|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 05:42:46
(EST)
From: Another
Email: None
To: Everyone
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
Jim, I told you!! I am spell check challenged.
The word is obfuscate and I'm certain you know
exactly what I meant. (Yes, I wax dyslexic on a
regular basis)
You do tend to browbeat and belittle those who may
waver or seem to be leaning away from the
deprogramming aspect of this site.
Getting into the basics of our little battle of the
bands, would require at least some objectivity.
Alas, neither you or I, (I am not using nor, in
defference to poor dead King Arthur) seem to have
much of that at all.
What we do have is ample fodder for our expressive
cannon's.
I understand those who hail this site as their
'Refuge'. Fine, I hope it gives them comfort.
I understand that I appear to be a contrarian with
respect to the goals (implied or otherwise),
contained in this webssite's archives.
I understand that much of what I have posted is
unwanted, unappreciated, unsolicited and very
unwelcomed by most of those logging on here. I
apologize, but there is truely another side to this
story.
I must however, give you quarter as the 'Tacit
Leader' even though many are pointing out my error.
(Respects to all, we are nothing if not EQUALS)
You folks have every right to please each other,
guide each other, need each other and cohabitate
through bits and bites for as long as one can
imagine.
You also have every right to flame, complain,
defame, shame, name names, dain, explain, expose,
cajole, mold and otherwise, tear the living shit
out of Mahharaji.
There are ample snippits from those who were
premies, which point to deep sadness, bitter,
bitter disappointments, wrenching misgivings, joy
at being individuals again(?) but most of all,
TIME, which was lost and apparantly wasted during
their tenure as followers.
I am deeply sorry for those persons and I wish to
you all, that healing you are seeking or have
found.
And yes, I try to be at least as clever and as
sarcastic as you JH esq, and yes, I admit grammer
and spelling are hard won when I communicate but, I
offer the following elementals which one might
possibly compare as analegeous and contemporaneous
to all of the issues fosterd by the collective,
assembled to drink from this 'Oasis' of the
internet.
Telling you of those extra-psycic and verifiable
occurences which brought me to Knowledge would be
tedious and dismissed. Let's just say they are
allowable under the 'X' File's rules of
engagment.
My mystic and socioeconomic flavorings aside,
certain criteria exist with regard to how truth has
been taught throughout the ages.
The historicity: (Thanks to Newt Gingrich for the
catch phrase)
Most all of those writings which survive as
Mythologies and Religious text, contain
commonalities with regard to the base elements
driving the belief supported in their respective
pages.
There was usually a Teacher. Ordinarily foisted
into the position of God incarnate, Son of God,
Messenger of God, Messsiah, Seer, Mystic, Recluse,
Avatar, Master, Rabbi, I think we get the
picture.
Most of the time, these people lived lives which
aside from the occasional miracle worker (Jesus and
Mithras are claimed to have raised themselves from
the dead after being killed for teaching the Word
of God), were remarkable only because they impacted
their respective civilazations and geographies,
with a specific message or teachings about, Peace,
Truth, Nirvana, Heaven or other such nonsense.
Normally these groups developed as colloquial
sects. But, there are ample era and writings
depicting these time frames, left behind to create
those religions we have all come to know and
love.
Most of the time these teachings did not become
nationalized, although several did, including
certain Egyptian, Hebrew, Christian, Moslem, Hindu,
Greek, Chineese, Tibetian, ad nauseum.
(Hell, even the pre-christian era of the Americian
Missippi valley had a Master who taught 'The Good
Word' and 'The Inner Light')(One theory states that
Adam, was actually a series of leaders and no, I
don't think Eve gave birth to Cain's kids).
So based on that tenet, is there such a thing as a
'God' incarnate? Let us deem it, possible.
Other incidentals such as the actual teaching,
being given by word of mouth, in secret, from the
teacher to a student, The Light, Sound, God's Name
or Word and the Ambrosia or Manna are more or less
rampant throughout these tales and legends.
If we examine the historical data at face value, we
can assume at least the possibility, that such a
thing as a 'God' in human form, (Might, Could be,
Perhaps, Possibly) can exist.
What are the odds?
Given the fact (Premise, Surmisation, Guess,
Estimation) that these traditions usually allow
only one 'God' to teach about one God, during a
given period of time, we arrive at the mathmatical
solution of ONE in SIX BILLION.
Now comes the clincher, because these 'Incarnates'
are supposed to be hovering in a state of inner
perfection, (Even whilst they sleep) By deeming
them to be susceptible or conditional to human
circumstance, as a standard issue mortal would be,
is error number one.
The basics only allow for the traditional aspect
that this individual(HE or SHE) although partaking
of the human life experiences is non the less
always going to be 'Not Quite Human'.
I believe this is expressed in the recent posting
from Hans Yog Prakesh but, more ancient and
widespred writings support this point of view.
Following this 'Theory', when we are around one of
these teachers, their individual behavior will be
perceived, literally by those who interact with
this Mentor.
If the beholder sees negatives and wants
justification about an Avatar's shortcomings, these
will manifist and that also is contained in the
writtrn record. (Ram, Khrisna, Buddah, Jesus,
Mohammed, Moses they all had detractors)
For many in these postings, this will be a
validation and I accept that. If Maharaji has: not
included, confused, precluded, refused, misused,
diffused, schmoozed, stewed, screwed, fried, lied,
imbibed, slighted or blighted you, that is between
he and you.
At the same time, regardless of these flaws, these
Incarnations will intend, to bring the presence of
this 'GOD' which they carry in them to every
mother's son and daughter on the planet,
period.(Anyone see the Terminator? 'You don't
understand, that's all he does')
By most historical data this thing, is purported to
allow the initiate an experience of Immortal
dimension, Heaven on Earth and as our poster,
child, with only an Eleventh grade education, said
the other evening, Yada, Yada.
We will call it Knowledge after the Greek word
GNOSIS. The Gnostics were the first to rebel
against the Paul over the issue of whether Heaven
was within or should be put into some golden
Altered box and only let out on Sunday.
