Mike Finch -:- This Forum's Agenda -:- Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 23:32:33 (EDT)

__ Joe -:- Agenda???? -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 20:45:18 (EDT)

__ __ Pat:C) -:- Secrecy vs openness and honesty, Joe -:- Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 02:39:19 (EDT)

__ __ Francesca :C) -:- GREAT post Joe! -:- Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 01:37:54 (EDT)

__ Nick -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:29:04 (EDT)

__ __ Francesca -:- **BEST OF FORUM*** Nick! [nt] -:- Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 01:41:36 (EDT)

__ __ Joe -:- Terrific post Nick, thanks. NT -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 20:51:45 (EDT)

__ __ Jim -:- And aNOTHer great post! -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 19:37:24 (EDT)

__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Yes, I want more, Nick! [nt] -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 19:41:26 (EDT)

__ Nick -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:04:48 (EDT)

__ __ Moley -:- Spot on Nick (OT) -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:18:05 (EDT)

__ __ __ Deborah -:- Re: Yea! Spot on Nick +) -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 21:34:32 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Moley -:- Re: Yea! Spot on Nick +) -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 22:33:57 (EDT)

__ JHB -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:59:38 (EDT)

__ Dermot -:- My agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:11:48 (EDT)

__ __ suchabanana -:- dat roly-poly concept-maker = da real doubt-maker -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 16:14:24 (EDT)

__ __ Pat:C) -:- I never tire of hearing truth, Dermot -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:14:53 (EDT)

__ __ __ Dermot -:- Yeah Pat -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:40:46 (EDT)

__ janet -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:03:59 (EDT)

__ __ Deborah -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 21:29:21 (EDT)

__ __ Nottingham Mole -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:31:27 (EDT)

__ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Thanks, NM, well said -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:31:57 (EDT)

__ __ Nottingham Mole -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:22:09 (EDT)

__ __ __ NM -:- Ignore this - posted earlier in error -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:33:40 (EDT)

__ Patrick Wilson -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:02:40 (EDT)

__ Tim G -:- Re: This Forum's Agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 05:22:36 (EDT)

__ __ Mike Finch -:- No Aplogies needed -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 08:43:41 (EDT)

__ Pat:C) -:- 7) Forum-junkie -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 03:19:23 (EDT)

__ __ Loaf -:- can we establish a FMG -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 04:46:06 (EDT)

__ Deborah -:- Yes Mike and a whole lot more -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 00:10:55 (EDT)

__ __ Pat:C) -:- I agree with everything you said, Deb, except -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 03:32:04 (EDT)

__ __ __ Deborah -:- Re: I agree with everything you said -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:23:23 (EDT)

__ Loaf -:- 3, 4 and 6 here Mike [nt] -:- Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 23:53:47 (EDT)

__ Scott T. -:- My Agenda -:- Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 23:48:45 (EDT)

__ __ Patrick Wilson -:- Re: My Agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:19:14 (EDT)

__ __ __ Scott T. -:- Controlling Agendas -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 11:13:30 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Peg -:- Re: Controlling Agendas -:- Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 13:42:40 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Pat:C) -:- Lively discussions on AG -:- Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 13:49:51 (EDT)

__ __ Zelda -:- part of our am agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 00:14:16 (EDT)

__ __ __ berni -:- Re: This forum's agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 06:39:52 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: This forum's agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:06:12 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ berni -:- Re: This forum's agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 15:40:15 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ Loaf -:- Re: This forum's agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:23:47 (EDT)

__ __ __ __ __ Scott T. -:- Re: This forum's agenda -:- Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:21:21 (EDT)

Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 23:32:33 (EDT) From: Mike Finch Email: None To: All Subject: This Forum's Agenda Message:

Hi Everyone   In a thread below, Jim asked me: What is my agenda ?   An interesting question. I am going to think about it for a day or so before answering, but first, I want to ask a question of my own: What is the agenda of this Forum ?   Or to be more precise, since a Forum cannot really have an agenda, what is the agenda, or objective, or desired outcome, of those who post on this Forum ? In other words, why do they (you) do it ? What is the purpose ?   I can think of several reasons:   1) To bring M down; to finish his work as a guru, at least in the West.   2) To put in the public domain private facts about M, his close advisors, and K.   3) So that premies can be exposed to points of view they would not be exposed to if it were not for this Forum (and others like it).   4) To provide an environment where individuals can become clearer in their own understanding and perception, whether as readers only, or as actively participating.   5) To obtain justice for wrongs committed.   6) To give vent to suppressed feelings.   7) Forum-junkie; no real reason other than withdrawal symptoms if you don't visit the Forum for a few days. Question: when you turn your computer on, what is the first thing you do ? If you go to this Forum then you are probably in this category.   I am sure this question has been asked previously, but I cannot remember such a thread, and I would be interested in the responses.   -- Mike

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 20:45:18 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: Agenda???? Message:

