Ex-Premie Forum 7 Archive
From: Feb 09, 2002 To: Feb 19, 2002 Page: 4 of: 5


Wish -:- Local Meetings over, only feeds -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:15:26 (EST)
__ janet -:- oh my-what about aspirants??? -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:20:20 (EST)
__ __ Deborah -:- ***Best of Forum*** -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 20:45:51 (EST)
__ __ Pullaver -:- Re: oh my-what about aspirants??? -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:47:37 (EST)
__ __ James Brown (GFOS) -:- Ow! You go, Jai! Git on UP-ah! (nt) -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:04:24 (EST)
__ __ missing the good old days ex -:- Not a bad idea, Janet..... -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:00:23 (EST)
__ The Maharaji of Malibu -:- is just doing a takeaway? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 05:07:52 (EST)
__ __ Cynthia -:- New communities and darshan starvation??? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 20:36:34 (EST)
__ __ A quiet commentator -:- Re: is just doing a takeaway? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 07:52:12 (EST)
__ __ __ TROLL ALERT -:- Something smells here -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 09:37:13 (EST)
__ ChrisP -:- Re: Local Meetings over, only feeds -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:56:18 (EST)

Deputy Dog =) -:- Article from 'The Onion' -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:20:28 (EST)
__ Jim -:- Like walking by a beautiful hooker -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:42:33 (EST)
__ __ Cynthia -:- Amen! -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 21:30:04 (EST)

Deputy -:- -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:17:13 (EST)

Deputy -:- -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:17:13 (EST)

Joe -:- Question regarding Shri Hans -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 15:24:08 (EST)
__ Will -:- Re: Question regarding Shri Hans -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 15:58:26 (EST)
__ __ Joe -:- Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:30:02 (EST)
__ __ __ Pullaver -:- e-mail addresses -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:54:51 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Yeah, I sent him one too -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:23:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Pullaver -:- Anathematically Correct -:- Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 16:11:18 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- What is Dr. Ron Geaves' problem??? -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:54:38 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jethrp -:- Just a small point -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:02:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- That's right -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:08:43 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Opie -:- Re: That's right -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:19:26 (EST)
__ __ __ Patrick W -:- Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:30:26 (EST)
__ __ __ __ janet -:- Re:ask Ron Geaves -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:47:56 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ PatD -:- That's right Janet -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 16:52:20 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jim -:- Great start, Patrick -- but try him again -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:15:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Pattrick W -:- Re: Great start, Patrick -- but try him again -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:32:01 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:07:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ A Friend -:- Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 14:14:18 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Beware spiritual ego!! -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 16:11:59 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- 99 languages? -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:15:07 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: 99 languages? -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:47:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Re: 99 languages? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 19:08:16 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: 99 languages? -:- Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 05:28:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Comparison shopping? -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:46:24 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Comparison shopping? -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:41:12 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Patrick W -:- Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:12:59 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:39:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Re: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 23:04:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Ron Geaves -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:06:02 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:10:58 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Patrick W -:- Re: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:08:34 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Sarupanand temple -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 23:13:15 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ A Friend -:- Re: Sarupanand temple -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 14:25:47 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Lineage/Ron Geaves -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:21:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Spelling question and intent -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:06:00 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick W -:- Re: Spelling question and intent -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:29:35 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- This is what Lane says -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:43:51 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A Friend -:- Re: This is what Lane says -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 14:49:08 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ A Friend -:- What Charan Singh says -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 15:08:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Can't you see through this charade? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 18:54:45 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.' -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:56:37 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatD -:- Re: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.' -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:04:14 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jethro -:- Re: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.' -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:40:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Joe -:- Thanks Jethro and Pat -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:43:15 (EST)
__ __ __ Will -:- email -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:51:59 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Nick -:- Re: email: are you sure? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 03:19:47 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Joe -:- Thanks -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:58:41 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Will -:- Re: Thanks -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 10:52:19 (EST)

gerry -:- We have liftoff... (nt) -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 15:22:33 (EST)
__ Mercedes -:- Thanks Gerry...(nt) -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:30:28 (EST)

Your Premie -:- Why have you abandoned me? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 03:59:10 (EST)
__ Richard -:- Re: Why have you abandoned me? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 13:10:51 (EST)
__ a fly on the wall -:- Beat me! Whip me! ... -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:17:59 (EST)
__ wolfie -:- Re: Why have you abandoned me? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:00:20 (EST)
__ Tonette -:- This is a joke right? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:46:40 (EST)
__ __ JHB -:- I don't think so, Tonette -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 08:37:46 (EST)
__ __ __ Tonette -:- Oh wow, whoops, sorry....... -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 09:24:39 (EST)
__ Patrick W -:- Never be fearful again Your Premie -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 06:06:56 (EST)
__ __ cq -:- 'God to a goldfish is a bigger Goldfish' -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:14:06 (EST)
__ PatC -:- Good luck, sister er brother? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:23:55 (EST)
__ __ OTS -:- Re: Good luck, sister er brother? -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 17:12:37 (EST)

Maharaji -:- Thank you, DJ -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:25:32 (EST)
__ PatC -:- Re: Thank you, DJ -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:29:23 (EST)
__ __ Richard -:- Thanks Pat -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:34:08 (EST)
__ __ __ PatC -:- Re: Thanks -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:36:53 (EST)

Jerry -:- The David Blaine cult -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:11:51 (EST)
__ Scott T. -:- Re: The David Blaine cult -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:58:45 (EST)

Patrick W -:- I think-Knowledge good/Gurus bad -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 07:02:07 (EST)
__ OTS -:- John*****BEST OF BORING*******[NT] -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:13:23 (EST)
__ Pullaver -:- Re: I think-Knowledge good/Gurus bad -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 08:10:43 (EST)
__ Mike Finch -:- Patrick, Jim and PatC and others -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:25:06 (EST)
__ __ Dermot -:- Hold on a second, Mike. -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 20:25:59 (EST)
__ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Re: Hold on a second, Mike. -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:02:33 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Dermot -:- Re: Hold on a second, Mike. -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:01:04 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Re: Hold on a second, Mike. -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 13:09:51 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Dermot -:- Ok Mike... [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 19:36:48 (EST)
__ __ __ Jim the ONLY forum watchdog -:- Nice try, Dermot -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 22:21:34 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Re: Nice try, Dermot -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:13:32 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Tongue-in-cheek -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:45:31 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Ddermot -:- It's ok Jim -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 22:52:13 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Nonsense, Dermot -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 23:08:29 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Dermot -:- I'm glad -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 23:30:04 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Re: I'm glad - to Dermot OT -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 23:37:43 (EST)
__ __ PatC -:- Knowledge and meditation -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:44:50 (EST)
__ __ __ Francesca -:- Pat, your rundown was FAB! :) -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 15:45:41 (EST)
__ __ __ A Friend -:- Re: Knowledge and meditation -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 15:23:46 (EST)
__ __ __ __ PatC -:- Hi, Friend, I was reading your posts... -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 16:22:27 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Re: Hi, Friend, I was reading your posts... -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 17:14:19 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Thanks, Mike! (nt) [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 15:48:19 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Thanks, Mike -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 17:28:55 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Mike Finch -:- Re: Thanks, Mike -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:49:01 (EST)
__ __ PatD -:- Re: Patrick, Jim and PatC and others -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:15:55 (EST)
__ __ Dermot -:- Re: Patrick, Jim and PatC and others -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 13:14:11 (EST)
__ Bryn -:- Onward ever onward! -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 09:17:41 (EST)
__ Francesca :~) -:- Showing someone, or ... -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 18:58:08 (EST)
__ __ Francesca -:- Other teachers -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 22:01:03 (EST)
__ __ __ Jim -:- At least it wasn't plastic surgery -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 22:23:03 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Francesca :~) -:- As I told in my story many times -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 02:14:10 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Deborah -:- I like what you have to say -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 21:57:07 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- How do you know they know ANYthing? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:09:15 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- I'm not sure mastery is the word -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:00:15 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- But ARE there really any trails? -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 16:45:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Yes there are trails -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 01:43:30 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Hm, that's not quite what I meant -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 13:18:12 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Hope this is the last on this -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 20:46:28 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Well said, Fran, but I'm green;) with envy -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 21:23:46 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Who's the watchdog?????? -:- Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 21:23:14 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- I won't be taking this thread elsewhere -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 00:52:05 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- No, you miss the point -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:18:13 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Just great, Francesca -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:07:02 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca :~) -:- company of truth or sangha -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:14:49 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deputy Dog =) -:- What is IS! -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:34:49 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Thanks for the link -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 14:23:26 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Deputy dog =) -:- Re: Thanks for the link -:- Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 14:15:52 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Francesca -:- Thanks again Dog -:- Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 21:40:30 (EST)
__ __ Dermot -:- Yep,neatly sums up M/K Francesca [nt] -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 19:06:48 (EST)
__ Jim -:- No way -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:30:01 (EST)
__ __ Patrick W -:- Re: No way -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 18:09:33 (EST)
__ __ __ Jim -:- Re: No way -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 22:14:52 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Patrick W -:- Re: No way -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:01:52 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- A few things -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:35:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Patrick W -:- Re: A few things -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:45:58 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ Jim -:- Re: A few things -:- Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:41:47 (EST)
__ __ Dermot -:- Agreed Jim -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:54:24 (EST)
__ Occasional Poster -:- Thanks Patrick ... -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 14:52:27 (EST)
__ PatC -:- Thanks, Patrick -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 13:29:27 (EST)
__ __ Patrick W -:- We need to break the spell. -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 14:51:28 (EST)
__ __ __ cq -:- BEST OF FORUM - raising important questions -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 14:23:51 (EST)
__ __ __ ChrisP -:- Breaking out of an invisible mould -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:27:43 (EST)
__ __ __ PatD -:- Interesting thoughts PW -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 19:28:46 (EST)
__ __ __ PatC -:- Re: We need to break the spell. -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 16:11:21 (EST)
__ __ __ __ Loaf -:- Meditation OT ?? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 03:32:43 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- Re: Meditation OT ?? -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:15:19 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ Loaf -:- A had another aspirant.. but he passed away -:- Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 05:04:24 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ PatC -:- That's better than mislaying an aspirant [nt] -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:42:55 (EST)
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Loaf -:- thats why aspirants need co-ordinating -:- Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 04:15:16 (EST)
__ Richard -:- EX-cellent dissertation, Patrick -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 10:59:30 (EST)
__ __ Marshall -:- Absolutely Fabulous -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:39:00 (EST)
__ Livia -:- Re: I think-Knowledge good/Gurus bad -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:36:38 (EST)
__ Jerry -:- I think Knowledge bullshit/Gurus too(nt) -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:16:25 (EST)
__ __ Joy -:- I agree w/Jerry--but great post anyway, Patrick -:- Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 11:34:43 (EST)


Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:15:26 (EST)
From: Wish
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Local Meetings over, only feeds
Message:
I've been away from knowledge for 2 years, and followed this forum for about a year. Last week I got a letter from the cult saying that the local events are over since the beginning of the year, and only satellite feeds, and a video library are available to the faithfuls. When I read that letter I laught out loud. The local meetings, a social club of sorts, kept the cult together. So even the faithful church ladies that would never dream abandoning the cult, well now the cult has abondoned you! I mean how long will premies stay faithful to some tv evangalist. I remember m saying that people had to attend local meetings, just watching videos at home was not enough of a commitment. This is probably old news for the regulars here. Are local meetings finished everywhere?

Surely there will be special meetings and they will all be FUND RAISERS.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:20:20 (EST)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Wish
Subject: oh my-what about aspirants???
Message:
goodness me. how will we ever be able to tell who the sincere aspirants are, now?? I mean, for years now, it has been a very strict condition of receiving Knowledge , that you have to be recognizable to the local propagation leaders for regularly showing your face at all the local events!! they have to know you by your name and face for at least 5 months, before they take your interest seriously.

NOW how will anyone know?? Poor interested folks might come across Maharaji's face on Dishnet satellite broadcasts, and become dedicated watcher;s ,never missing a single broadcast, and how is anyone gonna know??

why, just think--all those broadcasts. all that PR effort, with the articles and the interviews and the TV documentary--and all these new people getting so fascinated...how ever are they all going to find the rest of the master's followers? how ever will the rest of the PWKS know who they are and whether they are really serious about dedicating their lives to Knowledge???

'put yo Haynds on the screen! kin ya FEEL it, brothers and sisters?! FEEL the POWAH, as ah BLESS you awl in the naym of tha LOWD! ah aam, RIGHT this mow-ment, ree cee ving a spayshul BLESSin, an ah am sendin owt ta yew, by means of this HO'w- lee Grayse that Gaw'ad has invested in me!
just pt yo fo-head to the screen, an clwz yo aaaaz, and you will see the LIGHT! that is the Grayse of Gaw'd, ma children. yes, it eeiz! when eva you see that LIGHT, i wantcha ta know that you are seein ME, childrun, yes! you are ko-neckted to me, thru this dee vine powa that ah have, to Sayv Yuuuuu...'


---

---

---
-
wait! I have it!
we start holding events, ourselves again, in our own localities, just like in the old days--advertise in the papers and on radio--
'this is for anyone who has heard of Maharaji or seen him on dishnet tv, who would like to meet others who know his secret. '

people come, and we tell them the whole truth. and give them the techniques, too.

us ex's/

cool! it'll be like old times!
except absolutely NO smoothing of white tablecloths.
BYOB. larkin can write our new antidevotional song repertoire. with new tablature for guitar.

oh the possibilities are so rich.

i miss the old days, don't you? it's time to do prachar again, and save the human race from darkness.

anyone up for it?
I could use a social life again.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 20:45:51 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: ***Best of Forum***
Message:
You paint a lucid picture, sister.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:47:37 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Re: oh my-what about aspirants???
Message:
The only requirement nowadays to receive K is a healthy bank balance and a Platinum American Express card.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:04:24 (EST)
From: James Brown (GFOS)
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Ow! You go, Jai! Git on UP-ah! (nt)
Message:
GFOS=GodFather Of Soul
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:00:23 (EST)
From: missing the good old days ex
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: Not a bad idea, Janet.....
Message:
Hmmmm...hold on a minute there, girl, maybe you're onto something there...

How about a 'maharaji press conference' that is sponsored by the ex-premie community?
It could be videotaped, with lots of printed handouts available as well.
I'm sure some sort of media could be attracted, even if its only a local cable access channel ...(from Malibu perhaps?)...

This videotaped event could then be sold to local 'city contacts' in the ex community so that they could sponsor their own local events in their own community.
Could be shown for free on local cable access channels, or online- a 'virtual' press conference-beat M at his own techno game....
Of course it would be open to premies, aspirants and new people, as well as local media....
A small fee for the videotape and 'local contact franchise agreement' would help support epo.
It goes without saying that it would all have to be totally SYNCHRONISED, but that may not be hard to do, because a lot of us recent exes have 3 decades of experience in:

1)Being told what to do and following orders.
2)Watching videos with a blank stare on our faces, and assuming that all of it is true.
3)Not thinking.
4)Being in 'that experience'....(we can just pretend that we are having an experience from mindlessly gazing at the video...everyone else will have to agree, or look stupid, so we can all pretend we are having 'that experience'....the emperor really doesn't have to have any clothes, right?)
5)Paying money without questioning, to avoid guilty feelings.

So, we have a lot going for us...maybe we can use the aikido of the premie momentum to switch over to the ex side.

'Janet for National Coordinator'.....
'Jim for National legal analyst'...
'JM for National Archivist'...
'Joe for National Editorialist'...
'MD for National Historian'...
'Pat C for National Liason to SF gay community'
'Donner for National Chief of Staff'....
'Sir Dave for National Website designer'...
'John Mc for National Press Secretary'....

the possibilities are endless....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 05:07:52 (EST)
From: The Maharaji of Malibu
Email: None
To: Wish
Subject: is just doing a takeaway?
Message:
This may be a permanent move by mr. skunk but it also gives him the option of making their little hearts yearn for community; then, he can give it back (after taking it away)at a price.

Of course, with no community, it makes it impossible for his prisoners to notice how many continue to escape. It also allows him to fade into the sunset by letting the prisoners association gradually disband.

This move gives the malibu maha many options, given the fact that he cares not for his inmates.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 20:36:34 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: The Maharaji of Malibu
Subject: New communities and darshan starvation???
Message:
It will be interesting to see how this develops. A possible senario:??

A lot of premies have left already. Those remaining will be bored to tears while becoming more deeply programmed, i.e, brain damaged by the repetition of watching videos and the feeds. M has decided it's time for him which means he's liquidating assets to set himself up for the future. Premies will crave and beg for darshan and he'll hold little programs, holding out just long enough to get the right price. He'll hold small programs around the countries
between yachting and jet-setting.

It's quite possible the premies will evolve into giving ''satsang'' to eachother again out of a dire need to feel that feeling, and to do that, they'll have to get together. The New, New Community. Wink, Wink. No they aren't giving satsang, we're just watching videos together. Wink, Wink. No M's not the Lord but they'll scurry to any live program. Wink Wink, no that's not an alter and that's not an arti tray, either...

Instead of the Sunday potlucks with tofu and veggies, they'll have bbq's with ribs and beer.

Cynthia, anything's possible

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 07:52:12 (EST)
From: A quiet commentator
Email: None
To: The Maharaji of Malibu
Subject: Re: is just doing a takeaway?
Message:
and your post shows a really nasty streak to your personality mr anonirat

are you who we think your are?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 09:37:13 (EST)
From: TROLL ALERT
Email: None
To: A quiet commentator
Subject: Something smells here
Message:
Excuse yourself, 'commentator.'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:56:18 (EST)
From: ChrisP
Email: None
To: Wish
Subject: Re: Local Meetings over, only feeds
Message:
I've heard the same story for our community through our grapevine as well. So I guess it's back to crowded living rooms with satellite feeds and re-renting videos. Soon everyone will have them memorized.

And the only thing left will be, yes, fundraising. I figure MJ giving an interview (first one in 20-some years) to a leading American business magazine this spring would be a good marketing strategy in that area. Then Y. Weiss can take his call-for-support tour to American CEO's next.

Egad, it's so soulless...

ChrisP, I used to think he was cool.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:20:28 (EST)
From: Deputy Dog =)
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Article from 'The Onion'
Message:
After that much needed time out, here is an article from The Onion that could be a metaphor for what often goes on here.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
-

Black Gospel Choir Makes Man Wish He Believed In All That God Bullshit.

COLUMBUS, OH — The gloriously jubilant gospel singing that pours forth each Sunday from Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church is enough to make local resident Doug Kamin wish he believed in all that God bullshit.

'Their music is so spiritual and passionate. Whenever I walk past that church and hear it, it stirs something deep within my soul,' said Kamin, 28, a self-described atheist who was raised Catholic. 'It's almost powerful enough to make me forget about what a load of happy horseshit Christianity is.'

Kamin, who lives two blocks from Bethel AME Church, passes the church most Sundays en route to his local Starbucks. Though he has rejected the existence of God ever since discovering Marx and Nietzsche in the 10th grade, Kamin admitted that the exuberant singing of the church choir often produces in him a feeling of longing.

'It must be so life-affirming to be in there, connecting with fellow human beings and celebrating your faith while making that joyful noise,' said Kamin, a doctoral candidate in political science at Ohio State University. 'I still say it's a big, delusional fairy tale, this whole religion thing, but what's the harm in believing in a 2,000-year-old carpenter and some 'holy ghost' if it makes you happy?'

Kamin first discovered Bethel AME Church in May 2000, shortly after moving to the neighborhood. Long accustomed to dismissing all forms of Christian ceremony and worship as 'hysterical' and 'cult-like,' Kamin overheard a rendition of 'The Old Ship Of Zion' that led him to amend his opinion.

'I can't remember the words, but the soloist sang something like 'Join me on the old Ship of Zion, and you'll find peace in the Lord,'' Kamin said. 'The song probably went back to the slave days. Anyway, it stopped me dead in my tracks. I just stood in front of the church and let the music surround me. For that moment, I totally forgot what an artificial construct God is.'

Kamin said the gospel hymns he heard that first day reverberated in his head for hours.
'I found myself humming 'Mary Don't You Weep' and 'Move On Up A Little Higher' and all these other songs,' Kamin said. 'It made me think how amazing it is that a historically oppressed people can continue to persevere and derive strength from its music and its faith. I was very moved.'

Added Kamin: 'From a purely sociological and historical viewpoint, that is. Not spiritually.'
Despite his attraction to the Bethel AME Church, Kamin still can't bring himself to believe in the existence of a supreme being.

'There's simply too much evolutionary and cosmological evidence against it,' Kamin said. 'No offense to anybody, but I just can't buy into the parting of the Red Sea and the Immaculate Conception and all those other Biblical tall tales any more than I can The Odyssey.'

Kamin said he would love to experience a Bethel service, but expressed doubt that he would be welcome there.
'I bet they can smell an atheist a mile away,' Kamin said. 'I shouldn't taint their experience with my cold rationalism and irrefutable logic. And the fact that I'm white probably wouldn't help matters, either.'

Kamin need not worry, said Rev. Lawrence Stovall, Bethel's senior pastor.

'People of all colors and creeds are welcome in the house of the Lord, even non-believers like Doug,' Stovall said. 'Perhaps our abiding faith in Jesus and love for our fellow man will, at the very least, inspire him to quit living in his head all the time.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:42:33 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Deputy Dog =)
Subject: Like walking by a beautiful hooker
Message:
Funny article, yes. But honestly reflective of many peoples' experience, I think. Those songs are meant to make you feel that way. Of course people feel the siren song of religion when they hear them. Everyone, in some way, would like to be able to cast off the burden of life and the world, especially if it means hiding from the haunting knowledge of our own mortality. So religion beckons.

But all that glitters is not gold, Dog. Hey, there's another one for you!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 21:30:04 (EST)
From: Cynthia
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Amen!
Message:
The good part is you don't have to join the religion to enjoy the music. You can just walk on by.

You can buy a CD, play it, like it, feel good, turn off the stereo.

Go to a concert, feel moved, and go home.

Read a book, become inspired, learn stuff, then it's done.

Look at a sunset....errrr...never mind on that one...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:17:13 (EST)
From: Deputy
Email: None
To: All
Subject:
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:17:13 (EST)
From: Deputy
Email: None
To: All
Subject:
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 15:24:08 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: kevjo@mindspring.com
To: All
Subject: Question regarding Shri Hans
Message:
The Passages video starts out with statements about there always having been 'masters' with a series of pictures, just like on Maharaji's now defunct website, with the implication that Maharaji has impeccable "master" lineage. One thing the video says is the following:

Narrator: …Maharaji’s father, Shri Hans Ji Maharaj had been a student of such a Master named Sarupanand. On Sarupanand’s passing, Shri Hans Ji Maharaj became Master in 1936. He spent the next 30 years spreading the knowledge Sarupanand had showed him…

I think on EPO it says that Shri Hans didn't have a direct lineage from Sarupanand, and that Sarupanand had chosen somebody else to carry on as 'master' after him.

Does anyone know about this?

