Yes, that's the crime - rape of our minds - and to be frank, our reaction is merciful in the extreme compared to what he deserves.

Clearly telling the truth takes up even less space in your tortured psyche.

I addressed you more fully down below

And no, sorry, I have no intention of sticking around to get onto a shitting contest with you, and hear the hissing of your little gang. I come here once every six months at the very maximum just to see what you people are saying, that is the honest truth.

And you know what the sweetest thing about that is?.....I will not be here to see any agro bullcrap or twisted psychobabble about some 'premie troll' in yet another disguise coming here to frighten the innocent peaceful natives.

Well, Welinever has also departed from these forums for not being a nice person to regulars here.

F8 Moderators

As a person who thinks nearly all the premies he knows are nice and has even met premies he thought weren't nice in the past who seem to be nicer now I'm interested in your comment.

So I have a few questions:

When did you "receive Knowledge"?
When did you "leave Knowledge"?
What country are your from?
How many premies lived in your "local community"?
Were you active in your "local community"?
How many premies did you know?
How many premies were friends?
How many of the ones you know/knew were "nice"?
How many of the ones who were friends you know/knew were "nice"?

I'd really like you to answer the questions and I'l love it if other ex-premies (or premies for that matter) answered them as well.

I've found that most ex-premies talkk about themselves and their "experiences in Knowledge" and their present understanding of Knowledge and Rawat but little of the bigger picture of their involvement and I'm often curious.

I've found that most ex-premies talkk about themselves and their "experiences in Knowledge" and their present understanding of Knowledge and Rawat but little of the bigger picture of their involvement and I'm often curious.

That's not the case. There are hundreds of posts in the archives going back over the 8 yrs of internet discussions about Rawat, in which individuals have addressed that in detail.

Your detachment from this, the reasons why, are of course your own business, but seeing as you inadvertently became a player in his game, you might want to allow yourself to get pissed off.

Blow a fuse, it'll do you good.

We're in a new phase here, it seems to me.............going nose to nose with the Lord of the Universe, & he isn't a man who takes prisoners.

You know that of course.

So nice has got to do with replying to a post by someone who was talking about "nice premies". Mine, seemed like an appropriate post. Rather than reply with a post about nasty penguins which would have been off topic.

A little more seriously. This is quite an astounding thing to say. At least he knew premies and somn he thought were nice but apparently "all the nice premies I used to know have all left." That is certainly not my experience which is much closer to that of Lexy's below. I know/knew all sorts but nice absolutely predominated and they certainly haven't all left around here.

I have no need to get "pissed off" about people who are decent and friendly albeit mistaken in their views re Rawat. I am not likely to forget those who've done me wrong and should I ever get the chance to take an eye for an eye I will. Meanwhile this (XPO and the debunking of Rawatism) really is only a small, though important, part of my life and I enjoy it and I believe I add a viewpoint which includes my absolute certainty re the decency of most premies and my continual harping on that point when others make thoughtless posts belittling or falsely accusing them.

....I'm not convinced that premies ( or ex-premies) are any different from any other bunch of people. Over the years I've met all sorts from many parts of the world......( esp. Britain,Ireland and France )  the very good, the average joe, the borderline criminal,

the highly intellectual, the junkie, the alchy, the unbalanced,the con artist, the very kind, the generous, the stingy, the beautiful, the ugly, the little ,the large, the working class, the very posh....and so on. Mostly I've liked them and mostly I like people in general.

I received k in Feb 1974 from the pedaphile mahatma in Atlanta. I was very active in my community and then moved into the assram in Miami (1976). During m's time in Miami I recruited premies to do 'service' on his home there. I 'served' at the residence for a while. I was transferred to several communities as community coordinator as well. I left the assram in 1982 or so. One reason being I saw that premies were turning this into a religion and displayed less care for their own children than for m. I hated seeing premies unfed and unable to pay their own bills yet giving their last dime to m.

Many of my high school friends became premies. Most did not last long as they too saw the cult as it was.

I found many premies were 'nice' so long as you were a believer. Once you doubted or questioned m or any aspect of m's world, they turned their back on you! Dealing with assram premies that wanted to leave I saw the full wrath of hard core premies shutting these 'devotees' out once it became clear they could not "clear up" their confusion. I attempted to support and assist some of these premies but was directed NOT to do so lest I become "confused" myself???

