My Message to Aspirants

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 15:59:16 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well said Anon! As someone who is not a dissenter, this would be the same advice I would give everyone interested in pursuing Maharaji's teachings. Your approach is level-headed and common sensical. It is the same approach, more or less, that I've taken over more than 25 years of practising Knowledge.

I do see that it hasn't pointed in that direction for some of you. That's cool. We're all different. I just wish all the dissenters I read in this forum were as level-headed as you appear to be.

Good to read your input.

:o)
Hmmm. Well that all sounds very nice. And I have no doubt that premies are basically sincere and genuine. I have thought of myself that way, as well as many of the premies I have known.

That having been said, I don't see how you can reconcile the professed need to question everything about Maharaj Ji and his teachings, when he for years taught, in fact had as one of commandments, that one should never even leave room for doubt. If you followed that commandment, you could not, by definition, "face questions squarely" as you suggest, and his teachings were, in fact, entirely antithetical to your statement that his "gift" won't fulfill our "quest" "without diligent questioning...".

As I have said many times, if you ignored most of what Maharaj Ji said over the years, if you didn't try to keep from questioning him and his teachings and instead followed your own better judgment, if you didn't try to surrender your life to him as he demanded, and if you just took what you felt like taking and ignored the rest, well, if you did that, then the Maharaj Ji cult probably didn't cost you very much. But I also have a hard time seeing how you could have been his devotee is you just ignored what he was asking of you.

I also have no doubt that he doesn't say most of that stuff anymore because he can't get away with it. But what was all that "surrender" "ashram" "don't doubt" stuff about them, Hmmm? Was it just a phase he was going through and we were just too stupid to see it as just that? I also think it's offensive to people who sincerely tried to follow Maharaj Ji when current premies say we were just too stupid in listening to and believing what GMJ told us to do, and that we were defective in not, as you say, "exercising [our] powers of diligence and questioning" and that we "abdicated our common sense." That's both offensive and condescending, and, if you ask me, evidence that perhaps someone besides some ex-premies are a little deficient in the common sense area.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 16:05:33 (EDT)
Poster: Douche
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Since you seem to be the only practicing premie left around here Anonamous, can I ask you something that none of the others seems willing or able to anser:

Just what is the quest that you say Maharaji helps you fulfill? I'm really curious because all the dogma that I remember from 20 plus years ago seems to have been ditched long ago. I wonder what's left.

Douche
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 16:14:30 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
'Too bad they blame the one person that has always encouraged them to stand on their own real experience.'

I read your post with wonder. Here's a thoughtful person who somehow respects M. What's up? Then I read the last bit here and see the spark of OP in your eye. Tell me, friend, how does 'never leave room for doubt in your mind' or, if you prefer, 'always have faith in God', jive with your statement?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 16:49:04 (EDT)
Poster: Deena
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Respectfully, I ask you Anonamous, how is it Maharaji can claim very recently, that in the realm of Knowledge is the only place the living can learn about life? A decerning, questioning person would have difficulty with this, no? This gift you speak of that he gave you, not the 4 techniques I gather? The techniques can not useful without the Perfect Master he has said. Wouldn't a person thinking for themself find this information questionalbe? And all through the aspirant process including the night before receiveing Knowledge, does not Maharaji ask aspirants not to be full of doubt and confusion? He is clearly quoted again and again as having said in the public introductory phase as saying that think about it, go away and give it some thought. But after this, when a person starts to get more involved than he no longer mentions thinking but rathier following the heart. Isn't that the case?

Isn't it clearly necessary in following Maharaji's teachings to be rid of what the mind creates to distrurb that beautiful feeling of bing alive that Maharaji would love the aspirants to believe is happening because they are developing a relationship with the master? And this relationship is key to experiencing the Knowledge? Meaning a discerning individual who gave it thoughtful consideration would have to admit that Maharaji is a Guru (as he once was labeled) and in order for a follower (or devotee) to experience what he teaches, that he or she, must surrender to the master whether that term is used or not?

You sound like a true devotee of your master. Tell me did that not mean you had to surrender in your life to have the relationship of devotee with Maharaji?

If someone is warned that what they may be getting involved in is a cult and that persons close to that leader have revealed from their personal experience ( ie: Bob Mishler's interview, which is available to read on this site) and other living ex-premie's who have shared on this forum their personal experiences, then indeed their is alot for the questioning and discerning person to ponder.

But those individuals that were told that there questioning was mind and they should practise knowledge...well for these few premies the advise that you give is too late. Maharaji did not apologize to anyone of the familys or the premies who found those people after they committed suicide. He did not say yes, you should question. He did not remove the commandment of Rid doubts from your mind. He still speaks in those terms, though the use of commandments is too cultish to use now.

I gather that you are not unlike my husband in blind devotion no matter what is presented to you, you would rather not use your own ability to discern. Is that not true? You are happy with what you've chosen but if you are made aware that the one you claim has given you the most precious gift is in fact not the key, wouldn't that be something to investigate?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 17:41:46 (EDT)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
'It's not what you say it's the way you say it.....'
is a real conversation stopper...
Aren't Premies programmed only to listen or be open to words that sound terribly, terribly sincere and level-headed? My more gently toned and sincere sounding posts are evidently more palatable than the angry or more directly accusative ones. Such is the learned inability of premies to understand the meaning of words in their own right. They must be dressed up very very sincerely. very flatteringly.
Loads of people have patted me on the back for writing sincere sounding posts. I wish that their interest in the content didn't stop there.
Maharaji himself only wants to hear from those who speak respectfully. Thus he probably misses out hearing what people with genuine but strong feelings have to say. Your resect for level-headedness is pretty typical you know. But thanks anyway for listening.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 18:05:05 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Deena
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
You pack many questions into your response Deena. I won't attempt to answer them all but will try to respond in general terms.

