Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 12:03:04 (GMT)
From: Sep 06, 2000 To: Sep 14, 2000 Page: 2 Of: 5


Nigel -:- Ok, Shroom, here's the experiment again... -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 15:06:20 (GMT)
__ sam -:- Ok, Shroom, here's the experiment again... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 10:37:20 (GMT)
__ __ oops -:- oops, nigel.. that was to shroom..sorry(nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:04:54 (GMT)
__ Tonette -:- Number 4 because -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 02:30:05 (GMT)
__ Shroomananda -:- Ok, Nigel, I'll hazard a guess... -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:21:00 (GMT)
__ __ Nigel -:- You failed to identify Maharaji...(nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:34:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Brilliant, Nigel. And, Shroom? What sayest thou? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:05:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Nigel -:- Hey - it looks like ANYONE could start a cult... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:02:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Hey - it looks like ANYONE could start a cult... -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:53:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- Now there's an idea... -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 14:36:00 (GMT)
__ __ sam -:- Ok, Nigel, I'll hazard a guess... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:04:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- Can you imagine that, what a -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:20:23 (GMT)
__ Lotus eater -:- Ooh, tricky.... -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:44:36 (GMT)

Yves has to lose weight -:- Tribinanand Ji (Mahatma) -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:31:25 (GMT)
__ Yves -:- Please everyone read this short post carefully -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 02:37:07 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- you are always asking for info. Now it is my turn -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:01:59 (GMT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- Here's a good transalation -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:42:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- Thanks for that Sir knight. -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:30:20 (GMT)
__ __ __ sam -:- gimme, gimme -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:15:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ Oliver -:- Sir Dave, your linguistic abilities...... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:35:43 (GMT)
__ __ Oliver -:- Hi Salam, want a rough translation? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:51:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- Hi Salam, want a rough translation? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:26:04 (GMT)

Steve -:- Blast from the past - nothing new -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:21:46 (GMT)
__ cq -:- Hate one, love the other -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:45:11 (GMT)
__ __ Steve -:- Yes Hal is fading- using my real first name nt -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:26:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I like Hal better. More authoritarian. Haldor is -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:25:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Hal -:- So you like authoritarian figures ? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:57:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- Do not blame him, he is into Bondage -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:25:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- Why swap? Can't one do both? Although, I have -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:20:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Both? what? be both mindless AND authoritarian...? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:09:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Egad, Chris. Fookin VOGONS. I knew it. (nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:59:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- after you, squire ;) (nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:33:05 (GMT)

Jim -:- How about a Sing-a-Long Satguru Has Come? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:31:09 (GMT)
__ Tonette -:- LMAO!!! You outdo yourself. -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:59:29 (GMT)
__ Shroomananda -:- I nominate these songs for the 'Satguru Has Come' -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:40:41 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- It's already got its songs, you dork! -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 15:20:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ Shroomananda -:- Sorry, Jim, but I've never seen the 'Satguru Has -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:28:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Salam -:- No love lost between those two..nt -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:37:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ JohnT -:- Jim, have you been bursting into song of late? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:23:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- Correction: 'F-cking toady creep who had the -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:31:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Correction: 'F-cking toady creep who had the -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:18:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Thanks pal -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:53:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- Yes, we have no Knowledge today. --JohnT -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 00:22:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- Too late to answer you -:- Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 06:52:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Collins -:- Scurrilous -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 12:34:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ sam -:- why dont you sign off and go practise( nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:38:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Haldor -:- I command you to get back into meditation Shroo -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:52:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Tonette -:- You obviously need a good fuck -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 02:53:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Give him enough rope, Tonette -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:49:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I thought you weren't going to read anymore of my -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:29:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- I thought you weren't going to read anymore of my -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:32:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Who said I read them? Just copy, paste, send nt -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:32:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- How do you know his real name? (nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:03:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Have to answer that by email nt -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:07:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- Rob: do you think this is the same shroom -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:42:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Rob -:- Rob: do you think this is the same shroom -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:33:47 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- Note his post in the thread below to ExTex -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:17:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- When you are passing out pamphlets to the people -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:01:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- When you are passing out pamphlets to the people -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:36:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- You obviously need a good fuck -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:55:36 (GMT)
__ __ where -:- do you find the time ? nt -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:58:16 (GMT)

ExTex -:- A Request for Info -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:51:08 (GMT)
__ Get Yves-en -:- Some more -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:48:40 (GMT)
__ __ ExTex -:- Some more -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:52:25 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- 'Out!' -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:49:04 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- A Request for Info -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:43:28 (GMT)
__ __ ExTex -:- thanks Salam -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:02:23 (GMT)
__ Binliner -:- A Request for Info -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:43:23 (GMT)
__ __ Monmot -:- A Request for Info -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:52:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ ExTex -:- A Request for Info -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:56:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Monmot -:- A Request for Info -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:08:26 (GMT)
__ Know It All -:- A Request for Info -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:15:24 (GMT)
__ Read This -:- A Request for Info -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:41:55 (GMT)
__ __ Read This Too -:- A Request for Info -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:43:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ la-ex -:- A Request for Info -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:15:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ la-ex -:- A Request for Info -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:17:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- What I'm Looking For -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:14:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ old timer -:- What I'm Looking For -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:34:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- Arthur Brigham -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:25:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Get Yves-en -:- I recall some -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:43:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- I knew you were out there -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 21:12:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ wondering -:- Are you an ex, (nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:57:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Are you an ex, ? -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:31:02 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Two of your premises are false -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 21:39:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- Anybody got some spare meds for Ex-tex? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:39:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- He's a lot more rational than you, Shroom -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:27:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- He's a lot more rational than you, Shroom -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:33:49 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Tonete -:- All that jacking off -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:10:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I don't understand this term, 'jack off'. Could -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:10:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- I don't understand this term, 'jack off'. Could -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:02:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Open The Pod Door, Shroom -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:19:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Two of your premises are false -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 22:49:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Another strike at a dead horse -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:35:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Steve -:- It's all here on EPO exTex -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 07:25:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- It's all here on EPO exTex -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:36:54 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I heard from a very good source that Mishler's -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:16:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Well THAT makes more sense than -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:33:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ TexMess -:- Today's Affirmation: -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:45:44 (GMT)

cq -:- For the love of common sense - that 'A' word again -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:52:03 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Getting the facts straight -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:49:40 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- Getting the facts straight -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:50:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Getting the facts straight - it's logical -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:02:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- careful with that logic, Eugene -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 18:41:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- careful with that logic, Eugene -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:53:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Thanks, Nigel -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:42:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Nige -:- Thanks, Nigel -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 23:28:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- Where do your statistics originate from, Dave?(nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:39:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- 'Subtle'? Are you serious? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:44:26 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- That's a very whacky line of reasoning, Chris -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:32:40 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- Then answer me this, Cactus Jim -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:08:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, Chris, you're shooting blanks, bud -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:09:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- Take off your armour-plating and look at the holes -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 19:06:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Well, I disagree -:- Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 03:48:52 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- Expect YOU to take it seriously, Jim? ... -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:02:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- You don't seem to get it -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:41:28 (GMT)
__ Q -:- abuse abuse -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:01:05 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- 'trifling violation of social graces'??? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 18:45:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ Q -:- No, by and large, you are talking about -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:52:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- ... talking about victimhood. Now WHO would want -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:39:48 (GMT)

Super Sub -:- Schroom Schroom...he's our man...if he can't do -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 10:09:02 (GMT)

Jean-Michel -:- Amaroo 2001 - 5 days event annouced today ! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:27:12 (GMT)
__ Rob -:- Guess that will mean more of THESE at ELK -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:06:58 (GMT)
__ __ Way -:- Re:Guess that will mean more of THESE at ELK -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:38:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ Rob -:- Re:Expression -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:03:33 (GMT)
__ __ Shroomananda -:- You were one of 'those' folk, weren't you, Rob? NT -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:45:04 (GMT)
__ __ G -:- Australian Immigration -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:19:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ Rob -:- Australian Immigration -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:30:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Salam -:- To : G and Rob -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:39:01 (GMT)
__ __ Rob -:- PS -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:10:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- PS -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:15:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Rob -:- Ideas........ -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:33:45 (GMT)
__ Shroomananda -:- Anybody know of an inexpensive motel in Ipswich? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:16:29 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- Shroom, Shroom -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:16:06 (GMT)
__ __ Sir Dave -:- Maharaji knows his devotees -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:01:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave -:- and by the way, -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:07:14 (GMT)
__ __ G -:- motels in Ipswich -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 00:34:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- Cost of motels in Ipswich -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:57:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ oz -:- Cost of motels in Ipswich -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:42:51 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ sam -:- Cost of motels in Ipswich -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 09:07:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ G -:- Email address for the Ipswich City Council -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:07:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ G -:- Ipswich getting shafted -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:18:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ G -:- This 'land' idea -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:38:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Know It All -:- Differing costs to camp in Amaroo -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:21:42 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Lotus Eater -:- amaroo finances -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:22:35 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Amaroo 2001 - 5 days event annouced today ! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:54:57 (GMT)
__ __ Jean-Michel -:- Sorry: this US Dollars !!!! (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:58:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- Sorry: this US Dollars !!!! (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:47:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ G -:- I wonder -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:03:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Salam -:- I wonder -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:36:23 (GMT)

Jim -:- Take a look at this, please -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:18:43 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- Take a look at this, please -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:18:42 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- My point in a nutshell -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:34:56 (GMT)
__ __ ExTex -:- My point in a nutshell -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:55:58 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- Sorry Jim, Did not see your second post..nt -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:37:53 (GMT)
__ Yves' gone -:- C'mon Jim, this is a cult, beyond argument. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:34:47 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- What? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:38:27 (GMT)
__ Steve aka Hal -:- Superb analysis Jim- at this you excel nt -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:57:43 (GMT)
__ Shroomananda -:- You're up late, Jim. Can't sleep? I just got off -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:49:45 (GMT)
__ __ Rob -:- Michael, Michael, Michael.......yawn......zzzzzz -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:48:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ Michael -:- ¿Como? nt -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:22:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Rob -:- Not you Padre, the *other* Michael:) nt -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:57:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Michael -:- Oh. ¡Está bien! tn -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:01:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- hi! What's up? ot -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:08:15 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Your question's been asked and answered (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:00:04 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- question for you, Shroo -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:00:25 (GMT)
__ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I know nothing about Rajneesh, cq, other than -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:00:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- You don't get the connection? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:52:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Why not just cut out your neocortex, Shroom? (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:12:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I'll cut mine if you'll cut yours.You go first. NT -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:19:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- My post was funny, yours was just stupid -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:59:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- I thought I WAS dealing with a 9 year old, Jim! NT -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:56:24 (GMT)
__ __ Oliver -:- That's another 232 words Rob (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 08:53:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ Salam -:- Did you know? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:05:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Oliver -:- No I didn't know, and I'm a little shocked. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:26:20 (GMT)
__ ExTex -:- Take a look at this, please -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:38:27 (GMT)


Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 15:06:20 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Everyone
Subject: Ok, Shroom, here's the experiment again...
Message:
You said you'd be willing to have a go.

The point of the exercise is to establish whether even a devotee can tell the difference between the words of a 'Master' (their own Master) and somebody with no spiritual track-history or credentials pretending to be a Master.

Here's the orginal experiment reprinted as it first appeared here in May.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Brothers and sisters (or to put it another way, sisters and bros) in His Grace or otherwise.. please attend carefully.
The task:

(1) How many of the following seven passages are extracts from Maharaji's addresses?
(2) Of those which were given by M, how many are from the 1970's (before M 'evolved') and how many from the 1990's?

(Hint: none come from the 1980's)

To prevent it being too easy, I have tweaked the punctuation, capitalisations, spellings and paragraphing to make the passages appear similar throughout, and I have changed any references to 'Perfect Master' or 'Guru Maharaj Ji' to simply 'the Master'.

I think premies should have a go at this. It might help them sort out for themselves which inspirational materials are suitable for showing to new aspirants, or which are worth travelling a thousand miles to listen to..

Ok,let's go..

(1)
It's just like this really: where are we and what are we doing? Man looks up and sees this Moon in the sky. This beautiful Moon, and he says: 'I wonder if I could go up and land on it.. See what it's like up there. So he builds this amazing rocket, gets the best engineers to design it, and the first one maybe goes into orbit round the Earth..

Then he builds a better rocket and goes into orbit round the Moon.. Slowly, slowly all these rockets are getting bigger. They get more powerful, and they design this landing module which can detach from the main spaceship and it's like 'Hey, Jiminy Cricket!' Man has landed on the Moon. And so there he is, up there on the Moon, and it's like 'Wow, that is really something - man is on the Moon.' But then what does he do? He's standing there on the Moon - one guy, maybe two guys in these breathing helmets - they look up in the sky and what do they see?

I'll tell you what they see: they see the Earth up there in the sky. And it's beautiful! And maybe at that moment they know, they realise something. They know the place they really want to be is there on the Earth. That's really how it is! Where we already are - that's where we most need to be..
>

(2)
Have you seen worms? Have you seen ants? I can understand what it means to be born as an ant or worm in your next birth. That's why it has been said: 'It is with great good fortune we secure this human body. It is rarely attained even by gods, as scriptures say. It is actually the means to practice Knowledge and the gateway to salvation...'

But you just tell me one thing. Do ants go to their jobs? No. Do they get stuck in traffic jams? No. Do they pay taxes? No. Do they need to vote? No. Do they face all these worldly problems? No. Do they get two square meals a day? Yes. Do they have a place to live? Yes., So you just tell me one thing: There are those people too who sleep on the pavements and pass their time in trouble and tribulations. Now whose situation is better? The situation of ants or the situation of those people on the pavements? You tell me, those poor people who have no place to live, no food to eat, how do they fare in this world? Have you ever seen ants begging alms? Oh, everything is provided to ants... Have you ever seen ants saying, 'Yes sir. Yes sir!' Have you seen ants doing flattery without purpose? Have you seen ants saying, 'Please forgive me, oh forgive me?' So, you just tell me, on one side there is this human being and on the other is that ant. And for ants there are no restrictions. They are going on without any restraint. Then whose lot is better?
>
(3)
And there's this question, this big mystery.. What is this life? - this precious life - what is it? Why do we have it? What do we do with it? I mean, we have these five senses and we have all these incredible things to experience. I mean, it's out there for us. So many things to get into, things we get lost in, and that's exactly what we do. Look at it like this: we have these eyes. We need these eyes to even see where we're going. But we also use them to see the beauty - just of the world.

Also these ears.. life is tricky without them. Life is a problem. Sure it is. We need hearing for understanding each other. But also we can use those ears to listen to music. Whatever kind you like... we know what we prefer. I won't talk about that! Or the smelling sense - it's like that joke: 'My dog has no nose' and the other guy says, 'How does he smell?' and it's like 'Really bad!' meaning the dog smells really.. Ok, it's funny! It's a joke..! Ok, but is it really a joke? I don't mean it's funny not to have these senses. No, not that. I mean it's really no joke the way we are so caught up in these senses.. just tasting, just experiencing it all. And it's amazing. But it's really no joke that we miss the important thing. The thing our senses have no knowledge about.. The thing they don't even know about. They are supposed to be senses but sometimes they can't even sense it!

>>
(4)

And we want things.. no doubt about it. We see something in a shop window, and that's what we want. A minute before we were happy.. just walking down the shopping mall or whatever. We're whistling and smiling, you know, kicking stones or something. Just feeling Ok, Not feeling great but Ok, Then we look in that shop window and we see something just so amazing it's like - 'Hey, I'm not happy any more - I want one of those..' No, it's worse than that, we say 'I need one of those..'

