Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 20:45:36 (GMT) From: Eric Email: None To: Danny Subject: To MD, another perspective entirely Message:

Read your post with interest, my sentiments entirely. I have been dipping in to this site out of interest recently and have posted a few times. I also have noticed over the past few weeks that altho there seems to be quite a lot of activity after a while one notices it is the same few that seem to be involved. It was interesting to hear that it has been this same core group of people over the past 3 years. I personally do not have a problem with whether someone enjoys K and M or not. To me, people are people and I do not put someone in a box of whether they are in to K or not. A person is worth his own worth irrespective of what his personal beliefs are. The one dis-service that the people on this site do to themselves is that their greivances are mainly taking the form of insults and slanging matches. And, if you join in with coming from a different slant but voicing an intelligent and reasonable aspect, you are immediately harrassed by insults and belligerance. And as for Michael Dettmers, I was not too surprised to read his posts or to find out that he is an active participant here. I was living in Miami at the time of DECA, altho not personally involved myself. I did at various times have to sit and listen to Michael deliver 'satsangs' and, please forgive me Michael, I really did find him to be incredibly pompous, pedantic and boring and often wondered why M had him around at all. So there you go .... glad to hear another voice of reason. Take care.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 23:50:22 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Eric Subject: Tell me, Eric Message:

Despite that you found Michael's 'satsang' pompous and boring, although I fail to understand why that viewpoint makes his participation here any more or less surprising to you (care to explain?), what do you think of the substance of what Michael has had to say so far? Do you agree with it?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 15:55:14 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: Joe Subject: Eric, you disappoint me Message:

Eric, You complain that so many people on this Forum express their opinions by making insults, and yet, in the very next paragraph, you insult someone personally in very harsh and ugly terms. Someone might get the impression that you are a hypocrite, Eric. Surely, you don't want to be perceived that way. I am disappointed that when I responded to your last posting here, you did not acknowledge the points I made. One of the points was my argument that you did not accurately describe Rawat's reasons for closing down the ashrams. You said it was because the ashram premies were abusing the system and it wasn't working. I responded by telling you that my impression was that Rawat closed the ashrams because they were a financial burden, then I noted that neither you nor I were directly involved with Rawat's decision. But in the meantime, Michael Dettmers made a post that provides the explanation. He was directly involved and he let us know that Rawat closed the ashrams in the West because they had become a finanical liability. There were OSHA requirements and laws that required ashram premies to be medically insured and so forth, and this was too much of a financial burden. The ashrams were no longer an asset to Rawat and they were closed for that reason. I think you may have learned something here, but you do not acknowledge it. Of course, this is just one of many issues surrounding Mr. Rawat and his cult. But you seem to want to visit here every now and then, throw a few stones, and then run away and hide before anyone can retaliate.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 21:51:49 (GMT) From: Eric Email: None To: Joe and Way Subject: Would not want to disappoint Message:

Yes, I agree, what I said regarding Michael did come across as an insult and I did ask for his forgiveness before I said it. I just remember those past days when characters like him would get up and speak and they were among the many people that were around at that time that I personally could never relate to. Just as I could not relate to the majority of ashram premies, who seemed to think for some reason they were more evolved, more privileged, more eligible than the rest of us. You see, for me, I thought it was great when M closed the ashrams down. I cheered. Just as I cheered when I heard Michael Dettmers wasn't around any more. I would really wonder how M could let institutions like the ashrams carry on and people who came across as Michael did run things. One of the things I have thoroughly enjoyed about M over the years is his ability to change direction, to move on when things don't work. Why on earth would he want to create a situation that would cost even more money than the ashrams were already costing by continuing that system. All it had basically done was create an elitist system that separated ashram and non-ashram, with members of the non-ashram camp being considered to be spaced out and unworthy. And this was perpetuated by the ashram residents, not M. Way, I have replied to you. I certainly do not mean to be rude and I don't want to throw stones and run away. I don't feel I am throwing stones anyway. Most of the time when I have posted here it has been to offer another perspective. This site is entitled 'Anything and Everything about Maharaji and his Followers' - so let's see all sides. You guys might have your gripes about the past. These events that you mostly go on about are 20 years behind us now. That actually really astounds me that people can still be moaning about decisions they made, that did not work out for them, 20 years ago! My foundation with M is based on practicing K. That's it. The rest it, if you lived in an ashram or not, if you go to events or not, if you buy videos or not, if you go to the satellite or not is irrelevant. Because at the end of the day it's really only about how you feel within yourself in your life. I'm just having a bit of fun with this site. I'm not reallly on a mission to prove anyone right or wrong. Michael hasn't said anything that is particularly damming as far as I can see. M does let people run with projects and made their own decisions I do know that. He is not monitoring every decision that is made in every part of the world at all times. He speaks over and over again about our need to be responsible. If people at DECA were treated badly it was really Michael's responsibility to have been aware that his staff needed taking care of better. Just as in any company the M.D. has a responsibility for the working welfare of his staff. I have no fight with any of you I'm just in to healthy exchanges. I remain a friend.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 14:55:24 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: Eric Subject: Would not want to disappoint Message:

Eric, Thanks for your response. Yes, you have responded to me and you have now continued the conversation, so I take back my disappointment in that regard. Thanks also for the semi-apology for dissing Michael so personally. I hope you do not insult people so directly and personally in the future, even if you ask their forgiveness while you are doing it. If you don't like Jim's style, don't emulate it. About the closing of the ashrams. I agree that it made perfect sense for Maharaji to close the ashrams when they became a burden instead of an asset. But that wasn't our argument, was it? The reasons behind the decision was what we were talking about. And I am again a bit disappointed that you do not simply acknowledge that it was not the premie's fault. Which bring up my main complaint about your most recent post, and about posts from premies in general. Premies absolutely refuse to give Mr. Rawat any responsibility for the mistakes that have been made. It's silly. You specifically say that the elitist attitude of ashram premies was perpetuated by the premies themselves and 'not M.' No, no, no, no, no... Maharaji repeated told the ashram premies that householder premies could never realize Knowledge because only those fully dedicated to the Master would ever know that true devotion. Take off your rose-colored glasses. Please. Your point about the hierarchy among premies. I think you will find that this continues very much so to this day, and is completely unavoidable in a cult. The members who are closer to the leader are much more priviledge that the other members - human nature and inevitable. I share your wish that this could be overcome, with the unity of life more manifested in human society, but that will take eons of further evolution. Mr. Rawat cannot do a damn thing about it. Another objection to your latest post. You say that we exes are griping about the past, about events from 20 years ago. No, no, no, no, no... If Maharaji were not still perpetrating his personality cult, we would not be fighting here as we are. If current aspirants were given full disclosure, we would not be fighting here. If Elan Vital were not out-right lying in their CURRENT website, we would not be fighting here. If the people at ELK would stop talking about Mr. Rawat as if he is God in Human Form, we would not be fighting here. Please give us that credit. This is about the present, not just the past. You say you are just having a bit of fun here and not on any kind of a mission about right or wrong. Well, I hope you will acknowledge what is right and what is wrong about what I have said here. If you do not want to, then I wish you would quit posting opinions that are so provocative toward real discussion. Best wishes. I do accept the last word of your post as genuine.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 15:55:54 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Way Subject: very well done post Way (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 07:13:12 (GMT) From: DeProGram Anand Ji Email: not given To: Danny Subject: To MD, another perspective entirely Message:

To you I say what Maharaj Ji supposedly says about us, that is I simply shrug my shoulders and say people have to go through what they have to go through, if you wish to come back our door is always open to you. In addition we won't even ask you to contribute your lifes savings to us in return for our priceless spirtual wisdom.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 04:13:35 (GMT) From: Joe Email: None To: Danny Subject: Thou Dost Protest Too Much Danny.... Message:

Funny, you seem to agree with us that it is a bunch of lies that Elan Vital is putting out in its FAQs, calling it 'spin', which would not exist without Maharaji's express pre-approval by the way, and then you end up sounding just like Elan Vital. You are for 'full disclosure,' unless it's not what you want to hear, especially if it comes from dissatisfied customers of Maharaji, because you are a satisfied one. Funny, too, how you spend two short paragraphs saying you have no complaints about Maharaji or knowledge, and then you spend at least 15 paragraphs attacking the motives and clairty of people who do. Hypocrisy is your very strong point, Danny. By the way, if you say that 98% of the premies and ex-premies don't agree with what gets said here [your proof for this would be interesting to hear], why do you think there is NO open discussion on any of the premie websites, including Maharaji's? If it is so damn 'clear' that the premie position is so strong and favorable, why does ELK heavily censor what gets posted, and why isn't there any open discussion allowed? What is Maharaji afraid of?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 21:26:07 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Danny Subject: Right on Danny! Message:

Thanks Danny, Especially when you say, 'The fact is, this bring-the-demonic-Guru-down view doesn’t at all represent the feeling of 98% of the people who’ve received knowledge, both current and former practitioners.' With Knowledge you don't have to believe in anything. All you have to do is do it! There is no book to read, no funny haircuts, no special diets, no political stand, or weird clothes. All I have to do is practice and get in touch with my inner shelter. Seems like a good deal to me too.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 21:32:42 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Does nothing embarrass you? Message:

No wonder you post under the name of a cartoon character. What a fool you are, Dog. What a complete and utter fool.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 22:17:57 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Jim Subject: Does nothing embarrass you? Message:

I truly and honestly value the experience of Knowledge. When I practice it makes me feel secure, and in touch with who I really am. It just plain feels good. It does not embarrass me to say that. Sorry about that Jim. In fact if more people cooled out with Knowledge in the Holy Land (a misnomer if there ever was one) maybe things could turn around there. Like Roger eDrek I use a 'nom de plume' to avoid harassment.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 22:28:01 (GMT) From: jIM Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Why not call yourself Deputy Ostrich? Message:

Forget about Knowledge for a moment. Are you able in the slightest to talk about Maharaji? Actually, I know the answer to that, having watched people try to talk with you about him for months now. The answer is 'no'. You are psychologically unable to talk about Maharaji in any meaningful way. If you think I'm wrong, prove me wrong. Talk about Maharaji for juts one sentence that doesn't simply slide back into being about your mind-numbing Knowledge. You haven't done it yet, Dog. In fact, you've behaved exactly like, well, like a little house pet. Okay, that might look normal, healthy and natural to you but I've got news for you. People outside your cult would find that bizarre. Whatever. Your cult is sailing into some very turbulent waters these days. At a certain point you might wake up and realize that, however much you like squeezing your eyeballs, there are other issues concerning Maharaji worth considering.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 02:47:55 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: jIM Subject: Jim, what kind of a ponce are you? OK, here goes! Message:

Forget about Knowledge for a moment. Why? That's all I've ever talked about on this site. Ever notice that? Maybe I'm one of those guys that broke the monkey trap but still values the trinket. . . still values the trinket! Are you able in the slightest to talk about Maharaji? Actually, I know the answer to that, having watched people try to talk with you about him for months now. The answer is 'no'. You are psychologically unable to talk about Maharaji in any meaningful way. If it wasn't for Maharaji I wouldn't have Knowledge. So I'm grateful for that. The important thing for me is and always has been Knowledge, more exactly my experience of Knowledge. I think a lot of exes are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The baby is Knowledge. Knowledge is a beautiful experience. It gives me safety and soothes my soul. If you think I'm wrong, prove me wrong. Talk about Maharaji for juts one sentence that doesn't simply slide back into being about your mind-numbing Knowledge. You haven't done it yet, Dog. In fact, you've behaved exactly like, well, like a little house pet. Okay, that might look normal, healthy and natural to you but I've got news for you. People outside your cult would find that bizarre. OK here's your one sentence. He's a rich guy from India that consistently gives A+ satsang and inspires me to meditate. Whatever. Your cult is sailing into some very turbulent waters these days. At a certain point you might wake up and realize that, however much you like squeezing your eyeballs, there are other issues concerning Maharaji worth considering. I don't have a cult, never have. Wouldn't want one. Don't have time. Knowledge is a personal experience that I have been fortunate enough to recognize. Believe me, when I'm on my death-bed, I won't be thinking about my stuff, or my career, or my sex life, or any slights I may have received in this life. Can you guess what I'll be focussing on? The Knowledge I have found is the God of Moses, Mohammed, Buddha and Jesus. And in my humble opinion, all human beings are sputteringly evolving toward this experience.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 02:56:25 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: That's it? Fine, here's your score then: FAIL Message:

OK here's your one sentence. He's a rich guy from India that consistently gives A+ satsang and inspires me to meditate. That doesn't look to me like a sentence about Maharaji that 'doesn't simply slide back into being about your mind-numbing Knowledge.' You fail, Dog. What a surprise, huh?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 03:55:27 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jim, what is it now, you great pillock? Message:

Who the fuck put you in charge? I though it was a good post. About a B+ at least. On second thought, I refuse your mark and give myself an A-. And why don't you ever answer my questions? Like the one on the middle east, the one on evolution, the one on the monkey trap . . . ? I give you an F for that.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 04:14:15 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Don't you get it? YOU JUST COULDN'T DO IT! Message:

I don't know what questions you're referring to but I do know what happened with mine. I asked you -- pointedly, specifically, clearly as all get out -- to try to talk about Maharaji without mentioning so-called 'Knowledge'. You couldn't do it. So what does that tell me? Lots. It tells me that he's trained you good, little puppy dog. He can get away with anything with suckers like you. All he's got to do is give you some of that 'A+' satsang (by the way, I'm not surprised he's going to score that hight when you give yourself grades like you have here). That's all it takes. Ruff, ruff! Ruff, ruff! Ruff, ruff, ruff!!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 02:49:03 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Jim Subject: Don't you get it? YOU JUST COULDN'T DO IT! Message:

Jim, You must admit Maharaji is associated with Knowledge. When I'm having the spokes on my bike fixed I don't think about Maharaji. When I'm buying a new pair of Rockports I'm not thinking about Maharaji. When I think about Maharaji I think about Knowledge. Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? Maharaji is here to give people Knowledge not to discuss the book of the month. By the way I loved that lizard impression you used to do. Do you still do that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 02:55:16 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Did you just say what I thought you said? Message:

When I think about Maharaji I think about Knowledge. Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? I'm speechless. That's my point exactly, that you've been trained to deflect all questions and concerns about the man into this safe, nebulous box of woo-woo called 'Knowledge'. You must admit Maharaji is associated with Knowledge. When I'm having the spokes on my bike fixed I don't think about Maharaji. When I'm buying a new pair of Rockports I'm not thinking about Maharaji. Oh, I admit that Maharaji is associated with Knowledge. But you must admit that the man has a character and personality too, no? Why is it that you can't discuss those? The answer is in your own words above. Wake up!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 03:28:08 (GMT) From: Mickey the Pharisee Email: None To: Jim Subject: Jim, you ignored the IMPORTANT question! Message:

Do you still do the lizard thang or not?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 03:34:52 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Mickey the Pharisee Subject: Yes, I know, the lizard thang ...... Message:

I'm not sure which lizard thang Dog's talking about. There are a few. But, really, isn't this rich? Here's Dog reminiscing about me and him but wearing his disguise so that only I know who he is. I do scratch my head at this. Like what the fu...?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 14:24:24 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: Jim Subject: more probing questions for Dep Dog Message:

Dep Dog, 1. Did you read SQ's post about going to the last satellite feed? It was from Barcelona, I believe. Maharaji began his A+ satsang by talking about dirt. 2. Do you attend satellite feeds? At home, or with a group? 3. Do you pay $15.00 each time? 4. Did you attend the Barcelona satellite feed? If so, can you explain what Maharaji was saying about dirt. I'm sure he was speaking metaphorically somehow about the Knowledge of all the Masters, but unfortunately, SQ left the program after about 4 minutes so he didn't get to hear the whole thing. If you prefer not to answer any of these questions, would you explain why?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 02:19:06 (GMT) From: Deputy Dog Email: None To: Way Subject: more probing questions for Dep Dog Message:

Dep Dog, 1. Did you read SQ's post about going to the last satellite feed? It was from Barcelona, I believe. Maharaji began his A+ satsang by talking about dirt. That's right Way. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. What a piece of work is man. This quintessence of dust. (A little Shakespeare for ya.) 2. Do you attend satellite feeds? At home, or with a group? A group. 3. Do you pay $15.00 each time? More like 5 or 10$ 4. Did you attend the Barcelona satellite feed? If so, can you explain what Maharaji was saying about dirt. I'm sure he was speaking metaphorically somehow about the Knowledge of all the Masters, but unfortunately, SQ left the program after about 4 minutes so he didn't get to hear the whole thing. He was saying that dirt was magic dust. Our food comes from it so do we. We walk on it. Yet we take it for granted and don't value it. Same with our breath, our life, just being alive is a tremendous gift. I wasn't taking notes but that was the jist of it. If you prefer not to answer any of these questions, would you explain why? Hey, if I prefer not to answer any of these questions, and if I explain why I don't want to answer, wouldn't that be answering a question? Hey, I just been tricked! Way, you are one sneaky guy! Sheeesh. You don't happen to work for 'Confuse a Cat Limited' do you?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 14:27:48 (GMT) From: Way Email: None To: Deputy Dog Subject: Thanks, Dog, for those responses Message:

Dog, I appreciate the answers. I asked them because you have posted here for a long time and we have discussed things on and off, but I never could tell how much of a practicing premie you are. You often claimed that you related to Knowledge as strictly a personal experience unrelated to a cult, and I began to think maybe you really are not following Maharaji at all. You may recall that I once stated you were very close to being an ex. Now I see that you are indeed a fully active current Person With Knowledge and certainly a loyal follower of Maharaji, despite your occasional vague claims to the contrary. Your claims about not being in a cult must be based on your own personal definition and ideas about what consitutes a cult. My view is pretty simple - a cult is an authoritative religious leader and his followers. I have to elaborate just a bit. A Lutheran pastor and his congregation is not a cult, in my view, because the pastor is not seen as being a direct link to the experience of God. To have a cult, you must have a leader who claims some sort of direct link to the Godhead (so to speak) and the God-given ability to guide others to that link. This can take many forms, from an Eastern guru who claims to have reached Samadhi or Nirvana, or someone who claims a divine right to interpret the Bible for his followers, etc. I believe my understanding of the word 'cult' corresponds directly to the dictionary definition, and I leave aside the possible negative connotations the word usually involves. So, to my understanding, you are most definitely a cult member, following a cult leader. My only question to you now is can you give me some explanation of what your view of a cult is and how you think Mr. Rawat is not a cult leader and you are not a cult member. I'm assuming you have some sort of special understanding that is not dictionary-accurate. By the way, I have two other curiosities about current premies like yourself: (1) I wonder at how middle-aged people can continue to find Mr. Rawat's discourse A+. When I hear him talk about dirt as magic dust, for example, I cringe at the juvenile quality of the way he speaks. The example I give here is just one example. His discourse is constantly and thoroughly juvenile. (2) I also wonder at how people who say that they have reached the pinnacle of human evolution thanks to Knowledge, (as you claimed) still need frequent inspiration to meditate. If Knowledge were really as consistent and as wonderful as premies claim, why do they need to be talked into doing it? I still meditate, but only because I really want to and because I like it. I certainly don't need 'inspiration' to sit and quiet myself when I don't feel like it. I realize Dog, that I am putting you on the spot, so to speak, and you may not like being confronted directly, and on my terms. But again, I would appreciate your honest answers, in the hope that a mutual understanding can be developed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 17:11:18 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Way Subject: And three Q's from me for DEP... Message:

(1) What does 'satsang' mean? (2) If M died or retired leaving wishes that X become 'Master' - would you wait until you had graded the new boss's satsang before deciding whether X was worth listening to? (3) Could you tell the difference between the A+ satsang given by Maharaji and the E- pretend satsang of a joker? I mean, could you face my 'real-M vs fake-M' experiment? (Shroom tried it and failed miserably. Perhaps he wasn't as sharp as you at recognising the First Class stuff... eh?) Wanna try it? It's just a bit of fun.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 23:09:49 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Way Subject: Probing questions to a premie?? R U Sisyphus?nt Message:

Blah, blah, blah.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 21:13:55 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Danny Subject: To MD, another perspective entirely Message:

Danny: By the way, spin is spin and reading the Elan Vital FAQ or reading Gore/Bush press releases are virtually indistinguishable experiences. I give equal weight to all the above. None. This is probably the most telling thing you've written. In other words you start by giving him the same latitude you reserve for politicians, which seems the belie the claim that he's a spiritual leader. If he's a politician then let's judge him by that yardstick, OK? Or is it possible you're suggesting that he not be judged by any yardstick at all? Surely not? --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 21:39:46 (GMT) From: Susan Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Rawat uses EV to deflect blame from himself Message:

I think he always has. But it seems he has gotten even better at it. Danny misses the point that these EV posts surely are cleared by Rawat before they go on the site. EV is speaking for Rawat. If he doesn't like the FAQs they wouldn't be up. If he wanted the PAMs to bark like dogs and pee on fire hydrants they would. Rawat stays 'pure' and it is always the honchos, the premies, the bongos, the world, or whoever that doesn't understand him. He is a victim of all these confused people and he is so merciful to even let them send him their money.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 21:43:46 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Susan Subject: Yeah, Danny what do you say to this? Message:

Danny, I didn't even notice that part of your post until Scott pointed it out. Do you really think that EV would utter lies like that on their website without full authorization -- maybe even authoring -- of Maharaji? Please, tell us how that would work. Entertain us, Danny boy.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:23:15 (GMT) From: AJW Email: None To: Danny Subject: Danny, you have my sympathies Message:

Hi Danny, You sound like a sincere, intelligent person. What a shame you got trapped in a religious cult when you were young and impressionable. Your faith in the creator has carried you through. All that sincere effort and devotion to the Lord can't have been pissing into the wind right? And besides, you have the practical experience of 'Knowledge' right Danny? That 'limitless peace within'. And because of all this stuff, you know, in your heart, that you are walking the path of Truth. Not like the Moonies, the Hare Krishnas, the Children of God, the Followers of Bhagwan. You're following the true master with the true knowledge right? What a waste Danny. You've spent god knows how many years moulding and bending your view and philosophy of life to cater for this wierd set of beliefs you have ('Knowledge' is some kind of deep meaningful experience of life, Mahararji is you master etc). And it all makes sense to you... ...until that is, you take your post hippy philosphy out into the light of day. Then it becomes plain for all to see Danny- you're hanging on to a crock of shit. You're just another type of Moonie Danny, like I was. I hope you have the inner courage to get straightened out. Anth, glad to be out of the cul-de-sac

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:59:39 (GMT) From: Gregg Email: None To: Danny Subject: To Danny, an intelligent premie. Message:

And in my experience, many premies are very intelligent. Why intelligent people get suckered into this simplistic semi-Hindu cult is something about which I have opinions, but, never mind, for now. This, for now: many of us, if you've been a sometime visitor, you surely know, have been passionately involved with spiritual development for some time. Both pre- and post- Maharaj Ji. Have you ever had doubts about your guru's credentials? You should have. I've had doubts about my guru's credentials, and he's a hell of a lot more qualified than yours (and, once upon a time, mine). 'Never leave room for doubt in your mind,' a commandment you are no doubt familiar with, is anathema to true spiritual growth, as opposed to spiritual slavery, in my opinion. On this site, we are certainly opposed to GMJ's teachings. But the range of opinion -- from atheist to God-inspired -- is certainly much much greater than anything you are used to in your premie community. And I suppose you can dismiss Michael's statements the same way I could dismiss anti-M statements back in the day: 'He's in his mind.' Please. Use your brain. It's still working. And God doesn't mind your using your mind. There are many valid paths out there. Leave the cult and Grow! (My partisan feeling. I can't deny anyone's personal experience...I know -- from experience -- that you can be a member of GMJ's cult and still grow. It's just that there are so many authentic non-cultic paths out there...)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 19:50:15 (GMT) From: Danny Email: None To: Gregg,Bin,Katie,Joe,etc. Subject: Replies to some Qs Message:

Hi people, Rather than take up lots of space I'll try my best to reply to some questions from a few folks here in one swell foop. I'll deal with the ones that came with a reasonably or at least marginally friendly tone. Some of you, at least in your cyber-personas, left your charm back on the road somewhere. I hope you find it again, regardless of the route you choose to take. I don't post much and I couldn't help but notice that, for the most part, no one dealt with many of the points I was raising. Then again, I was responding to what seemed like an oddly forced about-face from Michael Dettmers. I also couldn't help but notice that the second he started agreeing with y'all, you embraced him like a long-lost friend when days before, most of you were heaping torrents of abuse on him. I strongly feel that whatever side of an issue one is on, determining your treatment of another human being this way is unbalanced, dehumanizing and just plain wayyyyy off. End of speech. Here are my answers. You may not like 'em but they weren't written by a committee or focus group. Gregg asked, 'Have you ever had doubts about your guru's credentials?' Not in a few decades. I've usually felt so good around him that there wasn't much to question, frankly. If, when in someone's presence, you felt at your highest, happiest, warmest and most aware, would you be asking them for proof-of-lineage certificates? Another way of looking at it: if you regularly felt powerfully sexually aroused around a certain person, would you need to ask them if they're hot? Gregg also said,' I've had doubts about my guru's credentials, and he's a hell of a lot more qualified than yours' Let's just leave that for what it is. 'But the range of opinion (on this site) -- from atheist to God-inspired -- is certainly much much greater than anything you are used to in your premie community.' Can't say I've run into lots of 'God-inspired' dialogue here, Gregg. I haven't been in a premie community (in the sense that you remember) for around 15 years. I'd have to say the range of opinion in the circles I run in would be somewhat larger than here, no offense. Strictly on the subject of Maharaji there's a larger range as well, along a wide spectrum which I mentioned in the original post. Gregg also wrote, 'Please. Use your brain. It's still working.' Thanks. I use my brain quite regularly, though on certain Mondays it fails to make an appearance. Bin Liner asked,' Maybe you'd like to say what you think about the allegation I made then , that a well known EV/UK spokesperson said to a video event organiser , vis a vis a premie who was becoming disenchanted with Bollix Shwar , ' if someone consciously obstructs M's work & won't stop , then in the end the only thing you can do is kill them' , or words to that effect.now ; you can always weave in a mention of the threat to MD , & your general thoughts on the role of intimidation in the divine plan.' Hi Bin. I don't know anything about your allegation. It sounds suspiciously like the tape of that security guy from 1973. I already told Jim what I thought of that email to Michael. It stinks. I don't believe anything worthwhile comes from intimidation, except perhaps a few extra strikeouts in a baseball game. No one should be forced or coerced to believe anything, including what people here believe or disbelieve. I'm a big fan of tolerance and leaving people alone who you disagree with. Katie (hello, Katie) quoted me saying,'Because, with some exceptions of course, no other view but the party platform (M is a fraud with no gift, talent or intelligence, it’s all about $, M’s motivation is to fuck people’s minds, set loose hammer-wielding child abusers on the world and get new, groovy forms of transportation and space-age plumbing fixtures, all premies are blithering nitwits and anyone who disagrees with any of this is a hypnotized, apologist cultist} is ever tolerated.' Katie then said, 'Sorry, but this just isn't true (I know you said 'with some exceptions', but that's not enough.) Like Joe and Nigel said a few days ago, I really dislike it when people make generalizations about this forum and its 'party platform' and assume that almost everyone on it has the exact same opinions about Maharaji, premies, and whatever. I find this to be PERSONALLY insulting.' Oh Katie, you seem like a lovely person. Please stop huffing. You very well may be one of the exceptions I noted but I stand by every single word above. Joe, who you mention, and who is probably a wonderful guy on Terra Firma, seems to come at anyone who sees this aspect of life differently from himself in just that way (look how he responded to me)...as do Jim, Rob, Gerry and most of the louder, more militant 'exes.' Jim, among the 'right-wingers,' at least leavens his abuse with some wit and the odd dollop of charm. Thus, the strychnine parfait. Katie then wrote, 'I agree that there are people on this forum who feel the way you described, but there are plenty who do NOT feel that way.' Perhaps so, but face it, Katie. The former group is clearly the predominate tone and voice of this page, whether you wish it wasn't so or not. This is what is largely projected here and THIS is what those unscientific 98% of people who've had some connection in whatever way to Maharaji do not agree with or wish to contribute to. Hostility, abuse and intolerance are NOT on the menu for most people. I know you don't embody or enjoy those 'qualities' but they are evidenced here in spades. If some of you weren't so busy being on the same 'side,' it might be more apparent to you. Joe, nasty tone and all asked,'why do you think there is NO open discussion on any of the premie websites, including Maharaji's?' Hi Joe. There is no 'open discussion' on MOST web sites covering MOST subjects. I don't know why this seems so sinister or unusual to you. The content being presented is Maharaji's, not Baba Ghanoush's, Ford trucks or RuPaul's CDs. Those who aren't interested go elsewhere. Most sites that are discussion-based have to do with a particular software, application or fan club. Even so, if you go to a Pagemaker discussion board and start talking about Quark Express, they'll ask you to stop or leave. Maharaji's not asking the general public how to teach...nor is Qantas Airlines asking people what movies they should show or what entrees they should serve. The people that want to discuss how much or why they hate Maharaji discuss that here, with few exceptions. That's 'open', but only in a limited sense. By the way, I don't intend to belittle or marginalize any pain anyone here has about these issues. I also know that one can get stuck on some perceived injustice (real or imagined) and it can be a bitch to extricate one's self from it, even if it's purely mental. I just can't pretend that it's my pain. It isn't. That's why I wrote the original post to Michael. Is it HIS experience he's speaking from or an empathetic amalgamation of others' grievances? Remember, when he wrote from what appeared to be HIS perception, it was greeted with raspberries. Plus a heavy dose of intimidation, Mr. Bin. AJW said, 'Danny, you have my sympathies.' Aren't you the fella who came to the profound realization that Knowledge was snot? Hold on to your sympathies. And your hankie. Danny, the Doing Just Fine and Nasally Satisfied