Recall if you will, the fried ones who have dropped
away. Why do they leave? I can't speak for them but
I'll give long odds that they never really 'Got'
it.(As in understanding)
Hell Jimbo, I didn't even start to practice until
1990 and I was initiated back when you were. And
guess what, Knowledge has and continues to knock my
fucking socks off and kicks my ass on a daily
basis. In fact, because of the purity which allows
me to experience Infinity, my arrogance has
somewhere to reflect upon itself (No mean feat, as
you can tell from my postings)
So go ahead, argue with history.
Shit Jim, look at it from the outside for a moment,
If, such a thing as an incarnate exists, and He
came into a modern society, guided by those around
him, subject to influences of power and other human
foibles,
Transgressed and or otherwise didn't fullfil some
post 60's expectation of a perfect sociological
planner,
Crapped out during training and ran the thing ass
backwards,
Finally figured as his body began to mature, that
elements and vestiges and procedure set in motion
with the aid and supplementation of those from the
west (Who were supposed to fucking know these
things, people like Mischler who stated' Nectar is
a state of mind' for Christ's sake), ad
infinitum.
Found out after several campaigns run by the 'Core
Elite' that people thought premies (And especially
Knowledge) were whacko's. (I know we both qualify
for this one).
Shit canned the arcane (Ashrams, Doti's, Saffron
Armies) and got with the program. (No pun
intended)
So what!
So what, if a lot of people are disgusted and
disillusioned. So what if he has human anomalies
which preclude him in your eyes from the Master's
Hall of Fame.
During this time he has never wavered from
speaking, seeing, doing and implementing the
primary function of presenting this 'Peace' to the
entire world. You know how intense it is to be
around him 24 hours a day. (Need to be un-fried for
that duty and many have tried and burnt like toast,
as you well know)
At what cost? That is for each individual to
decide.
After all this is the last judgement were
discussing here isn't it, deciding if Truth is your
cup of tea I mean.
Feed the Children, Water the desert, Save the
Whales, pick a focus.
I vote for the heart, like it or not, this wisdom
is all that stands between mankind and
oblivious.
Thanks Jim, for allowing me to post in your
cyberface space.
I'm not sure I need continue posting here after
this one.(I can almost hear the collective sigh of
relief)
Not that I accept your direction, I don't. I feel
cheated by your and several of my more local, old
friends demise from this experience but hey, we all
have our crosses to bear now don't we.
I just wish you folks would drop the pretense and
remember why you asked for this gift in the first
place.
Apologies for anyone who has taken umbrege to my
recent stint as foil to Jim but he really has been
a bit of a bully at times and I don't mean our
personal exchanges either.
I really do consider us all children of the
heart.
True and Free,
Another
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 07:24:46
(EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
To me it has been very enjoyable reading your post.
To have a discourse rather than an argument I would
think takes elements(stated/clarified/agreed
upon)like
- the intention (to seek/prove/discuss etc, eg: the
truth?)
- comprehensive content eg
factual/anecdotal/historical material is needed to
give content & pespective
- patience/willingness to see the other's view
point (empathy)
I suppose this is like saying: why, where, how, who
& what
(why are we saying this, where are we saying it,
how are we saying it, to whom are we saying it and
what are we saying?)
So if there is room here for discourse, I would be
interested in what others have to say in reply to
you. Anyway for my self, thank you for keeping the
question alive, as to what 'is' (such as, god)and
making an opening for another interesting
conversation!
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 08:04:35
(EST)
From: Gail
Email: None
To: anyone
Subject: Definition of a Premie
Message:
Inquirer: What's the definition of a premie?
MJ: A human being with no reason or
accountability.
(yea, I borrowed it.)
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 09:26:12
(EST)
From: Jethro
Email: cadbury@compuserve.com
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
''True and Free''
But not free enough to say your name. What are you
afraid of?
Jethro
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 12:37:09
(EST)
From: Joy
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
Another, do you talk like this in real life?
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 13:01:03
(EST)
From: bftb
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia-perspective
Message:
You know,alot of things are about perspective.Is
the glass half empty or half full?Is the word
dyslexic or cixelsyd?
I had lunch with a collegue and old friend
yesterday.This guy had been an aspirant for around
a month in '78 or '79.M and this website came up at
some point in the discussion.This guy asks(I should
mention that this guy thinks M is an absolute
charlatan after only $$$.Period.-that's HIS
perspective)'What exactly are the most pissed off
people pissed off about?' I thought to myself that
there are a lot of things but the first thing I
said was 'Well,one beef some people have is that he
said he was god in human form,they believed it,and
according to his instructions they moved into his
ashrams and now feel that they wasted many years as
celibate devotees of a guy who they feel turned out
not to be god and in fact is just a fraud.They feel
beyond ripped off'His immediate reaction was
'well....if they were so stupid as to believe that
con man and waste all that time then screw
them.They're dumb and they got what you get when
you're that dumb.'(he probably meant naive but he
chose to use the word dumb)
So,perspective.Here's a guy who insists that M's a
fraud yet he has no sympathy for any ex's
complaints.In that sense he shares the sentiments
of a lot of premies but from a radically different
perspective.
How about the way M says that it's not such a good
idea to talk about your experience(s) surrounding
the world of K.Well an ex could point to that as
proof of this being a cult.A premie could say that
it's actually really good advice because a)if
you're going to talk about it with other premies
then you'll be putting ideas into each others heads
and really you oughtta just experience your
experience for your own self and not worry about
what experience anyone else is having.This whole
thing is very personal and is for you and you
alone. b)if you talk to non-premies about your
experiences you will inevitably be misunderstood
and/or ridiculed and that ain't helping anyone
involved,so;like jesus told mary'tell others not
what you've seen' or something like that. Speaking
for myself,when I started trying to explain an
experience or two that I'd had to this friend at
lunch yesterday I very quickly became an object of
ridicule and realised I should probably just shut
up about it at that point. It's like trying to
explain the psychedelic experience to someone who's
never had it.It's kind of futile.
So is it 'shut up' because I want to control
EVERYTHING or is it 'shut up' because it won't get
you anywhere?
Perspective!
How about M's perspective on this web site? Is it
the worst thing that ever happened to the mission
or the best?
If he's sincere then this site is a good thing
because he can learn how people really feel about
what he does and,again,if he's sincere he could use
the information to his advantage and perhaps adjust
his M.O. a little bit to ease all the concerns.This
website presents a golden opportunity for the best
'customer feedback research'.And it's
free!Gathering info. like this would cost EV loads
of money in the real world.
