|
|
|
Rennie, If you're reading this, shame on you for tossing this stinky, new age tripe at us under the guise of an apology. Like your friend, Deepak Chopra, you're a snake. And a liar, by the way. The last thing I want to bore myself with is your sugary story of how you came to the light. God, I did read it and now I wish I could micro-lobotomize those brain cells. I feel tricked. Oh no, I just listened to bullshit-artist extraordinaire, Rennie Davis, give me satsang! Again! Anyway, because you think you create your own reality, it's clear that you have no respect for the truth. That's obvious. Instead, you just talk, long, flowery, talk that skates on the surface of life like a waterbug. I don't need your lessons about "killing the guru" anymore than I needed your lessons about loving him. You're a pompous windbag who's lost the ability to tell right from wrong, truth from lies and real feelings from new age posturing and artifice. Your apology means nothing when all you're doing is slighting us for not traipsing down your own smug path of juvenile spirituality. You're stunted, dude. You have insulated your silly little mind against responsibility such that you've lost your moral compass. Which is rather ironic, as you bleat on and on like a boring preacher. Yes, I despise people like you. And thank God I turned out different. Oh, by the way, is there any way I can get your autograph? I mean you are Rennie Davis after all! LOL!!
Modified by Jim at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 15:17:36
|
|
|
|
Don't be diplomatic. Tell us what you really thought about Rennie and his letter! 
|
|
|
|
I was just talking from my heart, Joe. By the way, Deepak Chopra's giving a talk here in Victoria. I'm thinking of going, paying the extra money to kiss his ass before the show and telling him what a snake he is. Rennie, if you're reading this, can you get me backstage? Hm? Pal?
Related link: http://www.victoriaarena.com/pr-jan132005a.asp
Modified by Jim at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 16:40:26
|
|
|
|
If you want to get near Deepak's ass, you better buy the $80 VIP ticket. I see he takes cash, visa or paypal.
|
|
|
|
i'm still chuckling Joe. Hi, by the way.
anth grin
|
|
|
|
Hi Jim,
Do you and Rennie have some bad history? Did he run off with a house mother you were in love with, or borrow your Strat' and return it with a big scratch?
(Hi and warm greetings to you and Laurie by the way.)
Anyway.
Rennie didn't have to write to John. He probably gets loads of emails (if his box is anything like mine, most of them are tips on how to enlarge your penis. Most systems are expensive and don't work and at least a dozen have given me funny rashes..anyway...I digress). He didn't have to reply to John. He didn't have to give so much time to composing a thoughtful response to John's queries, and he didn't have give permission for what he wrote to be published on the net so we could disect it and throw insults at him.
His motivation appears to be largely selfless, in that he understands people who spent a lot more time and energy in the cult have questions and concerns that he has kindly answered. He's not remained aloof in an ivory tower of 60s celeb', he has got down from wherever he lives and politely responded.
So, thank you for that Rennie, and respect to you.
Really Jim, I can't understand why you "went off on one". Rennie's probably a really nice guy (based on statistics, 80% of humans are nice, if you sample anti-war protesters this rises to 97%), and even if he's not, well there's no need to get personal.
I mean, you are Jim Hellhead after all.
And haven't you heard about post-modernism? There is no absolute truth anymore. This is the 21st Century Jim. We all create our own realities.
So, give the guy a break.
And if you want my autograph, it will cost you $10.
I mean, I am Anth Ginn after all.
|
|
|
|
I read that letter from Rennie and came away with the feeling I had been insulted. You didn't? I felt all the things Jim and Joe said. Like Rennie was wrapping himself in some new age "nothing is real" flag so he and Prem didn't have to face any responsibility for their past actions. I found the letter disgusting. If you take it and compare it to how Dettmers and Donner handled it when asked to come forward you see the difference in the strength of character. Rennie, IMO has none. I am not super familiar with the Chicago 7 stuff given that I am so young ( ha ha) but it sounds like that was admirable. But this letter is nothing but a slap in the face to anyone who has ever dared to stand up to Prem Rawat.
|
|
|
|
If you'd posted your reply first, it would have saved so many of us a lot of time and wasted words... >But this letter is nothing but a slap in the face to anyone who has ever dared to stand up to Prem Rawat. Abso-bloody-lutely...
|
|
|
|
Hi Susan,
Obviously I didn't feel insulted. That doesn't mean I agree with everything he said, or that he is right, or anything. I thought is was a sincere effort to communicate, from someone who is a lot further away from us, the way we think and the way we see things.
In terms of his understanding what Rawat is up to, he doesn't have the experience or education we do. We've been through all sorts of stuff since we left, sorting our heads out and adjusting to life outside the cult.
If I was pushed I'd say he quit early, and never reexamined his experience very deeply until John made contact with him. Then I think he gave his honest, first impression of looking back at his short time as a premie.
I imagine if he was allowed to get into a civilised discussion with anyone here about his view, then it would probably change. I don't think he has a closed mind, otherwise he wouldn't have responded so generously to John.
It's almost like, "We're experts on this topic and he isn't", well, if that's the case, at least we should be polite if want to communicate with him.
However, as you may have noticed Susan, I sometimes get angry and express it irrationally, so I can empathise to some extent.
I remember a while ago, there was a big hoo-hah about modifying our language and behaviour, so that people who were coming onto the forum for the first time wouldn't feel uncomfortable and insecure. At the time I was arguing against censoring posts with this in mind. (And I'm not arguing for censorship now) However, I do see the point in not attacking and insulting someone the first time they post, so they don't immediately turn and walk away.
So what if someone is new age? So what if they haven't thought their time as premie through yet? I thought that was one of the reasons that the forum was here.
I really don't believe Rennie intended to insult you Susan. Like I said somewhere else, he's probably a really nice guy.
Gotta go, Dot is calling, hope all is well with you and yours.
take care
anth the contraire.
|
|
|
|
when you say : "So what if someone is new age? So what if they haven't thought their time as premie through yet? I thought that was one of the reasons that the forum was here." I would have thought that during his "New Age", Motherwave,Throw Momma off the train (but gently),touchy ,feely workshops.... Rennie must have faced some of his Divine Light baggage. The thing is that I suspect it is "processed" in such a sweet ,forgiving ,lovey-dovey,everybody makes mistakes,scratch-each-others backs way......that everybody including "the Lord" himself gets off the hook. Having said that I can easily understand that retreating into a cuddly New Age Lala land is loads more attractive than squabbling with the rude and bolshy "experts" around here.
Modified by Lexy at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 08:34:53
|
|
|
|
R.Davis was a gullible and arrogant youth and so was I. He was idealistic and slightly charismatic, and so was I. Basically he was what we around here might call, a nobhead, and so was I. Judging from his letter he still is a bit of a nobhead. I've just looked at some of his video clips on the Drek site. He just can't resist the grand and astonishing claim can he-but then neither could I. Its a pathetic passive agressive religious psychology that is everywhere around today:from Alqaeda (the popular concept thereof), to that look on the shop workers face when she says no she can't give you your money back on those shoes. God,religion is everywhere and so dead dead dead! I really don't know what to do about it. So limp RD.Very weak dealing. Love Bryn
|
|
|
|
'Its a pathetic passive agressive religious
psychology that is everywhere around today:from Alqaeda (the popular
concept thereof), to that look on the shop workers face when she says
no she can't give you your money back on those shoes.'
They are the thin end of the wedge those kind of shop workers and we shouldn't accept their behaviour complacently. There should be a law against those behind the counter people who stick so rigidly to rules that may or may not have existed before you walked into the shop. There should be a law too against those who glorify those fundamentalist shoe sales-people. Bryn is right, and I intend to do something about it. I'll be in Clark's tomorrow at 9, with my shoe cartoon.
PS - if anyone has a need for a nice pair or size 9 brogues, brown, only slightly worn (but too narrow for my feet), get in touch.
|
|
|
|
Hi 13,
having worked in several shops, I'd say a surly shopworker is a sign of a greater sickness, namely poor working conditions, not enough wages, a shity boss or combination of all three. When staff are treated well and with respect, they usually work hard and work well.
anth the size 9 who likes brogues but unfortunatey has wide feet.
|
|
|
|
Anth,
What are you - a shop steward? I was playing with the image Bryn created in my head, of this continuum between Al quaeda and shoe shop workers. I wasn't attacking shop workers - I just couldn't help attacking a metaphor that perhaps stretched a bit too far, like those bloody shoes from Clarks...
|
|
|
|
Just been to see Jerry Springer the Opera. Gloriously gross, and full of great anti-religious lines like the above.I larfed out loud. There were christians protesting outside. They don't get it. Love Bryn
|
|
|
|
Its a pathetic passive agressive religious psychology that is everywhere around todayThis is really something that can make me sick. Too much brain farts all the time....wolfie
|
|
|
|
or are even being so now.No, what would give any one the impression that snide, sniping is rude or bolshy? After all, it's all in a good cause.Not only that, you keep on playing the game so you must get off on it. It's more the subtle bitchy approach that you prefer.Rude and bitchy or rude and bolshy ?...I wonder which one is the best approach? I guess it depends on the circumstances, eh? One is sly and venomous and one is loud and upfront. Still, your approach must be fun for you.The lone ranger ( and the occasional tonto she can pick up to give her a hand) against the big, bad, impolite world. Rudely telling the rude how rude they are. But keeping that mask on as all good lone rangers should.
|
|
|
|
.....it's hardly snide or subtle . It's there for all to see. I know you love a fight....and what else is there to say ?
Modified by Lexy at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 10:01:53
|
|
|
|
I don't love a fight just for fightings sake, though, that's for sure and that makes a big difference.Being prepared to argue my case and being prepared to accept arguments thrown back at me is nothing to do with deliberately " looking" for a fight.And I wouldn't even call it fighting ....more the rough and tumble of debate. And I'm always prepared to shake hands or kiss and make-up ( whatever the case may be, ho hum)when the dust has settled. Except, that is, in very rare cases when, over time, it's obvious that the best thing to do would be to withdraw completely. What else to say? Dunno, just at the moment. I'm sure we'll both come up with something to say to someone or other about something or other at sometime or other, though : ))
Modified by Dermot at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 11:16:12
|
|
|
|
I genuinely think it’s rude of you to accuse others of being rude when, in fact, they are legitimately responding to someone who started the ball rolling by being rude and insulting in the first place, albeit couched in the most seemingly “ polite“ and “ understanding“ manner. The plot thickens . The fact such a person was invited to speak rather than having volunteered to speak is hardly the point, either. You are making it the central point. To quote a piece from Mick’s post, look at what Rennie Davis actually once said re Prem Rawat/Lord of the Universe and compare it to the tosh he tried to palm off in his letter. “The Creator has come to help us pull the world back together again.” - Rennie Davis “When a devotee makes the outrageous statement that Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord of the Universe, it’s cause enough for a chuckle. But is also happens to be true. Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord of the Universe.” - Rennie Davis “America will teach the whole world the Perfect One has come.” - Rennie Davis His being wrapped from head to toe in new age doo-doo is no excuse either. His stage of being or not being an ex is also no excuse. He is, without a shadow of a doubt, playing the EV revisionist game. It’s rude and insulting when EV play it and it’s rude and insulting when Rennie plays it. He’s not a simpleton, whether new age or not, he certainly knows what he said in the past. Unless he‘s suffering from complete amnesia, which he isn‘t, It is impossible to “ forget” that you were 100% gaga and in “ Lord of the Universe” mode especially when it was such a public role he played. It’s written down. It’s filmed. So he’s obviously lying, no two ways about it. Just as EV people lie about Prem rawat’s and their own ( and our) claims in the past. The point isn’t that we all, to a greater or lesser extent, didn’t also claim that Prem Rawat was the Lord. Everyone did. Prem Rawat himself. Gurucharanand, the Mahatmas, the honcho’s, the initiators and the rest of us. Obviously the earlier we were in the cult the more that applies. Maybe there are people around now who don’t claim it ( but I’m damn sure the old timers such as Glen and Ron G , for example, still do so under their breath) but we are talking about us then and that includes Rennie Davis. He was totally over the top in his acclamation ,too, don‘t forget. So really, I think the stance you‘re taking is a complete red herring and it could well be that you just like having a snipe at the manners of the majority here, just for the heck of it, because you‘ve done it more than once before. However, IMO, if you‘d actually thought things through to the ultimate conclusion you‘d see that your stance is superficial and a diversion from the main point. The main point being: Rennie Davis is playing the exact same game as EV, Jossi on Ebay and all those who airbrush history and/or rewrite history so that it conforms to the current whims of Mr Prem pal Singh Rawat. Period. Well, hold on, in one sense Rennie Davis could be viewed slightly differently. His motive may not be to do the bidding of the master but more to play down the full nature of his devotional utterances in the past either out of embarrassment or whatever. I’m not claiming to know his motives but I sure as heck can see his game. None of us , ultimately, are more or less guilty for being cult dupes just as none of us are perfect in every respect. It’s not a matter of being superior or even inferior to Rennie or whomever either. It’s all focused on his invitation to get in touch and how he responded to that invitation. Like I say, just because it SEEMED to be ultra polite and ULTRA understanding doesn’t actually mean that it was so. ( Added extra) Actually, I'm not seeking a long drawn out fight with you but I just wanted to resolve it fully, from my side at least, so you know exactly my position without inneuendos or lack of clarity. You, of course, see it differently. You see Rennies polite response and think he should have been responded to politiely in return. I can understand that but such a controversial response from him was bound to be greeted with a mixed response. Some have accepted what he has to say and are prepared to leave it at that. I'm not saying they aren't entitled to their positon,I'm just saying those who replied more robustly are just as entitled to. I think it's actually the more appropriate way to respond.You don't. Fine.It's just the dig you had at others here that annoyed me.I haven't criticised those who've been polite to Rennie. I've just responded to Rennie in the way I saw fit.
Modified by Dermot at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 16:27:25
|
|
|
|
but as Nigel pointed, I've tried to keep the content of the original even though it got all jumbled when I was editing it. I wasn't even sure if I'd posted it as the forum went down as I sent it for posting so wrote another post immediately after. Then when I returned I tried to edit the original but it all went arse over tit.This second one ( above) includes everything said in the first post but is put across in a different way.
|
|
|
|
Dermot, did you ever "Kiss the Blarney- Stone" ? You have put so much effort into writing all that and now I'm supposed to answer without being rude. I understand your main theme re: EV Revisionism etc. Personally I don't think Rennie is coming from the same place as EV.Elan Vital are trying to rewrite an inconvenient history whereas Rennie is just trying to make sense of it all in a " no blame" new agey way....so that it doesn't contradict the new belief system he has embraced. ( or maybe he has been paid?) Rennie didn't deny that he said all those exuberant things ( which you quoted) about Guru Maharaj Ji so I don't understand your point about him lying about it. "it could well be that you just like having a snipe at the manners of the majority here, just for the heck of it, because you‘ve done it more than once before." At least I'm consistent. At the very end of your post you say: "It's just the dig you had at others here that annoyed me." My "dig" really wasn't that big Dermot. If he ever reads the posts here,Rennie Davis is expected to be able to take everybody's criticisms, even though he's new to the forum and isn't familiar with us. I'm sure you and all the others can take my little tiny criticism. "I haven't criticised those who've been polite to Rennie. I've just responded to Rennie in the way I saw fit." You know what,Dermot, when my 14 year old son is polite I don't criticise him, but I tell him off when he's rude. Sorry to be rude Dermot but ....you don't half go on!