Also, anybody who wants to see this video, who hasn't already emailed me, please do so. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 15:58:26 (EST)
From: Will
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Question regarding Shri Hans
Message:
The Passages video is misleading, but technically correct when it says that Shri Hans bacame 'Master' on Sarupanand's passing. If the video wanted to be clear and honest, it would have stated that Shri Hans declared himself to be 'Master,' but Sarupanand did not appoint Shri Hans as such. Of course, as stated in the video, it is probably infered by all the premies that there was a legitimate, official, and spiritual passing of the 'Mastership' to Shri Hans.

In fact, the devotees of Sarupanand did not begin to follow Shri Hans, rather Shri Hans left for a different area of India and started his own mission of Knowledge from scratch, so to speak.

True, perhaps, that it was the same Knowledge that he had been shown by Sarupanand. But MANY of Sarupanand's followers became 'Masters' after Sarupanand's death and they all taught the techniques to any students they could interest.

The death of a Master always brings on a big fracas among the potential God Incarnates.

Maharaji spoke about the transference of the mastership after the death of Guru Nanak, in which case there too was a messy fight about who would carry on and be top dog, I mean top god. Maharaji said that Nanak had given his guruship to a top devotee instead of either one of his own two sons. This story was told by Maharaji in 1974 or so, in the same satsang that contained the infamous thousand rotting vegetables.

It is amusing and pathetic to think about Shri Hans's devotees and their dilemma upon his death. Everyone would no doubt be grieving and wondering what to do. Then when it was offically determined that God had transfered himself from Shri Hans' dead body into Prempal little eight year old body, I suppose that the poor premies had to make some adjustments. But some premies can be very tenacious in their servitude, as we all now know.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:30:02 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Will
Subject: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves
Message:
This is outrageous Will and thanks for clarifying that. It's clear that the video is saying that Shri Hans took over from Sarupanand in 1936, because it said that Shri Hans became MASTER, it didn't say 'A MASTER,' or 'declared himself master.'

That video is full of blatant misrepresentations like that.

I really want to have a discussion with Ron Geaves about that video, because he is a professor of Religion, and presumably cares about historical accuracy. Indeed, his website refers to his devotion to 'academic rigor.' Well, if that video is anything but rigorous in purusing actual facts.

I have two emails for Ron Geaves:

r.geaves@chester.ac.uk

R.A.Geaves@wlv.ac.uk

Does anyone know if either is the correct one, or if there is a different one where I can reach him?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 09:54:51 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: e-mail addresses
Message:
I would suggest that the second e-mail address is missing the 'r' between the G and e. What the hey, send it to both addresses, the worst that can happen is that they will be returned to you address unknown. And then you'll know.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:23:03 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Pullaver
Subject: Yeah, I sent him one too
Message:
I think I mentioned it but I also sent Geaves an email last week:

Hi Ron,

As an ex-premie with an active interest in Maharaji I noticed the two folowing papers you plan to present:

Geaves, R.A (June 20-23rd 2002) 'From Divine Light Mission to Elan Vital: an Exploration of change and adaptation, Centre for the Studies on New Religions, The 2002 International Conference Minority Religions, Social Change, and freedom of Conscience, University of Utah: Salt Lake City

Geaves, R.A. (April 2002) 'From Totapuri to Maharaji: Reflections on a Lineage (parampara)', Cambridge

Are you aware of the extensive commentary on both issues that's on the ex-premie site? Here's a link to a page that introduces those discussions:

http://www.ex-premie.org/papers/indian.htm

There's also lots and lots of interesting analysis and anecdotal material elsewhere on ex-premie.org (EPO) as well as the related ex-premie forums.

Are you interested in any sort of dialogue on these issues? How about an advance copy of your work(s) in progress for some informed feedback and criticism? This could be interesting, don't you think? Maharaji himself seems to have never encouraged, let alone participated in, these discussions. Indeed, the whole idea of honest, uncensored reflection seems entirely anethmatic to his 'leadership style'. But if you're nonetheless willing to consider these topics with academic thoroughness and intellectual rigour, I applaud you. Let's talk.

Sincerely,

Jim Heller

I sent it to r.geaves@chester.ac.uk

I've vowed to stay home until I get an answer. It's been five days now and I'm getting hungry.....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 16:11:18 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Anathematically Correct
Message:
Ron didn't reply 'cuz you said anethmatic instead of anathematic which is still a bit of a construct. And as we know any good Oxford Religion and Philosophy Major worth his salt would never lower himself to discourse with an obvious illiterate pagan atheist. Or maybe he thought you were describing Maha as being asthmatic and of course all bets would be off because asthma is anathema to holy name and holy breath.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:54:38 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: kevjo@mindspring.com
To: Pullaver
Subject: What is Dr. Ron Geaves' problem???
Message:
Ron Geaves has a website on which he talks about his interests in studying religion. He works at Chester College in Liverpool, UK, and he did get my email with all my questions about the Passages Video and what he said in it and the problems I had with it.

He acknowledged getting the email, but said I should send it to his home email, but didn't give me the address. I have since sent him two emails asking him to please supply the correct email, but he has not responded.

Clearly, if he had any interest in being honest about all this, he would give me the correct email address. Further, he HAS my letter to him, which he could just read and respond to if he wanted.

Unfortunatelly, I am getting the impression, which I hope is wrong, that he has no interest in being either open or honest about any of this, and is just hiding out, too chicken to talk to anyone about it. As I said, I hope that's not true, because one would think that a Professor of Religion would have at least some interest in the truth, and in setting the record straight, espeically on the subject of a 'spriritual' master like Maharaji and his history.

I'm sure he wouldn't want the impression left to the world that he participated in making a dishonest, revisionist, lying video about his 'master' and his history. Therefore, I hope Dr. Ron Geaves does correspond with us about this, at least to tell us he doesn't want to. At least that much courtesy should be expected

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:02:33 (EST)
From: Jethrp
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Just a small point
Message:
The word professor here in the UK does not have ths ame meaning as in the USA. You see to call anyone who lectures in a college 'professor'.

In the UK. lecturers/researcers are awarded professorships and are hard to come by.

Ron Geaves is not yet a professor. I say 'yet', because I just rememebered that he told me that he would be a professor within 2 years.

Jethro

PS did I mention that he told me that in December 1999.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:08:43 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jethrp
Subject: That's right
Message:
You are right Jeth, and I actually did know that. I thought it said on Geaves' website that he was a professor, but actually it only says he is a Senior Lecturer. Thanks for the clarification.

So, why is a Senior Lecturer in Religion unwilling to discuss this?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:19:26 (EST)
From: Opie
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: That's right
Message:
You asked
So, why is a Senior Lecturer in Religion unwilling to discuss this?

---

Perhaps because he knows the game is up. A bit like someone who is totally rat-arsed, lying down and clinging to the ground like mad for fear of falling off the planet. :(

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:30:26 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves
Message:
What Will said is right on. Ron Geaves wrote an article on Enjoying Life a while back, about how he had met an old mahatma of Swarupanand whilst in India recently whilst going to see Maharaji there. The fellow died before Elan Vital could get an sound byte. Anyway here's my letter to him from 6/3/01 if you're interested :

Dear Ron,

You probably don't know me, although I believe that I may have met you in the past. Mike Finch (whom I'm sure you do know) and I started Brighton Ashram together in the late 70's. He used to tell me about the lineage of Maharaji and kindled some interest in me back then.

At present there is some general discussion amongst premies here, and the so-called 'ex-premies', who have drawn me on the subject since I have done a little of my own research which I have attempted to share. I have no idea whether or not any of this is true, but I have merely presented the results of my enquiries to those who are interested. If you can clarify anything about the subject all well and good. If not - so be it.

I would stress that as a non-academic these days I have no pretence of my extremely limited investigations being a scholarly exercise - it has been merely an interest that came from my personal desire to find out some true background on Maharaji and his roots, for personal reasons. I do not seek to scandalise or to diminish the reputation of any of the Guru's concerned, dead or alive, or their followers. I am just fascinated that, around these Masters, there is a historic pattern of disagreement at high level as to who is supposed to be the next one!

It was for these reasons that I was interested to read of your emotive
meeting with Akhand Yoganandji. He sounds like a venerable old fellow indeed and what a shame he passed away before you could see him again or the premies could get a sound-byte.

Whilst I have no reason to doubt that Akhand was telling the truth, I have also read a biography of Swarupanand - the book called 'Paramhans Advait Mat'- where he is most elaborately described, appointing a mahatma called Vairag Anand as his chosen successor, a gentleman who indeed went on with the mission in Guna afterwards as far as I can see. I have this book in front of me here and it says, black on white, that Swarupanand appointed this Vairag Anand to be his successor, and it describes by name and at great length all those present and the time and place when this happened amongst many other things.

Do you know what Shri Hans' given name was? - as a mahatma of Sarupanand that is? In this book, there are listed literally dozens of Mahatmas names amongst which I have found no 'Hans'. Should I be looking for someone else?

I gather that Divine Light Mission saw the other mission that ensued with Vairag Anand at it's head after Swarupanand died, as a bogus mission as it were - with a self-proclaimed but unrightful leader. I see that the early DLM literature supports this stance, accusing Vairag Anand by name as being a scoundrel who ran off with mission money or some such words.

I would love to know what actually took place, but the more I enquire, the more that I am frustrated, since the 'split' seems to have produced two distinctly different camps with conflicting versions of events.

I spoke to Professor David Lane a while ago (he is a fairly well-known
scholar of Indian religious groups in the USA -also an initiate of a
Muktananda was it?) who referred me to the book which I now have in my possession. Lane told me in an email that he too met an old mahatma (also of Swarupanand I seem to remember) who merely recalled that Shri Hans had been chucked out of an ashram for some scandalous reason to do with women I presume - he used the word 'sex' actually. Lane rightly commented that you can't believe everything you hear in India. So that was not so helpful.

Now, taking everything that Akhand Yoganandji told you into account, and considering that the Advait Mat biography goes into such very extraordinary and lengthy detail about Swarupanand's daily life (this book is pretty thick!), and DLM conversely seem to have rather little to offer as historical documentation of Shri Hans' past with Swarupanand, it would seem plausible that Shri Hans, although a devoted and beloved follower of Swarupanand, may have gone off and done his own thing at some stage - possibly even unaware that Swarupanand had appointed Vairaganand or even that the former had died.

Is there any evidence to suggest that this book I have is merely a work of
revisionism I wonder?

It seems to me that some attempt to seek out and question living members of Advaitanand's and Shri Hans' followers, or other people who were around, would be helpful to determine better what actually happened back then. The best result would clearly be to find and interview people who witnessed these events who were impartial observers since DLM and premies are naturally eager to confirm that Hans Ji was the rightful guru and the other lot to prove their man etc. I guess this is now a remote possibility.

Also, do you happen to know who Akhand Yoganandji's guru was after
Sarupanand's death? or even more recently?

At the end of the day I recognise that to make judgements about a Guru's
worth by coldly analysing the historical context is not entirely appropriate. Of course there is almost always a dispute that arises within the family of these Guru's when the Master dies. Maharaji himself is clearly not exempt from this principle since his brother Satpal seems to be convinced that Shri Hans intended him to be the next guru! There is a page on his website which is about Shri Hans.

For me, knowing the roots helps me a little to understand and come to terms
with something that has been a singular influence on my life since I was 17 years old. I still practice the meditation but wonder whether this guru
business isn't more down to social and human dynamics, than the 'Divine'
manifesting as one particular authoritative person -as is the suggestion.
Whilst I acknowledge that Maharaji as a teacher is loved and trusted by many including your good self - I have unfortunately had an increasingly hard time coming to terms with the 'surrender' aspect of his philosophy which I feel hurt me a lot in the past. That's another story though! I hope you don't mind me writing to you about this.

Sincerely

Patrick Wilson

Ron Geaves wrote back simply :

There are a number of points that you have raised that require considerable analysis. I would need to find time to discuss them them all properly in order to do them justice. I am not sure that I have the time at this stage so you may have to wait a while.
warm regards

Dr. Ron Geaves


---

---

---
-

I guess he's still to busy to discuss this in the depth it deserves 'cos I haven't heard any more from him since.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:47:56 (EST)
From: janet
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re:ask Ron Geaves
Message:
doesn't he think it negligent of himself not to examine the true history of his own preferred path of discipleship, while so minutely studying and lecturing about his research on the histories of all others?
isn't that a bit like wiping everyone else's behind except your own?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 16:52:20 (EST)
From: PatD
Email: None
To: janet
Subject: That's right Janet
Message:
I have a BIG problem with people who knew exactly what a hypocritical scumbag Prem is, as long ago as almost 30 yrs, & kept their superior being,close to the main-man fucking traps tight shut,because they knew in their gut that regardless of all the spiel in satsang, that it wouldn't go down too well with the guys at the back of the hall(like me).

When they're still at it, it's even worse.

I don't know anything about fragrant Ron,but I'd guess he's a guy who's invented his own job,& good luck to him.

If this stuff comes to haunt him it'll be interesting to see which way he jumps. Will it be the lotus feet or the paycheque?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:15:33 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Great start, Patrick -- but try him again
Message:
That was a great letter, Patrick (except for the one or two obvious parts you just know I wince at a bit). But you wrote this almost a year ago and now Geaves is preparing to present a paper on the very topic of guru lineages! Perhaps you should ask him if he's given your letter any further thought yet. He must have.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:32:01 (EST)
From: Pattrick W
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Great start, Patrick -- but try him again
Message:
That was a great letter, Patrick (except for the one or two obvious parts you just know I wince at a bit). But you wrote this almost a year ago and now Geaves is preparing to present a paper on the very topic of guru lineages! Perhaps you should ask him if he's given your letter any further thought yet. He must have.

As we say here 'I can't be arsed'. Yeah, I really do know the bits that make you wince..I put them there just for your pleasure you know.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:07:28 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves
Message:
Hi Patrick,

Vairag Anand's organisatiom is alive and well here in the UK.
I met the chief mahatma about 8 or 9 years ago. I was a premie then and went to talk to this man. He said he remembered Hans as being a 'satsangi'.
He said that when Sarupanand died , 4 people went off and started their own missions. He never tried to sell me the'the only one master' bit.
But I did to try and tell him that prempal was the only true master. I gave him all the early DLM literature about the Holy family and stuff,which he returned to me some weeks later without comment.
Ineterestingly enough, in the ashram I went to, they used phrases like JSCA. Also most of the Mahatmas names were the same as in DLM.
He also gave me the same book as you have with all the satsangs of the previous masters. Now we know where prem got all his satsangs from!

I also met his Guru Maharaji, who the Mahatma told me speaks 99 languages(sound familiar?). I went to see his Guru, who was Vairag Anand or his successor. I went through darshan(I didn't kiss his feet) and when I passed by, the Mahtama said to GMJ that I was a devotee of Balyogeshwar. The Guru, who only spoke broken English, told me to continue meditating and I will realise God.
I was also asked if I wanted to receive knowledge.

Bye for now

Jethro

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 14:14:18 (EST)
From: A Friend
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves
Message:
Hi Jethro,

I thought the advice about all you really need to do is meditate and you will realise god was really valuable information. All this other stuff (and as you can see there is eons of it) is the mind trying to distract us from this purpose.

For those like Jim who no longer want to experience God, higher Self or whatever you want to call it, well I guess they just have to make the best of it - the world that is!

A Friend
A Firend

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 16:11:59 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: A Friend
Subject: Beware spiritual ego!!
Message:
'All this other stuff (and as you can see there is eons of it) is the mind trying to distract us from this purpose. '

No it is people like m trying to control others. 'Mind' is just fine.

'For those like Jim who no longer want to experience God, higher Self or whatever you want to call it, well I guess they just have to make the best of it - the world that is! '

And how do you know that your life-experinece is of sounder quality than that of an atheist?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:15:07 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: 99 languages?
Message:
Hi Jethro,

Wow! Thanks for the interesting story. How did you manage do get a darshan gig with a different GMJ.

The Guru, who only spoke broken English, told me to continue meditating and I will realise God.

I was also asked if I wanted to receive knowledge.

In that order? ;)

'splain the 99 languages thingy

cheers,

deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:47:28 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Deborah
Subject: Re: 99 languages?
Message:
' How did you manage do get a darshan gig with a different GMJ. '
I became aquainted with that GMJ's mahatma who invited me to come and meet his GMJ when he came to the UK for his birthday.

'splain the 99 languages thingy

When I became a premie in 1974, there were all these amazing stories about m. One of them was that he spoke 99 languages. I just found it funny that this mahatma came out with the same stuff.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 19:08:16 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: 99 languages?
Message:
Jethro,

I received knowledge in 1973, and I never heard anyone ever say that M spoke anything besides English and Hindi. I did hear from time to time, that there were some misinformed people in the past (prior to our advanced understanding in 1973) who had said stuff like that, but I never actually heard anyone say it.

Is it true people actually said that to you?

As you know, this is the example Maharaji uses to talk about all the 'concepts' that the mahatmas and the premies tossed out that he is still having to deal with, (which he thinks is 'pathetic'), and which has pushed propagation into a 'hole.' I thought that was ridiculous and absurd when he said it. What a red herring!

I wonder if there really were people who believed the '48 languages' stuff or it was all a rumor that it ever even was a rumor.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 05:28:03 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: 99 languages?
Message:
Yes people told me that.

I just saw the Nottingham video where he says that people use to say that he spoke 48 languages. He denied that spoke 48 languages.

(A possible premie answer could be: well HE didn't say that HE didn't speak 99 languages he said HE didn't speak 48 languages.(premies that was joke,,,I hope).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:46:24 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Comparison shopping?
Message:
Gee, Jethro, why didn't you receive knowledge from this guy and then compare to the knowledge that Maharaji supposedly 'owns?'

Well, at least this Guru acknowledged the existence of Prem Pal, unlike the extremely infantile behavior of both Maharaji and his brother, who both act as if the other does not exist.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:41:12 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Comparison shopping?
Message:
'Gee, Jethro, why didn't you receive knowledge from this guy and then compare to the knowledge that Maharaji supposedly 'owns?' '

Because at the time, I didn't believe for a minute that anyone except prempal could give k.

I did speak with the mahatma who was not at all secretive and he described the same techniques as prem shows. Even the bit(as was then) about listening to the right ear.

Well, at least this Guru acknowledged the existence of Prem Pal, unlike the extremely infantile behavior of both Maharaji and his brother, who both act as if the other does not exist

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:12:59 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: Passages is full of lies/Ron Geaves
Message:
I was also asked if I wanted to receive knowledge.
That's a new idea. Get Knowledge twice! I dunno. They're all in competition to get your devotion... It's enough to give a guy a headache.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:39:03 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves
Message:
Did you mail the letter or was it an email? If it's an email, do you still have the address?

I just sent Ron a rather lengthy email asking about his comments in the Passages video, which appear on their face to be highly misleading, and also about how the general thrust of certain sections of the video seem to be blatant revisionist lies. I'm hoping he will respond, so I won't post those emails in case he does.

As I said above, the lineage issue is just one of the misrepresentations in the Passages video. I wonder who had editorial control over that video, although one has to assume that Maharaji had the final okay. It's amazing they would put out something like that which can be so easily proved wrong. And why would someone with the prestige of Ron Geaves participate in something so dishonest?

I have the same question about Tim Gallwey, but judging from Tim's statements I think he really believes what he says, and in the general revisionist ideology in the video, while Ron's comments, while perhaps disingenuous, are used more in bits and pieces to support the ideology, rather than stating it outright like Gallwey does.

Also, when I watched the video, it seemed to me that Tim Gallwey was very nervous about what he was saying, but not so with Ron.

I wonder, has Mike Finch talked to Ron about this, since you say he knows him?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 23:04:33 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves
Message:
I wonder, has Mike Finch talked to Ron about this, since you say he knows him?

No I have not talked to Ron about this - in fact, I have not talked to him at all in the last year or so.

I used to know Ron very well - we were druggies together (with Sandy Collier) at Oxford in the 60's, and Ron first told me about Maharaji in 69 or early 70.

Maharaji used to joke about us being 'spiritual brothers'.

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:06:02 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: kevjo@mindspring.com
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Ron Geaves
Message:
Mike, do you have a 'home' email address for Ron Geaves? You can e-mail it to me and not post it if you wish.

The reason I ask is that I sent Ron an email to the address on his website and he sent me a terse response saying he doesn't respond to non-work-related e-mails at his 'work' and that I should use his 'home address' and then he didn't give it to me. If I wasn't such a charitable person, I might think Ron is giving me the run around.

Anyhow, if you have his 'home e-mail address' I would really appreciate it.

Also, Patrick, under the circumstances, maybe I should try to use the one you did. It's very important that Mr. Geaves be given every opportunity to respond to the questions we have.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:10:58 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves
Message:
When I last spoke to Ron, I mentioned David Lane's writings.
Ron said that Land had made 'an academic mistake'.

Jethro
(BTW I have put up al this information before)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:08:34 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Thanks Patrick/Ron Geaves
Message:
Did you mail the letter or was it an email? If it's an email, do you still have the address?

I'm not too comfortable about passing on Geave's email because in his reply he launched into some stuff about me not sending mail to such and such an address so I guess he would not take kindly to me putting it up here or even sending it you - rabid Manmut that you are. Also he once said he wanted to punch Jethro on the nose for something or other so I don't want to rile him up at this stage or I might be the recipient of a left hook from the angry prof. Who does he remind me of now? Oh I know... Professor Calculus from Tintin..he was always getting terrribly offended and cross about things!

Mike Finch knows him for sure - don't you Mike - are you there? I should imagine if Mike wanted he could say quite a bit on this subject although I fancy I've just about found out as much as anybody. The whole history thing is very obscure and there is no very certain picture - only impressions. What's clear is that the idea of legitimate guru succession is a joke. I mean these Guru's and their disciples never agree on whose the rightful heir. What's guaranteed is that there will be a family squabble etc. Just like Maharaji and his own brother Satpal who thinks he's the legit. successor to their father.
So for premies to try and bolster and lend repectability to their claim for legitimacy by having some learned-looking bespectacled professor of theology speak in serious and authoritative tones for a moment is just as transparent as can be.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 23:13:15 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Sarupanand temple
Message:
There used to be a temple to Sarupanand in Leicester, England -- well, by 'temple' not much more than a house really, like most Hindu temples in Leicester. Leicester is 30% Hindu, and about 15% Muslim.

I visited this temple a while ago with Mahatma GuruCharnanand. I never thought of discussing the inheritance of the the guruship, though I remember GuruCharnanand telling me that very few of Sarupanand's followers recognised Shri Hans as the legit successor.

In other words, premie history writers would probably agree to the fact that Sarupanand's followers all split into different groups, with several of this mahatmas becoming gurus, but the 'fact' is that Sarupanand recognised Shri Hans alone - that is the story I suspect.

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 14:25:47 (EST)
From: A Friend
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Re: Sarupanand temple
Message:
Hi Mike,

I have a book I picked up in Seattle. It's called 'The Lord as Guru -Hindi Sants in the Northern indian Tradition' by Daniel Gold. There is no mention of Sarupanand in it or Shri Hans Ji Maharaj. there are however lineagesof Sants of the Bauri
parampara tradition and the Radhasoami lineages.

as I said before to Jethro does all this really matter? I think it's a bit of mental mass that definately distracts us from practise. Who really cares?