As I said in my posting, "Maharaji provides an answer to a specific quest", and that "For me the answer [to that quest] has always pointed back to him".

I recently saw him in L.A. after six months of chaos in my life. During this six month period I had little time to meditate, and didn't go to but four or five video presentations. My inner experience was barren and there was little I could do to generate my usual state of happiness. Life was becoming very narrow and all too short.

I arrived 15 minutes before the event began and went into the hall and sat down. A video started playing followed by Maharaji speaking. After five minutes of him speaking I started to feel my core again as he reminded me about the deepest longing in my soul. I meditated that night and was able to go very deep, feeling a soothing caressing of my heart. And I felt close to my creator as I knew I hadn't been abandoned for having "spaced-out" (to coin a tired and useless phrase). Since then that feeling has been with me every day. Don't know how, don't care why, but I know that he re-acquiated me with my true self - when I least expected it, and when I couldn't do a thing about it on my own.

So what do you say Deena when someone puts the color back in your life? I say thank you.

I'm not blind, and wouldn't call what I have devotion. I just know that he's helped me answer a very important question for me. And he continues to call events like the one in L.A. to give me the choice of whether to come and hear again or not. Hell, I didn't even give any contribution to help cover the cost of the event.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 18:34:11 (EDT)
Poster: Douche
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Far be it from me to knock or question what you feel, Anonomus, but did you ever wonder whether there might be some hidden dangers in relying on BigM for 'reaquainting you with your true self'?

I appreciate it's often easier to accept whatever bonuses we get in this life, rather than to ask too many difficult questions, but everything has a price. You may get away without paying Maharaji any money, but you're displaying all the symptoms of a typical 'Hale-Bopper'. I quote: 'For me the answer [to that quest] has always pointed back to him'.

To paraphrase another guru from 2000 years ago: 'Avoid building your castle on shifting sands'. Let's get real Anonomous: Maharaji is a highly professional cult leader. He's had years of experience at manipulating people. It's how he earns his living.

You may say 'I don't care because he's put me back in touch with my soul.' But it's not true. You did it yourself because you believed this was the trigger you needed. Take back control of your life, Anonomous. It may just be the only chance you get.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 18:50:43 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
It seems to me that you have been redefining your "quest" to equal whatever GMJ is, was, or will be, and whatever drivel he is spouting at any given time. If you do that, he will always be the "answer," but only because, like most premies, you are continuously changing the question.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:02:45 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Douche
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Say Douche. What school of pshycology do you have your Ph.D in? And what makes you think your so clever you know me better than I do?

Careful spending too much time in this dark little corner of cyberspace with your club of like-minded nay-sayers. If you all keep patting yourselves on the back and telling yourselves you're so right, you may end up becoming the one thing you all seem hell-bent on a crusade to eradicate from the thinking world: A close-minded dweeb who can't respond intelligently unless it's with club-accepted cliches.

:o|
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:09:02 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Now J-Dub, how the heck would you know that about me, we just met? Do you always read into everything so recklessly, and do you always make such gross assumptions without the full picture?

Your grasping my friend but no worries.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:17:59 (EDT)
Poster: Brian
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Don't know how, don't care why, but I know that he re-acquiated me with my true self - when I least expected it, and when I couldn't do a thing about it on my own.

That's not true that you don't know how it happened, or that it happened when you least expected it. In fact, expectation is entirely what MJ is about. You didn't just 'happen' to be there in the first place. You chose to be there. You play a typical premie game with yourself - set yourself up to be uplifted, and then express astonishment that it occurs. See, I'd buy into it if you had slipped into a church to talk to a priest and then majically MJ appeared next to you and encouraged you to meditate. But that's not what happened.

Feeling intense hunger, I went to Micky D's, ordered and paid for a Big Mac, ate it, and magically that hunger disappeared. Testify! Testify!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:25:39 (EDT)
Poster: Brian
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Maharaji himself only wants to hear from those who speak respectfully. Thus he probably misses out hearing what people with genuine but strong feelings have to say.

Exactly. He requires his devotees to become mindless idiots who are incapable of common sense thinking. That's why he was almost dumped on his ass when his chair broke, and that's why it will happen again. People like JW, who are capable of seeing through their own eyes and seeing what is actually there, eventually see enough to bail out on him.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:33:31 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Brian
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Cute little explanation Bri. Fits nicely into all the little boxes you've created for this thing but it's all too pat for my stomach.

Truth is though, after six months of trying to get back to a place of well-being and being unsuccessful, I showed up (yes of course I walked with my own two legs - what'd you expect?) and sat down and listened to the only person I know who reminded me of my deepest truth. Haven't been reminded yet by any of you guys.

And by the way Bri, your cute little ending reeks of self-assuredness. I wonder if you really are such a big strong man?

;-)
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:39:49 (EDT)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Cute little explanation Bri. Fits nicely into all the little boxes you've created for this thing but it's all too pat for my stomach.

And by the way Bri, your cute little ending reeks of self-assuredness. I wonder if you really are such a big strong man?

;-)
So what exactly is your deepest truth? Please explain seeing as you have been so successfully reminded of it.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:49:18 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
It's a personal pact between me and my creator. That's about all I can say without sounding to you "open-minded" cult experts like an over-sincere wimp.

Hmmm, that makes me wonder. Which one(s) of you are experts on the human heart? If you anyone out there fits the bill, I'd like to hear from you.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 19:55:46 (EDT)
Poster: Brian
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Truth is though, after six months of trying to get back to a place of well-being and being unsuccessful, I showed up (yes of course I walked with my own two legs - what'd you expect?) and sat down and listened to the only person I know who reminded me of my deepest truth. Haven't been reminded yet by any of you guys.