Modified by Lexy at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 19:37:41
|
|
|
|
I was sure I heard the bell for round three and rose from my stool with my defence tight and ready to pounce with devastating hooks, uppercuts, knees and one or two “ Glasgow kisses” ( it being Thai boxing, with the rules stretched, and not pussyfooting -around Western boxing) and what do you do? Deflate the whole shindig and make me feel like I’m taking it all too seriously! Ok, ok. However, I do want to return to one point. Don’t worry, though, you don’t have to respond in detail and, I admit, I probably do “ go on a bit” as you so humorously put it but it still needs to be said.You say “ Rennie didn't deny that he said all those exuberant things ( which you quoted) about Guru Maharaj Ji so I don't understand your point about him lying about it.”Well, hold on a second. He said he wanted to apologise for “ some “ of his “writngs” in the past ( but presumably he also meant all of his interviews, crowd rallying calls etc) and talked about those who may have been misled by them in the past. As to how such wildly over the top and oft repeated hyperbole, explicit as explicit could ever be, could be “ misleading” is another matter, but anyway. Then in the same short paragraph finished off by saying he thinks he owes “Guru Maharaji Ji ”an apology too.What’s that about? Rennie only knows, I guess. So his main apology was as vague as vague can be really. I mean, what’s he saying? The stuff he promulgated in the past was so vague that it could have actually misled people and he didn’t mean to be so vague so he’s sorry about that? Or he’s sorry and ,yes, he did say and write such stuff but is loathe to really admit it therefore he throws in a partial “ it could have been a little misleading, nudge, nudge, wink, wink,” get out clause ? So the only point in the letter where he tried to address the issue head on is the point where he flunked it, never mind the rest of his ramblings. To water it down even more, though, later on in the letter he throws in the full get-out clause ( in case the partial one needed some re-enforcing) with his “ Indian” excuse. That is, he knows those around the Guru claimed The Guru was the Lord of the Universe but he, Rennie? Well, keep it vague, keep it vague. So that’s my point about him lying. However, I’ve thought about what you and others have said especially a post by Jim where he gets more subtle about it and offers the possibility that Rennie has genuinely got so lost in doo-doo that he actually believes what he says is true even though it isn’t actually true. That’s a good point. Really, though, subtle and convincing as it sounds, ultimately I don’t buy it. There’s too much out there already documented in print and film so he isn’t ( like many of us) solely reliant on his vague memories and his internal “re-writing of history” mechanisms. So I think we could all agree on him being disingenuous at the least given the plethora of public evidence out there. With that evidence in mind, though, I’d plump for lying. I guess I’m being harsh and you only have to read him or listen to him, then and now, to understand that he’s “ way out there” in new age tripland and that always begs the question as to whether he really can tell fact from fiction, that’s true. Oh, heck, who knows?!!. Ok, for the sake of fairness to Rennie I’ll just say to me it sure as anything looks like he’s lying! However, those who say he could well be at some threshold point make a good point. Not wholly convinced myself, probably more of a brush off point. We can’t say for certain. Even if he is at a threshold point one or two of a bunch pointing out to him that, basically, they think he’s lying wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. Finally, with regard to yourself, even though I’ve thrown in a heap of stuff- such as “bitchy“, your snipes and your digs and all that sort of stuff- it doesn’t mean to say I feel ill-will toward you or anything For the vast majority of the time I like your style, humour and your insight into various stuff, especially that relating to your own experience. The nerve of the man, eh? Insults to praise, hehehe. But it’s true, certainly no hard feelings on my part. : )
Modified by Dermot at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 00:07:48
|
|
|
|
......for dogged persistence and arguing your point ! Yes, Rennie does use ALL the avoidance ( of the ghastly truth ) tactics that you have pointed out.I have to give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's probably in deep denial, rather than lying. In another post (not in response to one of yours) I mentioned the obvious cringeworthiness of Rennie announcing that he feels no shame or embarrassment about anything in his past ( so why has he left Guru Maharaj Ji off his C.V. ? ).That would be difficult to believe about anyone....and somehow it doesn't seem morally healthy. On a personal note, the virtual impression I get of you Dermot is of a Streetfighter from Derry.I think you have lived in England for a long time (maybe always ?) but I like to fantasise that you have an Irish accent when I read your monologues. It's a shame you didn't get to talk to "GOK" (a polite North of Ireland premie who visited Forum 8 some time ago) not only would you have been good for him ( and he for you) but you would have talked the hind legs off each other! Lexy.
|
|
|
|
'On a personal note, the virtual impression I get of you Dermot is of a Streetfighter from Derry.I think you have lived in England for a long time (maybe always ?) but I like to fantasise that you have an Irish accent when I read your monologues.' Actually, he's 5 foot 2, bald, myopic, likes train-spotting and has every copy of the Armchair Tram Lovers monthly packed between tissue paper sheets under his bed. He has never been involved in a street fight, nor any playground scrap when a boy. Drinks that Aime (or whatever) tonic winey type drink and has never flirted with guinness.
Modified by Anthony at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 06:21:04
|
|
|
|
I didn't say I believed the fantasy!It simply amuses me....
|
|
|
|
Hi Dr David Starkey ( or when I'm sober Dr. Johnathon Miller....or is it the other way round?) Well I was 6ft last time I checked but that was many moons ago....and don't we shrink with age?....or am I just imagining it?
Modified by Dermot at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 07:19:49
|
|
|
|
Modified by cq at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 15:45:50
|
|
|
|
Hi Catwoman : )Well at least you had the good sense to call it Derry and not Londonderry ( except, now, you'll have to wait for Pat D to jump down your throat saying " Professional Irish bastards really make me puke...it's fucking Londonderry...except to a bunch of retarded, drunken Fenians") No, we went across the sea to Ireland at every given opportunity from babe to teen but I left Northern England aged 16. Since then my accent has softened but not disappeared so my brothers think I'm a posh c*** and suvveners fink I'm a noaven bastard. As for myself...I think Irish-English ranging from 50-50 to 90-10 depending on the weather. And funny you should mention hind legs...I was speaking to this donkey in the County of Armagh the other day ...and...
Modified by Dermot at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 07:29:26
|
|
|
|
My father was born there, & I inherited from him the dubious ability to be 95% certain of whether a total stranger with an identical N. Irish accent was Catholic or Protestant.
I've never been able to think of a way of turning this uncanny knack into a moneymaking proposition...........maybe I should get together with four bodies Rennie, but on the other hand, no, I couldn't do it to the lad.
There already is a new current of consciousness there which has magically transformed the relationship between once bitter rivals. It all has to do with the number 9.............9 bar, 9 millimetre, 9 pints, & all awash in an ocean of red diesel.
Rennie would live for about 3 minutes in either the Bogside or the Waterside.............make it 10 for the Waterside, he does have a Methodist background after all. LOL
Modified by PatD at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 17:31:10
|
|
|
|
"My father was born there, & I inherited from him the dubious ability to be 95% certain of whether a total stranger with an identical N. Irish accent was Catholic or Protestant." I thought you just asked their name.If it's Patrick or Dermot they're catholic and if it's George or William they're prods...? During the first "cease fire" (early nineties),as it was a novelty to feel relatively safe to travel to Northern Ireland, I went with a premie friend (protestant) to meet his family who lived near Lurgan. His van broke down while we were there and his parent's neighbours offered to fix it.I was introduced and their names were Patrick and Siobhan.I commented to my friend ( later) that the lifelong neighbours must be Catholic. " Are they?" he replied. I learnt that many things are unspoken or expressed in euphemisms over there, and to keep my big trap shut !
Modified by Lexy at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 18:09:53
|
|
|
|
I thought you just asked their name.If it's Patrick or Dermot they're catholic and if it's George or William they're prods...?
That's a pretty good rule of thumb, though not infallible, but I'm talking about before that. I think it has something to do with with an indefinable difference in the way they express themselves, & then there's a often a subtle racial thing too. I know they all look the same to blackmen...........but.
Modified by PatD at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 18:34:19
|
|
|
|
My ole man was from Armagh and my mams side were all from Belfast ( Doherty's/Devlins) but we also had relatives in the South, too, around Dublin. You ever spend any/much time over there, Pat? I'm seriously thinking of settling in the South one day or other ...with Catholicism on the decline over there and possible Sharia Law on the increase over here ( no they aren't the real deciding factors, ho hum)....just thinking about it anyway. We'll see.
|
|
|
|
I spent most of my holidays on my uncle's farm in Co. Antrim when I was a child, & I lived in Dublin between the ages of 11/15. The last time I was over there was a couple of years ago, in Kerry.
I wouldn't live there, not in the country anyway, the curtain twitching mentality is still alive 'n well regardless of the decline of Catholicism. The Shinners are just as narrow mindedly unpleasant as the wispy bearded ones, & are on the up & up too.
It would be very easy to end up totally isolated there, & go mad staring at cows in the rain, but that's just me.
|
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong...I'd only visit the countryside for breaks....wouldn't dream of living there permanently.Beautiful country but I know what you mean about the mentality. No, it'd be Dublin if I did actually move there and only if I were in a positon not to be reliant on a job there...something I'm slowly but, hopefully, surely working on ( despite seemingly endless kick backs). I'd have to be in a position to live there but be free on every level to leave at a moments notice to anywhere for any length of time but still remain domicile over there. Otherwise I wouldn't be interested.I'm not that stupid : )Time will tell I guess.
|
|
|
|
Having said that I can easily understand that retreating into a cuddly New Age Lala land is loads more attractive than squabbling with the rude and bolshy "experts" around here. Of course it's more attractive. So what? Davis now has a bit of a choice in his life, at least. He can believe his own bullshit or he can avail himself of a reality check. By the way, we are "experts" in this context. When others, including Rawat himself, are either hiding or distorting the historical record, we're experts on the truth of the matter. Don't you agree?
|
|
|
|
He also came still wearing new age clothing. It is not easy to lose the guru effect when we are in such a -as Anth put it- postmodern environment. Granted, Rennie might really be not postmodern, but a bit affected by the buddist, new age, too burnt by the rawat deception to be able to see a god anymore. The real one mind you. In a time where there is no devil, or so we imagine, you know, it is easy to just decide that our personal flaws are all fixable by Oprah or Dr Phil, or some other professional, or by our own attitudes and ideas, and that the old eastern idea that -----YOU -------- your ideas of who you are are the only thing between you and who you really are------------!!! Meaning, you , yup you, are god, you dummy, dont you get it? We are supposed to kill the guru, not really, but just to realize that WE ARE THE GURU>!!! Yup, the guru. US. AND we are wasting time if we dont just start behaving like the god we are. I knew Jim would have none of it, funny thing is, stripped down, Jim (ooops, not like that), Jim is just a more clear headed athiest than Rennie. Rennie, if we take his post at face value, has declared that indeed god is dead, and whatever the oneness thingee is that hands out the light experience, it is not god certainly, and even if it is, it is not a god that deserves mention, or consideration. WE, ALONE< are all there is. AH brave new world, hmmmm, how new is that idea anyway?> I do recall a story, goes way back, granted, elements can be dismissed, but the real story to the garden of eden story is that the devil says we can be god, and the other option is that we see there is a god. Same old story line, again and again in history. Rennie has landed in the ------sorry to say it this way-----------devils camp, and he has joined the parade of those that say that we, like the dali lama, should 'meditate on the emptyness" Except of course whatever we decide to make reality.
