Ex-Premie Forum 6 Archive
From: Jul 14, 2001 To: Jul 28, 2001 Page: 2 of: 5


Jim -:- I've already contacted my proposed panel nominee -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:45:51 (EDT)
__ Deborah -:- Re: A couple of questions, please -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:37:44 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- No, that's all too complicated [nt] -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:26:30 (EDT)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Sorry, that wasn't NT [nt] -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 20:03:56 (EDT)
__ salam -:- exeuse please -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:51:34 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- A simple plan -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 11:09:42 (EDT)
__ __ __ such -:- heard they called Johnny Cochrane -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 14:52:53 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ janet -:- i could go see bill mahr here at cbs -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 06:14:29 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- What's your point, Janet? -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 15:47:05 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ such -:- Janet,yeah, go fer it!!! [nt] -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:43:23 (EDT)
__ __ __ salam -:- but but -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 12:12:21 (EDT)
__ such -:- play Truth or Consequences! [nt] -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:08:05 (EDT)
__ Abi -:- great idea nt -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 01:17:22 (EDT)
__ Bjørn E -:- Re: your panel nominee -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:48:28 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- Same answer I posted on LG -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 22:01:08 (EDT)

Joe -:- Recall this? 'The mind will be 'out.' -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:08:35 (EDT)
__ Paulina -:- Oh Joe,you poor guy.No wonder you're pissed -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:43:39 (EDT)
__ __ Zelda -:- Spkers Grace!! oh help- sprd kybd w/ cffy NT [nt] -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 17:17:29 (EDT)
__ such -:- like,dis is all lila... -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:03:09 (EDT)
__ Joy -:- Not a leaf falls -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 03:13:33 (EDT)
__ __ PatC b) -:- Not a leaf falls till autumn -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:39:00 (EDT)
__ Abi -:- Re: Recall this? 'The mind will be 'out.' -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 01:13:37 (EDT)
__ Cynthia -:- Recall this? 'The mind will be 'out.' -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:18:29 (EDT)
__ Dermot -:- Yup, remeber it well (nt) -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:40:44 (EDT)

JHB -:- Gems from the EPO site -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 18:37:17 (EDT)
__ Deborah -:- Re: Any more Gems? -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:42:41 (EDT)
__ Joe -:- Does Maharaji have a fetish for BATHROOMS??? -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:12:58 (EDT)
__ __ janet -:- Re: Does Maharaji have a fetish for BATHROOMS??? -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:35:55 (EDT)
__ such -:- 4 sale? lookin' 4 a dilapidated beach cottage -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:01:23 (EDT)
__ Deborah -:- Good Show!! [nt] -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:31:11 (EDT)

Joe -:- What happened? -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:44:01 (EDT)
__ AJW -:- Maybe Pia's too ill to work on it. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:18:56 (EDT)
__ __ Joe -:- Shut Up Anth, you are making me feel guilty -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 12:45:12 (EDT)
__ __ __ AJW -:- Yes Joe. -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:45:16 (EDT)
__ __ wolfie -:- Re: Maybe Pia's too ill to work on it. -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:40:30 (EDT)
__ __ such -:- ...or well enough to exit [nt] -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:04:14 (EDT)

Way -:- New anti-Sai Baba site -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 16:14:20 (EDT)
__ Deborah -:- Re: New anti-Sai Baba site -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:08:12 (EDT)

Vice Versa -:- Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 13:32:21 (EDT)
__ janet -:- Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 08:11:41 (EDT)
__ __ Jim -:- Dumb question, Janet -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:58:40 (EDT)
__ Richard -:- Agnew Challenge for Richard Nixon -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:25:38 (EDT)
__ AJW -:- A Challenge for Vice-Versa. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:01:23 (EDT)
__ Ben Lurking -:- Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 18:59:16 (EDT)
__ __ Deborah -:- Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:31:59 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- A Challenge for Ben Lurking. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:02:53 (EDT)
__ __ __ Ben Lurking -:- Re: A Challenge for Ben Lurking. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:52:18 (EDT)
__ Joe -:- Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:21:47 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- A Challenge for Joe. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:04:17 (EDT)
__ __ __ Joe -:- I was thinking of.... -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:06:55 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- LOL (nt) -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:55:32 (EDT)
__ Sherlock Holmes -:- David Whitla thinks we're all stupid -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 15:02:25 (EDT)
__ __ Dr Watson -:- No so Holmes (if I may be so bold) -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 21:32:22 (EDT)
__ __ __ Sherlock Holmes -:- It's elementary, my dear Watson. -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 14:06:20 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Ben Lurking -:- Re: It's elementary, my dear Watson. -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:35:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- Re: It's elementary, my dear Watson. -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:43:36 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Ben Lurking -:- Re: It's elementary, my dear Watson. -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 21:12:16 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Francesca :C) -:- Don't agree on showing IPs -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 15:07:30 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC b) -:- You let the pat out of the bag -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:54:41 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- Re: Don't agree on showing IPs -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:51:53 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Selene -:- although I share the same feelings -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 14:35:15 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- Re: although I share the same feelings -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 17:48:12 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Selene -:- it's up to dave I guess -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 17:54:58 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca :C) -:- Posters having passwords ... -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 18:34:11 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- Re: Posters having passwords ... -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:06:30 (EDT)
__ __ __ Francesca :C) -:- THANKS for doing THIS -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:41:39 (EDT)
__ __ Selene -:- no one cares really -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:39:42 (EDT)
__ la-ex -:- Let's do it for EPO and M/EV, OK? nt -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:34:20 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- A Challenge for La-ex. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:07:20 (EDT)
__ Cynthia -:- What's Your Name??? -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:21:28 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- A Challenge for Cynthia. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:06:33 (EDT)
__ __ __ Cynthia -:- Oh Anth..... -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:32:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- Bravo. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:36:31 (EDT)
__ __ __ Dermot -:- Re: A Challenge for AJW -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:27:22 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- Oh shit. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:34:31 (EDT)
__ Steve -:- WanKer Tanker -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:04:44 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- A challenge for Steve. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:19:36 (EDT)
__ __ __ Steve -:- You're an Angel Anth -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 02:40:27 (EDT)
__ David -:- Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 13:53:59 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- My Challenge to Dave. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:25:37 (EDT)
__ __ __ Dave -:- I'll run with this -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:55:35 (EDT)
__ __ Gregg -:- Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:13:40 (EDT)
__ Dances with Trolls -:- You're an anonymous troll -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 13:51:07 (EDT)
__ __ Dances with Names -:- My Challenge to Anth -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 03:14:53 (EDT)
__ __ Anon. -:- My Challenge to Dances with Trolls. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:27:06 (EDT)
__ __ Vice Versa -:- Re: You're an anonymous troll -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:11:14 (EDT)
__ __ __ JHB -:- I'll run with this -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:07:20 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- My Challenge to JHB -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:28:29 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ JHB -:- Re: My Challenge to JHB -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 03:06:17 (EDT)

salam -:- EPO Web Master -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:32:07 (EDT)
__ EPO Webmaster -:- Re: EPO Web Master -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:10:11 (EDT)
__ __ Salam -:- Re: EPO Web Master -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:43:44 (EDT)
__ Cynthia ;D -:- While You're at it Salam... -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:32:40 (EDT)
__ __ JohnT -:- While You're at it Salam... -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:53:41 (EDT)
__ __ __ salam -:- John & Cynth -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:46:24 (EDT)
__ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- ExPremies websites links updated -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 03:38:40 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Site for ExPremies -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:24:36 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Jean-Michel -:- Done ! -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:38:28 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Wow ! -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 06:57:46 (EDT)

magiclara -:- video of m when he was lord of the universe -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 09:49:56 (EDT)
__ Richard (original) -:- Re: video of m when he was lord of the universe -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:22:24 (EDT)
__ __ magiclara -:- Re: video of m when he was lord of the universe -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:25:48 (EDT)

AJW -:- Richard, you're in a muddle. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 07:14:35 (EDT)
__ Richard II -:- Re: Richard, you're in a muddle. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:21:34 (EDT)
__ __ AJW -:- Maybe we can clear this one up quickly Rich'. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:22:05 (EDT)
__ __ __ Richard II -:- OK I'll bite -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:39:26 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ AJW -:- I think I've got a bite -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:10:34 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Richard II -:- Re: I think I've got a bite -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:22:43 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- Re: I think I've got a bite -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 08:58:28 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard II -:- Re: I think I've got a bite -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:00:01 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ AJW -:- What references Rich? -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:53:48 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Steve -:- I know for sure...... -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 02:45:26 (EDT)
__ __ Dermot -:- Richard II...Logic -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:06:52 (EDT)
__ __ __ Richard II -:- Re: Richard II...Logic -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:37:37 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ JohnT -:- WORST LOGIC EVER!!! -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:25:23 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Richard II -:- Re: WORST LOGIC EVER!!! -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 12:46:27 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- the impossible dream -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:06:11 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Richard II -:- Re: the impossible dream -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:35:40 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ JohnT -:- Check the link above then [nt] -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:57:38 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Richard (original) -:- Nice going JohnT -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 11:31:20 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ PatC b) -:- Nice going JohnT- BEST OF FORUM -:- Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:04:40 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ This should be -:- *******BEST OF FORUM************ -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 00:36:02 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Bin Liner -:- Is my longing to know satisfied -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:18:45 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Richard II -:- Re: Is my longing to know satisfied -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:40:19 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Dermot -:- R-II, They're Rawats problems not bins' (nt) -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 21:49:06 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ Dermot -:- 'Is my longing to know satisfied ' -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:00:19 (EDT)
__ __ __ __ __ Dermot -:- PS Richard II -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:13:11 (EDT)
__ la-ex -:- Iis this a private fight,or can anyone join in? -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:01:00 (EDT)
__ __ Richard II -:- Re: can anyone join in? -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:20:47 (EDT)
__ __ la-ex -:- Rich,care to answer the aboove question? nt -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:51:05 (EDT)
__ Richard -:- Excuse me? Oh, you mean Richard II -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:49:53 (EDT)
__ __ Deborah -:- Re: Excuse me? Oh, you mean Richard II -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:23:04 (EDT)
__ __ __ Francesca :C) -:- The premies I know ... -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 18:05:48 (EDT)
__ __ Francesca :C) -:- How about Postie (Richard) -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:21:36 (EDT)
__ don puerco -:- Re: Richard, you're in a muddle. -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 07:29:44 (EDT)
__ __ wolfie -:- on acid I was god himself -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:57:05 (EDT)
__ __ __ don puerco -:- Re: on acid I was god himself -:- Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 11:47:06 (EDT)

AJW -:- Way, can you email me please? -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 06:52:00 (EDT)
__ Way -:- done [nt] -:- Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:09:22 (EDT)


Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:45:51 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: All
Subject: I've already contacted my proposed panel nominee
Message:
I've emailed the guy who I'd like to propose as the ex-nominated panel member. I explained to him, of course, that there's a good chance this will come to nothing as, so far at least, no premie's agreed to participate in any such 'tribunal'. Nonetheless, if my guy says yes I'll tell you all about him and see if there's some consensus amongst those who like the idea of this adventure that he'd be a suitable candidate. At that point, the next move will be the premies. With any luck, they won't be too scared to play.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:37:44 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: A couple of questions, please
Message:
Jim, what kind of ground rules will this debate require?