And who do you think MJ turns to for that reminder of his 'deepest truth'? My point is not that you should be getting you reminders from us, or that you shouldn't be getting them from MJ in particular, but that to be dependent on anyone outside yourself for what happens inside yourself is to re-enforce addictions to that outside source. MJ says that you shouldn't have that happen, but also encourages it by refusing to throw of the Satguru pajamas that his dependent devotees get their high from. He makes the bucks promoting that dependency in his followers by selling them 'let me remind you to remind yourself' videos. For you to pretend that he is any way the source of anything inside yourself is ludicrous. Expressing it in this forum is asking for just the response you got from me. Any drunk that attends AA meetings and states that he can take a nip to relax will get the response he came to hear.

I'm self-assured of that, yes. I got a lot of encouragement when I first started to post here. But I had to work through my feelings and thoughts on my own. I'm a lot stronger than I thought, and certainly stronger than MJ wants me to feel. He was the one who told me I needed him. I believed it at the time, because I believed that I needed SOMEONE outside of myself in order to see and be myself. I know he's badly mistaken. I was. You are too, if you think you need him. Who are you gonna need when he drops dead?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:02:31 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
So what are you saying here Anon, that you're full of shit? Either you're sincere or you're not. I'm not dressing myself up and then patting myself on the back afterwards for having "fooled" those stupid sincere souls who were naive enough to take me at my word.

Be real for God's sake, or don't waste our time. Hey, you should go into marketing, you sound like a real prize!

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:07:47 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Now J-Dub, how the heck would you know that about me, we just met? Do you always read into everything so recklessly, and do you always make such gross assumptions without the full picture?

Your grasping my friend but no worries.

:o)
No, I don't know you, but I'm beginning to learn about you, especially since you haven't bothered to respond to my posting above, that discussed my problems with what you have to say here in the first place. Will you respond to it, or not?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:10:23 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Brian
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Sorry Bri old bud. Didn't realize that you have found your support group here in this dank little outpost. Far be it from me to challenge another man's source of hope. Hope you find your happiness.

Just one thing. Don't think that we've all turned off our thinking caps just because we've found our happiness from the teachings of Maharaji. We are all different and I don't presume to know what works for you and what doesn't. I'd expect the same consideration back from any man (or woman).

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:11:33 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well said Anon! As someone who is not a dissenter, this would be the same advice I would give everyone interested in pursuing Maharaji's teachings. Your approach is level-headed and common sensical. It is the same approach, more or less, that I've taken over more than 25 years of practising Knowledge.

I do see that it hasn't pointed in that direction for some of you. That's cool. We're all different. I just wish all the dissenters I read in this forum were as level-headed as you appear to be.

Good to read your input.

:o)
Anonamous,

After watching your exchanges with others here I took another look at your original post again. Remember me? I'm the guy who said you sounded fairly reasonable up until your last description of M as 'the one person that has always encouraged them to stand on their own real experience.' I guess I'm always happy when a believer comes on-line and says that they respect the human mind. I get a kick out of that. I don't know why. As I've said many times here, if there's one thing I've proven in my life it's my incredible capacity to be fooled. I'm a sucker sometimes, that's about it.

The reason I say all this is that I feel a little foolish. Like I say, I've seen you in action, seen your typical premie presentation -- warm, principalled and accomodating on the surface, rigid, evasive and nasty below -- and looked again at your initial post. May I?

You say:

'Clearly there are many questions that arise that cannot be sloughed off and pretended don't exist. They have to be looked at. And if you face those questions squarely, trust what you know, question what you don't, all the time holding on to your truth, you will find the answer that works for you. It may very well NOT be Maharaji.'

I assume you're referring to the obvious questions. Why did this guy claim to be the Lord and saviour of mankind? Who is he really? Are they the kinds of questions you want to 'face squarely'? The way you describe the process it sounds kind of painful, doesn't it? Like some cowboy getting a bullet yanked on a shot of whiskey. You're really bracing yourself for these here questions, aren't you?

Well, my first 'hyper-question', if you will, is why be so defensive? Okay, okay, I don't want to draw the same fire Anon and Douche have. Far be it from me to psychoanalyze a total stranger. Fine. Let me ask you a 'hyper-hyper-question'. Don't you think it LOOKS like you're being a little defensive? I'm particulary troubled by your phrase 'all the time holding on to your truth'. A little conclusionary, wouldn't you say? What if the very thing you're holding on to's the problem? How're you gonna know? Remember the sugar ant and the salt ant? Think about it.

But that's not all, I'm afraid. (he, he, he). 'You'll find the answer that works for you'? 'Works for you'? Does that have anything to do with 'true'? Or is it perhaps something else? A little less RIGID maybe? A little less accomodating to 'YOUR truth' that you're 'all the time holding onto'? You do offer that it very well may NOT be Maharaji. I guess you're right. It all depends on what you're clinging to to begin with, right?

Then, my faux-rational friend, you offer to 'split the difference' so to speak. You say 'I do see that it hasn't pointed in that direction for some of you. That's cool. We're all different.' I have to ask you what's so 'cool' and what you mean by we're all 'different'? Different minds, different attitudes or different creators? (Personally, I don't beleive in any creator at all but you do, don't you? It's your philosophy I'm challenging, not mine. Don't think I'm bothered by your belief. It's cool. We're all diferent.) You know what that gesture on your part looks like, don't you?

You admit that M ' has gone through many changes from the time he was a child until now'. Who could disagree? But do you have the courage to really look at those changes? I mean without 'holding on to your truth' or anything? Just look? (By the way, 'YOUR truth'? Is that different from THE truth?).

You're really something. Swinging back and forth from earnest protestations of the highest standards -- 'The gift he gives fulfills that quest but not without diligent questioning and introspection' -- and even disavowing any tie with 'those who may not exercise their powers of diligence and questioning, who abdicate their common sense in the hopes that someone will feed them pre-digested answers'. The next thing you know you're all 'it works for me, alright?' Can you see how funny you're acting?