|
|
|
|
Hi all:I haven’t posted for quite awhile, but reading Rennie Davis’ letter and the responses "inspired" me to write and "share," too. Also, check out this recent article in Forbes magazine: Rennie Davis the Capitalist Hippie [aka snake oil salesman]. IBM! http://www.forbes.com/2006/02/11/rennie-davis-money_cx_lh_money06_0214davis.html?partner=yahootix In the letter to John, he sure is the same old Rennie [hey, Rennie, here's some EST therapy for ya, brother]: not a deep or lucid thinker but nevertheless typically supremely self-assured and smoothly condescending (in his letter), a veteran survivor chameleon salesman, always eagerly and outspokenly embracing and plugging something “new” (at least, for him) in the way of New Age hocus pocus jargon and accumulated concepts even he still hasn’t fully absorbed and doesn’t understand (let alone quantum physics), then moving on to the next rah-rah cosmic cheerleader con game — all the while deluding lots of people with his Age of Aquarius Pied Piper schtick: his latest, e.g. “an extraordinary new idea now reaching critical mass.” [Sound eerily familiar? hahaha...] His present game obviously pays way better than being a volunteer flunkie for the maha or for the Yippies. Hurry, hurry, step right up: Come to Chicago and let’s have a revolution for the hell of it, Come to the Houston Astrodome and bow down before the Perfect Master of our time, or better yet Come to my New Age Financial Consulting firm for regrooving. Well, come on, all you big strong IBMs, Uncle Rennie needs your help again, he’s got his mind in an awful jam, way up yonder in New Age disembodied land, So throw in Big Bucks and kick out the jams, cause Uncle Rennie wants the spotlight again – whoopie, and it’s 1,2,3, what is he trolling for, he needs attention, yes, but big bucks - More, and it’s 5,6,7 open up those corporate gates, ain’t got time to wonder why, whoopie, we’re all gonna die – and you can’t take it with you. r.e. Taking Responsibility for His Own Creation: I remember Rennie on stage publicly proclaiming stuff like “Millennium ‘73” was going to be the single most important moment in the history of the planet, and having M. on the planet was the most important event in human history. At least, he recognizes that the m. cult was [is] a “religion,” and he admits it (if not his own very key role — and especially His personal Accountability for misleading tens of thousands of people): “I embraced the entire religion as an article of faith.” In fact, back in 1973, more than any other American, Rennie Davis was the leading public mouthpiece for Guru Maharaji [Prem Rawat]. Rennie states in his letter: “Today, I don’t believe Guru Maharaj Ji is the ‘lord of the universe’ as the faithful that surrounded him in India once claimed.” Well, here are some Rennie Davis quotations from the book Who is Guru Maharaj Ji?, 1973 (HE wrote the introduction): “The Creator has come to help us pull the world back together again.” - Rennie Davis “When a devotee makes the outrageous statement that Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord of the Universe, it’s cause enough for a chuckle. But is also happens to be true. Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord of the Universe.” - Rennie Davis “America will teach the whole world the Perfect One has come.” - Rennie Davis So, cut the crap, Rennie! You always were a wild-eyed bullshitter. ‘Fess up! [We knew you; we were there!] Thanks to Rennie and his wacky pals, too, for helping elect Richard Nixon in 1968 with their idiot stunts, like instigating riots that backfired in Chicago. (btw, if you’re reading this forum – our mutual friend and 60’s activist Stew A. died last week, Rennie. Oh yeah, power to the people, right on. At least Stew was for REAL - his whole life - not a phony hipster politico turned capitalist corporate gurupie. I can respect that.) Too bad many people of the Baby Boomer generation actually fell for Rennie’s spiel — twice (in 1968 and then r.e. Rawat). The [not so] amazing thing is he actually believes all these accumulated concepts and layers upon layers of inculcated bs (sorry) stored and built up in his head, as if this were not simply a conglomeration of abstract theories or jumbled subjective religious/philosophical beliefs/concepts but rather Facts of cosmology - the World and Gospel according to Rennie, but he compounds this delusion with a pronounced compulsive behavioral pattern of publicly making unproven personal assertions and misrepresenting and proclaiming them as Fact (just like he routinely promulgated myths, as a Rawat cult spokesperson) — kind of like a New Age amoeba, absorbing cosmic debris and bacteria by osmosis, and then regurgitating and spreading the infection of amalgamated superstitious concepts to others. Only, he makes a buck off it nowadays — so he did learn something from the perfect massa, after all - and maybe a little bit from the Tony Robbins types, too. Note: Rennie went to a recent Rawat program and still apparently digs him: “I thought he was charming and positive.” He even credits Rawat aka Guru Maharaj Ji with being the ‘bridge’ for his own spiritual light. That’s still conceptual superstition (i.e. the magic master candle lighting the other matches concept), along with believing in all these other types of bodies. Unless he’s actually experienced these as 4 separate bodies/universes (probably gleaned from Autobiography of a Yogi, or something similar), he’s just like Maharishi cult tycoon Deepak Chopra (who talks about the gunas etc. and chakras he’s probably never seen, while charging exorbitant fees, plugging his own tapes/books and “Ayurveda” brand trademark herbal concoctions as ancient medicine, Ayurvedic medicine – when “Ayurveda” is literally just the brand of hyped-up junk he and some other cult members are pushing and profitting from – a billion dollar industry for top Maharishi cult insiders). Poor Rennie, he went from simple duality of mind – to being bodily drawn and quartered, too. A separate reality, as it were. So, Rennie hasn’t really gone any further in the critical self-analysis required of someone who has truly left a cult and a belief system – or found enlightenment or Truth. No, he appears to have ‘bought’ the maha revisionism, and meanwhile he’s just stockpiled more concepts borrowed from the Capitalist New Age supermarket – which he repackages and peddles as a so-called financial advisor. Interestingly, Rennie equates Prem today with Deepak, and it would appear that Rennie aspires (and has historically aspired) to a similar status. Well, up against the wall, motherf---er. Imagine — no religion, too... LOL, -- Mick P.S. For Rennie's own sake: I hate to diss the old capitalist hippie carnival barker, but “taking responsibility” means a lot more soul-searching and honesty than can be found in his somewhat pretentious letter – putting on airs, coupled with a casual, backhanded apology that rings hollow (especially coming from a former chief spokesperson for the cult and the guru), and with no demonstrated attempt to really critically examine the evidentiary facts underlying the deceptive Prem Rawat personality cult/religion. I sincerely suggest Rennie take a few weeks and look at all the accumulated evidence from thousands of sources on www.ex-premie.org., before ignorantly spouting off to anybody ever again about spirituality and his concepts. In light of all the evidence and the information many of us now have about Rawat and his self-serving mind-control cult, the obscene misuse of finances, abuse of position, the mountain of lies and deceptions, spins, and reinventions over the years, and the long-term harm done to countless lives and families, I find Rennie’s attitude flippant and naïve, at best. Since there are obviously some serious gaps in his understanding about the cult and Rawat, particularly since the 1970s, Rennie needs to do his homework on this subject (and others), not pontificate to premies or ex-premies alike - or anyone else, for that matter. His nauseating delusional grandstanding satsang was bad enough back in 1973, let alone again in 2006. Same old Rennie. (Was it the acid, back in the '60s?) On the other hand, this contact is fortuitous -- lucky for Rennie: in the bigger cosmic picture, he just dropped in to see what condition his condition was in. Www.ex-premie.org might be a real eye opener, as well as having some actual dialogues and discussions with ex-premies (Will, for starters, would be good). After all, Rennie Davis personally probably conned thousands of people into believing a whole bunch of rawat cult caca - people who then gave up their families, careers, fortunes etc. to serve Rawat, based on the representations of Rennie and other spokespersons for Guru Maharaj ji (Prem Rawat) and Divine Light Mission (later reincarnated as Elan Vital, and the Prem Rawat Foundation). 'Taking responsibility' means doing so in a sincere way, Rennie -- not just "sorry, ciao." That doesn't cut it. So, this could be your lucky day, Rennie! Cast out the delusional demons of your fantasy concepts and mythologies, stop habitually looking for the next "new" thing to grab onto and 'pitch' to people -- and just live in reality, here and now. Stop fabricating and spouting stuff you don't know to be FACT, stop misleading people! That's been your whole story, man -- a superficial understanding, superstitious, ignorant exaggerations, extrapolations, and misrepresentations. Do the world a favor: Retire from being a deluded pitchman looking for shills (political, spiritual, financial), or get a real job, dude. And, come clean, Rennie... You are accountable to all those people. So, here's your chance to clean up some karma - and learn, too. Seriously. And if you think you know more about spirituality or experienced meditation any more than anyone else on this forum (or anywhere else), then you are sorely mistaken. Your attitude reeks of spiritual egotism. Have you learned nothing, after all these years?! If I'm being hard here, it's because it seems like you, Rennie, haven't changed at all, really. And you can't see it for what it is: Rennie Davis, the insecure gullible, superficial ignoramus who gets up on stage and shoots his mouth off saying the weirdest most off-the-wall stuff, in order to get attention and feel important. Did you do that in grade school, too? Well, you sure did it in the peace movement, then in the Maharaji cult, and you're still doing it. And there were people who actually believed some of the garbage you said, and who got messed up in their lives because of it. Got it now? Take some responsibility. What you "wrote" in the cult was stupid enough, but that was only just a part of it. Give it up, Rennie. Stop setting yourself up, pretending to be something you aren't, an authority on anything -- except yourself. You don't have the answers, and never did, Rennie. Here's your ticket.
Related link: http://www.forbes.com/2006/02/11/rennie-davis-money_cx_lh_money06_0214davis.html?partner=yahootix
|
|
|
|
Great post, Mick. Here's the article you linked to. I thought it was worthwhile to post right here. Sounds like Rennie's surfing the Motherwave, alright. I can just picture Katie Darling looking in here and thinking, "Hm, I wonder if Rennie would like to give be a guest speaker when we get into teaching Planetary Leadership?" Well, not to change the subject. Rennie, if you're reading this, you're a clown. Oh I know, you already embrace your clown body. Forget it. Jim The Hippie: Rennie Davis
Interviewed by Leah Hoffmann, 02.14.06, 12:00 PM ET
To me, money is...a psychological construct. One of the great discoveries occurring in the present time involves recent discoveries in physics about the thought-reactive nature of this world. It turns out our entire reality is a psychological construct, and all our experiences, including those involving money, are coming from ourselves. How you feel about wealth and money--your own perceptions about your own abundance--shape your experiences of money.
A strange idea for a modern time, I know, but I am reminded that once upon a time, everyone believed the Earth was a stationary object located at the center of the universe--until Nicholas Copernicus convinced everyone that their common-sense understanding about how things worked was misinformed. Our situation today is similar. Almost everyone today, glued to various market reports, believes their economic indicators are the driving cause of market highs and lows, when, in fact, both our individual fortunes and our national wealth are not generated from outside ourselves but from inside ourselves.
Recent discoveries in quantum physics support this startling point of view with new understandings about the thought-reactive nature of atomic structure. Quantum physics is discovering that thought is primal in the creation of this world. Understanding this concept--that we are the authors of our own fortunes and "misfortunes"--may be outside the bounds of common sense but nevertheless describes how things actually do work. How you see yourself is how you see the world. How you see the world is how you experience the world.
Perhaps in some future generation, when the fear of losing everything or the belief that bad things happen for no reason at all have all been relegated to the scrap heap of history, abundance will be the natural experience on Earth as people embrace their own perception that good fortune flows easily when trust rather than fear is the unwavering belief. How do things work when it comes to money? You are always supported in this world when your perceptions of your self feel and understand that you are always supported in this world.
My last significant purchase was...some years ago. I was at the bottom of the Grand Canyon--I decided to make a purchase in myself. This purchase didn't cost money, but it was certainly my last significant acquisition. The gift I gave myself required I step into a new understanding of trust. For me, that meant becoming dependent on unexpected "coincidences" occurring at every turn. I had no stable job, no six-figure income and no bank savings to take care of expenses. What I had was my own attitude. I deliberately put myself in a situation where I could experience the beauty, abundance and material comfort of this world from the condition of empty. I wanted to know if life was abundant when my net worth consisted of two assets only: trust and respect.
Why was purchasing the answer to such a question so significant? It allowed me to touch into the pure experience that life supports me completely when I trust rather than fear. What could be more significant than that?
In the 1960s, Rennie Davis was the coordinator of the largest antiwar and civil rights coalition in the United States and one of the defendants in the "Chicago 7" trial. He has appeared on numerous television programs, including the Legends series produced by CBS, Larry King Live, Barbara Walters' and Phil Donahue's shows and on CNN. He has also been financial adviser to various CEOs and senior executives from major companies, including Gates Rubber Company, the Manville Corp., HBO and IBM. He is president of the Foundation for a New Humanity.
|
|
|
|
Hi Mick,
I thought quoting stuff from Rennie's premie days was a bit of a cheap shot. We all spouted plenty of crazy bullshit in our time. I certainly did (and frequently still do). Anyway...
I did agree with your general assesment of what he should do if he wants to sort that bit of his past out, and, to use your words, "clean up his karma", if, indeed he can be arsed.
And I guess the guy must have a pretty thick skin, as I'm sure this isn't the first time he's been slagged off.
Anyway, at least he got of his arse, got up on the stage and shot his mouth off, which is a lot more than most folk did. And I think summing up his time in the anti-war movement as "helping to elect Nixon" is also a bit of a mean conclusion. Don't you see the anti-war movement as being influential in ending that awful, dirty war?
anth the filthy capitalist situationist.
|
|
|
|
hi Anth,"And I think summing up his time in the anti-war movement as "helping to elect Nixon" is also a bit of a mean conclusion. Don't you see the anti-war movement as being influential in ending that awful, dirty war?" I was somewhat involved in the anti-war movement, too. Peaceful demonstrations, marches, sit-ins, letters, speeches, music, poetry. But, all the weirdo radical Yippie fringe shit and reckless behavior absolutely frightened and turned off most of America. We'd be at some peaceful demonstration, and then these SDS and Yippie radical arses and Maoists waving their red flags and holding their little red books (with Quotations from Chairman Mao) would come in and screw everything up - turning protests into freak circuses and violent confrontations with cops, etc. We'd be peacefully demonstrating on the front lines, with cops in full riot gear a few feet away ready to pounce on us, and then these idiot radicals at the back of the crowd would start swearing at the cops, throwing things, smashing and burning stuff, and generally trying to incite riots. What did they care? They were usually further back in the crowds, not usually right up against the cops with batons and tear gas, etc. We'd be up front, looking back and saying, "Hey, cool it. What are you jerks trying to do, anyway?" The protests during the presidential campaigns were very confrontational. Nixon used that stuff repeatedly in his speeches to rouse up the "Silent Majority." The Nixon people would purposely let a small bunch of the really obnoxious asshole troublemakers into his rallies, put them in a special section, and then Nixon or Agnew would point to them and get the crowd ranting against them. Then, it would be broadcast on all the national tv networks later. The SDS, Yippies, Black Panthers, White Panthers, Chicago 7 rioters and their ilk totally undermined the peace movement. It influenced the presidential election. As the poll numbers started changing in the weeks before the election, Nixon started moving up. Then, his creeps went to South Vietnam's junta govt and told them to scrap the peace deal that was on the table, that - look, see - Nixon was going to get elected and would get them a better deal, and so they pulled out of the Paris peace talks with N. Vietnam about 3 days before the election. (This was treason by Nixon et co., of course, to sabotage the US peace delegation during a time of war [even if undeclared[.)
LBJ was about to announce a peace treaty; that was the plan - for the Democratics. Then the rug got pulled out from under the diplomats. The anti-war movement existed with and without Rennie Davis. He was just one of millions of players in that movie. Only, he had the microphone and got lots of the publicity. Sure, he did some organizing - a whole bunch of organizing; but literally thousands of people organized peace rallies. I appeared on stage at some of them, too. I marched, I went to the meetings. Just about everyone I knew did. But what Rennie and those guys did in Chicago in the summer of '68 totally buggered and undermined the peaceful, law-abiding efforts and support of millions of Americans. The Yippies told everybody to go to Chicago; they wanted to cause some trouble, not just your mainstream peaceful protests. Only, most people didn't realize it, until too late. Just like the maha scene, good peaceful well-meaning naive folks got co-opted - by the radicals, the Really radical freaks. No, what happened on the streets of Chicago in '68 during the Democratic Convention is what got Nixon elected - not George Wallace, not Hubert Humphrey screwing up, not RFK and MLK getting shot, not the race riots in the urban ghettos. Hey, if they wanted to call everybody to a city to cause some trouble - and they did, they should have at least done it at the Republican convention, instead. It was stupid. Mayor Daley [Sr.] was pig, but those Yippie and SDS and Panther types absolutely diverted attention away from the Dem convention to riots in the streets and violent confrontations with stick-wielding cops. Nixon used that "Law and Order" theme over and over again, just like Reagan-Bush would do years later. It was a tumultuous time. imo the war would have ended soon after the '68 November election - if Humphrey had been elected and the Paris Peace Talks had continued. The peace deal was right on the table that October. Instead, the war went on into the '70s, and some of my classmates got drafted and were killed in Vietnam. Some of my ex-p friends served over there, and lots of old premie friends too, and they have all kinds of health problems from stuff like Agent Orange and other defoliants, etc. Dow Chemical. I registered as a conscientious objector for the Selective Service (the military draft); males 18 and over had to register, or face prison. Nobody would hire me, and my life was in limbo, while my status was 1-A. Then they called my lottery number, and while waiting, soon thereafter Nixon announced a gradual Vietnamization of the war, reducing US troops. So, luckily, I never got sent over there to be a medic as unarmed cannon fodder in the jungles. Had Nixon not been elected in '68, the war would have ended soon afterwards. Instead, tens of thousands more lives were lost. A tragedy. During the trial, my friends and I all supported Rennie and the Chicago Seven. I even played benefit concerts for our political prisoners and their legal fees, even into the 1970s. I look back on that whole period and think - what a colossal f---ing waste. And after studying all the govt documentation later released and available by the 1980s, including the Pentagon Papers, and lots of other stuff, plus all the radical groups' communiques and the Sixties Papers, etc., it really opened my eyes about how the radical fringe groups played right into the hands of the warmongers, Nixon, and the Republicans. Yes, Rennie did do some good things back then (and in preceding years), but the Chicago '68 stuff was totally assinine -- and the consequences were costly and bloody - to America and Vietnam. It changed the course of history. After the Tet offensive, and the assassinations, the peace movement had been gaining so much huge momentum, and then boom - Chicago - that just totally undermined literally years of people's concerted effort in the movement. What if Nixon had never been elected, and then re-elected in '72? That's food for thought. That's all I have to say on this subject.