It's all about perspective. I think.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 14:09:28
(EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: bftb
Subject: bif's friend is a hypocrite
Message:
The reason I say that is that he, too, fell for
some measure of this bullshit if he actually came
back to satsang for a full month. There are LOTS of
people who would consider anyone actually intersted
in a then-late-adolescent avatar preposterously
naive. Further, your friend doesn't seem to
understand that ANYONE can get trapped. All it
takes is that one moment when you flirt a little
too close with the 'You-are-not-your-mind'
philosophy. That's it. Can happen to anyone.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 14:58:59
(EST)
From: bftb
Email: None
To: bftb
Subject: Dyslexia-perspective pt.2
Message:
One minute I'm a wavering something floating in the
wind wondering whether or not this thing's really a
cult,and the next minute I find something like
this: http://www.csj.org/checklis.html (It's a
'checklist of cult characteristics')
Interesting.What's a fence sitter to do?
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 14:33:34
(EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Hypoglycemia
Message:
Yes, favourite conditions of the seventies. How
could I forget?
No, seriously, I, too, appreciate your post
somewhat. At least I understand you this time
(although you still lay it on a little thick
[i.e. verbosely] at times). Whatever.
That's not important.
What DOES matter is your view of history. You think
that because people have deified other people over
time there must be something to it. Well a lot of
people share that view. I know I sure did when I
got k. At my first festival, Guru Puja 73 in
London, the hall had big paintings of a lot of the
past 'avatars' running up and down both sides. This
was, I believe, brought from India. I didn't
recognize more than one or two -- you can always
spot Jesus or Buddha in a crowd -- but the ponit
was there: this kind of shit happens all the
time.
That gave me a lot of foundation for trusting
Maharaji. I mean, once you get to the point where
you're actually thinking 'if it's not him, then who
IS the living Satguru?' then you're already
hooked.
But, Another, that historical fact, which I, too,
accept, is just a reflection of man's ignorance.
Religion, as you probably know, likely started with
simple ancestor worship. All this other avatar
stuff is just an extension of that. It's bullshit.
An illusion. I imagine that the most primitive
societies have worshipped everything about their
leaders as 'divine'. Body, mind, his sheep, his
land, even his colours -- all divine.
Then, over time, these socieites have to deal with
their divine leader's mortality. The world gets
bigger for them, people learn of other 'divine'
leaders in other valleys... okay, so his body's not
divine. He's still the wisest man around and speaks
with and for all other gods, or whatever. Of course
that falls by the wayside too, soon enough.
You get the picture?
What's so interesting about Maharaji is that he
himself took us through a bunch of these steps of
diminishing avatar divinty in just a few decades.
Back in the early seventies we worshipped his body
as divine, drinking his bathwater which, was potent
with holiness if we drank even one molecule that
had ever touched his golden form. And his words?
Every last laugh and stutter were considered divine
utterances. Maharaji really pushed this view. Check
out some of his old satsangs.
Now he's retreated so far that he won't even talk
about it anymore. Premies are left imagining that
there's some little spark of something special in
him OR that he's anything and everything they're
comfortable believing becuase, after all, there WAS
Kabir or ... well, think about Shri Hans. Oh come
on, this is all bullshit.
Knowledge? Knowledge is a party trick. It feels
good to zone out of your thoughts on your built--in
white noise. That's it. Is it profound? No more
than nature's profound. It's just there and serves
as a very flexible backdrop for our own emotional
and mental projections.
Track down and read The Lucifer Principle if
you get a chance. I got a copy from Amazon books.
This religion shit has just been a way for mankind
to codify and enforce its evolving morality and for
people to wrest power away from one another and
'Lord' it over each other.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 19:26:18
(EST)
From: seymour
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Hypoglycemia
Message:
Another good post Jim ( although I hope you ego
will not be too boosted, you know it is the enemy
of true enlightenment) -
'Knowledge? Knowledge is a party trick. It feels
good to zone out of your thoughts on your built--in
white noise. That's it. Is it profound? No more
than nature's profound. It's just there and serves
as a very flexible backdrop for our own emotional
and mental projections.'
I think it's shame, and very embarrassing that I
read an awful lot more into my meditation
experiences than I should, but I see things now in
a different light.
BTW I was also at Guru Puja 73. Do you remember the
posters that said something like 'Get out of your
mind with Knowledge'?
I also remember GM saying one night at the camp
sight that he did not have all the riches that
people thought he had.
He said something like 'I do have a Rolls Royce,
but it is an old one'
It was not long after that his living standards
rose to more than an old Roller.
Seymour.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 16:25:25
(EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
A Not Her:
It is not usually considered methodologically sound
to reach a conclusion as a precursor
to conducting subsequent analyses.
-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sat, Jul 04, 1998 at 19:38:51
(EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
I'm not sure I need continue posting here after
this one.(I can almost hear the collective sigh of
relief)
I wouldn't be so sure about the sighs of relief. I
think people stopped reading your drivel some time
ago. You know, if you learned to write (maybe take
a class?) you might be able communicate what you
are trying to say without the most incredible
tendency to be verbose. With fewer words you will
certainly spell fewer of them incorrectly and use
more of them appropriately. More of what you say
will likely get read that way too.
After laboring through your post, I gather that you
think BM is the messiah, god incarnate, and that he
gave you a gift you like. Nothing else matters.
[See, I just said in one sentence what you
required over 30 paragraphs to say.]
Well, good for you! Unfortunately, BM says quite
directly these days that he is NOT god, [Scott
even got a letter in the early 80s from him saying
that] so I guess you've got a problem there.
But whatever you want to believe, more power to
you! It's a free country as far as religion is
concerned. But there IS another side to the story,
as you know. That's what this site it about.
Maybe Jim can be a bully, but he is certainly less
pretentious and condescending than you, and he's
also a lot smarter.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 02:54:53
(EST)
From: Another
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
Verbose? yeah, so what? Detail oriented and
academic? yeah, so what? drivel? if it seems that
way to you, so be it.
Condescending and pretentious? What do you think
makes this site go round any way, the milk of human
kindness?