I have written in the past of the so called "love' of premies describing how I had tomatoes thrown at me as I spoke to the community while I was community coordinator because I was dismantling the 'church' and advising premies to live and enjoy life, feed themselves and their children and only give m money if...IF they had money to spare. I was brutally beaten up by several "religious" premies because I didn't support their turning k into a religion.

After leaving the assram, I encountered a few (not many) premies I had affected and was thanked for opening their eyes to being able to live life on their own without the cult. Most however, shunned me as I no longer was a believer. I have kept in touch with one or two and we have agreed not to discuss m or k as they realize my life is fine without m and I don't want to force them to face things they aren't wanting to deal with.

For me.... the fruits of m or k do NOT bear out. Premies are not "shining" examples of enlightened beings, nor are they particularly happy or content. Many in fact are quite miserable and look as if they are 'beaten'. Not much life ..enthusiasm or displays of 'love'! In fact quite the opposite.

Karen,

                I certanly wouldn't dispute your Inquisition comparison .... but the European middle ages don't deserve the blame for mass witch burning - this was a  largely post medieval phenomenon and a protestant rather than Catholic prediliction. Of course heretic burning was a major initiative of the Roman church from the 12thC onwards.

The later witch trials actually rarely resulted in burning as the cost had to be borne by the civil authorities who frequently baulked at the shilling a fagot cost of firewood - hanging was a far more frequent sentence.

The last execution for witchcraft in England was 1684 - 1722 in Scotland and 1775 in Germany. And puritan America was hardly immune.

Premies of course can't see any reason to think they have any connection to persecution activies - they simply put the acts of actual violence down to the act of an aberent few in a 'it's nothing to do with me' alibi of their cult supporting mindset.

Nik

Although us Europeans haven't been burning witches for a while, we've burned a few million Jews, Gypsies, Communists and Trade Unionists fairly recently. We4 also burned (and bombed, and shot) quite a few fellow Europeans, Asians and Africans.

At the moment, we seem to be concentrating on burning (and bombing and shooting) Moslems.

All very interesting, but way off topic.

May I suggest, if there is a continued burning desire, to take this conversation elsewhere.

A suitable forum you may want to try is this political forum.

Thanks
F8 Admin

It seems to me that the ex-prems probably have a lot more in common than just having followed the same guru. One thing I was curious about when I started browsing around here is how people have moved on. Sure, there is naturally some anger, resentment and so on, but for me the biggest thing has been - so what to believe in now? Having been so wrong, how can I trust my own judgement, not to make just as bad a mistake again?

I remember watching a documentary a long time ago, about how susceptible people were to authority. An experiment was set up where people were asked to throw a switch that electrocuted someone sitting in a chair in a lab. The guy in the chair was an actor, but the people invited to the experiment didn't know that. A few people refused to do it. Most just hesitated, but were persuaded to get on with it 'in the interests of science'. Some people really really enjoyed it.

I remember being a bit smug, and assuming that I would have been one of those to refuse to do it. I wouldn't be so gullible... but I was an M-fearing premie at the time! Sorry, but I am likely to be one of those pulling the switch! My gullibility is well-proved. My judgement is unreliable.

I find it disconcerting that some people here just seem to think that the fakery is all M, and maybe a few other gurus like him. I think the problem is much bigger than that.

I like it when the subject of these threads diverge. I get to read between the lines, and figure out where people stand now. That's important to me. I am happy for threads to spin off into politics, music, philosphy, whatever.

I have heard enough about Rawat really. I need no further persuasion of his fraudulence, and I think there may be enough evidence spread here, EPO, and other sites for exiting people to plough through - how much evidence do people need?

Choice of belief could be a luxury that future generations look back on - perhaps with envy, perhaps with hatred, - depending on whether the Judge Dredds of this 21st century get the upper hand or not.

Either way, I just hope the proponents of the freedom of expression that this Forum has been host to in years gone by don't lose their rebellious spirit, when faced with the strictures imposed by the moderators of this particular incarnation of the Forum.

I think I'll believe in fairies at the bottom of my garden then, because the bottom of my garden is a bit of a mess, but if fairies live there, then it is best to leave it that way.

At a later time with a lot more experience and evidence you chose to rescind that belief.

I think we are very much products of our culture. I grew up questioning so much, maybe I grabbed at the first thing that looked like some kind of answer (an answer that wasn't mainstream at least - I did regard myself as some kind of rebel after all).