Modified by Mick at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 19:41:01
|
|
|
|
Hi Mick,
Thanks for taking the time for posting such a meaty response. I appreciate it. My view of the whole confrontation was from the other side of the Atlantic, but I thought there was an official US Gov enquiry into the event afterwards, which concluded that it was basically a riot by the Chicago police. The bits of film I saw certainly made it look that way.
I think there's a lot more to politics than simply who's in government. it's how human beings interact and organise things. I've been on loads of marches and demonstrations in my life. In Britain, the extreme groups who wanted a confrontation with the police always marched at the front to make sure they got their confrontation. The violence was almost ritualised and everyone, including the press, knew who the groups were who were involved.
It's sad you think all the effort you made in support of the anti-war movement was wasted. I disagree with you on that one. When a government is commiting war crimes against a "peasant country", I don't think a cry in opposition is ever wasted. And yes...my glasses lenses are sort of idealistic rosy colour. It's either that or the acid I took thirty odd years ago fucked me up a lot more than I realise.
Thanks Mick, I appreciate your reply.
anth the mousist.
|
|
|
|
Hi again, Anth [not anthony]you're right, the efforts of anti-war activists did finally help bring an end to the Vietnam war, but that could have happened earlier -- in 1968. that was my main point. I think the radicals' strategy and tactics in Chicago messed up our best chance to stop the war then. that's what was very sad, at least for me. so many more deaths for another 7 years (until Saigon fell, the US had pulled out most of its troops by '73) in UK, you get better journalistic coverage of this stuff. in US, the 3 major networks' tele broadcasts depicted total anarchy in the streets. the majority of America was totally freaked by the all these long-hairs chanting Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh, waving Viet Cong, red, and anarchist flags, shouting obscenities and throwing stuff at the cops, and the Chicago police acting like rampaging gangster thugs, beating the crap out of people all over the place. The cops were definitely looking to bust some heads. Again, I just take issue with the organizers' tactics, including Rennie, in historical retrospect. At the meetings I attended, there were always a bunch of revolutionary types advocating confrontations and tactics guaranteed to cause trouble. There are much better, smarter ways to organize. I guess many people of my generation (me included) felt that our leaders and elders weren't listening, or even trying to. We were desperate. Desperate times sometimes lead to desperate measures. However, there were a lot of people within the anti-war movement who also had other much more revolutionary agendas, both within SDS and some of the other more extreme groups. It was a huge umbrella movement of many organizations, individuals. I never appreciated it when some people began trying to impose their more radical agendas on everybody else. I even got punched out one time by a violent SDS member for not being "revolutionary enough." Yet, when it came down, we all stood together - pacifists like me alongside these types, in trying to bring an end to the war, and for civil rights, etc. So, sure, I thought the cops in Chicago then were definitely out to 'get' the demonstrators, brutally. The SDS and Yippie tactics, though, played right into their hands. stupid. We could have had a major counter-convention instead at the stadium, with speakers, music, war atrocity exhibits, and so forth. That would have given the peace movement so much better p.r. and good media coverage. Instead, anarchy - and rioting by mobs of cops and demonstrators alike. Yeah, all of us in the anti-war movement Did make a difference. And I'm glad we stood up for peace. I don't regret that one iota. After that, we had some huge peace demonstrations in Washington (1 million + people), marching from the Washington monument to the Capitol, etc. in the early 1970s. I just read Rennie's testimony at the Chicago 7 trial yesterday. the trial was a joke - a disgrace. Even though most anti-war activists did Not like some of the radicals' tactics, we were all shocked at Judge Hoffman's demeanor and seeing Bobby Seale gagged and shackled. I mean, that just serves to demonstrate the power of oppressive govt. I know Rennie meant well, but the SDS' strategy and tactics in Chicago were stupidly counter-productive and just bent on provoking the cops into a riot. The organizers of those protests there were too extreme - not mainstream peaceniks. If you ever saw Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, too, and their shtick - overall, America was not ready for that type of weirdness. (Check out: Revolution for the Hell of It, Steal This Book, etc.). politico space cadets. Some of what they did was kind of humorous, though. Going to the Stock Exchange and throwing dollar bills down from the gallery, and people scrambling for money. Burning money, and watching people freak out. Dressing up the pig. Street theatre! Look what happened later: they became the Establishment. Stock brokers. Or, Rennie, the mitochondrial DNA financial advisor balancing his chakras, eliminating thought and blood connections with other people, and going back before the creation of mankind, etc. -- see his website. some pretty off the wall stuff. I'm sure he thinks it's cutting edge, of course. [too much acid, too much new age superstition mixed with theories - with a tad of science thrown up?] I say to Rennie: if there's a 'science' to all of it (and I mean Everything on his website), then prove it - and let's have it all independently scientifically verified. But almost all of that stuff is just theories and things taken from various belief systems; he knows it - theories. The workshops are $100 each to attend. Well, as PT Barnum used to say, "There's a sucker born every minute." Sure, there are herbal/dietary/fasting methods to purify one's blood, meditations to calm and eliminate negative thoughts, and I've seen [within] what people would call chakras, too. I can feel energy go up and down the spine. I've had all kinds of interesting experiences. But, I wouldn't set myself up and proclaim this as science and technology and charge people to attend workshops. Like Rennie, I could write about this stuff, and lots of other related things, but only as a subjective empirical thing. As the forum header quote says: Experience is not Knowledge. It can be one's personal knowledge, but not necessarily with a big K. And I don't know how Rennie can even talk about what happens after death -- unless he died and came back. Sure, there are books like "Into the Light" that talk about stuff, or Tibetan Book of the Dead, but there are so many other views out there, too, and people who have had much different near-death and so-called out-of-the-body experiences. Same thing with Deepak; all the stuff he does is only backed up by Hindu beliefs and cult insider studies done by other doctor devotees of the Maharishi cult, with no outside independent analysis, or control groups, in the TM studies or the "Ayurveda" TM brand poisons they sell at up to 10 times the going rate for legitimate herbs and vitamins. These TM cult quack doctors all back each other up, in a little ring. I've checked their studies, read their papers (they cite each other as references). Some leading physicians are interested in my exposing Deepak and his pals as a fraud. The Journal of the Americal Medical Association editors said Deepak blatantly lied and misrepesented a whole bunch of stuff to them. He sued them -- and lost! Deepak's just a con doctor, pushing thinly-veiled TM cult quackery mixed with old Hindu concepts. (Now, there's a book right there, for anyone who'd like to take the time to research and write it.) Deepak and his buddies are also into pushing the TM 'yogic flying,' too. Yeah, bouncing around in a padded room. After 30 years, not a single one of them can actually levitate! But TM charges thousands and thousands of dollars for that course. Also, the TM doctors charge people to perform religious rituals - under the guise of 'medicine.' Seriously. In the UK, their Ayurveda products were analyzed, after someone died while using them; chemical analysis of the pills/tablets/supplements showed there was human feces used in some of the products ingested. That's poison. Anyway, I spent way too many years hanging out with people who were involved with these types of theories, which they were practicing and believed in. Today, they don't seem to be doing any better than anyone else, and in most cases - they seem sickly, spaced, delusional, and even incoherent. You can't have a rational conversation on these subjects with the adherents. 'Belief' is a powerful thing. But, as we know, it can trap and blind a person. And imposters who push 'beliefs' - as medicine - upon others are dangerous. Instead, I think most people would be better off just going to a gym and working out every day, take vitamins, and follow a sensible balanced, lo-fat, low-toxin diet. And get outside whenever possible and enjoy Nature around them. Garden, play music, whatever... People who claim to have 'The Way' are charlatans. Comedians Bob Hope and George Burns both lived to be 100 years old. (Yet, Burns smoked cigars every day.) So, I think a sense of humor also goes a long way, too, towards one being healthy. See, now here I am, setting myself up as an opinionated expert, too. That's all most personal representations are -- just people's subjective opinions. We all do it. But, I think a little balance is important. Nothing in Excess. Not this, not that. The Golden Mean. [another concept, too - of the Greeks, and who knows, maybe borrowed from somewhere else, too] wow, it's so easy to ramble... well, signing off for awhile. just thought I'd reply again. take care, - Mick, channeling the spirit of a 20,000 year old Atlantean quack priest
|
|
|
|
Powerful stuff, Mick. You evidently were closer to Rennie D than many of us contributors here, and seem to have a measure of the man that was unknown to ... well, to me, at least. I only hope your description of him isn't clouded by too much personal animosity. Why? Well, let's just say that impartiality can make for a better judge than an allegiance that's turned sour.But to the reason I started writing this: I couldn't help but notice that in your description of the Houston "Millennium '73" event, you quoted Rennie as saying that it was "the single most important event in the history of the planet". It was touted as more than that, as this letter from Rawat makes clear: QUOTE from http://www.ex-premie2.org/papers/millenium_invit_letter.htm Here's what he said in a letter to all the premies from Bonn, Germany on September 31, 1973 (Query: Is there even such a date?). The letter's printed in the 'Special Millenium '73 Edition' of the Divine Times, page 2, under the heading 'A Festival for the Whole World': A LETTER FROM GURU MAHARAJ JI Bonn, Germany September 31, 1973 Dear premies, First of all, I would like to tell you about something of great importance to all of us. Because we have realized this beautiful Knowledge which is of great bliss to us all, it is our duty to propagate it to the human race. For it is something they really need. In the world there is suffering, hatred and dissatisfaction. That fact does not need proof. It is understood by all that the world is passing through a great moment. No one has satisfaction of mind nor can they find the solution to this. The world is looking for the Perfect Master to come and reveal the Perfect Knowledge of God. There is a supreme energy constantly vibrating in everything making it survive and all the Perfect Masters come to reveal this Knowledge to people. We can attain all materialistic things and still not have peace, for peace lies inside not outside in materialism. As you all know Millenium '73 is being prepared for now. This festival has been organized by Divine Light Mission each year since 1967, in the memory of the late Satgurudev Shri Hans Ji Maharaji on His birthday. This year the most Holy and significant event in human history will take place in America. I think that Millenium '73 is a point where we can really get together and enjoy the bliss with all of our brothers and sisters who are premies; and also tell the world that we have received and realized the permanent service of Truth, Consciousness and Bliss which all the world is looking for in one way or manner. To do this I really need your help. I really need the help of all the premies in all respects; physically, financially and all other ways to make Millenium '73 come off. This is a festival not for you or me. It is for the whole world and maybe the whole universe. I hereby invite you to this Divine Festival of Peace, Millenium '73 and request all premies to help me financially, physically and spiritually to make the program manifest for all seekers of Truth. Isn't it about time you all get together and help me bring peace to this Earth? Blessings to you all, [Sant Ji Maharaj] END "This year the most Holy and significant event in human history will take place in America" - and this from the same man who now says his "Knowledge" has NOTHING to do with religion OR spirituality!
Modified by cq at Thu, Feb 23, 2006, 15:38:33
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,Actually, I don't really feel any 'personal animosity' towards Shri Rennet Ji (Rennie). Reading his letter just got me reflecting on all the things that transpired during the early Prem days in the West + Rennie and the radical wackos in the peace movement, and then his integral role in "Spread this Knowledge" and the "Lord has come," etc. I didn't know him particularly well, just casually. However, even back in the early DLM days in the West, his shatsang used to drive me up a wall - with his ridiculous assertions. His constant extrapolations and claims seemed bizarre, even when I was a premie. He was like a 'holy roller' preacher - bonkers! But think of the effect his preachy pronouncements as maha's spokesperson had on all the 'true believers' in the cult and the gullible aspirants! Same thing in SDS and the peace movement way back when. Just trying to tell it like I see it, as one who was there -- as an eyewitness on many occasions.