Sorry JW, I may not fit your idea of a towering
intellect, great writer or overall nice chap to
cyberchat with. My sincere apologies.
Besides, writers with talent usually have editors
before they release and I see misspelling and
grammar problems from others who post here, with no
tutorial from you in response. Could you be
singling me out? Nah, not a chance.
One thing is certain, I play guitar way mo' better
then you and probably Jim. Does that make me
qualified to be considered as superior because of a
single skill I may possess? Hardly.
Please elaborate on those sterling qualities you
have, which allow dominion over the weakness you
perceive others to be steeped in.
I bow before your prescient ability to gauge my
level of stupidity.
As to the idea that Maharaji has made it clear that
he is not God,
well no shit. He said that to the BBC camera in the
driveway one evening in 1971. Something like, 'I am
not a God, or Messiah or anything like that, but if
it's Peace that you want, then I can give it to
you'.
To claim title to that would mean the entire
universe including you and I would be contained
within him. I don't know about you but both of us
would give him heartburn, don't you think?
For the record, he be only what you need him to
be.
If you need him to be a money grubbing showman with
a penchant for wool pulling, then that is what he
will be.
If one asks him 'Are you God', he answers no but
maintains that he can reveal God's Grace to you, if
you choose.
Tradition holds that the true form of the 'Avatar'
lies within each heart.
The body containing that energy will be considered
as 'God Incarnate' but only because it is a vessle
and only by those who have the eyes to see this
person as that manifistation.
Depending on which way the wind is blowing,
attemting to pin down the 'MASTER' through
intellectual means, will bring mixed results
at best.
As for laboring through my muddle to ascertain the
brilliant fact that 'You think BM is the messiah'
let me clarify the ghee for you.
There is no intellect alive which will make that
determination for me, not even my own.
Being available to observe and witness the
attending drama which surrounds these
manifistations(Historically), was the point of my
10,00 character posting.
Believing is for those who do not understand OK,
being right or wrong about his divinty is not a win
or lose situation.
While I respect Jim's opinion that (Pardon my Karl
Marx) religion is opium for the masses,
And I mean it when I apologize for creating disgust
in your space bubble,
These things ultimatly have consequence only for
the ones doing the thinking, not for those who
aren't engaged in the exchange.
We limit our time to stimuli and concerns fostered
by and relative to ourselves, period. That is our
nature!
All the while, that certain someone, who's charge
it is to bring this infinite gift to every human
heart,
Exists,
Alone, in a seperate world, locked into time with 6
billion shipmates, most of whom would just as soon
see him pound salt.
I suspect that the level and state of being the
'Master' is in, although appearing to be like you,
me and Jim, is an altogether different place.
(Based on millenia of comparative sightings, which
are way too similar, to be dismissed as simple
belief)
It really depends on who is asking the question
then and what response they need to hear when
Maharaji says if he is or isn't God.
Perhaps the reasons for the 'LORD of the UNIVERSE'
ad campaign back in 72 and 73 are no longer valid,
or were ill fated and naive.
Perhaps the issues and social fabric of certain
countrys and mores which exist in the 1990's don't
allow a truely free expression of what and who
Maharaji is or isn't.
Perhaps all this talk is useless because his
destiny has been set ever since that ball of light
camped out in him, back in 1966.
What am I to say to you all? I believe? I don't
believe? It doesn't matter.
He simply is, end of story, nothing you or I say or
do, will ever, ever change that fact, nothing.
So we either live to enjoy it, or we live to do
other than that.
By the way bro' smarter you may be but wiser? that
is not for either of us to judge.
After all , you can't bullshit God, and if you
think you can,
'Den yore weigh mor smartour thenn Eye wil aver
bee'.
Regards, and thanks to those ladies who actually
complimented bits and pieces. My pleasure.
Another
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 10:37:42
(EST)
From: Gail
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Another, you are not stupid
Message:
Hi. I don't think you are stupid. You either:
a) Work for EV or
b) are trying to work things out.
Please read the other site under Jean-Michel's
lovers of India. There is a direct link. See where
MJ has come from (lineage).
We all seem to want a higher power to take care of
us. We all want magic, a lord, the path, the bliss,
etc., but after 24 years I realize that I have to
make my own.
This stuff just doesn't work for me. I am damaged,
but I allowed myself to be exposed to it. It is
hard to TAKE THE REINS OF YOUR MIND AND LIFE BACK,
isn't it.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 13:24:54
(EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
Anything:
That post was much improved. Less verbose. Thanks
for that.
For the record, he be only what you need him to
be
Another, there is such a thing as objective truth.
He is what he is, please don't lay that old premie
trip of BM being a mirror and a reflection of our
own needs. A multitude of atrocities have been
justified by that little line. I doubt anyone NEEDs
a money-grubbing showman. But, in my opinion, and
the opinion of a lot of others, that's certainly
one of the things Maharaji is. He certainly is INTO
money and lots of grandiose and expensive material
possessions. He he really was into propogation o
knowledge and saving the world, he would do with a
lot less. Now, I'm sure even you wouldn't deny
that. As to his motivations for that, people can
make up their own minds, and the most simple reason
is usually correct.
If one asks him 'Are you God', he answers no but
maintains that he can reveal God's Grace to you, if
you choose.
Well, I have heard him say all kinds of stuff when
asked this question. For many years he NEVER said
NO. He said coy stuff like: 'I don't say I'm god my
followers do and ask them why they say that!'
[I saw him say that a couple of times on
national television.]
I think you've also likely read some quotes in
which he comes VERY close to saying he's god. At
least until I left the cult in 1983 he NEVER
directly said he WASN'T god, while all the time
speaking in the third person, allowing himself ,
without comment, to be called Lord of the Universe,
the Superior Power in Person, the Perfect Master,
comparing himself to Jesus Christ, Krishna, Buddha,
etc., and had us sing Arti to him which has all
kinds of allusions to him as a deity. Most premies
I knew believed he was god in human form. BM raised
not one chubby finger to dissuade our beliefs.
Perhaps that has changed, but it was rather late in
coming if it has.
The body containing that energy will be
considered as 'God Incarnate' but only because it
is a vessle and only by those who have the eyes to
see this person as that manifistation.