I take it you don't count yourself amongst those who, as I've quoted, ' may not exercise their powers of diligence and questioning, who abdicate their common sense in the hopes that someone will feed them pre-digested answers.'

Is that just extremely hypocritical nonsense, ironic beyond comprehension and all at your expense OR are you willing to prove it?

See what's happening? Game for it? Welcome to the Tunnel of Love.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:12:54 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Sorry for not responding J-Dub. No, I don't feel that what Maharaji is saying is drivel.

How's that.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:21:28 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
So, what's your big problem? Brian is just "questioning" and you think that's a virtue, and, besides, his "quest" must just be different from yours, and you think that's cool too. Isn't that what you said,up above, or has your "quest" again changed again in the last few minutes?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:22:25 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
It's a personal pact between me and my creator. That's about all I can say without sounding to you 'open-minded' cult experts like an over-sincere wimp.

Hmmm, that makes me wonder. Which one(s) of you are experts on the human heart? If you anyone out there fits the bill, I'd like to hear from you.
Sorry, didn't anyone tell you? I, of course, am the expert on the human heart. JW, there, takes care of finances. And Douche, publications. Brian is responsible for vacuuming. Cooper looks after Bobby. But I do the heart.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:26:18 (EDT)
Poster: op
Email:
To: Jim and Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well, Jim, it looks like you've got another worthy opponent. One question:

I assume you're referring to the obvious questions. Why did this guy claim to be the Lord and saviour of mankind? Who is he really? Are they the kinds of questions you want to 'face squarely'?

Why do you assume? Maybe he has questions that have NOTHING to do with your questions. Not everyone is a reflection of your own perusals.

And Anon2 (much shorter, pls forgive) - if you've read my post above, you'll notice I forewarned you. But it seems, from your posts here, that you were ready and armed for battle. Welcome aboard (if I can say this - after all, it's not my forum). How long have you been reading this page before deciding to plunge into the icy waters?

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:28:37 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
So, as you "question" everything about Maharaj Ji which you contend everyone should do and you did for the past 25 years, you don't find any problem with the fact that he told you for years to never question him or knowledge, in fact commended that you not allow "doubt" to enter your mind. You can reconcile all that just fine. I mean it fits with your "quest" and all?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:30:49 (EDT)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Truth is though, after six months of trying to get back to a place of well-being and being unsuccessful, I showed up (yes of course I walked with my own two legs - what'd you expect?) and sat down and listened to the only person I know who reminded me of my deepest truth. Haven't been reminded yet by any of you guys.
Well you weren't listening to us were you?!
Joking aside. I have had the 'Satsang' effect in all it's glory, talking or listening to others.Not just Maharaji. Don't you remember getting really high in Satsang with other mortals like your good self? MJ wasn't there then was he? Maharaji has removed the possibility of any other 'Satsang competition' from premies lives. Incidently, thousands of followers of other Indian Gurus claim to be reminded of their deepest truths by their other masters. It's real for them. Don't you smell a rat? Or at least twig that their are more prosaic explanations for what is going on?
I try to remind myself of my inner truth by my own efforts to live as an integral and conscious human being. I don't need or MJ to show me that. As I said before I am afraid that there are many many pitfalls in adopting the attitude of crediting MJ in the way you seem to. I can't convince you but I myself am highly suspicious of this sort of interpretation .
Is it really 'a place of well-being' which one experiences after so-called 'Darshan'. Or is it a false high. A cop out. A temporary excuse to bury the real issues that we need to address to sort out our lives and feel a more solidly founded and real 'well-being'.
I feel that MJ's quick fix high appeals to our weaker nature which would happily deny coming to terms with real life. Real life, that is. That weaker side of us readily accepts the opportunity Maharaji offers to relegate responsibility for our lives to a simplistic formula that promises a simple fulfillment and salvation but actually robs us of our intelligence and is more akin to a state of delusory escapism. I have to say this because I cannot help noticing how the faculty of clear thinking is the first thing to suffer on this path. Also I have definately experienced the same trusting attitude as you before I realised I was courting danger.
By the way I just read your other reply to me where you suggest that I am gloatingly pretending to be sincere. Not what I meant at all. I am merely saying that I sometimes express myself angrily and that such an attitude is not so palatable to some people although arguably my meaning is just as relevant. I agree with you fundamentally that there is a real danger posed by those who preach with apparent sincerity but are actually misguided. They are the wolves in sheep's clothing to beware.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:31:43 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Sorry for not responding J-Dub. No, I don't feel that what Maharaji is saying is drivel.

How's that.

;o)
You have the wrong post. I'm referring to the one right after you posted the first time. The word "drivel" is not mentioned therein.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:37:21 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: op
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
OP, thank you again! You're absolutely right. I just 'made an ass out of u and me' didn't I? Holy shit! Welcome back, sweetie.

No, I agree, my little fixation on these trivial aspects of M's life are mine and mine alone. Yeah, right..... you'se come back more preposterous than ever. Maybe it's not such a good idea for you to traipse off to see the wizard.

By the way, WHAT ABOUT THE LAYING ON OF HANDS!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:45:50 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well my verbose friend, as I stand accused of being defensive, I must ask why you appear so agressive? Are you one of these guys who have a huge chip on their shoulder and feel they've got to prove something to themselves to somehow restore their manhood? Don't get me wrong, I'm not psychoanalysing you here, just posing a thoughtful question.

As for all the miriad of prattle you pose in the form of "meaningful" questions, I can say just one thing: STOP RAMBLING!

My truth is between me and, yes you say you don't believe, "my creator". I am reminded of that truth from time to time and that reminder makes life a great place to be (hope this doesn't sound too sappy for such a battle-weary soul as yourself). Unfortunately, and I say unfortunately because I really wish there were others (perhaps like yourself for example) who could truely remind me about this fundamental reality. But the only person who has done it so far is Maharaji (see my posting re: my big L.A. adventure).

