|
|
|
Mike, in answer to your response in an earlier thread...
But the negative and worthless I learned from him far outweigh the positive.
So can I ask why you originally came to him? In my case I needed (not wanted) to experience first hand who I am. Knowledge gave me a tool to do just that; if for no other reason than the time I spent quietly letting my awareness be taken deeper into myself took me closer and closer to 'me'.
You can opine all you want about the motives of the man, but the process of turning your awareness inward through Knowledge does, without question, increase your knowledge of self. So I find it intriguing that if you had an experience anywhere close to mine -- which could not be anything but the case if you sat and quieted the mind to any degree -- that you would not value highly such an experience. I mean, higher than satisfying your curiosity about such topics as astronomy, physics, etc… all interesting and exciting topics, but when the heart laments its emptiness, that stuff doesn’t come anywhere near satisfying its need to be filled.
So Mike, it makes me wonder just what you came to him for if satisfying a need in the heart was not what drove your initial acceptance and continued adherence for all those years. If it wasn't that your thirst was co-opted by your curiosity, perhaps it was one of the following:
a) Wanted to be on the winning team; after all, they did say he was God
b) Was a cool kid and thought it intriguing how at his age he could control all those devotees
c) Found an Eastern approach that offered a healthy escape from the angst and tedium of a western bred youth
d) Wasn’t ready yet to join the establishment
e) Enjoyed the camaraderie you had with premies
f) Found a cause you could get behind (see b)
g) Just got caught in the zeitgeist of the day
h) All of the above
And I think I could have learnt the positive from Maharaji in a fraction of the 30 years I spent with him, and saved myself all the grief.
In the last 30 years of my life I have been reminded countless times of the beauty within, and have been encouraged to persevere and keep reaching to quench the thirst that made me look for something more in the first place. This, in the face of doubt, fatigue, distraction, and emotional dyspepsia. And it’s taken all 30 of those years to learn what I’ve learned. I know what you're thinking… who gives a flying fuck what I did for the last 30 years, right? Whatever...
So what were those positives you could have learnt in a fraction of the time?
In fact, he increased the thirst with his tanatalizing promise of how he could quench it, but which went nowhere.
First let me say I consider increasing thirst to be a positive.
And you say it went nowhere. If experiencing what is left when thought subsides and no longer controls your attention is “nowhere” then I have to ask what you consider to be “somewhere”! (Or do you have no idea what I’m talking about?)
No-one has hijacked my perception; the tragedy is that I let Maharaji hijack it for so long.
If everything he said is, as your “robust and well-tuned bullshit meter” now indicates, was, well… bullshit, how could you have let it go on for “so long”? Thirty years man! That astonishes me Mike. If it was bullshit for 30 years then I’d say something else was ruling the day… like irresponsibility. You must have a difficult time explaining that one to yourself.
Or has the role of “victim” become a refuge from the self-criticism stirred up by such questions? Guess that’s why you have no choice but to degrade anything positive he ever did for you, to the point of demonizing him. The greater the deceit, the more comfortable the role of "victim".
I'd say your bullshit meter still needs a bit of tuning Mike.
Modified by jonx at Tue, Mar 29, 2005, 15:16:26
|
|
|
|
|
Jonx,
I'm not surprised that you didn't respond to my post below. What could you say? That you admit that you're a bullshitter who doesn't know what you think or say from one day to the next?
The post in the link below spells out the following:
- I offered you proof that Rawat claimed to be God.
- You responded that you had never said he wasn't God.
- I showed you an earlier post where you did, in fact, claim just that.
Game over!
Related link: Jonx caught in the headlights
|
|
|
|
Come on big boy! You quoted me responding to Brauns, which was at best quite oblique grounds to claim I'm a bullshitter. I didn't respond to the post in question because it was just more technical posturing on your part, which gets very tiresome. I mean, you must be really irritating at parties mate.
To set the record straight: I have always offered the possibility that he may in fact be God, as inferred by your quote. And if that were the case, he wouldn't have lied. Why don't you go ahead and look for that post Jim.
|
|
|
|
Come on big boy! You quoted me responding to Brauns, which was at best quite oblique grounds to claim I'm a bullshitter.
John specifically paraphrased your views as he understood them and presented them to you. The whole exercise was for one purpose alone and that was to clarify your position. John's first point was that Rawat is not God. You had every opportunity to disagree or quibble. Instead, you did neither.