Modified by Mick at Sat, Feb 25, 2006, 11:56:28
|
|
|
|
I was there when Rennie spoke for Maharajk, and I thought his retraction was sincere. If we can persuade all people to abandon Maharaji, we have won. Insulting the man accomplishes nothing. We all make misakes and Rennie seems to have apologized for his. The important thing is that he is no longer involved. It seems the only act that would satisfy you would have Rennie falling on his sword. John
|
|
|
|
Hi John You have replied to a very old thread. Most readers will not see your response unless they are using the time controls (last 12 hours or whatever as I have just done). You may want to consider starting a new thread even if it does refer to an old thread such as this. T
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your invitation to speak about a subject I know you and others feel deeply about. For me, Guru Maharaj Ji was an experience that happened more than 30 years ago. Ever since you wrote me with such passion about this history, I have wanted to understand what motivates and inspires you. More than anything, I have wanted to walk in your shoes and feel what this hurt and injustice you must experience is about. I know you have deep reasons and I hope to feel and understand what they are. Rennie, if you are reading this, I have a few points to make, this is the first: Don't you have any hurt yourself? Well probably not as you go on to say... While my own life has moved on from the days of Guru Maharaji Ji, I realize many people have continued a strong relation with him: most of them having a relation based on respect for his teaching; other having a relation that feels injured or misled by statements about him. This is, of course, psycho-babble - to suggest that ex-premies who post here have a 'relationship' with Rawat is on a par with saying a beaten-up wife (who has left her abusive husband) still has 'a relationship' with said husband. What does that mean? When I was in high school, I had a spiritual experience in church. It was a Methodist church and on this particular day I felt touched by the beauty of my own spirit. Don't think that Christians usually describe their experiences in quite such self-congratulatory terms. Today, I would say I have a physical body, a thought body, a light body and a dream body and that Guru Maharaj Ji was able to create an energetic bridge to my light body. A what? Today, I don’t believe Guru Maharaj Ji is the ‘lord of the universe’ as the faithful that surrounded him in India once claimed. From what I can understand--watching Maharaj Ji speaking today--it doesn’t seem he believes that either. I haven’t spoken to Maharaj Ji directly since the 1970s so I don’t know what he believes exactly but I did see him speak not too long ago in Colorado. At that talk, he had left his Indian crown and traditions for a western style suit and tie and he delivered a rather straight forward talk that might just as easily have been given by Deepak Chopra. I thought he was charming and positive. Rawat still makes out he is Lord of the Universe to his Indian premies. And hardly a compliment - the comparison with Deepak Chopra. There is a long tradition in this world about following the guru. Part of that tradition also involves ‘killing the guru.’ That means that in the ‘guru tradition,’ there is a stage when you follow the guru as a teacher, allow yourself to be guided through a spiritual process and perhaps even give up some of your worldly possessions but that stage may be followed by a second stage when you separate from the teacher and realize that what you seek is in yourself and not in another person. In the historic tradition, first you are the devotee, giving your devotion to the guru. Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs. You're so Chogyam Trungpa. And that ain't remotely what Rawat teaches. Then you leave the guru and find meaning in the ex-premie web site. I’m not suggesting there is a right or wrong about such choices. I’m just saying that both stages have an honored place in the tradition. What? One thing we probably share in common is the idea that each stage comes from ourselves. That is to say, each of us creates our own reality. Broadly speaking, it seems that millions of people today are coming to this remarkable understanding. Rather than believe that we are all victims of Guru Maharaj Ji, Rennie Davis, George Bush or other public personalities, many people understand an extraordinary new idea now reaching critical mass, "I create my own reality even when I don’t know why." In a bold departure from the human condition, this understanding also recognizes that when you blame someone else for your own creation, you turn your power over and become the victim. Obviously you have been reading 'The Celestine Prophecy'. No further comment available (without contravening polite discourse). Probably no one knows better than me the need to feel my own righteousness through judgments and blame. Oh - so that's what we are doing. Gee - I never knew. Thanks for pointing that out from your enlightened (but guru-free) perspective. Perhaps a part of humanity is getting ready to move on, however, into a new understanding--blaming no one, taking responsibility for their own creation and seeing the perfection rather than the ‘bad person’ in others. Ok, I'm ready to move on, I have a new understanding, I see perfection everywhere - in the child-abusers, the wife (or husband) - beaters, Pol Pot, the Third Reich - no bad people anywhere. Cosmic! I see the perfection in Auchwitz! Perhaps this apology and somewhat long explanation can lend a hand to all the ex-devotees of Guru Maharaji Ji who search for truth, understanding and their own light and empowerment inside. Or, perhaps not.
Modified by moley at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 18:24:45
|
|
|
|
in how to use passive-aggression to win friends and influence people and lace it with a load of ole bollocks and bullshit at the same time. Thanks Rennie
|
|
|
|
You are so right, Dermot. That letter is filled with a meanness covered over by new-age bullshit. It is one of the most insulting things I've read in a long time. He and Tim Gallwey should get together, if they haven't already. They deserve each other.
|
|
|
|
Thanks to Rennie for taking the time to write and emerge from a mysterious silence. It does help for people to openly communicate about issues. Rennie's particular stance about Rawat remains somewhat vague and mysterious to me, even after this letter, but at least he wrote something. I can't say that I agree or even understand the theory about people creating their own realities. I know that, on the contrary, they certainly can create quite a bit of mythology about themselves and their lives. Of course we can make choices and work to make those choices develop into the actions and situations that we desire. But the phrase "create reality" is too grand. Perhaps I am just not in on the new critical mass of people who understand this radical thought.
|
|
|
|
but it does look like he was the God Rennie deserved. Barf
|
|
|
|
I think Rennie felt that out in Las Vegas! Why not send Rennie a copy of the LOTU video?
|
|
|
|
That comment is so right, Susan.
....Some of my earlier writings
about Guru Maharaj Ji (that was his name when I knew him) certainly
deserve an apology. So please accept this apology—to you and anyone you
know that may feel misled by statements I made at an earlier time. I
feel I owe Guru Maharaj Ji an apology as well.......
So does he feel inclined to apologise to the shade of Mayor Daley & the citizens of Chicago for having helped organise a riot, & if not, why not.
.
|
|
|
|
Dayley was the right wing scumbag who turned the Chicago police onto a peaceful anti-war demonstration. He inspired what was effectively an organised police riot, in what was aleady- and still is a police state. You really seemignorant of the facts.
Give Davis a medal and life pension for standing up against fascist scumbags like Dayley.
I suppose you think the war in Vietnam- which you lost- could have been won if only the US had held its nerve and used a few million gallons more napalm on the Vietnamese peasants.
Anth the moderate.
Modified by AJW at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 11:54:47
|
|
|
|
>I suppose you think the war in Vietnam- which you lost- could have been won if only the US had held its nerve and used a few million gallons more napalm on the Vietnamese peasants. Anth, It sounds like you're mistaking PatD for an American. >You really are a fucking ignoramus. Careful - you'll tarnish your newly-acquired status as the voice of good manners  Nige
Modified by nigel at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 05:45:40
|
|
|
|
Hi Nigel,
You are quite correct to point out my bad manners and contradictory comments. After I cooled down a bit I realised I'd been a dickhead in what I wrote to PatD, and went and changed it.
He said something that made me see red- and later I realised that what Rennie Davis said had made Jim see red in a similar way. And I felt I suddenly understood something- but I'm not sure what.
Now I'll go down and read what PatD said and see if I end up swearing at him or apologising.
Anth the schizo nutcase.
|
|
|
|
You really like jumping to conclusions, don't you. I find that to be one of the more boring things about people whose political views never developed much after the age of 15 or so.
FYI I neither thought the Vietnam war was a 'good thing' at the time, nor have I altered my opinion with the benefit of hindsight. Not being an American the win/lose thing is irrelevant, & as for what I think about Mayor Daley, well, that's also irrelevant, but in any case isn't something anyone could deduce from what I said.
If Rennie Davis thinks he should apologise to Rawat, for what for christsake, then why shouldn't he also apologise for no good reason to other people for other things he's done?
|
|
|
|
50/50? What do you reckon?
|
|
|
|
Funny to see Anth just go off on one like that, especially after playing the holier-than-thou card elsewhere on this thread. Maybe he had a rough night last night, or otherwise just wasn't paying proper attention to what Pat was saying to Susan (re. Rennie's apology to *Rawat*, rather than to us.) He'll probably feel even more sheepish if he remembers PatD's former forum identity, and the fact the two of them were both at Latvian 2001 and probably met. [post edited to correct Latvian date] I'd give you 90/10 odds on... Nige
Modified by nigel at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 10:51:06
|
|
|
|
I blame the drugs. He's a good bloke really but seems to have gotton his knickers in a twist. He'll come back - tail between his legs and apologise. Unless he has got too carried away with those penis enlargers that is. Bunny
|
|
|
|
Leave me alone. I don't want to talk to anybody. I hate the internet.
And I haven't got a tail- I'm an ape, not a monkey.
Anth, carefully avoiding any crude puns
|
|
|
|
You are a cheeky monkey if ever there was one. But you are a bigger man in at least one sense for withdrawing your insult. Bunny
|
|
|
|
Okay, okay, I've apologised already, I feel so sheepish I fancy shagging one. I admit it, I've got a big mouth with plenty of room for my foot.
I didn't pay proper attention. It's true.
Nige- you bastard. Stop taking bets on the extent of my stupidity. You know too much already.
Like I said to PatD, he touched two raw nerves at the same time.
Leave me alone, I'm taking my ball home.
John Smith.
|
|
|
|
Everyone here knows your post was somewhat out of character, and probably due to a misreading. In fact I should have taken on Dermot when the odds were 50/50 and I'd have got a decent return on my stake. And yes, of course Mayor Daley was a fascist scumbag and Vietnam a blot on the American time-honoured tradition of non-intervention in other countries' affairs....er, hmmm... Where was I? Nige the Voice of Immoderation
|
|
|
|
Being a self-centred, highly strung, egocentric, prima-donna who has forgotten to take his beta-blockers, I need people like you around all the time.
anth the bouncy ball ock brain.
|
|
|
|
PatD,
Yes, I was certainly jumping to conclusions, based on your requested apology and apparent blame of Davis for the Chicago riots.
I assumed because you blamed the attack of the police on the anti-war demonstrators, in the form of Davis, and suggested that they apologise for being attacked, that you were in fact a supporter of the war. Apparently I was wrong.
I apologise for swearing at you and have deleted my insult, I think your comments touched two sore points at the same time.
My political views have developed quite a lot since I was 15, but I won't bore you with that tale.
Anyway PatD, glad you were against the war. So was Rennie, and he did something about it.
anth the big gob.
|
|
|
|
odds of 50/50 was a bit of an insult.And I thought Daley was worse than a scumbag, not just a scumbag, didn't support Vietnam but did support forcing Saddam into a hole in the ground. Now, when I get famous, I won't have to traipse to Baghdad and say " Sir! I salute your indefatigability!!! "
Modified by Dermot at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 13:15:57
|
|
|
|
Sir,
I salute yours too.
and your post made me laugh out loud.
anth - in de fat but getting thinner.
|
|
|
|
Modified by Dermot at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 21:27:46
|
|
|
|
I don't mind you swearing at me Anth, but I do rather mind you not swearing at Rennie fucking Davis, for your own sake more than anything.
I just read Mick's post above. He seems to have the measure of the man.
We never actually spoke, other than to say hello, at the 2 Latvian get togethers where we were both present in the physical body, which just goes to show what an incompetent bunch of hate filled conspiritors against the innocent private investor we are.
Maybe having lost the ability to tune into our four bodies due to turning manmot............yeah, that could be the reason we never made it across the bridge.
....I think your comments touched two sore points at the same time.
You're lucky you only have two, I've got a lot more than that.
Remind me to buy you a pint next time we meet.
|
|
|
|
Hi Pat,
I've got more than two, but they only usually fly up one at a time, unless I meet a member of the National Front- then my views on gun crime start to twitch, and want to go and play with Scott and NAR.
Yes, buy me a pint, that's worth organising a Latvian evening for.
Take care,
anth the bigfoot.
|
|
|
|
If others have already replied to your post, Anth, it's a bit unfair to edit your original without flagging up the fact within that post. That's why I keep a copy of the negatives and paste them into my replies, just in case... Nige, the bloody annoying pedant (who repeatedly edits his own posts until somebody replies. If no-one replies, you can delete the whole thing and act as if you never said it.)
Modified by nigel at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 21:25:01
|
|
|
|
I didn't think anyone else would read it, and if they did, well, obviously they were listening to a private conversation and... er...well...ok nige...I'll be good.
Anth the very good now.
|
|
|
|
[Too late - I've edited it out, so you'll never know what I said!]  
Modified by nigel at Tue, Feb 21, 2006, 08:04:28
|
|
|
|
I told you guys not to pester him for an apology. Now look what you got! Stinky!
Nice clean up job though.
|
|
|
|
I did not feel the massive negative reaction that others here seem to have felt when reading Rennie's email to JHB. Sure, based on what Rennie says on his website and elsewhere, I was sort of expecting to read a bunch of nuage babble. I was not disappointed to read Rennie's email where he comes up with baloney such as creating one's own reality and the second phase of 'killing the guru'. However behind all that garbage, as it is imo, I do detect a voice of humility on the part of Rennie where he does genuinely feel sorry for the mis-guidance he provided to others in his earlier life. Maybe I'm misreading things in his email and he is not really sorry for what harm he caused and is just saying that for effect. However I would like to give him the benefit of doubt and assume that he does regret that particular part in his past. However I don't get the apology to Rawat. What is that about Rennie? I could very much relate to Rennie's point about his light experience and having that fill him from head to toe. Much as I experienced many times, however I do very much disagree with Rennie's explanation of that. That of Rawat being a bridge of some sort. Just another bunch of magical thinking. But still. What I don't get is why Rennie is so totally silent on his website about his very substantial involvement in fostering Maharaji's early success in the West and the USA in particular. Perhaps Rennie is, as JHB said, embarrassed about that part of his life. If this is the case then I give Rennie some credit for writing what he did above and giving JHB permission to publish it. Even if it does contain a bunch of nuage babble, is passive-aggressive and does not recognise the true extent of the harm that Rawat has caused to many many people, it does take some considerable courage to write to JHB in the way he has done. Rennie could more easily just have not bothered, as many other prominant people have chosen to do. Maybe Rennie would like to come along and discuss his views here? I will be a keen listener. T
Modified by T at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 17:12:43
|
|
|
|
However behind all that garbage, as it is imo, I do detect a voice of humility on the part of Rennie where he does genuinely feel sorry for the mis-guidance he provided to others in his earlier life. You do? Sorry, but your detection system must be tuned to some other wavelength from mine. Maybe I'm misreading things in his email and he is not really sorry for what harm he caused and is just saying that for effect. However I would like to give him the benefit of doubt and assume that he does regret that particular part in his past. Are you making this up?