Excuse me, but I think this is exactly what I was
saying. Apparently you also hold the belief that BM
is 'god incarnate.' The vessel isn't god, it's a
body, but it contains god, and is the
personification of god, and he's the only being on
earth that is such. This, of course, fit right into
my Christian upbringing about who Jesus Christ was
-- God, in the vessel of a human body. Now, I dont'
believe this, but you are entitled to if you want
to.
These things ultimatly have consequence only for
the ones doing the thinking, not for those who
aren't engaged in the exchange.
Depending on which way the wind is blowing, attemting to pin down
the 'MASTER' through intellectual means, will bring
mixed results at best.
I don't get your 'wind-blowing' metaphor, but the
rest of these statements I reject based on my own,
won-the-hard-way personal experience.
I think what you are saying is that you can't use
your own mind and personal judgment to decide
anything about Maharaji. It goes back to his
commandment to 'NEVER LEAVE ROOM FOR DOUBT IN YOUR
MIND' which is now described in current
premie-speak as only using your 'heart' to see who
Maharaji is. I think it's a recipe for repression
of doubts and the creation of the heart/mind
dichotomy, which I think is false. I engaged in
that repressive process for a good 10 years and
found it very unsatisfying and destructive.
I suspect that the level and state of being the
'Master' is in, although appearing to be like you,
me and Jim, is an altogether different place.
(Based on millenia of comparative sightings, which
are way too similar, to be dismissed as simple
belief)
How do you know this? Where you there? Belief and
faith are very powerful things. That's why I don't
doubt premies often have profound and beautiful
experiences. I know I did. What I discovered was
that BM was not the source of them, they are
available without him and when I stopped believing
in him, that became clear. Also, I didn't have to
fight my own mind anymore to maintain my belief in
him. Following BM is very costly and I found it
wasn't worth it.
It really depends on who is asking the question
then and what response they need to hear when
Maharaji says if he is or isn't God.
Perhaps the reasons for the 'LORD of the UNIVERSE'
ad campaign back in 72 and 73 are no longer valid,
or were ill fated and naive.
Sorry, I think this is cult double-speak and
absolutely wrong. I think the Lord of the Universe
label put on BM was because that's who he believed
he was. To imply it is based on some 'need' of
those who saw the title is sophistry, and blaming
the victim. Certainly you know better than
that.
Perhaps the issues and social fabric of certain
countrys and mores which exist in the 1990's don't
allow a truely free expression of what and who
Maharaji is or isn't.
Okay, so now you are saying BM packages himself to
suit the times, but that, I guess, he really is the
Lord of the Universe, and god incarnate, but it
just isn't socially acceptable to say that these
days. Do you really believe this? I mean, I believe
that he does shuck and jive, and re-package himself
to try to hold his trip together, but I don't
believe he's god incarnate. So maybe he's god in
the 70s and maybe in India in the 90s, but
elsewhere he is a meditation teacher, or 'the
master.' Of course when he has people line up to
kiss his feet, like he did in Australia recently,
that kind of undermines the meditation teacher
label.
The truth is, BM has been all over the map in
saying who or what he is. He is anything but
consistent. And I think he has just tried whatever
he and those around him thought might work at the
time. And he lost most of his followers in the
process. Some stay on and will accept absolutely
any inconsistency he puts out and others kind of
hang on and don't know what they think. In both
cases, they get to feel special if they do.
He has a real dilemma if you ask me. He needs to do
enough of the 'devotion' and 'god-incarnate' trip
to hold on to the premies from the 70s who still
think he's god, or close to it. And, he has to cool
it to keep out of the press and to not scare off
new people and those who have received knowledge in
the 'meditation teacher' sales program of his. He's
walking a fine line. That's why he can't let the
premies give satsang, because as we all know they
would spill the beans about his past, his
perfect-master status, the grace of the lord and
all the rest. This would send new people away in
droves.
That's also why I was really surprised to see he
gave darshan in Australia recently. I think he
tought it was in such a remote area, that no one
would notice. But I think actions are louder than
words, and will catch up with him. I don't think he
can continue, at least in the west, to have his
cake and eat it too. You can only re-package
yourself so many times. This is especially a
problem because of the internet, which allows those
of us who know his past to point it out to anyone
who is interested. I think the idea of people
lining up to kiss is feet is repugnant to most
thinking people. However, the 70s premies, who are
still the bulk of his followers in the west, want
it badly, and will get more involved, and give more
money, if he does it.
JW
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 13:47:45
(EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: JW and Another
Message:
Joe,
Again, you articulate so well what even the premies
who post here know, in the bottoms of their
captured little hearts, to be true. Thanks for
laying it all out. There's just one thing I
disagree with. And that's your apparent concession
that Maharaji never came right out and said he was
the Lord. Joe, you've been talking with premies too
much (ha ha, I finally get to say that!). ANY
reasonable, fair-minded person in the world shown
those quotes -- or any of the many, similar
examples -- would say without hesitation that of
course he said he was God. That's it. End of
discussion.
And above all, Guru Maharaj Ji is the Supremest
Lord in person before us. is him saying,
specifically, categorically, without any room for
argument, that he is God. Who is Guru? The
highest manifestation of God is Guru. So when Guru
is here, God is here..? Same.
Of course I know you know that but I just wanted to
say it.
Another, what do you say to that? What do you say
to the fact that ANY reasonable, fair-minded person
would agree? Do you dispute that? If so, I dare you
to find me someone, anyone, who isn't a premie (and
who isn't a newage bubblehead) who'll interpret
those simple sentences otherwise. If not, and you
concede this point, I think you should ask yourself
two questions:
1) What are the implications of the fact that M
claimed to be God?
and
2) What's going on in me that I would go to such
great lengths to deny the obvious?
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 22:04:16
(EST)
From: VP
Email: None
To: Jim
Subject: Two valid questions
Message:
1) What are the implications of the fact that M
claimed to be God?
and
2) What's going on in me that I would go to such
great lengths to deny the obvious?
Jim,
These are the two best and most valid questions I
have seen asked of premies on this site so far. To
answer them is to find the truth about Maharaji and
about oneself.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 03:54:11
(EST)
From: Judex
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Dyslexia
Message:
For you info JW he gave darshan in Australia the
year before too in Brisbane). Apparently that year
it was the first darshan he have given in OZ in
many many years.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Tues, Jul 07, 1998 at 03:12:57
(EST)
From: Carol
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Applause, JW!
