Forum V: Archive
Compiled: Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 12:03:04 (GMT)
From: Sep 06, 2000 To: Sep 14, 2000 Page: 3 Of: 5


Jim -:- Badgering the witness -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:14:44 (GMT)
__ Michael -:- exegesis -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:51:44 (GMT)
__ Jim -:- Hey, I forgot what I was talking about! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:17:00 (GMT)
__ __ sam -:- Hey, I forgot what I was talking about! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:03:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ cq -:- Before you met M, Jim was a premie! (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:02:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ ExTex -:- Hey, I forgot what I was talking about! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:23:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Michael -:- Hey, I forgot what I was talking about! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:45:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ wondering -:- wondering if ANYONE ever 'REALISED' k ever? nt -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:33:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Idene Klapper did in Vancouver, Spring, '74 -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:06:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ la-ex -:- Hey Jim: I knew Idene Klapper from DC and Miami... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:06:36 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Great .... I guess that's enlightement for you -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:01:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Steve -:- wondering if ANYONE ever 'REALISED' k ever? nt -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 08:06:36 (GMT)

Selene -:- very OT sorry... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:11:10 (GMT)
__ Selene -:- ps oops typo again!! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:12:39 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- ps oops typo again!! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:49:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ Selene -:- how i am keeping -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:15:29 (GMT)

Salam -:- Ivory's Rock Conference Centre NEW web site. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:01:26 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- Ivory's rock has a sacred significance. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 16:24:11 (GMT)
__ Rob -:- Registrant -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:43:02 (GMT)
__ Salam -:- Free travil to Ipswich -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:14:15 (GMT)
__ __ Salam -:- More links -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:24:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Why aren't they listed under 'cults'? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:25:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Salam -:- Why aren't they listed under 'cults'? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:45:53 (GMT)

Jim -:- Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost] -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 23:49:09 (GMT)
__ ExTex -:- Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost] -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 03:16:55 (GMT)
__ __ Jean-Michel -:- So how did a LITTLE KID ? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:14:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ ExTex -:- Great points you made -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:38:56 (GMT)
__ __ Scott T. -:- Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost] -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:49:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ ExTex -:- Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost] -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:53:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Peoples Temple and the CIA - NOT! -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:23:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Peoples Temple and the CIA - NOT! -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:52:08 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Marianne -:- Peoples Temple and the CIA - NOT! -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:55:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- I guess I just don't get it. Oh well. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:28:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- Skepticism vs. gullibility -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:55:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Now we are starting to... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:44:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Why do you think that? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:49:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Why do you think that? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:48:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- That's an easy one. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:23:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Another example... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:21:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Another example... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:36:13 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Another example... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:45:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Another example... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:56:53 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Another example... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 22:10:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Skepticism vs. gullibility -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:49:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- My spectrum on improbability -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:11:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Steve -:- My spectrum on improbability -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:34:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Your logic's cockeyed, Chris -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:53:27 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Then let's be more scientific about it, Jim -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:16:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What's scientific about that? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:49:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- What's scientific about asking to be more scientif -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:14:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Thnaks, Chris. I'll take it all under advisement -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:34:18 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Skepticism vs. gullibility -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:00:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Exactly! -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:10:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mrs. Who -:- Exactly!But what is the ultimate objective? -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:34:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- Objective reality is the objective... -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:18:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mrs. Which -:- But I don't work like that! -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:49:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Nigel -:- I don't know another way of working... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:40:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- I don't either, but... -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 00:41:28 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Carol -:- I don't know another way of working... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:36:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- But I don't work like that! -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:40:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Carol -:- I admire your steadiness -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:35:24 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Just a big, fat new-age excuse, is what that is -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:13:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I thought the objective was just to feel good (nt) -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:38:59 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ ExTex -:- Typo: That was-ARTICHOKE Program -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 08:09:28 (GMT)
__ Nigel -:- Shit Jim... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:22:59 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Shit Jim... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:28:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ Nigel -:- abuse and bullying -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:11:45 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- abuse and bullying -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:34:49 (GMT)
__ Oliver -:- Nothing to argue about here except.... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 00:21:13 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Nothing to argue about here except.... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 00:26:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Where it all ends -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:11:06 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jerry -:- Have a star with your piece of the moon -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:04:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Roger eDrek -:- Sir D., you, sir, are as thick as a brick (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:55:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Oliver -:- Where it all ends -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:19:32 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ ExTex -:- My Apologies -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 03:33:16 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- No need to apologise -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:24:37 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- No need to apologise -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 10:39:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- No need to apologise -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:41:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Being 'bent. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:51:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Could this be more stifling? (ot) -:- Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 00:57:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Laid back and off topic -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 00:57:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- Laid back and off topic -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:24:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- S'more recumbent dealers -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 21:15:48 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Laid back and off topic -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:55:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Laid back and off topic -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:09:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- 100 miles, still off topic -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:37:58 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- No, it's my fault... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:12:42 (GMT)

Q -:- Would you believe an Imperfect Living... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:14:09 (GMT)
__ Nigel -:- Answer -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:25:05 (GMT)
__ __ Q -:- Answer: -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:31:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ Q -:- Seriously though (?) -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:41:44 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Oliver -:- That's right Q,..... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 23:38:01 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Q -:- Wow... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:06:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- Your the one that's wet Q. (nt) -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:13:56 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- Forget to take your Prozac, Ollie? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:21:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Oliver -:- I have referred your question to UG Krishnamurti , -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:42:38 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- The ultimate enlightenment is there is none? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:51:26 (GMT)

Katie -:- Listing of Fall 'Events' with M -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 17:06:13 (GMT)
__ Mrs. W , who cares. etc. -:- Listing of Fall 'Events' with M -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:30:25 (GMT)
__ __ Katie -:- Hi Mrs. Who -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:27:16 (GMT)
__ __ Jim -:- Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 00:47:50 (GMT)
__ __ __ Mrs. Which -:- Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 16:35:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:19:21 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Mrs. W C -:- Yes, if being raised in a faith is indoctrination -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:58:09 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Interesting, I'll think about that. Thanks. (nt) -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:42:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Sir Dave -:- He's a good example of a bad one -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:31:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Mrs. Who -:- About Amaroo -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:00:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:25:52 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Mrs. Whatsit -:- Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:53:05 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Steve -:- Thanks -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:43:35 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- I really feel for your sister -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:01:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Mrs. Who -:- I really feel for your sister -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:25:33 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- I really feel for your sister -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:40:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- I really feel, I think... -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:44:34 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yes, there are those kinds of friendships -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:42:04 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mrs. In-between -:- A fishy analogy -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:29:10 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Okay, now I feel sorry for you -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:25:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- A fishy analogy -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 14:21:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Carol -:- If so too bad..I want to be free...... -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:13:26 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- I want to be free...... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 21:34:00 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Shroomananda -:- Trust your heart, Carol, then make up your mind.NT -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:55:12 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Sure, go, but be honest about yourself first -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:20:43 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Steve -:- Sure, go, but be honest about yourself first -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:44:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Am I the only one's who's ever been persuaded? -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:56:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Steve -:- Not pessimistic at all..... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:22:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- The problem with that parable... -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:31:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Yes, there are those kinds of friendships -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:14:59 (GMT)
__ Joe -:- Katie, hope you are getting better... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:22:25 (GMT)
__ __ Katie -:- I'm OK, Joe (ot) -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:36:39 (GMT)
__ __ __ Scott T. -:- I'mok. You'reok. -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:52:41 (GMT)
__ Sir Dave -:- Listing of Fall 'Events' with M -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:04:20 (GMT)
__ Steve -:- Listing of Fall 'Events' with M -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 18:47:31 (GMT)
__ __ cq -:- Long gone are the days of Houston and the like ... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:44:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ Q -:- So what is the name you use in Journeys and -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:34:19 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- If I told you I was a sucker for your love, Q ... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:44:40 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- World's longest song title (almost not ot) -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 21:03:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Q -:- Would you believe Quiver... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:57:29 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- So what did you learn from Osho?nt -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:07:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- and may I call you Prem? nt -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:11:11 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- may you call me Prem? -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 12:19:30 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- may you call me Prem? as in Swami Prem Tusheer nt -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:53:07 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- that was my sannyasin name, but I wasn't known as -:- Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:21:46 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- Well, it's better than Tushier. -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:54:17 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- All snideness aside. -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:34:55 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- Read Hugh Milne's account and you'll see the other -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:59:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Q -:- It surprises me that people don't treat gurus -:- Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:26:57 (GMT)
__ __ __ Katie -:- Long gone are the days of Houston and the like ... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:48:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ cq -:- usher,usher all fall down?(at his Lotus tootsies?) -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:11:23 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ Mrs. who -:- usher,usher all fall down?(at his Lotus tootsies?) -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:35:14 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- have you seen the LOTU video yet? -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:46:15 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ cq -:- OMIGOD! - I just remember what you said about -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:15:41 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Katie -:- LOL! And... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:19:22 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ cq -:- My perverse little mind has just envisaged this... -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:26:03 (GMT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Tonette -:- LMAO!!!!!!!! Good one. nt -:- Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:49:00 (GMT)
__ Yves' being replaced -:- Too bad he don't come to town -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 17:52:51 (GMT)

Salam -:- Whatz the matter with you face? -:- Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 14:15:06 (GMT)


Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:14:44 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Badgering the witness
Message:
In a post below, Shroom accuses Rob of treating him as might a lawyer badgering a witness, trying to force him to describe things his way. Can we look at this?

Us people are verbal and our world is very much a verbal construct. Before any premie objects that that's not the case in 'Maharaji's World' (does anyone use that term anymore?) just think about how important words were to creating and maintaining that realm:

1) Satsang which, although we were trained to consider as something subtler and more sublime than the mere words spoken was indeed an oral tradition. We said the words never mattered but that, of course, was a complete, mind-fucking lie. The party line changed from year to year, sometimes quicker, sometimes slower, but if your words weren't on the money, in the pocket, on the line and all of that, you lost your place on the community roster. If you were into giving satsang you knew that and chose your words carefully. Even as you pretended to let Maharaji speak through you, you played that game.

And look how much of that blather we wallowed in! Satsang every single fucking night for years. Worse, there were the festivals. More satsang. Blah, blah, blah ....words, words, words. And how about when Maharaji freaked out the first time he started to let go of the Hindu shit a bit in '76? Threw us into that heavy guilt phase that actually boosted the words to a previously unimagined level. Now we had all day, all night satsangs on many a weekend, especially when an initiator, as they were then called, was in town.

And what were initiators anyway but talking heads on sticks, wound up to deliver the party line: I love Maharaji! I love Maharaji!? Hell, think about how they became initiators. Maharaji locked them up for months at a time and forced them to do nothing but talk to each other, i.e. give satsang, one at a time, carefully, carefully parrotting the party line. One false word there, boy ... can you imagine?

2) The oaths we took upon receiving Knowledge. Pledges that supposedly meant something. No one said THOSE words didn't matter. Why, even today the simple test of a fledgling ex-premie, in my humble opinion, is whether or not they're willing to break the cardinal promise of all promises, never to reveal the sacred techniques of Knowledge. Those words mattered, or yes they did.

3) The commandments he saddled us with. No one ever told me not to take them literally. Far from it. Remember in Orlando '75 when Maharaji expressly, specifically, no question about it, spelled out exactly what it meant to 'Never Delay in Attending Satsang'? He said, clear as a bell, that it meant to always, always never ever let anything slow you down from getting to the official satsangs conducted by DLM (a/k/a EV) in your lucky neighbourhood. The words mattered and he drove them home. That's just one example.

4) The scriptural pedigree Maharaji claimed for himself. Thnik of all the textual exigeses we indulged in proving Maharaji's legitimacy via one religion after another. They were all ours, their words were ours. We claimed them for our own. And that, of course, was all words; Just words, words, words.

5) Maharaji's own promises to us and the world at large. When did we first learn to even try to discount them? Not until the early eighties as far as I can tell. Before then they were words that stood up straight, proud and definat in the face of public perception. People didn't think Maharaji really would bring peace to the world, that he wasn't really the Lord of the Universe? Well fuck 'em! They'd see soon enough. He wasn't kidding when he delivered the Peace Bomb at age 12 in India. He was for real as were his words.

I guess there are more examples but enough's enough. The point is that this entire trip is ....

Oh yeah, what about arti? Have you ever stopped to think about how much time you spent singing that major mindfuck anthem of all anthems? I figure it lasted about nine minutes back when we sang it fast and took even longer, maybe 12, when we slowed it down. (I might still be in that stupid cult if we didn't slow it down. Now THAT was abuse!). Add up all the minutes, brothers and sisters, throw in the pranams, the gallons of scatalogically homeopathic holy water we drank. Just a lot of everything if you were in long enough. Okay, that'll be '6'.

So, like I was saying, I get so pissed off when premies, Maharaji, anyone tries to somehow sidestep the words that made -- and continue to make -- this ugly trip possible.

That's all.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:51:44 (GMT)
From: Michael
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: exegesis
Message:
'4) The scriptural pedigree Maharaji claimed for himself. Think of all the textual exigeses we indulged in proving Maharaji's legitimacy via one religion after another. They were all ours, their words were ours. We claimed them for our own. And that, of course, was all words; Just words, words, words.'