So do I care what a verbose rambling rose like yourself thinks of all that? And does this forbidden planet you guys have created have any virtue worthy of my sincerity? (You blonde nordic hunk you. Hey, I guess you could always hold up Deena to prove you guys are not all wierd. And she's married too. Bonus!)

Keep your stupid games to yourself Rambo. I'll go where the heart feels welcome every time.

;-)
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 20:50:13 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
I agree J-Dub. His quest is clearly different from mine. Mine hasn't changed for as far back as I can recall - and I'm not a young man anymore.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:00:41 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
I agree J-Dub. His quest is clearly different from mine. Mine hasn't changed for as far back as I can recall - and I'm not a young man anymore.

:o)
How nice for you. So, are you going to respond to my post, or not. Again, it's the one right after to posted the first time. Capiche?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:02:28 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hey, I always wondered where the cast of F-Troop ended up. Too bad about Deforrest Tucker though.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:07:06 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well said Anon! As someone who is not a dissenter, this would be the same advice I would give everyone interested in pursuing Maharaji's teachings. Your approach is level-headed and common sensical. It is the same approach, more or less, that I've taken over more than 25 years of practising Knowledge.

I do see that it hasn't pointed in that direction for some of you. That's cool. We're all different. I just wish all the dissenters I read in this forum were as level-headed as you appear to be.

Good to read your input.

:o)
Hmmm. Well that all sounds very nice. And I have no doubt that premies are basically sincere and genuine. I have thought of myself that way, as well as many of the premies I have known.

That having been said, I don't see how you can reconcile the professed need to question everything about Maharaj Ji and his teachings, when he for years taught, in fact had as one of commandments, that one should never even leave room for doubt. If you followed that commandment, you could not, by definition, 'face questions squarely' as you suggest, and his teachings were, in fact, entirely antithetical to your statement that his 'gift' won't fulfill our 'quest' 'without diligent questioning...'.

I also have no doubt that he doesn't say most of that stuff anymore because he can't get away with it. But what was all that 'surrender' 'ashram' 'don't doubt' stuff about them, Hmmm? Was it just a phase he was going through and we were just too stupid to see it as just that? I also think it's offensive to people who sincerely tried to follow Maharaj Ji when current premies say we were just too stupid in listening to and believing what GMJ told us to do, and that we were defective in not, as you say, 'exercising [our] powers of diligence and questioning' and that we 'abdicated our common sense.' That's both offensive and condescending, and, if you ask me, evidence that perhaps someone besides some ex-premies are a little deficient in the common sense area.
Oh, you mean this post... No, too many words. And you're too hell bent on converting me to be open to anything I say.

Keep smiling Dubster.

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:15:21 (EDT)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: all
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Poor old Anonamous! The jackals from Hell unite as a pack, all wanting a slice of poor old Anonamous! You've gotta laugh though...you're a long time dead.
I'm off to bed now. BIG HUG everybody!!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:25:22 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
You've been watching the Talking Head's movie far too much 'A'. Why don't you now try to START making sense. You flatter yourself by likening yourself to such an organized effective unit as jackals. From what I can see you're just a bunch of wierd strangers on some forbidden planet, that can't get it together to put a cognitive sentence together without breaking into well rehersed and highly cliched "cultbreaker-speak". Poor Jim, look at the sorry troops you've inherited.

"...you're a long time dead", shish, give me a break!

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:34:13 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Boy does that hurt! Ouch!

I stand corrected. I didn't realize that there are some premies, like yourself, who are genuine, sincerely interested in squarely facing the many questions about M. Okay, so nobody's perfect. I learned something. Leave me alone.

TO ALL YOU M CRITS: I don't know about you guys but I for one would at least like to believe I had some scruples. I admit it. This guy's whupped us. We were all so cocky with our questions and everything and here comes Mr. A and blows our cover. Well, I for one, am not such a big guy that I can't admit a few mistakes. This was one.

You know, this has been humbling. We prance around on our dirty little ex-premie page thinking we're so brave, so willing to call a dspae a spade, then this total stranger rides in and makes fools of every one of us. You, too, Deena. Face it. He's blown us all out of the water. We're NOT the only ones willing to honestly look at M. In fact, I'm wondering what we're doing at all.

'Rambo'? Yeah, I guess I did come on a little heavy. I'm sorry. I was just being with MY truth, you know? I guess MY truth wasn't feeling attunement with YOUR truth. Thanks, A, for pointing that out for me. Live and learn, huh?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:34:21 (EDT)
Poster: op
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
So far, so good.

You seem to have the same incendiary mix of testosterone and testiness a lot of the others on this site have. Who sent you?

Just one thing. I'll stand for lots of spelling mistakes from a lot of people, but if you're going to use a poetic word like 'myriad' - PLEASE SPELL IT CORRECTLY!

Otherwise just say 'bunch of'...

(disclaimer: not that my spelling's always on target...)
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:39:40 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hey, I'd match 'cult-breaker-speak' against 'guru-speak' any day of the week. Want to play? You go first. Give me the most vacuous, pretentious inanity you can find and I'll rewatch one of these videos and see if I can match you.

Or would you prefer playing against 'premie-speak'? 'Hold on to your truth' while you search for it' .... at first I thought we had another OP. Better, a new Mili!
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:41:10 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: op
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Thanks OP, but just finish up with the cookies, okay?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 21:56:09 (EDT)
Poster: op
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Where is this 'big LA adventure' posting you mentioned??

It's certainly not on my version of this page. Then I looked on both bulletin boards and even went over to Harlan's page. Please repost or tell me where to look.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 22:31:18 (EDT)
Poster: Burke
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hello anon no. 2

Maybe you guys could use a name.

What do you mean when you say --when the inevitable need to be real kicks in.