Message:
Very well said. Carol
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 14:10:19
(EST)
From: Jim
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Perplexia
Message:
Detail oriented and academic?
Is that really how you see yourself? Why? How do
those words describe you?
One thing is certain, I play guitar way mo'
better then you and probably Jim.
??
For the record, he be only what you need him to
be.
If you need him to be a money grubbing showman with
a penchant for wool pulling, then that is what he
will be.
This is nonsense. Are you saying that there is no
world, no reality, everything is anything, no
right, no wrong, no truth? If some crazy guy thinks
Maharaji's his chauffeur, then he is? Another, this
kind of newage stupidity gives all the other newage
stupidty a bad name.
As to the idea that Maharaji has made it clear
that he is not God,
well no shit. He said that to the BBC camera in the
driveway one evening in 1971. Something like, 'I am
not a God, or Messiah or anything like that, but if
it's Peace that you want, then I can give it to
you'
Please see my post to JW and you on this point.
But, further, if you claim that you're a great
guitar player one moment but then, soem other time,
say you're not, does that mean you never said you
were? Of course not. It means that a) you said you
were a great guitar player and b) you ALSO said you
weren't. If you want to make the argument that
Maharaji said both that he was God and that he
wasn't, go ahead. We can talk about that then.
Frankly, I don't think anyone here would give you
much grief over that point. He DID say both. The
question, then, becomes 'why?'
All the while, that certain someone, who's
charge it is to bring this infinite gift to every
human heart,
Exists,
Who says? I personally don't believe this at all,
anymore than I believe in fairies like Tinkerbell.
But, anyway, that's your CONCLUSION in this
argument. You can't, then, sue it as a premise as
well. It's the point you're hoping to prove. You
can't assume it.
Tradition holds that the true form of the
'Avatar' lies within each heart.
The body containing that energy will be considered
as 'God Incarnate' but only because it is a vessle
and only by those who have the eyes to see this
person as that manifistation.
'Tradition' also holds every last thing people have
ever believed but which was wrong. Is that your
proof? Tradition?
Perhaps all this talk is useless because his
destiny has been set ever since that ball of light
camped out in him, back in 1966.
Are you SURE that's what happened? Are you really
sure? Or have you just set your ship on that course
a long time ago and now unsure where you'd sail if
you had to change it? Go ask Satpal if he thinks
that 'ball of light camped out' in Prempal back
then?
What am I to say to you all? I believe? I don't
believe? It doesn't matter.
Well then, YOU don't matter. If you've got any kids
or people that love you tell them that. Tell them
that you are so insignificant that your trying to
understand life is a 'masterful' waste of time.
Tell them there's no point their trying to learn
anything either. Who the fuck cares?
He simply is, end of story, nothing you or I say
or do, will ever, ever change that fact,
nothing.
This kind of a tautology, coming as it does in a
discussion like this, is analogous to a smiling,
nervous stutter. You're not saying anything,
Another. I'm listening, but you're not saying
anything.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 19:33:11
(EST)
From: Another
Email: None
To: Jim and JW
Subject: Two Seperate Worlds
Message:
Jim and JW,
It's a simple explanation, OK!
If one person has an ability or intellectual
advantage over another, does that make natural
selection (survival of the fittest ie: smartest),
reason enough to ride roughshod over another, who's
perceptions or values may conflict with yours?
That was my only intent for the guitar comment,
really. The old pot calling the kettle black thing.
Try to take it in stride not stridence.
In other words we may be smart but someone else can
always come along who is smarter, or better at
something then we are. So why Lord it over those
below you?
It seems counterproductive to personal growth.
We can all three, find data advancing both points
of view regarding His statements about being or not
being God.
My point is this, our pontification will not change
things. It allows us to agree or to disagree.
The die has been cast, from Sandoz footage to
Satpal bootage, this thing has become what it is
and WE have become who WE are.
As for Darshan research, there is ample record of
this encounter.
Regarding my tight assed tautology, I offer an
etymological example for those postings I ascribe
to.
TAUTO: Greek for 'the same' and LOGOS: Greek for
'discourse'.
Carried one step further, LOGOS: Greek for 'reason,
thought of as the controlling principle of the
universe and as being manifisted by speech' and
'The Word of God'.
Based on the historic analogy of tautology, I am
using language for the reason it was made manifest
and functional. As a means of communicating about
'Gods Word'.
Ok, I agree then, sounds too much like Satsang
though so be wary about the cadence and subliminal
suggestion thing.For Christ's sake don't allow
logic 'the science of correct reasoning, from the
Greek word Logos', to cloud the issue.
What I've said is simply not understood because we
are speaking to seperate worlds as you have
previously mentioned. You to the intellect and I to
the realm of the heart.
Thanks Jim and JW, for your honesty.
Cheers,
Another
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Sun, Jul 05, 1998 at 20:54:05
(EST)
From: JW
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Two Seperate Worlds
Message:
We can all three, find data advancing both
points of view regarding His statements about being
or not being God.
I haven't seen ANY evidence for your point of view
and plenty from the other side. Specifically, that
BM claimed to be god at times, was vague about
whether he was god or not a whole bunch of other
times, but his actions lead his followers to think
he was, and he also apparently said he wasn't god
at other times. And it's more than just picking the
statement you want to believe. It goes to the heart
of Maharaji's lack of honesty, sincerity and his
inability to take responsibility for things he has
said and done. I would think someone as smart as
yourself would consider such things when deciding
whether or not to follow a 'master.'
My point is this, our pontification will not
change things. It allows us to agree or to
disagree.
It might not change our respective opinions, but I
completely disagree that open discussion about BM,
especially by his ex-devotees won't change things.
I think such open discussion is lethal to Maharaji.
And he is fighting like hell to prevent it if he
can. That's why he banned the premie website, won't
allow the premies to give satsang, dissuades
premies from talking about him on the internet and
hides from the press. Open discussion of all his
misstatements, contradictions, cult-like behavior
and the negative effects it has had many peoples'
lives had a BIG effect on Maharaji. And as long as
he doesn't address them, the worse it will be, the
bigger it will grow and the more it will all come
out in the open. 6,000 messages a day read on this
forum is pretty good for something that just
started a year ago, and it's growing.