Modified by moley at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 17:19:11
|
|
|
|
T, Here's the letter he should have written: Thanks for your email, John. Frankly, I don't know what to say. I was completely taken by the young Lord of the Universe, as were we all, and so I used my particular resources, experiences and skills to serve him. I know that a lot of my former "audience", if you will, in the anti-war movement thought I was ridiculous but obviously a number of people listened. Yes, I admit, I was at least somewhat influential in moving this show along. Yes, of course I was. So now you wonder why I don't mention Maharaji on my website. Well, I dunno. I guess because, when you come right down to it, it is a bit embarrassing. I mean, have you seen that bit from the "Lord of the Universe" video where I'm gushing in the car about the "Master suite" in the hotel with the swan-shaped faucets in the bathroom? John, quite honestly, I look like a f***kin' idiot. I guess we all did then. But at least I was thin. Now, is there anything I should do here? Hm. I don't know. Let me think about it. I guess the question is, as a former big shot in the organization do I have some sort of duty to publically take a stand? Would it make any difference? Maybe. Like I say, I don't know. Let me think about it. God was I thin though! Thanks for your email, John. I must say, even if I'm not doing the ex-premie thing myself at all, I'm glad someone is. Take care, Rennie
|
|
|
|
I'm with T on this. So Rennie ain't perfect, he's got baggage and beliefs and self image to preserve. Of course I'd like it if Rennie - and the rest of humanity - lived up to my expectations, but then if that was to be fulfilled Rennie would be physically thrashing idiot US politicians to a backing track supplied by Rage Against The Machine. As apologies and acknowledgements of the past go, I have no problem accepting what Rennie has written at face value and thank him for it. Though I do wish he hadn't used that awful 'I've moved on' mantra ... it's just so utterly naff. Ah well such are fallen idols. N
|
|
|
|
As apologies and acknowledgements of the past go, I have no problem accepting what Rennie has written at face value and thank him for it. As many have noted, the apology is more a lecture laced with patronizing insults. How can you possibly be grateful for that?
|
|
|
|
>How can you possibly be grateful for that?< Well I wouldn't go as far as 'gratitude' - "thank" in this context would surely be understood as a simple acknowledgement of the effort made by a third party ? I understand that others feel patronised and insulted - I don't. That's the point, I'm content to take Rennie at face value. I do think it a bit weird to invite someone to respond - and then pull that response to pieces because it doesn't measure up to some notion of fitness. If Rennie is insinscere in his response that's his problem, from what I understand of the way Rennie has lived his life, his reply to John seems to reflect accurately what Rennie is about. It's up to others how they want to deal with this - but I don't seen Rennie Davis as a major part of the present cult - and I don't see either the "new age" or even the "comfy capitilism" that Rennie promotes as worthy of the effort of deconstruction. So 'yes way'; what I said stands. N
|
|
|
|
I understand that others feel patronised and insulted - I don't. That's the point, I'm content to take Rennie at face value. Nik, What does it mean to take Rennie at face value in this context? Do I believe that he believes what he's saying? Perhaps. I mean, it would require some real dialogue to know better. There are some serious factual errors in his reply that may be just the result of one hell of a bad memory. Whether or not that's the case could be settled easily enough with a little back and forth. But it's also possible that Rennie's been lying to himself and others so long about so much that he's possibly lost any sense of what's really true or not. In that case, he could be sincere in what he's saying but only because he's so full of it and has been for so long. I don't give a lot of credit for that kind of sincerity. Do you? I do think it a bit weird to invite someone to respond - and then pull that response to pieces because it doesn't measure up to some notion of fitness. If Rennie is insinscere in his response that's his problem, from what I understand of the way Rennie has lived his life, his reply to John seems to reflect accurately what Rennie is about. John's invitation to Rennie was a very direct challenge to speak out. John didn't promise him any particular kind of response. Rennie does have a duty to speak out even if it's only to be pelted by rotten tomatoes from the cheap seats. He would have gotten a different response if he hadn't been so insulting. By the way, I see your saying that you don't feel insulted because you take Rennie at face value as a non sequitur. If some sincere racist pats you on the head because he thinks it's amazing that you've been able to become a doctor, what with being black and all, he might be as sincere as possible. It doesn't mean what he's saying isn't insulting. It's up to others how they want to deal with this - but I don't seen Rennie Davis as a major part of the present cult - and I don't see either the "new age" or even the "comfy capitilism" that Rennie promotes as worthy of the effort of deconstruction. No one said Rennie is a major part of the current cult. This is about the past, largely, when we're talking about him. As for his "comfy capitalism", I don't know, don't you see a bit of a despicable pattern of former big shot premies using their cult-developed philosophies and skills to peddle more, albeit different, new age BS? BTW, for reference, here's John's letter: Rennie, It's some time since we last made contact. I will be blunt - you have a responsibility to speak out about your role in the Maharaji phenomenon. Many young people came to Maharaji directly because of your support for him, and many of these abandoned their education, families, careers, and in too many cases, their lives, because of their belief in him. You now use your past as one of the Chicago 7 on your website presumably to enhance your status, but you make no mention of your time following and promoting Maharaji. In 1973 you, and Divine Light Mission, used that same status of yours to entice people into dedicating their lives to Maharaji. In the book edited by Charles Cameron, "Who is Guru Maharaj Ji", you are credited with writing the introduction. In case you cannot remember what you wrote, I'll remind you:- "People who wonder what has happened to me since meeting Guru Maharaj Ji should know that I spend every joyous, waking moment trying to create the conditions that will help America get into an all-out investigation of Guru Maharaj Ji. Because I know that if we even begin to wonder who this boy is who says, "I have come so that you may know God," the answer will come. When a devotee makes the outrageous statement that Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord of the Universe, it's cause enough for a chuckle. But it also happens to be true. Guru Maharaj Ji is the Lord of the Universe and anyone can find out who sincerely wants to know." There's more but this extract succinctly illustrates your published beliefs at the time. Maharaji now lies about his past. Your unique status and history makes you eminently qualified to help expose these lies. I assume from your website that you respect the truth. It's time to tell the truth about your time with Maharaji - particularly why you said he was the Lord of the Universe, and why, presumably, you no longer believe that. John Brauns
webmaster ex-premie.org
|
|
|
|
...and if you read the tone of most of the replies here, I think you'll understand why.
Fucking hell, give the guy a break.
anth
|
|
|
|
Um, if you read my post again you will see ........... Oh Hi to you Anth btw. T
|
|
|
|
...What's that?....oh...of course ...I am "me", although at one point (aged 19 and just out of school) I believed the Lord of The Universe's "Satsang", and thought "me" was all illusion, and my "mind" a product of "Maya" and a terrible enemy. Like so many others,I left my family and friends,gave up my place at university and all my worldly goods to become a fully surrendered devotee.Hopelessly trapped by the brainwashing, I didn't escape 'til over 30 years later (thanks to ExPremieOrg on the web). During that time the LOTU got rich and brought up a family in the lap of luxury off the backs of his followers,while I donated to his coffers,and lived in relative poverty, in the mistaken belief that this was the one true path. So...anyway..what was the point of my header " If I were ME I wouldn't come near this place!"..... What I am trying to say is that sometimes I wonder why I do come near this place.I feel that it isn't fair to invite an ex-premie to contribute ,and when they do,in the politest way, then RIP THEM APART. Maybe it's the Methodist thing ? Although I am Jewish I was religiously sent to the Methodist Church up the road every Sunday by the Children's Home where I lived for several years ( partly , no doubt, to set me on the "straight and narrow" ).I did hours of Sunday School there...maybe politeness was important ? I believe Anthony (Tempora) also has methodist roots and we've already had a methodist style "hymn" thread .It's interesting to see that Rennie was also a Methodist. I digress. It's quite clear to me that Rennie has NEVER really ex-ed. That's why he doesn't really stand outside that phase in his life and see it honestly for what it really was.....Yes ALL OF US were CONNED,you too Rennie. As Rennie is still in deep "denial" I've no doubt that he sincerely believes every word he has written.I think he's probably a nice,friendly guy too. I feel sorry that he's been jumped on and beaten up so mercilessly....especially as that means he would be a fool to ever come back....and we will never get his true "journey" (once he REALLY "ex-es" ) on the EPO "Journeys" page. JHB...I hope,when you benignly asked Rennie if it was OK to publish.....you warned him that you were throwing him to the lions.
|
|
|
|
It will be like water of a ducks back for him, after all he creastes his own reality, why would he allow our negativity to slip into his reality?
that@d be kindergarten stuff for him I reckon, either that or his previous response was dishonest..
|
|
|
|
I do post on other forums Hamzen where people aren't systematically set up like they are here.You're probably right about"water off a ducks back".I hope so. I said what I felt anyway as I'm not really interested in impressing anyone here.
|
|
|
|
Why should you try to impress anyone, that would just be daft.
And I certainly wouldn't want you to stop for a moment.
My comment was just pertaining to this instance, and I found that letter of his seriously patronizing and full of the usual guru condescension.
Re other forums, you might well be right, but then I don't know about where you hang out, but most other forums I'm on are not based on such a shaky history, I mean a cult background is just seriously odd, well and fucked up really.
But back to the issue, didn't you find that letter of his at all patronising?
|
|
|
|
Lexy, I'd just love to hear your own reply to Rennie. I mean that. He's likely not going to ever respond to me, if he was ever thinking of replying to anyone here. But you've got a chance to show him what a nice ex-premie sounds like. Please, let's hear it.
|
|
|
|
Just because it was " polite" and lengthy and took a few minutes to knock out is neither here nor there. I've no real vendetta against the guy, either way, as it happens, but as he was a big time, publicity seeking cheerleader for the Lord of the Universe you'd think ( he being so full of complete good will and empathy and all that) he'd reflect deeply about not just his time and his role in the whole Divine fiasco that was our life ( and his, while the spotlight kept shining on him) but also on the time ( and motives) of the basic audience he was addressing. Surely, anyone with a bit of gumption would just have a good look at the EPO website to realise that some new age bollox wasn't at all relevant.He didn't have a clue about the past as it was and his little walk-on role in it. oooo, he took some time out to give a sermon and apologise to Rawat, his followers and the other essential part of the new age structure concocted in his new age feather brain...us the detractors ....aren't we lucky? It wasn't even an apology I personally was after ...we were all involved in the bullshit to a greater or lesser extent...no, it was a bit of down to earth reflection and a simple explanation why he chooses to deliberately airbrush this particular aspect of his public life from his sparkling resume. He'd have been as well not to bother with the tripe he came up with.
Modified by Dermot at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 09:37:47
|
|
|
|
>>>>I realize many people have continued a strong relation with him: most of them having a relation based on respect for his teaching;<<<<<Well, we are obviously looking at this from the Western perspective so St Rennie “realises”. wrongly. The personality cult pulls in around 5000 hard core lifers, at the most, at most adulation fests.I’d confidently say that many, many more thousands dropped away over the years and don’t have a strong relation with him. >>>>>Today, I don’t believe Guru Maharaj Ji is the ‘lord of the universe’ as the faithful that surrounded him in India once claimed.<<<<<<<< What??? !!!! And don’t forget yourself in those who claimed such tosh and you did it big time in the full glare of publicity. Most of us around that time claimed the same thing not just the faithful that surrounded him in India. >>>>>There is a long tradition in this world about following the guru. Part of that tradition also involves ‘killing the guru.’ That means that in the ‘guru tradition,’ there is a stage when you follow the guru as a teacher, allow yourself to be guided through a spiritual process and perhaps even give up some of your worldly possessions but that stage may be followed by a second stage when you separate from the teacher and realize that what you seek is in yourself and not in another person. In the historic tradition, first you are the devotee, giving your devotion to the guru. Then you leave the guru and find meaning in the ex-premie web site. I’m not suggesting there is a right or wrong about such choices. I’m just saying that both stages have an honored place in the tradition. <<<<<<< Oh, thanks Rennie…..I’d worked out it was a personality cult based on greed, ego and power. Glad you’ve put me right. I’m still part of a noble tradition.Phew! That’s a relief. If Anth were you, though, he wouldn’t turn up here, so why not take his wise advice eh?
Modified by Dermot at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 10:19:00
|
|
|
|
Rennie, I think I will send off a short note directly to you in case you are reading. I don't know what you figured the response would be here to your "apology" but it doesn't seem too awfully positive so far. I will try to explain to you why some people object to what you have to say. At least this is my theory. Your intentions might actually be honorable and you might think you are being fair-minded, even reasonable, perhaps even inspiring and helpful. But you're not. I am afraid that you are a clear case of somebody who applies Big-Truth mentality to a dualistic issue. This doesn't work. At least not with me, anymore. You end up falling short of even the most basic human principles of little-t truth. This is a situation you should try to avoid. It can get very bad. People even commit murder for this mistake. History is full of examples (the Crusades) and unfortunately our present times are no exception. I don't mean to equate you with such drastic examples, I just want to point out the harm that can happen. Here the harm is simply one of miscommunicating and being unwittingly insulting. Evidently you don't realize that the majority of people on this forum have not only rejected Prem Rawat in all his incarnations so far, but we have also rejected the usage of Big-Truth excuses. Perhaps in some higher world of Big-Truth there is a way for adoration of the guru to be on an equal par with killing the guru. Perhaps in that realm you could feel apologetic to both to ex-premies and to Guru Maharaj Ji, all in the same moment. Maybe on some higher levels of thought, people create their own reality. Perhaps Prem Rawat can be understood to be charming and positive despite being a really big liar who has never yet reverted to honesty. But if you ever write us again, please try not to speak out of both sides of your mouth all at once, from some higher perspective. And don't try to get us to appreciate some new developing human condition. It is not the we are not yet ready for that new condition, but that we have already rejected that concept. So what would have been perhaps more acceptable to us? One, perhaps you could have simply assumed that you were talking to people who also have had their share of inner light experiences and had already by now integrated them into their life philosophy. This topic could be entirely avoided. Then, instead of explaining why you began to follow Guru Maharaji Ji and Knowledge in the first place, you could have explained how and why you rejected that path. You actually don't mention anything about that, surprisingly enough. Thus, you letter is more of a self-defense effort rather than a conciliatory and explanative one. I certainly do not mean to suggest that you should jump on board here and be a contributing member to the ex-premie forum, because you have already said that this forum would not continue given your own point of view. You are certainly most welcome to your own choices and opinions, obviously. I am simply trying to explain why some of us are not really satisfied by your letter. I do still thank you anyway for taking the time to at least acknowledge our concerns.
|
|
|
|
How can the average deli meat slicer understand the concept of a bridge to the light body. I refuse to read that shit again. Like the auto mechanic, I cannot understand a word of that. Can't. Hearing Rennie deliver his satsangs in the 70's was like off Brodway theater. The highlight of the day, for sure. Slow, a lot of spacing between words. It was some of the high drama of the times. Mr. Chicago Seven. The man who bagged meeting with Madam Vuwhoever and instead went to kiss the feet of a boy from India with a smile, witt and gift of gab. Like, Mr. Davis himself. They were close, the guru and Rennie. It was a mutual admiration society. The young boy was at the peak of his popularity, and though the war was not just yet over, it's top anti-war activist was now a follower of the Living Lord. What a coup for the Hans Family. Make sure that boy gets hot dahl and an extra chapati. However, thanks for the attempt -- weak, weak, weak -- at an apology. An explanation, nah. Nothing there. Just more B.S., Rennie. You were the best, still are. Why don't you just put it in your bio, and we'd probably just be satisfied. The truth. Watch the Video "The Lord of the Universe" again, you were a supporting actor of great skill. The guru's spokesman, don't forget. I love all of the responses I've read so far, but really, this one from Will is a masterpiece. RENNIE: PLEASE RESPOND WITH the truth. Not the Big-Truth fanciful expressions. -- Your ashram brother. "Time for Arti."
|
|
|
|
Well said OTS and how thoughtful, as usual, Will. This is fun! What else you got, Rennie? Help us, brother, for thine eyes can see.
|
|
|
|
For those not old enough to remember, my title here was an advertising slogan for an indigestion tablet (‘Rennies’). This Rennie’s apology has the opposite effect on me. Full marks for affected courtesy, of course, but I read this fizzling epistle with growing unease, and it took me at least four-point-five seconds to process it properly… Then two thoughts clambered through layers of befuddlement and social niceties to the top of my cognitive stockpile: flannel and damage limitation. It would take all night to list my points of disagreement on world-view and religion (and I notice others here already echoing my own hiccups and heartburn), so I’ll make just three for now: He doesn’t understand? If Rennie sincerely hopes to ‘walk in your shoes and feel what this hurt and injustice you must experience is about’, he could start with EPO’s Journeys page. Not too hard a task for the average, media-savvy venture-capitalist. Then he could read the site history and other main pages. I get the impression Rennie is unfamiliar with, or uninterested in the issues here. Why didn’t he check EPO out a bit before writing JHB this lengthy, self-justifying apologia? If he is not sincere, then, this posturing of kinship is just so much lather and blather, and his letter mere patronising nonsense. I detect no genuine empathy, though I suspect other personal concerns.