And dont praise that other alchoholic anon so much or he will become a classic english boor.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 22:38:20 (EDT)
Poster: Chris
Email:
To: Burke
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
I think Anon, he is a she.
Or was.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, May 29, 1997 at 23:11:21 (EDT)
Poster: burke
Email:
To: Chris
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
hi chris,
do you feel your breath all day?

does it matter in any way to you if you just think about whatever drifts in your head all day long?

how do you connect with god?

what is your view of god?

what does god want from me?

what do we want from god?

write a response and dont bother about reactions.

I took a shot at bobby and he didnt like it so I wont do it to you.

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 11:29:39 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
It wouldn't be possible for me to care less whether you get "converted" to anything. But thank you for the "response." Now it's clear to me that you are not interested in any kind of rational discussion, especially if there are "too many words." I'll keep that in mind, Amous.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 17:35:04 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
It wouldn't be possible for me to care less whether you get 'converted' to anything. But thank you for the 'response.' Now it's clear to me that you are not interested in any kind of rational discussion, especially if there are 'too many words.' I'll keep that in mind, Amous.
The thing that always amazes me about the dissenters in your group is how constantly use words like "rational" and "open-minded" to try to conjure the perception that that's what you are. I've observed you in action over the weeks and my conclusion is that nothing could be further from the truth. Though you may be trying to bluff people like myself, I certainly hope you're not bluffing yourselves. Let me set you straight!

For whatever reason, Knowledge didn't work for you. You have now, after much introspection and as a nice predigested answer to your confusion, jumped onto an anti-cult bandwagon, throwing every experience you ever had, valid or not, into a predefined cult slot, and adopting a mind-set and form of psycho-speak which is all too sickeningly predictable. You rely heavily on asking questions and trying to make the person on the other end seem "irrational" and "closed- minded" unless they answer them all. Then if they do, you completely disregard what they are saying, attempting to discredit everything they say. You especially love it when you get some poor soul on the other end who sincerely wants to explain what they feel. You see this as a vulnerable flank which you quickly seize upon.

So given the above Jaydub, tell me: Why the hell should anyone who is having a wonderful experience of life waste their time putting their heart out on a limb only to have dweebs like you stomp on it? (Sorry Jaydub but even though we've been getting to know each other over the last day and are starting to form a bond that, hey who knows where it'll go, I just don't give a shit about you enough to do that.)

Truth is, you guys are terribly afraid (yes even your ringleader Jesus O'Heller) to be the least bit open to the possibility of someone actually having a valid, sound, and wholesome experience of Knowledge. That would mean all your new-found answers would be flat and empty. So in the end your "truth" is lost in the application of truthful words: with the "rational" becoming irrational, and the "open-minded" becoming very close-minded.

I'm afraid I'm someone you and your buddies just ain't gonna explain away with your stupid bullshit. But take heart Dubster, it's really, really hard to find someone who has the total breadth of human experience to draw from. Maybe if you really learn to be open-minded that won't be such a liability for you.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 17:40:21 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: op
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
So far, so good.

You seem to have the same incendiary mix of testosterone and testiness a lot of the others on this site have. Who sent you?

Just one thing. I'll stand for lots of spelling mistakes from a lot of people, but if you're going to use a poetic word like 'myriad' - PLEASE SPELL IT CORRECTLY!

Otherwise just say 'bunch of'...

(disclaimer: not that my spelling's always on target...)
Thanks for the input OP. We need to get Scott to bild a good spel chekar into tis sight.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 17:45:47 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: op
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Where is this 'big LA adventure' posting you mentioned??

It's certainly not on my version of this page. Then I looked on both bulletin boards and even went over to Harlan's page. Please repost or tell me where to look.
See my response to Deena at 18:05:05 yesterday.

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 17:54:15 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Burke
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
"What do you mean when you say --when the inevitable need to be real kicks in."

Means that you can buy a party line for only so long without really understanding it, then at some point it becomes a hollow explanation that must be looked at and either thrown away, revised, or you bury your head further in the sand. In other words reality must be based upon something you've genuinely understood (a.k.a. experienced for yourself).

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 17:56:05 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hey, I'd match 'cult-breaker-speak' against 'guru-speak' any day of the week. Want to play? You go first. Give me the most vacuous, pretentious inanity you can find and I'll rewatch one of these videos and see if I can match you.

Or would you prefer playing against 'premie-speak'? 'Hold on to your truth' while you search for it' .... at first I thought we had another OP. Better, a new Mili!
Like I said Rambo, keep your stupid games to yourself. And do have a nice day.

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 18:43:08 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hey, Amous, I think you're confused. I don't believe I have ever commented on what your "experience" is, and, not being you, I have no idea whether it is "sound" or unsound, "wholesome" or unwholesome. If you are having a "wonderful experience of life," well, good for you.

I only commented that your explanation about "questioning" everything was inconsistent with what Guru Mahararj Ji taught, in fact commanded for years -- you remember: NEVER LEAVE ROOM FOR DOUBT IN YOUR MIND?. You didn't care to comment further on that, so I have not option but to conclude that you are not concerned with such contradictions. But hey, it's a free country and you can believe whatever you like.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 19:40:32 (EDT)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
You've been watching the Talking Head's movie far too much 'A'. Why don't you now try to START making sense. You flatter yourself by likening yourself to such an organized effective unit as jackals. From what I can see you're just a bunch of wierd strangers on some forbidden planet, that can't get it together to put a cognitive sentence together without breaking into well rehersed and highly cliched 'cultbreaker-speak'. Poor Jim, look at the sorry troops you've inherited.

'...you're a long time dead', shish, give me a break!

;o)
I seem to have been misread as to the meaning of 'you're a long time dead' by which I meant 'let's lighten up a bit as life is too short to take things too heavily'
I don't think that's too Yukky. This isn't a forbidden planet at all and there has been no rehearsal for what you describe as the 'highly cliched cultbreaker-speak' which we apparently are guilty of breaking into. What's the alternative anyway?