I'm still amazed at how much of this 'exegesis' continues to this day; Deputy Dogg was into it and Shroomananda spends so much time trying to prove M's connection to almost every scripture available that it is sad. I think that one could go through Time magazine or People magazine looking for every reference to light, music, word, and nectar and one could prove that Time/Warner, Inc. 'teach this Knowledge.'
Excellent analysis, Jim.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:17:00 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey, I forgot what I was talking about!
Message:
I hit 'submit' and then saw what my subject line was. Oops! Well, it's only words, not to worry.

Besides, you can tell where I was going with that. It's all obvious. Just like the cult's reaction. It's all so obvious.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:03:36 (GMT)
From: sam
Email: -
To: Jim
Subject: Hey, I forgot what I was talking about!
Message:
a lot of you guys make so much more sense than he ever did or ever could (wish I had have met you before m, Jim)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:02:04 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: sam
Subject: Before you met M, Jim was a premie! (nt)
Message:
sfgf
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:23:14 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey, I forgot what I was talking about!
Message:
Words. Hmmm Let us not forget about 'CONCEPTS'! Boy, anytime I voiced an opinion about anything that was outside the party line it was buckets of 'satsang' about CONCEPTS! 'You have got to SURRENDER your CONCEPTS. You've got too many CONCEPTS. Etc' Everything was an incorrect CONCEPT! The only CONCEPT that was allowed was that GM was GOD and that if I didn't practise all the doctrine then I would never loose my CONCEPTS and be able to completely REALIZE this CONCEPT.

And all the while the biggest CONCEPT of all with 99% of premies was just who is GM! Most never were ever anywhere near him and knew NOTHING about him really at all! Not a thing about him really. It was all a CONCEPT. And IF you were around him, who he was really was explained as the CONCEPT of lilas!
WORDS/CONCEPTS/WORDS/CONCEPTS/WORDS/CONCEPTS

BUT DO NOT USE YOUR 'MIND'! IT IS THE ENEMY! Classic brainwashing techniques!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:45:32 (GMT)
From: Michael
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Hey, I forgot what I was talking about!
Message:
Boy, I agree with you about the word 'concepts;' I avoid using the word at all now days simply because of the conotation. But I've noticed that our Premie visitors, especially the fungus amongus uses the word quite often. I was accused of being in my mind during most of my time as a Premie, and I had to hear the word 'concepts' over and over.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 07:33:03 (GMT)
From: wondering
Email: -
To: any/every one
Subject: wondering if ANYONE ever 'REALISED' k ever? nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 05:06:48 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: wondering
Subject: Idene Klapper did in Vancouver, Spring, '74
Message:
Funny you should ask. Here's what happened.

Mahatma Tejeshwaranand was in Vancouver for an extended stay (no this is NOT just another sex story!). This was the spring of '74, I think a month or two after Dave Wener hung himself not that that really mattered much to anyone, Mr. Mind and everything.

Tej came to town with that prince amongst his peers, the truly debonair, if slightly foppish, Monsieur Garnet Depuis. The two of them were quite a team. Each gave satsang nightly the rumour being that perhaps Garnet himself had realized Knowledge. I mean, there he was travelling with a mahatma and everything. And he did look so smart in the shirts we ironed for him, giving satsang every day and all that. You know.

We had two houses side-by-side then, 21 and 27 W. 13th Ave., I believe. The first was a bona fide ashram, the second we called the W.P.C. house (World Peace Corps). It was filled with ashram applicants some of whom had moved out before and wanted in again, others who were just patiently biding their time before they too would join the first ring of the inner sanctum of DLM.

Mahatma Ji was a noble character, kind of what you'd expect in a young holy man. We were thrilled that we finally had the grace of having a realized soul stay in our town for more than a stopover. Hey, maybe it didn't matter that Millenium was such a farce after all. Life was good.

Anyway, Tej did something kind of cute. He moved everyone from the training ashram next door into the real one. Instantly, just like that, all those people became full-fledged ashram premies. Can you imagine? Like I say, there was a lot of grace. The reason he did this was so that he, Tej, could take over the house next door for himself. That way he could meditate, eat, and do whatever mahatmas did back then. I guess in Tej's case that meant fucking his brain's out.

What Tej did was put together an international harem for himself in that there holy abode. He imported his girlfriend from some east coast American ashram (Philadelphia?) and mixed her in with local sisters and, well, you figure it out. Did I say harem? Hell what do I know?

:)

So one of the Mahatma Ji's 'friends', one of the girls who served him night and day, was the nice, wife of the good jewish Doctor from the states, now a well-established naturo- something or other, Mike Klapper. Her name was Idene. Idene was jsut a typical, unassuming nice jewish chick from Chicago, I think. Warm, friendly, not given to any particualr spiritual affectation (which, beleive me, was a blessing in itself back then). Idene wasn't anyone you'd think of when you thought of deep spiritual adventuring or anything. She wasn't Dr. Strange in a dress, that's for sure. She wasn't on anyone's list of contenders for early god-realization, that's for sure. She was just nice.

By the way, this was also around the time our premie band went to Nelson, the hippie enclave in the middle of B.C. where Tej excitedly told the entire Kootenay Valley at one over-crowded satsang that he was actually one of Jesus' disciples (he realized on the spot) and gave Knowledge to three sessions of lucky souls through that night and only paused long enough to take a brief rest, letting Gary Ockenden secretly take over squeezing people's eyes while he, Tej, got some sister pregnant in the back room. Adn yes, those were the very smae Knowledge sessions in which more than half the contestants saw Maharaji's face in the light, such was the grace!

But I digress....

So, like I say, no one expected Idene to realize anything special. She was just a nice community premie doing lots of service for Mahatma Ji along with a few other sisters.

But one night it happened! I can't remember if I heard about it first or was just there when she gave that first satsang. Idene was one of a few sisters who would come over with Tej when he decided it was time to attend satsang, usually after Garnet and a few of us commoners had warmed the crowd up a bit. On this occasion, though, Tej asked her to give satsang instead of himself and, in that satsang, she looked at us all with so much love, it was like something had happened to her! Quietly, solemnly, yet with so much love it made us shake in sympathetic vibrations, our skin and hearts all purring throughout the room, Idene explained to us that she had, by Maharaji's infinite Grace, realized the Knowledge! She had crossed over, she explained, and could now see Maharaji in everything!

'Holy fuck', we thought. What in the world? What lila! To think that Maharaji would begin popping his kernels over on that side of the pan instead of right here where we all assumed the heat was greatest. But, not to worry, it was all his Grace. We were floored, all of us. Even Garnet was impressed, I think. But you'd have to ask him (actually, I had lots of opportunity to do just that when both he and I were sent to the Canadian backwater of all backwaters, Regina, just before Maherst -- he, because the powers-that-be wanted to knock him down a peg or two and me, because Garnet liked the way I ironed his clothes).

And it's not like it didn't last either. For weeks, maybe even longer, Idene the Housewife was gone and Idene the Cosmic Lover had taken her place. There was hope for all of us after all. All of us able to properly serve Mahatma Ji anyway.

--- sigh -- those were the days ......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 01:06:36 (GMT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hey Jim: I knew Idene Klapper from DC and Miami...
Message:
Jim-funny you mention that name..it's a hard one to forget.
I knew Idene in DC and then later in Miami....
she was very devoted in DC, seemed a little too much, but at that time who wasn't?
Anyway, by the time she was in Miami it was the late 70's-early 80's, the DECA period...
She flipped out and m told her to be put on some sort of antidepressants.Actually everyone around her was so blown out by m's 'wisdom' and 'courage' to admit that the big K wasn't helping her with her problems...
So she was taking some sort of very strong drugs, and ended up going out into Miami in the mmiddle of the riots and almost getting killed in some sort of wierd riot situation..
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:01:46 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: Great .... I guess that's enlightement for you
Message:
So a happy, well-adjusted, confidant young woman in her twenties gets turned into a nutbar. Hey, I'm sure you can find lots of spiritual texts, including many of Maharaji's own satsangs, which will argue that she was really getting somewhere as she fell apart. You know, 'peeling the layers of the onion' or 'approaching the speed of sound' ..... all that shit.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 08:06:36 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: wondering
Subject: wondering if ANYONE ever 'REALISED' k ever? nt
Message:
I've never heard anyone say that they reached a CONSTANT enlightened joyful state free from pain and problems. People usually say that they have had occasional experiences of a feeling of perfect oneness or bliss.

Maha said once that realising knowledge meant simply to make it a real experience in your life and on that level there are many premies who would claim that.

My opinion is that followers never make it, same way that a sheep can't become a shepherd. Who's to say whether the shepherd has made it either? After all he has to make that claim to get the sheep to follow him.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:11:10 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: bb
Subject: very OT sorry...
Message:
or is it Sai bidla? or....???

I'm going to be your neighbor next week.
Thought we might want to connect. only if you want to
:) LOL right?

my email is selen@ocean.ccit.arizona.edu
oh oh right here in public.
sorry about this.
I lost your email. purged all of my emails in a snit fit a while ago.
so... if you want to... email me. I'd like to connect with any
ex's in the area.
thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:12:39 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: type sorry bb
Subject: ps oops typo again!!
Message:
it's selene@ocean.ccit.arizona.edu
yikes posted my email to all the world. twice. !!!!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:49:56 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: salam_au@iprimus.com.au
To: Selene
Subject: ps oops typo again!!
Message:
Hello Selene. I do not what you are talking about, but I thought to ask how you've been keeping. You want believe it. But after I e-mailed you, my brother in law did of lung infection. Just like that, it was a shock for me. Very sad, but that is life, big shit.

Salam

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 03:15:29 (GMT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: how i am keeping
Message:
I'm OK. I have reconciled my need to travel back home.
The thread I started was in hopes of getting in touch with ex's
in the area I am traveling to.
I sympathize with your experience regarding your brother in law. I am so sorry.
Thanks for checking in!
Love, Selene
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:01:26 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Ivory's Rock Conference Centre NEW web site.
Message:
http://www.ircc.com.au/

do not forget to bookmark us

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 16:24:11 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Ivory's rock has a sacred significance.
Message:
I was reading an article on the net, and came across this extract which very mysteriously ends with the words [Ivory's Rock]. So I e-mailed the fellow asking him for the significance of that

In turn, electromagnetic fields induced into the mantle of the earth, and variations in topography and geology create variations in local electromagnetic fields. Like any available energy source, these have been seized upon by the multitude of life forms that have emerged on this planet to fuel and inform their life. It remains a question today what of these 'earth energies' consist of pulsed electromagnetic fields, and what of other forms of 'energy'. For now, we have to be satisfied in the knowledge that they have been and are apprehensible and useful. [Ivory's Rock]

My e-mail:

I read your article with interest. I just could not understand

what the two words in brackets mean. Can you please explain.

Salam

Reply:

Hi Salam,

Sorry for the confusion. What you were reading, I believe, was a
chapter from a draft text of BUILDING WITH THE BREATH OF LIFE, which is
now published and available through amazon, b&n, and soon powells.com.

The items in brackets were illustration notes to myself. In this case
to an image of Ivory's Rock in Queensland, which geologically is an old
volcanic neck. I have some photos of it I took a couple of years ago
while keynoting a sacred design conference there sponsored by the
architecture school at QUT.

Looks like you are in AU, and probably understandably curious what
connection a local sacred place had. On one level, a place like IR, or
Serpent Mound in Ohio (USA), creates significant geological
discontinuities, with the volcanic neck breaking through existing
crustal rocks, and leaving in place a highly crystalline, ferrous-rich
connection to the magma below, creating hydrological, magnetic, and
other energetic anomalies. IR is a wonderful, magical place....I
remember it with awe!

My my. Heared that EV. Now you have something to brag about how your
master bought a place which came out to be all that stuff.

Do not forget to renew your third part insurance. The volcano might blow up.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:43:02 (GMT)
From: Rob
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Registrant
Message:
From whois aunic

domain: ircc.com.au
descr: Ivory's Rock Conference Centre Pty Ltd
descr: (ACN) 068618922
descr: P.O. Box 923 Ipswich, Q4305
admin-c: AL240-AU
tech-c: AL240-AU
zone-c: AL240-AU
remarks: Created 19980526
changed: register@aunic.net 19980526
source: AUNIC

person: anthony latemore
address: 18 elaine st
address: karalee
address: QLD 4306
phone: +61 7 32947099
fax-no: +61 7 32947088
e-mail: oem001@bigpond.com
nic-hdl: AL240-AU
remarks: (Organisation) hypermax pty ltd
remarks: (position) webmaster
remarks: Created 19970412
changed: register@aunic.net 19970412
source: AUNIC

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:14:15 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Free travil to Ipswich
Message:
In your dreams.

Have a virtual tour at:

http://www.ipswich.qld.gov.au/

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:24:30 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: More links
Message:
I found these links on the net for IRCC

a- The Art gallery

http://www.gal.org.au/foundation/index.html

b -Look whois upgrading the timber work:
http://www.tasbeam.com.au/projects_cs.htm

c- Under Accomodation IRCC appears:
http://www.queensland-raceway.org.au/html/accomodation.html

CONFERENCE VENUES - RESORTS (Groups only)
Old Hidden Vale Resort - Ph (07) 5435 5256
Ivory's Rock Conference Centre - Ph. (07) 5464 8200
Woodlands Conference Centre - Ph. (07) 5464 4202

d- The Fire Brigades mention Ivor's Rock.
How does the lord of the universe feel about
buyin an ex sloughter house?