Also, can we have a panel of (non-premish) observers comment on this debate. ie. teachers, students, lawyers, doctors, cult specialists, reporters, etc.

This might give us a rounded perspective and help the representative and third-party judge make their decisions.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:26:30 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: No, that's all too complicated [nt]
Message:
Deb,

My plan's much simpler than that. We nominate X, the premies nominate Y, X and Y then choose Z (or, if you're American, Z). X,Y and Z then decide how they want to investigate the issue. It's all up to them. We have lots of archival stuff if they're interested, which I'm sure they would be. The premies might have their own matierals to provide. But, as I said, the panel would control their process. And yes, part of the deal is that, afterwards at least, they let us in on their reasons.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 20:03:56 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Sorry, that wasn't NT [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:51:34 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: exeuse please
Message:
u THE JIM or jst nothr jim?

Where do you plan to have this historical event?
.
.
[few other questions]
.
.

Do you have a name for this event?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 11:09:42 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: A simple plan
Message:
Salam,

If my guy says 'yes' and you all think he'll do then he's the ex-nominated panel member. It's for the premies next to come up with their own guy. Could be anyone so long as he's not a premie, never has been (and isn't an 'aspirant' of all things either!). So the premies that have the guts to participate talk among themselves and nominate someone. At that point, our guy and their guy (or gal, of course) talk with each other and choose a third panel member. How? Who knows? That's their problem.

Once all three panel members are chosen, like I say, they control their own process. Do they want to ask questions of the respective sides? Do they ask us to point out primary materials, such as Maharaji's satsangs and the like? Do they simply want to research the issues themselves? All up to them. All we ask is that they somehow document the process so we can see what they've done when it's all over.

Finally, the issue their answer to the question 'Is Maharaji a cult leader?'. Then we all go for cyber milk and cookies.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 14:52:53 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: heard they called Johnny Cochrane
Message:
i.e. if the glove don't fit, den ya must acquit. [like, dey climbing above Jacob's ladder.]

I got some game-show nominees -- right now am channeling Joseph Campbell, Clarence Darrow, Socrates, and Isaac Newton.

Oprah might be interested! or maybe Politically Incorrect.

Peace and lentils,

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 06:14:29 (EDT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: such
Subject: i could go see bill mahr here at cbs
Message:
i know where he tapes the show. i have been n the studio for tapings. he might just like the idea. if so, there are 4 guests invited to debate the question. maybe mahr could pick the 4th after x and Y pick z>
should i pursue it? i'm here in the city. ican try.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 15:47:05 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: What's your point, Janet?
Message:
Janet,

What are you saying? That you DON'T think Beyerstein would be good? Or do you want to maybe start something different? Let's get Bill Maher to do a tv show? Why are you saying that?

Look, I've got a very workeable plan here. Not some dream but a real, doable proposal. And the way things are going, in another day or so I'm going to say that there IS a concensus that Beyerstein will do. So unless you've got some other nominee -- a real nominee -- you're not helping things.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 12:43:23 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Janet,yeah, go fer it!!! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 12:12:21 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: but but
Message:
How do we know who is who? I mean the nominees could be anyone, how do we check their integrety?

Also where is the process taking place. I don't want to be jumping back and forth between forums to read whathisname said in reply to someone else. I also like to watch, drink pepsi and eat popcorns. If they debate in some back allyway there want be any fun. I think this calls for another forum. [oh no].

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:08:05 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: play Truth or Consequences! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 01:17:22 (EDT)
From: Abi
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: great idea nt
Message:
x
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:48:28 (EDT)
From: Bjørn E
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: your panel nominee
Message:
Even if there is a completely different system in US about courts than in Norway, isnt it a require that the opposing party agrees to accept the nominee to be a fair arbitrer?

BTW you did not reply to my suggestion, neither here at LG or at F6?

Too chicken to take a challenge? (There will be more challenges to come).

BTW, if a person feels joy and enjoys Life, what difference does it make if some person(s) consider a group to be a cult.

Last night my wife watched a movie; 'Ayn Rands passion' on TV, I came home late, just to watch the ending part.
The end was a scene was when Ayn Rands stood on a podium and her admireres sat in a hall and they were invited to ask questions. One young girl asked; Are you the leader of a cult?' The camera switched to the audience and you could sense that the admirers were tense, like she had hit the nail on the head. Ayn Rands replied something like this; 'I am teaching individualism. Individuals cannot be a cult' The audience applauded and you could easily see the irony.

Next question came from a young man, (my wife told he is the former lover of Rands who had dumped him) Ryen replied (abreviated) 'Love brings forth the best in a human being. It is a reward'. (My wife at this poit said 'she really sucks, she is totally selfish and have no idea about love', (as I tried to listen to both, I did not get the exact words)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 22:01:08 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Bjørn E
Subject: Same answer I posted on LG
Message:
Even if there is a completely different system in US about courts than in Norway, isnt it a require that the opposing party agrees to accept the nominee to be a fair arbitrer?

No, that's not the way it works. Both sides get to pick whoever they like. It's to be assumed, unfortunately, that these two nominees, much as they commit to judging the issues impartially, will still have some bias for their respective nominating parties. The mechanism that saves this exercise from being a futile sham is in the agreement of those two as to the third abitrer.

BTW you did not reply to my suggestion, neither here at LG or at F6?

Too chicken to take a challenge? (There will be more challenges to come).

Your 'challenge' doesn't interest me. It's completely beside the point. If you were a little sharper you'd see that.

BTW, if a person feels joy and enjoys Life, what difference does it make if some person(s) consider a group to be a cult.

Maybe none but let's cross that bridge when we come to it, shall we? This proposed process is just a means of trying to resolve some of the protracted disputes premies and exes have about the fair meaning of m's words and actions as seen through the disinterested eyes of informed outsiders.

Last night my wife watched a movie; 'Ayn Rands passion' on TV, I came home late, just to watch the ending part.
The end was a scene was when Ayn Rands stood on a podium and her admireres sat in a hall and they were invited to ask questions. One young girl asked; Are you the leader of a cult?' The camera switched to the audience and you could sense that the admirers were tense, like she had hit the nail on the head. Ayn Rands replied something like this; 'I am teaching individualism. Individuals cannot be a cult' The audience applauded and you could easily see the irony.

Next question came from a young man, (my wife told he is the former lover of Rands who had dumped him) Ryen replied (abreviated) 'Love brings forth the best in a human being. It is a reward'. (My wife at this poit said 'she really sucks, she is totally selfish and have no idea about love', (as I tried to listen to both, I did not get the exact words)

So?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:08:35 (EDT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Recall this? 'The mind will be 'out.'
Message:
Does anyone remember Maharaji saying that anyone who remained a premie for 1978, the mind would be 'OUT?' Remember that?

What happened to all us ex-premies who are so 'into' their minds?

Also, Maharaji said, a number of times in the 70s that he had 'never lost a premie.' Does that mean that us ex-premies are just part of his divine plan, and we are still 'with' him, just playing our roles? The mind boggles.

And if that's true, why all the upset on the part of Maharji, EV, Pia Grunbaum and Charles Glasser, Jr, the attorney at Willkie, Farr and Gallagher? Don't they know not a leaf falls without Maharaji doing it? Or was Maharaji wrong about that, too?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:43:39 (EDT)
From: Paulina
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Oh Joe,you poor guy.No wonder you're pissed
Message:
Joe:

Why yes, of course I remember our Lord and Master telling us in no uncertain terms that if we just hung on for one more year that the evil mind would be gone.

As a matter of fact he promised it.

Didn't he deliver for you, Joe?

My mind was completely taken away exactly when he promised, and so was everyone elses in the ashram where I lived.
Are you saying that you missed out?

I think you should write our Lord right now and tell him that you are still experiencing 'mind', and tell him to remove yours right away.

You know our Lord is always right.
And he is always prompt with this promises, because he sets his watch according to the atomic clock, and also makes sure that all of his premies know how to work the fire extinguishers in the halls where they practtice self hypnosis every week.

And the nerve of the exes to say that our Speaker doesn't take care of us!

Sometimes those exes make me so mad I feel like telling my dear Speaker to never allow them to kiss his feet again!

But because our Speaker is the infinite sea of infinite compassion,by his grace he even allows people like that to still kiss his feet, with the right 'gift' to him...
Isn't it all just by 'speakers grace' that we can even begin to have the understanding of the realization that the speaker does everything in this world?
We don't do anything.

So Joe, please, in your heart beg the speaker to take you out of 'mind', and by his grace, he will remove your mind.

Jai Satchitanand, Joe!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 17:17:29 (EDT)
From: Zelda
Email: None
To: Paulina
Subject: Spkers Grace!! oh help- sprd kybd w/ cffy NT [nt]
Message:
NT
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:03:09 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: like,dis is all lila...
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 03:13:33 (EDT)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Not a leaf falls
Message:
Hi Joe. Yea, I remember all that nonsense. Total fear-mongering. He loved to say stuff like that, with huge inferences and implications, which led you to draw the supposedly obvious conclusions (i.e. that he was all-powerful, god-in-a-bod, etc.)

He did make the comment about not a leaf falls without his doing it, at some point, didn't he? That's even more weird. Goes to show how deluded he is/was himself and that he really believes he's God and the Superior Power In Person. I wonder how he justifies that to himself after he's said it? Or perhaps he's too blitzed on cognac to think about it much and maybe that's where these types of statements come from, drunken ramblings. Sad, sad, sad.

All's I can say is that this is one premie who was still suckered in 1978 but that he's lost for good and the only place my mind is, is OUT of his clutches, thank goodness.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:39:00 (EDT)
From: PatC b)
Email: pdconlon@hotmail.com
To: Joy
Subject: Not a leaf falls till autumn
Message:
Hi Joy, hope you are well and happy.

Did you read what his holeyness said last week in Mainz: ''You can't come home without the Master.''

He is is still fear mongering after all these years. Of course he hates his own mind and thinks everyone is as insane as he is. No wonder he has to drink himself to sleep.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 01:13:37 (EDT)
From: Abi
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Recall this? 'The mind will be 'out.'
Message:
Do you think he was trying to mess with our minds? That's really freaky.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:18:29 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Recall this? 'The mind will be 'out.'
Message:
Hi Joe,

I think Maharaji was wrong about everything. He's a tought nut to crack.

