or not a cult?
Message:
Jean-Michel.
For a starter I can quote from one of those books: Identifying a Cult (Jan Groenveld)
'From a warm, loving personality will come heaped abuse, rejection and
feelings of hate. The cult member sees himself as 'righteous' in
comparison and this comes across in their attitude toward all outsiders. '
Could you also check the definition of a cult in your dictionary!

Allow me also to quote from my previous post:

'It is a common understanding that a cult is based on some common belief. Cults also have usually a purpose. Cults dont need to be religios. Cults are often in oppositition to another belief or church and consists of former members of that? Cultmembers have a tendency to behave like brothers and sisters, and sometimes even accepts people that are really assholes, just because they are in the same sect. I could post 'test your self if you are a sectmember' but that would be too much.
When people form a sect (which is not always official) they tend to be more concerned about the sect than the truth.
When people join a sect or cult they tend not to listen to reason.
Sect members tend to 'meet' a lot, in order to grow in their belief.

So the common belief in this 'Anti Maharaji' sect is: Maharaji is a fraud. Is not that what you are thinking?
The purpose with this sect is to stop him. Ok?
The purpose is also to destroy thing for him and tell the world the truth. Ok?
Your purpose is also to save other people. Ok?
There is a underlying brotherhood in this sect. There are 'us' and the premies.Agree?
Some peoples posts are not really sticking to the truth. (I could prove that hundreds of times.)
If someone is trying to reason, sectmembers tend to avoid the issue, and instead attack the opponent. Are you awake enough to have seen that?
Some sectmember of yours even wrote: 'Thank you! It warmed my hearth' when some other guy linked her to a page where she sould read about pedophile Jagdeo. This says something.'

So may be the difference between us in this regard is just that admit I might belong to something that might be called a cultt and you dont admit it. Ok.
And there is a fact that Mahaarjai is taking away those thing which makes a cult a cult.

And by the way: in a post below, you brag about some recent satsang you bought in India. In case you did not notice it, they were from 1991-92

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 13:57:07 (EST)
From: The Anti-Maharaji cult is not unlike the
Email: None
To: Bublegum
Subject: ARYA SAMAJ
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:52:08 (EST)
From: More like
Email: None
To: The Anti-Maharaji cult is not unlike the
Subject: the Eagle Scouts
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:12:03 (EST)
From: Shri Hans was a member of the
Email: None
To: The Anti-Maharaji cult is not unlike the
Subject: ARYA SAMAJ
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 14:49:58 (EST)
From: Not for Long
Email: None
To: Shri Hans was a member of the
Subject: He was outa there
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 16:05:29 (EST)
From: Ye soon as he
Email: None
To: Not for long
Subject: Realised how much he could make being God
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:02:26 (EST)
From: Yeah, driving a Morris Oxford clone
Email: None
To: Ye soon as he
Subject: the famous 'Somerset' (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 17:34:17 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: All on this thread
Subject: Campaign for Real Info
Message:
Can you guys use the from and to fields for your names and the message field for you message? Please!!!

John

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 06:17:19 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Bublegum
Subject: Re: A cult or not a cult?
Message:
>And there is a fact that Mahaarjai is taking away those thing which makes a cult a cult.

You say this is a fact: can you elaborate a bit on this?

I'm all ears ....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:13:59 (EST)
From: bublegum=
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: =bugle bum(nt anagram)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 06:59:07 (EST)
From: Who really knows
Email: None
To: bublegum=
Subject: Re: =bugle bum(nt anagram)
Message:
...bugle like in the creeping weed in old days used as a remedy against bloodspitting (shitspitting)?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:41:24 (EST)
From: Light
Email: None
To: Who really knows
Subject: Re: ='bugle'
Message:
Dear Who,

Quite possibibly, although I've never heard of it.

A 'bugle' is also a trumpet-like instrument as used by the Eagle Scouts and suchlike. 'Bugle' can also be used as a slang term for cocaine in certain inner-city areas of the United Kingdom. For example, '
Are you gonna hoover all that 'bugle' up yer hooter or can I 'ave some.' Or so I'm lead to believe.

Light

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:50:06 (EST)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Buble ji's answer:
Message:
I've just found this on the French forum !

Jean-Michel
You asked me to elaborate on following: 'And there is a fact that Maharaji is taking away those thing which makes a cult a cult.
You say this is a fact: can you elaborate a bit on this?

I'm all ears .... '

First of all, I unfortunately dont have the time to Post any more at the Forum. And I see no purpose in doing that. (Actually I have to do the job of 3 persons for some time)

However you asked a sincere question which I wanted to reply so:

This is my opinion:

Maharaji took away the club mentality. That means premies are not a group anymore, they are individuals.