I didn't respond to the post in question because it was just more technical posturing on your part, which gets very tiresome. I mean, you must be really irritating at parties mate.
No, you're lying. You didn't respond because you're caught. That's all. It's obvious.
To set the record straight: I have always offered the possibility that he may in fact be God, as inferred by your quote. And if that were the case, he wouldn't have lied. Why don't you go ahead and look for that post Jim.
First, you mean "implied" not "inferred". Look it up. Second, YOU look it up. I just see the one post where you accepted John's statement of your views. That's enough for me.
|
|
|
|
Well then, I guess we disagree... nuff said. Now bite me!
|
|
|
|
A fair discussion is an honest one. But honesty is too much to ask of you, isn't it? You're a premie. You've got something a bit more special than plain ol' honesty, don't you?
|
|
|
|
A fair discussion is an honest one. But honesty is too much to ask of you, isn't it? You're a premie. You've got something a bit more special than plain ol' honesty, don't you?
Of course I can have an honest discussion about Maharaji. I've been honest to-date.Who the fuck are you to define honesty?
|
|
|
|
Of course I can have an honest discussion about Maharaji. I've been honest to-date.Who the fuck are you to define honesty?
I confronted you with evidence that you couldn't refute. That's why you flailed:
Well then, I guess we disagree... nuff said. Now bite me!
An honest person would have stayed on point and discussed it fairly. You didn't because you couldn't.
You already lost, Jonx!
|
|
|
|
Twist and turn. Obfuscate and dissemble. Innuendo and insults. Not a lick of fact or rational thought. No logic...... none!
The panel would eat him alive!
To Jonx: You have been peer-reviewed....... your presentation sux!
Modified by NAR at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 17:45:24
|
|
|
|
He'd make a reasonable spin doctor though. lol
|
|
|
|
I confronted you with evidence that you couldn't refute. That's why you flailed:
Stop flattering yourself Jim. You confronted me with a lame theatrical argument for no other reason than to try and discredit me, and you had no stomach whatsoever to discuss fairly the point I was making.
Now THAT is honesty.
|
|
|
|
Three limbs off and you're daring me to fight!
You really are funny, Jonx. Thanks for the entertainment.
|
|
|
|
Come back here and I'll bite your legs off
|
|
|
|
From "Life With Knowledge" ~ The Premie Guidebook ~ DLM 1975.
Modified by Hilltop at Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 00:56:53
|
|
|
|
From the Divine Times, June/July 1978. Page 37.
|
|
|
|
Dudes
To we mere mortals the very notion that such a transparent, conniving pipsqueek as Rawat could actually be considered by anyone as a candidate for God is ... well, words almost fail me... Jonx, I have to tell you, if I had a choice I would prefer you as God.
While you are clearly as foolish as Rawat your criminal intelligence falls some way short.
Luv Candy. Seriously, can you believe this crap?
|
|
|
|
"The only one who can settle the governments down is the Perfect Master, the incarnation of God Himself, who comes to Earth to save mankind". This quote recently came to light. Do you now concede that Rawat claimed he was God and the saviour of mankind? Jim Not all all.
If Maharaji meant he was God he would have said - The only one who can settle the governments down is me, God Himself, who comes to Earth to save mankind. But he didn't say "me" , he said the "Perfect Master" which also includes many other teachers, including his father ie it is the role that is important not the individual.
But most importantly he said "the incarnation" of God.
And as we should all know "incarnation" means "any person or thing regarded as embodying or exhibiting some quality, idea or the like - the leading dancer is the incarnation of grace". He isn't "grace" but he embodies or exhibits "grace".
And since, according to Maharaji, his father was the Perfect Master before him and his father had a Perfect Master before him etc, etc, the idea of saving mankind doesn't begin or end with Prem Rawat, anymore than the phrase " a doctor's role is to save lives" suggests that the role of your doctor is to save the life of every human on the planet and that the death of any human means the doctor failed or lied when he said his role was to save lives. Thanks Check
|
|
|
|
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever read. It's a moebius strip of bullshit. Just look at you fools! First he's not God, now he's not the Perfect Master, no wait, he is God, we never said he wasn't, no, hold on, he's not God, he's just a leader, wait, not that, he's no leader, he's just .....
Go shoot yourself up with some Sodium Pentathol and talk to a mirror. Stupid goofball!
|
|
|
|
That's where he says that it's okay that Rawat said he was the living incarnation of God, because we all are.