A Friend

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:21:21 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Lineage/Ron Geaves
Message:
I understand re the email address, and please don't get punched in the nose, especially by a bespectacled professor. Plus, Ron Geaves has no hair left, so no hair-pulling would be possible as a defense. Actually it's quite a shock to see Ron interviewed, bald as a que ball, and then shown in 1971 with shoulder-length hair walking around with hands folded as if in prayer. :)

Ron Geaves doesn't talk about lineage in the video, however, the disembodied narrator does that, and the pictures of the old 'masters' appear one after another, the same ones, I think, that were on Maharaji's website, and then the narrator implies that Maharaji is a direct descendent from that lineage. Ron, however, never talks about that, nor does anyone shown having a human body.

I do think it is appropriate, however, that if Ron will not have a reasonable conversation with those of us who have concerns, and actually feel a bit maligned by that video, that these things are appropriate for the EPO website, so they would be brought up by search engines under Ron's name, just as his own website is brought up, with titles of papers on 'Elan Vital' included on it.

It's just unfair to expect to make a video like that, and then not be responsible for what's in it. Especially somebody who is a professor of religion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:06:00 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Spelling question and intent
Message:
I noticed that in your letter to Ron you spell the name of the earlier 'master' two ways: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.' Do you know which is correct?

I wonder if you revealing this information is part of the reason that Maharaji's website was taken down -- with all the implied lineage included. He might feel it is better just to be silent on the lineage question.

However, that didn't seem to stop those who made the Passages video from making the same misrepresentations.

I think Maharaji and visions never expected that the Passages video would go beyond premies. I think it was probably felt that the video would be good for internal consumption, and give rationales for the past that most premies would accept.

But once such a video is being sold to the public, that is quite a different matter. Also, I am informed that a number of practicing premies were also put off by the misrepresentations in the video, particularly those of Mr. Gallwey.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:29:35 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Spelling question and intent
Message:
I noticed that in your letter to Ron you spell the name of the earlier 'master' two ways: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.' Do you know which is correct?

I believe I have seen it spelled both ways in different books. I have no idea which is correct. Actually I am really no authority on this Indian stuff at all - there are clearly a lot of people far more learned about the subject who may be able to comment - Jethro? Ron?? I've never been to India even. I think I was put off for life by the heavy dose of Indianism I got as a premie! I just did a little background investigation for myself so as to see what the roots of all this stuff I had taken for granted actually were. Lo and behold knowing a little history is actually quite helpful in coming to terms with the present - demystifying the whole thing.

Actually I think that all I and others have done is to ask some rather unsettling questions - rather than provide information - for indeed there is so little. I also wondered whether Maharaji realised that his publishing of his 'guru family-tree' might actually work against him after the doubts raised here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:43:51 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: This is what Lane says
Message:
'The Divine Light Mission was essentially a branch-off of the Shri Paramhans Advait Mat Group in Guna..... Sarupanand was Hansji's guru......Hansji was also apparently initiated by the late Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas.There is a book entitled Shri Paramhans Advait Mat published in India (Guna) and available at UCLA in Los Angeles, CA., which tells about their lineage....It is quite informative.....'
[ David Laneon DLM ]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 14:49:08 (EST)
From: A Friend
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: This is what Lane says
Message:
Hi Jethro,

I have a book called The Lord as Guru by Daniel Gold. He does mention the lineage of Beas, in fact that's what most of the book is about.

This is what Sawan Singh said, 'The guru or master remains with the disciple all through the journey from the third eye where the journey begins to the Sat Lok, the entrance to the highest division of the heavens, but his form does not remain like that of a man throughout the whole path. At the third eye his form is the same as human form outside in the physical world: but later, in higher transcendent stages, his form is different in different planes. However, in Sat Lok, his form is again of man, as it is at the Third Eye or outside in the physical world....It is not that the same form becomes more and more radiant or effulgent; the very form changes from stage to stage'

Is anyone else completely lost by his words?

It does say he had tens of thousands of disciples but that isn't unusual in India is it? It also says of those tens of thousands of disiples two gained substantial followings: Kirpal Singh and Charan Singh. I wonder if the latter was who Charanand was named after?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 15:08:33 (EST)
From: A Friend
Email: None
To: A Friend
Subject: What Charan Singh says
Message:
Charan Singh mentions in addition to Sawan singh's will, an internal 'key' given at the time of initiation':

As regards S. Kirpal Singh, let him say or do anything he likes. Sooner or later he will have to render account for his actions. You have beengiven the KEY at the time of Initiation and can satisfy yourself as to whether or not he is a true Master. It would not be in good taste for me to go into detail, but I will say this much, that the Great Master Sawan Singh Ji never gave him permission to initiate anyone, and duly appointed Sardar Bahadur Jagat Singh Ji as His Successor by a legally executed will, in writing amd duly witnessed, so as to leave no doubt about this matter...'

Rather Kirpal Singhs followers stress the importance of Internal criteria rather that will & testaments. Kirpal singh is emphatic that a TRUE MASTER should be able to give his disciples some spiritual experience at the time of Initiation - and this, he gives reason to believe does not usually occur at BEAS. When a disciple questions him about Initiation at Beas he replies matter-of-factly:

The other day I gave initiation to six hundred and fifty-three people. All saw Light - about two hundred saw the Master's Form. The teachings at Beas are the same, but the words given at the initiation now are NOT CHARGED. That is the difference....They're afraid of asking for any experience...'

Ayone else still confused?

Seems like the criteria used for reconizing the legitamacy of the Guru is the internal inner Key and the Gurus evident spiritual power.

So I suppose it's up to each one of us to decide if we GOT anything or not.

A Friend

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 18:54:45 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: A Friend
Subject: Can't you see through this charade?
Message:
Seems like the criteria used for reconizing the legitamacy of the Guru is the internal inner Key and the Gurus evident spiritual power.

Why do you assume that there's even such a thing as a legitimate guru?

So I suppose it's up to each one of us to decide if we GOT anything or not.

Really? That's it? Hm, I think I felt Tinkerbell's wings as she flew by. Does that count?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:56:37 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.'
Message:
I saw both these names in early DLM literature and for a long time I thought it was just a spelling error. However I think that they were actually two different people. Han's guru was Sarupapand. David Lane says that Hans was also initiated by another guru whose name I have forgotten.

But who really knows. It depends whose literature you read.

And it is pretty clear that devotees will lie for their master.
It's pernicious(sp?) stuff.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:04:14 (EST)
From: PatD
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Re: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.'
Message:
There were 2 of them.

Swarupanand is 'Sir Swaroop'(sic) knighted by the Gov. of India in the '30's for having got his followers to build a city with their bare hands. Presumably the powers that be were grateful they weren't all out agitating for Independence.

I wrote about this a long while ago assuming that this was Hans' guru. Someone pointed out that it wasn't. Sarupanand was the guy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:40:21 (EST)
From: Jethro
Email: None
To: PatD
Subject: Re: 'Swarupanand' and 'Sarupanand.'
Message:
'I wrote about this a long while ago assuming that this was Hans' guru. Someone pointed out that it wasn't. Sarupanand was the guy. '

If that is so, then the Indian background is wrong.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:43:15 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Jethro
Subject: Thanks Jethro and Pat
Message:
So, it's 'Sarupanand.' I guess Ron has never responded to either Will or Patrick W on that issue.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:51:59 (EST)
From: Will
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: email
Message:
I received an email from Ron Geaves dated March 6, 2001 from
R.Geaves@ucc.ac.uk
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 03:19:47 (EST)
From: Nick
Email: None
To: Deputy Dog =)
Subject: Re: email: are you sure?
Message:
I'm glad you were able to help your pal. Yes, it can be unsettling for some premies to exit. Was he more of a conventional premie than you? The ones who really toed the cult line seem to suffer more than those like you who dabbled in other spiritual stuff.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:58:41 (EST)
From: Joe
Email: None
To: Will
Subject: Thanks
Message:
I just sent him an email.

Why was he emailing you, if I can ask and if you can say?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 10:52:19 (EST)
From: Will
Email: None
To: Joe
Subject: Re: Thanks
Message:
Joe,

We were discussing this same topic about the lineage. Along with Patrick, I had emailed him about his story on ELK. I found it troubling that a university professor of religion could write a story that was so blatantly cultish and one-sided.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 15:22:33 (EST)
From: gerry
Email: None
To: All
Subject: We have liftoff... (nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:30:28 (EST)
From: Mercedes
Email: None
To: gerry
Subject: Thanks Gerry...(nt)
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 03:59:10 (EST)
From: Your Premie
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Why have you abandoned me?
Message:
Dear Maharaji, I speak to you with all of my heart as I understand it.

I have so many questions that I have never dared to voice until now.

Ilove/ed you more than any one in my life.
I have set up my life for the past 30 years in order to serve you alone.

I do not/did not expect this to mean that you would find me worthy of your benevolence.

I only prayed with all of my being that I could help you and be smiled upon by you.

From the first moment I saw your picture I felt you were the one. I had no compunction but to act accordingly and follow your directions which were to move into the Ashram and give my all, my all to thee.

I have forsaken a life of some financial wealth as my parents were opposed to my devotion to you from the start and as I directly went against their wishes in this it affected my support from them.

I have spent the past 27 years as a volunteer. Giving my all in whichever way I could.

I have seen many things.
I have been on the receiving end of great human abuse because I was deemed a 'Nobody'

I am a 'Nobody' along with all the rest of the Planet called 'Somebodies'

Something is Terribly wrong with this picture.

Each and every person who sincerely comes to the 'Feet of the Master' is supposed to be the most noblest of souls.

I truly believe that there is NO 'Feet of the Master'

Only Sincere Souls, I mean no spiritual connotation by this as i have lost even my faith in this at this point.

Maharaji, are you even listening to this one cry to you?
Please, I am sooo hoping that you will allay my fears and heartfelt pleas after all these years.

You are my one and only Master and I implore you to help me.

I have written to you innumerable times over the past years.

I have been in your presence and had personal service and had opportunities to speak with you, but I have been too afraid, for many obvious reasons.

I crave personal contact and direct guidance from my teacher to whom I have Dedicated Everything.

I have NO idea how to instigate this beyond the means available to me,

I have Never received a response from your office via letter or email in all of these years.

I have been focussed on you alone for over 27 years and without any direct guidance or encouragement. This is now wearing on me.

Please Help me.
I am confused.
I have read the accounts here on Forum 7 and I find them too compelling to dismiss.

Please explain this and I shall have no problem replacing you back where you rightfully belong.

My Perfect Master.
Lord of My and any other Universe.
Maharaji my all my Lord to me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 13:10:51 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Your Premie
Subject: Re: Why have you abandoned me?
Message:
Dear 'Your Premie',

If your post is sincere, it is so poingnant and sad. It strikes to the core of the fact that longing for Maharaji's love will always be just that. Longing without fulfillment. What you speak of is the insatiable longing for what is already yours to begin with. Begin to love yourself as you've described your love for M. You are the source of love and pain in your own life, not M.

If your post was meant as a spoof, it perfectly captures the same conundrum of longing that I've stated above.

All the best to you.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:17:59 (EST)
From: a fly on the wall
Email: None
To: Your Premie
Subject: Beat me! Whip me! ...
Message:
... make me write GOOD checks.

You are kidding, I hope. Either that or being melodramatic.

If you are for real, you've worked yourself up into a state. I sincerely hope you can find some peace. (Not kidding.)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:00:20 (EST)
From: wolfie
Email: None
To: Your Premie
Subject: Re: Why have you abandoned me?
Message:
Hi,

I don't know wether I should cry or laugh. I think this is the story of a fake devotee. I and I and I and I and I, a real devotee should take more care for the Lord, you should not complain so much about yourself you should weep tears of sadness that there are so many people who critizise the Lord of the universe. Anyway, what I have learnt, a devotee does not care to be a nobody. Don't fool an old devotee.

If you don't know what I'm talking about then I excuse myself, I can't believe that a person can be so naiv. I can't believe that someone can be ín that state of mind for 28 years, sorry I prefer to think this is a joke like the one from Swamiji Suchbanana.

.......ciao we are one in the spirit...........wolfie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:46:40 (EST)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: Your Premie
Subject: This is a joke right?
Message:
And if it isn't, well, all I can say is Maharaji didn't abandon you. How could he? He never knew you from a hole in the ground to begin with! He was never with you in the first place.

But surely this is a joke, what you wrote. It's gotta be.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 08:37:46 (EST)
From: JHB
Email: None
To: Tonette
Subject: I don't think so, Tonette
Message:
Of course you could be right, but I actually think it's sincere. It can't be easy for premies who are extremely devoted.

John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 09:24:39 (EST)
From: Tonette
Email: None
To: JHB
Subject: Oh wow, whoops, sorry.......
Message:
Well, let me drive another knife into this most damaged person's heart why don't I?

To the person named 'your premie,' my deepest condolences. But it is true that you have not been abandoned, you've been wandering from the truth, yourself. There's only one way to go from here, that's up. Look at this way, you've got lots of company.

Godspeed to you, Premie.

Thanks for the heads up John.

Tonette

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 06:06:56 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Your Premie
Subject: Never be fearful again Your Premie
Message:
Dear Your Premie,

I think the real God is helping you wake up from this cult.

Yes the stuff that people like Mike Dettmers reported about Maharaji's Secret Life is very compelling - hard to believe at first. Take it on board and throttle any fears you have at birth. Kick out the Jams! Don't be afraid to look! In fact make some effort like you always did to find out the TRUTH with an enormous capital 'T' for once. Prop your eyes open with matchsticks if that's what it takes. Talke the bull by the horns. Fear is the soul killer- fear is the true evil. Don't be afraid to ask Maharaji some hard questions - but don't expect a straight answer. If you feel the need - stop meditating (don't worry you can take that up again any time -I have) but it will show you that your fine without that habit- for that is what is also you are enslaved to as well.

You sound a lot like me a while ago if you don't mind me saying. I wrote some very similar pleas from the heart. Writing such stuff is very cathartic in itself.

It hurts to realise that the person you had cherished , enthroned , replaced your beloved concept of God when you were child with, is distinctly unaware of your existence, flawed and not in the slightest bit concerned about giving you a part to play in his Great Plan. Basically he doesn't have a Great Plan. He's making it up as he goes along. Well - you guessed that already didn't you? It's not a 'Lila. ' It's down to earth up to each and every person to decide what happens next and you better start thinking quick before your whole life slips away waiting for his great 'Lila' to unfold.
God to a goldfish is a bigger Goldfish. Time to see M for what he is - a powerful, manipulative human being whose own delusions of grandeur are so strong that others are taken in.
As you may have noticed Maharaji has no confidence in our ability to help him whatsoever when it comes to sharing the good stuff. We just get in the way. He thinks he's the only one capable of inspiring others.You are free to go and get some measley job and get your own life together as best you can. Just still give generously and keep the meditation secret - it's so intimate that way isn't it? Just between you and him. Perfect- no one can get in between then can they? Heard that kind of talk before? let me give you a clue.. think of a sexually abusive father talking to his scared child. 'It's our little secret isn't it? I think we should keep it that way.. don't you?'

He's not God and he is very pissed off that people like you and I keep reminding him that he pretended he was - how he promised that we could be his 'hands and feet' and that surrendering the reins of our lives to him would be rewarded - Jesus style- in Heaven. Your vocation is actually not serving him - he can't handle your love - your life. He took our time and money and spent it on providing himself and his family with a jetset lifestyle whilst we scratched our heads and tried to work out what our heartfelt and hopeful sacrifices had been all about. Remember the bit about your sacrifices being unconditional? Well, Maharaji owes us NOTHING. Get it? So as far as he's concerned we'd better just crawl back into our RATHOLES and ENJOY LIFE.

Here you go...I wrote this some years ago when I was still coming to terms with the disillusionment I felt after years of following Maharaji and practising knowledge. I surrendered to Maharaji, as he said to, in the ashram and felt bitter (in my 30's that my sincerity , dedication and heartfelt youthful energies had been wasted.) I have posted this here before but here it is again - because I empathise - even sympathise with you and think you may relate.

This is reproduced exactly as I jotted it down in a notebook. I absolutely never intended to show this to anyone, it sounds rather naive to me now, but this was a real spontaneous outpouring of my feelings as I approached my mid-life.

I think it reveals how I truly felt let down by my Lord and Master, Maharaji and how I desperately wanted to refind my lost childhood innocence and unembittered ÔlongingŐ. It also shows that I longed for a truer revelation of God in my life.

MY PRAYER

All my life I primed myself for something great.
To be a part of something ÔgreatŐ is the cherished goal of the soul of youth in Man.
I determined at an early age to give myself to a positive cause, thinking a mundane existence to be avoided at all costs.
I jealously idolised those who achieved apparent success and awaited my turn to contribute, to be used, to be a part of a Great Cause.
An elusive Great Cause it is proving to be. If life is a Ôgiving back of loveŐ to my Creator, then let it be so in thought ,word and deed.
Let the goal be clear, the faith be strong and the heart determined. DonŐt allow thoughts of decay and age to depress the soul, to sublimate oneŐs body into a meaningless existence.
Let passion rule where intellectual knowledge becomes impotent.
Give the fire in the heart oxygen to burn and explode.
Let me be in moments of Truth like the child I was/still am.
Free me from the bonds of egoism and let my life be full of delight and wonder so that each day is filled sufficiently for a lifetime.

Reveal thyself O mystery
DonŐt delay or let me be tricked into false sacrifice.
The dangers of waste and bitterness are too great -
Time is too precious and the need too strong.
Open my eyes to the meaning of life that is there; Tear down the hated symbols and rituals that rape my pure innocent heart and murder the true love within.
Arise inner God Child perfect and free,
Awaken lover within to my trueself.
Find strength and pure intent and behold.

Let me be found as I am lost. Let my purpose be clear as I am unsure.
Focus my emotion into everyday life, make it a practical force.
Let me be a noble soldier fighting for a just cause.
Let me feel the energy of youth flush through my body and mind.
Let me train to achieve.
Let me enter middle age with pride and integrity, not inner shame that I wasted my my time in delusion or gave myself in vain.
Let me argue.... Let me use my intellect...
Let me know why I must act...
Let me be unafraid..
Banish fear altogether..
Let me laugh and cry...
Let my heart be full as it is now hungry.
Let my gratitude return for life as I have grown bitter...
Let my soul live as my body lives.
Let life be full of deep joy.
Let me find the way to real faith and Knowledge.
Let me live a full life.
Let me turn over a million new leaves and let me blossom before I die.
Let this be it ; the life that fulfils itself utterly, that turns itŐs back once and for all on illness death and sorrow..
these hands respond to the power of love with absolute certainty, this mind serve the spirit with efficiency and excellence until the end...
these eyes see with clarity the way ahead and perceive all the joy and wonder of the universe...
these ears hear the undistorted voice of the Creator in the Creation.
Let inspiration in at every turn, let time stand still and the heart awaken.
Let a deep conviction grow where true logic has destroyed shallow meanings,.
Let Knowledge replace hope and reality dawn and never set in this being -
And fast!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:14:06 (EST)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: 'God to a goldfish is a bigger Goldfish'
Message:
Memorable little saying there, Patrick! (your own or a quote?)

'God to a goldfish is a bigger Goldfish. Time to see M for what he is - a powerful, manipulative human being whose own delusions of grandeur are so strong that others are taken in'.

Here's a little more of M's megalomania (from the Nottingham 30th anniversary event):

'Do good deeds ... and many people get in to this, y'know ... do good deeds.

There is no deed greater than to impart 'Knowledge' to a person who is ready for this gift of Knowledge.

If there is a charity, then this is the greatest charity there is. Because it is a gift that is given - unattached.

Unattached. With no expectation of anything in return.

Because the master knows - nothing can be given in return'.

Once again, the Master Bullshitter blows his own trumpet - but with such exaggeration, he loses all credibility.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:23:55 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Your Premie
Subject: Good luck, sister er brother?
Message:
You said: ''From the first moment I saw your picture I felt you were the one...''

I used to tell myself that too but have finally remembered that I never liked the guy or ever really trusted him. Ain't hindsight wonderful? But I used to hype myself up to believe in him and sometimes it really worked. I hope you see one day that you have been doing that too out of hope or wishful thinking.

I also hope for your sake that you finally realize that everything you ever felt for Rev Rawat was something which you projected onto him and he is simply another very flawed human being who may have started out being sincere but soon let his greed and venality over-rule what little conscience he ever had.

Good luck.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 17:12:37 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Re: Good luck, sister er brother?
Message:
Pat, right on. I agree with the fact that we did the projecting. [And I might add that your kindness overall in your posts is refreshing and warming -- when weighed against some of the infighting on F7.]

Regarding “From the first time I saw his picture”: When I received K, I was given a “K packet.” In there were, of course, the Five Commandments, along with some other shit and I’ll never forget a black and white 8x10 photocopy of M at about age 14 wearing a short-sleeve stripped colored (Western) sport shirt. I recall that this shirt was just like all the ones I myself used to buy at “Jules” (my neighborhood boys’ and men’s shop, where I purchased all my clothes till I was 17). Looking at the picture of my new “master” wearing a shirt from Jules was so puzzling. I had to work even that much harder to realize Knowledge, believe me. Eventually, I wore down, and somehow bit for all it’s worth down the devotional path -- hands folded, eyes down, surrendered. What a waste of 30 years.

To that person who wrote that letter at the start of this thread: We're with you. It IS crushing to realize how we were taken. And it brought an initial tear . . . but time will heal. I pray.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:25:32 (EST)
From: Maharaji
Email: None
To: All
Subject: Thank you, DJ
Message:
You've proved yourself to be my truest of devotees. You risk absolutely nothing by saying absolutely nothing. You have completely realized Knowledge.

I will be there at your last breath.
Maharaji

FYI: DJ just did a drive-by spamming without contributing a single vowel of content. Pathetic. His, er, contributions have been deleted.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:29:23 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Maharaji
Subject: Re: Thank you, DJ
Message:
Sorry I just deleted him and blocked him. It's D-J-U-R-O a well known spamming premie troll.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:34:08 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Thanks Pat
Message:
I was having a bit of fun above posting as the M-ster. The most telling of his/her posts is the one in the Krishna lawsuit thread. His/her question, 'Why do you mind?', sounds like a carbon copy of M's arrogant retort 'Why do you want to know?' when asked if he meditates. So that would make DJ the perfect student.

Richard who never replies to trolls so I let M do it for me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:36:53 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Re: Thanks
Message:
I don't have the time right now to clean up all his droppings but just got rid of the crap spam. :C)
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:11:51 (EST)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: All
Subject: The David Blaine cult
Message:
No, I don't think there really is such a thing. Is there? But on South Park last night Kyle and the boys got caught up in it. They went to a David Blaine magic show and were so blown away by the tricks he performed that they went to a seminar to learn them, but when they get there, instead of learning magic tricks, they get indoctrinated into the David Blaine cult because the greatest magic trick is 'learning to be happy', and only David can make us all that.

It was kind of silly but it did ring bells. You go to one of these cult seminars thinking you're in control of your life, and then somebody starts browbeating you that you're not and only service to the cult leader can make you that way. it totally fucks up you're head and has you thinking the way the cult leader wants you to which is basically, 'I must kiss his ass.... I must kiss his ass. There's no hope for me unless I kiss his ass.'