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 19, 2000 at 05:30:32 (GMT) From: Jerry Email: None To: Danny Subject: Replies to some Qs Message:

If, when in someone's presence, you felt at your highest, happiest, warmest and most aware, would you be asking them for proof-of-lineage certificates? Jim's response pretty much said it all, Danny, and I hope you do think about it as he requested. I've just got one more thought. If the feelings you have about Maharaji are based on who he claims to be, then yeah, it might be a good idea to question if he really is that person. A lot of us just took it for granted that he was. Actually, we all had it drummed into us that he was. We started out skeptics, but soon enough, after all the satsang we got bombarded with and all the happy shiny people, we started to believe it. Unfortunately, once we did, we kinda got stuck in that gear, until somebody (as in my case, and now your's) told us to slow down and think about it. Maybe you should. Maharaji is not who you think he is, Danny. He's just some distant figure, charismatic, to be sure, who's peddling some simple meditation techniques. That's all he is. Nothing to get all goo-goo-ga-ga about. That's just crazy, man.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 22:38:10 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Danny Subject: Look at what you've become, Danny -- no seriously Message:

Danny, You are glib and, in the right circumstances, that's a strength, not a weakness. But here, Danny Boy, it's a weakness. And why? Because your glibness cuts off your intelligence. Makes you sound as dumb as Bjorn, when it comes right down to it. I'll just give you one example (for now) but ask that you consider it honestly and fully. Really think about it, Dan. Really, really think about it. I'd be most interested in your reply. You wrote: Gregg asked, 'Have you ever had doubts about your guru's credentials?' Not in a few decades. I've usually felt so good around him that there wasn't much to question, frankly. If, when in someone's presence, you felt at your highest, happiest, warmest and most aware, would you be asking them for proof-of-lineage certificates? Another way of looking at it: if you regularly felt powerfully sexually aroused around a certain person, would you need to ask them if they're hot? I say that both your explanation and the analogy you think proves your case are breathtakingly superficial and inadequate. The analogy, quite frankly, is stupid. Maharaji presents himself as 'The Master'. Now let's be honest about this. For all his caginess, for all his blanket denials and bold-faced lies, there is, in fact, a historical and public record. This man has most definitely made some extremely extravagant claims for himself. Go to the DLM / EV Papers section here on this site and review some of the 'I am God' quotes. The same ones that EV claims were never uttered. Go to Maharaji's own web site where, as I think Joe pointed out the other day, Maharaji claims lineage as a Master. Consider ANY of his old satsangs. Any of them. He most definitely is claiming something very, very special for himself. Then consider the fact that Maharaji's lineage and thus credentials has been vigorously challenged by the very crew that supported him in this regard to begin with, his family. Then consider the history of the whole Ridemypony tradition, again as outlined on JM's website mentioned above. This much is indisputable, Dan: Maharaji is claiming something very extraordinary for himself, something far beyond the day-to-day experience of you, me or anyone we know -- he's claiming to be a 'Master', indeed the Master. Yet that claim is challenged and disputed from every direction. Even he has a hard time with it! The one group of people in this entire world that doesn't question him are his remaining followers. So, what could it possibly mean that your entire confirmation of his 'Master-ness' depends on nothing more than a feeling? When you're around him you feel good so there's nothing to question? That's what I mean by superficial, Dan. That is superficiality in the extreme. Think about it. Isn't the truth of the matter that you are doing no more than accepting Maharaji on his own terms? It's not that you don't have doubts and questions, it's just that you know he won't possibly deal with them so you'd better off pretend they're just not there? Isn't that it? And isn't that exactly how Maharaji himself suggests that one deal with doubts and problems when they occur? I think it was when he was last in India that he said that the best way to deal with problems is to ignore them. Go search ELK, it's all there. And, again, isn't this the epitome of superficiality? Dan, whether you want to acknowledge that or not, you know damn well that everyone BUT a current follower of your cult leader would say as much. It's just too obvious for words. But then your comments aren't just superficial, they're also stupid. Why do I say that? Because your analogy to sex appeal is oh so dumb! Sex appeal is all about personal impressions, Dan. That and nothing more. But what we're talking about is a bit more than Maharaji's golden skin and commanding figure, wouldn't you say? Dan, I'm not suggesting that you find a better analogy! Rather I'm inviting you to consider the thought process that lead you to offering such a bad one to begin with. See, I firmly believe that a smart guy like you wouldn't say something so stupid if you were thniking clearly. Indeed, as is apparent with cults-- and you should read the literature if you haven't already. It's all out there and this is a commonly-accepted notion -- people in cults have big, fat blind spots regarding their cults that do, in fact, make them function far below their real capacities as demonstrated in all other areas. Your very, very, very bad analogy says it all, Dan. Think about it, please.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 15:55:31 (GMT) From: janet of venice Email: None To: DANNY Subject: TO ALL PREMIES WHO COME HERE-LOOK AT THIS Message:

i see something else that needs examining too-- let's take your replies in order:'Have you ever had doubts about your guru's credentials?' and you respond truthfully,'Not in a few decades.' okay. good.>what were those doubts, when you did have them? now we go to your second response: 'I've usually felt so good around him that there wasn't much to question, frankly.' please look at that twice. think on a few other comparable circumstances, in which the same could be uttered, with equally clear 20/20 hindsight: 'I don't know why i let him talk me into it, Officer. He just made it seem so logical/natural/clear/ cool/exciting/ok/obvious/fun/, i just went along with it. We just did it. It was always like that when i was with him.' 'and so there seemed to be nothing wrong with it, when you (pick one or all:)shot that family/robbed that convenience store/raped that girl/ burned down that house/vandalized that school/stole that car/beat up that faggot/killed that kid?' contemplate on that , Danny-- and all other premies reading this? You explain yourself by asking us' If, when in someone's presence, you felt at your highest, happiest, warmest and most aware, would you be asking them for proof-of-lineage certificates?' Given the above, real-life story, that plays out every day, in police stations everywhere, think on your answer and whether you, yourself, would take that as a responsible, prudent,wise or realistic accounting, for trusting to follow someone without thinking?. Would you take that as a satisfactory answer from your teenage son who was in custody, down at the station? from your daughter, who was pregnant, and had AIDS from the encounter? from your aged mother, who gave her life savings to a suave, seasoned con, and is now penniless? from your spouse, who contracted with some charming guy who drove a truck, she met in the mall parking lot, who said he could remodel your kitchen for $5,000, cash on the barrelhead, and she used all your credit cards to pay him, up front, and he never came back? let's go to your second example: 'Another way of looking at it: if you regularly felt powerfully sexually aroused around a certain person, would you need to ask them if they're hot?' correction: no, you would need to ask yourself why you felt so powerfully aroused around them. you would need to ask yourself if they were that hot. You would need to ask yourself if pursuing sex with them were worth, say, destroying your marriage. or losing your job. or destroying their marriage. or getting AIDS. or siring a child you couldnt support or raise. you might ask yourself whether they were deliberately using their sexuality, to get something they wanted from you. Or intentionally distracting or diverting your attention, and better judgement, for some ulterior motive. (refer to above scenarios, esp the daughter, the mother, the wife.) let's say instead of being taken in, you did your background research. the teen boy thinks for himself and refuses to do things he knows are wrong. the daughter has a keen sense of self worth and refuses to get intimate unless she is serious about the man and he is too and they both get tested before they undress. your mom knows her mind and doesnt think much of a man who needs her money. your wife gets home with the truck guy's business card and immediately starts making phone calls and discovers that this guy isnt licensed, listed in the phonebook, no one knows him, and the mall management has him listed for passing bad checks. and you do some background research on this indian guy in malibu and you find out that while he says he gives this free, it turns out that everyone he gives it to is asked to give money at every turn for the rest of their lives. while he claims to be The Master who can reveal to you ultimate Peace, you learn from insiders that he never meditates on his own techniques, that he is an alcoholic who displays anxiety, temper, abusiveness, caprice,inconsideration for others, is obsessed with achieving megalomaniacal control over every aspect of his existence.You come to understand that while he talks of love all the time, that he has publicly ridiculed bereavement, and shows zero care for his followers troubles, problems, feelings, experiences, intelligence, or needs, up to and including his wife's. You learn, in your investigating, that this guy has an insatiable hunger for ever more money and material property, which he manipulates to get others to sign their names to be legally responsible for, but they are never to be allowed to enjoy the ownership of. You are incredulous to learn that among these signings, there are a 25 millon dollar house, a 25 million dollar jet, a 7 million dollar yacht, and every personal whim, taste and luxury he can crave. When you wonder where the money could possibly come from, you learn that he never thinks about how, he just wants, and he takes it from his followers at will. You learn that he has warehouses crammed with unwanted gifts his followers have spent stunning amounts of money on, that he is bored or angry with, because they didn't ask him what he wanted or sent money, instead. yet he refuses to part with it or sell it off or distribute it to the needy among his faithful, because its his, dammit, and no one else's. you find out that he evaded bank laws by having his people ferry cash in suitcases across the U S border so there would be no electronic trail to aleert moneylaundering sensors. you listen to eyewitness accounts of toxic dumps, OSHA evasions,unpaid labor, chemical exposure, overcrowding of families, all for the whimsical renovation of an airplane that he didnt want when it was finished. and somewhere along the way, your stomach knots up, your heart stops, your blood runs cold, and you realize, that this guy wants to add you, and the whole rest of the world, to his bottomless vortex----- and you run like hell. IN FACT--YOU START A WEBSITE.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 02:40:15 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: On the other hand... Message:

maybe it's not such a bad analogy after all. Gregg asked, 'Have you ever had doubts about your guru's credentials?' Not in a few decades. I've usually felt so good around him that there wasn't much to question, frankly. If, when in someone's presence, you felt at your highest, happiest, warmest and most aware, would you be asking them for proof-of-lineage certificates? Another way of looking at it: if you regularly felt powerfully sexually aroused around a certain person, would you need to ask them if they're hot? If I were aroused, infatuated or in love with a woman I hope I'd have enough presence of mind to notice whether she was duplicitous and deceitful? Maybe not, but if not I suspect I wouldn't be looking in the mirror congratulating myself on my excellent judgment. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 03:12:11 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: Come on, Scott, think about it Message:

The issue is whether noticing someone's sex appeal is in any way like scrutinizing their authenticity as a 'Perfect Master'. The first kind of assessment is the epitome of a non-intellectual process. But the second? 'He's the Perfect Master because he makes me feel so good whenever I'm around him...' No thanks!

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 05:04:09 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Jim Subject: OK Message:

Jim: The first kind of assessment is the epitome of a non-intellectual process. But the second? Well, so is the second. The point is that it's not a good argument in either case. In a sense, latching onto a charismatic leader is very much like being in love, because the normal rational processes *are* suspended, or at least supressed. The trick is that genuine love can withstand a little scrutiny, as can genuine leadership. So, our long-time-infatuated friend has a lesson to learn. It is at least as bitter as disillusionment with a lover, if not more so. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:57:33 (GMT) From: la-ex Email: None To: Danny Subject: a few questions,Danny.... Message:

Danny-I too go back a long ways-received k in 1972,and went through every imaginable era and error as well. And through it all I didn't really question the master (as in leave no room for doubt in your mind)until the last few years,when things seemed so wierd and strange in the world of m and k, that I had to take a second look at the man on the stage. So, I did follow my heart. I did go inside. I did listen to the still,small voice within. I did stop following my concepts. I gave up the religion. You know what? I took some of m's own advice, applied it to my life,and realized what a con game the whole thing has been for me for so long. It's embarrassing to admit that you've been conned, and believed it for so long. It's beyond comprehension to me how m can do a 180 on who he says he is, and expect all of us to believe it. He said a few days ago in a video-'are you comfortable talking about the master and knowledge?' Who could be,unless they feel comfortable with lies,denials,manipulation and coverups. Are you really going to tell us,as I asked Michael Dettmers a few months ago, that there are 'no unresolved issues from the past with m?' (Michael agreed, and said that there were plenty) We are dealing with them on this site. Sometimes through anecdotes,humour,anger..whatever happens, it's a free flowing discussion,which is a real first for many of us old timers who bought the party line for decades. Can you really look at yourself and say that there are none? How would you deal with them differently? Do you feel that m will deal directly with these issues? Every PAM I know has scoffed at that notion.Unfortunately for m, I believe that his extreme arrogance will be his own undoing. And in an ironic way, technology, which he has used so extensively to further himself, is now helping to expose him and bring him down. Any person in the world is a few mouse clicks away from knowing the truth abut m,and all the hypocrisies and blatant lies that he has told. Please don't tell me abut the 62,000 aspirants in India. We all know that this movement is dying in the US,but very few people want to talk about it, or m's personal problems, which I believe SHOULD be known to people who want to receive K,because the person of maharaji is such a big part of the package (premies generally say he's the WHOLE package, but that's just between premies, not generally told to people in the WORLD...) How about just letting MD tell his story? What do you find so threatening about that? If it's all so beautiful,what would be so bad about that? What are your doubts about m? Are you comfortable with all the deceptions and manipulations we have been put through? Do you feel that m has never lied to us? Just curious, La-ex

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 02:20:34 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: la-ex Subject: And great post, LA... Message:

What's the betting Danny will make himself scarce rather than answer anybody's questions?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 02:22:53 (GMT) From: Selene Email: None To: Nigel , LA Subject: that was a great post, LA... Message:

Like I was reading my own journey. That is exactly what happened to me a few years ago.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:40:51 (GMT) From: Anon Email: None To: Danny Subject: What great love and respect has he shown you? Message:

He's treated me with great love and respect and I'm neither a money donor, OHM nor airplane salesman. And so should any decent person. Can you give one example of How Maharaji has treated you personally with great love and respect? Seriously I would like to know this since I cannot really say the same. I would say that he treated me privately in no particularly extraordinary way. Just normal. Averagely kind and respectful. That is hardly remarkable. I would say that his ashram satsangs of the past- often intimidating stuff-were not particularly loving or respectful, in fact I think he has said some unkind and disrespectful things. I think he has made unrespectful demands on his followers frequently. Please give an example that backs up this claim of yours which I suspect is a glossy interpretation of yours.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:33:28 (GMT) From: Daneane Email: None To: Danny Subject: How come ALL premies say they never gave a dime?nt Message:

Immaculate piggy back floweth over

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:40:02 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Daneane Subject: Funny and on-the-money (no pun) as usual, Daneane Message:

It would have been 'nt' but I didn't have room

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:31:18 (GMT) From: Bin Liner Email: None To: Danny Subject: To MD, another perspective entirely Message:

Are you sure you only 'drop in from time to time' here ? When I made my 1st posting as an ex-premie about 2 months ago you were one of the people who replied. You weren't as eloquent with me as you are with MD , but then I'm just a lost pawn , not a knight or bishop. You still haven't said what you think about the allegation I made then , that a well known EV/UK spokesperson said to a video event organiser , vis a vis a premie who was becoming disenchanted with Bollix Shwar , ' if someone consciously obstructs M's work & won't stop , then in the end the only thing you can do is kill them' , or words to that effect. Maybe you'd like to now ; you can always weave in a mention of the threat to MD , & your general thoughts on the role of intimidation in the divine plan. Or maybe it's all just LILA eh ?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:25:06 (GMT) From: Katie Email: None To: Danny Subject: To MD, another perspective entirely Message:

Hi Danny, I know your question was to Michael Dettmers, so forgive me for butting in here. I just wanted to say a few things. First, the interactions you've seen on the forum between MD and other exes have not been all that's been happening. I think if you read some of Susan's, Jim's, Joe's, La-ex's posts, you may realize that a lot of personal, off-forum, interaction has been going on. I have not liked the way Michael has been treated by many people on this forum (and I've said this), but to assume that that is all that has been going on is incorrect. Second, you wrote: Because, with some exceptions of course, no other view but the party platform (M is a fraud with no gift, talent orthe intelligence, it’s all about $, M’s motivation is to fuck people’s minds, set loose hammer-wielding child abusers on the world and get new, groovy forms of transportation and space-age plumbing fixtures, all premies are blithering nitwits and anyone who disagrees with any of this is a hypnotized, apologist cultist} is ever tolerated. Sorry, but this just isn't true (I know you said 'with some exceptions', but that's not enough.) Like Joe and Nigel said a few days ago, I really dislike it when people make generalizations about this forum and its 'party platform' and assume that almost everyone on it has the exact same opinions about Maharaji, premies, and whatever. I find this to be PERSONALLY insulting. I agree that there are people on this forum who feel the way you described, but there are plenty who do NOT feel that way. You also wrote: This page represents a tiny (but loud) minority viewpoint... The fact is, this bring-the-demonic-Guru-down view doesn’t at all represent the feeling of 98% of the people who’ve received knowledge, both current and former practitioners. In case people here haven’t figured this simple fact out, that’s why they’re not chiming in. I don't know how you can presume to speak for 98% of the people who have received Knowledge, for one thing. But I will tell you something - I have a LOT of ex-premie friends who don't post here. Without exception, they are very supportive of ex-premie.org and my efforts on its behalf. The reason they don't post is not because they don't feel it is important (frankly, most of them didn't even know that Maharaji was still in business and that there were people who had been following him for over 25 years), it is because they have other priorities in their lives - mostly kids, work, or other social causes. Or because they are just not Internet people (there are still some of those around, you know.) Danny, before I found this site, I hadn't thought about Maharaji in 20 years. My attitude was 'Well, he's not that bad, but I'm glad I grew out of it.' You can read my Journeys entry if you want - I feel that I actually was helped at that point in my life by being accepted by the premie community where I live. I didn't sustain permanent damage - at least relative to everything else that had happened to me up to that point. I was actually told about this site by an ex-premie friend who doesn't post here but who did a web search on Maharaji (something I'd never thought of). I originally just had the idea of trying to find some old friends, but I ended up reading the Bob Mishler interview and the archives from Forum I. I was absolutely appalled at what had been going on, and what HAD gone on that I'd been completely unaware of. And then I found out that a close premie friend of mine (a former ashram premie) had killed himself, and that bothered me enough so that I began to help the people who were running the site at the time. This site and forum are about information. This is the ONLY place where ex-premies who didn't know each other in the Real World have been able to connect and communicate. (That is part of the reason you hear so much about the past - for many of us, this forum is the first place we have ever had where we can talk about these things with people who were in the same place at the same time that we were.) And, like I said to MD, before this site's existence, most of us only had little pieces of information that we hadn't been able to put together in order to see the whole picture. Even Michael Dettmers didn't have the whole story, by any means - as he has said. Maharaji and EV have always suppressed information about what has gone on and what is going on in their organization - they did it when I was a premie, and they are doing it now (just read the FAQ's on the EV site). They recently tried to suppress numerous ex-premie sites by legal means. Why do you think they don't want the ex-premie sites on-line? Do you think they might be trying to hide something? I think everyone has a right to have access to information about Maharaji's past, and about what he is doing in the present. And to be able to read about the experiences of people who, for one reason or another, have become disenchanted with Maharaji. Basically, it's here on ex-premie.org for people to read, and I, for one, respect the ability of these people to make up their own minds about how they feel about this information. I also think it's insulting to assume that people in general - and Michael Dettmers in particular - cannot make up their own minds about the posts on this forum. Sincerely, Katie

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:38:15 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Katie Subject: Great post, Katie Message:

Well said indeed.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:32:09 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Danny Subject: more Message:

Danny, Dettmers has clearly had a change of heart since any of us exes first interacted with him last spring. Sounds like you would attribute that to Michael's being 'harassed, harangued, berated, slandered, insulted and repeatedly dissed on this page by a lynch-mob mentality' and not simply his own evolution through dialogue, reflection and, as he himself suggests, reaction to some of EV's recent shenannigans like its FAQs. You would remind Michael of his 'real' sentiments, the ones you've quoted and which he expressed earlier in the ball game. I guess what you're trying to do, I'm sure you'd agree, is save Michael from the clutches of the Ex-Premie cult. Right? So, Danny, let's assume, for a moment, that there's an issue here. Is it the case that Michael's been so badly brow-beaten, cajoled and interrogated that he really has lost any sense of his own autonomy? His own self? Are we talking Manchurian Candidate time? Is that what you're thinking? Well, let's assume, for argument's sake, that that's possible. 'kay? In that case, Danny, I'd ask you what tools you'd suggest Michael employ to try to solve this 'puzzle'? Yes, he's got his own words thrown back at him. That's some evidence of something. Sure. But how would you suggest he consider those words? Huh? For example, Michael, like the rest of us here, seems a bit miffed by the apparent lies of EV's FAQs. How would you suggest he deal with that concern? Come on, Danny, if you're trying to lead the guy back into the fold surely you have a plan or something. What? You've done a clever enough (for a premie, that is!) job of ridiculing our criticisms of Maharaji, the signs we call tell-tale of the man's real character. You know, the spatula, Raoul's calcium, that's all funny ane everything. But are we to take from your post that there are no concerns worth fretting over in terms of Maharaji's behaviour, past or present? Like, Danny, you also throw back at Michael that maybe he is the inattentive friend who didn't keep up the communication. But, Danny, what would you suggest Michael say to his former guru besides 'Hi, how're you doin'?' Any ideas, Dan? And if they do get to talking someday, ( thanks to you, perhaps), do you then think it'd be foolhardy of Michael to bring up, say, some of these pesky matters, like the multi-million dollar yacht, the EV lies? I guess what I'm asking you is are you really offering Michael any sort of path of reason or is it just a hole in the ground -- right next to yours -- to stick his head in? Furthermore, you state, as if you know, that 98% of the people who received Knowledge don't share the same anti-Maharaji sentiment that prevails here. Are you serious? First of all, how do you know? Well, of course you don't. You're just saying it. But even though none of us, I assume, have done any formal surveys of any kind, do you honestly think that only 2% of all those people think that Maharaji's a fraud? How interesting. Anyway, not to ramble. Are you Danny Coyne, by the way?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:46:54 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: None To: Jim Subject: Great post, Jim (nt) Message:

nt

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:09:08 (GMT) From: Nigel Email: fitzroy@liverpool.ac.uk To: Danny Subject: The pipes, the pipes are calling... Message:

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 23:55:43 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Danny Subject: What do you think of Bill Murray, Danny boy?(nt) Message:

ffffff

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 18:15:52 (GMT) From: Danny Email: None To: Jim Subject: What do you think of Bill Murray, Danny boy? Message:

Hi Jim, I think that email is the work of a full-blooded, low-rent jackass. Whether it was written by a premie or ex, my opinion would be the same. Danny

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 18:28:21 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Danny Subject: Thanks for that answer. I agree. Message:

dddddd

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 11:29:19 (GMT) From: Mel Bourne Email: None To: Jim Subject: Heres what I think of Bill Murray! Message:

This is a copy of an email I've just sent to Mr Bill Murray... Bill I am a premie that occasionally contributes to the Ex-premie Forum in defense of Maharaji and premies and I am absolutely appalled at the blatant threats in your email to Michael Dettmers. I can only assume that you are acting on your own and not (hopefully) on behalf of Maharaji and Elan Vital. I believe your threats are despicable and entirely counter productive to dealing with the issues that ex-premies raise in a fair and rational manner. If you have ever read the Forum you would realise that such threats will merely confirm the views that many ex-premies have of Maharaji and premies generally. You obviously have access to the ex-premie forum so I would request that you publicly apologise to Michael on the Forum . Mel I can only assume that Elan Vital have read what Mr Murray has said to Michael Dettmers and will publicly dissociate themselves from his comments as a matter of their and (indirectly) Maharaji's credibility. Mel

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 15:25:44 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Mel Bourne Subject: My first valentine to Mel Message:

Good one. Keep going .......

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:12:43 (GMT) From: Bjørn Email: None To: Jim Subject: What I think ? Message:

There are a only few possibilities. 1. Micheal Dettmers became a nonbrainer during the weekend. 2. Micheal Dettmers last post was made by a fraud 3. Bill Murray is a premie pretending to be an ex-premie 4. Bill Murray is a ex-premie pretending to be a premie I think one of the above.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:35:23 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Bjørn Subject: A little wishful thinking, Bjorn? Message:

I talked with Michael today and, believe it or not, he sounded every bit as sharp as you, Bjorn. Number one's out. As is number two. Now your third possibility makes no sense. We'll pretend we didn't read it. The fourth? Why do you say that? Because no premie would ever threaten someone like that? You sure, Bjorn? Tell me about it.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:08:51 (GMT) From: Coach Email: None To: Jim Subject: MD's e-mail spoofed? Message:

Jim, If Bjorn is correct in his post below the e-mail sent to MD was spoofed so you won't get the ISP from the e-mail address, 'cos it don't exist. It may have been sent with some little e-mail prog that allows a sender to send anonymously. However, the information in the e-mail 'properties' could provide the necessary data to identify the sender. It's just that you mentioned trying to help MD get the guy kicked of his ISP. So, obviously, MD doesn't want to delete the e-mail on his machine and just keep a hard copy or something. The e-mail 'properties' should have the ISP and the modem from which the e-mail was sent. That plus the time and ISP logs might give the user. Coach.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 03:25:19 (GMT) From: Scott T. Email: None To: Coach Subject: MD's e-mail spoofed? Message:

Coach: There are at least a few email services that are completely anonymous, so that not even the server knows the identity of customers. These are, as yet, used infrequently so chances are you're correct that information in the header would be revealing. --Scott

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Tues, Oct 17, 2000 at 17:16:15 (GMT) From: Coach Email: None To: Scott T. Subject: MD's e-mail spoofed? Message:

Scottie, Thanx for that morsel of info. I live an' learn. Coach

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:28:17 (GMT) From: Coach Email: None To: Coach Subject: Forget It(nt) Message:

sdc

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 00:49:13 (GMT) From: Bjørn Email: None To: Jim Subject: So how come Jim Message:

If this mail would have been sent from Murrray, and received by Michael, it would be possible to send a mail to the same address? Right? It is not. If you copy the address and try to send a mail to this address, it does not exist. At least I did not manage to send anything to this addresss.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 01:24:53 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Bjørn Subject: Oh yeah? Message:

Well, Bjorneo, I emailed him too and my email never bounced back. Here's what I sent three and a half hours ago: Hey guy, I read your email to Michael Dettmers over on the ex-premie forum and have to ask you what in the world you hope to accomplish with this. Don't you know that it just makes the cult look disgustingly pathetic, flailing like that? Anyway, I'm inclined to send your email to your server as well. My experience suggests that they'll cancel your account in a flash once they put two and two together (Don't worry, Bill, I'll help them do that.) I've done this before with great success. They'll probably also identify you, by the way. How do you like that? But, being nice and everything, I thought I'd email you first and give you an opportunity to explain yourself. Got anything to say, Bill? Anthing? Jim

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 07:23:37 (GMT) From: Bjørn Email: None To: Jim Subject: You are right Jim Message:

When I tried to send the email, I got the message 'no matches found'. But what I had done was to clip all the text in the from area. My post also came through when I just clipped 'the mail to' address. But as you wrote; Hey guy, I read your email to Michael Dettmers over on the ex-premie forum and have to ask you what in the world you hope to accomplish with this. Don't you know that it just makes the cult look disgustingly pathetic, flailing like that? I agree with your statement thus I made the 3 & 4 alternatives in my previous post. But stupidity is everywhere

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 15:27:01 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Bjørn Subject: My first valentine to Bjorn Message:

Good one. Keep going ....

Return to Index -:- Top of Index