I have trouble with that word when applied to the Forum, because it implies some kind of preconceived set of objectives, which I don't think has ever existed. And even to the extent they now do, that sort of evolved over time, and it never was any kind of set objective. What started out as just a way for ex-premies to contact each other and communicate, became this thing that is so much more powerful. We can tell it's powerful from the way the cult works so hard to either destroy or counteract us. I never dreamed it would become that big a deal. And I think all of the things you mention may or may not be in the minds of any particular person who comes here, and then probably a lot more too. As for 'bringing M down,' I don't think we have the power to do that, only Maharaji and those who follow him really can. All we can do is try to expose what Maharaji is doing and has done, and how all that affected us, and to try to break through th lies and censorship of Maharaji and Elan Vital. If that 'brings Maharaji down' it's due to his failures, not the people who talk about them. 'Bringing to the public domain' has alway what I think has been most successful about the Forum and it has had a very profound affect on many, many people. I have always believed that secrecy is usually harmful to people, and because Maharaji is all about secrecy, exposing the truth is only to the benefit of everyone, whether they decide to follow Maharaji or not. And information really does set people free who are open to hearing it. As I have said before, I feel a moral obligation to be involved in this, at least to some extent, because I feel strongly that I wasted a lot of time following Maharaji, hurting people I loved, as well as myself, and this is an opportunity to make up for that somewhat, by doing something constructive as a result of what was otherwise a major waste. And it's very gratifying to see people break free with some support here, because when I left the cult in 1983, there wasn't any support, whatsoever. I was really on my own, and it wasn't easy. And for me, being a premie was all about the other premies. That's what was good about it. There were lots of premies I cared about, and most of them were very sincere, great people, who I learned a lot from and shared a lot with. And none of that had anything to do with Maharaji. So, to the extent this helps any of them who are still involved, or helps people who aren't involved sort it out and break free completely, I'm all for that. As to the 'forum junkie' concern, I confess that at times I have felt that way, especially when interesting things are going on, which seems to happen with regularity. I confess that I find all this very interesting, because it involves cherished beliefs and examination of how indoctrination works, and it's a fascinating dynamic to watch. So, there is a certain detached interest I have as well about what goes on here.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 02:39:19 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Joe Subject: Secrecy vs openness and honesty, Joe Message:

You said: ''I have always believed that secrecy is usually harmful to people, and .... Maharaji is all about secrecy....'' A lot of what gets said here is the same stuff but it always gets said with new insight or read with new insight. How could I have been so dumb as not to see that the veil of secrecy over Knowledge is the first cult deceit and from then on everything must be a lie or a nudge-nudge, wink-wink thingy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 01:37:54 (EDT) From: Francesca :C) Email: None To: Joe Subject: GREAT post Joe! Message:

Don't have much to say, it's just right on. I do feel an obligation to keep the word out that Rawat is a scam, and that people can leave and be OK, in fact, leave and be free of it. Now THAT'S enjoying life. Bests, Francesca

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:29:04 (EDT) From: Nick Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda Message:

Hi Mike The nature of the thread which has appeared in response to your question is exactly the reason why I continue to read and contribute from time too time to the Forum. 28 years of active involvement in the cult resulted, as one of its effects, in a significant dulling and almost nullifying of my analytical and critical faculties. This is bizarre given that I have a senior pos in a major UK university, but there was only one version of reality which was acceptable (which is whatever m happened to spout at any particular time either personally or through his close accolytes) and, much to my shame now, I never really challenged or contradicted whatever he said, even when it didn't seem to hold water (which was increasingly often). As I write this, I remember acting last year as a puppet mouth piece at one regional programme when I was asked to promote the concept of the smart card - things had got so pathetic, that we were given a script to more or less learn and deliver as if it was coming from the 'heart' - I couldn't help but laugh out openly as I was doing my bit and spill the beans to the assembled audience. My life as a premie was almost at an end at that moment, as cynicism overtook naivete. The challenging nature of your question and the very varied nature of the responses here are totally alien to the environment in which I spent most of my adult life, living, as I did, as a devoted follower of the 'lord of the universe'. I have not replaced my more or less undivided dedication to supporting m and EV with anything of any substance since I broke away a few months ago, but much to my continuing surprise, I feel no sense of loss at all - just the opposite; i.e a sense of relief tinged with a certain incredulity at my stupidity. However, by reading the postings of the people on this forum, I find myself consistently challenged, driven to consider why I am following a particular train of thought/belief. For all those years as a premie, if someone challenged my very cosy perspective on life, it was so easy to dismiss them (remember, 'Knowledge' with a capital K, the Lord of the Universe - you are quite simply on the winning side. It's a bit like supporting Manchester United, even if you have no natural allegiance to Manchester, yet feel so superior, so smug). I feel as if for years and years I've allowed myself to have been used, abused, confused. It is a genuine pleasure to be a part, albeit often as passive observer, of the often very thoughtful, sometimes controversial and usually heartfelt contributions of so many of the exes who contribute here. One thing is for sure, without the Forum, I would not have had the confidence to actually dismiss m as the clear fraud that he is and to begin to rebuild my life. So, my motives are not altruistic (even though I would be delighted if a prospective or current premie was in some way influenced by what they read here), nor are they destructive towards m, even though I would jump for joy on the day when m told the world (or at least his tiny premie world) that he had run out of inspiration, and that he had taken them as far as he could go). No, I am simply trying to re-construct my life, and the forum has proved to be a brilliant support. All the best Nick

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 01:41:36 (EDT) From: Francesca Email: None To: Nick Subject: **BEST OF FORUM*** Nick! [nt] Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 20:51:45 (EDT) From: Joe Email: None To: Nick Subject: Terrific post Nick, thanks. NT Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 19:37:24 (EDT) From: Jim Email: None To: Nick Subject: And aNOTHer great post! Message:

Really well said, Nick. What exactly do you do at this university anyway? I'm sure your students enjoy it whatever it is.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 19:41:26 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Jim Subject: Yes, I want more, Nick! [nt] Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:04:48 (EDT) From: Nick Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda Message:

Hi Mike The nature of the thread which has appeared in response to your question is exactly the reason why I continue to read and contribute from time too time to the Forum. 28 years of active involvement in the cult resulted, as one of its effects, in a significant dulling and almost nullifying of my analytical and critical faculties. This is bizarre given that I have a senior pos in a major UK university, but there was only one version of reality which was acceptable (which is whatever m happened to spout at any particular time either personally or through his close accolytes) and, much to my shame now, I never really challenged or contradicted whatever he said, even when it didn't seem to hold water (which was increasingly often). As I write this, I remember acting last year as a puppet mouth piece at one regional programme when I was asked to promote the concept of the smart card - things had got so pathetic, that we were given a script to more or less learn and deliver as if it was coming from the 'heart' - I couldn't help but laugh out openly as I was doing my bit and spill the beans to the assembled audience. My life as a premie was almost at an end at that moment, as cynicism overtook naivete. The challenging nature of your question and the very varied nature of the responses here are totally alien to the environment in which I spent most of my adult life, living, as I did, as a devoted follower of the 'lord of the universe'. I have not replaced my more or less undivided dedication to supporting m and EV with anything of any substance since I broke away a few months ago, but much to my continuing surprise, I feel no sense of loss at all - just the opposite; i.e a sense of relief tinged with a certain incredulity at my stupidity. However, by reading the postings of the people on this forum, I find myself consistently challenged, driven to consider why I am following a particular train of thought/belief. For all those years as a premie, if someone challenged my very cosy perspective on life, it was so easy to dismiss them (remember, 'Knowledge' with a capital K, the Lord of the Universe - you are quite simply on the winning side. It's a bit like supporting Manchester United, even if you have no natural allegiance to Manchester, yet feel so superior, so smug). I feel as if for years and years I've allowed myself to have been used, abused, confused. It is a genuine pleasure to be a part, albeit often as passive observer, of the often very thoughtful, sometimes controversial and usually heartfelt contributions of so many of the exes who contribute here. One thing is for sure, without the Forum, I would not have had the confidence to actually dismiss m as the clear fraud that he is and to begin to rebuild my life. So, my motives are not altruistic (even though I would be delighted if a prospective or current premie was in some way influenced by what they read here), nor are they destructive towards m, even though I would jump for joy on the day when m told the world (or at least his tiny premie world) that he had run out of inspiration, and that he had taken them as far as he could go). No, I am simply trying to re-construct my life, and the forum has proved to be a brilliant support. All the best Nick

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:18:05 (EDT) From: Moley Email: moldy_warp@hotmail.com To: Nick Subject: Spot on Nick (OT) Message:

Hi - It's good to see you posting here comrade. I haven't been around our usual haunts lately for a lunch meet but I'd love to meet you again soon. Maybe me and Nige could meet you soon for a night out. Email me if you fancy. (new email address above) All the best, Moley

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 21:34:32 (EDT) From: Deborah Email: None To: Moley Subject: Re: Yea! Spot on Nick +) Message:

Hi Moley :) Nice to see you around.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 22:33:57 (EDT) From: Moley Email: None To: Deborah Subject: Re: Yea! Spot on Nick +) Message:

Hi Debs - ditto ! :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:59:38 (EDT) From: JHB Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda Message:

Hi Mike, here are my responses:- 1) To bring M down; to finish his work as a guru, at least in the West. I think if he would just deal honestly and publicly with the complaints against him it might be enough, although if he did that his work would probably be finished anyway. 2) To put in the public domain private facts about M, his close advisors, and K. Only if the facts are relevant to improper bevaviour. 3) So that premies can be exposed to points of view they would not be exposed to if it were not for this Forum (and others like it). Yes - very important. 4) To provide an environment where individuals can become clearer in their own understanding and perception, whether as readers only, or as actively participating. Yes, very important. 5) To obtain justice for wrongs committed. Yes, although recognition for wrongs committed may be all that can reasonably hoped for. 6) To give vent to suppressed feelings. Yes, but personally I would hope contributors express their feelings with a little circumspection. 7) Forum-junkie; no real reason other than withdrawal symptoms if you don't visit the Forum for a few days. Question: when you turn your computer on, what is the first thing you do ? If you go to this Forum then you are probably in this category. Email first, then this forum. Guilty as charged, m'lud:-) John.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:11:48 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: My agenda Message:

Mike As a Premie , did you find it the easiest thing in the world to suss out that Rajneeshi's, Moonie's, Scientologist's etc etc , etc were in a WEIRD cult but you were somehow different? No matter if , to any intelligent, neutral observer your position would be completely untenable. In fact, didn't your EXPERIENCE prove to you that Maharaji was , as you said to Jim, 'the living incarnation of the Lord' ? Didn't that experience penetrate so deeply in your psyche, mind, heart and 'soul'? It did, didn't it? Did it go se deep that you were prepared to accept all the obvious shit from DLM/DUO/EV etc (and over the decades there was plenty of it) and NEVER REALLY (in your bones) attribute ANY of it to Maharaji, even though any average , intelligent 7yo would quickly deduce that the guy was really an incompetent , praise-loving cult leader? That his 35 / 36 years of 'preaching' (including his court battles with his mother/brother for the family 'religion' ) have resulted in a weird , dwindling cult that is seriously schizophrenic at the core ie Total 'lord of the universe' in India/arti and darshan secretly in Australia ……but a website saying he never wanted to be a leader/ it's all his followers mistakes. And of course at every 'event' trinkets and endless, endless photos of him sold without a hint of irony. Does it seem ridiculous to you that Maharaji now says (on his own web site) that followers just had weird concepts about him and over the years he's been an innocent, misunderstood, blameless victim of those very concepts? As if those concepts just happened to conjure up , out of the air, those huge badges with his smiling face and 'Lord of the Universe ' plastered all over it. Hey ! No factories involved …..he didn't know about it ……it was just our ideas about him! Likewise, he didn't know that the DIVINE TIMES I was handing out to all and sundry just happened to say ' The LORD is now in London' as a front page spread. Those damn concepts again! Poor Maharaji, if he had known any of this I'm sure he would have put us right IMMEDIATELY. Also, doesn't it just seem a little bit odd that only a few short years ago, Maharaji was (ridiculously) warning his followers of what a stupid illusion the internet was and how his advice would be to IGNORE it? As if it was something more than just another form of communication, like the telephone etc. Then a few years on to encourage a proliferation of sites ranging from his own, the EV spin site and the ugly CAC site. On top of all that , there are credible accounts of his hypocritical personal life. If he wants sex , drugs or whatever …fine by me but the HYPOCRICY angle is a little grating. My agenda? To remind myself and others that as a 22yo man I brainwashed myself and was brainwashed by others ie other premies, mahatmas, 'Holy Family' and Rawat himself (yes, I think it was brainwashing …..very subtle, very insidious but brainwashing nevertheless) to accept Maharaji as you say 'the living incarnation of the Lord'………and no fucking way ( despite what he says these days) did he do the slightest thing to discourage me from doing so ……rather, he actively (beyond the call of duty ! ) did EVERYTHING in his power to ENCOURAGE me. The conditioning of thousands of hours of satsang went so deep …. (remember some of those events where the initiators would DRONE on from morning till night then the man himself come on stage to add the cherry ? Only for it to be repeated the next day, with chit-chat actively discouraged)… that the central weapon of 'LEAVE NO ROOM FOR DOUBT IN YOUR MIND' was lethal for decades. Eventually, somehow or other, I saw it clear as day for what it was ….A WEIRD PERSONALITY CULT. From the early days, right through I also saw it as that too but, as I say, that lethal indoctrinated weapon of ' leave no room …..' always had the final say. So in spite of the brainwashing (and yes I admit, helped on by his charisma/charm , which I once so easily fell for) I want to let people know that I was well and truly conned by Rawat Enterprises Inc ( est 193-? By Shri Hans) and well and truly spent most of my adult life in it. Had I been a bit more sussed, I should have walked away as a 22yo before the brainwashing started or at least only have given my essential ' power' to him for a short while only. I also want to tell others …..hey, you want to meditate? Get a little yoga book, read it and meditate. Don't waste your time on a person who just loves to be adored and while he's being adored he and his family get nicely mega rich at the adorers expense. Mainly , I want to tell myself and others……don't be infantile…don't be conned by any of the new age or spiritual merchants. Think for yourself. Feel for yourself. Yes pick up and put down whatever, and learn from whoever and whatever but don't let some person convince you that you NEED them for your life to be authentic. Cheers Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 16:14:24 (EDT) From: suchabanana Email: bananas@freeatlast.org/asm To: Dermot Subject: dat roly-poly concept-maker = da real doubt-maker Message:

hey, you want to meditate? Get a little yoga book, read it and meditate. Don't waste your time on a person who just loves to be adored and while he's being adored he and his family get nicely mega rich at the adorers expense. Mainly , I want to tell myself and others……don't be infantile…don't be conned by any of the new age or spiritual merchants. Think for yourself. Feel for yourself. Yes pick up and put down whatever, and learn from whoever and whatever but don't let some person convince you that you NEED them for your life to be authentic. --- --- --- -- yep!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:14:53 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Dermot Subject: I never tire of hearing truth, Dermot Message:

What you said has been said before but I just lapped up your passionate indignation. Thanks.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:40:46 (EDT) From: Dermot Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Yeah Pat Message:

When it gets down to the brass tacks, our agenda couldn't be clearer or simpler. Cheers Dermot

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:03:59 (EDT) From: janet Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine Message:

mike all of your categories seem to be negative, even sarcastic. Deb has described my agenda far more accurately than you have. for all your genius, you might have failed to understand the magnitude of what belonging to this cult/lifestyle/belief system did/has done to us when contrasted against the backdrop of what the rest of the world experienced during the same time frame. This is the only place I have found where I can walk in, sit down, open my mouth, and I don't have to worry about how to explain to anyone else here what I spent the last 27 years of my life doing, or why. It is paralyzing and way TMI to even attempt to do that when I am in the company of 'regular' people who never did this.I can't even think of a way to begin to give them a starting point without telling my life story--and where i live, no one has the attention span to listen to it. Another fact is this:: right or wrong, this really was my life. This is what i did from age 20 to age 48. I didn't do something else, and I can't go back and change it and live it again like everyone else was living it. Only the others who were there need no explanation, and it is a relief to refer to the same events, the same people, the same strange habits or landmarks, and now be able to speak freely about my life as it really was, to people who were there and understand it. War veterans who served in the same battlefield can do this. For that matter, hippies who were at woodstock, or leftists who were at chicago can do this. and of late, anyone who was at ground zero on 9-11 can do this. if you weren't there, no words can explain it. you hadda be there. so the purpose of having this isn't negative, and it isnt about maharaji so much as it is about me. my life, my reality, what I did, what I thought, felt, saw, knew, wanted, had, didn't get, did get--and telling it to people who have the groundwork already, so i don't have to back up and start from the top, every time i want to voice my mind. Is it negative, that war veterans fall into speaking with one another in obscure references they understand among one another without explanation? Is it snide and exclusionary and destructive when old hippies get to reminiscing about Grateful Dead tours of yore? Is it deliberately alienating if survivors of 9-11 get shaky and emotional and overcome when they begin to try to speak of the experience of what happened and what they did when the building began to perish? c'mon mike. see the prejudice implied in your choice of terms and be evenhanded. we are peers here, in a strange and common experience we share, that took up years and years of our lives, and who else can we talk to about it, so openly and naturally. ? can you suggest anywhere better?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 21:29:21 (EDT) From: Deborah Email: None To: janet Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine Message:

Hi Janet, I'm glad you found some common ground with me on why I post here. You articulated what I feel about 'normal' very well. It is difficult trying to relate to a life that wasn't real. Yes, many people make mistakes, but they made them based on lack of information, not because they were deliberately brainwashed. And the mistakes we made were not limited to a bad decision here or there. It affected decades 24/7 of our lives. This is very disturbing. Even a lot of the good times (like festivals, doing service with loving friends, HOLI and other premie happenings that were utopian bliss at the time are currently tainted with ridicule and shame of deceiption. At least you don't have to beat yourself up for getting blasted and twirling your skirt at a Greatful Dead contest. Shit! Even the good times are damaged memories. I appreciate your feedback even though I don't think MF meant to be negative. I felt he put heart into his question as he is thinking about what his agenda is for posting here. Lots of love, hope you are doing well. Deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:31:27 (EDT) From: Nottingham Mole Email: None To: janet Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine Message:

Janet,   How fascinating that you should say: ‘all of your categories seem to be negative, even sarcastic’ Is 4 either of these?   4) To provide an environment where individuals can become clearer in their own understanding and perception, whether as readers only, or as actively participating.   Do you really think 3, 5, 6 are negative or sarcastic?   3) So that premies can be exposed to points of view they would not be exposed to if it were not for this Forum (and others like it).   5) To obtain justice for wrongs committed.   6) To give vent to suppressed feelings.   Many who post here would probably not consider the other categories negative either. As for sarcastic, well hardly, it's more an observation in view of the previously declared intent of a number of posters to bring Maharaji down.   On the other hand, your post began in an extremely sarcastic and even hostile tone.   Mike’s post has opened some positive discussion and when I last read the thread, yours was the only negative reaction.   Ironic that you should end with…………   ‘we are peers here, in a strange and common experience we share, that took up years and years of our lives, and who else can we talk to about it, so openly and naturally’   ……………in view of your post on Forum 5 when your response to Mike’s earlier postings where he expressed very personal feelings and was processing very publicly.   Do you remember your suggestion to ‘out Mike to his corporate clients’?   NM

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:31:57 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Nottingham Mole Subject: Thanks, NM, well said Message:

You asked Janet: ''Do you remember your suggestion to ‘out Mike to his corporate clients’?'' I hope Janet apologises to Mike for saying that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:22:09 (EDT) From: Nottingham Mole Email: None To: janet Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda and mine Message:

Janet,   How fascinating that you should say ‘all of your categories seem to be negative, even sarcastic’ Is 4 either of these?#   4) To provide an environment where individuals can become clearer in their own understanding and perception, whether as readers only, or as actively participating.   Do you really think 3, 5, 6 fit into these categories?   3) So that premies can be exposed to points of view they would not be exposed to if it were not for this Forum (and others like it).   5) To obtain justice for wrongs committed.   6) To give vent to suppressed feelings.   Many who post here would probably not consider the other categories negative either. As for sarcastic, well hardly, it's more an observation in view of the previously declared intent of a number of posters to bring Maharaji down.   On the other hand, I did find your post began in an extremely sarcastic and even hostile tone.   Mike’s post has opened some positive discussion and when I last read the thread, yours was the only negative reaction.   Interesting that you should end with…………   ‘we are peers here, in a strange and common experience we share, that took up years and years of our lives, and who else can we talk to about it, so openly and naturally’   ……………and rather ironic in view of your post on Forum 5 when your response to Mike’s earlier postings where he expressed very personal feelings and was processing very publicly. Do you remember your suggestion to ‘out Mike to his corporate clients’   NM

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 10:33:40 (EDT) From: NM Email: None To: Nottingham Mole Subject: Ignore this - posted earlier in error Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:02:40 (EDT) From: Patrick Wilson Email: patrick@patrickwilson.com To: Mike Finch Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda Message:

As usual Mike, you waste few words and present us with a thoughtful analysis. Let me use your concise list as a starting point to consider my reasons, which have changed over the years. Firstly let me dispute your point 7) where you say: Forum-junkie; no real reason other than withdrawal symptoms if you don't visit the Forum for a few days. Question: when you turn your computer on, what is the first thing you do? If you go to this Forum then you are probably in this category. No one is a Junkie for no reason. Some people do seem to have not much else better to do, judging by the lack of substance in their posts, than to switch on their computer and go straight to the forum. But 'withdrawal' itself can be for good reason. Although I certainly scan this forum quite regularly (maybe not quite daily - but almost) I am not ashamed to say that my habit is fuelled, (as I say again below) by a real need to see justice done and to scan the forum for interesting developments. 1) To bring M down; to finish his work as a guru, at least in the West. I was never motivated to bring M down as such. Rather I felt that the Forum was symptomatic of premies not having the opportunity within M's world, to voice dissatisfaction to him personally. Therefore my expressions on the forum (especially when I dropped the fear-based anonymity) were effectively a challenge to Maharaji himself, to address these issues that either he was unaware of, or was simply ignoring. This was more or less a personal expression that I hoped Maharaji might heed and/or other premies resonate with. I hoped, and still believe, that communication, sensible thought and public criticism could prompt Maharaji into setting matters straight on my particular questions, one of which was - why he was so tough on us living in ashrams and using his position of trust to control people with fear? 2) To put in the public domain private facts about M, his close advisors, and K. The secrecy factor about both the Knowledge itself, the goings of Elan Vital, and above all Maharaji's actual life and habits has long seemed indicative that there was something wrong. I have never felt that the secrecy was remotely justified, or explained by the party line. For a start, newcomers do not have an honest picture of what they are getting into. Therefore the fact that these Forum discussions take place in public and that some of these 'secrets' are discussed, has to be a good thing for them. At least they are getting both sides of the story before they get into it. To this extent I agree that the forum is undoubtedly a public service. 3) So that premies can be exposed to points of view they would not be exposed to if it were not for this Forum (and others like it). Only on a public forum can this really happen. Also, premies want to hear any stories about their Master that demonstrate his mercy, compassion etc. These were called 'darshan stories' and we could not get enough of them as premies. Naturally curiosity compels premies to at least prick up their ears when reports that hint of less 'divine' behaviour are published. They can get those stories here. The points of view of exes indeed are not always dismissed by premies as heinous nonsense. Many share the misgivings that exes have, but are not yet so sure that the bad outweighs the good. 4) To provide an environment where individuals can become clearer in their own understanding and perception, whether as readers only, or as actively participating. and 6) To give vent to suppressed feelings. I have got a lot out of both posting and just reading here, just as do many others. The fact that many choose only to ‘lurk’ is for several reasons. a) Current Premies are probably just perversely curious to see the 'fallen' in their hell but wouldn't dream of joining in. One premie admitted to me that he was drawn to read the site much as he was drawn to watch some hard porn movie! b) People 'on the fence' are scared of being confronted about their position by aggressive over-zealous exes. c) They, like me, have mostly said their bit and are just curious to sift through the dross to pick out gems and new developments and to respond when inspired. I used to have a lot to say... to get off my chest. I feel that in this respect I have succeeded and have less need to write now, as it would be mere repetition to do so. (Having said this I often do repeat myself addressing newcomers). Like others that posted here and submitted journeys to www.ex-premie.org , it was very helpful to have an environment where I could express my misgivings about what I experienced as a premie and to question the cultic aspects thereof. This was an exercise done somewhat in desperation after having been frustrated in seeking answers from within the 'system' over the years, or indeed having just 'bottled up' my doubts. There was an element of anger at having been subjected to authoritarian suppression within the system and a feeling that the Internet hailed an opportunity to get in touch with like-minded aggrieved persons so that we might voice our complaints. Putting pen to paper (tapping words to screen?) as such is after all, a powerful medium of expression and has the effect of making one consider ones buried issues in a concerted way. Just by writing and discussing with others, doubts that maybe one was timid to entertain, are addressed at last. The fact that so many others seem to share ones feelings and that there is a 'forum' where such doubts are not frowned upon is a relief and gives one confidence in oneself. A confidence that was severely undermined by the habit of demonising the 'Mind' within the cult. 5) To obtain justice for wrongs committed. In Maharaji's world there is a warped sense of justice, as is borne out by the fact that so many wrongs have been seen to have been swept under the carpet. I am reliably informed that, as a Scorpio with strong Libran tendencies, I am burdened with a particularly strong sense of justice! Maybe this accounts for my own feelings that there is an urgent need to not let these corruptive historic events be forgotten. If we cannot learn from history then it is a sorry world. The Internet gives people worldwide the opportunity, through public forums such as this, to expose the abuses of oppressive regimes and cults, both alerting people to the dangers of falling prey to them and drawing attention to the injustices that they have perpetrated that justice may finally be sought. This is an important point Mike. I have often felt that there was much about Knowledge that was suspiciously unfair. For a start, the qualifications for receiving Knowledge were always touted as simply having sincerity etc. In reality it was necessary that you be a very rare and particular social creature...one that could tolerate all kinds of nonsense from being willing to jeopardise ones job travelling around after Mahatmas to being able to bear the inane endless ramblings of weirdly dressed kids sitting on hard floors. This certainly severely marginalized the group of people who could possibly be eligible for this Great Universal Truth. Of course if you had a religious conviction that was a severe problem too. To me it was unjust to pretend that Knowledge was a gift that you could put into your life and it would improve, when the agenda became more and more about what you needed to give up of your life. Adding insult to injury, those sacrifices that we all made, that we now maybe feel as a sense of loss, were largely to Maharaji's enormous personal gain. Here is a man whose huge personal wealth others have given him, many of whom now feel is not altogether deserved. Some people just feel that it is enough to cut their losses and just get on rebuilding their lives. Others feel actually crippled by the abuse that they feel was perpetrated upon them, and feel that their 'moving on', their healing, is inextricably tied up with Maharaji, as chief abuser, being brought to account - to justice. As long as Maharaji is seen to be 'getting away with his past crimes' - carrying on with business as usual, many feel that they have an obligation, a personal need (maybe in some cases bordering on revenge) to keep pushing for justice- not to let the matter rest. I am driven by a mixture of these feelings (in degrees) and also a higher ethic that compels me to simply pursue truth even if that means, ironically, confronting the person I once adopted as a trusted teacher of that subject and his ideas about what 'It is'. The public forum is a neccessary watchdog to the continued activities and effects of Maharaji and Knowledge on people's lives. As far asa i'm concerned, if people like the Andersons, feel benefitted -that's fine. I can tolerate their position and indeed can repect it to some degree. However there is a need for an open public space to discuss both the pro's and cons of M and K, and at this time, this seems to be fulfilling that role. Finally, I must say that I have long been a supporter of the notion that this site should have some moderation to ensure that people stay on topic, rather than use it is a place to discuss world events etc. However, that some personal chat takes place is hardly intolerable, making the job of the FA particularly difficult.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 05:22:36 (EDT) From: Tim G Email: timgitti@indigo.ie To: Mike Finch Subject: Re: This Forum's Agenda Message:

Hi Mike Very succinct. I think I subscribe to all 7 reasons. It was good meeting you at the Latvian thingy. In the back of my mind I have a slightly guilty conscience about a scathing post I contribured about your good self and reference to 'Intellectual Satsang'. Please accept my apologies, if needed. It would be very interesting to hear your story in more detail, some more jigsaw pieces. Who's going to write the book? Film rights? Comedy or tragedy? Best Wishes Tim

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 08:43:41 (EDT) From: Mike Finch Email: None To: Tim G Subject: No Aplogies needed Message:

In the back of my mind I have a slightly guilty conscience about a scathing post I contribured about your good self and reference to 'Intellectual Satsang'. Please accept my apologies, if needed.   Yes, I remember the post. Don't worry about it, no apologies needed - but thanks anyway.   -- Mik

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 03:19:23 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: 7) Forum-junkie Message:

I must say that, after nearly ten months of posting and reading here, that ''7) Forum-junkie'' best describes why I read the forum. Exes are the sort of people who drew me into the cult in the first place; smart, sassy, gutsy, opinionated, enthusiastic, honest, iconoclastic, brave, irreverent etc. My agenda for writing here is: ''3) So that premies can be exposed to points of view they would not be exposed to if it were not for this Forum (and others like it).''