Love,
Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:40:44 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Yup, remeber it well (nt)
Message:
xx
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 18:37:17 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: brauns@apollo.lv
To: All
Subject: Gems from the EPO site
Message:
The wealth of information on EPO is daunting for both newcomers and old-timers, so a reminder of the stuff accumulated (in small doses) can't do any harm (except to Maharaji's 'work!').

Here are the plans to the ground floor of the new residence, which required the perfectly good, previous house to be demolished.

John.
[ The new Malibu residence ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:42:41 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Re: Any more Gems?
Message:
How many mansions does the spoiled SatGuru own, exactly?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:12:58 (EDT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Does Maharaji have a fetish for BATHROOMS???
Message:
Every single room seems to have a bathroom attached. It's like Maharaji is freaked that he might have to piss and he would wet his pants if a john isn't available within 10 feet.

Also, please note that those plans, elaborate as they are, are only for ONE of the floors of the theme park which is Maharaji's 'residence.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:35:55 (EDT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Does Maharaji have a fetish for BATHROOMS???
Message:
i bet you the two bedrooms off mom's side are for premlata and daya, the two off dad's side are for hans and amar. each person gets their own fireplace, their own bathroom, their own room closet, their own storage closet across the hall, and the boys have an exercise room between them.
its a luxury, yeah, but actually its pretty basic and modest for the neighborhood. each kid has their own room, bath, fireplace, closet and storage. mom and dad get their own bathrooms. my parents did that when they could afford to build their own house. they put in 5. one for each of them, one for the guest bedrooms, one by the exercise room and a half in the hall for dropin guests not sleeping over.
the more bathrooms, the less waiting. remember-he doesnt live alone. if everyone gets their own, no fights, no unbroken privacy, no getting in each other's way. the one by the pool is just common sense. you dont pee in the pool and you don't drip down the hall to go to the bedroom ones.

all in all, he can HAVE it. that's not my idea of a dream house by a long shot. who would want to live at the top of a mound on the middle of a barren, fire scarred, scrubby, dusty canyon? Or for that matter, like my father chose, in the middle of a drained swamp? I'd much prefer a green and verdant mature landscape with ancient trees, forest, color, water, rich earth and deep mystery. And furry animals and calling birds.

if that's his idea of a dream house, pardon me, but yuck.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:01:23 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: 4 sale? lookin' 4 a dilapidated beach cottage
Message:
hohoho
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:31:11 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Good Show!! [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:44:01 (EDT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: All
Subject: What happened?
Message:
Pia's website hasn't been 'updated' in almost a month, which is surprising, given that she claims all those pithy and fact-filled 'responses' have been pouring in, which will demostrate that the information posted here is 'falsse.' Same thing with Charles.

Was that just a little premie-service project that, like everything else in the Maharaji cult, gets everyone hyper-ventilated and then dies, and everyone pretends it never happened?

EV hasn't been updated in almost 3 months, and Maharaji's site hasn't been updated in about a year, at least. What's the problem? Nothing to say?

In the meantime, Enjoyinglife (which is better described as the 'Ivette and Janice Wilson Show') stumbles along, such as it is, but isn't it funny that in the years it has been on the net, they never got around to putting that 'open discussion' section on that site, which was promised when it got started. I noticed that they have even removed the (inoperable) menu item for that failed endeavor. We wouldn't want to let premies actually talk to each other, and, horror, allow ex-premies to challenege anything. Oh, no, that would be just so confusing.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:18:56 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Maybe Pia's too ill to work on it.
Message:
Hi Joe,

I think Pia is quite ill, and maybe she's had to stop working on her site. I've sent her a few emails, unrelated to IAS, but not heard anything from her.

I hope she is OK, she is an old and dear friend.

I personally will be very happy if she gets well enough to update her site.

Sincerely,

Anth

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 12:45:12 (EDT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Shut Up Anth, you are making me feel guilty
Message:
Well, I don't know Pia, but I do wish her the best of health.

But my implication was, that there isn't any way she or anyone else in her cohort working on that website can clarify, or prove the supposed 'false' statements of people like Donner, Dettmers and others who actually saw Maharaji do what he did, and the rest of us who actually heard what he said.

Since the 'contributions' to the site just say the same crap over and over: that premies don't 'care' that their 'Master' is a lying, alcoholic, philanderer, why bother to post more of them?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:45:16 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Yes Joe.
Message:
It's a complete joke to put a website to refute allegations, and then not bother to say which allegations you are talking about.

It makes her look stupid. That's the blind spot all premies have.

You shouldn't feel guilty Joe. You're a good, kind, loving human being. We need more like you. Maybe you should contribute to a sperm bank.

Anth, always full of good advice, though rarely takes it himself.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:40:30 (EDT)
From: wolfie
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: Maybe Pia's too ill to work on it.
Message:
Hi,

yeah! there are much more important things than fighting a battel. AJW, your heartfelt satement touched me.
When things come down to the fundamentals, then we can see what we have understood and whether we have achieved something like compassion or not.

I hope Pia finds some shelter in her situation....we've gone the same way for a while, even though I only know her website.

....ciao ...wolfie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:04:14 (EDT)
From: such
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: ...or well enough to exit [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 16:14:20 (EDT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: All
Subject: New anti-Sai Baba site
Message:
New anti-Sai Baba website.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:08:12 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Way
Subject: Re: New anti-Sai Baba site
Message:
HighWay, this is a cool link. I like the way its easy to navigate format. I took a quick peek and had to laugh when I read this part:

Origins: Born on November 23, 1926, to Pedda Venkama Raju
and Easwaramma. He is named Sathyanarayana Raju.

The early years:

'Materialises' candies and pencils for schoolmates.

At 14, declares himself reincarnation of Sai Baba of Shirdi, the town in Maharashtra whose saintly figure died in 1918.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 13:32:21 (EDT)
From: Vice Versa
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
It's abundantly obvious, to me at least, that there's really no talking to ex-premies. Why? Because, as a hate club, you've lost the ability to reason properly about premies and M. Trust me, if you're ever lucky enough to escape, you won't need me or anyone else telling you that. The point will be so damn clear you'll be scratching your heads wondering how in the world you got sucked in so bad. Until then, though, discourse is impossible. You make no sense, you barely try to make sense. Really, when it comes right down to it, you might as well be drooling on your keyboards. Yes, it's that bad.

So, here's my challenge. How about putting together a three-person panel of sorts to arbitrate the single issue: is ex-premie.org a hate club

It could work like this. Consulting with one another, the ex's would seek one willing and acceptable candidate for the panel. I'm thinking someone like a university prof, theologian, whatever. Could be anyone. Only stipulation is that he or she must not be either a premie, past of present. The whole point of the exercise is to get some arm's length assessment of ex-premie.org

Premies would then do the same thing. You could pick anyone you want, providing, again, that they've never been affiliated with this group. Then, once these two panel members have been selected, they will, in turn, select the third member.

When that's done the next stage would be up to the panel itself. They could, if they like, request submissions from both sides. Evidence and arguments. They might then provide some means of reply and rebuttal, if they so choose. Alternatively, the panel might decide to do their own fact-finding based on whatever current and archival materials exist and are accessible via the various websites, etc. All up to the panel. (I figure if we're going to somehow rope three people into this curious 'public service' they might as well have the fun of determining some part of their own process at least.)

Ultimately, I'd hope, we get a decision: is ex-premie.org a hate club or not?

Now, what is the benefit of this process? Well,, premies and exes have argued for years now about the fair meaning of various events and the appropriate standards of proof for this or that. Premies, like me at least, think you're all idiots or liars and ex-premies, for your part, call us drones, idiots, blah-blah-blah's whose judgement is worthless. Fine. Let's turn to the outside world and see what they say.

It's time for you jokers to put your money where your mouth is. you should be chomping at the bit to prove the point. This is your chance to prove that, as you've always maintained, we premies are unreasonable and unclear on the issues, unlike yourselves of course.

If you don't take up this challenge, however, I think the reason's painfully obvious. That is, that you don't reallly have any faith in the stupid, illogical bullshit you utter here or on F6 daily. There is no other acceptable reason and you know it.

So what say you guys? Talk about it amongst yourselves and let's get the ball rolling.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 08:11:41 (EDT)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
quite a satire of Jim's challenge, and i see how well it points up what you see as the flaws in it--

but the real state of things is that there is hate displayed from both camps, a truth which reflects badly on both the individuals expressing it and the collectives from which they come. such displays reduce valid human experiences to crude cartoon exaggerations, and negate the value of the lives in both camps.

i can understand why ex's might have a reason to hate.
i can't see why premies would, if knowledge and maharaji hold all that they are said to.

the fact is that the hate is being displayed on both sides, by all these people who have had the knowledge revealed to them, and all of them have given years of their life to it, but still they are quite capable of expressing hate. this tells me that something in the advertising about knowledge is false. if it were what it is billed to be, hate would fade away and we would not be hearing such things--from either side.

question:
what does hate add to the mix? does it help?
if two people are watching a sunset, and one says it looks red to hi, and the next one says he sees orange, doe the first guy hate him and punch his lights out for not seeing it his way? will punching him put change how he sees the sunset? will it convince him he was wrong? will it persuade him to see it differently?
what would you think of the one who had to punch? what goes on inside someone who hates anyone who doesnt see what he sees? what kind of a mind is that? what sort of person would that be? do you think that person is a happy individual? how do happy individuals act? do they go around punching people's lights out?

premies claim to be happy, staying with maharaji. but they speak in hateful ways.

ex's claim to be happy without being with maharaji. but they speak with hate too.

what's going on, here?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:58:40 (EDT)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Dumb question, Janet
Message:
ex's claim to be happy without being with maharaji. but they speak with hate too.

Exes don't claim to be 'happy' happy. At least I don't. Do you? I sure don't know of any exes who claim that their in some state of special 'ex-ness' such that they can't experience the full array of human emotions, hate among them.

Premies, on the other hand, DO face a philosophical quandry regarding hatred or any other emotion outside the narrow range of 'clarity-appreciation-gratitude'. Ha ha ha! That's their problem.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:25:38 (EDT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: Agnew Challenge for Richard Nixon
Message:
The rest is history.

Richard the First (not ever Richard II or Tricky Dick)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:01:23 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: A Challenge for Vice-Versa.
Message:
Try holding your breath for twenty minutes.

Anth the lungfish.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 18:59:16 (EDT)
From: Ben Lurking
Email: benlurken@aol.com
To: Vice Versa
Subject: Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
How will you 'prove' a belief system or ' inner experience', what scientific standard or method of measurement will you recommend? Premies have a belief system based on an inner experience and a set of teachings from the speaker - what validates your experience? what proves it? can you describe your experience using no quotes from either m or any other religous book or document and no analogies?
Once you describe it can you prove that it is not a belief system but measurable fact?
Ben
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:31:59 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Ben Lurking
Subject: Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
It's not about proving a subjective experience. Premies think they feel what they feel because it's a gift from Maha. Every ex has been a premie, we know what their experience is and what is not.