Whatever it is, a golf bag or a hi-fi, lots of things - it could be anything. Something not too valuable at all, something that isn't really necessary.. But suddenly we want it, and we're not happy until we get it. If we're just a kid we'll pester our moms until we get it.. Remember that? But that's how it is later on, too. We grow up, we want different things but we still have to have them. So one way or other we get them. But then what? Are we happy yet? You bet we're not!' Tell me, why is that? I can tell you that. I can explain that, and that's what the Master always comes to tell you, what he comes to explain. And he'll explain it again and again - it's like a full-time job. Believe me, it is a full time job, sometimes! But the beautiful thing is, all you have to do is listen. Simple as that. Just listen and understand something.

>
(5)
What is happiness? We know the word, what it means and sometimes we'll tell each other 'Yes, I'm really happy today'. And we mean it! But is it possible we don't even know what that word 'happy' really means? Perhaps we never even knew it, never really felt it inside. So we look for it outside. Of course we do. If we've never had something - I mean, maybe we've had it but now we've lost it, we look outside ourselves for it..

It's like my father, Shri Hans, used to say when someone in the residence lost something. They'd always start looking someplace furthest away - out in the garden and the flowerbeds or somewhere.. I mean it could be just they felt dumb for losing whatever it was and didn't want anyone to see them looking for it..! But Hans Ji always said 'Never look outside for what you lost indoors..' and that is so true. He wasn't talking about losing things, really losing things. He meant something else. That thing we really want, that thing we lost somewhere along the line.. and it's just like we know it's there somewhere. It's like an instinct, like a memory from way back…

That happiness, and we go 'damn it! I just know it's gotta be here somewhere.' But isn't that really what it's like? Except if we don't know where we were when we lost our keys, and 'keys' is good, 'keys' is exactly right! - if we don't know where we were when it happened.. Ok, we kind of suspect they're in the house, inside us somewhere, but unless someone can show us where, then what chance do we have… Is there any chance of finding those keys?
>

(6)
Some of you accept this Knowledge then go off and do your own thing. You say 'Thanks a lot [....], I have what I have now. I'll just go and practice it. Do it my way.' And the Master says 'Hang on a minute, are you going to be Ok?' And you say 'Sure. I know what to do. I understand it, I understand everything..'

And in a way, that's all right. That's fine. Knowledge is free - no strings attached! If you want to do it like that, then that's what you can do, and the Master just says 'See you later, then..' And, believe me, the Master usually will see them later. Why? Because it's like this.. You're teaching this kid to read, and you give him the alphabet. So does the child know how to read? Has he learned to use the language? No - of course he hasn't - but that's what it's like. Exactly what it's like. This Knowledge is like a language. You get the techniques and it's like having your alphabet, but you don't even know what language you're learning. Because Knowledge isn't that kind of language. You won't find a vocabulary, won't find a dictionary anywhere. This isn't French or Chinese. This is the Master's own language - the language of all the great Masters. It is a language of love.. the language of happiness. In fact it isn't even 'about' anything like those other languages. In a way it's not only a language of love but a language about love, and it is the supreme language.

So if you think you know what that means then, 'Ok, that's fine - off you go'. But just remember where you got the alphabet because that's where you'll find the vocabulary and all the rest of it.

>
(7)
And here we all are again. And why? For that one reason, that one simple reason - to grasp that opportunity while we have it.. That continuity. That rare and precious thing, Just to be alive and in the company of our Master. Do we have any idea? Do we really have any idea how fortunate we are? What that means? Can we guess how many lifetimes it took? 'Lifetimes spent in ignorance, wasted years in searching…' All that time waiting for the one thing we most wanted? That thirst of which Kabir and Tulsidas spoke? I'll tell you this right now: that thirst itself is precious, for 'without the thirst there cannot be the joy of drinking at that well'. .

I mean, do monkeys know that longing? No! Or do they know the joy of fulfilment or that recognition when they meet that living Master? No! To behold that Master and recognise the source of the fulfilment. To know the fulfilment and be merged with that Master? Because - it's crazy - that is it! That is all! That much is everything.

What more is there? Yet we blow it! We blow it again and again. It isn't easy! Ok, it looks easy. When we hear the Master speak it sounds easy. Very easy. Knowledge is simple, right? Well, yes it is, but it is also the hardest thing, a dangerous thing. This is really is a treacherous path and it is easy to slip over the edge. And that is the reason we pray - pray constantly - to our Master to help us. To hold onto us - it's like he ties his rope around our middles, so we don't just go 'Hey, I wonder what will happen if I untie this knot!'

Because that is what we do. Or we say 'I don't think this knot looks right. I'll untie it and see if I can tie a better one. It's like we always imagine we can see a better way of doing things - a better way of realising this Knowledge. So we untie the knot and, next thing, there we are at the foot of the mountain! If we're lucky we'll just have a sore head and we just have to go back and start climbing again. If we're not so lucky we'll have fallen too far - just blown it completely. Like the cat's nine lives - 'Uh-ho, there goes number nine! Help me, Lord! Can you get me out of this?' And it's not funny any more.. Seriously, it isn't. Because sometimes the Master can't get you out of it.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 10:37:20 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Ok, Shroom, here's the experiment again...
Message:
I reckon anyone of us could sound like a perf. mas. if we wanted to, with all our years of mindless videos. I dont think I could tell the diff. between a post of yours and a gem from m. You'd probably sound better because you wouldnt repeat for the hundreth time the story about the rose petals on the road or one of the other multi repeated boring takes.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:04:54 (GMT)
From: oops
Email: .
To: nigel
Subject: oops, nigel.. that was to shroom..sorry(nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 02:30:05 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Number 4 because
Message:
the fat fraud IS TALKING ABOUT MATERIAL WEALTH. He definately has an issue with material wealth since he preached for so long as to the insignificance of the pursuit of worldly knowledge and of course, personnal wealth of a premie. In summary, any wealth you have (trust fund, bank account, property, resources, ect. ect. ect.) give it to Guru Maharaji Ji. Give me the reins of your life. In order to be a true devotee of the living perfect master a TRUE premie wil give his/her all. Remember how he bragged about never reading a book? Geez.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:21:00 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Ok, Nigel, I'll hazard a guess...
Message:
I'll say that Number 1 is from Maharaji circa the 70's and I'll say that Number 3 is Maharaji circa the 90's. I think that the other quotes are from other folks. Number 5 could be Maharaji but I will guess his brother Bal Bhagwan Ji. But if that's the case, then he does have a spiritual tradition that he came from.

How'd I do?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:34:19 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Shroomananda
Subject: You failed to identify Maharaji...(nt)
Message:
werf
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:05:08 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Brilliant, Nigel. And, Shroom? What sayest thou?
Message:
Can't quite smell the Master's shit, can you, Shroom?

No, seriously, what does this tell you? I know what it tells me but you first.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:02:46 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Jim
Subject: Hey - it looks like ANYONE could start a cult...
Message:
Funny to think Shroom could twice mistake the ravings of a guru-baiting, neo-darwinian atheist like me (and who is just mucking about, fer Chrissakes) for the wisdom of his Lord and Master...

Like sam says above, most of us could improvise in the distinctive Rawat style without having to try too hard. And I found it's easy to do, once you've developed an ear for the style. Easy for me to do, and easy for Prem - even prem as a young boy, given the intensity of his early-years cult exposure. And there's no reason why any of us, with a bit of practice, couldn't spin garbage like the above into a full hour's video: just sitting, smiling, gesturing from that comfy chair, never in doubt of that warm reception, never in fear of contradiction.

While the likes of Shroom mellow out in the sunny glow of our presence as they reach out for some grains of understanding…

For me, the only stylistic device you need is to constantly interrupt yourself mid-sentence - never quite carrying an idea to a meaningful conclusion. In fact, the content needs to be a careful blend of the banal and the meaningless: that which isn't a self-evident truism (this life right now is all we have so we should enjoy it) should be sheer, vacuous nonsense (master comes to earth bringing a gift etc.)

There's no reason I can see that ANYBODY couldn't pull the same spiritual scam as Rawat Junior, given the right opportunities - and assuming they also lacked the critical faculties to question the morality of adopting that role.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:53:54 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Hey - it looks like ANYONE could start a cult...
Message:
Hey Nigel, couldn't you write a computer program to generate random satsang? Or maybe, that's what rawat already does do for these set-alight broadcasts? Think he's patented it, like the watch and the aircraft seat?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 14:36:00 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Rob
Subject: Now there's an idea...
Message:
Better still, send me that text file with thirty-thousand words of the wisdom of Shroom, and I'll write you a random Shroomism generator, and post the output on the forum - then the man himself can vie with his automated alter-ego, and see if people can tell them apart.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:04:01 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: .
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Ok, Nigel, I'll hazard a guess...
Message:
because you're a plant(I mean a bug, not a green thing) and have the rest of the community feeding you information? (i dont really believe that- just a guess). Why do people answer this git?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:20:23 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Shroom
Subject: Can you imagine that, what a
Message:
dickhead. Falling for a trick like that. Man. Does not even know if his master said the words or not. What a good example of a devotee and master that have nothing in common. Even a whore will know what her pimp told her last. Go burry yourself shoom.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:44:36 (GMT)
From: Lotus eater
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Ooh, tricky....
Message:
1 M in the 70s
2 M in the 90s
3 M hungover after a big night
4 imitation M
5 imitation M
6 M in the 90s
7 M in the 90s

so I hope you post the answers!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:31:25 (GMT)
From: Yves has to lose weight
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Tribinanand Ji (Mahatma)
Message:
Under the subject 'stories are coming out of the woodwork' I'd like to gather as much as possible about the above-noted mahatma Tribinanand Ji. If someone has a picture, it would help stir-up memories. It is welcomed and demanded at

montreal.quebec@usa.net

Some story will be coming soon on this forum. Stay tuned.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 02:37:07 (GMT)
From: Yves
Email: None
To: Yves has to lose weight
Subject: Please everyone read this short post carefully
Message:
Jagdeo has been one powerful buzzword which shook the EV empire a little.

Tribinanand is about to become a much more powerful buzzword. (Is this clear? If not, read again.) I need everyone attention and memories about this holy-predator. Some file is piling-up. More is needed. Would anyone warn Micheal Dettmers, this is no time for funky rethorics and could be his last chance to cross the floor before the grapes of wrath get squeezed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:01:59 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Yves has to lose weight
Subject: you are always asking for info. Now it is my turn
Message:
There is a post on the French forum on the 9th of Sep. by someone called Debouc. Is is something about amorro. Can you translate it to English and post here plllleeeeesssse.

merci.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:42:28 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Here's a good transalation
Message:
Here's what I've translated it into:

Here it is, they give this out! Not enough to have a racket which the devotees were subjected to in September 99, they attack again. He has just passed on the virtual waves the advertisement of a perhaps a probable future expected virtual event of 5 day to Amaroo (Australia) in April 2001. Initially an introduction, announcing a questionnaire. Then come the questions. Guess which is the N°3 question..... How much do you think will be given, and there, they do not hold back, they attack with 450USD (2600 with 3150frs) for the subscription + 1300USD for lodging on the site (between 7800ffr and 9100ffr) in tents 2 places, paper hankies included. 5 days with 1750 USD, that expensive made the guru. To count 8000fr plane, + incidental expense, that makes the week with 20000fr minimum if you remain only one week in Australia... On do 6 questions, 4 relate to the money, astonishing not? Go, I copy it to you, you will see for yourself.

======== integral Copy of the 2 messages ========== INTRODUCTION The preparations for an international conference with Amaroo (center of conferences of Ivory Rock'n'roll) in April 2001 are quite advanced. It will be for us the occasion to pass four or five days with Maharaji within the splendid framework of Amaroo. These preparations aim in particular the development of the permanent installations necessary to this conference but also for the following ones, so that international conferences can take place in a regular way by removing the high expenses related to the temporary installations. These new installations include/understand an enlarging of the campsites, with the medical permanent ones of quality, improvements made to the amphitheatre, surfaces of full air reserved for the meals and well more. The contribution required for the subscription as for lodging on the site will be fixed so as to be able to help to finance part of the costs relating to this equipment. While attending this conference, you will also take part in the development of Amaroo and support the prospect to increase the frequency of these events.

THE QUESTIONNAIRE The goal of this questionnaire is to give an indication of the number of people likely to attend the next conference. The number of places will be limited, as well as lodging on the spot because of the limited surface of the places. Information which you will provide will help us to plan the various aspects of the congress and to take determining measures concerning the budgets, the projects and the equipment permanent. Thank you for your participation in this questionnaire which will contribute to make conference of Amaroo 2001 an outstanding event. QUESTIONNAIRE To fill out this questionnaire, put to put X between the brackets against the question. Please turn it over before September 25 00 to: Herve Guilloux 34 street Henri IV 64110, Mazères - Lezons mall: hguill@club-internet.fr or Firstclass

Question1 Which your usual home country? ()

Question 2 After having taken knowledge of the details concerning the conference provided in the letter of introduction, will you be able to assist (do slave labour)? Most probably () Probably () Little probably () At all () In the case of a positive answer, pass to the following questions.

Question 3 Is it probable that the amount of the subcription for this congress is of 450$us (between 2600 and 3150 ffr according to course's), and that of the lodging of 1300$us (between 7800ffr and 9100ffr). Would be you laid out to spend this sum taking into account the reasons given in the letter of introduction? Most probably () Probably () Little probably () At all ()

Question 4 Do you prefer paying for only your subscription of 450$ and of organizing your own lodging apart from the site? Most probably () Probably () Little probably () At all ()

Question 5 Do you prefer to register in advance and pay money in several times? Most probably () Probably () a little probably () At all ()

Question 6 There will be probably three kinds of lodgings: standard; of luxury; and super luxury of different tariffs. Which would choose? Standard lodging () Lodging of luxury () Lodging of super luxury ()

==== You will not say that you were not informed!

© Bidouc on the Web

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:30:20 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: salam_au@iprimus.com.au
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Thanks for that Sir knight.
Message:
Can anyone tell me if this is a letter, a letter with an application form, or a pamphlet. I am very interested in getting a copy of it, wether original or photocopied. Can anyone help?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:15:17 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: -
To: Sir Dave
Subject: gimme, gimme
Message:
whenever I hear talk of a video, or a program or anything instigated by m- it seems to be nothing but $$$$$$$s- I'm so sick of it!I know it costs money to travel- but how much can he expect to suck out of us?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:35:43 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Sir Dave, your linguistic abilities......
Message:
...never cease to amaze me. :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:51:40 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Hi Salam, want a rough translation?
Message:
Check out this site.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:26:04 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Hi Salam, want a rough translation?
Message:
I going to have to learn French to be able to read this translation
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:21:46 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Blast from the past - nothing new
Message:
Just a couple of quotes I came across in doing some research into the Rhada Soami's

Some proclaim themselves teachers
And collect a crowd of followers
These are not men but dogs
Though they have neither tale nor four legs
Adulterous and drunken brutes
They fatten their bodies.
Tuka says ; they are fully equiped
To go down the pit.

Tukaram 1607-1649.

He does not know anything of God
And still pretends to teach others
He is a serpent going from door to door
To get some food
Many are the gurus of this kind
How can they show you God?

Akho 16th Century.

So Maha does come from an ancient lineage and tradition!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:45:11 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: Hate one, love the other
Message:
The Tukaram quote I hated. The Akho I loved.

Ah, well, pick'n'mix it'll always be, I guess.

Cheers,

Chris

PS - did you formerly post as Hal, or are you someone else?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:26:05 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Yes Hal is fading- using my real first name nt
Message:
khlkj
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:25:34 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: I like Hal better. More authoritarian. Haldor is
Message:
even better, Mr. Ra Orion. Steve sounds like a prep school/country club yuppie puke. (No offense!)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:57:24 (GMT)
From: Hal
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: So you like authoritarian figures ?
Message:
Well that figures. What about swapping S;S &M for some S&M ?