On as personal note, I appreciate your attempt to
speak directly about what you think. Yes, maybe we
disagree, but I do appreciate your attempt
nonetheless. I was a premie once too, you know.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 00:35:01
(EST)
From: Another
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: Open Discussion
Message:
Answer A) I only tried to point out that he has
claimed and not claimed this distinction over the
years. It seems we agree on this. It still remains
a, he said, she said quandry and can be stated
either way.
Answer B) Open discussion is what this site
represents,does it not?
If Elan Vital opens a website, I am sure the good
people who frequent this port in the storm, will be
quick to jump on it and draw these distinctions on
their site as well.
Expose' is an American tradition.
Maharaji has been the center of ridicule and
negative press on several ocassions.
What will happen when critical mass is reached is
predictable.
CNN did an expose' of Benny Hinn and a follow up.
The net result was negative press (Detractors and
skimming, secrecy etc) which accomplished the goals
of the production.
This surely drove off some new recruits and fence
sitters, but the airings only reinforced the true
followers participation and galvanized their
resolve.
Benny has used that negative press to help raise
funds for the purchase of a 30,000 square foot
production studio, so he won't have to sub lease or
borrow from TBN in the future.
That kind of money is a far cry from the ducets
available from the palms and wallets of
premiedom.
Bringing Maharaji into the focus of the mainstrem
will likley help you and the Jim's of this world,
feel vindication and some modecum of revenge.
In the end though, the curiosity factor will
enhance His mystique and contribute to ancillary
growth.
This isn't a prediction, but based on media and
spin control it is the easiest possibility to
forcast.
The distinction will have been made, the
implications will subside, the devotees will remain
and Elan Vital's phone will be ringing off the
hook.
This 'Outing' would allow a free and unfetterd
opportunity to reach through the haze and pique the
interest of those who share neither perspective but
will become curious.
Why Maharaji doesn't wish to use the web or
surrogates isn't as simple as him trying to
disengage a negative media conspiracy.
Try to focus on that which I have proffered over
the last several postings. If, he is who he is, and
If, he needs to reveal peace to others. and If,
these souls desire, to receive the Knowledge then
perhaps, he wishes for them to come as unfettered
as possible.
I don't know about you, but listenibg for five
months back in 72 would have been a good thing in
my particular case.(No dissing of the bongos
allowed but, I think you know what I mean)
I guarantee that I have alienated more then one
interested soul over the years. My 'Verbosity' is
likely hereditary.
So in my estimation, listening to him is a good
thing.
Other issues relative to elements a website might
draw in, would be an obvious concern.
If he wanted to go mainstream he certainly could,
satellite hook ups, cable tv blocks, print, the
list goes on.
No? Yes? Perhaps?
No reply needed,
I have put off several hours of work to engage you
lads and lasses and I must get back to it.
If you answer me, you will trip my verbosity switch
and I'll fire off another set of reasons why we all
agree to continue to disagree.
Thank you and peace be with you my friends.
Another
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 14:10:26
(EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Open what?
Message:
Ein Andere:
Bringing Maharaji into the focus of the
mainstrem [sic] will likley [sic]
help you and the Jim's of this world, feel
vindication and some modecum [sic] of
revenge.
In the end though, the curiosity factor will
enhance His mystique and contribute to ancillary
growth.
This isn't a prediction, but based on media and
spin control it is the easiest possibility to
forcast [sic].
I must confess that I am at a complete loss to
understand your diction. The three sentences
[paragraphs?] above are but an example.
What does statement 1 have to do with statement 2?
How can both be true? If you feel that the focus of
the public will result in a negative verdict for
your Guru, but he will nonetheless profit due to a
general lack of discrimination, then M's appeal is
to outliers in the community. It reminds me of a
wolf or lion that singles out week individuals in
the herd for a meal. And if this is not a
'prediction' what is it? What does the phrase
'easiest possibility to forecast' mean? Does easy
mean accurate? If not, why are you doing it? And
these are the three clearest statements you make.
Forgive me, but what are we to make of this:
I only tried to point out that he has claimed
and not claimed this distinction over the years. It
seems we agree on this. It still remains a, he
said, she said quandry [sic] and can be
stated either way.
If we agree that he has claimed and not claimed
then we are agree that he is not consistent. How is
this a matter of 'he said, she said?' I mean, let's
be honest, this is no quandary,
surely?
If Elan Vital opens a website, I am sure the
good people who frequent this port in the storm,
will be quick to jump on it and draw these
distinctions on their site as well.
Expose' is an American tradition.
Without making an issue of the fact that over half
the posters to this site are not American the
placement of comma and the lack of specification
just make the first statement hard to understand.
What is 'this port?' If 'this port' means the
ex-premie website, will those who frequent 'this
port' be quick to jump on the new EV website
('it'??) and draw the same conclusions we do here?
Why wouldn't we, if allowed to post on the EV
website (a questionable assumption at best)? You
agree that he's not consistent, apparently, so how
is that some sort of expose'?
I guarantee that I have alienated more then one
interested soul over the years. My 'Verbosity' is
likely hereditary.
If by verbosity you mean fluency then I'd have to
advise you to look elsewhere for an excuse, so as
not to impugn your forbears, since there is
distance between your meaning and reality. In
general it is extremely difficult to apprehend your
meaning so as to get an accurate guage of that
distance. Frankly, I think it appropriate to say
that you are close to incoherence and leave it at
that. Have you ever considered interpretive
dance?
-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 10:54:46
(EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: JW
Subject: The God-Man
Message:
A Not Her:
Briefly, on this business about whether Maharaji
does or does not claim to be God: It would be an
extraordinary departure from the Rhadasaomi
tradition if he did not make such a
claim. According to Juergensmeyer the Rhadasaomi
view of reality demands that a God-man either be
present, or immanent. The belief system would not
hold together without that. This is one of the
chief sources of friction with the Sikhs in the
Punjab. When M first came to the West he elevated
that claim to new heights, and has benefited
materially more than any Rhadasaomi or Sant Mat
Guru in history. (Whether he is a legitimate
successor within that tradition is another
matter.)