Maharaji took away the 'satsangs' of premies which means there are no longer generated thoughts pattern of the sectmembers. (If you really want to program somebody, it is really efficient to make them express the message over and over again.)

Even if only Maharaji is giving his message which always has been the same message: 'What you are looking for, is inside of you' you might say this is programming, but it boils down to each individual has a teacher if he wants to.

It has become more clear that you can do whatever you want, believe whatever you want, and leave if you want, give money if you want, (and it happens to my personal experience that not every donation is actually accepted) it is more and more clear that this is up to each individual. And what you should do and what you would believe in , is besed from your own conscious choice.

Maharaji is taking away elements that made premies a sect regarding things like eating, drinking, smoking, sex and other things. This was a big part of the premie cult dogma.

Maharaji is trying to go on satelite, that means there will be no need for people to meet any more. A cult where no one know each other or communicate with each other, is not really a cult.

In the west, according to my memory, Maharaji no longer uses the 'cultmember tag' - a premie.

If you agree or not, this is in my opinion facts.

I do not want to have an discussion with you, I think it is better I go my way, you go your way.

I've heard that BS for decades in EV!

Do you really think anyone believes this ? !!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 11:19:32 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: So we now know the real object of Maharaji's envy: the rich televangelist
Message:
Must have been hard for him, all those years reading and hearing about televangelists making millions without leaving home. Really, if you were a cult leader how would you feel if you had to fly here, there and everywhere just to make a few bucks when some joker you run into down the hill at the Trancas Market simply puts on a bit of makeup and steps into his on-site studio?

Of course.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 18:16:18 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Bublegum
Subject: Another flaming idiot!
Message:
Bubblegum,

Yet another premie that knows not how to think like a regular, educated adult. Really, gummie, you don't have a clue.

On the simplest operational level, fundamental logic, you're lost. People banded together with a common interest or goal are not, necessarily, in a cult. The cult thing starts when they're cut off from their own ability to discriminate. At that point, the cult can control all information because the mentally captive cult member has no inclination or power to object. The cult then fills the cult member's head with pure garbage and no one's around to object. The cult member's probably smiling through all of this. His opinion means nothing. He's far too compromised to really have one of his own.

Who then will even notice this abuse? Usually former cult members like us. People who've awoken from that ugly state of debilitation and dependency. That's who.

Does this apply to Maharaji? Of course it does. Where else in the world can you find an example of someone who proclaimed himself as Lord of the Universe whose followers, strangely enough, have nary a single hard question for him when he stops talking that talk? No where.

(Here, for your review, is conclusive, overwhelming proof that he did just that:

1) 'You look at Christ, for instance. And he came and was Perfect Master. According to the belief, he had enough power that after he was crucified, he came back. So, you think twice about this and you figure, if somebody has got a power -- and it was incredible as to be able to to be crucified and them come back again -- you can definitely figure out that he must ahve the power to sort of take the whole Earth and jiggle it once in a plastic bag. Give it a little twist, all us teensy-weensy things go falling into this palstic bag. He opens it up and says, 'Listen, you thing in there. Realize the purpose of your life, aim of your life. This is it. Period.'

*****

2)Q - To whom should we give our devotion?

A - Guru.

Q - Shouldn't we give our devotion to God?

A - What is God?

Q - Well, Guru is a personification of God in this Earth, right?

A - I told you yesterday: Who is Guru? The highest manifestation of God is Guru. So when Guru is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion? **** When God has come here, then what is the need to give devotion to God there?

*****

3) The Lord Himself reincarnates, reincarnates, reincarnates Himself for the very purpose of saving us. And we do not even realize who gave us the authority to refuse Him! Who are we anyway? From which field do we come that we can reject, that we can refuse, that we can deny our Lord? This is something that
I cannot answer. And we do it every time!. Because we have got a stupid ego. ..... We just don't know that we are His puppets.

***[a lot of stuff about how he could suck all the atmosphere away, etc.]

4) So when Lord comes to us, accept Him. And Lord is here. He has always been here. How can we make a statment, 'The Lord is gone', and then turn aroudn and say, 'Lord is omnipresent'? We are contradicting ourselves. He has always been here. He has always been saving us, but it's us who pull out of His shelter.