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:25:44 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Do not blame him, he is into Bondage
Message:
If you know what I mean.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:20:09 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Hal
Subject: Why swap? Can't one do both? Although, I have
Message:
to admit that sadism and masochism never really appealed to me. Maybe I haven't met the right mistress yet. Actually what I meant was that Hal carries more authority than Steve does. Probably because I always think of the HAL 9000 computer. Now THAT was an authority figure!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:09:37 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Both? what? be both mindless AND authoritarian...?
Message:
... now just who or what does that remind me of?

BTW, Hal could be short for Haloperidol. (an anti-psychosis drug).

Now there's a mixture of both for you!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:59:27 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Egad, Chris. Fookin VOGONS. I knew it. (nt)
Message:
... and I think I can prove it ;-))
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:33:05 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: after you, squire ;) (nt)
Message:
hjtyui
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:31:09 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: How about a Sing-a-Long Satguru Has Come?
Message:
I was just reading over on the CNN site about the new Sing-a-Long Sound of Music fad where fans dress up in crazy, relevant costumes and sing along to a subtitled version of the movie in Times Square. Kind of like the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Well, for my money, the best in-house cult movie we ever made was Satguru Has Come. I loved that thing (which is a grace in itself given that I had to watch it so often).

So wouldn't it be fun to have a subtitled version we could all sing to -- and shout at -- and have all sorts of fun with?

Can you imagine?

Or how about an unexpurgerated version of 'The Power of Love', you know, the one with all those bestiality scenes where then-sexy Marolyn gets it on with the Hamster?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:59:29 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: LMAO!!! You outdo yourself.
Message:
My personal favorite was Lord of the Universe. Sounded like a god damn nursery rhyme.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:40:41 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I nominate these songs for the 'Satguru Has Come'
Message:
sing-a-long festival:

Oh, when will dawn the blessed day
When Love will waken in my heart?
When will my tears flow uncontrolled
As I repeat Lord Hari's name,
And all my longing be fulfilled?
When will my mind and soul be pure?
Oh, when shall I at last repair
Unto Vrindavan's sacred groves?
When will my worldly bonds fall off
And my imperfect sight be healed
By Wisdom's cool collyrium?
When shall I learn true alchemy
And, touching the Philosopher's Stone,
Transmute my body's worthless iron
Into the Spirit's purest gold?
When shall I see this very world
As God, and roll on Love's highway?
When shall I give up piety
And duty and the thought of caste?
When shall I leave behind all fear,
All shame, convention, worry, pride?

Oh, I shall smear my body then
With dust from the feet of devotees;
Across my shoulders I shall sling
Renunciation's pack, and drink
From my two hands a cooling draught
Of Jamuna's life-renewing stream.
Oh, then I shall be mad with love;
I shall both laugh and weep for joy!
Then I shall swim upon the Sea
Of blessed Satchidananda;
Drunk with His love, I shall make all
As drunk as I! Oh, I shall sport
At Hari's feet for evermore!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have made Thee, O Lord, the Pole-star of my life;
No more shall I lose my way on the world's trackless sea.
Wherever I wander here, Thy brilliance shines undimmed;
With Thy serene and gracious light
Thou drivest all the tears out of my troubled soul.

In my heart's inmost shrine Thy face forever beams;
If, for a moment even, I cannot find it there,
My soul is overwhelmed with woe;
And when my witless mind strays from the thought of Thee,
The vision of Thy face strikes me with deepest shame.

(Both from 'The Gospel of Ramakrishna' by M and sung by Vivekananda)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 15:20:05 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: It's already got its songs, you dork!
Message:
What kind of an idiot are you, trying to ruin another good joke like this? First of all, the movie's called 'Satguru Has Come'. One doesn't say the Satguru Has Come in English. We don't do that with our movie titles, if you recall.

But the main thing is that the movie already has its songs. Good, old premie favorites from the Anand Band as well as a few scenes with everyone making fools of themselves singing 'Lord of the Universe', arti and that kind of shit.

You're an idiot, Shroom.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:28:03 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Sorry, Jim, but I've never seen the 'Satguru Has
Message:
Come' video, but I would love to view it. Do you have a copy to lend me? And I didn't say that the video was titled 'The Satguru Has Come'. If you'll clean your glasses and re-read my post, I said, I nominate these songs for the 'Satguru Has Come' sing-a-long festival.

You're a dweeb, you idiot.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:37:35 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: No love lost between those two..nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:23:16 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Jim, have you been bursting into song of late?
Message:
I have. To the tune of 'For s/he's a jolly good fellow'

Oh! We're the jolly good fellows!
Oh! We're the jolly good fellows!
Oh! We're the jolly good fe heh llows!
We kick Maharaji's butt!

I think you get the idea. And of course, if some visitors find the sentiment uncongenial - well, let them not sing 'kick'. Lick or kiss would be admirably fitting.

All together now, with spirit!

Hey! you too shroom' (ya fookin' toady creep).


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:31:45 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Correction: 'F-cking toady creep who had the
Message:
balls to investigate and RECEIVE Knowledge to determine it's validity and not a half-assed wannabe who never checked it out'. Loser.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:18:03 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: ALL
Subject: Correction: 'F-cking toady creep who had the
Message:
I am beginning to get the picture that little old Shroom is a 200% PHONY! I don't think he really PRACTISES the old knowledge. I think he comes here an says stupid shit in an effort to CONVINCE HIMSELF that he practises the old k. NOW THIS MAKES IT ALL MAKE SENSE!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:53:37 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Thanks pal
Message:
You know the tune, shroom - and we're all singing for you. So let's here it for the shroom, now folks. With spirit...

For shroom's a scurrilous fellow,
Oh! shroom's a scurrilous fellow,
Yes! shroom's a scurrilous feh-hell-low,
His head's stuck up his butt.
Stuck right up his butt.
Stuck right up his butt.
Oh! shroom's a scurrilous fellow,
Such a scurrilous fellow,
He's such a scurrilous feh-hell-low,
This nobody can deny.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 00:22:54 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Yes, we have no Knowledge today. --JohnT
Message:
Sing along now, John!---

Yes, we have no Knowledge today.
Yes, we have no Knowledge today.
We'll have none today, we'll have none tomorrow,
Yes, we have no Knowledge today.

Yes, my wife has Knowledge today.
Yes, my wife has Knowledge today.
She'll have it today, she'll have it tomorrow,
Yes, my wife has Knowledge today.

Yes, we don't know what Knowledge is.
Yes, we don't know what Knowledge is.
We didn't know it then, we don't know it now,
Yes, we'll never know what Knowledge is.

Yes, but I can guess what it is.
Yes, but I can guess what it is.
We guessed about it then, we guess about it now,
Yes, we fools can continue to guess about it.

PS--Even a fool can guess about it. And now you can sing about it too! In one part harmony. Especially recommended for fools. And losers. Like you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 06:52:47 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Too late to answer you
Message:
seeing that you have been shoed off.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 12:34:46 (GMT)
From: Collins
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Scurrilous
Message:
scurrilous adj. 1. grossly or obscenely abusive or defamatory. 2. characterized by gross or obscene humour. [C16: from Latin scurrilis derisive, from scurra buffoon]

Shroom the buffoon. So shallow he put the fish into superficial. They're laughing at you, shroom; and with me. That's what these people with knowledge are doing.

Funny that - but there you have it. You're the loser in the eyes of people who know. You are sad, shroom. Very, very, very sad. But vile.

JohnT

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:38:10 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: -
To: Shroomananda
Subject: why dont you sign off and go practise( nt)
Message:
instead of chit-chatting and talking about your concepts 'cause
m doesnt like what you are doing- he said so
Himself.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:52:14 (GMT)
From: Haldor
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: I command you to get back into meditation Shroo
Message:
You are losing your focus on TRUTH and falling down into the negative energy fields of these earthlings. That is not your mission as a lightworker. Reread your manual Shroo !

Mission Control

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 02:53:51 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: You obviously need a good fuck
Message:
or an enema. Why don't you get LOST!! You are tiresome and STUPID! Go join the club ilovemaharaji.yahoo.com. Go have some SATSANG! Spend your time MEDITATING! SURELY YOU HAVE BETTER WAYS OF SERVING 'The Living Perfect Master!' Bet you and your neurosis have found it hard to get laid even by brainwashed premie chicks! Face it, even the devoted find you unattractive and insane. Why don't you go play with yourself! I think you are jerking off as you post here----that's the attraction! I can only hope your jism will afect your keyboard to the point that it is useless. Get lost MUSHROOM. Everyone here thinks that you are a JERK!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:49:29 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: Give him enough rope, Tonette
Message:
he's hanging himself (out to dry). Let him ramble. His disparate mix of deeply devotional schmaltz and fetid hate-filled ravings make for a good anti-cult warning.

Besides, I'm emailing all his crap to EV for their enjoyment. With his real name attached, of course.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:29:38 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: I thought you weren't going to read anymore of my
Message:
posts, Rob? What's the matter, curiousity got the cat? Make sure to include Tonette's post and some of yours. We wouldn't want to deny the nice folk at EV some of the 'wisdom' displayed here, would we? Did you have brain fever when you were a kid, Rob? Or are you just a small-minded person in general? You do have too much time on your hands. My Dad used to say that idle hands make the devil's workshop. Who DO you work for anyway?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:32:44 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: All
Subject: I thought you weren't going to read anymore of my
Message:
Now if that isn't the most blissful satsang I have ever heard! This Shroom is truly showing me how devotion to the master is the only way to true peace and higher consciousness! I believe he is one of the most spiritually motivated people that I've ever heard. HAR HAR! Just an ocean of compassion, love and bliss selflessly flowing our way. We are soooo blessed.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:32:09 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Who said I read them? Just copy, paste, send nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:03:49 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: How do you know his real name? (nt)
Message:
mmmmm
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:07:22 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Have to answer that by email nt
Message:
sssshh
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 13:42:57 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Rob: do you think this is the same shroom
Message:
that was here a week ago or is he someone else. This one seems too voicerous and has his head between his legs. Or maybe it is the pressure?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:33:47 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Rob: do you think this is the same shroom
Message:
Oh he's the same, of that we are sure.

What you are seeing now is the true nature of a cult member once you scrape off the thin veneer of 'enlightenment'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:17:15 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Note his post in the thread below to ExTex
Message:
Right all the way down of the thread.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:01:25 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: When you are passing out pamphlets to the people
Message:
attending an event, make sure you smile so that they know how 'happy' you are. Even if you have to fake it. But I think they'll be able to tell that you're a phony. After all, what human being would want to stand out in the elements and try to convince joyous, happy, contented, conscious people who are about to listen to the Master of the time talk about the Knowledge of all Knowledges that they are unhappy? Quite a job!

Of course, you could always stay at home and play with yourself. That might be more satisfying in the long run. You don't work for an Escort Service, do you? If I ever get to go to Washington, I'd like somebody to accompany me to the event. And afterwards, back to the hotel. I'll even spring for dinner at a nice restaurant. Or we could call room service and eat in. I've got plenty of money for someone like you. Not that I couldn't get a date on my own. But I sometimes like to pay for it just so I don't have to take all the sass. Especially from a bitch.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:36:24 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: ALL
Subject: When you are passing out pamphlets to the people
Message:
More BLISSFUL SATSANG!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:55:36 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: You obviously need a good fuck
Message:
Delightful. I am glad to see that you were sensitive of poor Shroomster's obvious low self esteem. LOL! I would hate to see you really get upset. Har Har Har
This clown HAS GOT to be doing this as 'service'. No one could keep this up on his own. It would get too boring. This is obviously harrassment.
Enjoyed YOUR post though, T.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:58:16 (GMT)
From: where
Email: .
To: Shroomananda
Subject: do you find the time ? nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:51:08 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
Thank you for your interesting responses to my 'serious question' and related thread. At the risk of trying your patience, let me ask another question.

Can you give me any specific NAMES of early DLM 'devotees'? I mean really early, the one's that have been suggested were responsible for perpetrating the spreading of DLM in the US (and Europe)? The movers and shakers.
Not post 'Millenium' but at the start of the US 'propagation'. Any specific names and related bio info could help me start to try and research who these people were and where they went and when,why, etc. THE EARLIER THE BETTER!

The only name I can remember is the late Bob Mishler who met an untimely death some time after he left DLM and publicly 'came clean' on his take of GM. I don't know much about his death either.

I don't have a copy of 'Who Is GM?' anymore. That probably had some names in it. (Does EV even acknowledge the existence of that propaganda? And its required studying?)

Let's see what we collectively REALLY know. Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks, in advance.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:48:40 (GMT)
From: Get Yves-en
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Some more
Message:
You must put your hands on Who is GMJ pocketbook. Many names are there. If you want, I could borrow a copy and scan it for you.

You must see Roger eDrek site and maybe contact old farts whose email are listed there.

Think of it this way:

First wave.
1970. Some freaks go to India, track the star kid-guru and bring him to England.

Second wave.
1971. I recall an audiotape I heard in 1974 where he mentioned July 17 was the big date when he first came to the US. It must have been 1971. Guru lands in US. Hans Jayanti (november) in India. Few go. Second wave of devotees. Claire Tremblay was there. I got her phone number if you need to talk to her. My inner voice of tennis tells me she may be the one to whom was addressed the 1995 Durga Ji letter.

Third wave
1972. Big time in US. Jumbo jets bring premies to India for one month stay in Ashram around Hans Jayanti (november). Divine times titles biggest peacetime airlift ever. May have been a slight exageration there.

Fourth wave
1973. My first darshan was july 1973 near London UK for Guru Puja at Alexandra Palace. We camped on scouts jamboree campgrounds where I wore a tan polyester suit, slept in huge tent and fought jet lag. I recall Joan Apter onstage doing her Ki-Jay routine while I tried to stay awake. Next was Millenium 1973 in Houston for Hans Jayanti. National director had to insist we didn't need sleeping bags in hotels. He was right but I had mine just in case.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:52:25 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Get Yves-en
Subject: Some more
Message:
Good info, thanks. Scanning the book would be WAY too much trouble. I'll look for one in a used book store next weekend. It'll be cheap! Lot's of used book stores where I live. Thanks for the offer.
I was at Alexander Palace, London. Came from Texas for it. I remember the huge communal army tents and those fucking FREEZING showers. We went into town (spaced-out) to take hot baths at Kings Cross station. BAD PREMIES! I might get back to you about that phone #. I'll see. I was also at Montrose, Amherst and Orlando. And of course Houston.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:49:04 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Get Yves-en
Subject: 'Out!'
Message:
Claire Tremblay was there. I got her phone number if you need to talk to her. My inner voice of tennis tells me she may be the one to whom was addressed the 1995 Durga Ji letter.

No, Yves, it wasn't. It was some woman who was close to Marolyn in Malibu, much more of a PAM than Claire ever got to be (sigh!). She did daycare for the kids or something. Maybe their kids went to school together, yeah that's it.

Anyway, Maharaji once talked about karma at some small gathering and she tried to follow up, asking about how the 'rules' of karma applied to abused kids. She enver got an answer, kept trying, got pissed off and wrote Marolyn asking her why she was getting stonewalled. Marolyn's pathetic, wimply-ass screed followed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:43:28 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
I found this site on the net,

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/2349/maharaji.html

The fellow took k in 1971 and has some stories. The site is still being upgraded. He appears to have changed to budhisim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 04:02:23 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: thanks Salam
Message:
I bookmarked that site. It looks pretty interesting and it looks (at a glance) like it mught actually have some names in it. I'll read it later tonight after reading this forum, which by the way is not only fun but
BECOMING VERY VERY THERAPAUTIC (sp?) FOR ME. Thanks for being here you knuckleheads!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:43:23 (GMT)
From: Binliner
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:


I've been a premie since '72(London), have been connected to the internet for 3 weeks,found this site & now I'm an ex. I,m shellshocked. When I've taught myself to type closer to the speed of thought I might be able to explain myself better.