CLASS -2
DATE OF FORMATION: 1954
MEMBERS : 50. 16 Active. 8 carry pagers.

TERRAIN: 20910 Hectares Open grazing land undulating.
2690 Hectares mountain country
Total area 23600 hectares,
District Mountains. Mt Flinders, Mt Blain ,Mt Perry Mt Sugar loaf
Mt welcome, Mt Goolman, Ivory's Rock.
Housed at 24 boonah rd Peak Crossing
In a old early 1920 killing shed with hand cut timber slabs .
Houses the three vehicles also used for meetings
Brigade Phone no 70 5467 2600
VEHICLES: Unit (4). 600 lt trailer Ex S.E.Q.E .B trailer built up to our requirements.
50 mm Camlock couplings 19 mm hose - 2 reels.

http://maguires.com/Southeasters/g_ipswich/brigades.html

e- Some mention of IRCC, mostly advertisinig.

http://www.classiccarhire.com.au/quick.htm
http://www.yellowwweb.com.au/qldc108.htm
http://www.bangemann.gil.com.au/enviro/flinders.htm
http://www.eventnet.aust.com/visitbrisbane/venues.htm

What happened here? Can not find the article the Brisbane Mail.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/1710/pages/n_aus.htm

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:25:06 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Salam
Subject: Why aren't they listed under 'cults'?
Message:
I see 'hairdressers', 'cars for hire'. But what if you're looking for a cult?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 15:45:53 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Why aren't they listed under 'cults'?
Message:
I use many crawlers that in turn use several search engines, in general about 30 to 40 engines. Try using Copernic 2000, which you can download from:

www.copernic.com.

It is free and does a good job. Also try webferret from ferret soft at:

www.ferretsoft.com.

Not as fancy as copernic, but good too.

Also, sometimes you can not find the relation between what you ask and what you get. In these cases I use the view option to see the source document and search it for clues. It works most of the time.

And maybe the guru of the internet be with you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 23:49:09 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost]
Message:
I originally posted this to ExTex this morning but the post became one of those blank ones and didn't show up, I think, until shortly before it went inactive. I thought I'd repost it because, frankly, I think conspiracy is a fairly interesting topic of general interest. When's it fair to laugh ideas off and when is it giving them short shrift? Anyway, here it is, complete with original typos and grammatical errors .....

The best -- the only way -- to properly deal with conspiracy theories is to carefully rank explanations for the many events, intermediate and ultimate, in order of likelihood. Not that one has to do this 'formally' or anything but that should be the thought process. If you don't do this, you run the risk of getting trapped by the allure of one possible explanation, perhaps because it's just so 'sexy', and favoring it at the expense of its stronger (i.e. more likely) fellow possibilities. Kind of like, you're the doorman at some popular night club. You let some beautiful girl jump the queue (sp?) just because, well, because she's so attractive.
There are many, many more likely explanations for Maharaji being a master, coming to the west and all of that than the one you propose. REally, do we have to walk through them? You should be able to think about this simply enough. Think about all these factors:

1) The number of people necessary to put this 'plan' in motion. At least some of the key premies involved in bringing Maharaji to the west and advancing his 'mission' would have to be involved. Yet there's not a scintilla of evidence in that regard.

2) The historic context for Maharaji, i.e. the whole Indian, Hindu, Rhadsoami bullshit lineage trip. How far do you want to cast your net? Are you going to include Shri Hans in this? What about his predecessors, competitors, supporters and the like? Why single out Maharaji in this way? Again, not a drop of evidence.

3) The indirect and thus extremely ineffectual assistance DLM did serve the purposes to think it might have been targetted at. If the CIA or whoever -- MK ULtra or whatever -- would go to all that trouble to implement this byzantine deceit, you'd think it would have thrived a little better than it did, woudln't you? The truth is, this cult had one brief moment in the sun when people actually stopped and wondered just who could this young, fat kid be? I mena, at best. Most people either never heard or saw through it all immediately. Mind you, this was the early seventies, people did wear Nehru jackets and medallions and beads. It was all of that.

But, still, whatever even possible prospective legitimacy this cult had pre Millenium was washed out entirely afterward. Is that the best that all these Men in Black could effect? Why? Not only is there no evidence about this, the speculation itself makes no sense. It suggests secret operatives that are both extreemly powerful and just the opposite, all at the same time.

4) Your analogy to the Nixon Whitehouse is absolutely unfit. That was dirty dealings for a political purpose in a political arena. Even then it was very unlikely, although it did happen. However, just because it happened doesn't mean that suddenly the break-in was not unlikely. It was and still would be. Consider the fact that we haven't, ever since then, assumed that presidential candidates break in to each other's headquarters. That still is not the norm (despite however alluring the prosppect is to conspiracy buffs). So the anology is terrible and is, in fact, terrible for a bunch of reasons I won't even bother to go into. Think about it.

In short, your speculation's relaly only good for its entertainment value and I don't mean this offensively. Not to say that it's impossible, simply that there's no reason to treat it seriously. Thus, again, it can't properly hold up as a 'serious question'. It deserved the reaction it got.

With all due respect....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 03:16:55 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost]
Message:
Aha! Thank you. That was more the kind of posting that I was hoping for. Especially the part about there not being any evidence of any 'outside' influence or control. And as I repeatedly stated in my postings, I was not saying that it was fact! I was inquiring if anyone had any info that would support the possibility. There is a big difference. I am not locked into the idea that the CIA or any other government outfit was involved. I just wanted to pick the memories of the ex's on this forum to see what might pop up. I don't rule much out in an off hand manner these days, what with the history of humans being what it is.

You wrote: 1) The number of people necessary to put this 'plan' in motion. At least some of the key premies involved in bringing Maharaji to the west and advancing his 'mission' would have to be involved. Yet there's not a scintilla of evidence in that regard.

Well that is exactly what I wanted to know. IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO HAD ANY INFO ON JUST THESE PEOPLE?

And about the effectiveness of such an 'operation' IF IT HAD BEEN one....well who can say? What the goals of this type of thing would be is anybody's guess BUT the FACTS are that there were various mindcontrol operations (maybe ARE). That is a fact! I can recommend 'The Search For The Manchurian Candidate: CIA and Mind Control' by John Marks as a good place to start. And it is also a fact that many an 'operation', domestic and foreign, turned into a dismal failure...or got out of control and was 'cut loose' or dropped. Data gathering was always a sidebar benefit to even these programs. They do make mistakes and run things to see what would/could happen. (That is why they are called 'experiments')

And about the early India thing...Shri Hans and all of THAT stuff....well...All I know about the supposed early days are WHAT STORIES ABOUT SHRI HANS THE PERFECT MASTER, INCARNATION OF GOD, that I was told by DLM! That is all I really really know. And the 'Perfect Master' schtick doesn't hold much water with me now. So how did a LITTLE KID put this whole thing together IF HE WAS IN CONTROL? Doesn't make sense to me. If it was these early devotees running the show...WHO WERE THEY AND WHERE DID THEY COME FROM AND WHERE DID THEY DISAPPEAR TO??? Think about that.

In this country and Europe there were a hell of a lot of people, with ideas that the government was very nervous about, running around with books by Ram Dass and Paramahansa Yogananda in one hand and leftist literature in the other hand (so to speak). That could have given SOMEONE some idea's.

And I did not mean to connect the Watergate stuff to DLM. I just was trying to remind how strange and wacked out things were.

Your posting was most welcome and no offense was taken by any of it as it was obvious that none was meant. Thanks

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:14:39 (GMT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: So how did a LITTLE KID ?
Message:
Again, he's not the one who was responsible for the whole show !!

It was already going on before him, and he started to play a role in it before his father's death.

The whole story is perfectly understandable without any 'conspiracy' theory. What's obvious reg his childhood, is that he's been clearly manipulated by different people at different time: his family before the schism, his assistants (all of them were no idiots) and associates afterwards.

God knows what's going on these days, and how much hold on him his associates have. Their business clearly depend on him playing his role as the perfect maha ....

I can't see any intelligent non-premie having the possibility to play a role in this cuckoo's nest.

The question is: why try to imagine a 'conspiracy' ? Is it so difficult to admit the facts for what they are ? And us swallowing the whole thing with no other factor involved ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:38:56 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Great points you made
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:49:23 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost]
Message:
ET:

And it is also a fact that many an 'operation', domestic and foreign, turned into a dismal failure...or got out of control and was 'cut loose' or dropped. Data gathering was always a sidebar benefit to even these programs. They do make mistakes and run things to see what would/could happen. (That is why they are called 'experiments')

To put it simply, this sounds like science run by the three stooges. The bottom line here, and you don't need to be too rigorous to see this, is that a theory requiring the conspirators to be simultaneously idiots and savants is just not credible. In addition, an 'experiment' requires some methodology, or it's just not worth doing... because you don't learn anything. And throwing out a generic question as to whether anyone noticed anything suspicious thirty years ago is crappy method. What did you expect?

If you want to present a credible story then pose a research question to which the 'secret experiment' provides some answers... that a less expensive or less risky methodology won't. (CIA 'ops' in the US are illegal, so there's inherently some risk in them. The NSA and FBI are not under the same constraints.) Finally, if the chain of logic requires people to act without motivation, then at the very least you're in the dark, no matter how 'interesting' your speculations. Sorry if I'm being my old pedantic arrogant self, but it's true. Now I'll go back to lighting my farts.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:53:45 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Me to ExTex (re his 'serious question') [repost]
Message:
I've gotta respond to this. You wrote:
To put it simply, this sounds like science run by the three stooges. The bottom line here, and you don't need to be too rigorous to see this, is that a theory requiring the conspirators to be simultaneously idiots and savants is just not credible.
I say:
Well the facts are that there were many totally idiotic experiments run under the Artichike Program and the MK-Ultra programs that were total failures and were run out of no better excuse but curiousity to see what would happen. Things like 'Psychic Driving' and other nutty 'experiments. Things like keeping a woman in a sensory depravation tank continuely dosed with LSD for OVER a MONTH! Allowing her out for an hour a day to use the bathroom and eat! Continuely playing tapes of her own voice to her with excerpts from interviews with a psychologist! Pretty idiotic! It happened.

And there were hundreds and hundreds of people who were put through hell, without their consent in these programs! It is in the very documents released from the CIA through the freedom of information act. Fact! Yup, science run by the 3 stooges alright. Do some research. Look up the CIA connections to The people's Temple disaster. And if you think that because CIA OPS are supposedly illegal to be conducted in the US that THAT means diddley squat...well then you REALLY should start to do your OWN research cuz you've got a rude awakening.

You also asked:
And throwing out a generic question as to whether anyone noticed anything suspicious thirty years ago is crappy method. What did you expect?
I say:
I expected quite simpley either 'No, I don't remember anything.' or 'Yes, I do recall something.' but I didn't expect 'How crazy/stupid of you to ask such a question on our forum!'

The whole damn GM/DLM thing is pretty suspicious to me and (repeating myself) no matter who was behind the start of it (and I am not claiming it was or was not CIA/FBI/etc)...IT WAS A CONSPIRICY! Or do you still think 13 year old Rawat was running the show???

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:23:18 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Peoples Temple and the CIA - NOT!
Message:
ExTex: I am an ex-premie. You can read my Journey to understand who I am. As I have said many times before here, I was one of the attorneys for Larry Layton. He was the only person prosecuted in the US for conspiring to murder Congressman Leo Ryan, who was murdered by Peoples Temple members who returned to Jonestown to commit suicide. I was defense co-counsel in 2 trials concerning this matter and had access to every bit of information about Peoples Temple that existed, including exhaustive interviews with survivors. There was no CIA instigation of the events in Jonestown. Yes, there were CIA operatives and informants related to this event, but the CIA did not precipitate it -- Jim Jones' insanity did.

This is much more complicated than anything you have read on the web.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:52:08 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Marianne
Subject: Peoples Temple and the CIA - NOT!
Message:
Very interesting. Jim Jones insanity was obviously a large influence in that disaster. But you said:
. Yes, there were CIA operatives and informants related to this event, but the CIA did not precipitate it -- Jim Jones' insanity did.
Just WHAT were the influences of the CIA on this disaster? I would be all ears. AND WHY DID THEY NOT PREVENT IT, THEN???? Not to be aggro about it but YOU just confirmed my point! Also the continual referal to the Jones Town deaths as a mass suicide doesn't hold up to a lot of stuff from people who also were on the scene as close after it happened as anyone. There actually were A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WERE INJECTED WITH POISON AND A SIZABLE AMOUNT WHO ACTUALLY WERE SHOT, so these people said. And there were others who ran into the jungle to escape this 'suicide'. And there are the tapes that they recorded themselves that had a lot of curious stuff in them.

But I would apppreciate you explaining why there were 'operatives and informants related to this event' Just what kind of 'OPERATION' were they assigned to?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 04:55:22 (GMT)
From: Marianne
Email: MarianneDB@aol.com
To: ExTex
Subject: Peoples Temple and the CIA - NOT!
Message:
ExTex: I have been over this ground a lot on this site. Some of the people who get involved in this topic are a bit goofy. Email me and we can talk about it some more.

Marianne

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:28:10 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: I guess I just don't get it. Oh well.
Message:
ET:

Well the facts are that there were many totally idiotic experiments run under the Artichike Program and the MK-Ultra programs that were total failures and were run out of no better excuse but curiousity to see what would happen.