The debate is an opportunity to look at the facts. The facts are going evaluated, not the subjectivity.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:02:53 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Ben Lurking
Subject: A Challenge for Ben Lurking.
Message:
Try and get someone to pay for a holiday in Hawaii for you.

Anth the fishful winker

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:52:18 (EDT)
From: Ben Lurking
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: A Challenge for Ben Lurking.
Message:
Anth,
I ber I could get a paid trip to Hawii faster than a premie could nail Jell-o to a wall.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:21:47 (EDT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
Hi Vice, Passing Through, and all your other personas,

I found what you said really sarcastic and hateful. Is that because you belong to a HATE GROUP?

The idea of a panel isn't bad, though. If you set it up, I'd be happy to participate.

I don't think anybody has called premies idiots, but what they say, sometimes, really is idiotic and that probably has been said. The reason that has resonance, is that many of us said equally idiotic things when we were card-carrying, premie cult members.

By the way, your post was real negative, man. Where did you get tall that negativity?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:04:17 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: A Challenge for Joe.
Message:
Write a poem a day for the next month.

You can have a day off on Sunday if you do a sketch instead.

Anth, hoping all is well in Rainbow land.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:06:55 (EDT)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: I was thinking of....
Message:
Spending a day staring at a sign that reads: BREATHE. I could supplement that with a continuous tape recording of someone also reminding me to breathe.

Then, perhaps I could spend my entire vacation trying very hard to understand participation.

Vacation next year would be devoted to understanding the appropriate way to tell people about the master and knowledge.

Workshops in all of the above are probably available by invitation through Elan Vital, at a package price of $10,000.

The next step would be to make donations to Maharaji, to Elan Vital, attend 'events' and EV seminars and still be able to afford to wear shoes on a regular basis.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:55:32 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: LOL (nt)
Message:
eh har ha ha har
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 15:02:25 (EDT)
From: Sherlock Holmes
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: David Whitla thinks we're all stupid
Message:
Stupid people think everyone's stupid. David Whitla is spamming under multiple aliases. He has posted as:

Vice Versa
Browser Type: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)

snake
Browser Type: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)

Mala
Browser Type: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)

Passing Through
Browser Type: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)

David Whitla
Browser Type: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Mac_PowerPC)

Exactly one regular poster uses that browser - David Whitla aka Marolyn Kyntyre aka Selena Crumpet aka MK aka cerise. Get a life, David. You are bored with M and K and are now trying to bore us with your mental illness. Please see a psychiatrist soon.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 21:32:22 (EDT)
From: Dr Watson
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Sherlock Holmes
Subject: No so Holmes (if I may be so bold)
Message:
Not so Holmes. Mala and snake (same person) is in Australia while Vice Versa is in Canada. I haven't checked out Passing Through or David Witla yet.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 14:06:20 (EDT)
From: Sherlock Holmes
Email: None
To: Dr Watson
Subject: It's elementary, my dear Watson.
Message:
David Whitla is mala and snake. I also agree with Francesca that we need some recourse against the anonymous premie trolls. Hotboards allows for IPs to be shown to all. Perhaps just publishing IPs and letting others do the detective work would intimidate the trolls.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:35:24 (EDT)
From: Ben Lurking
Email: None
To: Sherlock Holmes
Subject: Re: It's elementary, my dear Watson.
Message:
Browser types and ips are easy to mask
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:43:36 (EDT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Ben Lurking
Subject: Re: It's elementary, my dear Watson.
Message:
People aren't getting it. Thanks for the imput.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 21:12:16 (EDT)
From: Ben Lurking
Email: prempalsinghrawat@notagoodidea.com
To: Selene
Subject: Re: It's elementary, my dear Watson.
Message:
And no one would understand us?
:=) Ben 'The original Lurker'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 15:07:30 (EDT)
From: Francesca :C)
Email: None
To: Sherlock Holmes
Subject: Don't agree on showing IPs
Message:
Dear Pat,

All doors swing both ways. If showing IPs would allow us to 'vigilante' the trolls, showing IPs would allow the trolls to harrass others using that information. Just opens up a big can of worms.

I know someone on a forum where anyone can lurk, but all posters get passwords using a real e-mail address. That has cut down the trolls on that board, although posters were still free to have an anon handle. It's not a foolproof system, but better than declaring open season.

Of course, the FA could try it and see how many people would post anyway. With a warning of course.

love, F

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:54:41 (EDT)
From: PatC b)
Email: None
To: Francesca :C)
Subject: You let the pat out of the bag
Message:
That's not a typo. Stop outing me. B)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 16:51:53 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Francesca :C)
Subject: Re: Don't agree on showing IPs
Message:
Hi Francesca,

I like the idea of getting a password. People posting for the first time can post right to FA and have their first post screened.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 14:35:15 (EDT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Sherlock Holmes
Subject: although I share the same feelings
Message:
about trolls. I hate them because of how they hide and snarl and bite. It's easy to be a shithead behind a mask and not suffer consequences.
Showing IP's would only mean we'd have to block their anonymity service, don't you think?

Anyway, (as much as I don't want to! )-I disagree about showing the IP. It's ironic really, it's too late for me! But I feel that showing IP's would open up a can of worms, invade well-intentioned people's privacy, leave them open to all sorts of hacking, etc. This was one of the reasons I didn't like the anonymity and turnover of the FAs, not knowing who had my work ip's etc. I am extremely lucky to work in a very liberal environment where I am totally supported but not all have this luxury.
Am interested how others feel about this.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 17:48:12 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Re: although I share the same feelings
Message:
Hi Selene,

I hate them because of how they hide and snarl and bite. It's easy to be a shithead behind a mask and not suffer consequences.

I know. And they also get too much attention when they do PUKE up over the forum. What do you think about the ID?

Every poster gets one ID from Dave. Dave could disqualify anyone for using different alias?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 17:54:58 (EDT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: it's up to dave I guess
Message:
I'ts a lot of work, unless HotBoards has it built in.
But it's a good idea.
Eventually something has to be done that I agree on.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 18:34:11 (EDT)
From: Francesca :C)
Email: None
To: Selene
Subject: Posters having passwords ...
Message:
I commented above that I know of a board (nothing to do with spiritual stuff) where all posters have to apply for a password with a real e-mail address, although anyone coming in off the Internet can lurk. I do believe it might have been a custom job, and someone had to write some scripts (probably perl or whatever).

I don't like the format of that board (all the posts in a line with NO threads, ugh, just posts lined up one before the other) but open lurking and passwords for posters is a good idea. The passwords could be more easily revoked than chasing down IP addresses. But just like you say, I'm not sure hotboards has this feature. I wouldn't want to shut out lurking, only posting by anon trolls.

On this other board I know of, people are still free to be anon, as long as they use a real e-mail address to set the whole thing up. Not foolproof, but cuts down the nonsense. Of course if we did that, I wish passwords wouldn't be given premies -- of course, this is my NSHO and it's not my call.

For me, there's not much to discuss on this topic with premies. I certainly don't go at it with the few I know, or tell them to read EPO. If they were curious, they'd have found it themselves, and if they found it themselves, they are already lurking or decided it wasn't for them. I don't know too many premies, and we stay off this topic.

bests, f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 19:06:30 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Francesca :C)
Subject: Re: Posters having passwords ...
Message:
Hi Francesca. Thanks for feedback. We'll see what others think.

Good question: Should premies get a password?

My response: When they've earned it. The policy could be to write the FA and request permission and get a temporary ID. If the poster turns out to be a non-spammer, or abusive poster, they get their own password. The likelihood that a premie would give it out to spammers is incredibly low.

Unsolicited posts can then be deleted or kept in an unsolicited file for future comparisons.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:41:39 (EDT)
From: Francesca :C)
Email: None
To: Dr Watson
Subject: THANKS for doing THIS
Message:
Dear Sir Dave,

I was beginning to think, by your replies to Nige, Anth, Pat and I over the Bjorn thing, that you were just going to let anarchy reign and the trolls would just take over Forum 6 and render it meaningless. There's still way more anarchy than suits my personal taste -- but I'm not doing the work you are on this site and for that I thank you.

My point is: The trolls get VERY bold when they think that no one is checking their IP addresses or monitoring their level of disruption.

IMO there is NO meaningful dialogue to be had with 99.9 per cent of the premies that post here. It is a waste of time and space. Even worse when the trolls run free. Thanks for helping to make them less bold.

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:39:42 (EDT)
From: Selene
Email: None
To: Sherlock Holmes
Subject: no one cares really
Message:
Until they get a cat attack or a Crumpet choke, whatever. I realize there are more important things to discuss. Until they get attacked :)

I said basically what you said, in the inactive - although I forgot David Whitla in the usual suspects list.
If you read it you will see the CW denial. He says he is always CW, Catweasel or Victoria Bitters.
And he doesn't care if I believe him. Which I don't. So I guess that makes us all on even ground - nobody cares (?)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:34:20 (EDT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: Let's do it for EPO and M/EV, OK? nt
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:07:20 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: A Challenge for La-ex.
Message:
Write that book.

Anth, writing that book.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:21:28 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: What's Your Name???
Message:
Is your name really vice versa? I doubt it.

As David stated below, I call myself an ex-premie because I have rejected the Maharajism cult, which you have chosen to be a member of.

I did laugh when I read your statement: There's no talking to ex-premies. If there is no talking to us, then go away. Pay no attention to us. I don't know you so how can I hate you.

I don't even hate Maharaji. But I am in full awareness of the fact that when I was 22 I became involved in a cult which was lead by Prem Pal Sing Rawat, a/k/a the Lord Of The Universe, the Perfect Master of his time, the Superior Power in Person.

At his own admission, Maharaji says he is just an ordinary human being. What I do hate about the cult is the fact that I was injured emotionally and physically by Maharaji's incessent demands for money, airplanes, obedience in the ashram, as well as about a year's stint at DECA where I was an illegal slave.

The word cult has triggered a lot of premies. Good. Instead of telling us we are a hate club, in a very pompous way, I might add, why don't you ask Maharaji about the various questions those of us here have tried to get answered.

The main focus of my interest is Maharaji's inability to answer anyone's questions. Why is he exempt? Why all the secrecy? He doesn't even have the credentials to teach in a school, much less 'save the world' as he promised many years ago.

Indeed, Maharaji's harboring of a pedophile, Jagdeo, (a close agent/associate of M) who intentionally, and willfully committed heinous crimes against the children of his (m's) followers is what concerns me the most. If Maharaji is so great and good, then what is the problem here? Why does he continue to lie, cheat and con YOU, as his premie, those of us here who have exited the cult, and the world at large?