*******

5) What is it? Something for people to understand: that there is a personality like God. Adn without him we are just pieces of junk, nothing else. And it's like, somebody has to really look up to it, you know. It's like, God is THERE, all the time. But for a person to see Him and underwstand Him, anyway he ahs to look UP to Him. But it's like, God is giving us all these indications of His presence. You know? If he does...

Look. The thing is, if somebody goes and does soemthing good, he will go and goof around all Arizona probably, saying ' I have done something good.' But if he does something bad, and he blows it [ed. like predicting the dawning of the millenium], you know, it means he just really blew it. Then he is going to blame it on somebody else; not on himself. So if God does something good for people, people will never understand it. People don't!

*****

6) 'Why do we have this human body? To know this, we will have to take the shelter of Guru Maharja Ji. Guru Maharj Ji knows all. Guru Maharaji is Brahma (creator). Guru Maharaji is Vishnu (Operator). Guru Maharjai is Shiva (Destoryer of illusion and ego). And above all, Guru Mahraji is the Supremest Lord in person before us.'

******

7) Who is Guru? The highest manifestation of God is Guru. So when Guru is here, God is here, to whom will you give your devotion?

******

8)Guru Maharj Ji knows all. Guru Maharaji is Brahma (creator). Guru Maharaji is Vishnu (Operator). Guru Maharjai is Shiva (Destoryer of illusion and ego). And above all, Guru Mahraji is the Supremest Lord in person before us.

*******

9) I have come so powerful. I have come for the world. Whenever the great come,the worldly oppose them. Again I have come and you are not listening. Every ear should hear that the saviour of humanity has come. There should be no chance for anyone to say that they haven't heard of Guru Maharaj Ji. Those who have come to me are already saved. Now its your duty to save others. Shout it on the streets. Why be shy?

******

10) When human beings forget the religion of humanity, the Supreme Lord incarnates. He takes a body and comes on this earth ......

When human beings forget this one way, then our Lord, who is the Lord of the whole universe, comes in human body to give us practical Knowlege, ....

But, most ironically, we don't appreciate the Lord when He comes in His human body on this earth.

Similarly, a Satguru, a Perfect Master, a Supreme Lord who is existing in the present time, can give you the practical Knowledge of the real thing...

So God Himself comes to give practical Knowledge of His divinity, of His inner self, which is self-effulgent light, eternal light, all-pervading light. **** And the Supreme Master, the Satguru, gives practical Knowledge of that light, irrespective of caste, creed, color, religion or sex, to those human individuals who bow before him with reverence, with love and with faith.
11)Just see, today this word 'guru' has become a ridiculous term, a sort of a joke and people do not know what is a 'guru'. When I fly a plane in India, I often listen to the radio in the cockpit. There are talks going on between various pilots in the vicinity. Somebody would address: ''Well Guru, how are you?' Because they do not know the true meaning and implications. They don't understand the glory of a guru and Master. Because they have forgotten altogether. They have made such pseudo-guru who have put the whole system to disrepute. For instance, in schools they don't know the correct meaning of a couplet like:

The radiance radiated from my beloved is of suds an amazing hue ...
They say, 'oh yes, because Kabir saw a sort of redness...'

But what sort of redness was it? Such so-called gurus have marred the reputation of this institution. It has been ruined. Actually the guru is such a personality about whom it is said:

>i> I bow down to the lotusfeet of my Guru Maharaji, who is the ocean of mercy and is actually Hari (God) himself in human form,
And whose words are like sunbeams to disperse the accumulated darkness of gross ignorance.

So Tulsidas says that he bows down to such a Guru Maharaji, the Master, who is really Hari (Supreme Power) in the form of man. So the main thing to understand here is that he bows down to the feet of that guru whose utterances, whose expressions are able to illuminate. And what is that which is illuminated by his words? It is the heart which is illuminated. His words are able to sever and dispel the spidery web of illusion, infatuation and ignorance. This I have seen myself and realized in my own heart. Yes, in my heart!

12) And so premies, the Perfect Master comes, and he comes in the human body. I mean, he doesn’t have to. All he has to do is have a body that’s as huge as the world – and even bigger, as the universe – and then pick up the whole world on his little finger and say, ‘You guys want to live, or should I blow you away ?’ He could do that, because we call him Almighty. And if we call him Almighty, it’s a jazz for him to do this. It wouldn’t take him anything. Because he’s perfect. And he could just very well do that and say, ‘Look. If you don’t realize this Knowledge, all I’m going to do is – boomp ! – and you are never going to know what hit you’. But he doesn’t say that.