I'm replying to you ExTex because I think I recognize a kindred spirit;someone who feels it important to get to the bottom of who did what,why &when.The abnegation of memory is one of the things about all this that I can't believe I've been a party to.

I don't go for conspiracy theories too much although its certain that all groups/movements are sussed out by the powers that be.

As to your request for info :m was brought to London by a handful of people(C1970/71)& then less than a year later went to America,having been back to India then again England.?? (not really sure)

One of the people who brought him was Mahatma Saphlanand Ji, an Englishman whose real name I don't know.I understood from the grapevine at the time that Saph had been the main man in the endevour. Later Saph was the guy who encouraged m to learn to fly.

Saph now lives in the S.W of England in an area popular with people who are/have been involved in every cult you can think of, as well as numerous freelance oddballists.

He is definately not into m & hasn't been for at least 10 years. I have no reason to suppose that he wouldn't co-operate in filling out the historical details if approached in a sensitive way.

Anyway good luck with the researches.It's taken me 2 hours to do this right so goodnight.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:52:18 (GMT)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: Binliner
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
Welcome Binliner. Jean-Michel posted a link to a copy of a series of emails J-M had with someone named Sitaram. It was fascinating reading.

Here's the link: http://www.ex-premie.org/papers/sitaram.htm

Or, if you want, go into the archives and get the live link in a post by J-M dated September 7, 2000. Sitaram discusses with J-M his involvement in the very early days of DLM. He was one of the earliest (if not the earliest) devotee(s) sent to the West to spread the word.

Hope this helps.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:56:17 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Monmot
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
THANK YOU MONMOT EVER SO MUCH! THAT WAS A VERY INTERESTING DIALOGUE YOU SUGGESTED! It seemed like it was an excerpt...but there was enough there to answer a lot of my questions. It did fill out a lot of what was blank for me. Still no names/info on 'western devotees', except the englishman, but nevertheless very good info. BIG THANKS!
Fellow ex's, if you have not read the above refered to text... check it out.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:08:26 (GMT)
From: Monmot
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
Dear ExTex:

It is pretty interesting, no? Perhaps Jean-Michel has more of those email exchanges, or more knowledge about names etc.

Thanks
M

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:15:24 (GMT)
From: Know It All
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
You ought to read the portions of the book 'Soul Rush' by now ex-premie Sophia Collier, which are reproduced as part of the EV-DLM Papers here. You can find it under the Indian background section.

KIA

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:41:55 (GMT)
From: Read This
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
Parents Versus Cult: Frustration, Kidnaping, Tears;
Who Became Kidnapers to Rescue Daughter From Her Guru

By Chip Brown, Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 15, 1982 ;

Emily Deitz was kidnaped the first time on a Sunday in June 1978. She would sometimes come by her parents' home in Silver Spring to see her five brothers and sisters, but that day her mother had taken the rest of the family out of the house. Her father and her older brother David bound her hands with adhesive tape. She was blindfolded, boosted into a van and driven around the Beltway to a house in Capitol Heights.

At 19 Emily was a legal adult, old enough to vote, drink and generally do what she pleased. But for two days her parents held her captive while three strangers vied for her mind.

...

Emily wanted something else. What she found changed her life and skewed the lives of her parents as well. She was a willful, restless, girl of 15 when she devoted herself to Guru Maharaj Ji, the spiritual leader of the Divine Light Mission. Her parents watched unwittingly at first as their once freethinking child became increasingly involved with an adolescent guru who seemed to them to be nothing more than a charlatan with a weakness for cliches and a talent for fatuous analogies. She abandoned her goals. She squandered her advantages. She became, before their eyes, a daughter they no longer knew.

Like the thousands of parents who have turned to deprogramming in the decade since the process was conceived, Esther and Leonard Deitz believed they had lost their daughter to a subtle, sophisticated form of mind control. In trying to break the hold of the Guru Maharaj Ji on Emily's mind, the couple found themselves embroiled in the controversy that has surrounded deprogramming since its beginning, and in the larger debate over the nature of cults, mind control, religious conversion and the protections the First Amendment affords all manner of gods.

Religious cults have flourished throughout history in cultures beset by tumult and change. Today, according to anticult groups such as the Citizens Freedom Foundation, as many as two million people in the United States belong to more than 2,000 cults. The current upsurge in the United States dates from the late 1960s. Many of the major groups rode the counterculture to popularity, capitalizing on an alienated generation of young people that was seeking spiritual conviction in a time of transition and uncertainty. Through such practices as chanting, meditation, encounter sessions, absolutist doctrines, demanding regimens and communal life styles, cults provide not just a spiritual order but the ecstatic firsthand experiences of God absent in traditional religious ceremonies. The major groups attracted bright, idealistic young people, including a disproportionate percentage with Jewish and Roman Catholic backgrounds.

The groups that most concern parents and some religious leaders are the so-called 'destructive cults.' Bitterly criticized for motives that have more to do with power, exploitation and control than with God, they range from the highly organized Unification Church of the Rev. Sung Myung Moon to small fundamentalist Christian sects of less than a dozen followers. Regardless of size, these groups share such characteristics as living leaders with messianic convictions; restricted environments in which information is controlled; doctrines of exclusion and isolation that emphasize the importance of the group ahead of the individual.

How do these cults implant their simplistic dogma in intelligent people? How do they persuade doctoral candidates from MIT to panhandle in airports and on street corners? Their critics say the destructive cults employ deceptive recruiting practices and sophisticated forms of mental conditioning that some experts feel can result eventually in the permanent impairment of the mind's critical ability.

The Deitzes joined the crusade combating these 'new religions,' taking the view that the 'psychological coercion' practiced by cults presents a greater danger than the temporary violation of civil liberties required to get unwilling cult members into the hands of deprogrammers. They came to the conclusion that a forcible deprogramming was the last move left to them to rescue Emily. They believed this move was a measure of their love and concern, and was justified by reports from experts such as Margaret Singer, a Berkeley professor who wrote, 'The cults. . . maintain intense allegiance through the arguments of their ideology and through social and psychological pressures and practices that, intentionally or not, amount to conditioning techniques that constrict attention, limit personal relationships and devalue reasoning.'

...

'Americans in China'

Guru Maharaj Ji, leader of the Divine Light Mission, caused a sensation when he arrived in America in 1971 as the 13-year-old 'Perfect Master.' Four years later, when a suburban teen-ager named Emily Deitz discovered him, his followers had peaked at around 40,000 and the mission was among the half dozen major cult groups in the country.

In their ignorance, Esther and Leonard Deitz had not taken their daughter seriously when she came home talking about her new guru. Through meditation he taught something called 'Knowledge,' 'the experience of one's real self and harmony with the ultimate which is inside of all of us,' as Maharaj Ji put it in an interview in 1979. The Deitzes shrugged.

'One day Emily said, 'I'm going to a 'Knowledge' session, I'll be gone all day,' ' Leonard Deitz recalled. 'We didn't know what that meant. We were stupid-ass parents.'

But as Emily entered her senior year at Springbrook High School, it was plain to her parents that her behavior and her personality were changing. New tensions sprang up in the Deitzes' handsome house at Crest Park Court in Silver Spring. Planning to work on her bicycle, Emily carried her tools and her 10-speed into an empty room, and before sitting down, thumbtacked a poster of the guru on the wall in front of her. It wasn't enough that she had posters of him all over her room. Her father ordered her to take it down.

'At first I was a closet parent,' Leonard Deitz said. 'I was embarrassed my kid got involved. I thought my daughter was too smart to fall for anything like the guru. Then right before our eyes she grew more and more distant. We began to read a little, but we didn't know what was happening. We were like Americans in China.'

In the fall of 1976, Emily moved to rural Massachusetts to attend Hampshire College, an innovative school suited to her independent ways. Relieved as they were that Emily had started college, her parents were still concerned by her faith in the Divine Light Mission, and they started their own education.

They devoured any information they could find about the mission and the guru. At a conference on cults in Maryland, they met other parents with tales to tell much like their own. Their phone bill jumped from $20 to several hundred dollars a month, as they called new contacts around the country, and developed strong relationships with people they'd never seen.

By the end of 1977, the Deitzes were thoroughly schooled in the message of the Divine Light Mission. They had acquired tapes of the guru's satsangs, or spiritural discourses, and copies of his magazine. Maharaj Ji harped on the theme that the mind was the worst enemy of his 'premies,' as his followers are called.

He compared the mind to a skunk, a pair of 'freaky binoculars,' a fly that could be smashed, and a snake. In 1972, extending Eastern precepts in selflessness and surrender, he said, 'The mind keeps the secret that you are divine away from you. . . . The mind is a snake and the treasure lies behind it. If you want that treasure you will have to kill the snake.'

Conjuring a grim future for premies who strayed from the fold, he compared leaving the Divine Light Mission to jumping off a ship into shark-infested waters. In the kind of remark that never endeared him to parents, he once said, 'The only tie you have with your parents is hanging in the closet.'

The more they learned, the more dismayed the Deitzes grew. 'It took us a good couple of years to realize that Emily was getting deeper and deeper into the cult and developing a distinct personality change,' Leonard Deitz said. 'It was confirmed to me when she said, 'Dad, you can be Jewish and belong to this group, too.' That was a line fed to her by the cult.'

Emily dropped out of Hampshire College in 1977 after the fall term, staying in the Washington area to work cleaning houses, though she was a girl 'whose room was always a mess,' according to her mother.

That was the turning point. Their worst fears realized, the Deitzes decided to have Emily deprogrammed. They were influenced by the book 'Snapping: America's Epidemic of Sudden Personality Change,' and by the research of Harvard psychiatrist John G. Clark Jr., who warned that continuing membership in a cult leads to the 'gradual degradation of ordinary thought processes necessary to cope with highly differentiated and ambiguous external life problems of the future. The intellect appears to lose a great many I.Q. points; the capacity to form flexible human relationships. . .is impaired and all reality testing functions are difficult to mobilize so that judgment is poor.'

The Deitzes asked their lawyer to investigate the possibility of securing temporary custody of Emily through a conservatorship. Conservatorships have been granted in some states to parents seeking legal ways to get their adult children to deprogrammers. The lawyer sounded out judges in Montgomery and Prince George's counties, but reported back to the Deitzes in June 1978, that 'the climate wasn't right.'

Now in their distress, the Deitzes believed they had no choice but to compel Emily, for her owne, Emily sake, to attend what she would not voluntarily sit for.

'Emily had reached a point where she was hardly a member of the family,' said Esther Deitz. 'If the deprogramming were unsuccessful, we ran the risk of losing her completely. Since we didn't have that much of her already--she was so distant, so alienated--the risk didn't seem so much.'

Among the people the Deitzes were acquainted with through their contacts in the anticult network were three ex-cultists not much older than Emily. They had not belonged to Divine Light, but they agreed to try to deprogram Emily, inexperienced as they were about life as a premie. At the time the Deitzes couldn't find any ex-members of Divine Light.

Though it would be conducted under the shadow of coercion, the deprogramming planned was a simple matter of talking and reasoning with Emily to help her overcome the psychological and emotional control of the cult. If the process was a success, Emily possibly would thank her parents as many successfully deprogrammed cult members have afterward. Their aim, the Deitzes said, was not to dissuade Emily from her beliefs, but to restore her ability to think critically and exercise her own free will.

Their misgivings about breaking the law were balanced by hope. Ted Patrick, the man known as 'Black Lightning' who coined the term 'deprogramming' and who claims to have gotten more than 1,600 people out of cults since 1971 at a success rate of 90 percent, once said of his method, 'The only way I can describe it is that it's like turning on the light in a dark room. . .It's like seeing a person change from a werewolf into a man.'

No such dramatic transformation came over Emily in the two days she underwent what her parents later lamented as 'a very poor, inadequate deprogramming by well-meaning but inexperienced people.' As Leonard Deitz left the house in Capitol Heights, accompanying Emily to a house in Minneapolis where she was to spend a while in what the trade calls 'rehabilitation,' Esther Deitz was uneasy. 'It was a gut feeling,' she said. 'I never had the feeling they had really reached Emily.'

A few days later, after Dr. Deitz had dropped his daughter off in Minneapolis, news came that Emily had escaped with the help of premie friends, who had called posing as her sister Leslie and arranged to meet her on a supervised trip to a health food store.

To this day Emily has never been back to her parent's house at Crest Park Court, the home of her childhood. The garden of tomatoes and peppers she had started near the top of the driveway went untended, and the image of it haunted her father over the years with its intimations of failure and loss and of a relationship that never bloomed.

'From that point on, she was gone,' said Leonard Deitz. 'She literally went underground. We didn't hear from her. She didn't call. We didn't know if she was dead or alive.'

To Emily the situation was simple. 'My parents made their statement with the first kidnaping,' she said. 'I never thought I'd speak to my father again after that. It was a complete injustice. He said 'We just want you to talk to some people.' He never tried to talk to me himself.'

Emily had left behind an unmailed letter when she fled from the house in Minneapolis. It was returned to the Deitzes along with their daughter's things. They reread it many times, pondering the handwriting and tone, the intangible clues between the lines.

'I see now,' the last paragraph read, 'how subtle the whole thing was with me getting involved in the DLM [Divine Light Mission.] The whole time as a premie the strings just got pulled tighter and tighter on my mind in such a way that it really seemed like it was actually me doing the pulling myself. The peer pressure was very strong, and in an effort to please, one always went along with the general group feeling about something. I'm truly glad to be away from the whole thing now, as I can see it for what it is. It's amazing how similar all the cults are.'

'When I read that,' said Leonard Deitz, 'I went to the FBI and said my daughter's been kidnaped.'

Then in September came a blow, the first word her parents received from Emily since she'd vanished. She scorned her parents' secondhand knowledge of God. 'I have experiened truth,' she said, 'I have experienced the real, practical experience of the source and essence of this creation.'

Most dispiriting, she wrote: 'I know that you are hanging on to every thread of hope, so to ease your mind let me inform you that the unfinished letter from Minneapolis was 100% fake. Made up. In fact it sounded so fake to me that I didn't even bother sending it.'

Revelations

If the Deitzes had any doubt about their effort to deprogram Emily, it was obliterated two months later by the horror of Jonestown, where more than 900 members of the People's Temple cult, urged on by the demented exhortations of the Rev. Jim Jones, drank from a tub of cyanide-laced fruit drink and died. Jonestown triggered nationwide inquiries into the nature and practices of all religious cults.

Suddenly there were new reports from people who'd actually managed the Divine Light Mission--Robert Mishler, the man who organized the business side of the mission and served for 5 1/2 years as its president, and Robert Hand Jr., who served as a vice president for two years. In the aftermath of Jonestown, Mishler and Hand felt compelled to warn of similarities between Guru Maharaj Ji and Jim Jones. They claimed the potential for another Jonestown existed in the Divine Light Mission because the most fanatic followers of Maharaj Ji would not question even the craziest commands. As Jim Jones convincingly demonstrated, the health of a cult group can depend on the stability of the leader.

Mishler and Hand revealed aspects of life inside the mission that frightened the Deitzes. In addition to his ulcer, the Perfect Master who held the secret to peace and spiritual happiness 'had tremendous problems of anxiety which he combatted with alcohol,' Mishler said in a Denver radio interview in February 1979. His former officers claimed the Guru had 'a sadistic streak,' and that practices Maharaj Ji employed, theoretically to subdue the ego, included 'stripping devotees, pouring abrasive chemicals on their bodies and into their mouths, administering drugs, having them beaten with a stick or thrown into swimming pools.'

For the Deitzes one revelation struck home. 'Our hope,' Mishler said, 'is that the families of these followers will try to exert pressure to save them.'