When Pia and Charles Glasser found it necessary to protect poor Maharaji from the publicity generated out of this forum and the EPO site, the premies didn't seem to care one way or another about us. Fine.

Now you feel threatened, are in complete denial about what you are doing with your life, and come here and generalize that we are a 'hate club.'

That's too easy for premies to do. 'Oh ex-premies are in a hate-club.' Is that all you have to say?

Well, I guess so, if you are too afraid to even post your name. And if you care to investigate the many sites which monitor cults, DLM, EV, and Guru Maharaj Ji, a/k/a Maharaji is listed on each and every one. I believe on some of those sites (CAN is run by Scientologists so forget that one) their reference for more information is back to EPO. In other words, EPO is the link to finding out the truth about Maharaji and what he has done, and continues to do as a personality cult leader.

Inasmuch as I would love to call you a name, that doesn't make me hateful, however, I believe strongly that if you read the EPO site and links carefully, you might get a bit sick to your stomach about the testimony, yes, real life eye witnesses about how Maharaji operates and how he doesn't give a rat's ass about any one but himself.

And he's using you again. That you felt compelled to come here with what I would call a parody of Jim Heller's proposal proves my point.

I personally don't agree with Jim's idea, nor yours. I think it's a matter of time before Maharaji sinks into oblivion. But go ahead and make fun.

You naughty troll!
Cynthia J. Gracie
Vermont

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:06:33 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: A Challenge for Cynthia.
Message:
Bonjour Cynthia,

My challenge for you is to learn French, then go to Paris and have dinner with Jean-Michel.

Anth the agent-provocateur.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:32:24 (EDT)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Oh Anth.....
Message:
I've always wanted to speak French. And I'd love to have dinner in Paris with Jean-Michel.

I accept!

Love,
Cynthia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:36:31 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Cynthia
Subject: Bravo.
Message:
I've always wanted to speak French. And I'd love to have dinner in Paris with Jean-Michel.

I accept!

Love,
Cynthia


---

Bravo,

Peut-etre je gatecrasherai.

Anth le vin rouge s'il vous plait.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:27:22 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: A Challenge for AJW
Message:
Repeat this 50 times while eating cream crackers :

' There was a young woman called Dot
Whose husband smoked pot quite a lot
He came home one night
and said ' I'm alright'
She thumped him and said 'no you're not'

Copyright AJW the Jacobs cream cracker

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:34:31 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Oh shit.
Message:
Impaled on me own sword.

Anth, choking on his own cream crackers.

Dot's away for a couple of days, I'm taking the opportunity to do a bit of ram-raiding. She tends to get pissed off when I wear one of her stockings and start firing me shotgun off. So I have to induge while she's out of town.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:04:44 (EDT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: WanKer Tanker
Message:
Why don't you fuck off back to your little premie hate club over on LG.

You've got the nerve to tell me to piss off back over here for causing trouble over there at LG. Next thing you're over here causing trouble. Your cowardly use of various aliases doesn't fool me . your sick , bitter , twisted style is so obvious. I'm starting to really fucking despise you , you dickhead.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:19:36 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Steve
Subject: A challenge for Steve.
Message:
Learn the tango.

Anth, completely lost it, da da da da da der olay.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 02:40:27 (EDT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: You're an Angel Anth
Message:
Very light hearted.

Stop being so eternally serious will ya ? Have a joke and a laugh once in a while !

Best to you and yours

Steve

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 13:53:59 (EDT)
From: David
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: Vice Versa
Subject: Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
I'm not an ex-premie, per se. A person is only really an ex-premie while they still identify themselves as having been a premie. It was so long ago when I was a premie (18 years ago) that I can't identify myself with that. It happened a long time ago and it almost feels like another lifetime.

The term 'ex-premie' here is used simply as a term of reference, indicating that someone was once a premie as opposed to just an ordinary person who never got into such things.

So I'm not in a hate club. I'm merely curious as to how the trip turned out after eighteen years of my leaving. I also like tinkering with web sites and this internet technology, so I'm the webmaster here. I'd just as readily open up a porn site, if people wanted me to.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:25:37 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: David
Subject: My Challenge to Dave.
Message:
Bake a fruit cake.

Anth the Fat.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:55:35 (EDT)
From: Dave
Email: sirdavid12@hotmail.com
To: AJW
Subject: I'll run with this
Message:
but only when your waist measurement is down to 34 inches.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:13:40 (EDT)
From: Gregg
Email: None
To: David
Subject: Re: Anew Challenge for all ex-premies
Message:
Yeah, what David said. It's been a long time since I called myself a premie (twenty years), and I spent many years barely giving the bloke a thought. But this forum is fun; the subject interests me. Subjects, I should say.

And like many others on the forum, I don't hate Maharaji. I haven't seen a movement to kick me off the forum due to insufficient vitriol.

I do believe, though, that if you're into foot-kissing, Prem Pal is the wrong guy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 13:51:07 (EDT)
From: Dances with Trolls
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: You're an anonymous troll
Message:
How could you even put together something where flesh-and-blood people would appear, you vacuous joker! Oh yeah, we'll contact you at?? Huh??

Go to that hate club on Lifes Great and get out of here, scram.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 03:14:53 (EDT)
From: Dances with Names
Email: None
To: Dances with Trolls
Subject: My Challenge to Anth
Message:
Prove that you are not Catweasle.

JohnT
- when did you stop beating your wife ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:27:06 (EDT)
From: Anon.
Email: None
To: Dances with Trolls
Subject: My Challenge to Dances with Trolls.
Message:
Use a consistent name so we know who you are.

Fred Smith.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:11:14 (EDT)
From: Vice Versa
Email: None
To: Dances with Trolls
Subject: Re: You're an anonymous troll
Message:
Dear Dances with Trolls,
I did go on LG ! this challenge is a 'carbon copy' of Jim Heller's challenge posted there yesterday. Check it out
I guess you don't like to be served the same medecine...
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:07:20 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Vice Versa
Subject: I'll run with this
Message:
VV,

I'm happy with this challenge. Let's get started. My address is brauns@apollo.lv. Email me with your suggestions for venue, procedure, etc. Should be fun!

John Brauns

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:28:29 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: My Challenge to JHB
Message:
Learn to stand up on the saddle when you gallop over the Latvian plains.

Anth the Estonian

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 03:06:17 (EDT)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: My Challenge to JHB
Message:
Learn to stand up on the saddle when you gallop over the Latvian plains.

Anth the Estonian


---

How about just keeping somewhere near the saddle when I'm riding?

John the knows how to fall off a horse.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:32:07 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: All
Subject: EPO Web Master
Message:
I am not sure who you are, but thanks for adding it-IS-so to your link page

Now I have to move my ass and update it, sheesh.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:10:11 (EDT)
From: EPO Webmaster
Email: webmaster@ex-premie.org
To: salam
Subject: Re: EPO Web Master
Message:
As I'm new to webmastering, I cannot claim any credit here - Jean-Michel Kahn continues to do his splendid job of looking after the content of EPO.

John Brauns, trainee Webmaster

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:43:44 (EDT)
From: Salam
Email: None
To: EPO Webmaster
Subject: Re: EPO Web Master
Message:
Well thanks to you and JMK, am sure you'll do fine. If you need help htmling, javascripting or anything please don't hesitate to ask me, I will help when I can,

cheers

Salam

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 14:32:40 (EDT)
From: Cynthia ;D
Email: None
To: salam
Subject: While You're at it Salam...
Message:
Hi Salam,

While you're updating the It is So site, could you please include my name under the 'who we are' category?

I'm not afraid of the bullies, I don't care who knows who I am, I am proud to be part of the real backlash!

Pretty please? You can even use my full name!
Love,
Cynthia (Cynthia J. Gracie), I'll be checking.....;)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:53:41 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Cynthia ;D
Subject: While You're at it Salam...
Message:
thanks for including me among the who we ares. You can use my full name there if you like, John Tucker.

JohnT
- never a premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:46:24 (EDT)
From: salam
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: John & Cynth
Message:
I will. One the weekend.

take care,

Salam

and remember Rawat, Pia and Charles all suck, yeah.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 03:38:40 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: ExPremies websites links updated
Message:
Updated ...

More candidates ?

Bobby's website ? What about Bobby ?
[ ExPremies Websites ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:24:36 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Site for ExPremies
Message:
My collection of poems called Unholy Trinity at was written for exes. They hardly make sense to anyone who does not know quite a lot about Rawat's racket. So I guess the collection is an ex-premie site in one sense, although I'm a never myself.

I'd be delighted to receive a link from EPO to the collection at http://www.jtucker.dircon.co.uk/unholy3.html

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:38:28 (EDT)
From: Jean-Michel
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Done !
Message:
Did you check the link ?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 06:57:46 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Jean-Michel
Subject: Wow !
Message:
That was quick! Yes, the link works just fine. Many thanks.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 09:49:56 (EDT)
From: magiclara
Email: None
To: All
Subject: video of m when he was lord of the universe
Message:
Does anyone want me to make a copy of the far out video and send it to the U.S.? Someone said they wanted it. I can put gooey at Glastonbury 1971 on as well.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:22:24 (EDT)
From: Richard (original)
Email: post@rmi.net
To: magiclara
Subject: Re: video of m when he was lord of the universe
Message:
If someone can convert it to NTSC (US format), I'll pay postage from UK to US and forward it to another hate-filled ex who wants to watch it while ridiculing M & K and then post about it here. Thanks for the offer.

Richard the First (not Richard II since all eternity)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:25:48 (EDT)
From: magiclara
Email: None
To: Richard (original)
Subject: Re: video of m when he was lord of the universe
Message:
Hi
Someone is asking a friend who can convert them but apparently you can get it done in shops in the US. I will make a copy any way and await further hate ridden instructions, as to if you want it and where to send it. It is very entertaining.
Magiclara
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 07:14:35 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Richard, you're in a muddle.
Message:
Richard and I have been having a chat down below, but the thread is moving South, so I thought I'd bring it back to the top.

Richard, you said,

'Now, what about all those terribly wise souls throughout history who allude to a method akin to Knowledge to be able to know the Creator? '

What great souls are these Richard? Maybe you mean Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed,Guru Nanak, etc I suppose. None of them ever mentioned 'Knowledge'. None of them ever mentioned sticking your thumbs in your ears, or shoving your tongue back down your throat. Where did you get this, 'alluding to Knowledge' shite from? It's not even the current cult party line. According the the new regime, you've missed the point of it all. 'It's not a religion. He never said he was like Jesus. He's just a simple teacher, etc etc etc. People who think that are just old hippy farts who don't understand his message.'

But you obviously believe in the dynasty of Perfect Masters. Can you find any reference to this succession, continuity etc, outside your tiny little cult? Can you quote me a single reference to it, outside cult publications?