It's beyond idiotic.
By the way, if this is the One Reality guy, I sure hope he keeps that website up, because it's about the worst publicity for Rawat in his "new" PR campaign, you could imagine.
It is funny, but I think this guy actually believes this tripe. Talk about twisting yourself into a pretzel to try to explain something away!
|
|
|
|
I wonder if it means "check," as in "check your brains before entering rawatville?" Or maybe..... "check your common sense all who enter rawatville."
No, I've got it, "check your wallet, you are entering rawatville" there be a perfect master-pickpocket there!
Instead of calling that place "one reality," it should be called, "altered reality"
|
|
|
|
Jim,
I called it "twisted revisionism." I like yours better! If this individuals ability to be rational is really this far gone, there is no hope. "Moebius strip" really says it all, Jim...... well chosen, I say, well chosen!
|
|
|
|
The quote stands on its own -The only one who can settle the governments down is the Perfect Master, the incarnation of God Himself, who comes to Earth to save mankind. Any literate person would translate it as I have.
Only a dishonest person would translate "Perfect Master" as exclusively Prem Rawat and ignore the fact that Maharaji has always refered to past teachers as "Perfect Masters".
And only a dishonest person would ignore "the incarnation of" and translate the quote as if that phrase didn't exist.
And only a fool would ignore the obvious.
Check
|
|
|
|
You're out of your league numbskull. Why don't you just go home & relax & forgetallabout it.The Perfect Master has real heavy hitter lawyers looking out for him, & doesn't require the services of an amateur such as yourself. Any literate person would translate it as I have. It's written in plain English, so translation isn't neccessary. Think about it.
|
|
|
|
Translation is not just limited to language.
In this case the translation I made was from Jim's illiterate, illogical conclusion to one based on grammar and context.
|
|
|
|
Just keep repeating that to yourself, Check......... you've been check "mated" and you know it! Worse yet, you don't actually know it.
The contradictory nature of your massa (and those that follow his divine example) is plain for all to see. Please, keep giving us more examples......... we really love displaying that nonsense for all potential victims of your beloved cult and leader.
Modified by NAR at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 13:00:41
|
|
|
|
No one's claiming that Rawat says he's the only incarnation of God to ever live. Just that he's one, that's all.
And before you try to say that maybe he claims there are all sorts of Perfect Masters at any one time, read this:
Wood: Do you think that there is only one Perfect Master?
Maharaj Ji: You see –here I want to be very frank –people come to me and ask me about this, and they say, “What is your opinion about a Perfect Master? Is there one, is there two?” I tell them my opinion that there is only one Perfect Master. Because perfectness, is one, not two, not three. So there is only one Perfect Master in this world. And because he is perfect, that’s it. He is perfect. You just can’t divide perfect.
So it's pretty simple: one Perfect Master in the world at a time and he just happens to be God.
|
|
|
|
How can you possibly expect anything other than stupid responses from people who have left rational thought behind? I mean, let's be realistic, shall we?
|
|
|
|
Check,
That was absolutely the worst case of twisted revisionism that I've ever witnessed. I suppose you are one of those that wonders what the meaning of "is," is!
If you actually believe what you just wrote, your mental capacity and ability to utilize rational thought are completely shot! Toast, gone, hasta la bye-bye.
In other words, your "explanation" is pure road apples!
|
|
|
|
That was really stupid, and premies who say stuff like this aren't even embarassed.
Well, they are anonymous, so maybe no one will know. But even premies who aren't anonymous will say outrageous things to rationalize Rawat's claims to be God, when they would never do that kind of thing in any other arena.
Your post is about the dumbest so far, but I have heard other things that made me sigh just as much.
About a year ago, I had one very intelligent and otherwise lucid premie swear straight face to me that Maharaji was never a living deity to him. ("You didn't actually believe that, Joe did you?' - after singing Arti right next to me, with full pranams, for years).
One other premie I also lived with in the ashram with felt very disaffected and disenfranchised and was dissing Maharaji as a very imperfect Perfect Master with lots of problems, and told me how sad he was that Rawat was such a failure, but this guy was still stuck in some strange Twilight Zone because maybe Maharaji is some whacked out Lord giving them the big test...
I was just kind of flabergasted by those comments, and almost didn't know what to say, except, "oh, come on!"
Jim and Cynthia and Hilltop just seem to have endless energy to dig up the quotes and try to argue with people like you, and I take my hat off to them, but actual facts just don't cut it, because this is not a rational discussion.