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 19:42:21 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Oh, and also, thank you very much for telling me that you have every person who posts on this page figured out. That's quite a feat of psychiatric evaluation, given that you have not even met any one of us and have no idea what any of our lives are like.

Also, if you are having such a "wonderful experience of life" why do you care what anybody else thinks, and why does what I, or what anyone else says, upset you so?

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 19:44:10 (EDT)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: anyone
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Despite all the things here to which people voice objection, I think that this site is nevertheless generally a healthy development. Just as in Maharaji's world there are positive and negative attributes of course. Not just one or the other.
Most of the contributers to this site so far, seem to be keen to look at Maharaji from a skepical angle. It just so happens that it this site is shamelessly designed to accomodate that viewpoint and to encourage discussion. I find it refreshing and often very amusing. I take no great pride in being (albeit temporarily) a member of a pack of skeptics. Nor do I feel ashamed if that is the case.
If there is a 'clubby' atmosphere here, that's not so bad. There's a clubby atmosphere at events too. I have got quite a lot out of my system, posting here and I feel better for it. Others (who don't participate) read and enjoy the dialogues. Obviously the tempers flare from time to time and people get rude but that's fairly inevitable I'd say. Combatants are generally respectful of one another when they disengage. (hence my 'Big Hug' comment.)

Ultimately in such an arena as this, one seems to have 3 alternatives. Either to address the topics of debate squarely with all ones faculties, or to get into other personal chats, or to avoid the issues and questions altogether and soliloquise with impunity!
Of course one doesn't have to respond to the questions people ask. There are no rules here. Anything goes for once. Scott merely asks that personal flaming be kept to a minimum. (I have ignored a few questions aimed at myself, usually because of being pressed for time)
The soliloqies are good too. I love to hear from those who have had similar experiences and doubts as myself and who are expressing them here possibly for the first time. The personal chats are'nt so bad either.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 20:03:04 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hey, Amous, I think you're confused. I don't believe I have ever commented on what your 'experience' is, and, not being you, I have no idea whether it is 'sound' or unsound, 'wholesome' or unwholesome. If you are having a 'wonderful experience of life,' well, good for you.

I only commented that your explanation about 'questioning' everything was inconsistent with what Guru Mahararj Ji taught, in fact commanded for years -- you remember: NEVER LEAVE ROOM FOR DOUBT IN YOUR MIND?. You didn't care to comment further on that, so I have not option but to conclude that you are not concerned with such contradictions. But hey, it's a free country and you can believe whatever you like.
Hey JW let's clear up this "never leave room for doubt..." club you keep hitting me with. Try this on: "Never doubt what you KNOW from having had a REAL experience." In other words, don't chuck what's valid just because something comes along that doesn't make sense. Question what doesn't make sense. Find an answer. But don't let your momentary confusion override what you know to be true.

Now here's an interesting thought. If you do succumb to your momentary confusion, does that make the truth you once knew any less true? Hey, you'd never know would you!

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 20:14:05 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Oh, and also, thank you very much for telling me that you have every person who posts on this page figured out. That's quite a feat of psychiatric evaluation, given that you have not even met any one of us and have no idea what any of our lives are like.

Also, if you are having such a 'wonderful experience of life' why do you care what anybody else thinks, and why does what I, or what anyone else says, upset you so?

If you think your experience and beliefs are beyond rational discussion and beyond any questioning, and that's cool with you if you want to believe that, then I suggest you not try to have rational discussions on that subject, or you are likely to feel that others are 'discreting' or 'questioning' your sacred beliefs, because that is what rational discussion is all about.
Oh don't be such a spoilt sport Dubster. We're just having some fun here aren't we? I must say though, if you keep coming back to me with your "...you're not open to rational thinking" crap, you're going to bore me to death. Your starting to be as interesting as William F. Buckley Jr.

And you're right ol' boy. I really will get upset if you start "discreting my sacred beliefs". (Is that like excreting them? Hmmm...where is that nordic savage when you need him?)

;-)
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 20:17:06 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Despite all the things here to which people voice objection, I think that this site is nevertheless generally a healthy development. Just as in Maharaji's world there are positive and negative attributes of course. Not just one or the other.
Most of the contributers to this site so far, seem to be keen to look at Maharaji from a skepical angle. It just so happens that it this site is shamelessly designed to accomodate that viewpoint and to encourage discussion. I find it refreshing and often very amusing. I take no great pride in being (albeit temporarily) a member of a pack of skeptics. Nor do I feel ashamed if that is the case.
If there is a 'clubby' atmosphere here, that's not so bad. There's a clubby atmosphere at events too. I have got quite a lot out of my system, posting here and I feel better for it. Others (who don't participate) read and enjoy the dialogues. Obviously the tempers flare from time to time and people get rude but that's fairly inevitable I'd say. Combatants are generally respectful of one another when they disengage. (hence my 'Big Hug' comment.)

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 20:38:33 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Oh, so we get yet another interpretation of the Guru's commandment not to doubt (OP said it meant to go wherever you need to go to get your doubts answered, including, apparently, the Bible or the Encyclopaedia) so this is a new one I haven't heard before: Do you mean when you say don't doubt what you "KNOW," to include what you know in your MIND? Which, you know, GMJ told us was basically the devil and was out to lead us into confusion and take away our bliss. So, if I KNOW that Maharaj Ji is a charlatan, I should just never doubt that, right? Because I KNOW it and I'm sure of it.

And I agree that you shouldn't allow confusion to cloud what you know to be true, but isn't the nature of confusion such that your ARE "confused" about what IS true? Isn't that why you're confused, because you're not sure what you know? So, I guess I don't see how you can do what you suggest, but I guess if it's only MOMENTARY, it's not really a problem, but what if it's a little longer than momentary?