Well, if that's the issue then it seems to me we ought to have some sort of rationality test for entry into the intelligence service, rather than a host of conspiracy theories that spill over into every institution. If these people are really that stupid then the danger is stupidity, not highly sophisticated conspiracies. Think about it. An intelligence service that apparently doesn't know or understand the first thing about scientific method. That makes me feel less safe than highly intelligent evil, and completely justifies Pat Moynihan's insistance that there be more transparency for these kinds of public secrets. The issue is incompetence.

And the role of secrecy also feeds into the absence of criticism for these 'revelatory' studies and articles on far reaching conspiracies. No alternative view? Why not? Seems more like groping in the dark than any real or healthy airing of the laundry.

I expected quite simpley either 'No, I don't remember anything.' or 'Yes, I do recall something.' but I didn't expect 'How crazy/stupid of you to ask such a question on our forum!'

And what would you have done with that info, just add it to your pre-existing bias? You have to ask a question such that you can obtain an answer that falsifies the hypothesis. (Read that last sentence twice. It's important.) For one thing, what would most exes know about intelligence ops, and how would they make a judgment about what was suspicious? You apparently attribute Maharaji's rise to prominence to a conspiracy, when all you need is an understanding of human nature and a modicum of sociology to explain it thoroughly. This sort of 'conspiracy' is more the rule than the exception througout history, which suggests that it's just business as usual. I repeat, suspicion is not enough to build a theory.

Personally, if there was any sort of CIA involvement in the Jim Jones incident, other than just keeping tabs on a potentially dangerous cult, it constitutes almost astronomical levels of incompetence in a service that probably can't or shouldn't tolerate even modest levels.

I took a look at an annotated bibliography of articles and books on MK Ultra, and decided it was a swamp. No way to tell innuendo and assertions from fact... and to be honest I just don't have the time to wade through it all. Makes me think there are lots of people with way too much time on their hands. I would accept whatever Pat Moynihan has to say on the subject though, at least as a starting point. Odd that I don't see any reference to Moynihan on these sites, who is far and away the most vocal and credible critic of the intelligence services. Maybe I missed it, but it should be fairly prominent, no?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:55:59 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: ExTex and all
Subject: Skepticism vs. gullibility
Message:
A healthy skeptisism is NOT the same as having a closed mind.

And poo-poohing an idea simply because it sounds improbable isn't good science, IMO. Think of how many discoveries the world would be without if that attitude prevailed.

Came across the following recently:

Retired Air Force and Intelligence officer, Texe Marrs, relates in his 1988 book:

' ... regarding the New Age influence within our military service. That influence has especially made itself felt in the upper echelons, among the high-ranking brass. But it impacts lower ranks as well. Military personnel are often ordered to attend such New Age mind control and spiritual training programs as est and Lifespring.

Evine's research also turned up the alarming fact that in the early 1980's, officers at the prestigious Army War College at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, prepared a study aimed at creating a 'New Age Army.' These officers, some of whom were graduates of Werner Erhardt's est or former members of the radical university group Students for a Democratic Society, recommended the Army adopt meditation, psychic powers, magic, and neuro-linguistic training.'

You might also like to check out: http://www.parascope.com/en/articles/starGate.htm - their message-board might help in your enquiries.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:44:12 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Now we are starting to...
Message:
peel the layers of the onion. There is a lot of stuff we do not know and there is a lot of stuff we do not really know about the start of DLM/US/Europe. Seperate what we were told from your actual experience and see what is left.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:49:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Why do you think that?
Message:
... there is a lot of stuff we do not really know about the start of DLM/US/Europe.

Where do you get that from?

Let me ask you this, what do you think the 'official' story is and what part of it do you find suspiscious or missing?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:48:30 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Why do you think that?
Message:
Very good question and I am glad you asked it. Let me preface my answer by saying two things. 1- I SHOULD HAVE SAID, there are a lot of things THAT I DON'T really really know about the start of DLM, even though I did get involved way back. Guru Puja/Montrose 197?

2- And I must point out it has been a very very long time since I have even consciously seriously delved into this subject. (It is sick, I suppose, but this is THE FIRST TIME I have even openly conversed about GM/DLM in a critical way or in ANY WAY since I cut myself loose...completely...around '85!!) But that is symptiomatic of the cult indoctrination! (Small parts isolated and destroyed.)

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?

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: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:23:57 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: That's an easy one.
Message:
ET:

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.

Succession battles between factions of followers are the norm within the Rhadasaomi movement, very possibly the fastest growing new religion on earth. There are a number of books on this, including 'Rhadasaomi Reality' and several books by David Lane. Some time ago Anon asked me to dig up an obscure publication on some of these lineages because I happen to live near the Library of Congress. I sent the relevant passages to Anon and using that and other sources he and JM put together a site that delineates much of this history with regard to the lineage that led to 'our' Maharaji. (There were many who used that name, and a number of branches of Rhadasaomi that gained a foothold in the West. 'Ek Ankar's' Paul Twitchell was in the lineage of Kirpal Singh, a well known Rhadasaomi master who was far more prominent than Shri Hans.) The specific succession battle that led to GM is now fairly well known I think, and the reasons for it are pretty mundane. I don't know what happened to that info, but assumed it had been incorporated into this site somehow. Maybe ask JM... or Anon?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:21:05 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: ALL
Subject: Another example...
Message:
of the type of weird 'programs' that CIA has run...
Do some research on the connections between the COMPANY and Christian 'children helping' outfit known as 'WORLD VISION'. There is a fine example of the type of covert programs that have been run, for what purposes we can only guess. There is data on this and on the People's Temple/CIA connections that is pretty damn strange.
And of course you will have to do some REAL searching cuz it isn't going to be handed to you on a plate. AND I NEVER SAID THAT IT WOULD BE EASY. But it is out there for your scrutiny if you look. If you are curious. Seek and ye shall find. Har Har
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:36:13 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Another example...
Message:
There is a fine example of the type of covert programs that have been run, for what purposes we can only guess. There is data on this and on the People's Temple/CIA connections that is pretty damn strange.
And of course you will have to do some REAL searching cuz it isn't going to be handed to you on a plate. AND I NEVER SAID THAT IT WOULD BE EASY.

As I said, it is a morass and does not represent a schholarly or credible body of literature with anything like peer review, for the most part. Learning something about any subject takes some work, but eating a lot of crap and dung along with the food is usually not required. The paragraph above is just bulging with useless innuendo, for instance. Finally, what the hell does the most credible authority on intelligence abuse have to say about this? I asked before and got no answer from you. I ran into him by accident last week, and could have asked him directly had I known it to be an issue, not that he knows me from the bellhop. He looked pretty frail, so I fear I may not get another chance.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:45:44 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Another example...
Message:
Thanks for your last 2 posts. Good info. I don't think asking questions is pointless and I am not trying to stir up a hornet's nest of paranoia. It just seems damn strange when I read things about covert operations and then think back on what went on back then.
And who could be a definitive source for info on black-ops? It is set up so there cannot be any credible such thing. There are billions of our tax dollars given to black-ops operations right now that our representatives CANNOT find out what they are used for. Hey, don't shoot me I am just the messanger.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 21:56:53 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: Another example...
Message:
ET:

No problem. Moynihan has been pushing to get this stuff in the open for ages. I doubt, unfortunately, whether his successor will be similarly motivated no matter who he/she is. Too bad. Pat has been asked to become a fellow at the policy school where I did my grad work. No word yet on whether he's accepted. If so I might be able to have a semi-private conversation with him some time, and I'm sure he'll insist on getting some of us involved in this issue. It's not dead just because he's retiring from the Senate. I'm not that conversant with his position, but basically I think he favors making everything older than 5 years public knowledge. Having an intelligence service that is shielded to this extent is just not commensurate with a modern democracy. Get things out in the open where we can gain some purchase.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 22:10:07 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Another example...
Message:
Wow! IF you do ever get the chance to talk with him....I for one would be all ears to hear anything you might share (without betraying any confidentiality between you and him)!
Anything would be interesting but any info related to cults would be obviously of high interest.
We must find representatives to replace these aging warriors for truth as they pass on! (Maybe that was a bit strong and flowery but you get my meaning)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:49:33 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Skepticism vs. gullibility
Message:
poo-poohing an idea simply because it sounds improbable isn't good science

But it's not science at all, Chris. Who said it was?

Anyway, how about if an idea doesn't just sound improbable, what if it sounds really improbable? That's 'really' as in 'extremely' as in 'ridiculous'? Or doesn't your spectrum go that far?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:11:03 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: My spectrum on improbability
Message:
'extremely' as in 'ridiculous', Jim?

Depends on your timescale, doesn't it? Like to suggest to the Pope of 500 years ago that the Earth revolved around the sun - ridiculous, absurd. THEN.

What do you think? Was it the accepted opinion of the majority just because he said so, or did he say so because it was the accepted opinion of the majority?

BTW, I take then that you're aware that your 'poo-poohing' of my ideas, calling them 'absurd' and such, isn't science either?

(In fact, your put-downs remind me big-time of how M and some other premies used to treat ideas and concepts that were considered as being 'of the mind' and consequently not worth considering. How wide is your spectrum on that angle, Jim?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:34:15 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: My spectrum on improbability
Message:
Listening to a scientist on telly today. He said that if anything
science had taught him to say 'never say never' or to discount the possibilty of anything.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:53:27 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Your logic's cockeyed, Chris
Message:
'extremely' as in 'ridiculous', Jim?

Depends on your timescale, doesn't it? Like to suggest to the Pope of 500 years ago that the Earth revolved around the sun - ridiculous, absurd. THEN.

What do you think? Was it the accepted opinion of the majority just because he said so, or did he say so because it was the accepted opinion of the majority?

You're right, our expectations of each other do vary with time and place. It would be unfair to blame any European of 500 years ago for thinking the Earth was the centre of the Universe. But now, it would be most fair to ridicule any supposedly educated person for thinking that. So? What's your point?

BTW, I take then that you're aware that your 'poo-poohing' of my ideas, calling them 'absurd' and such, isn't science either?

Did I say they were? They're not. They're just comments.

(In fact, your put-downs remind me big-time of how M and some other premies used to treat ideas and concepts that were considered as being 'of the mind' and consequently not worth considering. How wide is your spectrum on that angle, Jim?)

What a dumb comparison! When did Maharaji ever say 'that's ridiculous' to someone and invite or welcome argument to the contrary? The reality was exactly the opposite. No one talked about anything there and you know it. Are you just trying to get a rise out of me or is that really how you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 18:16:23 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Then let's be more scientific about it, Jim
Message:
Are you 'inviting or welcoming argument to the contrary'?

Or are we to think that your put-downs such as 'what a dumb comparison' mean that you think the conversation should be abandoned as worthless?

BTW, you still haven't said. How was it YOU felt abused as a premie?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:49:12 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: What's scientific about that?
Message:
What do you mean, 'let's be more scientific'? What do you even mean by the word?

Listen, I don't tell you how to think or what to say. You say what you want to say and I say what I want to say. If I think your idea's good I'll say so. If I think it's bad, I'll say that. If I think it's really good, I'll mention it and if I think it's really bad I'll say that too. I don't tell you

I don't see what your problem is, really. What is it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:14:45 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: What's scientific about asking to be more scientif
Message:
What's scientific about asking to be more scientific???

I mean let's NOT (I said NOT) knock an idea simply because it's improbable. As Hal/Steve relates in a recent thread,

'Listening to a scientist on telly today. He said that if anything science had taught him to say 'never say never' or to discount the possibilty of anything.'

And by the word 'scientific' I mean being less subjective and more objective - i.e. that we quit promoting our OPINIONS as being facts.

And Jim, I really have to take it with a pinch of salt when you say: 'Listen, I don't tell you how to think or what to say...'

I thought you were a lawyer?

Good grief man! Isn't that part of your job? Trying to tell the jury what to think?

And the 'problem', as I see it, is that you for one, Cactus Jim, (prickly ol' son-of-a-cucumber that you are, but then, so am I, on occasion), have turned a professional trait (viz. dissing the opposing party and their witnesses) into a habit that causes people to give up posting on this site often in despair and sometimes in disgust.

(strange isn't it, how the viewing numbers to this site DO go up when there's been an excessive amount of verbal abuse? - and I'm thinking here of Gerry's last tirade against Yves and Stonor, who BTW, HAS left this and all other M-related sites, whether from disgust, despair or disparagement I'm not sure.)

The point is - YOUR ATTITUDE DOES HAVE AN EFFECT. Occasionally beneficial, (like when premies respond to the 'verbal' they've been used to for so long), more often, IMO, self-defeating, if you'd like this to be a site where people can feel free to discuss their doubts about the Maha.

THAT's the problem, OK?

Oh yes, and if you think I suffer from 'cockeyed logic', I suggest you refer to my reply (above) to your post entitled 'You don't seem to get it'.

PS. Thanks (genuinely) for putting me straight on the subscript to the phrase 'received wisdom'.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:34:18 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Thnaks, Chris. I'll take it all under advisement
Message:
Can we just leave this now? Aren't there bigger fish to fry than the issue of my character, etc.? I'm glad Stonor's gone (what was she doing here anyway?).