Technicolor Lord Delusional Believers is what they say they are, even if all "Coolchilld" websites try to reinvent them.
Premies are a huge problem for Rawat, aren't they?
Modified by Joe at Tue, Mar 29, 2005, 20:26:02
|
|
|
|
If Maharaji meant he was God he would have said ...Eh, bwoy!? HOW is it you know de mind o' de Perfect Master of our times? HOW? Yu is after his job, innit? Yu's in freakin trouble, bwoy, for sayin yu knows the mind o' de PERFECT FREAKIN' MASTAH!! Yo! Deep shit for the dip stick. Heh, heh, heh! Mr T
(also never a premie)
|
|
|
|
Jonx, your little diatribe is nothing more than arrogant, malicious clap-trap!
Let's see if I can find an appropriate sentence that sums you up....... ahhhh, here's one:
"....Knowledge gave me a tool to do just that; if for no other reason than the time I spent quietly letting my awareness be taken deeper into myself took me closer and closer to 'me'. ...."
So how many times did you say, "I," "me" or "my" in that sentence? Shall we count the number of times, Jonx? Why, without much trouble I count six (6) times in ONE SENTENCE! Impressive! And you think you are so spiritually advanced...... what arrogance!
If you have an "empty heart," which seems to be the case because there is no room there for anyone but yourself (according to the number of times you refer to yourself and yourself alone in the quote above), I'd recommend a spouse. Actually, real friends would do. You do remember what those are, right?
Earn the degree(s) that Mike has and then talk to him about the subjects to which you referred and whether said knowledge can bring some happiness or satisfaction into your life. Until you have done that, you have no business proclaiming anything about how satisfying they are or are not. You are clueless! You are just like the silly creationists that proclaim molecular biologists to be idiots, while the creationists possess absolutely no training with regard to that subject. They proclaim the earth and universe to be 6000 years old, while none of them possess a degree in geology, physics or astrophysics. You are no different!
Jonx wisdom: ALL HAIL ABSOLUTE IGNORANCE! That is, of course, unless you are referring to "me, me, me, my, I"
Modified by NAR at Tue, Mar 29, 2005, 15:37:13
|
|
|
|
Jonx,I'll bet you would appear so funny on a video clip interview with your adament self statements about your wisdom and everyone else's ignorance who doesn't see Rawat as their God. I know you probably don't see your self as a comic jester but that is how it comes across. I must admit, I tried coming up with some jokes about Rawat, but you did a better job !!! The comments in follow up posts really got me laughing because it is true, the comments about the creationists arguing against science, logic and fact, and you, arguing in the same way about Rawat, or maybe people who are a member of the Committee To Believe in a Flat Earth, Martians from outer space believers, and other similar mind-sets of individuals.
I'll bet you never thought your would be such a joke but I must give you credit for this one point. What you say is, to be honest, all -------- B S
|
|
|
|
So how many times did you say, "I," "me" or "my" in that sentence? Shall we count the number of times, Jonx? Why, without much trouble I count six (6) times in ONE SENTENCE! Impressive! And you think you are so spiritually advanced...... what arrogance!
I make a point of describing my own experience, which necessitates using these pronouns. What would you have me do, describe your experience?
I'd recommend a spouse. Actually, real friends would do. You do remember what those are, right?
Actually I'm doing quite well in that department mate.
So is that what you distract yourself with? Spouse and friends? Kinda takes the edge off of facing yourself doesn't it. Or are you such a civic-minded example of humanity that you never think of yourself. What bullocks!
Earn the degree(s) that Mike has and then talk to him about the subjects to which you referred and whether said knowledge can bring some happiness or satisfaction into your life. Until you have done that, you have no business proclaiming anything about how satisfying they are or are not.
I can tell you with 100% confidence that a degree has nothing whatsoever to do with happiness. You are easily impressed mate.
As for diatribes, mine is nothing compared to your little rant.
|
|
|
|
I, like Mike, have a degree. Mine is in astrophysics and, quite frankly, I am quite "satisfied" with it and what I do with it.
Impressed? Why, yes I am! I'm impressed by a universe that I understand more and more each and every single day! I'm not talking a Rawat-style, nebulous-type "understanding," but a real, factual understanding of how it all works. Yeah, that's pretty satisfying and pretty impressive, too. Even more satisfying and uplifting is that I am an active part of that knowledge-gain and that it benefits anyone that cares to know it. Yup, that's pretty satisfying. What's more...... I don't have to embellish what I learn and/or know with fantasy and la-la land beliefs. The universe, as it is, is pretty darned great, all by itself.