A ‘false equivalence’ between premies and exes. To suggest that former premies and ongoing premies are somehow yoked together by a ‘strong relationship’ with Rawat is absurd coming from somebody who seems to make his way in the world by generating cutting edge, blue-sky ideas. If you’ll forgive the reducio ad adsurdam, that’s like saying the Gestapo shared the same dependency on Hitler as the Nuremberg prosecutors. (Sure, this example is way OTT, but the comparison is logically valid.) Any idea of equivalence is a category error of the first order. In a Hamlet-sized nutshell: what has focusing one’s beliefs and life choices upon the bumbling, incoherent ‘teachings’ of a New Age guru got to do with calling that same guru to account for exploiting people, past and present? Folk involved in the former are self-absorbed, gullible, involved, seeking personal fantasies of fulfilment; the latter are safely detached and objective, seeking redress and explanations, who do not need their ex-Master for anything, but maybe gain a pleasurable sense of justification or amusement from a bit of part-time mischief-making, or resolving personal crises. No strings attached. The former have an imaginary relationship. The latter have no relationship. (It takes two to have a relationship, remember; in a cult there are no relationships.)
Where’s the 'devotion?’ Rennie made no emotional commitment; that much is clear. He was Knowledge-lite, focused only on his solipsistic, sub-druggie ‘experience of light’. Is that really all he recalls from the seventies? Of course it isn’t. Which leaves me wondering…
Did Rennie get a payoff?
Oops, sorry – I’d said I’d limit this to just three points, so I’ll leave it there.
Modified by nigel at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 19:52:45
|
|
|
|
Then two thoughts clambered through the layers of befuddlement and social niceties to the top of my cognitive stockpile: flannel and damage limitation. I swear to God, I, too, was just thinking "flannel". No, seriously. I thought of Rennie in dorky, flower-print flannel pyjamas.
|
|
|
|
Hello Rennie, Premies gave up inheritances, careers, relationships, education, children, and good jobs so that they could follow someone on a wild goose chase. I think that would be enough to piss most people off. Why you can’t see that I don’t know. And Maharaji still thinks that he is Lord of the Universe. They have darshan and arti in Amaroo and in India nothing has changed. You thought Maharaji was charming and positive last time you saw him. Well so what. Most con men are appear charming and positive. You also say that part of the tradition involves ‘killing the guru,’ and both stages have an honored place in the tradition? Well, I don’t think M knows about this tradition as he has threatened ex-premies with lawsuits. You say that each stage comes from ourselves and the experience is created by our Self? You really think each of us creates our own reality? Well how many people do you know who would deliberately create cancer or accidents for themselves? Did the psunami victims create that "experience?" You say, “I don’t feel embarrassed about what I have done at any stage of my life.” Well I don’t trust people who never feel embarrassed. To me that attitude smacks of sociopath. Most con men and grifters never feel embarassment, guilt or shame. Hardly human. No, your long explanation did not help me in my search for truth, understanding and empowerment. In fact it made me feel rather ill.
Modified by Steve at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 23:48:58
|
|
|
|
I'm glad that Rennie replied. A man of less integrity might not have bothered. However, I see a stark difference between Rennie and most posters here—he appears to have escaped M relatively unscathed. He seems unaware he is talking to people who have suffered decades of exploitation, psychological rape, and who have been deeply damaged by M's lies. Mr Davis displays a nu-age inability to see evil for what it is. He should take a good look at EPO. He would do well to reflect on Burke: "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." In truth, the only honest response to M is denounciation. Neville B
|
|
|
|
In fact usual new age bollox really, no negative or dark thoughts allowed, everything is positive and has its place and its point, move on, blah de blah de blah
But as for trying to understand John's point of view, to walk in his shoes, well I see zilch in this letter, sorry Rennie, fake empathy irritates the fuck out of me
|
|
|
|
What are you guys getting so upset about? Listen to the way this guy thinks. Today, I would say I have a physical body, a thought body, a light body and a dream body and that Guru Maharaj Ji was able to create an energetic bridge to my light body. Does this sound like a guy who has his shit wrapped tight? He doesn't know if he's coming or going, probably never did. That's not to say that the rest of us have figured it all out, but this guy has gone way out there. 4 fucking bodies, man! How do you walk around thinking you've got 4 fucking bodies? My question is which of the bodies did Maharaji create a bridge from? The thought body, the physical body, or the light body? If I have a beef with this guy it's that he's still in a position to influence others when he obviously doesn't know if he's coming or going himself. But I guess that's part of the journey we've all got to go through before we realize that these guys who act like they're in the know don't know any better than we do what's actually going on. They just get to be celebrities. How does that work that some people get to be such stars? I guess with Rennie it started with the anti-war movement. That's where he got all his credibility, but since then, what one real thing has he done besides lead others down the same fucking blind alley he's been going down himself. But, heck, I woudn't mind having an autograph, myself. After all, Rennie is a star, isn't he?
|
|
|
|
: ))) Hilarious. Well, ok, to those who got upset about his "welcome" ....I guess there's a point to be made about that ...but really...come on...a bit of plain talking is sometimes as good as polite cap doffing. I suppose you could argue polite criticism would have been a third and better option. Maybe/maybe not. I'll think up a new age solution on the best way to communicate with someone with four bodies. I'll let ya know when I've worked it out.
|
|
|
|
Dear Rennie, Thank you for your letter to this forum. While I found it full of bland meaningless New Age thinking, I feel that you left out some important points. - As others here are saying, devotees secretly still believe in LOTU and the guru is doing nothing to disabuse them of this thinking. So while outwardly he is portraying himself as the mellow “motivational speaker,” the crown has not been renounced or burned.
- Where did you get this “kill the guru” stuff? Rawat doesn’t subscribe to this, nor does any other guru or spiritual “master” that I am aware of. I found this part of your letter both patronizing and condescending. The people participating in this forum have a wide and diverse motivation for being here. One of the biggest motivators that I see is to alert the world of rawat’s fraudulent claims in order to help premies exit and prevent the recruitment of more newbies. Doesn’t this qualify as an important service to the world? Also in your discussion of spirituality, you never talk about what comes after the “kill the guru” phase. Have you dead-ended there? It seems that you have killed the guru only to become one yourself – and not a very good one at that.
- One of the WORST theories to come out of the New Age movement is this “you create your own reality.” Tell me, without resorting to some vague explanation of karma, how a child crippled by Thalidomide created that reality. What I find abhorrent about this theory is that it blames the victim for their troubles. Did the young victims of Jugdaeo ask for what they got?
- Many lives were ruined by rawat. Yes there is anger expressed on this forum. In your philosophy, is anger never justified? Premies have accused this forum of being stuck and wallowing in the past and in this anger. If you take the time to study and read the evolution of the individuals on this forum, I think you will find people that come and go, and people that stay and grow. There is a lot of talk among the people here about some of the deep psychological, economic, physical, and mental scars that involvement in the cult caused. I know this forum has helped me to get through the exiting process. But I don’t see people that are stuck on one note. For me also, I find much humor in this forum as well, and often the posts here uplift my day.
- You ignore the impact that you as a famous political leader had in bringing people to rawat. One of the most important steps in the “12 Step” programs is to atone personally to people that one has harmed. I feel that you are very slickly ducking this issue. If you DO believe in karma, isn’t it in your own best interest to walk the impeccable path and take a serious hard look at how you contributed to a fraudulent cult leader getting rich on the backs of brainwashed young people.
I could go on, but the snow is falling and I need to get home before I get stuck out on the roads. I think you get the idea of where I am coming from. Karen Kirschbaum
|
|
|
|
that was excellent. Heck, don't wanna a pummel a guy when I've already done so.
I'll try and show a bit of grace, at least, ho hum.
Modified by Dermot at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 15:34:15
|
|
|
|
I deleted a post earlier because I thought perhaps I'd said enough about Rennie but having been reminded via his quotes of the time the real extent of his claims re the Lord of the Universe and then reading his recent letter wherein he says the bit about " the close indian followers" only claiming it, I thought I'd post what I posted earlier.I know I already pulled him on his " Indian followers only.." claim and I know we fell for the Lord thing too but Rennie Davis really is just doing an EV revisionist job with us. Basically, it's an insult. No way could he forget the extent of his hyperbole at the time especially as some of it was a foreword to a book.There's nothing particularly special or particularly interesting about my post ...basically, it's just a piss take...but, on second thoughts, I don't see why I should withdraw it.
.................................................... I have a sneaking suspicion, though, that Rennie is more used to his " bland meaningless new age thinking" and that he's more used to preaching it, (in extremely polite,all embracing, all-is-valid, nothing's right/nothing's wrong terms, of course) and he'll be looking around for another pulpit, now that's he's done his duty and reminded us that "anything goes", rather than wanting to prolong matters .The impression I got was one of " fault this ultra polite, ultra understanding letter if you dare but please, can you just leave me alone when you're done ? " Anyway, We're just killing the Guru, once we've actually killed him, then we'll understand Rennie ( body 1,2,3,4) that much better. Besides, fair's fair,a political dissident....well, you can live off the prestige that comes from that for a whole lifetime if you play your cards right....George Galloway, right here in the UK is a master at it ( hehehe)..but a dupe of a greasy young kid who was God in human form and was going to lift the Astrodome into outer space, well, you could use it but it'd be a bit dodgy in some circles ....oh, sod it....might as well just scrub it off the resume. Only a small bunch of ex Lord worshippers will ever know and, besides, they can be sent a patronising letter to make them think it was noble to even communicate with them anyway. Hehehe, am I just a cynical curmudgeon or what?
Modified by Dermot at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 19:38:23
|
|
|
|
Dear World, Thank you for that. I don’t feel embarrassed about what I have done at any stage of my life because each step has taken me to this moment now. What could be more beautiful than that? Nor do I find it appropriate to judge others for what they do or fail to do as they create their growing and maturing experiences. Hugs and Kisses, Your favorite Serial Killer or Fascist Dictator ( isn't it wonderful no one can be judged as they grow and mature, phew )
|
|
|
|
Susan, I think that is tasteless. Rennie may have been naive and gullible, as he more or less admits, but he was not unscrupulous, unlike the persons you mentioned. Andries
Modified by Andries at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 15:31:33
|
|
|
|
I tend to take arguments to their logical extreme. My point was not that Rennie did anything as bad as a serial killer or dictator, but how false the argument was he was making. I felt by comparing the same statement a person could evaluate how absurd what he is saying is. Rennie said- "I don’t feel embarrassed about what I have done at any stage of my life because each step has taken me to this moment now. What could be more beautiful than that? Nor do I find it appropriate to judge others for what they do or fail to do as they create their growing and maturing experiences. " My mind immediately jumped to what if everyone thought this way? What is someone REALLY bad said the same thing? What if Rennie put his own words in the mouth of someone who was a whole lot worse and looked at them again? I still think it has some usefulness. I think sometimes we should be embarrassed. Maybe I should be for making the tasteless comparison.? Maybe I am. I will try to be more tactful in the future.
|
|
|
|
If you think that way then your reading comprehension skills need work. She is right on the money. Hardly matters the extent of each in comparison to the other. They are a perfectly reasonable example. One way to see if an idea is reasonable is to follow it out to its far edges where its real nature come more fully into view. Do you pick on girls?
|
|
|
|
Anth, Maybe you're right and I was too harsh. Why don't you show us what you have to say to Rennie? Please lead by example here and demonstrate a fit response. I know, it will lead with several warm, sincere courtesies, thanking him for bothering to write, for taking the time to say it all so nicely. After that, though, what'd you got for him? My view is that he's lacquered in so many coats of self-righteous shellac, like Ham said, anything he doesn't like will quickly run off so unless you want to have at least a tiny, little chance of getting through you're going to have to hit that shell with a hammer. But then that's just me. How would you approach the guy?
Modified by Jim at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 13:34:03
|
|
|
|
Hi Jim,
I think I'd say something like, "Hi Rennie, glad you managed to find a bridge from your light body to the old whatever it was.."
Nah...(now Jim, you know I'm not so daft as I look, sound and act, and have a political streak too... so) I think I'd say something like...
Hi Rennie, welcome to the forum, and (you were right Jim) thank you for taking the time etc... If you decide to post here , you'll probably find it a raucous, iconoclastic, rowdy atmosphere, and because you were a bit of a public figure, you'll get extra attention and extra flak. I imagine your New Age philosophy will come under attack, and who knows what else. So, in this respect, if I were you, I wouldn't bother posting anything here. Who needs this kind of bollocks? If you stick around, answer questions patiently, people will calm down, realise that you're simply human, and full of contradictions like they are, you might make a couple of online friends, but shit Rennie, if you want friends, the world if full of people everywhere, and, as you may well be aware, most of them are OK if you treat them properly.
If talking to John, and reading our babble here has caused stuff to start floating to the surface about your days in DLM, and you want to natter about it, this is the best place there is. From the sound of your letter, most of the folk who post, such as myself, were much more involved and commited to the cult than you were.
In fact Rennie, I'd say you weren't really surrendered. You didn't really let go and give yourself fully. Because it's only when we truly surrender do we feel the true power of heez love and grace in our hearts more and more each day. It's like, each moment, if you're in your true home, at the lotus feet, your heart will tell you, more and more each day, that you have begun to realise the true purpose of this life.It's sooooo beautiful.
So Jai Sat Chit Anand,
your brother in his love,
anth just a humble servant.