Now, like they say in Narnia, onwards and upwards.....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:00:11 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Skepticism vs. gullibility
Message:
Actually, the mere fact that an idea is scoffed at or taken lightly doesn't mean that's an illegitimate way to behave, or that the idea won't get a fair hearing if it deserves one. Michael Polanyi, a Canadian who won a Nobel, once suggested that people were justified in scoffing at some of his early contributions, even though they were eventually proven to be correct. The scoffing actually helped to lay the groundwork so that people could eventually understand the contributions in context.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 19:10:32 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Exactly!
Message:
With you all the way there, Scott. I've had ideas laughed at, lots. It happens several times a day at least between me and my colleagues. They laugh and I think again. If I still think I'm right, I argue the point. Sometimes I convince, sometimes I don't. Sometimes no one 'wins' but you can tell that the rope has been pulled a little ways further to one position or the other.

Other times, my idea gets scoffed at and I fold immediately, seeing now what I apparently didn't see when I was just doing my own thinking.

Of course the best moments are when my ideas get scoffed at and I try to persuade whomever that I'm right but they don't see it, still I persevere and win in the end. Then I get to say 'I told you so' and that's always fun. Hey, it doesn't happen all that much but it happens. One of life's great pleasures, really. Don't know why that is but I'm sure I'm not alone feeling that satisifaction, getting vindicated in the face of ridicule.

The last thing I'd ever want my colleagues to do, however, is to patronize me, even if it means that I smart a bit when initally confronted. Shit, this stuff happens all the time in the work I do. Flexibility and an eye on the ultimate objective's what you need to rise above the petty defensiveness that's always waiting to kick in. Well, you know ...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:34:55 (GMT)
From: Mrs. Who
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Exactly!But what is the ultimate objective?
Message:
Is there one for humans? Is there one in your life?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:18:44 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: None
To: Mrs. Who
Subject: Objective reality is the objective...
Message:
...for the subject-matter in hand, ie. the notion of M as conspirators' puppet.

The question is not whether a person is willing to believe a theory, not whether thousands are willing to believe it, nor whether they get a nice warm glow from believing it...

But simply whether that theory or idea makes claims which are testable. Is the evidence out there? - and if so let's have a look at it. What further hypotheses would also have to be true if proposition (1) is true? Test those out as well.

As always, extraordinary claims require extraordinarily strong evidence.

And until the evidence makes belief a necessity, it is best to give highly implausible notions a very wide berth, IMO.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:49:40 (GMT)
From: Mrs. Which
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: But I don't work like that!
Message:
I have a very strong ability to study facts and use reason...but some things can't be explained by reason and facts alone; as in you can't prove it so it doesn't exist. Not to my satifaction. Maybe when we've evolved into using our greatest capacities and potential of our minds, we will have the means to figure it all out. I think the mind holds many more secrets, undiscovered facts.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:40:38 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: I don't know another way of working...
Message:
I have a very strong ability to study facts and use reason...but some things can't be explained by reason and facts alone; as in you can't prove it so it doesn't exist.

Not quite sure what you mean, Mrs, W. If a thing exists it leaves evidence of its existence, surely? (otherwise you wouldn't be able to refer to it). Evidence could and should be studied - which is my entire point.

Mind, consciousness, perception, emotion etc, offer a thousand and one avenues for research and for me the beauty of such research - whether evolutionary, psychological, neurochemical etc - is the way different areas work independently but yield compatible findings.

Not to my satifaction. Maybe when we've evolved into using our greatest capacities and potential of our minds, we will have the means to figure it all out.

I think you are in for a long wait. There is no reason to suppose our minds have not already peaked. (The extinct Neanderthals had larger brains than us). But you seem to also imply our minds have unexplored 'capacity' and 'potential'. I can't buy that. Claims of people like Aldous Huxley that 90% of our brain is unused have been long discredited thanks to brain-scans etc. It is pretty well extablished that we use all of our brains at different times and for different tasks. There will always be new connections maybe, new ways of looking at the world - but no hidden, cosmic dimensions of experience, no undeveloped paranormal powers lurking out of sight behind some psychic veil.

I think the mind holds many more secrets, undiscovered facts.

Depending on what you mean, exactly, I might agree with you here.
Everything is secret until discovered. But if you're hinting at some kind of interface with the 'infinite', that looks like so much wishful thinking to me. (Wishful thinking with ancient traditions and a powerful emotional appeal, maybe, but wishful thinking all the same.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 00:41:28 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: I don't either, but...
Message:
Nigel:

The difference between Neanderthal and us had to do with the way the brain was organized, and not the size. Fascinating to compare the two though. I had a friend who felt that modern man triumphed because he was better adapted to the European climate... so had to set him straight on that point. Neanderthal was much better adapted. How did we deal with this 'other human' with whom we coexisted, competed, and possibly interbred for thousands of years? Can't even imagine such an epic, but it did happen.

I'm also highly skeptical of the idea that we've reached some sort of optimum of either physical or cultural evolution. We are probably still evolving physically, although cultural evolution has been far more significant. The notion that we have reached some sort of apex seems Hegellian. It is, in fact, precisely this speculation that motivated Fukuyama's 'End of History and the Last Man' hypothesis. I think he has changed his mind now.

What would we do, for instance, if confronted with the coexistence of another human species besides our own? Would be be accepting, or competitive? Would a more 'highly evolved' species simply wipe out all competitors, or coexist according to some mutually beneficial pact?

Most importantly, how do we deal with charisma, which is both a solution and a problem? I'm not at all convinced that skepticism is up to such a task. We seem almost at the mercy of chance when it comes to the difference between good and evil charisma... and the 'iron cage' of legal/rational organization appears to have its pathological side.

More to come...

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 20:36:38 (GMT)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: I don't know another way of working...
Message:
Wishful thinking is another way to say 'hope'. But I work to replace my need for hope (which I have need of when I am feeling low) with living in the present in a state of acceptance and contentment that I have what I need right now. Really, I must go now to my garden and nuture my plants and be nurtured by sun wind and life. While I appreciate the medium of conversation...it is as limited as reason to fill me with peace. May truth and love prevail..both are necessary.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:40:03 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: But I don't work like that!
Message:
Carol:

I have a very strong ability to study facts and use reason...but some things can't be explained by reason and facts alone; as in you can't prove it so it doesn't exist. Not to my satifaction.

This is the famous 'verifiability test' that went out several generations ago with the logical positivists. I think it may have been Wittgenstein who showed that the verifiability test--that we believe or accept nothing that can't be verified scientifically--cannot itself be verified. This led to Popper's 'falsifiability test'--that we accept and operationalize only those statements that can be falsified. We can make lots of statements about the universe that are not subject to falsification. What he's saying is that whether these statements are true or not is irrelevant. The point is that they aren't useful.

Maybe when we've evolved into using our greatest capacities and potential of our minds, we will have the means to figure it all out. I think the mind holds many more secrets, undiscovered facts.

We might be able to do more with the facts we have someday, and may be able to enhance our insight into their meaning. We also may acquire more facts. In fact, I'd be surprised if this weren't so. But, we still know quite a few things that simply cannot be true, no matter how extensive our abilities become.

I have said previously that acceptance of Maharaji as a deserving and legitimate spiritual master would require changing our ideas about whether or not a molested child were blameless, rather than placing blame on the perpetrator. It simply turns logic on it's head. I just don't want to undermine my own faculties to that extent, given that I need them for other sorts of critical judgments in life.

You may want to build a different theory to explain the facts, and abandon the one that can't make sense no matter how it's embellished.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:35:24 (GMT)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: I admire your steadiness
Message:
I'm an expert at undermining my own faculties!

You are a very intellectual thinker and I respect you and thank you for not putting me down when you disagree. I'm not going to to be posting or reading here again for awhile. Just wanted to respond to you. If you ever come my way, please make contact! Carol rbruce@teleport.com

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:13:29 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: Just a big, fat new-age excuse, is what that is
Message:
Who told you that we've got all this untapped brain potential just waiting to be used? I could be wrong but my understanding is that brain scientists stopped thinking that years ago.

You say you have this 'very strong ability' to use reason but, frankly, Carol, I question that. Again, I come bakc to what you said yesterday of the day before about how you knew Maharaji got something special from dad because you saw the moment captured on film. That belief seemed particularly untested by reason. You still haven't responded when I've challenged you on it. Does that mean that you concede that that was a silly thing to think and say? If not, please use your 'very strong ability' and deal with it. Don't just step over it, deal with it. My guess is that you'll end up conceding that, in that case at least, you avoided using whatever ability to reason you have, very strong or not. But you won't know unless you deal with it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:38:59 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: I thought the objective was just to feel good (nt)
Message:
rrrrr
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 08:09:28 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Typo: That was-ARTICHOKE Program
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:22:59 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Jim
Subject: Shit Jim...
Message:
- nicely done, an' all -

... but didn't you just ask me 'Don't you have crosswords over there? :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:28:37 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Shit Jim...
Message:
Well, yes, you're right.

But, you know, I just HAD to abuse someone and I'd never abused Texex before. Sorry, I mean bully.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:11:45 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Jim
Subject: abuse and bullying
Message:
You just have to remember the etiqette: say 'Hello' first or 'I understand where you're coming from' then ask 'Is hamster crap, or what? If they don't say 'yes' straight out, you have to tickle them bit. If they retreat back under the cushion you hold off the abuse till they twitch their little noses out again.. Patience and consideration are the things to considerate.

If they still don't say 'yes' well I guess you either punch their fookin headlights out or you end up with soundsurround Shroomananda...

(or - worse - do the first and get the second anyway..!)

Hmm, tricky area...


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 04:34:49 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: abuse and bullying
Message:
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.

And bullies? I remember bullies. The kids that I avoided every day after school in Grade 2, they were bullies. They'd smash you as soon as look at you -- assholes. That's what 'bully' always meant to me.

So what is this shit, this diluted, sensationalized lexicon? Could it have anything to do with selling books, you think? I do.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 00:21:13 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Nothing to argue about here except....
Message:
.....why bring the silly subject back to life? It seems to me that the whole thread started by ExTex was a joke from beginning to end and the best place for it is Inactive. Now we have another space wasting thread to look forward too. Thank's Jim.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 00:26:56 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Nothing to argue about here except....
Message:
Yes, Oliver, I thought we might be wasting a bit of cyberspace here. And what with there only being so much left and everything. But the fact is ExTex was quite adamant about his post being serious and not a joke at all and thus my reply.

Well here I go again wasting even more space.

Sorry...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:11:06 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Jim
Subject: Where it all ends
Message:
When I was a child I often used to imagine that the universe would end at a brick wall. Then I got to wondering, what would be after the brick wall?

But there is definitely an end to the internet. Click here to go to the end of cyber space and remember this place next time you're thinking of using up some valuable web space.

Incidentally, it's now possible to buy land on the Moon for £10 per acre. You get a title deed, a map showing exactly what you've bought and sole mining rights. I heard this on the radio today.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:04:56 (GMT)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Have a star with your piece of the moon
Message:
Here you go, Sir D. 55 pounds, cheap. Own your very own star, or buy one for a loved one. My boss bought one for his wife not too long ago for their anniversary.

Your very own star

Too bad it's a scam. My boss didn't find out about it until after he bought it. He's got an 'official' certificate and everything, along with a map showing exactly where in the sky his wife's star is. He hasn't had the heart to tell her. She still believes there's a star in the sky officially named Elsie after her.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:55:00 (GMT)
From: Roger eDrek
Email: drek@oz.net
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Sir D., you, sir, are as thick as a brick (nt)
Message:
plank
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:19:32 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Where it all ends
Message:
I've been wondering where to build a little retirement home and the moon could be nice. I'll have 5 acres. Where should I send my cheque?
Of course the downside might be that when I take up residence I'll probably be called a Moonie:)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 03:33:16 (GMT)
From: ExTex
Email: None
To: All
Subject: My Apologies
Message:
I am sorry if I brought up a subject that you all have already beat into the ground prior to my finding this site. I was seriously curious about this subject (and still am) and I thought I might get some answers here.
And I got tired of reading Shroom debates and personal chit-chat so I thought as an ex-premie I had as much 'right' as anyone to ask a 'serious' question. So sorry if it was beneath you. Thank you to those that responded.
Sorry to waste 'YOUR SPACE' on this forum. Let's chat about hockey? Or maybe some cooking tips? Or we could wait til Shroom gets us all nostalgic and debate him? Sheesh!
But my apology IS SINCERE. Sorry I brought it up.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 09:24:37 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: ExTex
Subject: No need to apologise
Message:
Actually, I didn't think Jim's post to you was insulting or anything. Just a bit of wry humour, that's all. And he did go to a lot of trouble to write it.

Considering all the crap that gets written here, your conspiracy theory was one of the more intellegent posts and infinitely preferable to the endless posts about Shroom, abuse, cycles of abuse and all the different personalities here which tend to fill up this valuable cyber space.

Not to worry, they'll soon be able to expand cyber space to the moon (at £10 per acre) and then we can devote reams of trash to discussing the latest premie plant conspiracy theory, some of which make your theory look extremely sensible by comparison.

It is the nature of conspiracy theories that they sound far fetched. Yours was interesting although I doubt it myself. I think Maharaji just got lucky for a few years. The main thing in his favour was that he was a young messiah.

After the sixties and all of the anti war movements and especially the Paris riots of 1968 where France was reduced to anarchy (is it happening again now), the youth movements became a much stronger force. People of that generation (us) felt that we had something to tell the world and to make it a better place.

That was unique in modern history and it also set the stage for fake messiahs like Guru Maharaj Ji to reap an ill gotten harvest from some of that generation. That sort of thing won't happen again, in our lifetime.