Really, where do you get all this stuff from? (Maybe you realised it from within? Or maybe someone told it you so many times you started to believe it.)

You say you poke yourself in the eye, and, unlike myself, you actually take a look around. Care to tell me what you see Rich?

'To imply the techniques are banal and do not lead to a deeper knowledge of the Creator is to imply you know something about the nature of that experience, and you have clearly stated you do not. So my question to you is why not just leave those who are discovering the Creator to it?'

Richard. Of course I know something about the experience of practising knowledge. I did it for 25 years. But snot is not infinite. It is not that which has no beginning and no end. It is not that from which the universe came. It is not love. It is snot. No matter how hard you believe Richard, doesn't make it true.

Do the nectar technique now Rich, and tell me what you taste. I'm only getting snot.

You're in a cult mate. Just like the Moonies and Hare Krishnas.

Anth, neti, neti, neti, neti, neti, neti and not snot either.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:21:34 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: Richard, you're in a muddle.
Message:
>>What great souls are these Richard? Maybe you mean Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed,Guru Nanak, etc I suppose. None of them ever mentioned 'Knowledge'. None of them ever mentioned sticking your thumbs in your ears, or shoving your tongue back down your throat. Where did you get this, 'alluding to Knowledge' shite from? It's not even the current cult party line. According the the new regime, you've missed the point of it all. 'It's not a religion. He never said he was like Jesus. He's just a simple teacher, etc etc etc. People who think that are just old hippy farts who don't understand his message.'

Well, my combative and caustic friend, Krishna for one talked about all four techniques. Mohammed’s disciples were instructed in secret techniques for going inside. Buddha was shown how to meditate by his master. The breath is consistently mentioned by too numerous teachers to count. Then of course there are the many Indian saints like Brahmanand, Kabir, etc. who’s writings “allude” to the actual techniques. Come on Anth, if you are going to argue about something you admittedly know nothing about at least do your reading.

And it’s also pretty clear that none of these men had a goal of starting a religion. That’s what happens after we’ve strung them up on a pole. As for what Maharaji says about himself, he says he is not the first one to convey this message to people. Does that mean he is like Jesus? Well you are right, he never said he was.

>>But you obviously believe in the dynasty of Perfect Masters. Can you find any reference to this succession, continuity etc, outside your tiny little cult? Can you quote me a single reference to it, outside cult publications?

Dynasty is probably not an appropriate term for what I believe. I believe there is always someone who “knows”, and who can show someone who wants to know. If you don’t want to know Anth then this person would clearly have nothing to say to you. And this is not new thinking Anth. Islam for example was first built on this premise. Certain sects of Islam still believe in the succession of Imams. The idea of the line of ten Sikh gurus is predicated on this concept.

>>Really, where do you get all this stuff from? (Maybe you realised it from within? Or maybe someone told it you so many times you started to believe it.)

Where do I get this stuff? Well I try and pay attention. I take an interest in all aspects of human history. And I use basic logic. Logic dictates to me that if there is a Creative Force in a universe that I am a part of, there must be someone who knows how to get in touch with it. And if this Force is where I came from some half century ago, and where I’ll go back to, probably within the next 30 or so years, I bet it’s pretty close and accessible. That to me is just logical.

>>You say you poke yourself in the eye, and, unlike myself, you actually take a look around. Care to tell me what you see Rich?

Myself.

>>Of course I know something about the experience of practising knowledge. I did it for 25 years. But snot is not infinite. It is not that which has no beginning and no end. It is not that from which the universe came. It is not love. It is snot. No matter how hard you believe Richard, doesn't make it true. Do the nectar technique now Rich, and tell me what you taste. I'm only getting snot.

You are correct Anth; snot is snot. But concerning the infinite, snot it’s not. Our minds can make judgments about many things, which often serves us well. But when our mind misjudges something of value and casts it aside, we are in danger of losing something precious. Of course, if you never knew its value in the first place you are none the wiser. But if somebody comes along and tells you how valuable a thing you threw away then of course you will be in no mood to hear about it. If you do not really care to know the Creator then something given to you to know it will be of no value to you. That is just logical, right? You may even think it as valueless as snot.

>>You're in a cult mate. Just like the Moonies and Hare Krishnas.

Call it what you want “mate”, that’s cool with me. Twist and spin it to look like the darkest thing happening on the earth, no problem. But that won’t change how good it feels to “know”. To know for sure, beyond doubt. Wouldn’t that be nice Anth? I know, just a bunch of airy-fairy hippy shit, right? ;-)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:22:05 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: Maybe we can clear this one up quickly Rich'.
Message:
Do you know the difference between a myth and a historical fact?

Anth, trying not to myth the point.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:39:26 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: OK I'll bite
Message:
Do you know the difference between a myth and a historical fact?

Anth, trying not to myth the point.


---

Uh yeah, do you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:10:34 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: I think I've got a bite
Message:
Hi Rich,

Do you agree that Krishna is a mythological character?

Anth who caught a real fish today.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:22:43 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: I think I've got a bite
Message:
Hi Rich,

Do you agree that Krishna is a mythological character?

Anth who caught a real fish today.


---

No. I believe he did exist but his memory is now encrusted by mythology. Do you believe Mohammed is a mythological character? Or Kabir?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 08:58:28 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: Re: I think I've got a bite
Message:
Let's stick to Krishna for now Rich', we can come back to the others later.

So, what is your source of information pertaining to Krishna as a real person, rather than a blue skinned incarnation of God, playing his flute, wearing a crown, dancing on snake heads etc?

Have you read Joseph Cambell on mythology by the way?

Anth the blue-skinned.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:00:01 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: I think I've got a bite
Message:
Let's stick to Krishna for now Rich', we can come back to the others later.

So, what is your source of information pertaining to Krishna as a real person, rather than a blue skinned incarnation of God, playing his flute, wearing a crown, dancing on snake heads etc?

Have you read Joseph Cambell on mythology by the way?

Anth the blue-skinned.


---

No Anth let’s not focus on the one reference that is could be most easily dismissed as a mere myth. Otherwise the only fish we will catch today will be a red herring. Instead take the fact that there are many references, including the Krishna example, to techniques shown to individuals who have demonstrated to a recognized Master a commitment to wanting to “know”. This relationship has been around a lot longer than Anth, the prince of cute and snappy come-backs.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 07:53:48 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: What references Rich?
Message:
You keep mentioning references. What references to Krishna revealing the four techniques are you talking about Rich'? Care to give me some book names and page numbers? Or even direct quotes.

But don't stick to Krishna alone Rich'. Give me some references for Mohmammed, Jesus, and Buddha talking about the four techniques if want.

By the way, do you think Mary was a virgin when she gave birth the Jesus?

Anth, trying to seperate myths from facts.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 02:45:26 (EDT)
From: Steve
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: I know for sure......
Message:
...that Darth Vader really exists ! He came into my bedroom last night and told me that I was working with the DARK SIDE and to keep up the good work !
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:06:52 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: Richard II...Logic
Message:
Richard

In your post you state 'I believe there is always someone who 'know' '

Fair enough. We do not need logic to believe in something, although it can be used up to a point and then we proceed to 'belief '. Different people believe different things. Again, fair enough.

Later on in your post this ' belief ' is then a ' knowing ' due to logic. You state 'Logic dictates to me that if there is a creative force in a universe that I am part of , there must be someone who knows how to get in touch with it' hmmm ...tell me ...how/why does logic dictate this ? I can see how ' belief ' can dictate it ...but I've thought and thought about it and I can't for the life of me see how LOGIC dictates it.

I can see how there COULD be someone, COULD be a a million people at any given time or COULD be no one ever, or COULD be whatever. I just can't see how logic leads to your stating 'there must be someone ...'

Am I missing something or are you getting your belief mixed up with your logic ??

Cheers

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 19:37:37 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Re: Richard II...Logic
Message:
Richard

In your post you state 'I believe there is always someone who 'know' '

Fair enough. We do not need logic to believe in something, although it can be used up to a point and then we proceed to 'belief '. Different people believe different things. Again, fair enough.

Later on in your post this ' belief ' is then a ' knowing ' due to logic. You state 'Logic dictates to me that if there is a creative force in a universe that I am part of , there must be someone who knows how to get in touch with it' hmmm ...tell me ...how/why does logic dictate this ? I can see how ' belief ' can dictate it ...but I've thought and thought about it and I can't for the life of me see how LOGIC dictates it.

I can see how there COULD be someone, COULD be a a million people at any given time or COULD be no one ever, or COULD be whatever. I just can't see how logic leads to your stating 'there must be someone ...'

Am I missing something or are you getting your belief mixed up with your logic ??

Cheers

Dermot


---

I prefer to see the relationship between belief, logic and knowing in a scientific light. Logic opens the door to a theory or theories. As you know, scientists in their field formulate beliefs of the nature of the universe based upon logical theories. They set about to design tests to prove or disprove, which in turn adjusts their beliefs. The hope is that one day they will prove their theories to a point where it is no longer a belief but a knowing.

One tends to accept a theory that makes sense and adopt it as a belief. For example, I believe I will get to my destination tomorrow based on taking such-and-such route and making such-and-such stops. Now, what transforms my belief into knowing is actually proving my theory, or in this example, by travelling the road. The proof of whether someone knows or not about the Creator is whether they can show you. Maharaji showed me the Creator through Knowledge. You could argue it doesn’t prove that there is ALWAYS someone who knows, it just proves there is someone today. That would be fair. This is where I would look through the archives to see if history supports my theory.

What gets dicey with Knowledge is I cannot prove to anyone that I have in fact experienced the Creator by setting a series of objective tests. I can only prove it to myself by being in touch with myself and asking the question, “Is my longing to know satisfied”? That is all anyone can do to know if Maharaji has delivered on the promise of knowing the Creator. Of course, the only ones who qualify to even ask the question are those who have a longing to know, and are in touch with themselves in the first place.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 09:25:23 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: WORST LOGIC EVER!!!
Message:
Richard II: I prefer to see the relationship between belief, logic and knowing in a scientific light. Logic opens the door to a theory or theories. As you know, scientists in their field formulate beliefs of the nature of the universe based upon logical theories. They set about to design tests to prove or disprove, which in turn adjusts their beliefs. The hope is that one day they will prove their theories to a point where it is no longer a belief but a knowing.

Mostly crap, I'm afraid, Richard II. Your understanding of the scientific method is badly dated. It is not logically possible to prove a theory. We can say a theory should have this or that phemomena as an observable consequence, and, if we fail to see that consequence, we can may well hold the theory to have been disproved. But if we see the predicted consequence, we have NOT proved the theory at all. There are an indefinite number of theories that account for any given body of data, you see.

If a theory resists disproof for long enough, we tend to regard it as true. But your theory that there is something special about Rawat has been shown to be inconsistent with the facts. It is therefore untrue in the scientific sense.