Why? He bears up with everything in this world. Look at us humans; look at the people of this world. Every time he comes, they say, ‘Forget it, he is not the one; he can’t be the one. He doesn’t have Knowledge. This is some crazy thing.’ And I mean, if really this ever happened, that the Almighty, the All Perfect, just picked up the whole world in his hand and said, ‘Should I kick you?’….
He doesn’t have to go to any person and say, ‘Should I kick you ?’ If he says, ‘Should I kick your world ?’ you’d never know what hit you, and you are going to fly somewhere else. But he doesn’t. And it’s really beautiful.
)

The fact that not a single premie can criticize Maharaji says it all. I look forward to his ultimate demise. If he died today I'd fly down to Malibu for the funeral only to laugh out loud. My only tears would be in laughter and yes, they still flow sweetly from time to time.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 16:18:52 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Bublegum
Subject: This post already rebutted below
Message:
Bublegum,

I gave a detailed rebuttal of your post below in the 'Re: To be or not to be a sect' thread.

It would be polite to respond to that before repeating the same post again.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 16:46:31 (EST)
From: Bublegum
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Re: This post already rebutted below
Message:
I did not see it. Now I posted.
Greetings
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 17:23:05 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Bublegum
Subject: Goodbye Bublegum
Message:
In a thread below, Bublegum slinks away without responding to the truth:-

I am sorry, I dont have the time to argue with you. It is no need to and it not my purpose to to win a discussion. I think your post is OK, but allow me to disagree.

So may be I will post some time again, if I feel for it.
Wish you a marry Christmas

Bublegum

You have to admire the intelligence and integrity of premies don't you.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 03:54:26 (EST)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: me think that Bublegum is Bim Doubtfire (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 18:59:23 (EST)
From: Not so fast, M Roget
Email: None
To: Roger eDrek
Subject: bublegum=bulge bum(nt anag)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:36:01 (EST)
From: Who really knows
Email: None
To: Not so fast, M Roget
Subject: Re: bublegum=bulge bum(nt anag)
Message:
...bugle like in the creeping weed in old days used as a remedy against bloodspitting (shitspitting)? Or is 'bulge' (?) the correct word?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:31:21 (EST)
From: Light
Email: None
To: Who really knows
Subject: Re: 'bulge'
Message:
Dear Who,

Oui, 'bulge' it correct.

Ligtht

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 13:07:09 (EST)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Re: Bublegum's cult
Message:
And I think few premies realise just how close Maharaji's cult has come to disappearing. Maharaji was ready to give up and go back to India in the seventies. Actually Jean-Michel, I'd say Maharaji's organisation is now a very small cult indeed. It's almost a club.

Click here to read about Maharaji's true motivation and you'll see that premies are on shaky ground when it comes to following Maharaji. He could just disappear like a puff of smoke, any time. There's no guarantee he's always going to be around.

Also, click here to see that Maharaji is ready to jack it all in at any time and then where will people be? Stuck on the sand bank with all those years wasted.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 12:42:05 (EST)
From: Grace
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Just another thing I'm curious about. What did the premies with children do at Christmas time? Did M have anything to say about it being materialistic or not celebrating or any other type of agya? The only thing I know stressed to the premie kids was being vegetarian, and of course, eventually receiving K. Anyone?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 20:33:01 (EST)
From: CD
Email: None
To: Grace
Subject: Re: Christmas celebration
Message:
>Did M have anything to say about it being materialistic or not celebrating

I remember going to a Christmas show at the theatre in Long Beach where there were some plays and performances put on by premies.
I never heard anything about not celebrating. In fact I remember hearing about celebrating every day as if it was Christmas.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 17:14:13 (EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Grace
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
I remember on a couple of occasions Maharaji did a 'phone feed' on Christmas. We all went to the satsang hall to hear him babble over the telephone on Christmas day. It was kind of like going to Midnight Mass if you were a Catholic. Maharaji generally made fun of Christmas, because it was celebrating the birth of a now-dead perfect master, and, of course, he was the LIVING perfect master so he saw it as kind of dumb.

I think I related before that he made pronouncements that ashram premies couldn't go visit their (biological) families at Christmas and I remember in 1979 he said he was really pleased that the ashram premies in Miami stayed around to spend Christmas with their 'Real' families, not those worthless biological families.

I don't recall anything being said about Christmas in relation to children, but I'm sure his own kids got a lot of really expensive stuff at Christmas. They seemed to always get everything they wanted and then some. The premie families I knew did celebrate Christmas, sort of. It was just toned down to a kind of secular holiday. Many of them developed new traditions like:

1. Going around door to door in their neighborhoods singing songs like Arti and Lord of the Universe and handing out free 'And It Is Divines'.