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 04:46:06 (EDT) From: Loaf Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: can we establish a FMG Message:

I should like to suggest that this place needs to be more organised. If we establish a Per Post (or provisionally per-poster) FMG (Finch Motivational Grading) so that the intentions of each post can be weighed and sorted into categories...perhaps we can stop the confusion.. and get some of the posts into tidy piles instead of spread all over the floor. licenses to post can be issued in various categories - we can use the Recent ex-PAMF Forum administrators to vet applicants. We cant have babies being thrown willy-nilly any longer. Synchronised baby hurling is the way forward. Yours Loaf - displacing an alarming amount of bathwater It seems that the FOMFs and PAMFs or even the RE-PAMFs should have their own forums too...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 00:10:55 (EDT) From: Deborah Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: Yes Mike and a whole lot more Message:

Hi Mike, I've read your posts and would like to welcome you back. Yes, you hit the nail right on the head with all of the proposed agendas (agendae?)and I fall into the latter category of agenda 7. Forum Junkie, although I check my email first. But I open up two windows so that EPO can load, than I keep the two windows open. If I'm not expecting any return emails I will use the second window for Anything Goes II and toggle back and forth. Believe it or not, if I'm on a reading and posting spree, I have actually opened a 3rd window. I'm a student and sometimes I will use that 3rd window to search the web for school related stuff. Yes, I've opened 4 windows. Whew! Somebody organize an intervention. I think a big reason why a lot of us stay at EPO is for the friendship and deepseated relatability. I have enormous compassion for what people have gone through and you know how the addage goes: 'If you want to receive something, than do it for other people.' Also coming to terms with cult abduction can leave a pretty hollow place in one's psyche and/or heart. It can be very disorientating at first (it was for me and I drifted in the late 80's). This could also induce social alienation, you know a feeling of being defective and therefore removed from 'normal' people who don't join cults and kiss asshole guru's feet and swing arti trays and you get the picture. Although I don't usually admit it, I believe that people who were premies developed ideals that shouldn't be thrown out because of Maha's fraudulence. Right, wrong, or indifferent, we were an amazing group of people. I still see the same qualities with exes that I cherished from my involvement in the cult. I like the quality and values of people here. Although the cult is in itself, negative, the people emerging with clarity are rather positive. So, nice to meet you. Hope to see more contributions. Deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 03:32:04 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Deborah Subject: I agree with everything you said, Deb, except Message:

.....your last paragraph: ''Although I don't usually admit it, I believe that people who were premies developed ideals that shouldn't be thrown out because of Maha's fraudulence. Right, wrong, or indifferent, we were an amazing group of people. I still see the same qualities with exes that I cherished from my involvement in the cult. I like the quality and values of people here. Although the cult is in itself, negative, the people emerging with clarity are rather positive.'' I believe that we all had those qualities before we met Rev Rawat. Those were the qualities that provided the energy and enthiusiams of the early days. I was talking to an ex (who very frequently posts here) on the phone yesterday and we both agreed that there was a lot of juice around in the early days but I feel that it started to leak drastically sometime in the 80s. I've met quite a few former 70s premies in SF and they are mostly still unusual and creative people. It is no coincidence that, since all the most creative and enthusiastic people left the cult, the juice has really gone right out of it for all but a handful of people who don't mind the idea of having a televangelist priest running a money-making religion.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 17:23:23 (EDT) From: Deborah Email: None To: Pat:C) Subject: Re: I agree with everything you said Message:

Hi PatC, I didn't mean to imply that Maha was responsible. It was because of the premies. Most of my friends were from the 70's recruitment not 80's as well. Lots of love to you, Deborah

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 23:53:47 (EDT) From: Loaf Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: 3, 4 and 6 here Mike [nt] Message:

[nt]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 23:48:45 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Mike Finch Subject: My Agenda Message:

Mike: I'm not allowed to discuss my agenda on this forum, but suffice to say that Maharaji is only tangentially related. That has been the case since the first word I posted 4 years ago, and I've never apologized for it (and don't intend to). I wish this forum were a reflection of the 'real world' but have come to believe that's a vain hope. It's no longer very interesting to post here, and not much fun. Well, you asked. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:19:14 (EDT) From: Patrick Wilson Email: patrick@patrickwilson.com To: Scott T. Subject: Re: My Agenda Message:

Mike: I'm not allowed to discuss my agenda on this forum, but suffice to say that Maharaji is only tangentially related. That has been the case since the first word I posted 4 years ago, and I've never apologized for it (and don't intend to). I wish this forum were a reflection of the 'real world' but have come to believe that's a vain hope. It's no longer very interesting to post here, and not much fun. Well, you asked. --Scott Scott, I have always enjoyed your intelligent posts and have observed your recent hiccup with the FA with some surprise. As one who obviously has the ability and desire to make sensible comment about the chosen topic of this forum, I 'm sure you can appreciate that there is a real benefit to keeping generally on topic. I don't know the exact circumstances of your 'straying' but even if this forum does not have room to discuss the wider issues of 'the real world' at length, surely that does not make it an uninteresting place to talk about Mand K. I know it's not fun when people seem to be against you. I have experienced that too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 11:13:30 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Patrick Wilson Subject: Controlling Agendas Message:

Patrick: I know you have. I don't mind people being against me, or even moderating my topical excursions. What I mind is having a rag stuffed in my mouth by someone who has participated in those excursions at least as much as I, and just as heavy handedly quelled any sort of open speech on the subject of 'topics' no matter how well considered. To me it largely de-legitimates the Forum, until there's a substantial change in administration. But I can see how you might regard it as better than nothing. And from a practical standpoint the fellow would have a really rough time if he were to quell any speech having to do with Maharaji directly, although it's not clear what would happen if you were to discuss *The Guru Papers* from a critical perspective. You're relatively safe though, it seems. What can't be done: You can't grab a handful of insight from any substantial analysis and argumentation of larger related events having to do with cults, and then using that insight *re-focus* on Maharaji from a different perspective. That is completely forbidden by the 'new format,' by virtue of the fact that you can't let go of Maha long enough to extract your hand from the jar. And that's the major reason why I regard it as a serious, and even unconscionable mistake. It's not as though I actually lost that argument. There has been no open discussion of it. Not anywhere. Sobeit. Fact is fact. As far as I'm concerned the only legitimate constraints ought to be the validity and sincerity of the argument. But that's just me. If and when people get fed up with this situation lets have a discussion on some open forum. Maybe it needs some 'soak time.' --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 13:42:40 (EDT) From: Peg Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Re: Controlling Agendas Message:

Is there another open forum that has discussions such as happen here but on other topics? I am glad this forum is on topic but would also appreciate being able to discuss other things in the same way. I am just learning about 'the real world'. I have looked around but am not so good at computers and haven't really found anything. Please could you send me a link if you have one. Peg PS preferably one where I won't be ridiculed for being at the stage I am, ie have hardly read a newspaper for 30 years or written anything. Not of major importance tho' as I don't have to post do I?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 13:49:51 (EDT) From: Pat:C) Email: None To: Peg Subject: Lively discussions on AG Message:

has undergone quite a transformation. I'd be happy to chat with you about almost anything over there as I'm sure Scott and hamzen would. We're all very opnionated and enjoy having discussions. So where would you like to start? [ Anything Goes Too ]

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 00:14:16 (EDT) From: Zelda Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: part of our am agenda Message:

and its one of the coffee break story lines \\\ albiet it has been pre-empted by the world events Even so -non premies want updates of the unfolding SCAM expozay. but the abuse cover up is BIG . some have it bookmarked personally, I am not here to see mafluky get brought down . that is too remote. I am interested to see his reputation as a used car salesman spread. It is fascinating cause its in slow motion. Z

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 06:39:52 (EDT) From: berni Email: bernee@flashmail.com To: Zelda Subject: Re: This forum's agenda Message:

Jim has suggested below that this forum should be a place where 'we (ex-premies) should all be able to chat with each other in a free, unstructured environment but I think the FA tends to disagree with that and wants the topics to be always within certain criteria. I agree with Jim - except that I think there should be some rules of behaviour - after all manners maketh a man, and whatever the disagreement, there is no excuse for rudeness, although Jim says it is a myth that some people find F7 hostile and agressive and asked... 'Tell me, Mike, what happened to you that was so bad when you first posted? In particular, what did *I* say that qualifies?' Maybe it's just different cultures or degrees of sensitivity but Mike did present a couple of examples of what was said to him in previous posts e.g.You know, you just might the only premie that avoided promulgating the cult programming when you gave satsang. Then again, you may be full of shit (and there are so many examples throughout the forum archives - not just between Jim and Mike or Katie etc. but between other exes). I know that badinage is a great aspect of any group debate but insulting posts that have the intention of putting someone down - without the necessary relationship that badinage requires is just nasty and could indeed make this a place that those of a sensitive nature would not want to spend time in. Some of us remain fragile even many years after leaving ( and is the reason why many of us joined DLM - 'protection of the weary and the weak') and many premies and exes are of a sensitive nature - especially when they are trying to leave the cult. Mike says 'Certainly lovey-dovey acceptance of everything one says is not challenging. But is it not possible to be challenging and civil ?' This sums up what I wish the forum would be. A place where people who have been through a similar experience of being 'devotees' of the living master can share ideas and experience, indulge in dialectical debate and hopefully come up with advice to others as to what to do with your life after years of following a path that took you nowhere. I agree with Scott that Maharaji is only tangentially related or at least should be. Haven't we wasted enough of our lives thinking about him and his 'mission'? Best wishes, berni

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 18, 2001 at 14:06:12 (EDT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: berni Subject: Re: This forum's agenda Message:

Berni: I don't agree with the notion that it should be unstructured, nor does Jim probably, if you pressed him on it. However, I'd substitute the term 'standards' for 'structure.' I just disagree that the 'structure' needs to be based primarily or rigidly on topic (or on manners, directly). There are lots of controls that a population can exert on posters short of excluding them, and these are usually referred to as 'social controls.' So, in most cases there's no need for direct controls. What I think the forum lacks are 'standards' not only to decide when someone is trolling but more importantly to determine when an argument is being won or lost, and that's the chief reason we get into trouble. I, for instance, don't think there's much credibility to the notion that the WTC disaster was caused by the CIA or the Bush family. I think that I can win that argument hands down, but if people are willing to entertain someone who insists otherwise then there ought to be some sort of flag, at least, to indicate to people that the issue has been engaged and decided. So, unless some radically new evidence is introduced continuing to post such messages ought to be considered trolling, or serving some other personal psychological need that may or may not need to be addressed by the group. There are also some issues that probably can't be decided to a high degree of certainty, so in those cases we should at least be able to make judgments about whether the views expressed are sincere and leave it at that. I may or may not feel compelled to respond politely to someone who thinks the WTC attack was justified, or that Jagdeo 'had his reasons' or whatever. Spamming and obvious trollery, as well as presenting insincere arguments for the sake of strategic advantage ought to be gro