A degree in astrophysics had and has everything to do with my happiness and that of my colleagues. So your 100 percent "certainty" is pretty meaningless. Maybe you do have a degree..... was it the wrong one for you? Too bad.
My "self" is doing just fine, thanks. I just don't spend as much time as you worrying about "myself." I'd rather spend my time learning, doing and teaching it to others. I'd rather spend my time dealing with and interacting with others. I'd rather spend my time sharing whatever I can with others. "I" am just fine without all the worry about "me." "I" am not all that interesting to myself. I know myself pretty well. I guess you can't say that, can you?
Modified by NAR at Tue, Mar 29, 2005, 16:15:13
|
|
|
|
Like Nik, I have come to the conclusion that Jonx is fixated on Mike Finch for some reason, but I'm not sure why.
Jonx has been dogging Mike for months now, but maybe it has something to do with the fact that Mike was once close to Rawat, and now that he is an ex-premie, his website gets high rankings on a Prem Rawat Google search. I hear a lot of resentment in Jonx against Mike.
Jonx was pretty nasty to me down below in a thread too. I guess Knowledge isn't working out so well for him. I don't know why Jonx comes to the ex-premie forum when his experience of Knowledge obviously isn't going well. Maybe he's thinking about leaving the feet.
Cynth
|
|
|
|
Good point, Cynthia.
I think Jonx might be obsessed with Mike Finch, because he actually knows Mike Finch and probably doesn't know any of the rest of us, at least personally.
I know when I left the cult, a couple of my premie friends tried to get me to go back, although that lasted a few days, max, because it all had become so clear to me how blind I had been and I made it clear I just wasn't interested anymore, and that I was more interested in getting on with my life. Once the shades come off, that was it. Still, these premies were talking to me the way they were because they cared about me, or were worried about me, or something like that. Jonx just seems angry.
When somebody you really know leaves the cult, it's a lot harder to rationalize and it calls into question the whole belief system. I think the only it can be dealt with is to just drop the person and not think about them, or you have to rationalize that they are confused or something, and then, well, there has to be something wrong with them -- it's just hitting too close for comfort.
I think Jonx believes Mike was hijacked the the "hate group," and Jonx sees it as his "participation" to try to bring him back, or at least shut him up.
|
|
|
|
Great post NAR but a point of order. I would have thought a nebulous understanding was rather important to an astrophysicist.
Luv Candy
|
|
|
|
Candy, I just KNEW someone would say that
There is a difference between "nebulous understanding" and "understanding nebula"
Of course, jonx probably doesn't see the difference, thus his/her confusion. If I were to be able to ask M any question....... it would be about an unknown in astrophysics and see if "gawd" can give us an answer....... figure the odds.
|
|
|
|
Are you saying that your nebular understanding is not at all nebulous? Do you really expect people to believe that?
|
|
|
|
Otherwise, some decent posts may be deleted.
But, just for fun, here's my response to your query: My understanding of nebulae is considerably less nebular than the nebulous understanding of a non-existent place which possesses the rather nebulous (or is that ominous) names "nirvana," "samahdi," "knowledge," "true self," "atman," "jivatman," and many, many more.
Actually, my understanding of the content, nature and formation of nebulae is quite specific and complete. Nebulae are very well understood, these days. I don't expect anyone to "believe that," I expect them to read about it in recently published papers. Actually, it really doesn't need to be all that recent. Nebulae are well known and understood. Even the one that spells "GOD" in a rather obscure way (read that: you kinda have to squint a little to see the letters). My personal favorite is the one I like to call the "Rude Gesture" Nebula.
Modified by NAR at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 13:15:17
|
|
|
|
Jonx try answering a question with asking one :
>but when the heart laments its emptiness< This is pure Rawatism, to any normal person it is meaningless - explain just what it is you mean by:
1. heart
2. heart laments
3. [hearts] emptiness
>reminded countless times of the beauty within< again without some context this is meaningless, explain just what it is you mean by:
1.within
2. the beauty [within]
>then I have to ask what you consider to be “somewhere”! (Or do you have no idea what I’m talking about?)< Oh right - you've had that special experience that can't be explained - only the true devotee, one who has truely thirsted can know what you are talking about. Sorry that doesn't wash here - all human experience is amenable to a substantial degree of explanation - those who say it isn't are liars or charalatans or both. Which are you ?