But her parents did not know where Emily was, and Emily did not want to be found. Esther and Leonard Deitz's interest in contacting former premies redoubled, for now the parents asked for news of their daughter as well as information about the mission. All the while they were planning another attempt to deprogram her, feeling they had not given Emily the benefit of a 'first class' job the first time. For the second try they had lined up Ted Patrick, 'Black Lightning' himself.

After months of searching, the Deitzes located Emily in San Francisco, and in March 1979, they tried again. Dr. Deitz had shaved off his beard to disguise himself while he kept his daughter under surveillance in the tense days before the 'pickup.' This time, Dr. Deitz and hired hands were able to get Emily into a station wagon, but she raised such a commotion they could not remove her to a motel room where the deprogamming was to be done. A suspicious bystander alerted the police, and the Deitzes' careful plans collapsed.

Esther Deitz remembers that moment. She was waiting in a motel, expecting her husband and her daughter to arrive any minute. Ted Patrick was scheduled to meet them. The door opened. There was Emily and Leonard and--her heart sank--the police.

'That was the worst moment of my life,' Esther Deitz said. 'It was a feeling of having lost everything in one instant, in a stroke of fate. We had pinned so much hope on Ted Patrick. My mother has died, my father has died and I never reacted to those deaths the way I did to seeing Emily at the door with the police, knowing it was over, knowing that we had had her and now we'd lost her. I just--got hysterical. I was crying, 'Emily, won't you come in, won't you stay for minute?' I put my arms around her and held on. I was just holding on, begging her to stay and talk to us. Len was hugging the two of us. He was crying, and he never cries.'

The reunion lasted a few minutes while the cops stood around looking at their shoes. They weren't making arrests, it was just another domestic case. At length Emily said, 'Well, I've got to go,' and she was gone.

The Deitzes flew home in a pall of grief. Esther Deitz felt she could never go through anything like the past few days again, and she was utterly resigned.

Emily's older sister Leslie greeted her mother and father at the house. 'When they came home after the second attempt I could see my parents age,' Leslie said. 'My father came over and fell into my arms. He was crying. I'd never seen my father cry. I said, 'You've done everything you can, you've got to forget it, you've got to put it behind you.' '

But Leonard Deitz, a man noted for his stubborn streak, still believed he had not done his daughter justice. He had yet to give her that 'first class' deprogramming. His wife's hopes for Emily had been extinguished. His had not. Slowly, over the weeks, over the months, long before the family knew where Emily was or if they would be able to find her again, a resolve took root in Leonard Deitz's mind. He would try again.

Articles appear as they were originally printed in The Washington Post and may not include subsequent corrections.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:43:36 (GMT)
From: Read This Too
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
Bill on Guardians for Cult Members Elicits Emotional Testimony on Both Sides of Issue

By John Feinstein, Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 12, 1982 ; Page B4
ANNAPOLIS, March 11, 1982 -- t was the kind of hearing most legislators dread: a long list of witnesses marching before them to tell emotional tales, personal horror stories that seem to go on forever, often having little to do with the legislation being discussed.

But Wednesday evening, when the Judiciary Committee of the House of Delegates heard testimony on a bill which, if passed, would provide for court-appointed intermediaries in disputes between families and religious cult groups, most of the committee remained in the packed hearing room for 3 1/2 hours, listening attentively.

The bill, introduced by Del. Ida G. Ruben (D-Montgomery) would allow a court to appoint a guardian for 45 days when families could produce evidence that a family member was under some kind of mind control.

'To the casual observer,' Ruben said, 'it is easy, too easy, to dismiss those involved as poor lost souls, casting about for some certainty in their lives, gullible and easy prey for the soft touch. Judging from the people involved whom I have known, if these are lost souls, then we are a lost race.'

Ruben was the first of 32 witnesses, all of whom provided emotional, sometimes wrenching testimony on both sides of the question. The committee heard former cult members tell of being subjected to mind control and having deprogramming forced on them. They heard a psychiatrist, who said there are more than 4,000 cults in this country, explain the cult phenomenon.

Current cult members defended their groups, claiming the bill, as one of them put it, 'is proof that society judges us to be guilty because we are not members of main-line religions.' And a member of the American Civil Liberties Union declared the bill unconstitutional as a violation of First Amendment rights.

Esther Dietz, of Silver Spring, whose daughter joined the Divine Light Mission eight years ago, described the nightmare which led to her conviction, along with her husband, on charges of kidnaping their daughter in Colorado. Coolly, she quoted medical reports on mind control and the cult movement. But finally, she looked up from her typed testimony, looked at committee members and said, 'Must we wait for yet another Jonestown before we act?'

Detractors of the bill claimed it could easily be abused. 'I'm sure back in Rome, the Christians were looked on as a cult,' said Jim Wright, head of the Family Protection Lobby, an antiabortion group.

Michael W. Jenkins, director of the Maryland branch of the Unification Church, run by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, labeled the bill, 'a violation of religious liberty every step of the way.' He suggested alternatives, such as a safe house that exists in San Francisco, where police provide a neutral ground for parents to meet with their children.

The witness who brought complete quiet to the room was Maggie Shivers, a 28-year-old junior at Yale University. She told of joining the Divine Light Mission at age 19 and rising through its ranks during her six years as a member.

'I believed the Guru Maharaj Ji was the Lord and I was created to serve him,' Shivers said. 'I thought deprogramming would be worse than death because I had been told I would shatter into a million pieces if I ever left. I was in psychological bondage. Even after I knew about the Guru's 30 cars and his Boeing 707 with gold seat-belts, I rationalized it.'

Shivers was near tears. 'There are children still there, even if they are adults in age, who cannot cry for help. They cannot communicate at all. We have to start . . .' Shivers' voice broke. She could not finish her testimony.

Ruben, the measure's sponsor, said there is no law of this kind in the U.S., although bills on the subject are before 13 state legislatures. But following the hearing, committee chairman Joseph E. Owens (D-Montgomery) termed the measure 'drastic.'

Articles appear as they were originally printed in The Washington Post and may not include subsequent corrections.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:15:34 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Read This Too/JM or FA-
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
JM or FA-
I think these articles are excellent and should definitely be included somewhere in the site.
I was living in the DC area at the time, and remember the whole incident, especially from the DLM/Premie spin perspective...
LA
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:17:16 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: JM or FA-good material
Subject: A Request for Info
Message:
Please see above post,requesting that articles from the Washington Post be included in the EPO site...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:14:21 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: ALL
Subject: What I'm Looking For
Message:
I am looking for the names of people who were the ones who brought Goom-margie to the west and were running the show. My premise being if 13 year old Rawat was NOT calling the shots (highly unlikely that he was) do we know specifically who this small group of westerners were?

Names of the people who set up DLM in the US! Who was running things?
Who wrote the checks, for instance. Who rented the halls in the EARLY days. It had to have started with a specific small group of western 'devotees'. Long before Guru Puja Montrose.

I know that this may be impossible to track down. But who knows who is reading this? I know it has been a long time. But did we ever know who these 'devotees' were? I will check out 'Soul Rush' as suggested. SOMEBODY out there MUST know. I am curious as to who they were and where they went?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:34:30 (GMT)
From: old timer
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: What I'm Looking For
Message:
to my knowledge, some of the originals were:
Suzy 'Bai' Whitten,Arthur Brigham,Ira Woods,Joan Apter,Bob Mischler,John Hand,Gary Girard,Charles Cameron and Saphlanand from the UK,Bill Patterson,Ron Colletta....
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:25:27 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: old timer
Subject: Arthur Brigham
Message:
Last I heard Arthur had left the cult and was living in the Cairns area of northern Queensland.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:43:09 (GMT)
From: Get Yves-en
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: I recall some
Message:
Joan Apter who was there early. you'll find a ling to her website at roger's edrek's page and devotional hogwash from her on enjoyinglife.com.

Micheal Dettmes was a big PAM and financial advisor who was in early on the fraud but kept fooling the crowd. Link to his page at Roger plus page on him there.

Willy Swob was canadian director in 1974. He took-over after former director Brian McDermott became ill. I know Willie's dad was a farm-machinery manufacturer in Ontario. Willie must have taken-over.

Ann Johnson was the Mrs Kravitz of the canadian chapter. Became an initiator and now is laundry maid in Malibu.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 21:12:57 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: All
Subject: I knew you were out there
Message:
Thanks. That is a good start, and some of those names ring a distant bell. Come on rack those brains! Can anyone remember who the cadre of American 'devotees' were who accompanied 13 year old Rawat from India or were sent on ahead to prepare the way?
I searched through 'Soul Rush' and the history section on this site and came up with....ZERO! No names! Nothing! (Now I might have missed something, it was late).

This is starting to be as I suspected. A BIG HOLE in the chronology. You would think that these peoples names would have been CANONIZED as the SAINTS who helped by being the first Americans to do such 'blissful service'. All I ever heard them refered to was 'a group of Western devotees'. Makes you wonder, I hope.

For those who did not read my former 'question thread' I am reposting a bit that will clarify why I would like to get SPECIFIC NAMES for further research. Here it is:

There might be verifiable answers to my questions/concerns/confusions and it should be obvious that THAT is exactly why I am on this site.

Now to answer your question. I know the 'story' all to well of how Rawat supposedly became the great GM. And Rawat the adult is a whole other area that we are all too familiar with as we wake-up from the indoctrination and SEE. What I am curious about is where the truth lies at the start of it all. Sure there was an Indian DLM. Sure there was a Shri Hans, etc. But I don't see much questioning of his 'Divinity'. I don't buy the Satguru entered into Rawat's consciousness and then he made the 'Peace Bomb' and moved towards Europe and the US ONLY TO LATER BECOME A FALSE GURU as he got older.

A leader of a smallish sect dies...and AGAINST THE WISHES OF HIS FAMILY a little 10 year old (or however old he was) kid TAKES OVER the leadership and comes to the west and ensnares thousands and thousands of disaffected people in his cult.

Now considering that, as I have already stated elsewhere, there were thousands of confused, searching disaffected people running around with books by Ram Dass and Yogananda in one hand and radical literature in the other...searching for A BIG CHANGE IN THE WORLD did this little kid just 'luck out' and take advantage of all this? Pretty big stretch in my view. Or did SOMEBODY step in and highjack the sect and use this little kid to try to accomplish THEIR AGENDA?( Money? Mind control? Sainthood? Who knows?)

I have repeatedly said that I am not saying it was or was not the CIA etc. I am saying very strongly that in all the critisizing of Rawat/GM there seems to be a big hole at the early stage, where even adamant ex-premies ARE NOT USING THEIR BRAINS but just STILL buying the DLM party line.

IF it was the 'Holy Family' running the show, then what is up with the story about how thay were AGAINST Rawat becoming GM? And later off splitting. If it was Indian 'devotees' running the show...WHO WERE THEY AND WHERE AND WHY DID THEY GO? If it was US devotees (who at this time numbered very very few!) then WHO WERE THEY AND WHERE DID THEY COME FROM AND WHERE AND WHY DID THEY GO? This, of all questions, deserves some scrutiny!

I will be the first to admit that I do not have answers to these questions but they seem valid and it doesn't seem like anyone is asking them. Even on this site the 'history' of the very early days is basically the same story that DLM/EV tell!!!

I am VERY curious to hear your views, my fellow ex's.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 11:57:09 (GMT)
From: wondering
Email: ?
To: ExTex
Subject: Are you an ex, (nt)
Message:
or soap-boxing?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:31:02 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: wondering
Subject: Are you an ex, ?
Message:
Oh yeah! Got the old indoctrination at Guru Puja Montrose '7?
Never joined an ashram but spent years in very formal premie houses and a multi house commune (Divine community blah blah or something...it's been a long time) in Houston. Spent years restricting all socializing to premies and DLM. Oh yeah I am an ex, alright. Bailed around 77-78 but came groveling around the lotus feets for a brief look-see in 84-85. That was it for my CONSCIOUS INVOLVEMENT.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 21:39:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Two of your premises are false
Message:
The first assumption I don't buy is this:

A leader of a smallish sect dies...and AGAINST THE WISHES OF HIS FAMILY a little 10 year old (or however old he was) kid TAKES OVER the leadership and comes to the west and ensnares thousands and thousands of disaffected people in his cult.

You make it seem as if Maharaji's succession just came out of nowhere. But Mishler's account, excerpted below, gives a different impression, suggesting that Maharaji squeezed in there as a favorite of a mahatma and/or premie faction that simply preferred him over his older brother. Why? Maybe because he was more malleable, maybe because he was cuter or maybe, because of some spiritual superstition they all took seriously. The point is, the story makes sense to me. It sure doesn't cry out, in my mind, for some further mysterious agent, outside the cult. Here it is:

His mother, the former guru's wife, who was known as Mataji and was part of the so-called Holy Family before they split apart, wanted to ascend the throne herself. At the father's funeral, at which time the new guru was supposed to be proclaimed, she was in a meeting with the governing body and some of the very influential devotees - the Mahatmas - arguing this point view.

She had one Mahatma who was very influential arguing on her behalf. Most of the governing body was resisting this, because they were saying that it flaunted the Hindu tradition that the 'perfect master' must in fact be a man. They couldn't go over to a 'holy mother' kind of belief structure when all along they had been operating in this 'perfect master' one.

While this was going on, some other younger and not quite so influential but nonetheless aggressive Mahatmas had a much closer relationship with the younger son. The one who was most instrumental was a Mahatma known as Mahatma Sampuranand. They seized upon the opportunity of absence while this argument was going on behind closed doors in another part of the Ashram.

They put the youngest child who was eight years old at the time - the Guru Maharaj Ji that we're talking about tonight - on the throne and crowned him. He was already accepted as the guru by the devotees by the time that they had finally come to an agreement in this other meeting that was taking place.

In this meeting, they had decided to put the eldest son on the throne, because that was in line with Hindu tradition that the eldest son always inherits from the father. This eldest son would then be under the control of the mother anyway, as he was about thirteen or fourteen at the time. The mother finally agreed to that.

When they came out, they were really shocked to find that the youngest son was already sitting on the throne, wearing the crown and already accepted by the devotees. So they accepted this, but nonetheless there was the enmity that existed between the eldest son, who felt that his inheritance was robbed, and the younger son.

That dynamic eventually exploded in 1974. The mother then, at that point, when the youngest son was really defying her authority, said she'd back the eldest son now. But it was a bit late by that point.

As I say, this is all very plausible to me, especially as Mishler was in a position to know. Its further supported by the fact that, after the split, Mata Ji asserted that Bal Bhagwan Ji (Satpal) was always meant to be the successor. Again, no outside agent needed.

You also write:

Now considering that, as I have already stated elsewhere, there were thousands of confused, searching disaffected people running around with books by Ram Dass and Yogananda in one hand and radical literature in the other...searching for A BIG CHANGE IN THE WORLD did this little kid just 'luck out' and take advantage of all this? Pretty big stretch in my view. Or did SOMEBODY step in and highjack the sect and use this little kid to try to accomplish THEIR AGENDA?( Money? Mind control? Sainthood? Who knows?)

Not a big stretch at all! Maharaji was just one of a number of gurus entrancing western hippie travellers then. So he was one of the few who saw the appeal of taking his message to the world. Big deal. It could have been him, it could ahve been the guru next door. It's not at all unlikely that one or another took the plunge and you have the accounts from all the premies who were there at the time (e.g. Apter, Cameron) to explain how they got they helped get the ball rolling. You find it suspicious but I don't know why. It's a story that makes a lot of sense to me, especially given the number of people I've heard it from. And don't forget, if it's NOT the case you're going to have to explain away all those early western devotees' accounts as fraudulent or duped. That seems very uncalled for, in my view. Their stories make sense any which way you look at it.