Cheers.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 10:39:09 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: No need to apologise
Message:
David:

After the sixties and all of the anti war movements and especially the Paris riots of 1968 where France was reduced to anarchy (is it happening again now), the youth movements became a much stronger force. People of that generation (us) felt that we had something to tell the world and to make it a better place.

That was unique in modern history and it also set the stage for fake messiahs like Guru Maharaj Ji to reap an ill gotten harvest from some of that generation. That sort of thing won't happen again, in our lifetime.

I'm not sure I like the idea that the conviction to make the world better won't be very strong again in our lifetime, or that this was the key to the power of false Messiahs. Do you?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 13:41:21 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: No need to apologise
Message:
I don't particularly like both ideas but I think they're true. Over here we have our eco warriors who sit in trees when contractors come to cut them down to build a new road but it's nothing like the youth movement of the sixties.

The generations that have grown up since the sixties have either been very cynical or sensible - nothing like the misty eyed, spaced out and far out hippy era. The modern day drug culture is too extreme to be anything like the dope and acid days of the sixties and early seventies.

I think our generation was the first real youth culture to take off. The fact that there were a lot of us (baby boomers) meant that we were a major force in the world. We had the new music which identified us as a very different generation from previous ones. Music just for youth by youth was a new idea. We also had the benefit of not being in a world war.

The Vietnam war was such that it was easy to oppose it. Very different to previous wars where it was the patriotic thing to go and fight or at least offer support. So the new youth culture had a big thing to oppose and that widened the generation gap between us and the old generation who had done their much needed duty in WW2.

We really thought we knew better than the previous generations. Since then, new generations have not had such a stark contrast. That makes us unique.

There will be and are many false messiahs but they don't make such a big impact on today's youth who are more sensible/cynical than we were. There's now the internet which soon shows up the glaring cracks in the messiah. If the net had been around like this in the early seventies, Maharaji would never have been so successful.

Do you get saddle sore riding the recumbent? I thought it might hurt the small of your back or bottom on long rides particularly since you can't get out of the saddle.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 18:51:30 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: freewheeling@bigfoot.com
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Being 'bent.
Message:
David:

Do you get saddle sore riding the recumbent? I thought it might hurt the small of your back or bottom on long rides particularly since you can't get out of the saddle.

You don't get the sort of saddle sores that are common to upright riders (including Armstrong) at all. Not even a little. There is something called 'recumbent butt' that is very painful. Speculation is that it's caused by blood and lactic acid pooling in that area during the course of a ride. It goes away as soon as you're off the bike. The remedy is pretty simple. Set a greater recline angle so that pressure is transfered from your ass to your back. I never get it, even on the longest rides. Never have. Other than that there are small aches and pains that are really just a matter of becoming fit, and using muscles that are infrequently used in other sorts of exercise, like the sartorius, which has atrophied in most of us. A weak sartorius and hip adductors can lead to knee problems because of poor alignment during pedaling... so the cure is to pay attention, and perhaps do specific exercises to strengthen these muscles. More simply: don't splay your feet.

My worst problem has been 'hotfoot' or sinus tarsi syndrome, but I had this on uprights, and running, as well. I've taken to riding without socks, and this seems to help a great deal. Haven't the foggiest idea why. Maybe my foot gets more purchase inside the shoe so it doesn't twist and flex as much, which keeps the inter-tarsal nerve from being pinched. Anyway, it seems to work. Take a test ride on one of these critters. Let me know where you live, and I'll question some of my UK mates about bike shops in your area that carry some of the clever Euro bikes, like the HPVelotechnik Streetmachine.

I'm convinced that if recumbents were allowed on the Tour de France they'd eventually dominate the race, even the mountain stages.

--Scott
freewheeling@bigfoot.com

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Sep 12, 2000 at 00:57:43 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Could this be more stifling? (ot)
Message:
Apparently the UCI, the organization that sponsors and sanctions the big cycling races and competitions like the Tour de France, has decided to disallow Chris Boardman's hour record because he used advanced technology and a unique aerodynamic position. They've decided to roll back the UCI record to Eddy Merckx's 1972 mark, which even amuses Merckx. Boardman still owns the unfaired HPV record, which is sponsored by the IHPVA, and not UCI. Wonder if UCI has managed, finally, to make itself irrelevant? Sheesh!

Possible relevance to topic: the discussion has turned many times to the role of evolution, and the UCI's position seems to be anti-evolutionary. No improvements allowed. Is this an industry that is unwittingly cutting it's own throat?

Story at:
http://www.greatoutdoors.com/auto_docs/velonews/thisjustin/000911142511.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 00:57:12 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Laid back and off topic
Message:
If Sir Dave is in Town one day, he might like to visit Dulwich Park where a firm called London Recumbents hires out a range of different machines. You can go for a spin round the park for a hour or so, Sir Dave.

I think it is the Kingfisher model which is based on the machine which holds the human powered vehicle land speed record.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:24:23 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Laid back and off topic
Message:
I went there today with my kids and saw some very strange and wonderful looking machines. There was a recumbent tricycle made for two. I fancy a go on that one with my eldest daughter. She can do all the work.

Where exactly in the park do they hire them out? I also saw a young girl riding a unicycle. Perhaps she hired it from there.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 21:15:48 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: S'more recumbent dealers
Message:
David:

I've been told that another dealer in your area is:

Bike Fix - http://www.bikefix.co.uk/

or there is a list of them in Recumbent UK at

http://www.btinternet.com/~laidback/recumbentuk/issue5/Issue5.pdf

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:55:22 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: Laid back and off topic
Message:
If you use the entrance opposite Dulwich Picture Gallery on College Road, it's just 50m or so inside the park, on your left, down a little lane.

I've ridden the Kingcycle (thanks, Scott T.) and its much cheaper replacement. I found each one fast and nippy. And I've tried a very long wheelbase machine designed for touring.

Handling can be well wierd - especially on the models where the steering apparatus is under the saddle! And I had some difficulty getting started. Everything is so strange. But once you get going - well it's two wheeler. A unicycle is where I draw the line.

A recumbent tricycle went past us as we sat outside the Prince Regent on Dulwich Road today - I see recumbents fairly regularly around here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:09:35 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Laid back and off topic
Message:
John:

I think it is the Kingfisher model which is based on the machine which holds the human powered vehicle land speed record.

One of the earliest modern recumbent designs was called the Kingcycle. No longer in production, it was actually the forerunner of my bike, and many other short wheelbase designs. AFAIK the Kingcycle never held the HPV land record, but it was a good practical design. The current human powered land speed record is held by a machine called the 'Cheetah' and may soon be challenged by a device called the 'Virtual Edge.' There's nothing about either of these 'bikes' (only in the sense that they have two wheels) that would be suitable for the typical cyclist. The rider in the Virtual Edge, for instance, can only see where he's going by watching a closed circuit TV screen inside the completely closed fairing. Not very practical.

A version of the Gold Rush, which was the first HPV to achieve 65 mph unassisted by wind, gravity, etc., designed by Gardner Martin and ridden by 'Fast Freddy' Markham, is in production for everyday use. The actual bike is on display in the Smithsonian Museum in DC. The production version is called the Gold Rush Replica, manufactured by Easy Racer. It's one of the best selling long wheelbase recumbents.

Personally these faired designs don't appeal to me. A bike called the Aerocycle, based loosely on the Kingcycle, has dual 650 wheels. The big wheels give it a feel and handling that's very similar to a conventional road bike... only a lot faster. And unlike most recumbent designs it can climb *very* well. Eventually I think a bike like this will best Chris Boardman's hour record in the unfaired HPV class. Unfaired is where it's at as far as I'm concerned. Can't stand fairings.

Ride often, if not fast.

--Scott 'going to ride 100 miles tomorrow' T.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:37:58 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: freewheeling@bigfoot.com
To: Sir Dave, JohnT
Subject: 100 miles, still off topic
Message:
Well, I rode the 100 miler yesterday over a very hilly course in southern Maryland. Did reasonably well but 'bonked' on the last 15 miles. Couldn't get my heart rate above 110 (I have a maximum of 190) and could barely break a sweat, and it was hot out. Can you say 'running on fumes?' Still finished in just over 6 hours. Ate two big helpings of homemade icecream afterward. More than worth the effort!

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:12:42 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: ExTex
Subject: No, it's my fault...
Message:
ET:

I was seriously curious about this subject (and still am) and I thought I might get some answers here.

I think I came on too strong above. Found out my students just gave me an 'adequate' rating for the course I taught this summer, and I'm sorta pissed. Well, I knew absolutely nothing about database management, so I guess 'adequate' is a victory. But ignoring my excessively wagging finger for the moment, it really does help to ask yourself the relevant questions first, in order to enhance the prospects of getting relevant answers from others. Distrust isn't enough to build a good conspiracy theory. (I'd say 'abuse theory' but apparently it means something else.) An autocrat might conduct the sort of experiment you suggest, because he isn't really interested in answers so much as prooving his power... but I don't think you can make this attribution stick with regard to the CIA. So, perhaps that's the real difference between gurus and spooks.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:14:09 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Would you believe an Imperfect Living...
Message:
...well I'll let each of you complete that phrase according to your lights.

THE QUESTION(ER) REMAINS: Is there really such a thing as enlightenment & does UG Krishnamurti have it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:25:05 (GMT)
From: Nigel
Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk
To: Q
Subject: Answer
Message:
Is there really such a thing as enlightenment

No, of course not.

& does UG Krishnamurti have it?

Yes, of course he does.

Got any more?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:31:41 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Nigel
Subject: Answer:
Message:
Oh. No. So?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:41:44 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: Seriously though (?)
Message:
There is a dream called Enlightenment & UGK doesn't have it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 23:38:01 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: That's right Q,.....
Message:
....it's all just a fucking dream.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:06:29 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Wow...
Message:
you mean life is a WET DREAM? Far out, etc., etc..
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:13:56 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: Your the one that's wet Q. (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:21:52 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: Forget to take your Prozac, Ollie?
Message:
Look on the bright side, Ollie. Hopefully one side of the toast isn't quite as burnt as the other. Or are you the sort that can't find anything for which to be grateful?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:42:38 (GMT)
From: Oliver
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: I have referred your question to UG Krishnamurti ,
Message:
and he has suggested that you go back and read some more. :)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:51:26 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: Oliver
Subject: The ultimate enlightenment is there is none?
Message:
Do you really think so, Ol? Perhaps, as Fagin said, you should review the situation.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 17:06:13 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Listing of Fall 'Events' with M
Message:
Hi everyone -
Someone sent me this a while ago, and due to personal complications (I broke my foot - badly - and have been quite immobile except for visits to the doctor and hospital), I forgot to post it. Please notice the Paris/UK/European events. I gather from the posts below that M is going to be in Amaroo between his appearances in New Zealand and Paris.

Thanks to my informed friend for sending this to me -
Katie

M. has accepted invitations to speak at the following events from September to November 2000:
September 10
Auckland, New Zealand~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge.

September 25
Paris, France~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge. Due to limited seating, these events are for the people from Europe only.

September 27
Harrogate, UK~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge. Due to limited seating, these events are for the people from Europe only.

September 30
Rome, Italy~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge and for people preparing to receive Knowledge. Due to limited seating, this event is for the people from Europe only.

October 2
Barcelona, Spain~ For people who have received the techniques of
Knowledge. Due to limited seating, these events are for the people from Europe only.

October 13
Durban, South Africa~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge. Due to limited seating, this event is for the people from Africa only.

October 17
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge.

October 22
Tokyo, Japan~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge.

November 6, 7 and 8
New Delhi, India~ For people who have received the techniques of Knowledge.

November 17 and 18
Kathmandu, Nepal~ For people who have received the techniques of
Knowledge. Due to limited seating, this event is for the people from Nepal only.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:30:25 (GMT)
From: Mrs. W , who cares. etc.
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Listing of Fall 'Events' with M
Message:
Sorry about your infirmity. Guess you can't dance for awile! Bummer! Do you know who I am in this persona? Selene can tell you if you don't. I hope you get better soon!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 02:27:16 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Mrs. W , who cares. etc.
Subject: Hi Mrs. Who
Message:
[Mrs. Who (along with Mrs. Which and Mrs. Whatsit) is a character in 'Wrinkle in Time'.]

The answer is yes - figured it out after about five posts. (Do you think I can put this talent on my resume - snicker?) I did post to you that I liked this side of you, too.

Thanks for the well-wishes,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 00:47:50 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Mrs. W , who cares. etc.
Subject: Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah
Message:
Carol?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 16:35:40 (GMT)
From: Mrs. Which
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah
Message:
Good guess. Why can't people just accept me for whoever I am? Liking would be nice, too. I try to be real in all I say. (Gerry really hurt my feelings, but I'm over it. Do I owe him an apology for something I'm not aware of?)

The whole transmission of power from Shri M to little M was captured on film and I for one was very convinced by the evidence of higher authority at play. It hearts/hurts in my chest when I read about this scene.

My opinion is: He was not groomed for the job by anything but his own devotion to his daddy and his teachings. Also convincing was the powerful speech made by an 8 year old boy. His entrance into this 'business' is one of the main reasons that I do not agree with any of you that think he is deliberately trying to dupe people or only does his thing for money.