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:58:45 (EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: Re: The David Blaine cult
Message:
What I liked was the 'Super Friends' group, especially Moses. How do you kill a large animated stone statue of Abraham Lincoln? With a large animated stone statue of John Wilkes Boothe, of course. (Good thing Jesus was a carpenter, too.) I wonder how 'Seaman' (pronounced 'semen' for a giggle) got admitted to the Super Friends. He doesn't seem quite on the same spiritual plane with Moses, does he?

--Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 07:02:07 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: All
Subject: I think-Knowledge good/Gurus bad
Message:
On 'Life's Great' Lou wrote the following , eliciting my response reproduced below:

i know of someone who took the techniques from EPO and it did not work; so she became curious, interested in K. and finally ended up asking for K., receiving it and is still enjoys it to this day. After everything is said, the true experience still stands out

I would like to comment on this post because it touches on something that I have been considering for some time, namely, the question of whether Maharaji has some unique mysterious power ('Grace' as we used to call it) through which somehow he can influence a person's experience of meditation.

I would like to mention that my position is that I have practiiced meditation as Maharaji taught daily since 1974 until the mid nineties when I developed misgivings about Maharaji's methods and emabarked on a process of questioning my commitment and his role as a teacher.
Although initially I found that it was helpful to stop meditating- to take a break - I could not entirely reject the practice because I found it pleasurable and peaceful. What I rejected were, as far as I was concerned, the concepts surrounding the experience - 'What it was' and 'who gave it to me' - for example.

Lately I have been regularly meditating and have been as blissful as ever doing it . ( I still call it 'meditating' because I feel that 'practicing' is current premie terminology which implies that I also do 'service' and feel the desire listen to M to enhance and maintain my experience. This is not the case).

People like Lou are fond of relating instances where people have learned about the techniques from a source such as Ex-Premie.Org, or a Raj Yoga book where there is little or no 'inspiration'- encouragement to practice etc. (quite the opposite in the case of EPO) and who then go on to 'receive Knowledge' from Maharaji and 'Bingo' get results.

I strongly feel that it is important to see what is going on here in some more depth than just to believe , as certainly used to be the case, that Maharaji uniquely holds the key to ones experience of meditation.

I acknowledge that Maharaji's organisation (largely thanks to our financial contributions , and other input) provides an appealing and practical instructive environment where there is some encouragement, preparation and care taken to ensure that someone interested in meditation of this kind can get results- and there is some sense of community and follow-up.
Much of the experience is due to ones own comittment and application and enthusiasm in devoting time to practicing the meditation.

What I am wary of is the 'bad' innuendo that accompanies the 'good' instruction. By this I am talking about the 'divisive' ideas that people innevitably get that the 'Knowledge' comes from Maharaji and that he has Godlike powers, therefore deserving more respect and even adulation than he really deserves or is healthy for both parties.

At this point I would like to mention a couple of facts which satisfy me that the interpretation of the experience of Knowledge as being Maharaji's unique gift is wrong.

Firstly, there are many people who have wonderful meditational experiences of what we called Light, Music, Holy Name and Nectar from other Gurus. A prime example of this is Maharaji's brothers followers in India. They offer the same thing in a different cultural context with diiferent numbers of adherents etc. (and other religious concepts involved)

Secondly, I can sit down and meditate just as I have always done and feel the same bliss and devotion to God that I always felt despite being highly critical of Maharaji's methods and indeed without feeling any need to see him , listen to him or have anything to do with him. Also I personally saw Light very brightly in my head before I ever heard of Maharaji and recognised it as a pleasurable and valuable experience. I also had an instinctive emotional 'spiritual' feeling about it.

I would say however that, as someone who does deeply appreciate the feeling that meditation brings I am by no means forgetting the means by which I was personally introduced to what has been a great means of 'going inside' and feeling peace and ecstatic, even transcendental bliss on many occasions.

My acknowledgement of Maharaji in the equation of Knowledge and I has evolved over 30 odd years to a point where I see him as being a capable teacher but not a 'perfect' one - albeit he is a very succesful one who has also successfully monopolised the teaching for a number of reasons.

The way I see it is that his competence as a teacher does not mean he is perfect or infallible as some seem to believe. I believe that with some adjustment his 'teaching' could be much more successful and of benefit to mankind.

Generally I would say that the improvements that could make Knowledge a more realistic and helpful proposition for the world today would center around the dismantling of the idea of Maharaji being the lynch pin and 'owner' of the experience. In other words I think Maharaji's success as an 'authoritarian' is archaic and impossible to make palatable to a more enlightened age however he twists and turns to present it differently- or that people conspire with him to attempt to perpetrate his authority.

There is no doubt in my mind that Maharaji comes from a tradition of authoritarian masters who used fear as well as love in their 'parental / God /Lord' role-playing to their disciples. Despite the controversial revisionism that suggests that all is well within the Maharaji camp and that the 'rotten apples' have either been weeded-out or excluded themseves (ex-premies) I predict that a course of action by Maharaji which does not include him coming very drastically down from his pedestal and coming squarely to terms with his now grown-up and critical 'children' will only result in futher dysfunction and conflict.

If 'spiritual' health is a resource that should be freely available to humans, as Maharaji implies by insisting that Knowledge 'appears to be' free of charge to one and all, then he needs to accept the fact that 'fat-cat ' bosses have no place in a modern corporation whose responsibility is primarily to it's shareholders. Even if one sees the vehicle for Maharaji's work as a 'charity' - for indeed that is the status it has been accorded at times - then the problems of 'hocus-pocus' , cult beliefs, dysfunction, hypocrisy, his grossly disproportionate financial benefit compared to that of others involved, and trail of disillusioned former workers needs to be addressed- faced- not brushed under the carpet with the risible pretence that all is going ahead perfectly well.

Maharaji is fond of citing the much used Indian-Guru rebuttal 'The Dog's will bark'' to counter,and diminish the relevance of critics however apt or even helpful their criticisms may be. The use of the derogatory term 'dogs' leaves one in no doubt as to his disgust for those who dare dissent or moan that they have been mistreated.

As long as Maharaji stubbornly sticks to the delusion that he is somehow essentially superior to the rest of the human race the respect he earns will be as short-lived as the time it takes initially impressed customers to see through the whitewash and see their experience in a truer light.

The experience does and will endure for those who have put the effort in to do those techniques but, I believe we could all share in the inspiration we have felt and get together to organise that the knowledge be taught without the deification and investing of authority in any one man who clearly has no more mysterious powers or divine authority than any man or woman.

Even if Maharaji is capable of inspiring and teaching, that should not mean , as it has done, that we or others with inspiration should keep it secret and just refer others to him.

My frustration has long been that I love the experience and long to share it with others, but cannot bear to refer people to a Guru and organisation that is not only an insidious and dangerous personality cult that hurt me in the past, but also that tells me that if I don't keep it secret and let Maharaji be the teacher I will reap some disaster. This was superstitious scare-mongering that has allowed Maharaji to retain his monopoly and which subjucated us to being servile and harbouring many fears.

He is a man not a God - he lies, smokes, drinks, gets angry , makes mistakes, is unfair, misguided and worse believes he is the Perfect Master. And he has tried to coverup a lot of his private less perfect behaviour. Why should we be the servant to this man? If Maharaji has any hope of proceeding as a teacher of Knowledge then I think he has to include and trust others as equals , be open to criticism and dialogue in a way that we have not yet seen. We are all in some respects able to be servants of humanity but to do so we need to accept each other as equals first. That does not occur in situations where a man exalts himself and encourages others to exalt him in the way Maharaji does. It has to be said that Maharaji's way of exalting himself includes the habit of putting others down.
Maharaji clearly finds it very hard to trust people around him - his inner court is tainted with suspicion and fear. These are all symptoms that should not be ignored. What does this tell us? We should not just ignore these things. If we do we are the fools.

After all's said and done the experience does indeed 'stand out' but can we please be clear that the teacher does not own the experience, should not be confused as being the only source and should not be considered beyond criticism or deserving of praise for passing on information to us which is rightly ours in the first place.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:13:23 (EST)
From: OTS
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: John*****BEST OF BORING*******[NT]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 08:10:43 (EST)
From: Pullaver
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: I think-Knowledge good/Gurus bad
Message:
I may as well chime in with my salutations (of the non-lotus variety) to you Patrick for cohesively stating what has previously been expressed only as fractured sentiments here. For the record, I'm a muddy tater too. However, like PatC below, I now have a low tolerance for superstitious, pre-scientific, eastern mystic clap-trap masquerading as Truth surrounding the practice. Lords, Gurus, avatars, saviours and the Speaker? see tooth fairy. Bhakti? send it bhack. Yeah and anything smacking of new-age hucksterism can take a hike too. Definition of new age hucksterism: superstitious, pre-scientific, eastern mystic clap-trap mixed with a dollop of pop psychology and sold to medulla-oblongata-challenged western consumers.

It's kind of amusing to watch the Captain's ship listing severely in the storm. Cap'n Rat perched petulantly at the stern, casting about for whom to blame. Squawking new directions still to an ever-dwindling crew. The not-so-good ship GMJ sinking under the weight of his own uncaring, irresponsible, accumulated history. The pampered and bloated captain will eventually head for the lifeboat leaving his crew to go down with the ship. Strap on the life jackets. What a weird voyage this has been.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:25:06 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Patrick, Jim and PatC and others
Message:
Hi Patrick

Thanks for your post, and the ones below. My two cents worth is this:

I agree with much of what Jim writes below, in that I no longer buy all the baggage that went with Knowledge, such as belief in God and in one's mind as being bad and something to transcend - Jim's 'dark force'. So if you mean by 'Knowledge' the meditation techniques plus all the philosophical underpinning that went with it, then I now reject it.

If however you mean just the 4 techniques themselves, then I see Knowledge now as one of many meditation techniques in the Radha Soami tradition, which people may or may not find valuable. By the way, I also find the techniques explained in a much more interesting and valuable way by other teachers in that tradition.

Where I think I differ with Jim is that I do not reject the idea of meditation as something either worthless, or at best a relaxation technique.

I think it a valuable exercise to meditate, which I define (this is my own definition here !) as being aware of your own awareness. If the 4 techniques of Knowledge help a person do this, then fine; for me personally, as they are now simply one of many meditations, I am free to look for other and better ways.

I now do the Buddhist Insight meditation, which to me has no belief system attached to it at all, other than the belief that looking at your own awareness is a valuable and worthwhile thing to do. I have read Jim somewhere saying that he does not even buy this, but that is a topic for another thread.

As a general point, for the ex-premies who were premies primarily for the experience Knowledge was supposed to bring, this is a vital issue: What do you do now ? Do you give up meditation altogether, or not ? And if not, what meditation do you do ? Pat Conlon has questioned below whether this is a valid topic for this Forum, and I think it is not only a valid topic, but an important one. It is certainly the issue that I find most relevant, and I know from people I have spoken to that I am not alone.

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 20:25:59 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Hold on a second, Mike.
Message:
I detect a contradiction in your two posts in this thread and also sniff a bit of spiritual elitism. As for the elitism, I'm almost certainly mistaken and just mis-reading what you've written. Nevertheless, it's how it comes across to me.

In your first post you say:As a general point, for the ex-premies who were premies primarily for the experience Knowledge was supposed to bring, this is a vital issue: What do you do now ? Do you give up meditation altogether, or not ? And if not, what meditation do you do ? Pat Conlon has questioned below whether this is a valid topic for this Forum, and I think it is not only a valid topic, but an important one. It is certainly the issue that I find most relevant, and I know from people I have spoken to that I am not alone.

To begin with ,I would think almost ALL ex-premies were premies primararily for the experience knowledge was supposed to bring.Or at least for some good and heightened experience. Maybe not all but the vast majority.The trouble is the guru mixed up the 'supposed' experience with devotion to him,leading a surrendered and disciplined life, attaining liberation through experienceing the ultimate reality (God, creator or what have you) via meditation but NOT just the meditation. Maybe your system of classifying the PRIMARY reason for being a premie is satisfactory to you but, like I said in your 'classification' thread, I, for one am not so sure. It's a very, very general pointer nothing more.Very few premies, especially yourself actually(with all your intimate darshan revelations and resulting devotion and surrender to Maharaji based on those)were these super sussed 'meditation only' beings, no matter how much the meditation meant or still means.Without wholesale acceptance of the fairy tale ie devotion and surrender to Maharaji the K meditation meant Jack Shit in its Maharaji context.To imply otherwise is mis-leading IMO.So the PRIMARY thing in all of this was accepting Maharji and in the early days even making oaths on receiving 'HIS' knowledge.The fairy tale came first before the tool of meditaion (and the other tools.....service, satsang)slotted into place.Only a few people received K without accepting M.A few but some, nevertheless.

With that in mind, I'd say your questions quoted above are pretty much directed to all ex-premies not just some primarily classified meditation freaks who were seeking 'what knowledge was supposed to bring' (presumably as oppossed to those who weren't !!!) .Sometimes Maharaji himself wasn't totally clear about what the 'the experience of knowledge was supposed to bring'. He has always contradicted himself. I could drag out quotes of his where he emphasises meditation above all else and I could also drag out quotes where it's almost belittled when compared to devotion, surrender or whatever. So what I'm saying is if YOU know what knowledge was supposed to bring then you know more than me and, ironically, more than Maharaji himself.To be clearer, I'd say knowledge was supposed to bring whatever mish-mash Maharaji wanted to promote at any given time.PRIMARILY Premies went along with that, on the whole. Yourself included I'd suspect. In the very early days he may have stressed meditation, at Kissimee he stressed total devotion to him and he chopped and changed whenever it was convenient.In Mike Dettmers opinion, devotion to Maharaji was the way Maharaji saw K, not the meditation. Although, as I've just said, Maharaji chops and changes but I'd reckon, ultimately, Mike D's view is probably right.

So on a public forum a post like yours is not only addressed to all ex-premies IMO but also openly invites a mixed response.

In a second post you state:
The problem with most threads on this topic is that they are mix of a discussion between people who either meditate or want to, and between those who don't see it as valuable and want to project that belief into the thread.

Why on earth you see that as a problem, I'm not exactly sure and it reads like those of us who don't value meditation as much and are, nowadays, more sceptical, want to 'project our beliefs into the thread' (oh, dear musn't do that!!).I'd guess those who DO value meditation also want to project their beliefs into the thread and good luck to them, I say. Isn't that partly what threads are for!!

Mike, on a public forum, EXPECT a mix.You can discuss it in public as you've done....and I agree with you enthusiasts....it's valid if you want to discuss it.Just expect some disagreement. Of course you're always free to discuss it in public and also go deeper into it with like-minded enthusiasts via email, or whatever is suitable and convenient.

Cheers

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:02:33 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Re: Hold on a second, Mike.
Message:
Hi Dermot

I think you are squinting too earnestly down the microscope here !! Some brief responses to your main points:

I detect a contradiction in your two posts...

Well, if you detect it, you detect it, but I cannot see any contradiction myself.

also sniff a bit of spiritual elitism. As for the elitism, I'm almost certainly mistaken..

I hope so, because I am not conscious of feeling any spiritual elitism. In fact, I don't feel 'spiritual' anything !!

I would think almost ALL ex-premies were premies primararily for the experience knowledge was supposed to bring.

I think many premies were in it primarily for other reasons - like M's love, to bring peace etc. My point of my 'Categories' post some weeks ago, was that you can only really tell EITHER when a person was joining, OR what mainly concerns them when they leave. I agree that as premies it was all mixed up, but I still think the distinction is valid.

Maybe your system of classifying the PRIMARY reason for being a premie is satisfactory to you but, like I said in your 'classification' thread, I, for one am not so sure. It's a very, very general pointer nothing more...

Ok, let's agree to differ. But I will say it one more time: as PREMIES I agree you had to accept the whole thing M, devotion to him, K everything. But on BECOMING a premie, I believe one thing was important or primary, and the same on leaving. Therefore my claiming to address that subset of ex-premies to whom meditation was important is not elitist at all.

Mike, on a public forum, EXPECT a mix...

Yes of course - the point you are referring to was specifically addressed to PatC, who was saying that no one had read his post, and was saying that he would like to discuss meditation but thought that no one was really interested. He and I have exchanged lengthy emails on this, and my response to his post was assuming that as context.

For the record, I would like to see both areas discussed:

1) The need, or perceived need, to practice meditation; I find reading those who claim to reject all pre-scientific thinking and mystical juju very interesting. I agree with most everything they say, and to find a position in myself where my current meditational practice sits comfortably with no mystical, religious or illogical assumptions or thinking is both challenging and rewarding.

2) Having accepted (1), then further discussing what type of meditation to do is also a topic I am interested in.

Take care

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:01:04 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Re: Hold on a second, Mike.
Message:

I think you are squinting too earnestly down the microscope here !! Some brief responses to your main points:

I detect a contradiction in your two posts...

Well, if you detect it, you detect it, but I cannot see any contradiction myself.

Possibly I am squinting too earnestly down the microscope!However, the contradiction I referred to related to first the questions directed to ex-premies who were primarliy seeking what knowledge was supposed to bring (as I've stated, IMO, practically, we all were)and then your seeming slight resentment that meditation enthusiasts weren't the only ones to respond to you.The first is an open invitation for all to respond while the second contradicts that. Of course this all depends on your definition of 'knowledge' and then on your definition of 'what it was supposed to bring'.Further down though you point out that you were speaking specifically to Pat and in the context of that, so fair enough.

also sniff a bit of spiritual elitism. As for the elitism, I'm almost certainly mistaken..

I hope so, because I am not conscious of feeling any spiritual elitism. In fact, I don't feel 'spiritual' anything !!

As I thought really, hence my stating I'm almost certainly wrong.Why it came across was due to the 'definition' problem mentioned above.

I would think almost ALL ex-premies were premies primararily for the experience knowledge was supposed to bring.

I think many premies were in it primarily for other reasons - like M's love, to bring peace etc. My point of my 'Categories' post some weeks ago, was that you can only really tell EITHER when a person was joining, OR what mainly concerns them when they leave. I agree that as premies it was all mixed up, but I still think the distinction is valid.

You completely miss my point.Again it goes back to the drfinition of 'knowledge'.All the reasons (not just meditation) such as you've mentioned above ie 'M's love', 'bringing peace' etc etc, were what 'knowledge was supposed to bring'. According to the 'giver' of the knowledge anyway.I also tried to convey to you that the concept of what it was supposed to bring was (probably deliberately) muddied by Maharaji himself.I cannot see how you can say 'what it was supposed to bring' with any clarity or certainty. You can refer to your own opinion on this but it's too mishy-mashy to refer to definitively.You seem to think it was some kind of austere, detached focus on meditation designed to lead to some kind of liberating truth.It was partly but not wholly. That's my point.

Maybe your system of classifying the PRIMARY reason for being a premie is satisfactory to you but, like I said in your 'classification' thread, I, for one am not so sure. It's a very, very general pointer nothing more...

Ok, let's agree to differ. But I will say it one more time: as PREMIES I agree you had to accept the whole thing M, devotion to him, K everything. But on BECOMING a premie, I believe one thing was important or primary, and the same on leaving. Therefore my claiming to address that subset of ex-premies to whom meditation was important is not elitist at all.

Yep, i'll agree to disagree here.I just cannot see how, if someones PRIMARY purpose was the liberating meditation above and beyond anything else,they wouldn't choose countless other meditation techniques, groups or even go it independently. Anything with a 'Buddhist' orientation would have been well up on the list.Maharajis mish mash of mainly Hindu bhakti (with tinges of Sikhism) is far too overladen with all sorts of other stuff apart from meditation.In the early days especially most must have bought into this, deeply and primarliy, no matter how enticing, appealing and satisfying the meditation. Otherwise, like I say, countless other paths would have been chosen apart from some weird devotional thingy.
Seems we'll still disagree on this though so fair enough!!

Mike, on a public forum, EXPECT a mix...

Yes of course - the point you are referring to was specifically addressed to PatC, who was saying that no one had read his post, and was saying that he would like to discuss meditation but thought that no one was really interested. He and I have exchanged lengthy emails on this, and my response to his post was assuming that as context.

Ok

For the record, I would like to see both areas discussed:

1) The need, or perceived need, to practice meditation; I find reading those who claim to reject all pre-scientific thinking and mystical juju very interesting. I agree with most everything they say, and to find a position in myself where my current meditational practice sits comfortably with no mystical, religious or illogical assumptions or thinking is both challenging and rewarding.

2) Having accepted (1), then further discussing what type of meditation to do is also a topic I am interested in.

Personally , all power to your elbow.I'm not in any way trying to stifle or discourage you or anyone else from discussing whatever you want to!!

cheers

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 13:09:51 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Re: Hold on a second, Mike.
Message:
I just cannot see how, if someones PRIMARY purpose was the liberating meditation above and beyond anything else,they wouldn't choose countless other meditation techniques, groups or even go it independently.

OK - I think the difference between us is that you define Knowledge as the whole shooting match - the meditation techniques, M's grace, the fact that it had to be given by him or with his authority, and all the cult activity to support it. And I think you are right - certainly M means by 'Knowledge' this.

On the other hand, I was meaning by Knowledge just the meditation per se. I accept that this is misleading, and should have made the distinction clear.

If you accept the above, most of our differences vanish. I agree with you that 'Knowledge' should be the wider definition, and I will be more aware of the distinction in future posts.

Take care

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 19:36:48 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Ok Mike... [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 22:21:34 (EST)
From: Jim the ONLY forum watchdog
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Nice try, Dermot
Message:
I'm sorry, Dermot, but this kind of aggressive argument where you actually scrutinize the other person's posts is NOT what people became ex-premies for. Anyway, whether you understand this or not (I sure don't), please remember, there's only one

Jim
The Forum Watchdog

:)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:13:32 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: Jim the ONLY forum watchdog
Subject: Re: Nice try, Dermot
Message:
this kind of aggressive argument where you actually scrutinize the other person's posts is NOT what people became ex-premies for.

Jim, I don't know if this is a general comment, or specific to Dermot's answering my post with quotes, or a tongue-in-cheek comment.

But as far as I am concerned, I welcome scrutiny of whatever I say, and I welcome being challenged (I may not like it, but I welcome it) since it sharpens my own thoughts about things, and encourages me to be more rigorous and precise in my own beliefs and feelings.

Take care

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:45:31 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Tongue-in-cheek
Message:
Hi Mike,

No, I was just kidding. In fact, I thought Dermot actually made some excellent points. I think the close scrutiny of our words and opinions in this fuzziest of areas is important as it's the only way we have of tracing our steps into, and, if we want, walking back out from, these spiritual forests we've all inhabited one way or another.

The joke about me being the watchdog was just because Fran had given me shit for parsing out posts too closely. Hell, I like to fool around. Shoot me.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 22:52:13 (EST)
From: Ddermot
Email: None
To: Jim the ONLY forum watchdog
Subject: It's ok Jim
Message:
Hardly anyone reads my posts and as for replying to them ....!!