One tends to accept a theory that makes sense and adopt it as a belief. For example, I believe I will get to my destination tomorrow based on taking such-and-such route and making such-and-such stops. Now, what transforms my belief into knowing is actually proving my theory, or in this example, by travelling the road. The proof of whether someone knows or not about the Creator is whether they can show you. Maharaji showed me the Creator through Knowledge.

You did not walk that road, Richard. It was just a dream. And, no, Rawat did not show you God. He didn't. He encouraged you to think that, but he was playing a trick on you.

Anyone or no-one could play his role in your mind, and you would still be able to generate the same experiences. Plenty of people have discovered this, and attested to this fact.

You could argue it doesn’t prove that there is ALWAYS someone who knows, it just proves there is someone today. That would be fair. This is where I would look through the archives to see if history supports my theory.

Your belief that you have experienced GOD is just a cosy little delusion that helps you feel like a special kind of guy. You believe that you have proved Rawat knows. But all you have proved is that you Believe Rawat. I ask you Richard how can you believe him when he tells you that he loves you when you know he's been a liar all his life? Rawat is a liar, that has been proved. That he has a unique ability to reveal God has not been proved.

What gets dicey with Knowledge is I cannot prove to anyone that I have in fact experienced the Creator by setting a series of objective tests. I can only prove it to myself by being in touch with myself and asking the question, “Is my longing to know satisfied”? That is all anyone can do to know if Maharaji has delivered on the promise of knowing the Creator. Of course, the only ones who qualify to even ask the question are those who have a longing to know, and are in touch with themselves in the first place.

Yes, you cannot prove to anyone that Rawat showed you God. Because that notion is not susceptible to proof or disproof it is not a scientific claim at all, contrary to your opening sentences.

If my longing for food is satisfied, have I eaten food? No, that is not certain. I may have eaten a load of guar gum which (not being digestible) is not food, but by having mass, quells hunger pangs. Or again, I may simply have ingested an appetite suppressant drug which has no food value.

In the case of Rawat, he has merely perverted your spiritual hunger. The proof of this is that he leaves you like a junky, always hungry for more, and a slave to the pusher.

You said I prefer to see the relationship between belief, logic and knowing in a scientific light but your own words show you are not able to do that.

JohnT
- never a premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 12:46:27 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Re: WORST LOGIC EVER!!!
Message:
JohnT said:

>>Mostly crap, I'm afraid, Richard II. Your understanding of the scientific method is badly dated. It is not logically possible to prove a theory. We can say a theory should have this or that phemomena as an observable consequence, and, if we fail to see that consequence, we can may well hold the theory to have been disproved. But if we see the predicted consequence, we have NOT proved the theory at all. There are an indefinite number of theories that account for any given body of data, you see. If a theory resists disproof for long enough, we tend to regard it as true. But your theory that there is something special about Rawat has been shown to be inconsistent with the facts. It is therefore untrue in the scientific sense.

I’m going to engage you in a dialog JohnT in good faith that you are not just another know-it-all who wants to score macho brownie points by ganging up on premies.

Take the meaning of science step further than how it is typically applied. Put aside for a moment your ideas of whatever methodology is accepted to prove or disprove a theory. That’s extraneous to the discussion. The point is, an acceptable proof is needed before a theory becomes accepted. You have described the common accepted criteria for proof. But this discussion is slightly different because it doesn’t deal with physical phenomena. The difference with physical phenomena and, for want of a better word, spiritual phenomena is that there is no room for objectivity in the latter. It is entirely a personal journey. So the proof, or disproof if you prefer, goes on internally and invisible to everyone else.

So try this on: Knowledge shows you something real. Proof is, try it. Over time if what you experience remains real, the theory is not disproved and therefore it is accepted.

>>You did not walk that road, Richard. It was just a dream. And, no, Rawat did not show you God. He didn't. He encouraged you to think that, but he was playing a trick on you. Anyone or no-one could play his role in your mind, and you would still be able to generate the same experiences. Plenty of people have discovered this, and attested to this fact.

John, who was never a premie and thinks he’s a scientist, you expose your pompous side. I’ve got a simple question for you. How would you know where I’ve walked or what I’ve seen? You don’t. And for the sake of maintaining an honest dialog, please don’t presume you do. Your pat explanations for phenomena you cannot explain reeks of standard issue fear, myopia, or arrogance. True, there are no doubt many instances of people being mislead, and that possibility should be quite rightly considered (and I can say with confidence I have ruled that out). But such a blanket application of a pat explanation is too easy, and is an excuse for laziness.

So JohnT do me a favor and don’t comment on Knowledge if you haven’t received it. Believe me, you don’t know what you are talking about. And even if you had received it, if you didn’t apply it with the right attitude you would still be blind to its value.

>>Your belief that you have experienced GOD is just a cosy little delusion that helps you feel like a special kind of guy. You believe that you have proved Rawat knows. But all you have proved is that you Believe Rawat. I ask you Richard how can you believe him when he tells you that he loves you when you know he's been a liar all his life? Rawat is a liar, that has been proved. That he has a unique ability to reveal God has not been proved.

Maharaji said he would show me a source of peace within that is real. He gave me Knowledge, I practiced it, and voila, that peace I now know. So no matter how his words past and present are being interpreted or misinterpreted, he delivered to me on his primary promise. No lies there.

Whether or not he loves Richard II is kind of not my concern. But more importantly, I have a deep affection for him that has developed over the years. When I am in his presence and express that affection he reciprocates. None of that is built on belief or theory but a wonderful and real feeling.

>>Yes, you cannot prove to anyone that Rawat showed you God. Because that notion is not susceptible to proof or disproof it is not a scientific claim at all, contrary to your opening sentences. If my longing for food is satisfied, have I eaten food? No, that is not certain. I may have eaten a load of guar gum which (not being digestible) is not food, but by having mass, quells hunger pangs. Or again, I may simply have ingested an appetite suppressant drug which has no food value.

Give up the science reference JohnT, it was just a way to convey ideas in a logical pattern. If it didn’t work for you forget about it. I certainly don’t want our dialog to digress into discussion around setting up a double blind study to prove or disprove what I’ve experience internally.

>>In the case of Rawat, he has merely perverted your spiritual hunger. The proof of this is that he leaves you like a junky, always hungry for more, and a slave to the pusher.

Proof? Hmmm…..nah, I won’t try and beat you at your own game.

Take care JohnT.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:06:11 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: the impossible dream
Message:
Richard II: Put aside for a moment your ideas of whatever methodology is accepted to prove or disprove a theory. That’s extraneous to the discussion.

That's an assertion (a theory if you will, a concept, an idea). Why should I accept that assertion? See the difficulty here?

In a discussion, one needs to have some common ground, some way of appealing to a common reality. I appreciate the tone of your post, but this line is where the shell game starts.

The difference with physical phenomena and, for want of a better word, spiritual phenomena is that there is no room for objectivity in the latter.

I disagree with this assertion (theory, concept, idea) as well. Look at it more carefully. You are making an objective claim about the nature of (what you define to be) the spiritual realm. You have contradicted yourself, and from a contradiction, one can logically derive any conclusion.

This then, is what you define as the spiritual. It is a realm of contadiction and absurdity, fansasy and dream. Nor does it correspond to my idea of what spiritual means, for to my mind endeavors in that realm do have an impact on the objective world, and in that sense as as real as anything we can talk about.

You continue, largely to defend your spiritual path and to deny me the right to comment on it. But as I've explained, what I mean by that term spiritual is not all the realm of dreams. I, and many pwks posting here would say the impact of your spiritual master and the path he preaches would seem to have been largely malignant.

Give up the science reference JohnT, it was just a way to convey ideas in a logical pattern.

To be fair, it was you who started off saying I prefer to see the relationship between belief, logic and knowing in a scientific light. Logic opens the door to a theory or theories.

But I do poetry as well!

JohnT
- never a premie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:35:40 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Re: the impossible dream
Message:
First JohnT let me applaud you on your excellent use of the language. Now:

Richard II said: “Put aside for a moment your ideas of whatever methodology is accepted to prove or disprove a theory. That’s extraneous to the discussion.”

JohnT responded: “That's an assertion (a theory if you will, a concept, an idea). Why should I accept that assertion? See the difficulty here? In a discussion, one needs to have some common ground, some way of appealing to a common reality. I appreciate the tone of your post, but this line is where the shell game starts.”

The common ground we might have had was the reference to scientific thinking. But unfortunately the philosophical constructs provided by the classical use of the field have given way to today’s use of the term to merely measure physical phenomena. If that is how you are limited to using the term JohnT then by all means, “Put it aside…it is extraneous to my discussion.”

Richard II said: The difference with physical phenomena and, for want of a better word, spiritual phenomena is that there is no room for objectivity in the latter.

JohnT said: I disagree with this assertion (theory, concept, idea) as well. Look at it more carefully. You are making an objective claim about the nature of (what you define to be) the spiritual realm. You have contradicted yourself, and from a contradiction, one can logically derive any conclusion.

You are splitting hairs to the detriment of meaningful dialog JohnT. Just to be clear about what I said: The measure of spiritual validity is strictly subjective. That is if you step back to look at it, it turns to concrete. Also by saying it’s not objective, I’m meaning you cannot find common ground to prove or disprove for mass consumption.

JohnT said: “This then, is what you define as the spiritual. It is a realm of contadiction and absurdity, fansasy and dream.”

No. I didn’t say that. Funny you should translate it into that (I take that back about using the English language). If you care to continue having meaningful dialog, the first thing you’ve got to do is stop thinking you’re so much cleverer than me, and begin to discuss honestly as equals. There is nothing contradictory, absurd, or fantasy about my experience of self. And, by the way, there is nothing you have presented as proof to support your assertion that that is what I said -- just an unsolicited opinion. C’mon JohnT, play by your own rules if you’re going to try and impose them on me.

JohnT said: “Nor does it correspond to my idea of what spiritual means, for to my mind endeavors in that realm do have an impact on the objective world, and in that sense as as real as anything we can talk about.”

Indeed. Please explain. And if you have scientific proof, all the better.

JohnT said: “You continue, largely to defend your spiritual path and to deny me the right to comment on it.”

You are of course welcome to comment on my spiritual path, otherwise I wouldn‘t have shown up here. And I do not believe I said anything to dissuade you from commenting -- if I did, my apologies. Could you please provide examples to prove this “assertion“.

JohnT said: “But as I've explained, what I mean by that term spiritual is not all the realm of dreams. I, and many pwks posting here would say the impact of your spiritual master and the path he preaches would seem to have been largely malignant.”

You have not taken a good random sample upon which to base your hypothesis JohnT. Most of the pwks who post here come here strictly because they are predisposed to being negative. That, unfortunately skews your results. What kind of scientist are you JohnT???