And why didn't GMJ just say what he meant, if he meant what you say he meant, because he actually said to not let the DOUBT even get in your brain in the first place (through constant meditation and repressing your doubts). And how can you possibly question ANTHING, when you aren't supposed to even entertain a doubt about it in the first place?

God, I guess I am MOMENTARILY confused, because what you said makes no sense. I guess I forgot what I KNOW.

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 20:44:19 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well, I disagree with Bill Buckley on most things politically, but he's not completely irrelevent.

And yes, this is fun, and I must say I'm enjoying this. You sound just like I did 15 years ago. It's kind of like having a discussion with my former self. It's kind of intersting, but a little bit much deja vu. You know, been there, done that?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 23:00:15 (EDT)
Poster: op
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
(OP said it meant to go wherever you need to go to get your doubts answered, including, apparently, the Bible or the Encyclopaedia) so this is a new one I haven't heard before

Did I say THAT? I think I said something about getting the questions answered, usually by personal experience, and thus having doubt removed, rather than stifling it, stuffing it, and otherwise trying to bury it in the recesses of the mind you're trying so hard not to have. Which doesn't sound all that different from what Amous (nickname ok??? I think it's kind of cute - Anonamous is soooo long - but I've said that before) stated, about differentiating what you KNOW from what you have absolutely no idea about.

It's so freaking SIMPLE! Just a matter of common sense. Not a matter of guilt trips, ego bashing, beating yourself with cat-o-nine-tails or rubber hoses.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 23:02:09 (EDT)
Poster: op
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Do you have an e-mail address I could send a message to?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 23:07:49 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
'You rely heavily on asking questions and trying to make the person on the other end seem 'irrational' and 'closed- minded' unless they answer them all.'

How does this anti-rational attitude above jive with this from the other day:

'The gift he gives fulfills that quest but not without diligent questioning and introspection. The people I know who pursue this quest are for the most part sincere and genuine. Of course there are those who may not exercise their powers of diligence and questioning, who abdicate their common sense in the hopes that someone will feed them pre-digested answers.'

You're the biggest hypocrite I've met in a long time.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 23:28:11 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: op
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
OP,

How does 'personal experience' answer why M used to head a religion with this central dogma: M is Lord, he has 'saints' who, by his grace, can open a person's third eye?

How does 'personal experience' answer the question of how M ever got to be M in the first place?

Also, OP, while we're talking, what is 'doubt' anyways? Is it an illness? A condition? Like, if you doubt that I know what I'm talking about, is that a good thing? If you doubt that YOU know what you're talking about, is that a bad thing?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, May 30, 1997 at 23:34:35 (EDT)
Poster: burke
Email:
To: Anonamous
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
What do you think about maraji's evolution? Earlier postings by you indicate you watch the videos. I have seen the evolution but I dont know anyone else who has. The people I know who watch the videos say-what are you talking about?-

Anyone who really watches the videos should know what Im talking about without me haveing to lead them on.

Have you been watching the changes that stemmed from his mothers death?
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, May 31, 1997 at 01:54:16 (EDT)
Poster: JW
Email:
To: op
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
More intelligence insulting OP, you better watch it! A lot of revisionist mental gymnastics going on here!!!!! You said that "don't doubt" means get your doubts answered. Your interpretation is stupid and defies the plain words of the commandment. You can't go get a doubt answered if you haven't allowed it in your brain in the first place, which is what the commandment says, and certainly your interpretation defies the commandment in the context that Maharaj Ji told us to meditate 24 hours a day. In all the years I was a premie, I NEVER heard anyone give the commandment your interpretation, which I strongly think is made with the benefit of hindsight. In the least, let's just say your interpretation is "unique."

"getting the doubts answered by personal experience". So, if I was living in the ashram and, by Guru Mahrarj Ji's agya I was suppposed to be celibate, and I had a doubt about that, according to your interpretation, the commandment would allow me to go out and have some "personal experience" of sex and find out whether it's better to be celebate or not. Cool. But that is NOT how it worked, believe me.

But then, according to your revisionist theories, the ashram, the commandments, agya, and that stuff were just Hindu trappings that we, his followers, DEMANDED, and GMJ, being kind-hearted and into "humanity" like you say, gave in to our desires and instituted that stuff, but he really wasn't into them at all. Bullshit.

Date: Sat, May 31, 1997 at 13:06:58 (EDT)
Poster: Brian
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Sorry, didn't anyone tell you? I, of course, am the expert on the human heart. JW, there, takes care of finances. And Douche, publications. Brian is responsible for vacuuming. Cooper looks after Bobby. But I do the heart.

I want to trade with JW.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, May 31, 1997 at 13:39:01 (EDT)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Hey, Amous, I think you're confused. I don't believe I have ever commented on what your 'experience' is, and, not being you, I have no idea whether it is 'sound' or unsound, 'wholesome' or unwholesome. If you are having a 'wonderful experience of life,' well, good for you.

I only commented that your explanation about 'questioning' everything was inconsistent with what Guru Mahararj Ji taught, in fact commanded for years -- you remember: NEVER LEAVE ROOM FOR DOUBT IN YOUR MIND?. You didn't care to comment further on that, so I have not option but to conclude that you are not concerned with such contradictions. But hey, it's a free country and you can believe whatever you like.
What irks particularly about this guy, JW, is that he first came on with this heavy self-righteous line about diligent questioning and introspection. It's another layer of hypocrisy. I guess I'm a Viruvian.
Back To Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sat, May 31, 1997 at 22:30:49 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
Well, I disagree with Bill Buckley on most things politically, but he's not completely irrelevent.

Date: Sat, May 31, 1997 at 22:33:39 (EDT)
Poster: Anonamous
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: My message to aspirants
Message:
'You rely heavily on asking questions and trying to make the person on the other end seem 'irrational' and 'closed- minded' unless they answer them all.'

How does this anti-rational attitude above jive with this from the other day:

You're the biggest hypocrite I've met in a long time.And you're the biggest suck.