Don't worry Jim, you're still top dog.....I just aint got the ambition to make a challenge :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 23:08:29 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Ddermot
Subject: Nonsense, Dermot
Message:
I always read your posts. I was tempted to respond to that but felt that it really was addressed to Mike F.

Oh, okay so I did not answer your post in Chit-chatroom. But it was about politics and you're such a commie pommy that I don't stand a chance arguing with you. I'm only really here to talk about the cult stuff anyway.

But I'll talk Queer as Folk with you in the Chit-chatroom any day. I rented the videos of the first US season and was glued to the box for two days - well, I have a good excuse, a cold.

If you can rent the videos there, please treat yourself. It was actually made in Canada and probably could not have been made here. The bible-thumpers would have had heart attacks in Congress. Believe me, it was a lot bolder than the Brit version.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 23:30:04 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: I'm glad
Message:
you didn't write your political post Pat....I'm in a 'Apolitical' (is there such a word?...probably not)mode at the moment.I think I'll leave world affairs to those incapable of making a good job of it....Bush et al :)

Yep, I'll keep an eye out for the US version vid...sounds good.

You often get colds....I can't remember the last time I had a cold or other ailment.....Damn, I'll probably go down with one now after saying that!!

Cheers Pat

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 23:37:43 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Dermot
Subject: Re: I'm glad - to Dermot OT
Message:
That's more like it, Dermot. Leave politics to the politicians. Obviously I'm kidding but I haven't gotten into settling world affairs seriously in 30 years or so. Usually too theoretical for my tastes. I do my bit on the local level - like voting against all bonds - not good for business.

I've had more colds in the past year than since I lived in UK. Working with the public exposes me more and there have been some real nasty colds out there lately.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:44:50 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Knowledge and meditation
Message:
I've said some of this here before as well as in email to you and a few others and you know what I think about meditation. I have still not explained meditation to myself satisfactorily enough to foist it on others. In email you can be a little less nitpicky about words than you can here.

I do agree that it is a valid topic especially for the exes who have meditated for many years as I and many of the longtermers who are now exiting have but, every time I hear someone else try to talk about it, I realise that there are problems in communicating something as subjective as meditation.

Back in the days when we called it Knowledge and thought that we were all experiencing the same thing, we could use buzz words: ''that feeling,'' ''getting high,'' ''satchitanand,'' ''clarity'' etc. those days are over for me. Some people have moved on to other schools of meditation which also have their jargon but I have become totally allergic to all eastern mysticism and cannot comfortably use any of the mystical jargon.

It was so simple 30 years ago. Well, it was for me. LSD showed me bliss which sure beat the hell out the misery I had come from - living in apartheid South Africa, being gay when we were still called ''filthy queers.'' guilt-inducing catholicism, an alcoholic and dysfunctional family, the Cold War and Viet Nam - all man-made horrors which, after taking acid, seemed simply to be the product of a lack of love and no peace of mind.

I knew the solution but did not have the means to implement it. I knew that putting acid in the water supply would not work. I turned to yoga meditation but during the next two years that I did meditation (and none of my friends were interested) I despaired of ever making people see that happiness, peace and love were the solution to the world's problems

That's when Rawat arrived. All my fiends became premies and seemed to be so sure that this was the natural evolution of the hippie peace and love thing. I felt wonderful feelings in satsang. Then I got K and saw that they were the tried and trusted yoga techs that I had already been using and that Rawat had the means and existing organization to implement the spreading of the techs. I put aside my misgivings about him and his organization and joined the cult.

In the early days it seemed as if we all knew and agreed on exactly what K was. It was a way to become quiet and feel the peace and love within us so that we could then go out and share that peace and love with others. Of course there was also a lot of fuzzy thinking going such as K is love, love is god, therefore K is god etc. It was all about feeling and no one really minded how others described K as long as it was obvious that they were feeling great and wanted to share that feeling. No one nitpicked and analysed.

The interesting thing about those early years is that I was not really listening to Rawat. I was there for the vibe. I heard from him what I wanted to hear. Most of the time I actually fell asleep during his satsang. I told myself that I could not understand him because I was not as enlightened as he was. Living with the Indian premies in South Africa in the 70s made it clear to me that K was the solution to apartheid and racism. Their understanding of M and K was so simple and it jived completely with mine. K was love and M was the one who brought us together in one happy family.

Then I came to the US in 78 and saw that there really was not much unity among the premies and that there seemed to be a lot of confusion about what M and K was all about. Over the next few years I began to listen to what Rawat was saying and started to wonder if it was his ramblings that was causing the confusion. I wrote him a letter telling him that he really needed to clarify K and stop yakking about planes and other stuff. I accused him of chit-chat when premies were desperate for guidance. No, he did not answer. :C)

When he first stopped premies giving satsang I was happy because it had become painful and boring to sit and listen to them going on about their existential angst or other stuff that seemed to me to be psychological nonsense. Now of course, with hindsight, I think that that is where Rawat completely lost the plot. He silenced us just when we needed to begin discussing things more deeply and in western terms. He took over and imposed his bhakti guru-worship religion on us.

I drifted away from premiedom but continued to enjoy K and went to see Rawat about once a year. I still fell asleep during most of his satsangs but it seemed as if he was trying to westernize K and I gave him kudos for that. Then came a period of ten years, 85 to 95, when I stopped going to see him, had nothing to do with premies and just meditated on my own. During that time I also became sick and began to study Science of Mind, positive thinking and healing because the medical profession could not cure me.

Unbeknown to me, during that time I had formed my own understanding of K and I did not realize how far it was from Rawat's official version until Andy wanted to get K six years ago and I bought some Rawat videos and took Andy to see Rawat. At first it seemed that I agreed with Rawat. He had shed most of the Hinduism but was still promoting K as a means to happiness. I finally became inspired enough to go back into premiedom and help propagate ''this beautiful gift of K.''

Seeing premies again after many years abscence was a shock. So many of them were confused, unhappy and often mentally disturbed. Till then I had only watched videos of Rawat's one hour discourses. The premies however preferred the swans and waterfall videos and so I began to watch them. The more I saw the more I realized that Rawat's teaching was not only empty and idiotic but dangerously irresponsible. He did not teach positive thinking and mental health and the premies were going nuts listening to his insane philosophy.

Then I began to read on EPO what Rawat was really like behind the public persona. I saw that he was indeed nuts and here I am. I still enjoy meditating as a way of relaxing and feeling peace and love but I don't demonize the mind. Instead I practice mental health and clear thinking. I don't call it Knowledge anymore because K is Rawat's religion of guru-worship and the techs are used by him to enslave premies not to free them.

I used to talk about meditation in flambuoyant terms (Andy hated what he called my ''fireworks'' satsang) but now I really prefer to use understatements. Whatever altered states of consciousness I have really are unexplainable to others. To me the most important part is that I enjoy the subjective experiences which make me feel peace and love and then share my joy with others. I can never describe the subjective experiences that have caused me to feel the peace and love.

So, I understate my experience of meditation and simply call it relaxation or brain yoga. Just as I do physical yoga to keep my body limber so I use the meditation techs to keep my brain fresh and strong. It is simply a mental health exercise regime for me. I can no longer agree with Rawat that it is immortality or the god within or any of that other religious stuff. This world is all I need and meditation is my way of slowing down enough to smell the roses and to enjoy it as much as I possibly can.

Like Patrick W, I also still use the word Knowledge sometimes, usually when talking to premies. It's shorthand for a nice feeling, the feeling that brought us to M but, in the end, I think we just got out of M and K whatever we expected and put into it and it is certainly not some universal truth or even a uniform experience. Like Mike F, I appreciate Jim's skepticism and prefer it to what he calls New Age rubber talk anyday.

This was not a well-thought-out essay but a bit of a ramble. I've got a cold and am woolly-headed. I hope it makes some sense. I have got quite a bit of this stuff sorted out in my head finally after a year of struggling to discard cult-think.

I am no longer too reluctant to talk about it even if I have not yet begun to put it into words. So, if anyone wants to discuss this in more detail, I'm up for it but give me a few days to get over this lousy cold.

PatC, the old flower-child gardener who likes to stop and smell roses and enjoys the blossoming of my breath but no longer likes lotus feet or marigold malas.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 15:45:41 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Pat, your rundown was FAB! :)
Message:
For someone with a wooly head (don't I know all about that) you've put it quite nicely. I remember when you were still 'hot' on bringing the techs to the world, which is why you hitched your wagon back up to Rawat's star for a short period there. So I knowwww what Andy was talking about there. Fireworks satsang! Hahaha.

Bests,

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 15:23:46 (EST)
From: A Friend
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Re: Knowledge and meditation
Message:
I agree with you.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 16:22:27 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: pdconlon@hotmail.com
To: A Friend
Subject: Hi, Friend, I was reading your posts...
Message:
...and wondering what your POV was. You seem to have as little patience or respect for all the discussions of guru lineages as I have. I'm also wondering of course if you agree with me completely or partially especially since I am critical of Rev Rawat.

If you want you can always email me to continue this discussion if you want as no one else seems to have read my post or is interested in discussing it on the forum. The topic of meditation is boring to most people here.

But, welcome to the forum anyway.

Patrick Conlon,
San Francisco.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 17:14:19 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Re: Hi, Friend, I was reading your posts...
Message:
no one else seems to have read my post or is interested in discussing it on the forum

Ahhh Patrick - I read your post, several times in fact !!

And as you know, I do think it a topic worth discussing (if people are interested, as you say).

The thing is not to 'prove' meditation is a valuable activity - I don't want to do that, and I don't believe it is possible anyway. My point is that for those who already believe that some form of meditation is a worthwhile activity, and believe this enough to want to practice as a regular thing, for those people (of which I am one) discussion is a good thing.

The problem with most threads on this topic is that they are mix of a discussion between people who either meditate or want to, and between those who don't see it as valuable and want to project that belief into the thread.

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 15:48:19 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Thanks, Mike! (nt) [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 17:28:55 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Thanks, Mike
Message:
Yes, I don't believe that meditation is for those who are not interested which is why I have hesitated to talk about it here much but the funny thing is I have benefitted more from the feedback of those who think it's hooey (like Jim) than those who think it's great, like our resident New Agers like Deputy Dog to whom I said below:

I used to enjoy all that spiritual stuff like your Alan Watts quote but I no longer listen to anything anybody has to say about meditation especially if they have studied some sort of eastern mysticism. That's because too many pre-scientific ideas are involved and because huge assumptions are made based on the belief that eastern mysticism is valid.

The more I get rid of eastern spiritual concepts the more I see that everything I ever needed to know about my consciousness was shown to me during the years I took acid. At the time I was overwhelmed by the information and did not have the words to understand what I had seen. Very little had been written about LSD and what little was written was hopelessly tainted with eastern mumbo-jumbo. Hence I was ripe for the plucking by a Hindu guru.

Some of the things that I learned from psychedelics which I have only just begun to think and write about are:

As Brian said, we only use part of our brain. Psychedelics stimulate parts which we normally don't use.

Those parts of the brain can be stimulated without drugs. After taking acid I often had flash-backs not induced by drugs. I also had similar experiences during sex or when in a creative state. Later, when I began to do yoga meditation before getting K, the same states were recreated.

Those parts of the brain seem to be associated with feelings, creativity and imagination and are associated with an effortless and exhilirated alertness.

Because they are tied up with the imagination all sorts of errors of discernment can take place such as hallucinations which one thinks are real. (I have a hunch that most religions and pre-scientific cosmologies were the result of psychedelic experiences.)

It is for this reason that I distrust any eastern mysticism or anybody else's explanation other than my own. The imagination has not been sufficiently studied by anyone to give me a satisfactory explanation.

From psychedelics I also learned that, once the drug wore off, that I could be left feeling vigorously healthy and alert or that I could be caught up in endless loops of thought which ultimately left me feeling groggy and depressed. That taught me that I was the creator of my own states of mind, mood and attitude.

Yes, about this word MIND. To me my entire consciousness is my mind. Thoughts are just a small part of my mind. My mind observes my thoughts and feelings as well as all sensual phenomena. I don't want to be nitpicky but I do feel that Rawat used the word incorrectly. He used MIND to mean thoughts and, as I've said before, because his thoughts were so inane and maybe insane, he demonized the mind.

I'm game to talk about this stuff but I want to talk about it with people who are also willing to struggle to explain it in their own words without resorting to any sort of mysticism or religion whether of east or west.

I definitely agree with you to let the good times roll. We are the masters of our own happiness. I choose to be happy and to share that with anyone else who wants it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:49:01 (EST)
From: Mike Finch
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Re: Thanks, Mike
Message:
I have benefitted more from the feedback of those who think it's hooey (like Jim) than those who think it's great..

Me too - I have just said something like that above

I'm game to talk about this stuff but I want to talk about it with people who are also willing to struggle to explain it in their own words without resorting to any sort of mysticism or religion whether of east or west.

Someone else has challenged me to do this in a recent email, so I will give it a shot in the next few days.

Take care

-- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:15:55 (EST)
From: PatD
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Re: Patrick, Jim and PatC and others
Message:
Where I think I differ with Jim is that I do not reject the idea of meditation as something either worthless, or at best a relaxation technique.

I wouldn't reject the idea either. What I do reject is the notion that meditation has any real connection with spirituality,other than possibly putting one in a frame of mind where the big picture can be thought about without too many distractions.

By the big picture I don't mean whether there is or isn't a God,that resides in the realm of faith not rationality,but in how life can be lived with the minimum hassle to oneself but with the maximum benefit to one's fellow man.

Needless to say after 28 yrs of being discouraged from thinking about these things I'm a bit rusty,but I certainly won't be looking to points east for the foreseeable future in search of an answer.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 13:14:11 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Mike Finch
Subject: Re: Patrick, Jim and PatC and others
Message:
Mike, part of your post read

Where I think I differ with Jim is that I do not reject the idea of meditation as something either worthless, or at best a relaxation technique.

I think it a valuable exercise to meditate, which I define (this is my own definition here !) as being aware of your own awareness. If the 4 techniques of Knowledge help a person do this, then fine; for me personally, as they are now simply one of many meditations, I am free to look for other and better ways.

I now do the Buddhist Insight meditation, which to me has no belief system attached to it at all, other than the belief that looking at your own awareness is a valuable and worthwhile thing to do. I have read Jim somewhere saying that he does not even buy this, but that is a topic for another thread.

As a general point, for the ex-premies who were premies primarily for the experience Knowledge was supposed to bring, this is a vital issue: What do you do now ? Do you give up meditation altogether, or not ? And if not, what meditation do you do ? Pat Conlon has questioned below whether this is a valid topic for this Forum, and I think it is not only a valid topic, but an important one. It is certainly the issue that I find most relevant, and I know from people I have spoken to that I am not alone.

I don't necessarily translate the term 'relaxation technique' as a put down or something inferior, just that I think anything more is just a 'hype'. Relaxation is something virtually everyone can relate to. Those loaded with decades of 'spiritual' concepts, 'personal growth' concepts or those who aren't. Greater relaxation doesn't rule out an enhanced awareness or a quieter, finer state of mind. However, even the descriptive words I've just used there are debatable.All our descriptions and interpretations are really,it seems to me, just purely subjective.I think we'd have to have to a full (or fuller) understanding of the brain to really know what's going on when a person relaxes or meditates or whatever. Not even brain specialist have that understanding yet. Seems more sensible to me to just accept the relaxtion technique or meditation technique as something to be appreciated and enjoyed, plain and simple.In much the same way that people appreciate nature, books, films,music or whatever.Insights and enhancements can come from these things too but whether they take us out of a 'subjective',well I think not. So what?

The 'being aware of your own awareness ' which you speak of is fine by me.Whatever turns you on so to speak.I get the impression (correct me if I'm wrong) that you also look upon this as a 'purposeless' activity.I wonder though.Hours spent in formal meditation for no purpose? To be aware that you are aware? We ARE aware beings anyway.Surely being alive is being aware.Unless the process of 'being aware of our awareness' is carried out with some other motive,I can't see its relevance as a regular FORMAL practise.This is probably just a matter of personal taste though . These days I prefer things that happen spontaneously. For instance, just out walking looking at a beautiful multi-coloured sky, feeling a an exquisite breeze across my face.....just for a few moments a (excuse the subjectivity here) trancendental feeling may come upon me or a vague notion of something more, an expansive feeling, a feeling that beauty is there......all this stuff just comes but I haven't got a clue actually if it's 'REAL' or 'TRUTH' or an intimation of 'GOD' but I just like the feeling. Then it goes away and I continue to like other stuff. Trying to do my work, noticing what's going on in the world, hobbies or whatever.

Why would I even want to label it or later on have faith in it? Like everything in our lives things come and go.All those heavily loaded things like “God” or “following a path” or “spiritual practise” or whatever just seem to be a clutching at straws.We can’t accept that we’ll never fully understand so we choose something to have faith in or adore or whatever.Any experience which seems to be above and beyond our “normal” experiences we use as validation of this greater something. These days I prefer to take a down to earth, take it as it comes, approach.

You ask 'what do you do now'? 'Do you give up on meditation altogether?' Personally. pretty much so.Not entirely. If I actually feel like sitting down to 'meditate' then I do so.Probably just the 'breath' and 'light' technique. However, I don't want or even see the need for it to be a regular disciplined activity nor do I see it as leading to anything or answering anything concerning my temporary existence here on this planet. It’s relaxing enough, it feels ok and that’s it.

Personally, I much prefer the “corpse” relaxation posture after doing some yoga asanas. I love the feeling of just letting go, sinking into the floor, relaxing as best as I can the whole of my body while breathing deeply but naturally and regularly. 10 to 20 minutes of that (without any hype!) after some exercise is very refreshing, invigorating and seems to do just what formal meditation did for me. Of course I like to wonder and ponder, think and read ….whatever….giving up a formal “spiritual” or “meditational” practise doesn’t mean you lose the simple joy, appreciation and inquisitiveness of life.In my experience life is better actually.I also like to smoke some quality weed every so often too. Not regularly because it just becomes jaded but every now and then it’s cool to have something to “shift” the awareness, so to speak.

Cheers

Dermot.

<

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 09:17:41 (EST)
From: Bryn
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Onward ever onward!
Message:
It seems to me that the next step to meditating, is developing an understanding of exactly what 'this experience' is. To do that you are going to have to bring into movement a dynamic process called 'thinking'. Thinking is characterised by (among other things) the fact that if you don't do it it won't happen:if you dont do thinking, you have no thoughts to evaluate, and so no evaluation of 'that experience'.

Feeling 'the experience' is all very well,(no sneer implied) but even so thinking has already taken place. Coherent feeling implies that subject and object have already been established-how else would you know that 'it' was a feeling?, and that the one who is feeling it is 'me'? Thinking already exists in feeling. Epilepsy and psychic fits of all kinds are thought free feeling.

Going back to the 'if you don't do it it won't exist' idea. Another way of looking at this is to put the ideas the other way around and say: 'where ever thinking is, I can expect to find evidence of me.'
At this point however I like to differentiate between 'thinking' as a dynamic phenomenon, focused loosely around a potential 'Me, and 'thoughts' which are the product of this activity of participating in thinking. Thoughts are fixed condensations that result from my doing thinking.I have something to perceive in thoughts.

It appears to me that the experiences in meditation are further fixed representations from the dynamical realm of thinking. Fixed they are,(light forms, colours sounds sensations of bliss etc) but more dynamic still than thoughts.

The journey (if the metaphor works) is into thinking, where (where?) I can reasonably expect to find more of ME. I think behind the experiences of thought, and meditation lies Being. Being is like me.

Love Bryn, with time to spare in an IT room.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 18:58:08 (EST)
From: Francesca :~)
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Showing someone, or ...
Message:
... having someone else show someone 4 techniques is not exactly much in the way of teaching. I'd consider him a motivational speaker for those that he motivates, but in no way does what he talks about at programs have anything to do with further instruction on practicing the 4 techniques.

He started conducting K reviews himself in about 1984 or 1985, but I heard the content of the 1st one through a friend who went, and there was no real instruction other than to go over the same old thing. I think they were told to stop using baragons. That's when I really lost it with the whole thing. I thought, what is the use of leaving my arms up in the air for 30 minutes! I've never heard anyone who went to any of the others talk about him imparting any real substance about the practice itself -- just the usual rambling motivational talk.

He rambles on about his own philosophies of life and death and breath, and rambles on about gratitude etc. After I received K I never learned one thing more about the meditation experience itself.

I started practicing many other techniques starting in 1985 and have found many that I like, and teachers (and their students) that meditate themselves and are way more competent to talk about the meditation process.

How can M be considered a 'master' of anything if he just passes on 4 techniques and gives motivational talks. More like Hindi-inspired new age fluff, with some real techniques to back it up that are taught in may other places.

Big whoop. That's one of the reasons I left. Prem Pal Singh Rawat is neither a master nor a teacher. He's just a gabber.

--f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 22:01:03 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Francesca :~)
Subject: Other teachers
Message:
I know that some exes don't care about meditation, but I've often said that I studied with 'other teachers,' so I only thought it fair to name some of them.

Here are the names of some other teachers that I have studied with after M. M doesn't hold a candle to any of them, IMO, because these people actually meditate, and at least can talk about it in a way that is helpful to those who wish to meditate.

Of course, if you don't like meditation, you'll probably think that some of these people are full of it, but I've gained something of value from all of them. Of course, in the final analysis, I have to think for myself.

Francesca

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
--
Teachers

Jack Kornfield (Spirit Rock, Marin, CA)
John Travis (Spirit Rock, Nevada City, CA)
Gil Fronsdal (Spirit Rock, Bay Area, CA)
U Sillananda (Daly City, CA)
The Dalai Lama [Tenzin Gyatso] (Tibet, India)
The Tai Situ (Tibet, India)
Lama Lodru Rinpoche (Tibet, India, San Francisco, CA)
Bokar Rinpoche (Tibet, India, France)
Khenpo Donyo (Tibet, India, France)
Ponlop Rinpoche (Tibet, India, USA)
Thrangu Rinpoche (Tibet, India)
Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche (Tibet, India)
Sogyal Rinpoche (Tibet, India, USA)
Jetsun Chimey Luding (Tibet, India, Canada)
Lama Tashi Namgyal (Seattle, WA)
Lama Jyinpa (Tucson, AZ)
Lama Kunga (Sebastopol, CA [deceased])
Thich Nhat Hahn (Vietnam, France, USA)
Sister Chan Khong (Vietnam, France, USA)
John Kabat-Zinn (Univ. of Massachusetts)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 22:23:03 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: At least it wasn't plastic surgery
Message:
That's a whole lot of teachers you got there, Fran. Why do you think any of them would know anything particularly? Honestly, I have to tell you, for such an obviously intelligent and outspoken person as yourself, someone so apparently proud and idependent (all good, no tongue-in-cheek here), I don't quite get how easily you submit yourself as a humble student to these guys. Are you a sucker for long asian words? Mandalas? Gongs? What?
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 02:14:10 (EST)
From: Francesca :~)
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: As I told in my story many times
Message:
Probably because you are assuming that I 'submit' myself as a 'humble student.' Since I left in 1985, I have listened to many teachers -- some I've studied with intensively, some it has just been one seminar or talk. The reason I offered the list is because I've been exposed to many teachers since M, and in comparison, M is not much of a teacher of meditation -- which is about the only thing he could purport to be a 'master' of. Otherwise, he's just a 'toastmaster,' i.e. a good speaker. (Which of course, he's not, he's more like "the squeaker.") I figured I should at least say WHO I mean when I say 'other teachers.'