I don't remember weighing up the pros and cons of believing in Rawat, and then choosing.

I certainly believed that the experience I was having in satsang (and later to a lesser extent in meditation) was extremely enjoyable and that despite the many problematic aspects of DLM and Knowledge I should give this "path" a try, a full on try.

I was young and naive, and the solution M seemed to be offering seemed to fit the questions I was asking, so I went with it. I eventually swallowed it all, hook (liberation?), line (satsang and service - to keep us connected?) and sinker (the Lard).

However, the questions I was asking then were very much part of the zeitgeist - having unconsciously absorbed some of the 60's rebellion against the hard work and conformity of the 50's, having read such stuff as Herman Hesse, George Orwell. I was looking for an individualistic solution to my identity crisis - preferably something that would boost my apparent unimportance (and what could be more of a boost to self-esteem than being one of the few to recognise the living Lord??!). I was asking the kinds of questions that many others in my time were asking, and I wasn't smart enough to look beyond the first answer that looked like it fitted.

Did I choose to believe? I don't think so. I followed a path that I thought was my own, but with the benefit of hindsight, I see that the questions weren't really my own - they were just part of the culture at the time. I have since spent time in quite other cultures (Africa, SE Asia), and have been struck how few people in those cultures asked the same kind of questions (big generalisation I know, a continent and a half, but I am talking of the people I met at least). For the most part, they just grew up with a strong sense of belonging, and questions like 'why am I here' made no sense to them.

I don't ask those questions any more either. I am no longer a 'seeker of truth'. I don't think those questions count for much any more - you know, why are we here, what is the purpose in life - there is so much presumption behind such questions, I gladly chucked them out with the bath-water.

Firstly you chose to accept a minority zeitgeist of the time. It may have been fashionable but despite media reminiscences most young people of the 60's grew up and led normal 9 to5 suburban lives.

There are myriads of forums on the internet for discussing anything we want. This one's about the cult we were in, and I, for one, don't want this forum to go too much off-topic. Gerry appears to allow more OT posts, although he says he doesn't want politics, but it hasn't really taken off yet. Why don't you post there? Most of the posters here read and post there as well. The mods here have made their position clear many times, and the rules are pretty clear, so I don't really see why you're complaining.

But you (presumably) pay for the upkeep of this place (and maybe even volunteer to mod it), so it's your call.

Chris,

You presume incorrectly, although your opinion is, of course, as valid as anyone else's.

And I did indicate in the topic line on my post, that it wasn't about Captain Rawat and his evaporating cult.

So surely, anyone only wanting to read about the Captain would refrain from clicking.

Maybe you should relax a bit, perhaps try some of Dr Weils meditation techniques, outlined by Steve, above.

The Umpire is always right and a good player never dissents with a decision - at least that's the way I look at forum moderation - and if the mods say 'out' that's fine with me.

Like John I want F8 to be focussed - in the case of this thread I was trying to make the point that the religious fundamentalism that underpinned witch burning was not something of long ago and far away but that the 'religious violence' of (at least some) premies has a more recent antecedance than the middleages. In retrospect it was probably a 'point too far'.

Taking an OT subject to another forum seems eminently sensible - I'll take witches, Nazis and murderous Judeo-Christo-Islamism to a suitable spot on Hamzen's forum, later.

Nik

Actually Nik, in sport, the umpire is sometimes wrong. That's why they've started to use video replay in some sports - rugby and cricket for example.

The sooner it comes to football the better.

And a good Situationist always attacks authoritarianism, even when the attack is completely pointless and pisses people off.

Though I am a very outgoing person who is friendly with many people, family has been the most important thing for me and my close relationships are with my family members.

I have always thought of myself as being very unstrange though I am hardly in a position to make an unbiased decision.

How is it that people who are not mean-spirited and deceptive will act that way for Rawat?

Rotten people became premies and remained rotten, and good people became premies and for the most part remained good, but when it comes to the Lord, some might be capable of going against their true natures.

I think that is the downside of religion and more specifically of faith, which is by nature unthinking and requires sacrifice of not only your time and attention, but even of your values, when it comes to the nub.  I know I did things as a premie that were unethical and would never do before or since becuase I thought I was supposed to just trust that it was what Rawat wanted.

Or as the physicist Steven Weinberg put it more recently: "With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things, and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

i find it astonishing again and angain when current rawators expose their lack of intelligence