Juergensmeyer recounts the succession of M.B. Lal
to the guruship of the Dayalbagh community. Lal, an
academic, had no desire to become the Guru, and did
almost everything in his power to avoid it. He was
eventually told that according to the tradition it
was an office he did not have the freedom to
decline: 'The rules give us the right to acclaim,
but it [sic] doesn't give you the right to
disclaim.' Since the time of his ascendancy he has
refused to accede to the trappings of the God-man,
though his followers continue to honor him in that
manner. On occasion they ensure that all the seats
in the room he is about to enter are occupied
except for the throne of the Guru. When he enters
and finds only the throne unoccupied he chooses to
sit on the floor. (Can you just imagine!)
The point here is that to say M. does not refer to
himself as God, or make such a claim, is simply
ridiculous, and irrelevant. The belief system
demands it, which gives him a certain amount of
security and latitude in the sense that he can rely
on a selective semantic interpretation to keep
himself clear (a relative thing, I suppose). The
issue has to do with how he fulfills this office,
since unlike Lal and to a degree far greater than
all other Gurus in the tradition he uses the
position for his own personal enrichment. These
actions are not required by the
tradition. They are clearly a personal choice, and
I might add a choice that seems distinctly outside
the progressive traditions of the sect. It is
appropriate to interpret those choices as
manifestations of a personal ethic that is rather
flaccid and unanchored.
-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 09:22:49
(EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Unmitigated nonsense...
Message:
Dear Another,
this is probably your most coherent post to date
and its very clarity of speech highlights the
gaping holes in your arguments.
If we examine the historical data at face value,
we can assume at least the possibility, that such a
thing as a 'God' in human form, (Might, Could be,
Perhaps, Possibly) can exist.
What, do you mean legend, myth, rumour, scripture
and generalised wishful thinking. Sorry but on that
basis you're still competing with alien abductee
theory and devil worship.
Given the fact (Premise, Surmisation, Guess,
Estimation) that these traditions usually allow
only one 'God' to teach about one God, during a
given period of time, we arrive at the mathmatical
solution of ONE in SIX BILLION.
That good huh! I'd love to know the mathematical
basis for this outrageous calculation.
You know how intense it is to be around him 24
hours a day. (Need to be un-fried for that duty and
many have tried and burnt like toast, as you well
know)
On this basis, my friend, you might as well claim
that Howard Hughes, Margaret Thatcher and Adolf
Hitler have claims on divinity since they too were
meglomaniacs who gave their underlings a hard time.
And hey, other Masters have also displayed a
little humility. Who was the last premie to have
his/her feet washed by Maharaji?
Sorry, I can't do this any more. Trying to pick the
substance out of your post is like chasing a
dream.
Dream on.
Richard
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 17:33:08
(EST)
From: Another
Email: None
To: Richard and Scott
Subject: Open yer eyes, er arse
Message:
I guess I'm too [sic] to know the readers
of this site are doing so in the English
language.
My apostraphies to both of you for threading on the
values of the
Queen's English.
Although you are excellent as the nit and pick tag
team, I have been strafed by Mr. Heller himself and
let me tell you Msr's R and S , you are no Jim
Heller.
When I become rich and famous, I will hire both of
you to edit all copy before it goes to net.
My statement [sick} as it reads, is simply the
way it will pan out in the media over the long
haul, based on the historicity of those downfallen
icons of late. (Such as Hinn, Moon, Baker, ad
nauseum).
So, be careful what you wish for as they say,
whoever they are.
East, West, North, South or on the bloody moon, the
wheels are in motion and we are in this together,
good, bad and ugly.
Thanks for the ripping, It couldn't have come from
two smarter guys because there are none, are
there?
Respects to my Eleventh grade English teacher who
said I was smart and gave me an F,
Another.
p.s. Try, A Not Here, that would be more suitable,
or would it?
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 18:33:34
(EST)
From: Gail
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Do your reading.
Message:
Except for the suicidal cults, they are all still
on the go. They have people just like you to keep
fertilizing the dogma. Sun Mung Moon (spelling?)
just married a whole pile of couples in Korea last
month. His cult prospered even while he was in jail
in the US for tax evasion.
Aren't you lucky you didn't stumble in with that
lot. With your luck, you might have had to marry
your equal.
Remember when MJ said he didn't like having the
dogs around for pets anymore. That's because he's
got you.
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 23:27:31
(EST)
From: Scott T.
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Open eyes, engage brain.
Message:
Another:
It is not a matter of finding a good editor, but a
matter of discerning coherent ideas from incoherent
ones. Wherever you put your commas the ideas
wouldn't wash. There are others on this site whose
grammatical construction is idiosyncratic, but
their ideas are solid as granite and their delivery
straight as an arrow. All you're doing with your
'verbosity' is simply obscuring a lack of good
sense with a lack of grammar. But if you don't have
a decent argument, being obscure is about your only
choice. That, my friend, has nothing to do with
genetics.
I thought we were agreed that Maharaji is
inconsistent. Want to start again from that
point?
-Scott
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
Date: Tues, Jul 07, 1998 at 07:23:02
(EST)
From: Richard
Email: None
To: Another
Subject: Too many games Another...
Message:
Dear Another,
I admit that I'm an honesty freak and, to that
extent, I prefer straight and direct communication
which has a kernel of substance. Many years ago I
might have enjoyed sparring with you and making fun
of such things as a weakness in spelling or grammar
but not now and I don't think that I have done that
here.
Your lack of honesty is evident in your failure to
examine and outline just what you do believe in.
You prefer to lurk in a kind of intellectual limbo,
emerging only to occasionally snipe at chosen posts
or individuals.
Your sycophantic duals with Jim and trashing of
others indicates that you wish to be seen as
impenetrable, understood only by the
superior mind. Your choice.
But your convoluted and abstract ramblings are
merely camoflage to cover up what you don't want us
to know and, almost certainly, what you do not wish
to know either. i.e. What you would like to believe
but cannot justify, even to yourself.
So spit it out. You can be clear here, this is not
a place where honestly expressed ideas get trashed.
Several people have tried to deal with you fairly
and have demonstrated a willingness to listen.
regards
Richard
Return to Index -:- Top
of Index
|
|