But then, yes, there is the question of teachers, and how far I want that to go.

I was leaving Tibetan Buddhism right around the time that Pat and Chuck and Andy were leaving the cult. This Forum helped me immensely to get out from 'under' teachers and it was fun to be exiting at the same time as Pat, Chuck and Andy. My father's death greatly accelerated the process several months later. I am no longer a 'humble student,' although I'm not an arrogant one either. I am not closely connected with any teacher's group at this point, but since I still practice meditation, I find some of the teachings and obervations to be of value. At the very least, it gives me some food for thought. At the moment, I'm allergic to the Tibetan variety, although there were many Tibetan teachers on that list. It is funny that I had the same experience many recent exes have when I was leaving the group I was a part of (and had actually been the facilitator of for 5 years). People ignore me. Do not respond to e-mails. For about 90 percent (or more) of the people I knew, it is as if I dropped off the face of the earth. Because if I'm not supporting their trip, they are afraid of hearing the little old doubtmaker, me!

There are teachers that know more than I do about meditation, that don't ask me to become 'their' student, that don't ask me to join groups, that don't ask anything of me, really. The thing I've learned is to see them like you'd see a college professor. Just because the subject is meditation instead of art history doesn't put them up on a pedestal, or make all their ideas correct because they are accomplished meditators.

If a teacher wanted me to submit to them, I'd be outta there.

But I'm puzzled as to why you'd think that the teachers' input would be totally valueless. For example, why would I think anyone on this bulletin board would know anything particularly, or had anything to offer me? Interaction as well as learning situations stimulate growth for me -- the teacher or the person I interact with is a catalyst. And sometimes I disagree totally with what the teacher presents, just like I do with people I interact with.

I know you think meditation and sprituality is a lot of hooey, but that's not the same for all exes. Presenting an alternate view on this board often ends up in debates, of course. But I don't think I'm going to convince anyone else of anything they aren't -- deep down -- already convinced of.

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 21:57:07 (EST)
From: Deborah
Email: None
To: Francesca :~)
Subject: I like what you have to say
Message:
I think you expressed yourself very clearly. Teachers of any discipline can be great catalysts. And sure, with the right attitude could be a godsend. ;)

A guru (not M, obviously) said that the disciple gives the guru his guruness or something like that. I remembered that and applied it to my journey in academia. I often encourage students to look at the responsibility of the student being good, for they can make a teacher good. You know students will often have the attitude that they should just go to class and let the teacher do all the work.

I definitely do my part in class to bring out the best in the teacher's abilities. My theatre teacher last summer told us that a good actor is one who makes the other actors look good.

It's a symbiotic relationship when it works. I wouldn't want to study on my own. I also love and strive in the classroom environment. And most fascinating things that I have learned, I never sought.

Thanks for reposting your story, you told it to me once, but I appreciate it more today, for some reason.

cheers,

deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 11:09:15 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca :~)
Subject: How do you know they know ANYthing?
Message:
There are teachers that know more than I do about meditation, that don't ask me to become 'their' student, that don't ask me to join groups, that don't ask anything of me, really. The thing I've learned is to see them like you'd see a college professor. Just because the subject is meditation instead of art history doesn't put them up on a pedestal, or make all their ideas correct because they are accomplished meditators.

Fran,

The problem with your analogy is that art history is a significant discipline with definite substance we can all understand. It makes perfect sense how someone could study it for years, learning something new with every book, lecture, conversation or field trip. It's obviously a real body of knowledge and is the kind of thing people can share with one another.

Meditation might be anything from trivial mental relaxation to profound mental relaxation to communion with God to transcendance into God. I just don't see where anyone gets off claiming some sort of great qualification as a 'teacher' though. I used to, back when I thought there were plains upon plains, worlds upon worlds to explore and that guys like Maharaji's mahatmas were truly advanced in that respect. Now, though, it really does seem funny to concede any 'expertise' to any of these guys.

I guess I also don't buy the idea that any of them are truly adept at controlling their minds as they'd like to have you believe. Judging from my own experience and my perceptions of others' as they related them over my many years as a premie, I think that's all bullshit too. That is, I don't think that people develop some sort of mind control mastery. The mind's far too nimble and subtle for that.

But then maybe I'm wrong. That's just how it all strikes me now.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:00:15 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I'm not sure mastery is the word
Message:
It's more akin to if meditation were the Australian bush, and someone had spent years of time exploring in there. Hearing the different birds, knowing the seasons, walking the trails.

If I wanted to spend some time in the bush, I'd at least find what those people say to be of interest. That's what I mean. Pretty practical. Not lofty high-guy/gal stuff. And always with a good degree of skepticism.

And there have been some scientific studies of the mind, at least in terms of modern western science, such as the neuroscience stuff. Kabat-Zinn, for example, has a stress and pain control clinic at the University of Massachusetts hospital where meditation is part of the therapy, stripped of the relgious aspects. There are others that have taken some of this stuff into a more clinic environment, stripped of juju.

I've bought the book 'Snapping,' at the recommendation of several folks here, and I'll be reading it at some time in the future. I believe there are even harmful forms of meditation, or at least harmful ways to do meditation, just as there are harmful forms of exercise. Some people use alcohol and meds (perscription or non) in an attempt to loosen up or stay on an even keel. It all can be abused and misused.

And there are some people who -- because of serious study of meditation and its effects on people -- actually teach it in a University setting. When he was exiled from Vietnam during the Vietnam war, Thich Nhat Hahn taught at various universities on the east coast. Eknath Eashwaran (now deceased) taught at the University of California, Berkeley. Robert Thurman and Ponlop Rinpoche have taught at Columbia in New York. There's a University in Seattle (I think U Wash.) that has Buddhist teachers in its religious studies program.

In the academic setting, they definitely differentiate between a flim flam man/woman and someone who at least is making a serious study of it.

Bests,

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 16:45:21 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: But ARE there really any trails?
Message:
It's more akin to if meditation were the Australian bush, and someone had spent years of time exploring in there. Hearing the different birds, knowing the seasons, walking the trails.

If I wanted to spend some time in the bush, I'd at least find what those people say to be of interest. That's what I mean. Pretty practical. Not lofty high-guy/gal stuff. And always with a good degree of skepticism.

But, surely, whether or not there are any trails to begin with is an open issue. My difficulty with all this is that, while I am certainly no expert on the Australian bush, I can, I think, go there and see it for myself. I can fly over it and poke around it on foot. I can see photos and review other kinds of evidence that it exists.

The spiritual 'bush', if you will, isn't like that at all. It might be no more than the figment of peoples' imagination. And it's not much comfort, to me at least, that the only proof of its existence is that the supposed guides have seen it, know their way around it, etc. Why, even if we accepted their accounts at face value, half of them contradict themselves internally and those that don't contradict each other. Plus, there's no physical or scientific explanation for such an internal landscape anyway. Hardly the case with the Australian outback. Good intentions or not, sincere, modest teachers or not, the whole cosmology surrounding this stuff could be entirely wrong. Of course it would have to be untestable save but by subjective experience which is undoubtedly undependable and worthless, given all the ways we can and do trick ourselves.

And there have been some scientific studies of the mind, at least in terms of modern western science, such as the neuroscience stuff. Kabat-Zinn, for example, has a stress and pain control clinic at the University of Massachusetts hospital where meditation is part of the therapy, stripped of the relgious aspects. There are others that have taken some of this stuff into a more clinic environment, stripped of juju.

Now THIS I would find interesting. I would imagine, though, that there isn't too much we actually know about meditation or that we can say about it now if it really is stripped of all the religious and spiritual packaging.

I've bought the book 'Snapping,' at the recommendation of several folks here, and I'll be reading it at some time in the future. I believe there are even harmful forms of meditation, or at least harmful ways to do meditation, just as there are harmful forms of exercise. Some people use alcohol and meds (perscription or non) in an attempt to loosen up or stay on an even keel. It all can be abused and misused.

Haven't read the book but yes, that's got to be true. I know that some of the times we tried to go all out and really supress Mr. Mind once and for all were pretty destabalizing for sure. I don't doubt for a moment that some people suffered permanently, not to mention, of course, those that went so far as to hurt themselves or others in the effort.

And there are some people who -- because of serious study of meditation and its effects on people -- actually teach it in a University setting. When he was exiled from Vietnam during the Vietnam war, Thich Nhat Hahn taught at various universities on the east coast. Eknath Eashwaran (now deceased) taught at the University of California, Berkeley. Robert Thurman and Ponlop Rinpoche have taught at Columbia in New York. There's a University in Seattle (I think U Wash.) that has Buddhist teachers in its religious studies program.

Yeah but what are they teaching? Is it religious or not? If it is, it matters little that they're teaching it at a university. What's the difference in terms of whether or not they actually know anything (besides the religious trappings, that is)?

In the academic setting, they definitely differentiate between a flim flam man/woman and someone who at least is making a serious study of it.

Yes, I'm sure that there are all sorts of sincere students of these traditions. I'm just saying that, when it comes right down to it, the teachings are based on cosmologies that are, in all likelihood, false. Thus the teachings may have all sorts of artistic or other kinds of cultural value but, in terms of truth value, aren't worth anything.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 01:43:30 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Yes there are trails
Message:
A person can meditate themselves, and see for themselves, just like they can walk the trails themselves, and find new ones as well. Plus meditation, for some, is more about being fully here than about going anywhere. Maharaji's style was to go somewhere, at least that's what it seemed like to me. Advertised as find some place of peace that isn't here, in this awful world. The 'Beam me up Scotty' thing.

Without the religious trappings and the hype, things are simpler and stripped down. But with meditation you are also talking about the nature of the mind, and that does tie in with science and psychology.

As far as figments of imagination -- it would be interesting to see just how much of the content of anyone's mind is self-created. I don't think you need to assume meditation is the culprit, if there is indeed anything wrong with imagination, and if indeed it is a bad thing. I would bet, not always, but sometimes, just like everything else.

==f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 13:18:12 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Hm, that's not quite what I meant
Message:
A person can meditate themselves, and see for themselves, just like they can walk the trails themselves, and find new ones as well.

But, Fran, that's the whole issue, isn't it? Are there really 'trails' there or just their imagination? How could anyone know without subscribing to one spiritual concept or another? There's nothing objective about it. Indeed, it's like the perfect petri dish for fertile imaginings -- just you, your mind and whatever expectations you plugged in, all set to brew in the dark with your eyes closed.

Plus meditation, for some, is more about being fully here than about going anywhere.

Yes, I understand that but what's to teach? Personally, from all my experiences before during and after K, people pretending to have som mastery at 'being here now' were just posturing. Hell, I did it myself! When I first got into 'Be Here Now' and spent a summer in the mountains in Jasper, I tried all the stuff in the 'cookbook' section in that book and returned to Toronto earnest to show people that, in my newfound silence, I had become 'high' or something. Really, it's ridiculous and laughing-out-loud embarassing. There I was sitting around with my old friends trying desparately for them to get the 'Those-who-know-don't-speak' trip. Some of them 'got it' and nothing satsified me more than the few times I overheard someone say 'Did you notice how Jim's changed? He's so spiritual now'. What a crock! Anyway, I think taht game continues at much subtler, more grown-up levels, throughout the meditation world. In fact, I think anyone who sets themselves out as knowing anything special about what goes on when you turn out the lights, from either their own meditation or readings and trainings, is, at minimum, exaggerating.

Maharaji's style was to go somewhere, at least that's what it seemed like to me. Advertised as find some place of peace that isn't here, in this awful world. The 'Beam me up Scotty' thing.

Of course it was.

Without the religious trappings and the hype, things are simpler and stripped down.

Yeah, but if you really strip away those things is there anything left but the dark, your mind and whatever you put into it?

But with meditation you are also talking about the nature of the mind, and that does tie in with science and psychology.

Oh sure, but that's science, not any meditation tradition.

As far as figments of imagination -- it would be interesting to see just how much of the content of anyone's mind is self-created. I don't think you need to assume meditation is the culprit, if there is indeed anything wrong with imagination, and if indeed it is a bad thing. I would bet, not always, but sometimes, just like everything else.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 20:46:28 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hope this is the last on this
Message:
A person can meditate themselves, and see for themselves, just like they can walk the trails themselves, and find new ones as well.

But, Fran, that's the whole issue, isn't it? Are there really 'trails' there or just their imagination? How could anyone know without subscribing to one spiritual concept or another? There's nothing objective about it. Indeed, it's like the perfect petri dish for fertile imaginings -- just you, your mind and whatever expectations you plugged in, all set to brew in the dark with your eyes closed.

No, Jim, it's not the whole issue. Why does one have to subscribe to a spiritual concept in order to practice meditation? It almost sounds like you think meditation practice is some mind-control technique for someone who wants to sell you a line of spiritual hooey and have you meditate on that, rather than simply meditate. It is true that it can be USED as a mind-control technique if there is a tie-in with spiritual concepts (like the Maha-juju), but it doesn't have to be that way. And unfortunately, it sometimes is that way. People love to make a big deal out of something that works for them, and they can make a living at proselytizing, and the gurus depend upon church ladies and hype-helpers. But, for example, someone can sit with their eyes closed and 'look' at light or more accurately for some, 'look' in the area of their 'third eye' (or follow the movement of their breath, or listen to the 'internal' sounds of their body when they have their fingers in their ears), rather than following their thoughts around. And if a thought comes up, they just note what's going on and put their concentration back on the chosen object. Or maybe another technique is to relax and let the mind float free, and just observe where it goes, like following a kid around in a candy store. Where's the spiritual concepts there? And the person observes what they observe. These types of techniques are relaxing for some of us. I can understand that some others would not want to bother. But to put it down as if it is the worst thing around is puzzling. I'm sure people kill way more brain cells with alcohol, pot, and legal psych. meds than they do with a little meditation! And waste just as much time (probably more) on TV and empty-calorie movies!

Plus meditation, for some, is more about being fully here than about going anywhere.

Yes, I understand that but what's to teach? Personally, from all my experiences before during and after K, people pretending to have some mastery at 'being here now' were just posturing. Hell, I did it myself! When I first got into 'Be Here Now' and spent a summer in the mountains in Jasper, I tried all the stuff in the 'cookbook' section in that book and returned to Toronto earnest to show people that, in my newfound silence, I had become 'high' or something. Really, it's ridiculous and laughing-out-loud embarrassing. There I was sitting around with my old friends trying desperately for them to get the 'Those-who-know-don't-speak' trip. Some of them 'got it' and nothing satisfied me more than the few times I overheard someone say 'Did you notice how Jim's changed? He's so spiritual now'. What a crock! Anyway, I think that game continues at much subtler, more grown-up levels, throughout the meditation world. In fact, I think anyone who sets themselves out as knowing anything special about what goes on when you turn out the lights, from either their own meditation or readings and trainings, is, at minimum, exaggerating.

Jim, I agree there is more posturing and fluff than substance to some of it. But for a person for whom the meditation approach would be beneficial, they need to learn somewhere, and/or often want follow-up support and interaction with others. Why are we here, for example, interacting with others? Birds of a feather and all that. There is also something to discuss. For people who are practicing meditation as a tool (such as for peace of mind, unwinding, stress reduction, pain control, etc.), there are shared experiences to discuss (discussion groups often happen in workshops or on retreats, for example). Someone who has been working with various techniques and applying them to themselves and in various situations for a number or years, or is compiling the experiences of people who have, has some interesting experience to impart for those who are so inclined. I just don't agree with what you've said that anyone who has anything special to say about meditation is exaggerating, and that ANYTHING to do with teaching in this area is posturing and bunk. Now as I said earlier in this thread, the Maha offers no such support. He merely keeps feeding and drilling in dependence upon him, never doubting and all that. I'm sure there are other situations where the 'support' or continuing instruction is equally disingenuous or 'vaporware,' as they say in the IT industry.

Maharaji's style was to go somewhere, at least that's what it seemed like to me. Advertised as find some place of peace that isn't here, in this awful world. The 'Beam me up Scotty' thing.

Of course it was.

And there are people who come to meditation for that sort of thing, an escape of sorts. That's certainly where I was at in 1973. Sometimes after someone slows down, they go at it as just one of many things in their bag of coping skills, if there isn't any harmful juju attached to it that takes them in another direction. Because of the juju, I had to strip off a lot of nonsense, and certainly don't practice M's techniques any more because it is way easier not to. So even going to it as an escape, based on the person's level of angst, desperation or temporary trauma, is not reprehensible in and of itself.

Without the religious trappings and the hype, things are simpler and stripped down.

Yeah, but if you really strip away those things is there anything left but the dark, your mind and whatever you put into it?

There's the key, 'whatever you put in it.' What if you don't put anything in? What if you just observe, or let it be what it is naturally? Again, some people enjoy quiet reflection. Some don't. For some people to sit in meditation is absolutely aggravating. That's why the one size fits all solution, or the 'you need this' approach, is not only hype, it is potentially harmful to people for whom this approach doesn't work. If it's tied in with a religion, for example, a vulnerable person thinks there is something wrong with them and, carried out to an extreme, that they may as well go kill themselves. But if it's not tied in with religion they just say, 'none for me, thanks,' as one of my friends whose wife is a meditator has done. He can't STAND sitting. But to assert that it's bad or useless for all is an extreme, and I believe unwarranted, view.

But with meditation you are also talking about the nature of the mind, and that does tie in with science and psychology.

Oh sure, but that's science, not any meditation tradition.

But there ARE people in meditation traditions that do talk about the science of it, and there has been scientific studies done of the effects of it. This is important work, because it will be taken out of the 'faith' realm and into the practical realm. In the practical realm, either it is worth your time, or it isn't, pure and simple.

As far as figments of imagination -- it would be interesting to see just how much of the content of anyone's mind is self-created. I don't think you need to assume meditation is the culprit, if there is indeed anything wrong with imagination, and if indeed it is a bad thing. I would bet, not always, but sometimes, just like everything else.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

This ties in with you assuming that anything that happens in meditation is a figment of one's imagination. For the observation type of meditation I spoke of above, there's nothing to imagine – just let it be. But there are visualization techniques where a person does just that, actually conjures up a visualization, but it can go beyond mere imagination. Some of what a person 'visions' can be something very peaceful and loving and healing, or can end up telling them a lot about themselves, or a lot about how they relate to others, or the world around them. And sometimes, it's just a relaxation tool, such as visualizing a favorite place. (I hear that that's how Paul McCartney's wife made her exit, visioning riding her horse in a favorite place.) None of this stuff is bad in and of itself. I think that's why I champion it on the Forum – because there is a tendency for many exes to stridently say that it is all bunk. (Run, screaming!!! Run, run for your lives!!! The tingler is loose in the theater, right now!!!!) And it is true that when one is first exiting, one may need to give EVERYTHING related to meditation the big 'heave ho' and sort it all out. But this is not everyone's approach. Again, there is no 'one size fits all.'

Meditation is fine. It's just not the big deal that gets made out of it. A big deal also gets made about saying it's all bunk, at least on this Forum!

Postscript
So, Jim, I hope this is the end of this thread and no more back-and-forth needed. I'm not trying to change your views on any of this, but you keep asking questions and part of me thinks you deserve a response. But these long replies take too much time! Your tendency to let no comment go unchallenged that is favorable to meditation or any sort of internal experiences that border on the spiritual, has a chilling effect. I think you may well know this, and seem to be watchdogging the Forum in order to keep it free of such content, and to control its tone. I cringed at making the post that started this whole thread, thinking that this would happen – and it did! I believe this is what you want – to either debate us to death until our POV is clarified and acceptable to you, or scare such comments off the Forum entirely. I noticed that you are going at it below with Brian Smith, as well. In having to exhaustively explain myself and have every such comment be challenged by you is not conducive to a free and open discussion. It makes me not want to bother to deal with the challenge, debate and hair splitting, and thus I avoid making certain statements on this Forum. (Maybe this can give you a clue as to some of the subjects I discuss on RE.) I question why you cannot accept other people's views in this regard at face value, but invariably challenge every such post.

Best wishes,

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 21:23:46 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Well said, Fran, but I'm green;) with envy
Message:
You said that Jim may be ''watchdogging the Forum in order to keep it free of such content, and to control its tone. I cringed at making the post that started this whole thread, thinking that this would happen – and it did! I believe this is what you want – to either debate us to death until our POV is clarified and acceptable to you, or scare such comments off the Forum entirely.''

Jim may be exhausting but the fact that he demands that we make ourselves understandable to him is invaluable. Well, it is for me and I wish he would pick on me more often.

As soon as I divorced Rev Rawat, I found that my mind began to clutch at straws. I even flirted with christianity. I already detested all eastern and New Age stuff so I turned to western culture and found that I came full circle back to the day when I first dissected a frog in pharmacy school and realized that science was civilized man's true religion.

But I also invested a lot of effort in meditation and got a lot out of it. Being a businessman I don't like to throw away investments. So yes, I admit that, when it comes to talking about meditation, I start with the fact that I enjoy and then work forward from there to make sense of it.

I'm glad that the skeptics and atheists here make me think twice about what I write. I don't want to live in the fuzzy world of New Age relativism. I want to be able to communicate respectfully and intelligently with those skeptics because skepticism and inquisitiveness are the basis for science and logic.

I think your writing on meditation etc has definitely become less esoteric and more down to earth and I think so has mine. I hope.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 21:23:14 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Who's the watchdog??????
Message:
Fran,

For all your intelligence, good will, etc. etc. it's you, my friend, not me who presents like a watchdog. I want to discuss things and you bristle. As far as I'm concerned, no, you neither got nor responded to what I was saying but I'll be damned if I continue. I'll just say this, your post has what I think are several logical flaws in it. Now if only I had a secret UN-recent ex site to talk about it with others!

Anyway, feel free to ignore the question marks in my subject line. They were rhetorical as I wouldn't dream of burdening you with this conversation any further.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 00:52:05 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: I won't be taking this thread elsewhere
Message:
That's not what I meant at all -- I'm not taking this particular thread somewhere where you can't be in on it. I've just said my piece, that's all.

I wouldn't dream of taking a discussion you were in to somewhere where you couldn't continue it, if I were into continuing it. No, I'd continue it right here -- you've given me no reason not to, other than this sort of thing does not interest me.

But Pat's ready for 'ya :)

Maybe it's a "guy" thing?

--f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 12:18:13 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: No, you miss the point
Message:
I wasn't suggesting that you'd take this thread anywhere. I was just playing off the fact that you said that RE's good for not having to watch what you say all that carefully.

Here's what you said:

In having to exhaustively explain myself and have every such comment be challenged by you is not conducive to a free and open discussion. It makes me not want to bother to deal with the challenge, debate and hair splitting, and thus I avoid making certain statements on this Forum. (Maybe this can give you a clue as to some of the subjects I discuss on RE.) I question why you cannot accept other people's views in this regard at face value, but invariably challenge every such post.