Or has the role of “victim” become a refuge from the self-criticism stirred up by such questions? Guess that’s why you have no choice but to degrade anything positive he ever did for you, to the point of demonizing him. The greater the deceit, the more comfortable the role of "victim".
OK you opened the door - what is this huge problem you have with MF ? - sounds like he must have rejected you or something. Tell us Jonx, is your investment in Rawat more than just your time and donations - you wouldn't happen to be on the payrole would you ? And your anxiety about Mike Finch an expression of old unaddressed premie jealousy ?
|
|
|
|
You know Jonx, you still haven't answered Mike's post to you of January 12th. Please answer this one, before you change the subject again, remembering that you are a guest on this forum.
http://www.forum8.org/forum8/posts/11309.html
Jonx, you write: unlit match, grace being powerful enough to, all-knowing...If the above is representative of your personal cosmology as a premie then I'm not surprised you consider yourself clearer. which I assume is saying that I never really understood what Maharaji was all about, and that Knowledge being all about M's grace was a misunderstanding on my part.
Well Jonx, if you are who I think you are, you were not around during the seventies, not as an active premie, like you are now with your current wonderful service. You only came in during the tail-end of the era when M's grace was openly talked about, and was considered the source of all. But you and I both know well that even today premies think that way privately. Of course, part of your job is to keep the public relations spin going, that M is just an 'inspirational speaker' etc, which we both know is not the whole truth by any means.
I have no wish to persuade you of anything. You are an intelligent person, and I have always liked you and had great respect for you. I believe that you understand very well what you are doing, and you certainly have the capacity to understand and answer Jim's questions (your response 'Done' as if you have done that is disingenuous) - but unfortunately you have put your sharp wits, your intelligence, and your 'get-it-done' attitude that we all admired so much at W...y Villas (see, I am respecting your incognito) at the service of a tacky personality cult.
While the efficiency with which I see you perform your current service is nothing less than what I would expect, why do you put your formidable talents to such waste? Actually, don't bother to answer - I know the answer, both in your specific case, and in the general case (I did the same for 30+ years, so I can't point the finger).
By the way, why do you keep anonymous? You are well protected, your real name is known elsewhere, think how wonderfully you would be performing the task your Master gave you if you posted here under your real name!
Take care
-- Mike
|
|
|
|
Just "get 'er done," Jonx!
|
|
|
|
In my case I needed (not wanted) to experience first hand who I amSeems to me you've got it bad. I got into this out of uninformed curiosity, & then was hooked because the initiation triggered off an infant memory which I took to be proof that 'it' was true. The 12 yrs of my youth which were spent during the days which you & your lying co-apologists claim never happened, were a time of utter directionless confusion during which I found out who I was more by a process of elimination than by any words of wisdom from Prem Rawat. Sorry to drag up one of your responses from another thread: He has always called a spade a spade in that regard, almost as a counter to the perception that parental love is the highest. It's high; it's joyous; it's fulfilling... yes... but it has limits. Ask the parent whose kids have left and they never hear from, or worse, whose kids have died. It's easy to get caught into some ego-centric martyr complex being a parent, and he's never let me get away with that. But that has never eroded my deep love for my kids, or appreciation for my responsibility as a parent. On the contrary, it has freed me to love them even more. This is wishful thinking bullshit,& emotionally manipulative to boot. Let me tell you that when one of my children died (cot death),if I'd had the misfortune to be consoled by someone like you telling me that it wasn't so bad because GMJ's love was of superior quality,I'd've punched your fucking lights out.
|
|
|
|
Well said! If this guy thinks that loving some distant fraud, who doesn't even know they exist, is superior to the love of a parent for their child........ well, that's just ........ stupid.