I really do get the sense that you're on this conspiracy kick and won't let go no matter what. Tell me, what would it take to assuage your suspicion? Have you ever wondered?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:39:36 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Anybody got some spare meds for Ex-tex?
Message:
Hey, Jim, is this guy for real? I've heard of conspiracy theories, but this one takes the cake! This guy is obsessive about this, isn't he?

Take your medication, Ex-tex! Maybe the National Enquirer will publish your theories. No one else will.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:27:14 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: He's a lot more rational than you, Shroom
Message:
TexEx (?) is much more fun to talk to than you, Shroom. He might be pushing the envelope a bit with his conspiracy theory but he's at least rational about that. You're not rational about anything. He strikes me as someone talking in good faith. You don't.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:33:49 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: He's a lot more rational than you, Shroom
Message:
Thank you Jim, but calling me rational just might really be pushing the envelope!!!! HAR HAR HAR!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 03:10:40 (GMT)
From: Tonete
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: All that jacking off
Message:
has affected your brain Shroom. Why don't you get lost? No one wants you here. Get it?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:10:56 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Tonete
Subject: I don't understand this term, 'jack off'. Could
Message:
you explain it to me? A demonstration would be even better. How does one 'jack off', Tonete? You sound like you have some expertice in this area. I'm always interested in learning new techniques in 'self' gratification. Is it joyful like practicing Knowledge is?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 05:02:01 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: I don't understand this term, 'jack off'. Could
Message:
That's odd. From where I sit THAT IS ALL YOU DO!!
SELF ABSORBED JACKING-OFF!!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:19:46 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Open The Pod Door, Shroom
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 22:49:35 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Two of your premises are false
Message:
Well I suppose I am on a 'conspiracy kick' here. Sorry to drag this on and on. I just want to scrutinize the possibilities and see what others come up with. Your points above are good one's. But the story that Mishler tells STILL implys that 13 year old Rawat then took over DLM and was running the show. What he stated may be exactly how that part went. But who was running things? Was MATA-JI running things, Bal-Bagwanji? I have never heard it explained. Nor who the early western devotees actually were.

I would just like to know which adults were responsible for perpetrating this well executed fraud. A 13 year old could not have been calling the shots. A 13 year old would probably not have had any concept of the cultural upheaval/spiritual searching that was going on in the west. That it was ripe for capitalizing on with a guru trip. Some of this stuff just seems to give way too much credit to young Rawat while at the same time we are trying to expose the fraud.

I suppose his family could have been the culprits and when the kid got old enough they could not keep control of him. Ultimately I suppose I will have to settle for this explanation. But by posting my questions I have at least hopefully created a situation for people to examine what they really know about this part of the saga.
Then what you are saying is that everyone with the possible exception of the family were true believers who were all just taken in like the rest of us? All innocents?

There were sure some slick consciously perpetrated scams. Two that I noticed at the time, but attributed to my being in my mind, were as follows-

The film 'Who Is GM?' had film footage of Gandi's funeral intercut with footage of young Rawat on an elephant. The film stated that the thousands were devotees of GM and the event was Shri Hans funeral! (The same film footage opened up the film 'Gandi', minus Rawat of course.)

At Guru Puja in Montrose we waited hours in the hot sun (middle of summer) in the darshan line. while darshan was going on a lone crop duster type plane flew over head. Shortly after that out of a blistering hot clear blue sky....NICE COOL HAIL WITH RAIN fell on the blissed out/burned out premies! Just for a very short time! (Most likely some form of 'cloud seeding') The word spread quickly and was put forth 'officially' by DLMers that it was 'Maharaji's Grace cooling down the hot premies!' All were blissed out by this stunt. That stuff creeps me out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:35:01 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Another strike at a dead horse
Message:
I do not know anything about the death of Bob Mishler. I heard it was some kind of airplane accident, after he came out exposing Goom-margie. How long after? What was the story? Was Fakiranad any where near? (Har Har Har)
More paranoia on my part? Just curious.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 07:25:13 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: It's all here on EPO exTex
Message:
The bob Mishler interview I mean. I found it very informative . Sorry I haven't mastered the art of links but it's not difficult to find. go to homepage.
Steve.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 03:36:54 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: It's all here on EPO exTex
Message:
Yes I read it the very first day I found this site. (Maybe I should reread it?) Still no names of 'western devotees' from India. Thanks
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:16:23 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: I heard from a very good source that Mishler's
Message:
plane crash was caused by an ultra-secret government agency. It's so secret that no one has ever even heard about it. You see, the guy I heard it from used to work for this firm. I met him in a lingerie bar in Santa Ana where he was working incognito as one of the barmaids/lingerie models. He was really sexy looking. You couldn't even tell that he was a man. Although he had kind of a husky voice.

He called himself 'Deep Tongue'. He was terrified of his former employers and swore me to secrecy. He said that the agency wanted to keep Maharaji and DLM going strong so that more and more young people would join the 'cult'. Mishler was a threat to that goal so when he started becoming more vocal, they decided to 'arrange' a plane crash. I think his plane went down in South America somewhere. Since there weren't many other 'real' American citizens on the flight, they felt that the benefits in removing Mishler as a threat to DLM were worth any deaths caused by the crash. He wouldn't tell me what the agency's actual name was, just the initials. D.U.M.B.S.H.I.T.

I don't know what the acronym stands for. Maybe you can figure it out in your investigation.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:33:34 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Well THAT makes more sense than
Message:
most of the robo-speak that you post here! LOL!! It's pretty fantastic though. But come to think of it ....it's not quite as fantastic as the Divinity of your Lord and MASTER! LOL!
BAAAA BAAAA Your shepherd is calling you to the flock.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 00:45:44 (GMT)
From: TexMess
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Today's Affirmation:
Message:
I have the power to channel my
imagination into ever-soaring levels
of suspicion and paranoia.
E.T.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:52:03 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim and everyone
Subject: For the love of common sense - that 'A' word again
Message:
Jim, you recently posted this:

'Do you remember a time, not so long ago, I think, when the term 'abuse' had real impact?
It was like dark, abherrant. The gimp in Pulp Fiction? Now he was abused. Oliver Twist
in the orphanage? Abused. Premies frightened literally to death sometimes, yes it's true, by
a cult leader who warned them that their minds were poison? Abused.
'

Yes, I think you're right to include premies among your examples of people who were abused (though no doubt a lot of the current pro-Mahas would find the idea laughable).

Admittedly it wasn't the sexual molestation, wife-battering type of abuse that most people associate with the word. It was a more subtle, more insidious form of abuse, but its effects were damaging nonetheless.

Received wisdom says that former victims of abuse have a tendency to become abusers themselves. This isn't just my idea, it's the current thinking on the subject.

Now, if that received wisdom is indeed correct, what sort of abuse do you think we, as ex-premies and therefore (by your own reasoning) former victims of abuse, might have a tendency to inflict on others? Surely it would be the same kind of abuse as was inflicted on us.

And what kind of abuse was that?


This isn't meant as an accusation of anyone here. More a plea that we be aware in ourselves of this particular consequence/repercussion of premie-hood that, though unpleasant to face and admit to, certainly isn't dealt with by denying the probability that we ARE more likely to inflict abuse than those who have never experienced it.

I'm sure someone could present this argument in a much clearer way, but I'm not that good a writer. But I hope everyone here gets at least the gist of the idea.


PS
Some would say that, as an indicator, the stronger the denial of the abuse victim, the stronger the tendency to abuse is. But, of course, to the victim, nothing could be more scary, hence the need to deny.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:49:40 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Getting the facts straight
Message:
Most abusers have been abused themselves. However, most people who have been abused do not go on to abuse others.

This is true of all types of abuse.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:50:45 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Getting the facts straight
Message:
I did say, Dave, that 'those who have been abused are said to have a tendency to abuse others'.

I myself see this as still being valid, but you're right if you're implying that it does not represent the current thinking ('received wisdom' as I mistakenly called it) on the subject.

To correct this to: 'those who abuse others have, themselves, a tendency to have been abused in the past' is more accurate. Thank you for pointing that out.

It is an apparently subtle, but nonetheless significant difference, IMO.

BTW, how did you feel abused by being a premie? Or didn't you?


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:02:08 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Getting the facts straight - it's logical
Message:
I agree with Jim there because it's not a subtle difference between the two statements. This is more about logic and venn diagrams.

Statistics show that the majority of people who abuse others have been abused themselves.

Statistics also show that of all people who have been abused, the majority do not go on to abuse others.

So the logic dictates that if someone has been abused, they are less likely to abuse other people than abuse them and are more likely to not be abusive.

In answer to your other question; yes I have been abused my Maharaji and his organisation. However, it certainly does not make me want to abuse others, more the opposite since I understand the pain of being abused and do not want to inflict that on other people.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 18:41:33 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: careful with that logic, Eugene
Message:
Dave, you say:

'So the logic dictates that if someone has been abused, they are less likely to abuse other people than abuse them and are more likely to not be abusive.

More likely not to be abusive than WHO? is the question most would ask here, though to do so would be missing your point.

I think we've overstepped the bounds of logic here.

I know you're implying that those who have BEEN abused are less likely to be abusive THAN THOSE WHO ABUSED THEM, but read your paraphrase again, and tell me if it doesn't sound like you're saying that those who have been abused are LESS likely to abuse others.

That's not what you meant, is it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:53:14 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: cq
Subject: careful with that logic, Eugene
Message:
More likely not to be abusive than WHO? is the question most would ask here, though to do so would be missing your point.

I think Dave means 'more likely not to be abusive than be abusive'.

Which is a well-researched piece of information. Nearly 70% of abuse victims do NOT becomes abusers, even though two thirds of abusers were abused as children. Remember, in any generation there is a ratio of many victims to comparatively few abusers - which is why the figues still add up.

(I can cite some research papers if you want more solid evidence.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:42:28 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Thanks, Nigel
Message:
Though I did go on to say to Dave:

'I know you're implying that those who have BEEN abused are less likely to be abusive
THAN THOSE WHO ABUSED THEM, but read your paraphrase again, and tell me if it
doesn't sound like you're saying that those who have been abused are LESS likely to
abuse others.'

Thanks for the stats. Where from, BTW?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 23:28:55 (GMT)
From: Nige
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Thanks, Nigel
Message:
I'll get back. I was reading some stuff on this yesterday which is why I had the figures in my head..
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:39:16 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Where do your statistics originate from, Dave?(nt)
Message:
fgkjuhj
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:44:26 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: 'Subtle'? Are you serious?
Message:
There's nothing subtle about that difference, Chris. Nothing. Saying that most abusers were abused is worlds apart from saying that most abused will become abusers.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:32:40 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: That's a very whacky line of reasoning, Chris
Message:
Received wisdom says that former victims of abuse have a tendency to become abusers themselves. This isn't just my idea, it's the current thinking on the subject.

First of all, I'm not even sure if you're aware of this given how you use the phrase as you do with no apparent irony, 'received wisdom' is not a complimentary term. It suggests unquestioned 'knowledge', usually some sort of theoretical assumption (hence the 'wisdom') which should be, in fact, re-examined if not outright rejected. Proper usage, then, usually follows along the lines of:

'Although the received wisdom on the subject says that [x], it's more likely that .....'

I don't think you meant to say that that way but rather meant to suggest that you fully adopt that excessively vague and general slogan as the truth. Well I don't. It's far too broad, strong and unspecific. And look at the trouble it can cause!

Common sense should tell us that if someone is raised in a distinctly abusive environment, there's some reason to believe that they may adopt some of the same bad habits their trainers had. Mind you, even that expectation gets srongly diluted by the prospect of all sorts of ameliorating influences in the abusee's development. In other words, it's silly to think that if someone's father was a violent drunk that that person could be expected to be the same. There are far too many exits on the highway before you get to that destination.

And that's all dealing with abuse suffered during one's very young, most psychologically formative years. I don't think there's even any 'received wisdom', no matter how readily one subscribes to this notion which is itself, ironically, often 'abused and tortured'. In other words, even in the most liberal and enthusiastic interpretation of your 'received wisdom' I don't think you'll find any support for the idea that adults -- even young ones -- who are trapped in a cult for some time will tend to act out some of the traits of their cult leader when they ultimately leave.

That's just your fantasy, Chris. And welcome to it, I guess. But don't expect me at least to take it seriously. I think you'd be on much solider ground if you thought that someone who was in the cult for some substantial length of time might have been shaped by the experience somehow. But that somehow would vary so mcuh between people. The most likely effect, in my opinion, is that the person would be more eary than most of bullshit cons and bad religion. Certainly not that they would take any of the traits of the cult leader that they've walked away from. Sorry, I think that's an absurd assumption on your part. Sure, there might be one or two premies who leave Maharaji and start their own little dream factory. Why not? Shri Hans did, didn't he? And how about Maharaji's own brother, Satpal? But that's a far cry from continuing some sort of cycle of abuse. A far cry.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:08:24 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Then answer me this, Cactus Jim
Message:
You think my idea is stupid?

And you want me to respond to what YOU wrote?

Allow me to take on both those birds in one post.

You wrote:

'Common sense should tell us that if someone is raised in a distinctly abusive
environment, there's some reason to believe that they may adopt some of the same bad habits their trainers had. '

But you then refute your own argument by saying:

'...it's silly to think that if someone's father was a violent drunk that that person could be expected to be the same. '

Forgive me for pointing it out, but I'd say you're contradicting yourself there, Jim.

Continuing to respond to what you've written:

you say:

'' I don't think you'll find any support for the idea that adults -- even young ones -- who are trapped in a cult for some time will tend to act out some of the traits of their cult leader when they ultimately leave.'

And WHO is it that keeps polluting this site with repetitions of the half-assed, third-rate imitations of Maharaji's fourth-rate poetry that originally appears on the pro-Maha sites? That you is it, Jim?

Or is it just my fantasy? An 'absurd assumption on my part' as you call it?

My oh, my. To think that premies would ever 'take any of the traits of the cult leader that they've walked away from...'.

Is my sarcasm getting through to you, Cactus Jim? There's spines and there's backbones, y'know.

Wake up.

You're not just talking to the jury on this site.

Here, (as I'm sure you'll notice) the accused can bite back too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:09:32 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Sorry, Chris, you're shooting blanks, bud
Message:
Chris, Chris, Chris......

What are we going to do wtih you?

Listen, there's no contradiction at all there, if you'd just tihnk about it. There's a big difference between 'may [do x]' and 'could be expected to [do x]'. Different points on a spectrum of possibility, don't you think?

And if you're actually suggesting that my posting some of the tripe from EV here means that I'm 'taking on the traits ...', you're being ridiculous. Honestly, that's the stupidest thing I've heard all day.

What's your education level?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 19:06:48 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Take off your armour-plating and look at the holes
Message:
Take off your armour-plating and look at the holes in it, Jim.

Let's look at this 'big difference' , shall we?

'An abuser may abuse again'

Compare that with:

'An abuser could be expected to abuse again'.

Not quite as many worlds apart as you suggest, IMO.

'What are we going to do with you?' you ask.

My guess is that 'we', as you now call yourself, Jim, are going to continue to be patronising when you think it suits you, and abrasive when you think you can get away with it.

And, you have seriously misunderstood me if you think that I was suggesting that your re-posting of the 'tripe from EV' meant that YOU were taking on those particular traits of Mr Rawat.

It was the premies copying their 'master' I was referring to.

You wouldn't deny that we as premies did that, would you?

Which brings us back to the original premise of this thread.

And to put the record straight, let me just say this:

I can see that I was wrong to think that a former history of being abused automatically implies that the person abused will be more likely to become an abuser. As a senior colleague at work (who deals with the issues of abuse on a daily basis) said to me this afternoon: 'Chris, every case is different'.

OK? you got that? I was wrong. At least I can admit it. (and you could say that my education on THAT particular subject was certainly lacking, though to suggest that I'm a total ignoramus would be ... well, what can I say, ... just like you, Jim?)