I'm sorry you feel this way, actually. See, I think that the strain you feel isn't my fault at all but rather a function of the vagueness and often untenable-in-broad-daylight quality of so much stuff associated with meditation and spirituality. As I said to Mike above, I think the close scrutiny process is actually quite important as it was words, just words, that got us where are today in terms of our beliefs and practises.

Face it, Fran, you bristle at this process. You can call me all the names you want, call it a 'guy thing' or a 'Jim thing', a 'lawyer thing' or whatever, but the fact is, some of us,at least, believe there's not a thing wrong with the closest possible examination of our words in this area. Others do and that, I take it, is one reason you guys enjoy RE. Well, you can bristle all you want but I resent your characterizing me as offensively as you do. I'm proud of being interested in looking closely at this stuff. The closer the better. You don't need to be watching out for my 'victims' thank you very much. I'm sure they can well take care of themselves.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:07:02 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Francesca :~)
Subject: Just great, Francesca
Message:
Being a self-taught person is essential but there's no doubt about it that having a teacher can make learning more interesting and less predictable. I even learned from my bad teachers. I certainly learned from Rawat never to accept any oriental mumbo-jumbo ever again.

I'll just have to experiment with meditation on my own because I can no longer respect any pre-scientific ideas no matter how many exotic syllables they have or how remarkable they may seem.

If I can't explain it right away, I'll wait until I have figured out how to say it in plain English. No more spiritual concepts for me no matter how much I enjoy meditation.

Yep, separated at birth. :C)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:14:49 (EST)
From: Francesca :~)
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: company of truth or sangha
Message:
Yeah, Pat, definitely.

I consider my 'company of truth' or 'sangha' (community) to be everything I come in contact with. No accept. No reject.

What it IS.

:~) f

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 22:34:49 (EST)
From: Deputy Dog =)
Email: None
To: Francesca :~)
Subject: What is IS!
Message:
What is IS! Sounds very vipassana-ish to me Francesca. Insight or vipassana is the meditation I'm into most these days.

Those who might want to investigate this non-devotional meditation can check out the Vipassana.com Newsletter which is published approximately three times each year and is sent only on request.

You can subscribe instantly at:

http://www.vipassana.com/cgi-bin/nl.cgi

For those who don't know, the meditation technique called Vipassana (insight) was introduced by the Buddha about twenty-five centuries ago and is a set of mental activities specifically aimed at experiencing a state of uninterrupted Mindfulness. The Landmark Forum, which I mentioned earlier, IMHO is a kick-ass crash course in vipassana. The Forum is what got me in to Buddhism.

I highly recommend both to exes who want to accelerate their personal growth toward self determinism and independence. Thanks for the two quotes earlier.

=) DD

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 14:23:26 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: notinherent@yahoo.com
To: Deputy Dog =)
Subject: Thanks for the link
Message:
I'll check up on the Vipassana link, since I've studied Vipassana some with the Spirit Rock folks about 10 years ago.

Landmark I will steer clear of. I've had enough people try to recruit me into their methods over the years (including someone who took the EST training while she lived in the ashram in 1981) that I will steer clear of it. Almost everyone who has ever taken it has tried to strongarm-hype me into thinking that I needed to take it. Glad to know that it was helpful for you, however.

I used to work at the Peace Press in LA with a bunch of atheists, premies and EST folks in 1978-80. The EST person who was a higher up in the organization was worse than the premies. She made fun of premies and Maharaji in clear earshot (although she would have never done it to our faces) and had a really superior attitude. The funny thing is that we were both in cults.

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 14:15:52 (EST)
From: Deputy dog =)
Email: None
To: Francesca
Subject: Re: Thanks for the link
Message:
Thanks Francesca,

Vipassana is where it's for me these days. Ah, getting high on what is, 'Mind is Buddha' and all that.

I too found the est/Landmark Forum strongarm recruitment tactics abhorrent and took the training in spite of them. It's almost impossible not to find true followers who turn one off, be they neurotic ninnies, pretentious assholes or hoaxed simpletons. Some people called the est fanatics, estholes.

It might be worth noting however that I got 'nothing' from the Landmark Forum training (nudge nudge, wink wink). And you don't need to take it.

Elizabeth Kubler-Ross beautifully describes the stages people go through as they approach death or any great loss. There is the resistance, the denial, the bargaining, the anger, the despair, and then the opening space. I feel the Landmark Forum could help exes get to the last phase in just three days. Just an opinion.

When you are busy struggling against something, you're just reinforcing its reality. Oh well! Just an opinion.

I was just looking over the list of teachers you have had. Quite impressive, but you are finished with the Tibetan guys I take it. I always found Tibetan Buddhism a little too flashy, and am attracted to the simplicity and 'emptyness' of Theravada and Zen Buddhism. I like the metaphor of having two mirrors facing each other, with nothing in between.

You are having an interesting life, and I think you've learned to listen to yourself and to be honest with yourself which is so key (ki?).

I'm going to take a break from Forum 7 for a while. Take care. Or as you would say,

Bests,

=)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 21:40:30 (EST)
From: Francesca
Email: notinherent@yahoo.com
To: Deputy dog =)
Subject: Thanks again Dog
Message:
My e-mail is above if you ever want to yack during your Forum break. Tibetan is flashy compared to Theravadan and Zen, but is SO low key compared to Rawat.

The problem with Tibetan is that I'm allergic to gooroos.

Liked this, and agree:
When you are busy struggling against something, you're just reinforcing its reality. Oh well! Just an opinion.

My old est friends called themselves estholes, because back in 1978 they were so, so into it. Although the ones I worked around were organizational types, there were others who took the training and then walked away, and felt they had gotten something out of it.

Who knows, it might have laid the foundation for my ashram roomie leaving the whole trip and moving on in her life, as well.

Bests to you too,

Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 19:06:48 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Francesca :~)
Subject: Yep,neatly sums up M/K Francesca [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:30:01 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: No way
Message:
Before you can talk about the efficacy of Knowledge, you have to define it. M defined it as the means to transcend your false, bad ego and merge with God. The definition, then, assumes that the mind is a dark, illusory force. It also assumes that there is such a thing as God whom we can and ought to merge with. You have to accept all those premises to make any sense of Knowledge. Otherwise, it's just another way to avoid or relax from the world around us.

Personally, I don't accept any of those premises. That is, I don't believe in God. Certainly not one who's trying to get us to 'merge' with him. That's absurd -- and yet it's the foundation of Knowledge. And I don't believe that the mind is this dark force that clouds our spirit like a parasite. So there's no way that Knowledge can ever 'work' in any meaningful way. I mean a broken fax machine will still 'work' as a door jamb but so what? Sure, these meditation techniques, like any others, will let you concentrate as you shut out the outside world. Big deal. But do they 'show you God face-to-face'? Etc.? No.

Furthermore, the idea of giving either Rawat any credit for teaching anything is a farce as the lies and falsehoods they perpetrated -- i.e. that Knowledge IS a vehicle past the evil mind that's taken us hostage and that Maharaji's its pilot -- so far outweigh what ever little value the meditation retains as a relaxation tool, that he gets no credit for nothing. Never can, never will.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 18:09:33 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: No way
Message:
Jim wrote:

Before you can talk about the efficacy of Knowledge, you have to define it.

M defined it as the means to transcend your false, bad ego and merge with God. The definition, then, assumes that the mind is a dark, illusory force. It also assumes that there is such a thing as God whom we can and ought to merge with. You have to accept all those premises to make any sense of Knowledge. Otherwise, it's just another way to avoid or relax from the world around us.

Personally, I don't accept any of those premises. That is, I don't believe in God. Certainly not one who's trying to get us to 'merge' with him. That's absurd -- and yet it's the foundation of Knowledge. And I don't believe that the mind is this dark force that clouds our spirit like a parasite. So there's no way that Knowledge can ever 'work' in any meaningful way. I mean a broken fax machine will still 'work' as a door jamb but so what? Sure, these meditation techniques, like any others, will let you concentrate as you shut out the outside world. Big deal. But do they 'show you God face-to-face'? Etc.? No.

Furthermore, the idea of giving either Rawat any credit for teaching anything is a farce as the lies and falsehoods they perpetrated -- i.e. that Knowledge IS a vehicle past the evil mind that's taken us hostage and that Maharaji's its pilot -- so far outweigh what ever little value the meditation retains as a relaxation tool, that he gets no credit for nothing. Never can, never will.

Isn't it clear from my post that my definition of Knowledge varies rather drastically from that of Maharaji ?

Firstly I don't think I said anything about Knowledge being about God. I don't make any claims to undestanding God or even believing in such a thing. I don't suggest that the meditation brings you face to face with God but , in my experience it can be quite an exploration into ones own psyche. Maybe this is just because of the way I'm doing it! I don't know...I think one's attitude counts. what you put in affects what you get out.

The whole idea of the evil mind is also something I don't buy. I do say that through meditation I have felt my thoughts 'quieten down' to an extent where I start having some kinds of the sensory experiences that we associate with the techniques. It's that simple. I think those experiences can be quite pleasant and rewarding- make that very pleasant and rewarding.
I am impressed enough with meditation to feel it a worthwhile practice. I like the idea of the mind being like a lake with ripples on (thoughts) . When the surface becomes calm the lake reflects the moon more accurately. Me with a calm mind is able to function better mentally. I happen to find the techniques calming. to be honest I haven't tried any others. I'm sure others work well too.

Although I am critical of Maharaji and his methods, (as you well know) and do disagree with his past and possibly current definitions of Knowledge, I don't feel the need to deny the fact that it was historically he who somehow imported this information over from India, along with a bunch of other crap that I could do without , and that I appreciate some aspects of this information.

I take your point about crediting Maharaji being somewhat farcical considering the enormous amount of abuse that went with the whole trip. However there WAS a carrot that had appeal -the bliss -the inner peace- and Maharaji did deliver on that quite important ingredient albeit with disingenuous strings attached. To deny that is probably to revise your own past isn't it? After all I bet you used to get all high from meditation. I just happen to have kept up the practice but cut the strings and ignored the original definition.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 22:14:52 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: No way
Message:
Isn't it clear from my post that my definition of Knowledge varies rather drastically from that of Maharaji ?

No. To the contrary, you seem to be saying that Knowledge might well be everything it's classically packaged and sold as, only without Maharaji as the exclusive distributor he claims to be. For example:

Firstly, there are many people who have wonderful meditational experiences of what we called Light, Music, Holy Name and Nectar from other Gurus. A prime example of this is Maharaji's brothers followers in India. They offer the same thing in a different cultural context with diiferent numbers of adherents etc. (and other religious concepts involved)

Firstly I don't think I said anything about Knowledge being about God. I don't make any claims to undestanding God or even believing in such a thing. I don't suggest that the meditation brings you face to face with God but , in my experience it can be quite an exploration into ones own psyche. Maybe this is just because of the way I'm doing it! I don't know...I think one's attitude counts. what you put in affects what you get out.

If you're not associating Knowledge with experiencing God, indeed, if you're not sure you even believe in him, how can you say:

Secondly, I can sit down and meditate just as I have always done and feel the same bliss and devotion to God that I always felt ...

The whole idea of the evil mind is also something I don't buy. I do say that through meditation I have felt my thoughts 'quieten down' to an extent where I start having some kinds of the sensory experiences that we associate with the techniques. It's that simple. I think those experiences can be quite pleasant and rewarding- make that very pleasant and rewarding.
I am impressed enough with meditation to feel it a worthwhile practice. I like the idea of the mind being like a lake with ripples on (thoughts) . When the surface becomes calm the lake reflects the moon more accurately. Me with a calm mind is able to function better mentally. I happen to find the techniques calming. to be honest I haven't tried any others. I'm sure others work well too.

Yes, well there's always this 'positive' way to look at the mind problem, that it's just a little pesky turbulence on the surface of the water, kind of thing. The problem, as I see it, though, is that the whole myth of Knowledge implies that there is indeed a well of happiness awaiting us on the other side of that mind. You might not want to call it evil but the dichotomy's unavoidable once you accept that myth which, as I say, is inherent in the practise of Knowledge. Otherwise, do what you want with it, just don't read any Hans Yog Prakash, etc.

Although I am critical of Maharaji and his methods, (as you well know) and do disagree with his past and possibly current definitions of Knowledge, I don't feel the need to deny the fact that it was historically he who somehow imported this information over from India, along with a bunch of other crap that I could do without , and that I appreciate some aspects of this information.

God, Patrick, you're using 'information' like a full-on new-ager! You know, the way they'll talk about some channelled this or that and tip toe around the 'But is it TRUE?' question by calling it 'information'. Is it Knowledge of God? Raj Yoga? Or is it no more cosmically significant than Ty Bo? What do YOU think?

I take your point about crediting Maharaji being somewhat farcical considering the enormous amount of abuse that went with the whole trip. However there WAS a carrot that had appeal -the bliss -the inner peace- and Maharaji did deliver on that quite important ingredient albeit with disingenuous strings attached. To deny that is probably to revise your own past isn't it? After all I bet you used to get all high from meditation. I just happen to have kept up the practice but cut the strings and ignored the original definition.

Right, got that. So NOW what's your definition?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:01:52 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: No way
Message:
You wrote:
If you're not associating Knowledge with experiencing God, indeed, if you're not sure you even believe in him, how can you say:
'Secondly, I can sit down and meditate just as I have always done and feel the same bliss and devotion to God that I always felt ...'

Let me try to explain what I feel. Firstly I should explain that I am not one of those people who has convictions abut God..for me the jury is out as it were. I maybe have hopes.. I don't know all the answers - but I am still very interested in feeling good and getting high in ways that are not to damaging to my health. I also am interested in texploring he emotional feelings I have had since childhood (sometimes suppressed) towards knowing my creator - something that is a feeling akin to religious devotion I suppose. It may be in vain but I don't care- I find that it enhances my life to explore this.

When I meditate I sometimes put my aspirations towards God in there- much like I did as a child praying to Jesus. You see for me I felt very good doing that as a kid and I don't judge that innocent attitude as being altogther merely childish. I don't interpret the experience of meditation as being definitively of God although seeing an inner light that makes me feel good comes pretty close to satisfying me on that particular count. I can only describe it as almost a womb-like experience. .or what i would imagine a womblike experience to feel. I think it has something to do with being flooded with a good sensory impression. I think we are wired in a way that we can get very high by focussing our emotional energy in these ways. maybe it's a form of brain feedback. I don't know.

Praying to God (maybe for a revelation of what 'it/He' really is...in desperation in one moment... is not the same as having a regular firm belief in God or an elaborate concept about what God is or feels like. Most people have desperate moments occasionally in their lives when they reach out to God- maybe they are scared or dying or at the end of their tether.

I felt a feeling of gratitude and bliss towards a higher power.. the Universe... whatever you want to call the great unknown...even before hearing about Maharaji etc. I associate Knowledge with God, not in the sense that I think the experience is 'of God' . what I was saying was that during my particular way of meditating - throughout my time as a premie - meditation time, as it were, also meant a certain amount of 'prayer time' . I found that it was natural for me to use that time when I was quietening down my everyday thoughts- to focus on a feeling of humility towards Life itself. I could call it God. I enjoy my devotion/ application/ interest in finding out the truth about life- whether it be scientific investigation, or some sort of ethical growth of awareness - it feels good to me.

You wrote:

Yes, well there's always this 'positive' way to look at the mind problem, that it's just a little pesky turbulence on the surface of the water, kind of thing. The problem, as I see it, though, is that the whole myth of Knowledge implies that there is indeed a well of happiness awaiting us on the other side of that mind. You might not want to call it evil but the dichotomy's unavoidable once you accept that myth which, as I say, is inherent in the practise of Knowledge. Otherwise, do what you want with it, just don't read any Hans Yog Prakash, etc.

I think there is a well of happiness - sort of - that comes from being still. Just as sleep rejuvenates a busy mind in ways we barely understand - I think that conscious meditation also can be very rejuvenating. As I said, I think that it can also be very dangerous when combined with a lot of hocus-pocus religious belief.

I wrote: Although I am critical of Maharaji and his methods, (as you well know) and do disagree with his past and possibly current definitions of Knowledge, I don't feel the need to deny the fact that it was historically he who somehow imported this information over from India, along with a bunch of other crap that I could do without , and that I appreciate some aspects of this information.

You replied God, Patrick, you're using 'information' like a full-on new-ager! You know, the way they'll talk about some channelled this or that and tip toe around the 'But is it TRUE?' question by calling it 'information'. Is it Knowledge of God? Raj Yoga? Or is it no more cosmically significant than Ty Bo? What do YOU think?

I am NOT putting any 'cosmic' spin on my use of the word 'information' - you are. Let me be clear that by 'this information' I specifically mean the techniques of meditation.

I wrote: I take your point about crediting Maharaji being somewhat farcical considering the enormous amount of abuse that went with the whole trip. However there WAS a carrot that had appeal -the bliss -the inner peace- and Maharaji did deliver on that quite important ingredient albeit with disingenuous strings attached. To deny that is probably to revise your own past isn't it? After all I bet you used to get all high from meditation. I just happen to have kept up the practice but cut the strings and ignored the original definition.

You replied: Right, got that. So NOW what's your definition?

My definition of Knowledge (or should I say ' my habitual use of the word Knowledge with silly capital 'K' etc.) is just the meditation using the four techniques - more or less as it was told me by Krishnasuchanand in 1974 . If Maharaji has changed those techniques drastically since then maybe we are talking about different Knowledge. As I said I don't think Maharaji's definition is much use to me wjhat with the satsang, darshan of the PM and service bit.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 17:35:21 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: A few things
Message:
Let me try to explain what I feel. Firstly I should explain that I am not one of those people who has convictions abut God..for me the jury is out as it were. I maybe have hopes.. I don't know all the answers - but I am still very interested in feeling good and getting high in ways that are not to damaging to my health. I also am interested in texploring he emotional feelings I have had since childhood (sometimes suppressed) towards knowing my creator - something that is a feeling akin to religious devotion I suppose. It may be in vain but I don't care- I find that it enhances my life to explore this.

When I meditate I sometimes put my aspirations towards God in there- much like I did as a child praying to Jesus. You see for me I felt very good doing that as a kid and I don't judge that innocent attitude as being altogther merely childish. I don't interpret the experience of meditation as being definitively of God although seeing an inner light that makes me feel good comes pretty close to satisfying me on that particular count. I can only describe it as almost a womb-like experience. .or what i would imagine a womblike experience to feel. I think it has something to do with being flooded with a good sensory impression. I think we are wired in a way that we can get very high by focussing our emotional energy in these ways. maybe it's a form of brain feedback. I don't know.

Praying to God (maybe for a revelation of what 'it/He' really is...in desperation in one moment... is not the same as having a regular firm belief in God or an elaborate concept about what God is or feels like. Most people have desperate moments occasionally in their lives when they reach out to God- maybe they are scared or dying or at the end of their tether.

I felt a feeling of gratitude and bliss towards a higher power.. the Universe... whatever you want to call the great unknown...even before hearing about Maharaji etc. I associate Knowledge with God, not in the sense that I think the experience is 'of God' . what I was saying was that during my particular way of meditating - throughout my time as a premie - meditation time, as it were, also meant a certain amount of 'prayer time' . I found that it was natural for me to use that time when I was quietening down my everyday thoughts- to focus on a feeling of humility towards Life itself. I could call it God. I enjoy my devotion/ application/ interest in finding out the truth about life- whether it be scientific investigation, or some sort of ethical growth of awareness - it feels good to me.

This one's a hard one for me. I, too, could conjur up my favorite sense of God and pray to it. However, seeing as I don't think there's really anyone there listening, I feel it'd be weak and dishonest for me to do that. It'd be a game, really, and one at my own expense. Maybe, some years from now, I'll feel differently. Maybe with no more reason to believe or disbelieve in God than I have now, I'll still decide to tip the balance back towards faith. I hope not, though. I hope that if I honestly continue to believe God's a myth that I stay the course and enjoy my God-less universe where no one listens to my prayers but at least I'm smart enough to know that beforehand.

think there is a well of happiness - sort of - that comes from being still. Just as sleep rejuvenates a busy mind in ways we barely understand - I think that conscious meditation also can be very rejuvenating. As I said, I think that it can also be very dangerous when combined with a lot of hocus-pocus religious belief.

This is a key question, in my opinion. If you honestly do believe that there is such a well then of course you'd find meditation promising. I don't think that there IS such a reserve of any kind of emotion inside, good or bad. I think emotions are manufactured as we need them, kind of like in a Japanese factory. I mean, if you think YOUR way don't you then have to deal with why we aren't enjoying all that happiness that's already in there? And isn't that then a perfect lead-in to the 'evil mind' theory?

My definition of Knowledge (or should I say ' my habitual use of the word Knowledge with silly capital 'K' etc.) is just the meditation using the four techniques - more or less as it was told me by Krishnasuchanand in 1974 . If Maharaji has changed those techniques drastically since then maybe we are talking about different Knowledge. As I said I don't think Maharaji's definition is much use to me wjhat with the satsang, darshan of the PM and service bit.

I'm not sure that's really much of a definition, although I'm well aware that this is the best the cult itself currently offers. I like the older definitions, the one's that talked about the real purpose and meaning of these four techniques. Now that's Knowledge! And that's the ghost definition that's always floating over any discussion of same, don't you think?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 19:45:58 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Re: A few things
Message:
This is a key question, in my opinion. If you honestly do believe that there is such a well then of course you'd find meditation promising. I don't think that there IS such a reserve of any kind of emotion inside, good or bad. I think emotions are manufactured as we need them, kind of like in a Japanese factory. I mean, if you think YOUR way don't you then have to deal with why we aren't enjoying all that happiness that's already in there? And isn't that then a perfect lead-in to the 'evil mind' theory?

It might be construed perversely by some that because our thoughts distact us occasionally from having peace of mind that the mind is inherently 'Evil'. I don't believe in or understand 'Evil' so that is not a theory that appeals to me.

I'm not sure that's really much of a definition, although I'm well aware that this is the best the cult itself currently offers. I like the older definitions, the one's that talked about the real purpose and meaning of these four techniques. Now that's Knowledge! And that's the ghost definition that's always floating over any discussion of same, don't you think?

Yes the older definition is the ghost definition that floats o'er us here - but I don't like the older definitions. neither do you if your honest - it sucks.

I will be away tomorrow so I may have delay the continuation of this rather time-consuming but delightful foray on the forum.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Feb 12, 2002 at 20:41:47 (EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: A few things
Message:
It might be construed perversely by some that because our thoughts distact us occasionally from having peace of mind that the mind is inherently 'Evil'. I don't believe in or understand 'Evil' so that is not a theory that appeals to me.

Patrick, don't the dots connect like this? If there is, as you believe possible, a well of happiness awaiting us inside, wouldn't whatever cuts us off from it be very, very bad, at least (if you don't like the word 'evil')? I mean, people kill themselves. They kill others. There is so much unhappiness. It's only logical, is it not, that something that cut us off from our deep reserve of happiness is necessarily bad? Doesn't matter if you call it 'evil' necessarily. However, just the aversion one would develop for such a nasty force would be just as strong.

Yes the older definition is the ghost definition that floats o'er us here - but I don't like the older definitions. neither do you if your honest - it sucks.