Sorry, monitors, there is no other way to put it.
|
|
|
|
Hi JonxI am not sure why you address so many of your posts to me (but I have a good idea). In any case, I thank you for the fact that you are concerned about my leaving Maharaji, and that you clearly wish to set me straight. But I have to tell you that your compassionate attempt to guide me back is wasted. Here are a couple of points from your post which sum it all up for me - my own position, and your misunderstanding of that position. ...but the process of turning your awareness inward through Knowledge does, without question, increase your knowledge of self. So I find it intriguing that if you had an experience anywhere close to mine -- which could not be anything but the case if you sat and quieted the mind to any degree -- that you would not value highly such an experience.....So Mike, it makes me wonder just what you came to him for if satisfying a need in the heart was not what drove your initial acceptance and continued adherence for all those years Of course 'satisfying a need in the heart' was what drove me (I use your premie way of expressing it). The whole point is, that Maharaji does not satisfy that need in the 'heart'. Yes, I had the experience you describe - in fact I had very profound experiences while practising Knowledge. And like you, I had this belief in Maharaji to the extent that I ascribed my having those experiences to him and his grace. Now I am able to make a separation between my actual experiences (before getting Knowledge, during my 30 years, and now) and my interpretation or belief about those experiences. It is not having particular experiences that define a premie, it is having the belief that one's experiences are in some way caused or enhanced by Maharaji and his grace. And that is what I now reject. Your experiences are, well, experiential, and cannot be doubted. What or who you think is responsible for those experiences is a belief system. That belief-system may be true, or it may be false, but it is a belief. It is a defining characteristic of a premie, that they deny it is a belief, and say they 'know' their experience comes from Maharaji. You can opine all you want about the motives of the man... Or has the role of “victim” become a refuge from the self-criticism stirred up by such questions? Guess that’s why you have no choice but to degrade anything positive he ever did for you, to the point of demonizing him. I don't opine at all about his motives, for me they are secondary. If you read what I have written about him, you will note also that I do not attack him personally (his private life or his personal characteristics). I only write about his public stance and statements. Nor do I demonize him. And you say it went nowhere. If experiencing what is left when thought subsides and no longer controls your attention is “nowhere” then I have to ask what you consider to be “somewhere”! (Or do you have no idea what I’m talking about?) You are too intelligent not to know that you are deliberately mixing metaphors here. 'It went nowhere' is a phrase meaning the outcome of a sequence of events was not what was promised or anticipated. Whether your experience when thought subsides can best be semantically described as Nowhere or Somewhere (or Everywhere) is a whole different question. Do you have any idea what I am talking about? Your points (a) to (h) are just facetious and stupid, and not worthy of you. At the risk of wearing my heart on my sleeve, I loved Maharaji more than you can possibly know, and I had a desire for inner fulfillment more than you can possibly know. He failed me on every count. It will not do for you to then say that in that case I never understood what Maharaji was all about. I did and do understand very clearly what Maharaji was and is about. He peddles a belief-system that encourages gullible people to take their good heart and their desire for self-knowledge and place their life in his hands (or at his feet, as we used to say). It makes them doubt their own capacity for learning and self-understanding, and to rely on him for these things, which he cannot possibly fulfill. -- Mike
Modified by Mike Finch at Tue, Mar 29, 2005, 19:51:31
|
|
|
|
I did and do understand very clearly what Maharaji was and is about. He peddles a belief-system that encourages gullible people to take their good heart and their desire for self-knowledge and place their life in his hands (or at his feet, as we used to say). It makes them doubt their own capacity for learning and self-understanding, and to rely on him for these things, which he cannot possibly fulfill.
That about sums it up pretty nicely. Premies obfuscate the issue when they talk about Knowledge and the experience they have when practicing it. That's NOT what Maharaji is about. He's about being the Perfect Master, about being the guy who can do for you what you can't do for yourself. If it was just about going within, would we really need Maharaji? Truly, can't we do that without him? You'd never know it by listening to him.
|
|
|
|
Your points (a) to (h) are just facetious and stupid, and not worthy of you.
My points are real reasons why people were attracted to Maharaji. I state them because I recognize for myself some of these same reasons apply. Are you saying none of them apply to you? Come on... some honesty Mike.
It will not do for you to then say that in that case I never understood what Maharaji was all about. I did and do understand very clearly what Maharaji was and is about. He peddles a belief-system that encourages gullible people to take their good heart and their desire for self-knowledge and place their life in his hands (or at his feet, as we used to say). It makes them doubt their own capacity for learning and self-understanding, and to rely on him for these things, which he cannot possibly fulfill.
My friend, you do not understand what Maharaji is about. That is 100% clear. A belief system is so far away from what he "peddles". My view is you should rely on him for only those things he has given you and nothing more. The rest is fantasy, and fantasy is what you should revolt against. But don't blame him for your fantasy! Like so many of our era, you jumped in with both feet before you had a chance to look. That, my friend, was irresponsible.