As it happens, I'm not at all ashamed of being more than moderately intelligent, (IQ of 149) although (at times) also thick as two planks. Both are part of who I am, and I certainly don't need to try and convince anyone that I'm automatically right all the time.

Nor you, I hope, Jim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 03:48:52 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Well, I disagree
Message:
Take off your armour-plating and look at the holes in it, Jim.
Let's look at this 'big difference' , shall we?

'An abuser may abuse again'

Compare that with:

'An abuser could be expected to abuse again'.

Not quite as many worlds apart as you suggest, IMO.

I strongly disagree. 'May' implies that it's only possible. 'Could be expected to' implies that it's likely. And yes, they're worlds apart.

And, you have seriously misunderstood me if you think that I was suggesting that your re-posting of the 'tripe from EV' meant that YOU were taking on those particular traits of Mr Rawat.

It was the premies copying their 'master' I was referring to.

You wouldn't deny that we as premies did that, would you?

I'm sorry, Chris, I'm just not interested in this theory of yours.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:02:34 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Expect YOU to take it seriously, Jim? ...
Message:
... but isn't that your forte?

Or are you dissing the idea because accepting it would place you in an apparently untenable position?

I asked you a question that you haven't yet taken on Jim, so here it is again:


what sort of abuse do you feel you were the victim of as a premie Jim?

Did it include feeling that you were being told that your mind was not to be listened to, and that your concepts were holding you back from 'realising'?

Were the ideas emanating from your mind dismissed as being inherantly invalid?

Were concepts considered worthless and absurd?

Is there a connection between this and the attitude you take to premies (and sometimes to me) on this site?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:41:28 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: You don't seem to get it
Message:
... but isn't that your forte?

Quit trying to goad me.

Or are you dissing the idea because accepting it would place you in an apparently untenable position?

No, I'm dissing it because I think it's stupid. I explained to you why I think that. I don't know what else I can do but repeat myself. Perhaps you'd care to respond to what I wrote for a change.

I asked you a question that you haven't yet taken on Jim, so here it is again:

what sort of abuse do you feel you were the victim of as a premie Jim?

When did you ask me that? Anyway, like I've already said, the 'abuse' was in estranging us from our minds. Everything else followed from that.

Did it include feeling that you were being told that your mind was not to be listened to, and that your concepts were holding you back from 'realising'?

Yes. I'd already said that.

Were the ideas emanating from your mind dismissed as being inherantly invalid?

Yes (but it's 'inherently').

Were concepts considered worthless and absurd?

Yes.

Is there a connection between this and the attitude you take to premies (and sometimes to me) on this site?

No, and you're pissing me off by continuing to say so when the truth is anything but. Maharaji taught us that all concepts are worthless. I, like any normal person, thinks that some are.

Have you ever once seen me criticize you or anyone for thinking? For discussing things? Of course not. But that's what Maharaji was all about, still IS all about. Right? There's no comparison, different as night and day.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:01:05 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: abuse abuse
Message:
Maybe it is an abuse of the conotation of the word abuse to use it for any trifling violation of social graces, but to use the word according to its denotation might sensitize us to departures from kindness. That could be a good thing.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 18:45:05 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: 'trifling violation of social graces'???
Message:
is that all we're talking about here?

I think not.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:52:16 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: No, by and large, you are talking about
Message:
self abuse. (The non-Onanistic variety.) And by all appearances, not trifling at all. We may BE victims, but we are almost invariably volunteer victims. Learning how not to volunteer for victimhood may be one of the great lessons of life. And, believe it or not, M has been useful in that regard for me.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:39:48 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: ... talking about victimhood. Now WHO would want
Message:
to deny that we've ever been victims?

Then again, who's brave enough to admit that they've been a victim?

It's all part of the human condition, Q.

(though we all try not to let it happen again to us - being the victim that is).

No praise, no blame.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 10:09:02 (GMT)
From: Super Sub
Email: non
To: Everyone
Subject: Schroom Schroom...he's our man...if he can't do
Message:
it.....blah blah..mushroom boy.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
There ain't no cake here.
Give it up for lent.
If the sun shines where the sun doesn't shine....well...
schroom onward and upward...or is it sideward ?
o well...what's the diff.
schroom.com// the lil'engine that could
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:27:12 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Amaroo 2001 - 5 days event annouced today !
Message:
Not for sure already. Should be in April.
EV's sending questionaires to active premies.

Registration: $ 450
Housing on the site (tent): $ 1,300
De luxe housing: no price given for the moment.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:06:58 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Guess that will mean more of THESE at ELK
Message:
From ELK Expressions:

Off to Amaroo

I am so very happy to be invited to go to participate at Amaroo!

It was inspiring to see the participation video from Amaroo from last October.

And now I will be leaving Sweden mid-April to go to Australia

Håkan Holmqvist

Participate! Hmmm, now doesn't that mean work? So there'll be hundreds more of these folk flying in from around the world to work at Amaroo?

Anybody got the address of Australian Immigration?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:38:04 (GMT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Re:Guess that will mean more of THESE at ELK
Message:
Rob,

On Monday morning, I could not find the expression by Hakan in the Expression section of ELK. Is it posted somewhere else, or have they removed it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 02:03:33 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re:Expression
Message:
Way

Yes its still there. You have to click on view by Author first.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:45:04 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: You were one of 'those' folk, weren't you, Rob? NT
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:19:06 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Australian Immigration
Message:
Australian Immigration: http://www.immi.gov.au/

There's a link for Illegal Migrants; on that page they mention 'work without approval'.

How would the Australian government and the Ipswich City Council feel about all this work being done with no money going to them and no Aussies being hired for the work?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:30:23 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Australian Immigration
Message:
Needs local action IMO, any volunteers? (no pun intended)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 12:39:01 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: To : G and Rob
Message:
I am not sure if you have noticed the search engine on the Immigration Departement web site. There are hundreds of document to be searched. I think I will give them a call, now that is local action for you. In the mean time try the search engine.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:10:42 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: PS
Message:
Don't forget to include the Job Listings at Elan Vital's Participation page for their definition of 'participate'. Plus any other examples of 'participation' you can find. Wouldn't want them claiming it merely meant 'to take part in';)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:15:51 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: salam_au@iprimus.com.au
To: Rob
Subject: PS
Message:
Anyone is interested in writing a letter to the immigration departement and Ipswich city council regarding this matter. I would like very much to see if an action will be taken. My feeling is EV and maharaji think that they can get away with it doing things out of sight in the bush. That is why he can do the things that he does not dare doing in the US of A. We should keep the pressure up until he pops. Any ideas?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:33:45 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Ideas........
Message:
Are best confined to email. I'll have more time tomorrow to get with you on this.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:16:29 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Anybody know of an inexpensive motel in Ipswich?
Message:
Eight words. Oh, I mean ten words. Oops! Make that twenty words. Did you get that, Oliver? Darn! Twenty-eight words. Is twenty-eight one word or two words? Let's call it forty words.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:16:06 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Shroom, Shroom
Message:
Why do you say so much bullcrap? I am ending up with all your posts on my computer. Keep it to the bear will ya.

TA

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:01:39 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Maharaji knows his devotees
Message:
Why don't you ask Elan Vital. Better still, email Maharaji. I'm sure he'll reply personally to one of his own devotees and let you know where you can stay which is cheaper than $1,300 for five nights.

After all, he won't mind it if you don't pay the obscene campsite price and instead of him getting the money, you keep most of it and just pay a fraction for a hotel bill.

Why does Maharaji charge such ludicrous prices to his own devotees for a campsite on land which his devotees payed for?

I'll tell you why. Because Maharaji knows he can rip his devotees off. He knows they're all suckers. They must be, to be following him.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:07:14 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Magic mushroom man
Subject: and by the way,
Message:
it's a very expensive 'free gift' isn't it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 00:34:33 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: motels in Ipswich
Message:
I can understand why you wouldn't want to pay $219 a day for a tent in a former cow pasture in the boonies in Australia. I would say the outback but it's not quite that.

See Accommodation in Our City. But Rawat may not allow it, consider that the Australian Society for Limnology said in their description of IRCC 'but we do have an obligation for most people to stay on-site'. Don't forget the airfare and the $450 for registration alone, which is $90 a day. That's quite expensive for a converted cow pasture. From what I can tell, IRCC is already paid for, so why the fee? Rawat has already gotten a lot of money from premies via Amaroo fundraising and they make money renting the place out. The premies do the work on the place for free. Sounds like a money maker for Rawat. Have you heard of Jeep Nominees? They own the place. I can guess who owns Jeep Nominees. A nominee is 'a person or an organization in whose name a security is registered though true ownership is held by another party'. Who drives a jeep at Amaroo? Doesn't this sound suspicious?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:57:18 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: G
Subject: Cost of motels in Ipswich
Message:
In general, most hotels/motels in Ipswich are three and a half
stars. Won't get anymore than that. They all have licensed restaurant. The cost of twin share room varies with the holiday season. It is in the range of 70-to-85 Australian dollars. That does not include breakfast, which is around 10 extra dollars.
In US it is 40-to-50. And you get to watch TV and have a bit of booze on the sideline. Compare that to a camp site of few thousands people rushing to the showers and toilets and having to wait.
Can everyone e-mail the Ipswich council telling them that having on site accommodation (which is most likely compulsory) could have a detrimental effect on the tourist industry? Oh, but ofcourse, IRCC, will donate a 1000 dollars to the council, so it is ok.

Now let see 2000 dollars by say 1000 people that makes 2,000,000 US dollars or about 4,000,000 Aussies, not a bad week's work

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:42:51 (GMT)
From: oz
Email: -
To: Salam
Subject: Cost of motels in Ipswich
Message:
I know of a few times in australia where fund-raisers have rung a list of prems and the targeted list is business people who regularly contribute and the last I heard they rang 1000 'regulars' and asked for 500 each
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 09:07:41 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: .
To: oz
Subject: Cost of motels in Ipswich
Message:
Iheard it was 5oo people asked for 1000 each but not sure just reminiscing(do we have a premie spelllllll chech?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:07:52 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Email address for the Ipswich City Council
Message:
Ipswich City Council - council@gil.com.au

Ipswich Visitors and Tourist Information Centre - ipsvisitor@gil.com.au

Maybe they should know about what happened with Raganeesh and the town in Oregon.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:18:55 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Ipswich getting shafted
Message:
Ipswich is getting shafted in this deal.

When I went to Amaroo, I heard nothing about motels in Ipswich and didn't have a clue that they were there. I stayed at a hotel in Brisbane. There were buses going between Amaroo and Brisbane and it was quite a hassle. I don't think they provided transportation between Ipswich and Amaroo. The time spent in walking to the bus and being on the bus was significant. I think the reason that Rawat (via EV) didn't mention the motels in Ipswich was to affect the pro and cons of staying on the land in a tent vs staying in a motel/hotel. Making staying in a hotel a hassle and more expensive (Brisbane vs Ipswich) makes forking out big bucks for a tent seem better. Then there was the idea that maybe, just maybe you would get a little more 'darshan' because Rawat was there. I think stories were told of premies and Rawat sitting around a campfire, but that could have just been my imagination. Maybe just some vague statements were made to make it seem that that was happening. Rawat is a whore.

The same thing happened at La Tierra de L'Amour (The Land of Love, really The Land of Mud). There was the choice between obsene prices for a tent vs staying in a hotel in the city. There was a loooong walk through mud to the bus and a long bus ride. Maybe there were motels close by, but I wasn't told about them. And there was no parking at either of these lands that I knew of.

It is much more convenient just to have these shindigs in cities, but then Rawat doesn't make as much money and there is less feeling of isolation from 'the world'. You know, the world that we actually live in.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:38:11 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: This 'land' idea
Message:
I remember rawat going on and on repeatedly about this 'land' idea, that it was necessary to have a 'proper' place for people to 'receive Knowledge' and for the programs, a place - in so many words - away from the filthy vibes of non-premies, those slimy creatures that we must endure when we are in our rat holes. Oh, to be able to at least get out of our rat holes and away from those sub-humans for a little while and escape to these most Holy Lands where the Lord and his blessed followers can be together in peace away from the wicked world. It sounds so lovely. Then there's the slick videos making these places out to be heaven on earth, only showing selected areas, not a realistic portrayal.

The reality of these places is so different.

I remember having more human interaction with the employees at the hotel in Brisbane than at Amaroo.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:21:42 (GMT)
From: Know It All
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Differing costs to camp in Amaroo
Message:
Aussies: Since this place is supposedly used for both EV events and non-EV events, has anyone ever looked into the cost to camp there when M is there compared to the cost for non-EV related events? Is there a difference in cost? If so, how is it justified? That might be something to bring to public attention.
Where does the additional money go?

KIA

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:22:35 (GMT)
From: Lotus Eater
Email: None
To: Know It All
Subject: amaroo finances
Message:
Look, I have debated as to whether to weigh into this thread, because I really don't know the whole picture and so I think one can make a lot of false statements.

However, prefacing this with saying that, I am sure you are right that other groups, such as the limnologists pay less, there are also VERY few groups other than EV that have had conferences there, and in the big amaroo finance picture, I would doubt if the profits have paid for the promotional leaflets etc, but on a one to one basis, I would suggest that the small conferences have actually made a profit, whereas the last big one (97) where the camping costs were equally astronomical, and the queues for the bathroom and the dining room distressingly lengthy, the nett loss was also distressingly large.

You can build a house for the same amount of money it takes to put up a couple of marquees for an event. This fact has not escaped the big hamster's attention, he has been insisting that the money raised for amaroo be spent on permanent improvements, rather than hiring stuff. This is not so easy when you start adding up the numbers for a large event. The money required is massive, so if he is still drawing a line in the sand over temporary structures, don't hold your breath for amaroo 2001. It will need more of the conferences like the one he has just done, where (at 450 delegates) I guess he must have made a large profit in excess of a million US even after all his 'living costs'. Even against that sort of profit, the costs of putting in the structure to run a large event run into the multiple millions.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:54:57 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Amaroo 2001 - 5 days event annouced today !
Message:
That's obscene. Is that $1,300 US Dollars or the Australian toy money? Must be about the most expensive campsite in the world.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:58:22 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Sorry: this US Dollars !!!! (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:47:36 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Sorry: this US Dollars !!!! (nt)
Message:
Is it a must to stay on site during the event?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:03:55 (GMT)
From: G
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: I wonder
Message:
Sam wrote below in the thread 'Letters from downunder':
'I've noticed how expensive it is to stay at IRCC when m is 'on site', I wonder how much they charge for the general populace to use their do?'

I wondered the same thing.

If an extra night is included (for 6 nights), the price they are charging premies for staying at this second rate campground is $217 a night ($291 including the reg. fee). That's more expensive than most hotels! You can be sure that other people (e.g. people watching the races) don't pay anywhere near that kind of money to stay there. We're not talking about a 5 star hotel in New York City. Considering that premies paid for the damn place, they shouldn't have to pay any money at all. Of course, the whole idea of traveling half way around the world to listen to someone who just an ordinary humam being and never said he was God is ludicrous.

In the Australian Society for Limnology's description of IRCC, they say

Accommodation is nearly all in tents - either set up by the conference centre (regular or deluxe versions) or you can bring your own tents -costs vary accordingly. The tents are twin share or single depending on how much you want to pay. A special cheap rate has been negotiated for students who want to bring their own tents. There are also twelve twin share 'pents' - these are like tents but made from wood! ... For those who may need more 'robust' accommodation, Ipswich and its many motels is about 25 km north, but we do have an obligation for most people to stay on-site. ...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:36:23 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: G
Subject: I wonder
Message:
When I was a premie, any festival that was more than a hour or two away, I would not bother to go to. Bad premie.

you would say that somebody would question this. I wonder what consumer affairs will think of this highway robbery?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:18:43 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Take a look at this, please
Message:
I was looking at EV's hamster hagiography (long version) and noticed something fascinating and really quite significant. A couple of things. First, the consistently superficial, one-inch deep perspective and depth of analysis on everything. This so-called explanation is no explanation at all. If Maharaji was legitimate at all it would be the most fantastic, bizarre thing imaginable. Or so you'd think. Look at how simplistically EV grants him credibility as something they haven't even begun to properly think of:

Accounts from family, friends and close associates claim that it was soon obvious that, of his siblings, Maharaji was a natural teacher. When they set-up stage and played at organizing events at their traditional Hindu homestead in Dehra Dun, it was always the young Maharaji who ended up center-stage giving a discourse.