No, I DO like the older definition because it's much more honest. Bullshit for sure but honest. What is Knowledge? Knowledge is a set of four meditation techniques given by the living Satguru to his devotess which, when practised diligently, can, over time and with the guru's grace, lead to god realization. Now that's Knowledge! Isn't it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:54:24 (EST)
From: Dermot
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Agreed Jim
Message:
....a way to relax from or avoid the world, nothing more and nothing less.

Just a matter of choice if a person wants to use it or any other of myriad relaxation techniques.Radha Saomi and the offshoots (including Shri Hans/Maharaji/Bal Bhagwan Ji)have just loaded a whole load of crap on simple yogic techniques.

If people derive enjoyment or satisfaction from the techniques, all well and good but I don't think they have any deeper 'meaning', especially 'God' related.God is just a figment of imagination.

ALL ABOVE IMO ONLY ;)

Cheers

Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 14:52:27 (EST)
From: Occasional Poster
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Thanks Patrick ...
Message:
Your 'thesis' is well found and clearly spoken. As I mentioned to you previously I always enjoy reading your fine words which so much reflects the similar path of mine. I look forward to reading more of your words soon - but what about that lunch we spoke about! :-)

OP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 13:29:27 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Thanks, Patrick
Message:
Your essay was a lot like a letter that I sent out to premies last year before I exited the cult. Since then I have realized that M is no teacher at all and that he has in fact done much harm with his incompetence and irresponsibility and his inability to learn from westerners.

I got out of K exactly what I put into it and expected from it and I think other people can get exactly what they want out of whatever they use to relax and be peaceful.

The premies who stuck around for many years did so either because they got something out of either M or K. I think the former will stick with Rawat and the latter will eventually exit the cult and some will turn up here.

This conversation is not over yet. In fact it is the elephant sitting on the sofa in the living room and eventually we will have to talk about it with those who still enjoy what we used to know as K. Thank you for your contribution.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 14:51:28 (EST)
From: Patrick W
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: We need to break the spell.
Message:
Thanks for the responses -
Livia wrote:

I think you have a very valid point. From the standpoint of the practice of this meditation as being a good thing, what holds us back from showing other people how to do it?

The problem is, though, that it could never be done to any meaningful extent in an organised way by exes, because a lot of exes doubt even that the practice of K is a good thing in itself. There was a thread a few days ago that made some very good points about K possibly dulling people's emotions and actually preventing one from living life fully and intensely. For myself, the jury is out. I just DON'T know. It's so long for me - 30 years - that I can't remember really how I felt before.
Also, as I have gone from youth to the other side of middle age during those years, it's really hard to know whether one's altered feelings are the partly the product of aging and maturing.
Also, (worryingly?) the practice of 'Holy Name' or whatever it's called these days has become such a deeply ingrained habit that I catch myself doing it at odd times of the day - it seems virtually impossible to stop it. I wonder if anyone else here finds themselves doing this? I wish I COULD stop it because then it would be possible to examine how life really is without it, and then decide which is better.

and Joy added:

I was not able to separate doing the techniques from Maharaji, and all the Hindu nonsense that went along with them, the pranaming, prayers, bholay-shri's, photographs, altars, etc. Therefore I gave up the whole kit and kaboodle, baby, bathwater and all, and have not missed K in the slightest.
There are lots of other spiritual practices in the world, and I have dabbled in one or two since leaving K, it's not an exclusive road to peace or an inner experience (and not much of one at all, in my experience). But if you and others value continuing to do the techniques on a regular basis, fine, but disassociating them from M and his Perfect Master/Lord guise is not that easy (as Livia states), and a break from them, as well as from him, is necessary, I think, to be able to get a clearer perspective.

It seems that there are quite a number of people who feel that despite whatever peaceful feelings they get from meditation, their distasteful association of M with this particular practice is at least for the while, totally off-putting.

Then there are those who , like Jerry, think (correct me if I'm wrong) that the meditation has really no value whatsoever and is even a dangerous practice -like a drug - addictive and likely to lure one into a deluded state of 'contentment' which amounts to being anaesthetised to reality and prone to believing in all kinds of cult interpretations of what one is experiencing.

Strangely I can see all sides of this. I have felt exhalted and 'blissed-out' recently from meditation -I could even describe the feelings as being of being in touch with a deeper part of myself. I really don't associate this with Maharaji's grace or any such notion. For all I know it may merely be a physical reaction in my brain producing pleasant sensations. In fact this seems by far the most plausible scenario. But I allow myself to enjoy it very subjectively anyway.
Like Livia, the habit of feeling my breath going up and down 'like a swing' or whatever (and the sort of intoxication I seem to get from it -is it hyperventilation ? - I don't think so) is something now so deeply engrained that I could hardly ignore it if I tried. To be honest I find myself doing the nectar, light technique and the music now again almost totally automically. I'm sure if I had done Yoga or some other spiritual practice (like the ones Joy eludes to) for years on end I would be into doing that just as much. I am not saying that this one is the best or making a value judgement like that.

I have also experienced that deep meditation can be really disorienting and dangerous, in that it can leave one in a sort of mental vacuum that can then be filled with all sorts of anxieties, self-destructive thoughts, feelings of lack of confidence and worse, the need to turn to the Guru as a sort of trusted icon or idol who can step in and save you from yourself. I hate the way that the value of rationality and thinking has been demonised as being the workings of an evil, doubting mechasnism called 'The Mind'. I can now plainly see how the promotion of this concept effectively undermined our confidence in ourselves at a root level making us believe that the only recourse was to think and act only on the instructions of the Master who was supposed to be able to in return give us 'peace and bliss and harmony'. All that ego-demolishment trip which we once subjected ourselves to from him is now clear to see as the abusive situataion it was. For me that is.

It has to be said that I have had the benefit of probably 6 years of consciously rejecting all those formerly precious beliefs and associations I had with Maharaji. The last time I saw him was in Amaroo in 1995 I think. I have since been quite actively trying to do a reality check and that has meant an awful lot of soul-searching, writing and discussing. Also I have virtually nothing to do with premies, mainly because since I became outspoken in my criticism they literally cross to the other side of the street to avoid me! This has happened to me in Brighton (where I do still indeed live Livia.)

It occurred to me recently that what is wrong about this whole thing really isn't the simple calming down process of meditation, or the aspiration towards leading a more meaningful life that many of us once cherished and hoped would somehow be achieved through Knowledge. What was wrong was indeed, as Joy said, all the Hindu nonsense that went along with it and the fact that the meditation, satsang, service and devotion to Maharaji did truly become an anaesthetic which made us lose touch with vitally important parts of ourselves. A situation of woeful imbalance that we are at great pains to redress.

It would, hyperthetically be quite healing if there were some attempt from exes to redeem the good parts, and teach it ourselves - without all the hocus pocus. I think that in itself would actually be quite satisfying and of course, possible of some concern to or confronting for Maharaji and premies. After all... he and premies really do think that he has a monopoly on this stuff! It suits him for us to say it's all bullshit because that's exactly what premies think exes think (if you see what I mean) . What makes premies far more uncomfortable actually, is the situation where someone (like me!) comes along and says: 'Look, I like the meditation but I'm not going to let that stop me criticising M where I see faults - and I am not going to be intimidated into letting him be the only person who is 'allowed' to enthuse about it or to show others how they can do it if they want.'

Maharaji would like anyone who is critical of his methods to basically disappear - get lost - get out of his way - Walk! (as he would see it) - he doesn't mind criticism as long as it is not from within the ranks as it were of those people who are inspired by their meditation. They should basically just be grateful and take a back seat.

This is so demeaning - you only have value as a mute admirer and if you fail to admire his mistakes, arrogance or insensitivities then tough. No wonder there are so many premies who are deeply confused about how to express their feelings. This is his show! sit back and be entertained and if you think you could do as well or better then get the hell out of here!

No matter how inspired or sensible you may be you are not allowed to talk aloud about it - only Daddy can. You will just confuse people.

Practically speaking - I can see that to set up an alternate, bullshit-free school of meditation based around similar 'Knowledge techniques' would indeed be a tough assignment. - It would be very hard to offer people the kind of sense of community and 'relegation of responsibility for their life' that people find so comforting in Maharaji's promises - 'I will be with you always' etc.

What is comforting and reassuring about these internet forums is that it is very evident that one is far from alone in wanting to take the good and leave the bad with regard to the Knowledge experience.

I have heard time and time again from premie friends who express that they love to meditate - would like to recommend knowledge to a friend or loved one, but cannot bring themselves to introduce someone to a programme that, although it may be able to instruct them in the meditation , is likely to put them through considerable unnecessary cultic programming / introduce them into a personality cult etc.

It is so relevant to question oneself - why am I so unnaturally reluctant to show people myself? The answer has to be that we were told not to - 'asked' not to - however you slice it -this is supposed to be a secret and there is a fear that surrounds that and entraps/ enslaves you. I think that this is a fundamental fear to overcome. It is easy if you have no appreciation of the experience then it is of no consequence to talk about it openly. If however you value it as most premies (exiting or otherwise) do, then it is very hard to trust ones own experience above the warnings, orders or requests of the person who seems to somehow have got you into the whole thing and you have developed some trust for. That has to be confronted which is very tough.

It's a bit like being given a mirror by an Evil Witch and it being a revelation to you how beautiful you are. The natural urge is to give others the mirror but you were sworn by the the Witch to secrecy - the spell would be broken if you shared it. The condition is that you have to send others to the Witch who will then own their souls too or something...Anyway the Witch ends up having power over all these souls. What it takes is for some sincere person to break the spell. I say sincere because if someone just goes around saying this mirror is bullshit -'look it doesn't work' - it doesn't. They can't break the spell. Maharaji's trick is to focus your sincerity and use that to enslave you. Someone from within the ranks of the enslaved who has seen the beauty but dared to question the Witch has to break the spell.

People who have never invested their heart and soul in Maharaji can really never effect premies. That is why people who write here who maybe were never premies can never really impress with their words. They can rant about M all they like - be as rude as ever - but it sets no one free because people are trapped by their sincerity and it takes someone who has experienced that vulnerability and yet dared to break the spell and speak out, to wake up the sleeping prisoners.

One 'Mike' on this forum is worth a thousand Barrys ! (No offence meant there Barry dear boy)

I just went to see Harry Potter with my kids - all these films have the same theme -the pure of heart get to ovecome evil. Likewise the prisoners of Maharaji can only be set free by people who attack Maharaji with absolutely pure motives and who have themselves faced the fearmonger at their most vulnerable and childlike and survived.

Maybe it is best just to try to make available a resource where the other side of the story can be told - where there is no judgement about meditation being either 'bullshit' or ' spiritually important' but where the facts are laid out and people can come to their own conclusions. Obviously that is what EPO is pretty much committed to doing and I think that is extremely important role.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 14:23:51 (EST)
From: cq
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: BEST OF FORUM - raising important questions
Message:
some snippets from your post, Patrick, which rang loud and clear for me:

'I have heard time and time again from premie friends who express that they love to meditate -
would like to recommend knowledge to a friend or loved one, but cannot bring themselves to
introduce someone to a programme that, although it may be able to instruct them in the
meditation , is likely to put them through considerable unnecessary cultic programming /
introduce them into a personality cult etc'.

If the Maha really were an altruist with humanity's best interests at heart, WHY OH WHY would he prevent people (like those friends and loved ones you mention above) from experiencing the benefits of meditation, simply because he has a vested interest in being the sole focus of the gratitude that arises in people for whom meditation produces positive results?

Answer - he ISN'T the altruist he pretends to be.

When he says (as he did in Nottingham a couple of years ago):

'Do good deeds ... and many people get in to this, y'know ... do good deeds.

There is no deed greater than to impart 'Knowledge' to a person who is
ready for this gift of Knowledge.

If there is a charity, then this is the greatest charity there is. Because it is
a gift that is given - unattached.

Unattached. With no expectation of anything in return.

Because the master knows - nothing can be given in return'.

when he says that, is he saying that PWKS should now share the 'knowledge' with other people - those who might benefit from learning this meditation?

Is he saying that?

If so, he MIGHT deserve to be called an altruist/benefactor. But his record over the past 30 years doesn't bode too well for that. He still wants what he can get out of it (and how!).

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:27:43 (EST)
From: ChrisP
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Breaking out of an invisible mould
Message:
Hi Patrick, many thanks for these wonderful posts. I really like what you've written here, and as another recent ex, I'm also feeling my way through the moulds that have become quite ‘mouldy'.

For me also, meditation's inner experience is the one shred of truth amidst a labyrinth of lies that I'm ‘walking' away with. I know M's not the exlusive owner of these techniques; many other teachers reveal them and they're hardly a secret anymore. Others have discredited meditation altogether, however I can't deny having felt so many good things in it myself. I recently visited a Buddhist centre and equally enjoyed one of their meditation sessions as well. As well, I've been alerted to and recognize the pitfalls of too much meditation.

For me the thing is (and always was): I don't need more nice reminders to visit the purity inside (the premie mantra). Upon exiting I actually stopped meditating regularly to sort through my feelings about the whole thing. Since then, there've been some serendipitous moments where I find myself naturally feeling my breath; or while lying down I hear music and will listen to it for a bit. Another time I felt the urge o the light technique. I ceased these moments and just went with it and enjoyed it for a few minutes. These times showed me I don't need to continue as a premie to experience anything; it will indeed be with me the rest of my life sans MJ & grace (whatever that's supposed to be), and will always be there for me to enjoy whenever the urge hits me. Indeed, this actually confirmed that the whole premie belief system (BS!) along with its devotion and MJ-isms, are actually, in comparison, detrimental, restricting and oppressive to my true benefit of them; they wrongfully claimed ownership and control of something that's all MINE to enjoy.

Upon exiting, I feel more empowered and freer than ever in many ways. I'm also glad F7 is here as a chance to come out and say exactly what you think without fear (no matter who agrees or disagrees) and to go ahead and look at all the questions that ‘never quite sat right'. It's very healthy, given that for decades inside premiedom this was unthinkable and simply never done. Instead, it's been repressed right to the bone.

Thanks again, Patrick - looking forward to more of your posts

ChrisP

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 19:28:46 (EST)
From: PatD
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Interesting thoughts PW
Message:
Hi Patrick

You are definitely someone whose talents were taken advantage of by a self serving,trained up for the job, megalomaniac.

Hindsight......wonderful stuff.

I agree with a great deal of what you say,but also with what everyone else has said,including Jerry,Joy & Jim.This is because I am someone who sometimes believes in God & sometimes doesn't.

I never went along with the mind is evil theory,which as you can imagine caused immense conflicts at the time. Conflicts I juggled with by trying not think about them,& by keeping my distance from too close an involvement,whilst still wanting to be where the action was.

I was very fucked up in my '20's as a consequence,although there were amazing experiences from the med. from time to time.

I now suspect,although on zero evidence I must admit,these being uncharted waters,that the meditation can put one close to the edge,has got something to do with inducing a near death experience in susceptible people. I know there is a great deal of controversy about those too,but there you go.

As to what that means I have no idea. I wouldn't go any further than saying that I believe the Universe is essentially benign,& by extention if there is a 1st cause,then that is benign too.

As Livia says the habit of a lifetime is impossible to break,& indeed why try is my point of view.I don't do the light,music,nectar teks anymore,but the holy name....soothing.I find it sharpens my thought processes as long as I don't try to stay 'on'it all day,which obviously now I don't. Doing that isn't even obligatory in Bollixshwar's world these days.

On spirituality I've gone back to my Catholic roots:

Prudence
Justice
Fortitude
Temperance
Faith
Hope
Charity

I can't really handle those either,as my preferred spirit comes out of a bottle,but never again will I listen to anyone at all who mumbo jumbo's physical manipulations & calls it getting closer to God.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 16:11:21 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: pdconlon@hotmail.com
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: We need to break the spell.
Message:
Yes, Patrick, we do. I'm just having a quick coffee break at work so I can't answer at length and do your post any justice. However I will re-read it later and answer although I agree with just about everything you said.

If meditation is off topic here (where the main focus seems to be demystifying M and writing the real history of the cult) we could always take it to the Sat Chit-chatroom or discuss this topic by email.

I would personally like to hear from anyone else who agrees with Patrick and me to see how much of a need there is for this discussion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 03:32:43 (EST)
From: Loaf
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: Meditation OT ??
Message:
Hmmm .. OK I know that there isnt a lot of juicy gossip regarding meditation.. not like Personality Cult-Busting - especially as we have been brought up to think that we shared our love of maharaji, but Knowledge was something private, seperate and secretive.

I agree with Patrick that the reclaiming of the techniques is a significant step psychologically - but in the cold light of day the only power the those techniques have comes from the light of the context.

This may be not be as true of other Mantra based meditations, but Knowledge is quite subtle - and its subtlety lends it as a blank canvas to 'prop up' or support and justify the philosophically thin relationship with maharaji.

I think that the allure of the techniques - and even now I can think myself into a warm glow about them... comes from a number of associations which we were encouraged to make with them.

1. There is a 'within'
2/ That which you are looking for is within you
3. The notion of timeless/permenant/ real
4. that the Lord in Human form is here
5. maharaji validates the techniques by his existance
6. The ordinary world is an illusion
7. The God notion
8. The aspirant process making K a big deal
9. the mind and personality as irrelevant or enemies
10. social peer pressure
11. Frustration at not being able to please maharaji makes meditating a blessed release
12. The notion that we have a better option than whatever is going on around us.
13. The 'I just want to feel happy' syndrome
etc etc

For me it was quite a complicated bundle.. can we seperate the techniques from the context which 'set them up' for us ?? I mean.. on the face of it, the elbows are a problem...and I (Thanks to pat) have been practicing them in physically ascending order .. 3, 4, 1,2 cos i like the idea.

I have shown the techniques to a friend in the mid 90s.. and I became hugely aware that the focus of the 'aspirant' without the Guru, or the context is not satisfactory.

My aspirant therefore has been forced to do service to me for the past 11 years... i will let you know when they are grateful enough to receive this most precious gift from myself.

Cheers and Blessing

Would be Guru Loafanand

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 04:15:19 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Loaf
Subject: Re: Meditation OT ??
Message:
You've only got one aspirant? What sort of perfect master are you anyway? Great post again, Loafie.

It's too late for me to contribute anything useful to this whole thread which I find really interesting. Can I take a rain check?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 05:04:24 (EST)
From: Loaf
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: A had another aspirant.. but he passed away
Message:
he waited for me to give him knowledge just a little too long I think.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 03:42:55 (EST)
From: PatC
Email: None
To: Loaf
Subject: That's better than mislaying an aspirant [nt]
Message:
[nt]
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Feb 14, 2002 at 04:15:16 (EST)
From: Loaf
Email: None
To: PatC
Subject: thats why aspirants need co-ordinating
Message:
i have a fully synchronised staff of 4 people co-ordinating my aspirant... 24/7.

Confusion can strike at any moment... we must be vigilant.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 10:59:30 (EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: EX-cellent dissertation, Patrick
Message:
You have been awarded a Doctorate in Cult Studies from EPO University. Your dissertation is flawless and should be preserved for every ex, fencesitter, premie and aspirant to gain insight from.
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 17:39:00 (EST)
From: Marshall
Email: None
To: Richard
Subject: Absolutely Fabulous
Message:
I agree, 100%.
Patrick W. is a friggin' genius.
Compared to Patricks brilliant insights,
Maharaji's rambling,arrogant, monologues seem as if they come from another planet.
I say we depose the whole Rawat clan and install Patrick W. as the new perfect Master. I certainly respect what he has to say about a trillion times more than the current 'perfect Master'
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:36:38 (EST)
From: Livia
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: Re: I think-Knowledge good/Gurus bad
Message:
Thanks, Patrick, for that brilliant and thought-provoking post. (Are you Patrick Wilson formerly of Brighton, England? Obviously you don't have to say if you want to remain anonynous..)

It's a total minefield for premies, this inability to separate K from M and as I am still in the middle of exing, and struggling with it every day, a lot of my confusion is around this area. I find it very hard to separate the two in my mind, and feel more and more that it is down to guilt and fear.

Just before I received K, someone revealed to me the techniques. I was still questioning the 'purity of the master' (!) at that point, so had no real reason not to try them out. So I said down and did them all at once. (I didn't know you were supposed to do them separately.) To my amazement I was virtually blasted off into outer space - it was almost frightening. I certainly felt as if I was leaving my body, and stayed with the experience until I felt so spooked I had to stop. Then afterwards I felt slight feelings of guilt, so I must have been beginning to entertain (unconscious) feelings that M might be the Lord. I didn't do the techniques in that way again.

A few weeks later I received K and to be honest I didn't experience much in the session. Certainly not as much as that first time. (I always wondered about that....)

A few weeks later, however, a definite experience began to grow, which was certainly helped along by the constant exposure to satsang and the absorbtion of a sanctioned premie lifestyle that involved daily bouts of sitting down to meditate. I also felt that without M I would have felt too 'rudderless' - I felt as if one needed a teacher for all sorts of reasons, not least to prevent a 'spiritual ego' from growing. (However, that couldn't have worked, because when I first told my partner what I thought K and M were, he thought I was one of the most spiritually arrogant people he had ever met!)

I think you have a very valid point. From the standpoint of the practice of this meditation as being a good thing, what holds us back from showing other people how to do it?

The problem is, though, that it could never be done to any meaningful extent in an organised way by exes, because a lot of exes doubt even that the practice of K is a good thing in itself. There was a thread a few days ago that made some very good points about K possibly dulling people's emotions and actually preventing one from living life fully and intensely. For myself, the jury is out. I just DON'T know. It's so long for me - 30 years - that I can't remember really how I felt before. Also, as I have gone from youth to the other side of middle age during those years, it's really hard to know whether one's altered feelings are the partly the product of aging and maturing. Also, (worryingly?) the practice of 'Holy Name' or whatever it's called these days has become such a deeply ingrained habit that I catch myself doing it at odd times of the day - it seems virtually impossible to stop it. I wonder if anyone else here finds themselves doing this? I wish I COULD stop it because then it would be possible to examine how life really is without it, and then decide which is better.

So Patrick, I don't think it would work - not enough exes keen enough on the techniques to be keen enough to spread 'em!

But I could be wrong.

With love, Livia

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 09:16:25 (EST)
From: Jerry
Email: None
To: Patrick W
Subject: I think Knowledge bullshit/Gurus too(nt)
Message:
nt
Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 11:34:43 (EST)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Jerry
Subject: I agree w/Jerry--but great post anyway, Patrick
Message:
I was not able to separate doing the techniques from Maharaji, and all the Hindu nonsense that went along with them, the pranaming, prayers, bholay-shri's, photographs, altars, etc. Therefore I gave up the whole kit and kaboodle, baby, bathwater and all, and have not missed K in the slightest.

There are lots of other spiritual practices in the world, and I have dabbled in one or two since leaving K, it's not an exclusive road to peace or an inner experience (and not much of one at all, in my experience). But if you and others value continuing to do the techniques on a regular basis, fine, but disassociating them from M and his Perfect Master/Lord guise is not that easy (as Livia states), and a break from them, as well as from him, is necessary, I think, to be able to get a clearer perspective.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index