2. Baking cookies, using prashad and charnamarit, with pictures of M's face (and of course feet) on them.

3. Decorating a Christmas tree with Guru Maharaj Ji buttons and lights.

4. Making a stuffed Santa Claus and sitting it in 'Maharaj Ji's chair.'

5. Baking a tofu turkey stuffed with dahl.

6. Exchanging framed pictures of Guru Maharaj Ji (and his feet) as gifts.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:09:26 (EST)
From: Grace
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Believe it or not, I actually considered and discussed with my family whether we should just celebrate M's birthday, since he was the current master. It seemed to make more sense. Of course my kids went for it, they didn't want to wait until the 25th to get their presents when they could get them on the 12th (or was it the 10th?) I still haven't told the kids M isn't the current Master or that I've left him, I don't know how to do it without confusing them, so I'm just leaving the whole issue alone. I'm sure they've picked up on the fact that I haven't quoted or talked about M in ages and there are no more photos of M plastered on every wall in the house. If they ask, I'll tell them, but am upset with myself I got them even marginally involved by discussing M occasionally in the first place. It's a weird situation for me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 10:59:52 (EST)
From: Susan
Email: None
To: Grace
Subject: How old are your children Grace?
Message:
I did not discuss any of this with mine until my teenage son wanted to know why I was posting here. That is a long story I have told before. But since then I have told both my teenage kids about it. I understand your embarrassment. I was and am very embarrassed I fell for the cult. But I found talking to the kids was a real life lesson for them about the nature of cults and what sucks a person into one. I have this small hope that perhaps discussing my experiences has inolculated them a bit to cult think.. As we all know Rawat's is just one of many, and young adults are so vulnerable. I do not know how old your kids are though. If they are very young it would be difficult to explain. At a certain age they really want to believe that their parents don't make mistakes. Anyway, I sympathize with you on this.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Dec 07, 1999 at 15:59:39 (EST)
From: Grace
Email: None
To: Susan
Subject: Re: How old are your children Grace?
Message:
They're 6 & 10, still at the ages where they think parents know everything. Basically, all they know is that Maharaji is the one who taught me meditation, something I let them know is very valuable (still think so), and obviously someone who I looked up to so much as to have photos all over the house. Plus, I was always quoting him on issues, and my hubby occasionally as well. I guess since they didn't know a whole lot in the first place, I'd have to get all into it before I explain that I'm now OUT of it. I just don't want to deal with it right now, so I'll leave it alone until they ask, but I still feel in a weird situation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:13:53 (EST)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: Grace
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Dear Grace,
That is tough for you I am sure but it seems they weren't involved enough to mention the changes, a good sign. Hope you have a great Christmas this year. :)
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:00:19 (EST)
From: Grace
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
JW,

Thanks for the examples of 'new traditions', they were funny!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 19:11:08 (EST)
From: Robyn
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Hi Joe!
God I hope you were kidding about that list:
'Going around door to door in their neighborhoods singing songs like Arti and Lord of the Universe and handing out free 'And It Is Divines'. '
oh my god, more dreaded then the visiting Jehovah's Witnesses! Do you know you have ruined the shorter, JW's for me as I don't want to cause confusing and have people think I am 'dissing' you! :) Speaking of.. A very nice Jehovah's Witness came to my door this weekend checking I still wanted to be listed as a no visit! Uh, yeah...
Anyway all of that list are sad and gross. I love Christmas and all the decorations, house full of pine and lights I couldn't have handled the tackiness of GM buttons on a tree!
Love,
Robyn
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 18:56:10 (EST)
From: Mahatma Santananda
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Children, Santa Claus is not an overweight, bearded whiteman in a red suit handing out presents. Santa Clause is an overweight Indian man in a Krishna suit with a pitiful mustache and you give HIM presents.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 19:03:32 (EST)
From: Mahatma Offanand
Email: None
To: Mahatma Santananda
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Oh my dear brother in his grace, you are only silly and have been making one mistake in all these things. You must never forget crown of Maharaji. It is so beautiful when he dance with crown and then he can be one santa claus so you can give gifts to him like one Ferrari and these all things. But remember also to give gift to Mahatma. Or if you are premie sister come to Mahatma room without clothes. It is so beautiful.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 21:05:54 (EST)
From: Nakedananda Bai
Email: None
To: Mahatma Offanand
Subject: Re: Premie Children and Christmas
Message:
Oh Mahatma Ji

You're on, and I'm off. I want to share that experience with you. It is soooo beautiful, by His Grace.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index