But don't a million questions come to mind? Why was it so obvious that he was a 'natural teacher'? How did they really know what the hell was going on, with him, with themselves? I mean, how did they know that they weren't just playing at something right form the start? Did they ever really even try to analyze this guru thing? at all? It sure doesn't sem so:

Whether spiritually astute from an early age or a child prodigy of sorts, he nevertheless was singled out by his father as having a special gift for grasping the essence of the teaching. He loved to listen to his father teach and to take part in any way he could. As a result, even though he was a young child, his father allowed him to speak publicly at his large open air meetings. When the young Maharaji began to speak, people, curious to know how such a young child could come to have such wisdom, would congregate to listen to him. Then his father would come out and continue to teach them. Such was his appreciation for the power and simplicity of his father’s message that, even as a child, he saw this as being one of the main ways he could help his father. The other more light-hearted job he gave himself was to go around the house every morning and wake everyone, telling them it was time to get up and practice the Knowledge techniques.

So you have this kid of a guru. That's it! I mean, where is there even the slightest acknowledgment by these people that that's even a factor that might affect the formula? There isn't. Instead, there's this completely unalert, willfully non-, in-, un-, anti-discriminating approach. Once someone forms a little, tiny opinion about something, that's enough, that tells the story.

Here's what I mean. Maharaji, EV says, saw that he could help his father by mimicking his, daddy's, shtick before daddy himself came out and gave them the whole godman rap. He'd give them whole goddam rap too. So is all we're talking about here being some sort of hindu preacher? How was it that this kid could unilaterally, just by his own whim assert this kind of cosmic identity for himself?

But that's just one example, and not the best. Anyway, EV continues with this bizarre shaggy dog parable, I guess:

When not at school and not helping his father, he was a normal and mischievous child, known for his tendency to take everything apart to see how it worked. He laughingly tells how one day he figured out how to put things back together again and returned to his toy box and carefully reconstructed all the toys he had originally dismantled.

and then gets into this shit. Here's where something strange happens. Remember, this is the new, of-the-moment, official, from-the-top

excuse for everything

. But look what happens:

Transition

This idyllic childhood came to a sudden end however when his father died in 1966. Suddenly the eight year old child was faced with the task of stepping into his father's shoes. It is not a given that the new master emerges from the previous master’s family. Indeed from the tradition that Shri Hans Ji Maharaj came, this is the only time when it has stayed in the family.

Why?
Why?
Why, why, why, why, why,

why??

Is this just something that kind of happens? This is the first that that it stayed in the family? Like, what the fuck is it anyway?

How much can any one group of people be expected to sleepwalk and for how long?

So here's the beginning of a different oddity:

However the circumstances surrounding how the young Sant-ji became Maharaji are curious. Those close to him at the time said that he had always behaved with a confidence and sense that he was to be the next master, and his father had made it known that it would be his destiny to take this teaching around the world. However his succession was not accepted by some of the leaders of what was now a large and widely recognized organization.

On the day after the funeral, a large crowd waited in the grounds of Prem Nagar ashram for an announcement to be made on who should be the next master. Meeting in a small room— a meeting from which Maharaji was excluded on grounds of youth— the key people could not make a decision. Meanwhile, the young Maharaji went out to reassure the people who had gathered to mourn their master’s death. This speech apparently moved the people who heard it to tears. In it Maharaji said there should be no weeping, for what the master taught was always with them, and that he for one was ready to take Knowledge forward. And thus the decision was made, not through discussion but through the genuine feeling that Maharaji had evoked in the people present.

Look what EV's done to sidestep all the other, the only other validation Maharaji could have had, yet the very validation that EV can't even talk about, let alone claim anymore: Maharaji's own, omniscient, truly God-like (to say the least) ability to stand up -- even as a mere eight-year old child ('child'?) -- and announce himself! EV's tried to make it a mere matter of public opinion determining how's our next Lord of the Universe. It's as if they've gutted the whole story, cause they had to I guess, but, nonetheless, they're trying to keep the shell or something.

Or maybe the other way around. Throw out the shell and just have this amorphous blob of leftover spiritual something, call it a 'Master' maybe. Why not? It's just a feeling anyway, isn't it?

Then EV goes on to talk about how Maharaji grew up, always dogged by the world's skepticism but really, no shit, stop the press, and analyze this no further -- so intelligent and wise and able to actually give those wonderful discourses on his own that his must be

... what

?

Well, whatever it is, the important thing si that there's just nooooo analysis:

For the next few years, Maharaji lived the difficult combination of the full-time life of a schoolboy while, at weekends and vacations, going on teaching assignments, but this dual role was the least of his problems. The shadow of Shri Maharaji was long, and the young Maharaji was regarded by many as a cipher, a substitute for his father who would teach the same subject in the same way. Not only this, but amongst the public at large there was a general skepticism that would dog him until he had reached maturity. People found it very hard to accept that a child could be so intelligent, wise and yet still be a naturally playful little boy when not teaching. Because of this, claims were made that he was coached in what to say, or that he was miming to a tape recording in his public discourses, or indeed that he was not a boy at all but an adult of very small stature!

After that, the FAQ goes on to discuss the next years of his life. But never again does it even come close to this pathetic description or explanation. So as far as who Maharaji is and what the fuck that means because it's got to be weird -- nothing.

This most definitely looks like a cult. People have some strange agreement almost not to use their minds. Not to use them in all these otherwise natural grazing areas, anyway. I mean, it's as if EV expects its audience, its readership, to have as little curiosity as they, EV, want to grant them. It's weird shit is what it is, isn't it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:18:42 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Take a look at this, please
Message:
The whole ad on EV web site is a con job.
A casual reader would not question what EV has put down. After all there is not reason for it.
There is a high tech intro using macromedia and a site glossed so well that you could see your ass if
You wanted to.
EV claims to break up with tradition and believes in modernization. I think that is a lot of bull wash.

To understand the problem, you should look at it with an Indian mind. In India, the majority of people are gullible and simple minded in particular the cast class. A guru is not considered to be a good guru if he does not perform miracles and magic. This is the reason why Sai Babaji does his stupid magical tricks. A guru that performs miracles is considered to be supernatural (anyone for that matter), therefore with powers of the gods. That immediately entitles him to rub ass with the gods. The sermon is really irrelevant. Once a guru has performed his miracle, he can rabbit about anything he wants, exactly like maharaji.

How does this apply to maharaji?

Well, maharaji can not run 20 meters without panting (all the lard); neither he can fart a rainbow. So for him to be accepted as a full-fledged guru, someone had to come up with a story, which is what you have just read. It is a fairy tale story about a little fat boy that eats rice krispies and at the same time talks about something that no one can understand. The story is half complete because EV has dropped the part about him (maharaji) hearing a voice three times telling him that he is the one. This story is most likely still being passed around in India until now; it was appealing for us in the early 70s, But not now. The western mind has evolved and can see through the charade.

As for maharaji being “He who is”, you really need to dig deep into the Radhasoami dogma. So,

SOAMI IS OCEAN AND RADHA ITS FIRST WAVE

The founders of the faith have a few allegorical interpretations to put forward to explain the two components of the word - Radha and Soami. The second guru says that the Supreme Being may be compared to an ocean. A creative ocean cannot be perceived without commotion. The first wave of the endless ocean is Radha. The original current is not different from but is identical with the ocean itself and as it comes out so it is ever drawn towards it. The creative ocean, therefore, is Soami and the first original wave just identical to the ocean is Radha. The two together from the supreme ocean full of...

That is assuming that Shri Hans was the Supreme Being.


… the followers of the faith designate the living Satguru as 'Radhasoami'. In fact, a devotee who practices surat shabd yoga and attains such spiritual heights as to identify the Satguru with the Supreme Being can alone reveal the secrets of this name. But as the Satguru is the human manifestation of the Supreme Being and is known as His son or representative in the world, he is generally addressed as 'Radhasoami'. Such a one possesses all the attributes of the Supreme Being and like the tidal wave of the ocean, remains in constant union with Him.

So you can see, that EV is still dishing out Indian carp disguised as modernization.

Maharaji became what he is because of his father’s agya, or wish. In a society where the matriarch rules, no one had the balls to argue; what with that elephant, Mataji being around bashing us all. So the little brat already experienced in gibberish language, did not find it hard to play the game. The shit hit the fan, when little dickey came into play and maharaji decided to veer off tradition (marry an outsider).

The whole thing is illogical. There is no way that you can bring this issue to a witness stand and expect an answer. It is intangible.

Soami Salamji

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:34:56 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: My point in a nutshell
Message:
Sorry about that little writing exercise. Late at night and all that (that's a Friday night, I might add). But here's what I'm trying to say in a nutshell.

EV has finally described how Maharaji got to be Satguru, Lord of the Universe, Saviour of Mankind. Here's the explanation:

... the decision was made, not through discussion but through the genuine feeling that Maharaji had evoked in the people present.

and that's it!

Now what's wrong with this picture? Well, I thought that Maharaji was the one who knew who he was. That he was the 'realized soul' with divine eyes to see who he was, where he was, where he'd come from and where we were all going. He didn't need us to create him; this wasn't just some popularity contest. Otherwise, what is the difference between Maharaji, Satpal, Sai Baba, Moon, or any of them? If it was all just a matter of winning the crowd's affection at their most vulnerable moment (after all, they'd just lost their cult leader!), what kind of anything is that?

But now, given that Maharaji's afraid to invoke the divine card any more than he has to, he's thrown it all back at the premies. They 'elected' him, I guess.

WHAT A MONSTROUS FUCKING JOKE!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:55:58 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: My point in a nutshell
Message:
What a monstrously brilliant thread! This is GREAT READING! Mucho fun! Thanks!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:37:53 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Sorry Jim, Did not see your second post..nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:34:47 (GMT)
From: Yves' gone
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: C'mon Jim, this is a cult, beyond argument.
Message:
An obcene one. While we were under sheets, The Godfather came out. I saw it years later. It shows what 'the family' must be like. Remember the satsang about the mobile home, and the houses and the airplanes and the computers and the Masseratti and on and on. A dwork.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:38:27 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Yves' gone
Subject: What?
Message:
I'm not sure what you're saying although I, too, saw the Godfather after I got out. Does that help?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:57:43 (GMT)
From: Steve aka Hal
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Superb analysis Jim- at this you excel nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:49:45 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: You're up late, Jim. Can't sleep? I just got off
Message:
work and thought I'd see what you all are talking about. From what I just read I'd have to say you're really worked up.

Let me ask you something. When you got involved with the 'cult', what was your proof? What kept you coming? You stuck with it for years, didn't you? I read that you lived in an ashram for 8 years. Correct? Why? It was really a 'cult' back then, wasn't it? Why did you stick with it so long if you had no proof of his 'divinity'? Peer pressure? Wanted to get together with some blissed out premie chicks? Just loved doing satsang, service and meditation? And darshan? Too lazy to get a real job? Why? I don't get it. If I didn't feel like Knowledge was doing me any good, I'd leave immediately. If I didn't enjoy listening to Maharaji, I'd split. What went on back then to keep you coming back to the feet of the 'Lord of the Universe' if there was no proof?

Even if God himself appeared before me in all his glory and said that Maharaji was His authorized representative, I'd leave if I didn't get anything out of Knowledge and I didn't enjoy listening to Maharaji. Were you really that 'tricked' back then that you would believe without proof? I don't understand.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:48:23 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Michael
Subject: Michael, Michael, Michael.......yawn......zzzzzz
Message:
zzzzz
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:22:55 (GMT)
From: Michael
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: ¿Como? nt
Message:
¿Como?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:57:26 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Michael
Subject: Not you Padre, the *other* Michael:) nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:01:12 (GMT)
From: Michael
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: Oh. ¡Está bien! tn
Message:
esta bien
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:08:15 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: Michael and Rob
Subject: hi! What's up? ot
Message:
Hi guys. We're the only ones here. How are you?

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:00:04 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Your question's been asked and answered (nt)
Message:
jjjjj
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:00:25 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: question for you, Shroo
Message:
Shroom, your questions to Jim are valid ones for all exes to ask themselves, IMO, but I doubt we all got into the trip for the same reasons.

BTW, your reasoning seems to be: because the Knowledge works for you, therefore the person who showed you it must be OK.

Well, the meditations I was taught at Rajneesh's ashram in Poona worked for me, but does that mean I should still think well of him?

Can you see the connection?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:00:01 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: I know nothing about Rajneesh, cq, other than
Message:
what I read about all the Rolls Royces he had. And that he died a few years ago. Terry Cole Whittaker wrote a book titled 'What You Think of Me is None of My Business'. I would think that sentiment applies here. What I think of the Master is none of my business. Knowledge is internal. What he does on the outside can be thought about and interpreted many ways. Does his Knowledge work for me or not? If yes, as in my case, then I should enjoy it. If something else comes along, I'll look at it. No expectations required. No judgement needed. The true judge is the experience. Does it quench my thirst or not?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:52:29 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: You don't get the connection?
Message:
Shroo, one day I hope you'll wake up to what you mean when you say: 'What I think of the Master is none of my business.'

Are you happy to have given your mind away like this?

(Bear in mind that, some day, you might want it back)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:12:28 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: Why not just cut out your neocortex, Shroom? (nt)
Message:
ffff
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:19:27 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I'll cut mine if you'll cut yours.You go first. NT
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:59:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Shroomananda
Subject: My post was funny, yours was just stupid
Message:
Really, Shroom, even on a simple humour level you seem kind of slow. Where's the humour in your post? There isn't any. Mine might not be brilliant but it's a joke at least. It's got context, it means something (no, I won't expplain it for you!).

But yours? Yours is just a pathetic empty retort such as one might expect from a nine year-old, 'I know you are but what am I?' kind of thing.

Pathetic.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 06:56:24 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I thought I WAS dealing with a 9 year old, Jim! NT
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 08:53:06 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Rob
Subject: That's another 232 words Rob (nt)
Message:
(nt)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:05:43 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Did you know?
Message:
That Shroomji the broomji's collective works made 47 pages. I have read a third so far.

Why do I get myself involved in stuff like this? I do not know?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:26:20 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: No I didn't know, and I'm a little shocked.
Message:
I have resolved not to read a word of him. Even when I pasted his post to Word to do a wordcount I managed to not see a word of the drivel he wrote.
Who are you going to send the 47 pages to? Maybe you could send it to Fred Nile (Festival of Light, NSW Upper House, Right Wing Cristian polititian) and ask him what he knows of the Lard. He's always good for a fight against the Anti-Christ's of the world. A mention of Amaroo and the alledged Christians who posted below might wet his appetite as well.
Anyway Salam, stop reading Shroom or you may go blind! :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:38:27 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Take a look at this, please
Message:
Very funny. For me, the whole India story is a crock. Half superstitious nonsense from a Hindu off shoot sect and half outright concocted bullshit. Where one ends and the other begins is anybody's guess. Ever hear the story about evangelical child preacher Marjoe Gortner? Just like Rawat, he was GROOMED FOR THE JOB. That is my firm opinion of how Rawat 'became' The Lord Of The Universe, The Perfect Master, The Satguru Of Our Age!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index