He made lots of mistakes and I think it would be best for all if he owned up to them and apologized to all that were hurt in the process by being cult members. But I also believe it may be possible to practice knowledge and love M as a teacher, without being a part of a cult, in current times at least. Not to say that I am practicing K or doing anything else that implies obedience. I am a very 'bad premie' if I am one at all! It is the whole good vs. bad trip that I became an ex from. And I reject any should's about how I think or behave that are not 'my own' within the guidelines of 'Do no Harm to others' as much as I am able. I make mistakes plenty of times, too. I reject all the labels, too: premie, ex-premie, psych labels, etc. That is not who I am.

A lot of this may defy logic or will make no sense to you, I know, so please don't tie yourself in loops over it. If I'm wrong then spanking me or putting me down isn't gonna make me change or make you feel better. I already know I may be wrong about many things and I continue to be open to see things differently.

There are lots of reasons that I don't want to be involved with premie culture, which makes me an ex-premie. But I also have this problem with continuing to feel something for M at at very gut and heart level. (Have a little sympathy, Jim). Maybe it has to do with how much I needed to love him: as if he were greater than my own family...and how much I needed to have unconditional love after having been truly abused by my family. Well I believe I have that now: unconditional love, because I know the presence of God is within and outside me. The reason I *know* that, is from a way that you deny is valid or logical or provable, if your beliefs are what they were a couple of years ago. (Did you know why Darwin and Wallace parted company in their conclusions on evolution?)

My sister just told me the other day, when I mentioned my posting here, that she hates M and wishes someone would assasinate him. I asked her why and how she could feel such vehement hatred for him! She said it was because he took me away from the family. I told her there were many ex's and family members who felt the same way; that people gave up years of their lives to only live for him and his mission. I also told her that had already been moving away from the family by my drug use (plus being married with a child) and that when I went to M, I stopped the drug use and risky behaviour that I might not have survived had it continued. She agreed that she was grateful for that aspect of my involvement.

She also thinks ex-premies could have a lawsuit for the damages caused by the cult. I told her, I thought it would have occurred if it could work. I said, how would a judge separate individual choice from the matter. I also said that it would be very expensive and that M's resources are much higher than many could match. Would do you think about this? Have there been any successful lawsuits against cult or spiritual leaders?

I'm afraid, in your mind, I will forever thought of as a fence sitter or a new age bubblehead as you called me before. But I am still sometimes grapple with the question of 'Who is Maharaji?' in my own heart. That is why I return. But I am also no longer seeking because I know that what is his true nature is the same as mine and everyone else's, waiting to be realized. We are all capable of what the greatest among us and the worst among us have done, by nature of being human. It is our choice how we tune ourselves by the thoughts we allow free reign, and by how we each direct our activities.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:19:21 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah
Message:
I notice that M has (at least on the surface) stopped teaching many of the so-called 'Hindu concepts' that he presumably inherited from his father. (You know - the 'mind is the devil' - surrender it to me' type stuff.

Do you think perhaps that M was as much a victim of this kind of 'abuse' (forgive the term if it causes you trouble) as the early-day premies were?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 19:58:09 (GMT)
From: Mrs. W C
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Yes, if being raised in a faith is indoctrination
Message:
and mind control. But it is not 'abuse' by itself.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:42:04 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Mrs. W C
Subject: Interesting, I'll think about that. Thanks. (nt)
Message:
dhhj
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:31:05 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: He's a good example of a bad one
Message:
Mrs Which; you wrote -

'I do not agree with any of you that think he is deliberately trying to dupe people or only does his thing for money.'

Well consider the Amaroo site which premies payed for and at which they now have to pay $1,300 to camp there for five nights. The only reason Maharaji charges such a ludicrous camp site fee is because he's in it for the money and to Hell with any poor premies who can't afford to pay.

The trouble is, premies' expectations have gotten so low. A proper 'teacher' (or incarnation of God) would be out preaching his truth to the masses every week. Consider such people as Dr Martin Luther King, John Lennon or Princess Diana if you want to see how spreading a message is done properly.

Maharaji is the leader of a dwindling cult. That much is clear and he's trying to extract as much money as possible from the poor suckers who still believe he's the Lord.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:00:29 (GMT)
From: Mrs. Who
Email: None
To: Sir Dave
Subject: About Amaroo
Message:
Are they helping to buy the land for a permanent festival site? Are they actually charging that admission? That is high!

And I guess he is transmitting to the masses twice a week via satellite plus making numerous appearances. Did you see the schedule Katie posted?

Anyway...I replied below about some of the why's of my beliefs/non-beliefs. Perhaps I have a problem with being too open to settle on any one way of thinking about spiritual teachers.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:25:52 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah
Message:
Carol:

He made lots of mistakes and I think it would be best for all if he owned up to them and apologized to all that were hurt in the process by being cult members.

Well, doing that would go a long way toward convincing me that he has some legitimacy. I do believe there were legitimate leaders in Rhadasaomi, though I have no reason to suppose that any were 'divine' so to speak.

But I also believe it may be possible to practice knowledge and love M as a teacher, without being a part of a cult, in current times at least.

For the reasons above I just don't think that's possible without self delusion.

Maybe it has to do with how much I needed to love him: as if he were greater than my own family...and how much I needed to have unconditional love after having been truly abused by my family.

You may have your finger on something here. In a sense we all need to believe, and there is precious little that really deserves any such thing. I still think of the meditation as connected with something worth believing in, but also recognize that I could be wrong. I don't understand why some people believe in the biblical account of creation, since it's not even internally consistent, let alone consistent with a stadiumful of evidence. Must be that they need to believe, and they don't see any better candidates... possibly some sort of testement to just how impoverished we really are.

I have thought for a long time that we're pretty much out of it, as in: nobody's even very close. Creationism: not close. Evolution/Dawinism: closer, but not useful in a real bind and leaves a couple of biggies completely unaddressed. Rahdasaomi: dirty but possibly not poisonous water. Politics: too specialized to be useful in a bind. Econonics, etc. etc.: an amusing diversion sometimes. Psychotherapy, psychiatry, etc.: much greater increment of superstition than most people think.

I suspect Karl Popper was on the right track though: If it's not falsifiable it's not useful. Now, how do we apply this to the 'spiritual?' Paul says: 'If it were impossible to know, then it were better not to believe.' And what does the rest of his life say about what *he* believed? Nice to hear from you again, Carol.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 07:53:05 (GMT)
From: Mrs. Whatsit
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Wonderful guessing game, oh yeah
Message:
Nice to hear from you too, Scott. I forgot to mention that I knew you, too.

I am not stubborn, as Jim thinks, as if I were choosing to disregard evidence. I just have evidence on both sides of the issue and both sides argue well, to me (not in a way that would suit a lawyer!) and one side seems to have reason and intellect and the other has feeling and intuition and belief and all the less concrete evidences. This all goes on inside me: I am both lawyers and the judge and the witnesses include everybody else and myself! It is easier for now, I think to just say...I don't know and I'm not going to try very hard to figure it out. Life is full and goes on and I want to keep up with it in the present. I sure can't keep up with life and all the forum(s) at the same time very easily.

I have been reading from a book called Phantoms in the Brain: Mysteries of the Mind by a neuroscientist: V.S. Ramachandran. A chapter called God and the Limbic System is fascinating. My 'God' experiences may be the result of little electrical storms in the temporal lobes! He talks about Darwin and Wallace and Frick. What I like about the author is the absense of his own conclusions or his willingnes to stay open to further developments and understanding. I am like that too, for the most part.

I like to feel high, to feel love. I had extremely powerful feelings that way in the past with drugs and music and M and Native American ceremonies and sometimes just out of the blue. Those feelings have often driven my decisions. I find now that when I believe in God within me and I live my life trying to put love first as an ideal, I am a happier person and I get more of the feeling I need. I help give other people good feelings too. Maybe I'm just a love addict! I am grateful for all the wonders and gifts of life? They seem like gifts but that implies a giver.(?)

I saw Peter Noone of Herman's Hermits perform tonight! He is an excellent showman. Lots of good feelings! Also performing were The Grass Roots and Mickey Dolan of the Monkees. My son won the tickets on the radio and gave them to me!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 20:43:35 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: Thanks
Message:
For your openness and sincerity. Wish you clarity and happiness.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:01:17 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Mrs. Which
Subject: I really feel for your sister
Message:
I can understand your sister's exasperation, Carol. There's a stubborness to you that stands in the way of real dialogue, I should think. Go ahead. Grapple with the question 'Who is Guru Maharaj Ji?' in your heart. Play that old tape loop from Satguru Has Come where the shot of a father and son smiling at each other under a voice-over from a smooth, if young, BBC-type female voice pronounced with such authority 'but the light never dies! was played in slow motion for maximum effect. Tell yourself that it all somehow means something. Go for it.

And who cares if its real or not, eh?

Or do you care?

It really sounds like you want it all, don't you? You want the full pleasure of being able to see through the cult, yet you want to cling to it too. Look, you're no different than the rest of us. We all, I'd venture to say, suffered some serious disappointment when we realized that this trip was fake and worthless. What's unique about you is that you're so willfull about rejecting what you know for the sake of a few old memories. No, Carol, I can't respect that. In fact, I doubt that you can much either.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:25:33 (GMT)
From: Mrs. Who
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I really feel for your sister
Message:
Hey, she's not exasperated with me! We communicate well and agree to disagree about some things. We still need each other to process the shit thrown in our paths by various family members who were trapped in ignorant and selfish and abusive behaviors and sort out the good stuff from it all, too. Our old friends can do this with us, too, if both parties are willing and able.

And, the only thing I'm willful about is trying to stay true to myself regardless of what pro or con pressures are on me!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 17:40:14 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Mrs. Who
Subject: I really feel for your sister
Message:
Sorry, I misread you on your sister, I guess. But this 'true to yourself' thing can be a big trap, don't you know? In this context, especially.

Look, on the one hand you say a lot of what you say 'may defy logic'. On the other, you admit you may be wrong about many things but 'continue to be open to see things differently'. But what's going to get through to you if you abandon logic? Your 'heart'? The same heart that can't get over that 'touching' film moment between the cult leader and his son, both probably vamping for the camera anyway? That's the kind of stuff you just can't get past?

You strike me as somehow who's trying to establish relationships with people on a funny, unspoken basis: you'll be really nice and polite and, in turn, your 'friends' won't press you on any of your unsupportable beliefs.

That's not a healthy basis for a friendship, in my opinion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:44:34 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I really feel, I think...
Message:
Jim:

You strike me as somehow who's trying to establish relationships with people on a funny, unspoken basis: you'll be really nice and polite and, in turn, your 'friends' won't press you on any of your unsupportable beliefs.

That's not a healthy basis for a friendship, in my opinion.

I know what you're saying, but am not sure I agree. I have a very important friendship that remains alive precisely because this is the way it's organized. It's valuable for completely different reasons, of course, but it's alive because of this. Does that make sense? It's like (forgive me) not sawing off the branch where you happen to be sitting. In other words, there seems to be some real value in restraint, possibly even for it's own sake. To be honest, I don't really know anything better than what my friend has, even though I think what he has is a load of crap. The minute I think otherwise I'll force the relationship to a different branch, and saw this one off. Probably doesn't make sense... but it does.

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 01:42:04 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Scott T.
Subject: Yes, there are those kinds of friendships
Message:
Sure, Scott. I'm just saying that these kinds of compromises are stifling. People should be able to be honest with their friends. They should be able to really challenge ideas they disagree with and know they'll get something more than a smile in return.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 08:29:10 (GMT)
From: Mrs. In-between
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: A fishy analogy
Message:
I'm afraid that is why I want to talk to some of you people here, because many people do not want to discuss things they have already made up thier minds about or they dismiss it or guard themselves from revealing what they really think. My position does not win me any popularity contests and I don't choose be stubborn or make trouble.

Don't you think all I've read here over the past two years should have made me firm in my disbelief about M (it almost made me an atheist, too). Yet I exposed myself to him again I felt a little tug on the line and realized I was still sort of hooked even though I've been able to swim far far away and thought I was free!!!! I believe also that M wants me to be free.

I am sorry if it is frustrating for those of you exs who want all the exs to be sure of themselves and supportive to make their true exit from M, but your efforts to help me have sometimes been sort of like netting me and taking me out of water where I can't breathe. At least if I'm hooked, I have enough freedom swim wherever I choose.

I wish it were as easy as it sounds: to make up your mind that you don't believe something anymore. To try to brainwash myself away from belief is just a little too much the old commandment to 'Leave no room for doubt in your mind' once you 'make up your mind' to give up belief.

Understand what I'm saying?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 16:25:55 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Mrs. In-between
Subject: Okay, now I feel sorry for you
Message:
Fine, then, Carol. Keep your guru. Whatever.

And don't forget how you just 'know' that he's the one. That lovely slow motion moment in Satguru Has Come. Very, very powerful.

Have a good one!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 14:21:00 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Mrs. In-between
Subject: A fishy analogy
Message:
Hi Mrs Morph :),

You'll probably understand that I cannot possibly understand what you are saying, but let's not let that worry us too much. I hear you, and I know what you are saying. I neither understand it nor like it emotionally, that's all. If that seems like Greek, I'm sure Katie or Selene can fill you in.