Modified by jonx at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 17:18:49
|
|
|
|
Jonx,
Is this the same 100 percent as the one you referred to earlier? You remember, the 100 percent certainty that a degree doesn't bring happiness? That same one? If so, then you should drop the "1" and just leave the remaining zeros.
If this rawat "church" doesn't involve "belief systems," then why does an aspirant have to sit for hours and hours listening to the keys? Why do they have to empty their minds of "doubt." If it were really THE truth, it wouldn't matter whether you doubted it or not. It would just work. It doesn't and it costs much in terms of time and personal wealth to find that out.
The "fantasy," as you refer to it, was created by M, with M's blessing and M's direct involvement. It wasn't "my" fantasy, it was his! All I did was hope that it wasn't a fantasy....... ah, well, so much for the pie-in-the-sky youthful exuberance and guileless trust. Remember? That was part of the "requirements" of this fantasy, too. Trust!
Tell M to give this oh-so-phenomenal "knowledge" to anyone who asks, WHEN THEY ASK...... that moment exactly! No keys, no preconditions, no waiting periods, nothing. You see? He can't do it! Why? Because, Mr. 100 Percent, he has to pump a belief system down your throat, FIRST!
Talk about lack of honesty! You can't even admit that simple set of facts to yourself. Hey, by the way, is he god today, perfect master today, and inspirational speaker today, a guru today, THE satguru today? Which one(s)?
Modified by NAR at Wed, Mar 30, 2005, 17:38:17
|
|
|
|
Jonx
"...you should rely on him for only things he has given you and nothing more."
What, prey are those 'things' ? That man is 'complete' and needs no 'embellishment'? That the 4 techniques are keys to unlock the door to the infinite, unchanging, ultimate Truth? That the thirst is there within and so is the water? That God can manifest in a human body to save mankind? That Truth is 'simple' ? That there is a True Self? That mind is the creation of man and is therefore 'bad' and must becontrolled by Holy Name? That mind is the creation of God and therefore cannot be controlled? That the love between devotee and Master is 'unconditional' and is the highest form of love ? That the love between man and wife, man and child, man and friend are conditional and therefore not as valuable? That when man finds peace within there will be peace in this world? That you can trust your heart but not your mind? That Knowledge is not selfish ? That this Knowledge is the same Knowledge that Jesus gave, that Krishna gave, that Mohammed gave? That there is only ever one True Master in this world? That what you are looking for is within you? That everything you see with these eyes is illusion, except Maharaji? That in one lifetime our 'evolution' can be completed? That what matters is the 'journey' and not the destination? That if God had manifested Himself one year later it would have been too late ? That as soon as you receive Knowledge your karmas are finished? That there is a purpose to human life and that the purpose is : to have faith in Maharaji, to be happy, to find inner peace....That you are perfect but made imperfect by the mind? That as soon as a man takes Knowledge he is liberated? That devotion means living without suffering, no suffering at all? That if you don't practice this Knowledge you will get rotten inside? That Grace is necessary to make Knowledge active? That through the Knowledge you can become one with God? That the more you meditate the higher you get and then you join that frequency where you become infinite? That man who is just perfect in meditation does not do a wrong action? That Maharaji is permanently in God consciousness? That Knowledge is infinite and Maharaji has not reached the pinnacle of it? That the people who are most receptive to Maharaji's message are people who are 'free in what they think'?
Are these some of the 'things' that Maharaji has given us? How 'reliable' do you think these concepts are? Is there any 'fantasy' in amongst this collection?
Listening to satsang for 30 years must have addled my brain and I can't think clear. Can you help?
|
|
|
|
Billy,
You described all of the concepts that came directly from Rawat to us so well.
Thank you sooo much!
Cynthia
Modified by Cynthia at Thu, Mar 31, 2005, 07:43:30
|
|
|
|
Jonx,
As a premie, you should feel some doubt that Maharaji will never enter a forum to answer historical facts about his life and the DLM.
If you feel such idealism for Rawat and his claim of being God, then see if you can get him in a forum to answer facts of his life, and DLM and Elan Vital. I'm sure you know he would never do this unless he controlled the questions, etc.
Jonx, I hope this forum helps you come out of the Elan Vital for good, and see Rawat for what he is -- a fake, cult leader who uses deception, the end justifies the means, for his own benefit.
Hussain
|
|
|