JohnT said: “To be fair, it was you who started off saying I prefer to see the relationship between belief, logic and knowing in a scientific light. Logic opens the door to a theory or theories. “

As I said, let’s forget about science JohnT. Yes you’ve got me on that one, it was I who raised it, but clearly it has distracted you from what I was originally trying to convey, so let‘s just drop it. ‘kay?

JohnT said: “But I do poetry as well!”

That’s great. Let’s see what you got.

Richard

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:57:38 (EDT)
From: JohnT
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: Check the link above then [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 11:31:20 (EDT)
From: Richard (original)
Email: None
To: JohnT
Subject: Nice going JohnT
Message:
I love the smell of logic in the morning.

Your belief that you have experienced GOD is just a cosy little delusion that helps you feel like a
special kind of guy.
That bit is the keystone of premie belief, without which the arch of M&Kjism comes crashing down.

The Richard formerly known as Postie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:04:40 (EDT)
From: PatC b)
Email: pdconlon@hotmail.com
To: Richard (original)
Subject: Nice going JohnT- BEST OF FORUM
Message:
Postie, Richard the second is sincere but not equipped to convince John. I think we ought to suggest a challenge to premies - if they can propagate K to John then they win.

John, I just had to break my fast by commenting on your response to Richard the second because it was so quiet and sensible. Thanks.

K is the last four kriyas of kundalini yoga and can be very interesting to say the least if persevered in. Combine the discovery of ecstatic energy in the body with bhakti gurujism and you have the makings of a good business gulling the gullible.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 00:36:02 (EDT)
From: This should be
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: *******BEST OF FORUM************
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:18:45 (EDT)
From: Bin Liner
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: Is my longing to know satisfied
Message:
My longing to know my creator was inextricably tied up with my longing to know my creator ...aka Prem Pal Singh Rawat born Lord of Yogis Greater than God & one time Lord of the Universe who came to me one day. Fuck knows why ,I must have been out of it at the time, but I believed .

Now that I do know more about him I find the notion that he is the manifestation of the creator grotesque, & also find I don't give a rat's arse whether in fact I 'long' for anything in that line much anymore.

Anyway your biggest problem, should you decide to fight the good fight on behalf of your incarnation, wouldn't be your subjective experiences. They could be put on one side.

Howaaaaarrya gonna spin the LILA.

There's the brandy lila
the brat behaviour lila
the shagging blonde lilas
the jagdeo denial lila
the subordinate takes the rap for the dead cyclist lila
and so on and so forth.

Get in touch with the universe of plain fact : that'll fill a big hole for you . The one where your brain should be .

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:40:19 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: Bin Liner
Subject: Re: Is my longing to know satisfied
Message:
My longing to know my creator was inextricably tied up with my longing to know my creator ...aka Prem Pal Singh Rawat born Lord of Yogis Greater than God & one time Lord of the Universe who came to me one day. Fuck knows why ,I must have been out of it at the time, but I believed .

Now that I do know more about him I find the notion that he is the manifestation of the creator grotesque, & also find I don't give a rat's arse whether in fact I 'long' for anything in that line much anymore.

Anyway your biggest problem, should you decide to fight the good fight on behalf of your incarnation, wouldn't be your subjective experiences. They could be put on one side.

Howaaaaarrya gonna spin the LILA.

There's the brandy lila
the brat behaviour lila
the shagging blonde lilas
the jagdeo denial lila
the subordinate takes the rap for the dead cyclist lila
and so on and so forth.

Get in touch with the universe of plain fact : that'll fill a big hole for you . The one where your brain should be .


---

My longing to know my Creator has never gone away Bin. We’re different in a number of ways. For another I don’t give a rat’s arse about your Lilas. They are your problem. Good luck.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 21:49:06 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: R-II, They're Rawats problems not bins' (nt)
Message:
xx
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:00:19 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Richard II
Subject: 'Is my longing to know satisfied '
Message:
Well again we are in the realm of murky, subjective feelings as opposed to clear actual fact. Satisfaction of a ' longing' (if genuinely and completely satisfied...but I'll take your word for it )has no relation to the knowing of ultimate truth as per your terms of reference ie someone revealing the truth of the ' creative force of the universe '

I'm sorry Richard but I STILL only see it as your belief and your personal subjective feelings. You're fully entitled to them but I don't think you are entiled to claim they are the ' ultimate truth of the creative force of the universe ' or claim that Mr P P S Rawat is the one who reveals that truth. You are free to believe it ...anything beyond that is very debatable indeed.

Now if you say ' I believe ...Prem pal etc ' then I have no argument with you apart from thinking what a strange thing to believe :)

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 20:13:11 (EDT)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: PS Richard II
Message:
When I got K in the early 70's I had to sit through hours and hours and hours of satsang before getting k. I don't know when you got K but perhaps you too had to go through this ' priming' or ' conditioning' process. You know, where we are taught how to put it all into context ie Maharaji is Lord not Bal Bhagwan ji ( he and the other bros were just lesser gods...vishnu, shiva etc ahhahaa)and how K is actually knowledge of ' God' or ' the creative force etc ' ..and how ' devotion ' to the living master iss the only true way to ' truth ' etc etc etc

Without any of this .....say if Rawat ( who you didnt know from Adam ) just walked into a coffee bar sat with you for a few mins ...revealed the techniques and said ' do these four techniques for the rest of your life' and then split, never to return. No talk, no ideas, concepts just the actual 'k'.

Would you hold the same belief that you know ' the creative force of the universe ' ?

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:01:00 (EDT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Iis this a private fight,or can anyone join in?
Message:
Rich-

I would like to ask you two simple questions:

1)Can you please,in detail, explain or describe your divine experiences within that you have personally experienced from using the four techniques.

Not festival experiences, but the specific experiences that you have had from poking you know what, you know where, that have led you to believe that you are experiencing God when you do the 4 techniques.

And how often do you have these experiences?

2)Why do you think that 95% of all people who have been shown these techniques have left?
They have decided that they are better off NOT following maharaji, than following him.
Are they all lazy,deluded,too caught up in the world, not sincere enough?

Plus, most of the premies I know in the community where I live have told me that they do not come close to practicing the 4 techniques for an hour minimum every day....almost none of them do...

Why wouldn't the 5% sincere premies practice knowledge and do service as much of the time that they possibly could?
It's the most beautiful thing, right?

Also, would you ever consider asking maharaji if HE practices for an hour a day, minimum?
You see, I saw a woman ask him that in amaroo.
He couldn't answer her, and told her that he was so tired that he once fell asleep in the shower.
Well, that's an interesting fact, and I do think the man should get some more sleep and lead a more balanced lifestyle.
But the fact is, he never answered the question.
Later on, that Q&A was removed from the video that was shown to the premies.

Would you/could you please ask maharaji if HE practices what he preaches?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 13:20:47 (EDT)
From: Richard II
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: Re: can anyone join in?
Message:
La-ex, you asked:

>>1)Can you please,in detail, explain or describe your divine experiences within that you have personally experienced from using the four techniques. Not festival experiences, but the specific experiences that you have had from poking you know what, you know where, that have led you to believe that you are experiencing God when you do the 4 techniques. And how often do you have these experiences?

No, that’s personal property that I don’t care to share. Sorry. Why do you ask?

>>2)Why do you think that 95% of all people who have been shown these techniques have left?
They have decided that they are better off NOT following maharaji, than following him.
Are they all lazy,deluded,too caught up in the world, not sincere enough?

One cannot assume that if you drop a certain discipline you are following that you decide you “are better off NOT following” it. For example, I know I should follow a regular exercise regimen but I’m afraid I am pathetic at keeping it up. There are a lot of things I stop doing that are good for me. Why? Well, perhaps laziness, lack of commitment, lack of getting enough out of it to make it worthwhile to me. I suppose all of these reasons could be used for why premies stop practicing. Another reason though that is not applicable, to say exercise, is premies get confused. They listen to people who have no clarity and stop feeling their own thirst that brought them to want Knowledge in the first place.

>>Plus, most of the premies I know in the community where I live have told me that they do not come close to practicing the 4 techniques for an hour minimum every day....almost none of them do...

That’s their choice. It takes discipline to keep in touch with your heart. As we have gotten older and the number reminders have been removed we are left to stand more on our own two feet with regards to staying inspired. Obviously this is a difficult step to take.

>>Also, would you ever consider asking maharaji if HE practices for an hour a day, minimum?

No. Just like I wouldn’t ask you or anyone else.

>>Would you/could you please ask maharaji if HE practices what he preaches?

Maharaji is not a preacher.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:51:05 (EDT)
From: la-ex
Email: None
To: la-ex
Subject: Rich,care to answer the aboove question? nt
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 11:49:53 (EDT)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Excuse me? Oh, you mean Richard II
Message:
AJW,

I've only been posting on Forum 5 and 6 as Richard for 7 months so I can easily see how you wouldn't know me that well but I'M RICHARD. The person you are debating with is RICHARD II or RICHARD 2. I guess I'll have to go back to being Postie.

Richard the First, a.k.a. Richard the Original Crispy Recipe, a.k.a. Richard, a.k.a. Postie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 17:23:04 (EDT)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Re: Excuse me? Oh, you mean Richard II
Message:
Thanks for clarifying that. I was getting concerned. Hey Richard, isn't richard II also Bjorn?

Isn't there only about 5 real premies at LG. Have to split into multiple personalities to make it look like their site look good.

The premies I knew wouldn't come here and play silly games.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 18:05:48 (EDT)
From: Francesca :C)
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: The premies I know ...
Message:
... wouldn't come here and play silly games either. Right on, Deborah!

bests, Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 12:21:36 (EDT)
From: Francesca :C)
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: How about Postie (Richard)
Message:
You poor maligned soul. I knew dat wasn't you!!!

love, f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 07:29:44 (EDT)
From: don puerco
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: Re: Richard, you're in a muddle.
Message:
there is such an exerience as nectar, i have experienced it long
before i received the k techniques, it's got nothin to do with the
so-called 4th technique..it may be helpful i don't know, but it was
more like a smell for me , real sweet, real cozy, very erotic also,
i had it twice on acid...and in charanands and former bal bhagwans
presence...it just happens.. i'd sure like to get this experience
again..i don't know if sticking your u know what up your u know what
is helping any....
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 05:57:05 (EDT)
From: wolfie
Email: None
To: don puerco
Subject: on acid I was god himself
Message:
Hi
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 11:47:06 (EDT)
From: don puerco
Email: None
To: wolfie
Subject: Re: on acid I was god himself
Message:
who the heck is god ???
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 06:52:00 (EDT)
From: AJW
Email: anthginn@yahoo.com
To: All
Subject: Way, can you email me please?
Message:
I've lost your email address.

Anth lost half his memory too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:09:22 (EDT)
From: Way
Email: None
To: AJW
Subject: done [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index