I think I've read everything you've written - and the replies - since your 'who cares' appearances, and probably before. You are hurt that Gerry may feel disgust at some beliefs you (still) have. I know a number of full-blown premies and yes, I am too disgusted to enjoy a civil on-topic conversation with them. It will too easily end in a blazing row. A long-time friend of my wife (a guy who took her to see her first video events and still believes Rawat to be God-in-a-bod) no longer visits us here, after I quoted Rawat (qua Maharaji) back to him.

'You know nothing.'

Must've been the way I said it.

When a child grows into a woman and leaves her mother may not want her to be free. But moms realise kids need to grow and be free. They know when to let go. There is no such idea of growth and awareness leading to autonomy within the cult. None. A paraphrase (I leave it to the interested reader to find the exact words)...

'This is not liberation I am offering you. I am offering freedom from ego, your mind, through devotion to the Guru.'

M does not want you to be free; never did.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:13:26 (GMT)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: If so too bad..I want to be free......
Message:
free from others judgment that I am right or wrong and free to love whomsoever I damn please.

If God esists: The god within me loves the god within you and the rest is irrevelant.

I don't come here to try to rile people up or upset them or subject myself to abuse. I come to try to expand my own understanding and to share my perspective, for what it's worth, on the off-chance that some other person might see what I'm talking about and help clarify our thoughts for each other.

I am spending too much time on the computer doing this particular thing...so I intend to leave now and if my will is strong enough, I won't come back for months, like I've done before. When I am unresolved about certain issues, sometimes I spend intense times exploring them and then take a break from them and come back later. If anyone wants to continue relating to me by email I will post my address this one time: rbruce@teleport.com I will continue to respond to comments by email only for now. Bye Bye!
I wish you all well.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 21:34:00 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: I want to be free......
Message:
It is worth finding the actual quote. That will take less time than writing long posts (smile).

One thing you will never be free from is, of course, other people's judgements - or your own for that matter. One has to assess whether a person is a fraudster, a waste of time, or potentially violent, perhaps the sort who would force himself on one. There is nothing wrong with making those assessments.

No one is perfect, and to strive for perfection is a sickness of the soul. In Islam, for example, the intricate and symmetrical mosaics are deliberately flawed by an incongruously placed tile. We are self-conscious and therefore transcendent creatures who, in all humility in the face of the Unknowable, must aim merely to excell. (And 'good enough' is OK by me.)

What you can free yourself of is censoriousness or censure. Yes, the world is full of fraud, lies, and violence. But had you or I been born into the lives of people caught up in acting out these horrors, then would we have behaved any better? The saying 'There but for the grace of God go I' encapsulates this.

The trouble with leaving Rawat, is that there is nowhere to stop until the false gestalt has morphed into a picture of a gross and poisonous toad that feeds on premie lives. It is a disgusting and horrible reality.

Take the time to understand how a collision of cultures caused a corrupt reflection of messianic monotheism to hit the jackpot. Understand the way it worked; the need it filled; and the way the world is.

And how it could have been so much better...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 23:55:12 (GMT)
From: Shroomananda
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: Trust your heart, Carol, then make up your mind.NT
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 20:20:43 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Carol
Subject: Sure, go, but be honest about yourself first
Message:
I don't come here to try to rile people up or upset them or subject myself to abuse. I come to try to expand my own understanding and to share my perspective, for what it's worth, on the off-chance that some other person might see what I'm talking about and help clarify our thoughts for each other.

You might not see it, Carol, but it's quite obvious to me that you're just another stubborn new-ager. You want it all. Oh yes, you're soooooo proud of your 'very strong ability' to reason, you just only use it when you want, right? You're much beigger than simple reason, right? Reason for you is optional and who's going to tell you otherwise? You want support and compliments -- you have no problem lapping them up -- but confrontation, having someone actually point out where you might be simply wrong, that's not so much fun.

And why should it be fun when you probably immerse yourself in a new-age environment that's all about thinking whatever you want to think and letting no one say otherwise. Yes, you give yourself full points for being open minded but are you? Are you really? You're open to other people possibly helping you 'clarify your thoughts' but only if they already 'know what [you're] talking about'.

Very cagey, Carol. And you're on the inside.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 06:44:11 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Sure, go, but be honest about yourself first
Message:
The moment we feel anyone's resistance to our communication and we nevertheless insist on changing their ways , we oppose. We fix them more in their old ways. Instead of helping we isolate them more.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:56:14 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: Am I the only one's who's ever been persuaded?
Message:
Sounds pretty pessimistic to me, Stve.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:22:30 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Not pessimistic at all.....
Message:
That's how I feel from my experience of coming on this forum in the beginning. I know others who react in the same way too.

The wind was one day boasting to the sun about how he was the most powerful force in the world. The sun listened quietly and said nothing. ' So you think you're more powerful than me do you?' Again the sun said nothing. ' Right said the wind , we'll have a contest . You see that human down there , the man with the raincoat on? I'll force him to take his coat off within 5 minutes' ! Go ahead ' the sun replied.

So the wind started to gust forcefully and the man tightened his raincoat about him. The wind blew harder and reached gale force. The man crouched down and held his coat even tighter. Finally the five minutes was up. The wind was perplexed and disappointed.

The sun just glowed with amusement and then shone with power.

You can guess the rest. Yes the man immediately removed his raincoat.

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 16:31:39 (GMT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: The problem with that parable...
Message:
is that it presumes that the wind had no power of persuasion. That there was no reasoning involved. Think about it.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 02:14:59 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yes, there are those kinds of friendships
Message:
Agreed. But for some reason the only time these kinds of friendships blossom is on the battlefield. Maybe it's the real reason we fight wars.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:22:25 (GMT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Katie, hope you are getting better...
Message:
God, a broken foot. Ouch. I hope you are on the mend. Take care, okay?

By the way, I hope some of you Brits, who have remained anonymous, will use you anonymity to attend one of those exclusive, people with knowledge only, programs and then report back. It would be very interesting to hear what M will say when gullible aspirants and 'new people' aren't in the room. I expect nothing we haven't heard. Maybe he will say he isn't the incarnation of god, just to make that perfectly clear.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:36:39 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: I'm OK, Joe (ot)
Message:
Thanks, Joe -
It's going to take me at least 4 to 6 weeks to get out of the cast, and maybe an operation (I hope not - getting a MRI next Tuesday to determine extent of damage).

Moral of the story is that 44-year-old aunts shouldn't try to keep up with 7-year-old nephews (snicker!). That's how it happened.

Love,
Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 23:52:41 (GMT)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: I'mok. You'reok.
Message:
Katie:

Sorry to hear about the break. May it heal stronger than before it was broken. (Fat chance, I guess.)

--Scott 'still sitting on a less than optimal tail' T.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:04:20 (GMT)
From: Sir Dave
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Listing of Fall 'Events' with M
Message:
Oh dear. All those people who I've convinced that Maharaji is the master are going to be very disappointed now since the program isn't for them; only for people who've received the T of K. And I had put extra effort into propogation too.

Perhaps I could take them to Rome, though. Why is that the only place where new people can go? Is he trying to compete with the Pope?

No more marathons for you, Katie - for a while.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 18:47:31 (GMT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Listing of Fall 'Events' with M
Message:
I notice that the UK event is in Harrogate in a small hall, Harrogate is a medium sized English town and not very central or accessible. Gone are the old days of hiring massive venues like the Royal Albert Hall and Earls Court exhibition centre. May your pathetic little ego trip continue to falter , dwindle and fade away fatfraud!

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:44:14 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: Long gone are the days of Houston and the like ...
Message:
remember the Astrodome?

'the most important event in the history of the planet' as it was billed.

No doubt he'd now claim that he was talking about the real Millennium (only a few months away folks!)

PS Anyone know why the event was called 'Millennium'?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:34:19 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: So what is the name you use in Journeys and
Message:
what kind of sucker are you now?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:44:40 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: If I told you I was a sucker for your love, Q ...
Message:
... nah, I guess premies don't give that kind of stuff any more.

My name in Journeys? (and who mentioned Journeys all of a sudden?) anyway - the cq stands for my first two initials, and the surname is Giles, hence my (in need of updating) Journey can be found under, you guessed, my real name - Christopher Quartus Giles.

And yours?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 21:03:14 (GMT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: World's longest song title (almost not ot)
Message:
is, I believe

'How can you believe me when I tell you that I love you when you know I've been I liar all my life?'

unless, of course, you know different.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:57:29 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Would you believe Quiver...
Message:
I'm nearing the end of your account, as you can see.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:07:17 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: So what did you learn from Osho?nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 21:11:11 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: and may I call you Prem? nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 12:19:30 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: may you call me Prem?
Message:
You'd be the first person ever to, but if you prefer it to my real name, well, that's a choice for you to think about.

So, what did I learn from Osho?

[Incidentally, he never had that name when I was in the Poona ashram (and I got out just in time before the move to Oregon). Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh's trip was so VERY different to the Maha's. At least back in the late '70s it was (though I begin to see some similarities in both cults today).]

But what did I learn from him? Hoooo, a few spontaneous thoughts:

That true wisdom doesn't come without a price (especially when the 'wise' one starts to attract a following who want to put him/her on a pedestal) ...

That being in your early 20s is a great time for doing anything you want. (Later on in life you have to act your age a bit more - though I still love 'idiot dancing', but rarely in public!) ...

That conventional wisdom isn't all it's cracked up to be ...

That the darkest place is right under the candlestick ...


That's more than enough for today.

PS - do we call you Quiver? Are you a he or a she? (thinks, why should that make any difference?) Are you a 'premie' still?

Do tell.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 14:53:07 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: may you call me Prem? as in Swami Prem Tusheer nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 17:21:46 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: that was my sannyasin name, but I wasn't known as
Message:
'Prem'.

Come on, Q, you can work it out.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 14:54:17 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Well, it's better than Tushier.
Message:
Pardon, Tusheer. I'll work it out.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 15:34:55 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: All snideness aside.
Message:
'Quiver' had to do with 'Love, a quiver in the heart' a translation of your sannyasin name. I thought you might surmise.
It seems your guru encounters were more costly than they were worth. Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh was one of the funniest gurus I ever read. I was hoping you found he actually offered some pieces of the puzzle.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 17:59:15 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Q
Subject: Read Hugh Milne's account and you'll see the other
Message:
...side of the coin.

Milne - a.k.a. 'Shiva' - was Bhagwan's bodyguard from the late 70s to (I think) the mid 80s. His book is called 'Bhagwan - the God that failed'.

And though Bhagwan could be hilarious at times, the underground goings-on in the organisation that HE was ultimately responsible for are far from being a laughing matter.

Like many gurus, he wrecked some very beautiful people's lives.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 19:26:57 (GMT)
From: Q
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: It surprises me that people don't treat gurus
Message:
and nuclear power with more care. Could it be we feel we're indestructible? Methinks, we fools feel hardy. And, in many ways we are.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 19:48:15 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: Long gone are the days of Houston and the like ...
Message:
I believe that Millenium was supposed to mark the beginning of 2000 years of peace on the planet (or maybe 1000 - I can't remember). Anyway, it was tied in with all that apocalyptic/end of the world/end of the Piscean Age/beginning of the Aquarian Age stuff we believed back then. Not to mention the end of KaliYuga and the beginning of the Golden Age (forget what that one is called). I keep wanting to say 'usher in' instead of 'begin', so that must have been part of the propaganda :).
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:11:23 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: usher,usher all fall down?(at his Lotus tootsies?)
Message:
Yup, that rings a distant bell, Katie, now that you mention it.

I wonder if cba (from the thread two below this) knows of that remarkable picture of the Maha where he says:

'I swear on the Bible that I will establish peace in the world' ?


Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:35:14 (GMT)
From: Mrs. who
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: usher,usher all fall down?(at his Lotus tootsies?)
Message:
Speaking of falling down...I got sunstroke after marching to advertise the big show, and then waiting at the airport for his arrival! Missed a good part of the program with chills and fever in my room!
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:46:15 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Mrs. who and all else
Subject: have you seen the LOTU video yet?
Message:
somehow, I think you might have had the more exciting experience.

Gotta go now.

Enjoy your weekend, folks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:15:41 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: OMIGOD! - I just remember what you said about
Message:
... your broken foot, Katie.

Oooooooooooh.

How to say sorry?


Bad timing and forgetfulness on my part.
(that's me all over ...)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:19:22 (GMT)
From: Katie
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: LOL! And...
Message:
...I won't be giving darshan any time soon!

(Really, it was funny, cq! Don't apologize, please)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 20:26:03 (GMT)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: My perverse little mind has just envisaged this...
Message:
and I might yet have to apologise for this one ;)

Can you imagine ...

Maharaji playing the part of the writer in Stephen King's 'Misery' (post-hobbling, that is?)

That'd put him off foot-kissing for an eternity!

('Oh! but I just want to kiss them better, Maharaji!'

'Yeeeeeeeoooowwwww'!)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:49:00 (GMT)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: cq
Subject: LMAO!!!!!!!! Good one. nt
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 17:52:51 (GMT)
From: Yves' being replaced
Email: None
To: Katie
Subject: Too bad he don't come to town
Message:
I'd have gone to make trouble.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 14:15:06 (GMT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Whatz the matter with you face?
Message:
If you are looking for an emoticon, then you can use this search engine at:

http://www.chatlist.com/newcfdocs/getfaces.cfm

Just enter the face and it will give you the emoticon. You can also enter the emoticon and you get the face, though this is not precise.

Check the acronym list, it is huge. No one should be in the dark.

Enjoy it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index