How's that Jim? I think I covered everything. Do I get the job?
|
|
|
|
Anth, You get full points for being friendly. But that's about it. You offer him a chance to feel comfortable and conveniently pass over his pompous lecturing to us, let alone any question about accountability. In fact, you actually encourage his avoiding any accountability when you say: I imagine your New Age philosophy will come under attack, and who knows what else. So, in this respect, if I were you, I wouldn't bother posting anything here. Who needs this kind of bollocks? Understand, Anth, that it's not just Rennie's new age ideas that irk people. They're funny enough and bound to get a little ridicule but, whatever. What incenses people here is that he uses these new age ideas to both shirk any responsibility and worse, blame us, for even thinking in those terms. You're right though about one thing, if Rennie did start posting there's a good chance he'd find some common ground on this or that with some people. That's always nice and friendship-building. But he'd also take a lot of flak and -- who needs the bollocks? He does. Did you know, by the way, that on his own website, where he assiduously avoids any mention of his years barking for Rawat, he still purports to be a "voice of his generation"? Not exactly a shrinking violet.
|
|
|
|
Hi Jim,
I think I've said almost everything I want to say on the subject of our born again new age capitalist friend.
"You are right from your side, I am right from mine, we're both just one too many mornings and a thousand Divine Times."
Maybe he does need the bollocks, but if you shout too loud while he's at the door, he won't even come in, and sit down at a table where you could serve them too him on a plate.
Anth who has never eaten sweetmeats but has been kicked in them a few times and frequently talks them.
|
|
|
|
Maybe he does need the bollocks, but if you shout too loud while he's at the door, he won't even come in, and sit down at a table where you could serve them too him on a plate.
Rennie is being so ridiculous, precious and downright full of it in his email that it would take one hell of a lot of stifling to get him to the table on your terms. Stifling of our real thoughts and reaction which have to be worth something, I'd think you agree. You know, the value of honest expression for its own sake? Plus, getting Rennie to the table on the basis that all's good with merely a few minor quibbles to discuss would be somewhat deceitful and he, or anyone watching, would then have some basis for calling us duplicitous. Finally, inviting Rennie to the table as if all's good between us makes us look really stupid when he doesn't come as is more than likely anyway.
|
|
|
|
.....blimey AJW ! A beam of light suddenly transported me back to a cinema in Camberwell.....there's this bespectacled bloke up on the stage making everyone laugh ( as he is mostly way off topic) and cheering up what would be such a dreary evening.
Modified by Lexy at Mon, Feb 20, 2006, 18:55:37
|
|
|
|
First off I would like to thank Rennie for taking the time and effort to communicate some of his current thoughts regarding "Guru Maharaj Ji" and in regard to his earlier involvement as a spokesperson. My take is somewhat different from what has already been said above by other posters. What catches my eye is the following quote: Probably no one knows better than me the need to feel my own righteousness through judgments and blame. Blaming others for what happens in one’s life is a stage of awareness and there’s nothing wrong with any stage of awareness. Perhaps a part of humanity is getting ready to move on, however, into a new understanding--blaming no one, taking responsibility for their own creation and seeing the perfection rather than the ‘bad person’ in others. <blockquote>I personally have a life filled with ‘mistakes.’ If someone feels hurt by something I have said or done, I offer my respect and love. If an apology helps, I give that freely and sincerely too. I just choose not to turn all my mistakes and learning experiences of my life into guilt and shame.</blockquote> This statement is a so-called big T Truth statement, as Will would put it. Afterall, if we are all evolving and growing beings in this global sense then we are wherever we are without judgment. However, I don't know anyone in the real world who operates at this level. Actions have and deserve consequences. If you are reading this Rennie, ask yourself if it is inconsequential to hold Nixon, Daley, Bush, or Bin Laden responsible for their actions. Are the Nurenburg trials of no importance? So, it is not that we are choosing to be on some kind of "victim" treadmill that is defining our existence and creating our reality but rather we are attempting to hold Rawat/Guru Maharaj Ji responsible for his actions. While I don't expect that you live your life "in shame and guilt", you have offered an unreserved apology for your tiny walk-on role many acts ago in this unfolding drama and I for one certainly accept it. This was also a learning experience, as you say, for you on your path. Most of us here have also unwittingly led others astray according to our understanding at the time. But we have received no such mea culpa from Guru Maharaj Ji/Rawat and therein lies the difference. Indeed, instead of taking responsibility Mr. Rawat has embarked on decades worth of spin and revisionism in regards to what he said and did and the impact this had on our lives.
Modified by Dr.wow at Sat, Feb 18, 2006, 15:38:53
|
|
|
|
While I don't expect that you live your life "in shame and guilt", you have offered an unreserved apology for your tiny walk-on role many acts ago in this unfolding drama and I for one certainly accept it. You call this an "unreserved apology"?: Probably no one knows better than me the need to feel my own righteousness through judgments and blame. Blaming others for what happens in one’s life is a stage of awareness and there’s nothing wrong with any stage of awareness. Perhaps a part of humanity is getting ready to move on, however, into a new understanding--blaming no one, taking responsibility for their own creation and seeing the perfection rather than the ‘bad person’ in others. I personally have a life filled with ‘mistakes.’ If someone feels hurt by something I have said or done, I offer my respect and love. If an apology helps, I give that freely and sincerely too. I just choose not to turn all my mistakes and learning experiences of my life into guilt and shame. To me, this is no apology at all, reserved or otherwise. He's just saying that IF he's ever done anything to hurt anyone -- not that he has or anything -- he's sorry. On the other hand, anyone that would even bother to confront him with his past mistakes is a spiritual neanderthal.
|
|
|
|
If someone feels hurt by something I have said or done, I offer my respect and love. If an apology helps, I give that freely and sincerely too. That is an apology. However, I agree with you and others in this thread that he seeks to absolve himself for his role in the Mariachi Capers and more importantly, seeking to hold Rawat to account, based upon a pastiche of new-agey hokum. At the same time, my point is that we were all guilty of leading people astray when our pineal glands were secreting copious amounts of god-chemicals after possible lifetimes of disuse . Yeah, Davis' '60's radical street cred carried a kind of underground stamp of approval but I wouldn't over-state his sway over the hippy hoi-polloi. Remember, Millenium was for all intents and purposes - a cosmic bust. The superdome (or whatever the hell it was) never lifted off and Kahoutek came and went without so much as heraldic Christ-on-a-Comet tchatkes. I also heard that Davis got his cum-uppance when Guru Maharaj Ji told him point blank that he wasn't DIVINELY sanctioned by his or any other Lardship to become the next President of the United Snakes of Amerika. Certainly no one can accuse Rennie of shying away from over-the-top hyperbole. But, it wasn't Davis sitting up there on the throne demanding surrender, devotion and our daily bread. I note that Michael Dettmers offered a similarly detached response when initially flushed out of the cyber ethers before finding his integrity and writing his pivotal (for me) memoirs and answering forever that most essential question: Who is Guru Maharaj Ji? Interestingly, it appears that Mr. Davis is riding the tofutti train on a track not too disimilar to Mr. Dettmers' human potential/corporate training tapes (remember them?). Michael even had a similar "crest of the next wave" epiphany in the form of his study of the etymology of language. In fact this whole thing of being amongst the first in on the ground floor of the next global wave of human consciousness is worthy of a thesis (if not another thread). Christ, prior to Goomraji the last time that I felt like that was back in the days of mescalin and acid and reading Huxley's Doors of Perception. Okay. Maybe his apology wasn't unreserved. Maybe it carried along with it a boat-load of reservations-cum-new-age rationalizations. But, I kinda feel like it was a threshold statement. Like we're standing at the cross-roads of the new-age and old-school. Like the deep loamy smell of the earth before the rain begins. Like a bird on a wire. Like a drunk in a midnight choir. I have tried in my way to be free. But let's leave Lenny Cohen out of this.
Modified by Dr.wow at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 21:55:36
|
|
|
|
Sorry, DW, I can't agree. In fact, the more I look at it the more he just looks like a pompous a**h***: "Hey, Sandra, do me a favour. I'm running a bit late here. I think someone might show up saying they're hurt by something I've done. Do me a favour, will you? Send them my love. If it's an apology they need, sure, whatever. Please, don't buzz me though. If these people can't evolve past all this shit .. well, I shouldn't say anything. Be nice. It's not their fault. Hey, I guess it's my fault! At least they think so (Isn't that funny?). Anyway, don't give them a hard time. Send them my love, do whatever, and let's keep this thing moving!"
Having said that I enjoyed, nodded along with all your other observations. Is that true that Rennie wanted to sit by the Lord's side like that? I'm sure that even Rawat found him a bit insufferable. When you gonna come visit, by the way? Play some tunes ... Why don't you come out and visit sometime? Play a little music. You know? But I don't see that as an apology.
|
|
|
|
. . . when I sort this mess out.
|
|
|
|
Doc, enjoyed so much your post. [Though I feel he DID sway greatly the masses....and that your high high came after Jim Morrison's inspiration from A. Huxley; perhaps it was "Be Here Now" by Ram Dass.] I brazenly challenged you all in my first ever post here, and waited a month to actually exit in my second post. I was a devotee of steel and you all were not gonna budge me. But I came to understand the truth of the matter and tearfully sulked away. And admitted it is a cult. And I was smack dab in the middle of it. And for 30 years. And it hurt. We can only hope it takes Rennie Davis a shorter time, but we'll see. He's still on the mailing list, I bet. Perhaps he wants to stay chained up. Please write again, Wow.
|
|
|
|
Ended 30 years of cult indoctrination after a month and by your second post - that's amazing. Belated congratulations. Too bad we can't have some kind of on-line ceremony marking the occasion when we finally snap out of it. Something like everyone tapping on their delete button at the same time while viewing a halographic image of the former LOTFU. Then we can all head over to Heller's pantry for some burfi and laddus.
|
|
|
|
Dr Wow, I'm glad that people understand my position about the problem of Big-T thinking. You do highlight a perfect example. Here Rennie is advocating "seeing the perfection" instead of blame and shame. He is trying to live that philosophy now. He evidently thinks it makes for better living. But, although it sounds appealing, this stance is so problematic. It creates more problems than it solves. You adequately describe the practical mess that this particular example leads to. What if policemen and judges adopted Rennie's ideas? No, a person simply cannot operate this way in the real world. There are so many examples I could write a book about it. One example that comes to mind just now is the current argument over stem-cell research. In that case you have Big-T Christians opting in favor of the divinity of cellular life over the health of actual living beings. I do so wish people would stop such misguided highmindedness.
|
|
|
|
Rennie, If you're reading this, here's a challenge which I think you'll agree is only fair. You write: Today, I don’t believe Guru Maharaj Ji is the ‘lord of the universe’ as the faithful that surrounded him in India once claimed. From what I can understand--watching Maharaj Ji speaking today--it doesn’t seem he believes that either. I haven’t spoken to Maharaj Ji directly since the 1970s so I don’t know what he believes exactly but I did see him speak not too long ago in Colorado.
As you must appreciate, some of us don't share your opinion about what Maharaj Ji (now Prem Rawat or maybe, at most, Maharaji -- truncated, you'll note) believes these days. In any event, it's a good question, wouldn't you say? Especially a good question for you who, as others here have pointed out, were very instrumental in getting the message out that he is the Lord, in fact. So, why don't you call or email him and ask him yourself? Don't you think it behooves you to resolve this? Or would you rather not know? But let me warn you, even if he does deign to respond (don't hold your breath), you'll get nowhere if you ask him to start with the assumption that he once called himself the Lord. As you can see from Elan Vital's FAQs, that never happened in the first place: Frequently Asked Questions | I. | History – when Maharaji first came to the West | | | | back | | | (1) | Is it true that some people used to venerate him?
Some see him as a friend, some as a teacher, some as a Guru or Master. What does he claim to be? He recently told a journalist: "People used to call me Guru. I speak from my heart, and what happens is from one heart to another. I'm not trying to place myself above people. I am a human being. Many things have been said about me. Many of these things have come from people's own emotions, good or bad. I am proud to be a human being. I am very happy that I have this life. I am also happy that I can feel joy and pain like everyone else. Some people would love to put labels on me, but I am just me." | | | (2) | It has been reported that his students touch his feet. Is this true?
Expressing respect is not unique to students of Maharaji. Asian teachers of all disciplines, including martial arts, music and philosophy, conduct to this day a procession where students line up and pass by their teacher, bowing or touching his feet as a sign of respect and gratitude. Many Catholics express similar respect to their Cardinals and Bishops by kissing their rings. There is no great secret about this: Maharaji sits in a chair while people file by and pay their respects. Many simply walk by and smile, others simply say "thank you," others bow, and others choose to briefly touch his feet. In the 1970's the reception line called "darshan" was common in the West, but this practice is now only conducted on rare occasions, mostly in the Indian subcontinent where the practice is culturally accepted. There is no admission charge or fee connected to the reception line, and there is no recommendation or obligation in any way to participate. | | | (3) | Why was Maharaji described in the 1970’s as “Guru” and as "Greater than God"?
Such statements were made in the '70s at a time of affinity for all things Indian. People in India routinely pronounce the Guru as God or even greater than God. To the man on the street in India, "Guru is greater than God" is a common statement. Such statements can be difficult to understand in Western countries. In India, however, they are seen as mainstream. | | | (4) | Why was he called "Lord of the Universe" in the '70s?
In Western culture, when a title is given to a person, it comes with a position. In India, by contrast, such grand labels as "His Holiness" or "Lord of the Universe" are given on the basis of affection or admiration. The use of this title, which was used only in the '70s—an era of love for all things Indian— does not imply any claims that the person is holy, any more than the use of "His Excellence" means that the person is an embodiment of excellence. "I am a human being, and you are a human being," says Maharaji, "and that is the basis of this relationship." Other people in India have also been called "Lord of the Universe" well before Maharaji, without its ever implying that they claimed to rule the universe or have anything to do with its creation. | | | (5) | What about this song called Arti?
Another little-understood practice that came from India with Maharaji in the '70s is Arti, a song sung to the teacher or to members of his family. Arti is performed not only in front of a teacher or master but also on many other occasions: a son returning from a long journey, a sister honoring her brother or to honor the successful completion of an important endeavor. On a handful of occasions in the past decade, some Western students have sung Arti as an expression of the gratitude they feel to their teacher. | | | (6) | Has Maharaji made efforts to remove the Indian trappings from the '70s?
It is often overlooked that Maharaji was 13 years old when he came to the West. As a young boy, the presentation of Knowledge and his public persona was handled by Indian adults steeped in Indian ways. This resulted in an environment that now seems anachronistic, but was culturally accepted in the 1970's, where many Indian rituals and cultural traditions were being embraced by the younger generation. Living in "ashrams" and vegetarianism are two examples. As a teenager, Maharaji often wore traditional Indian garb. People teaching the techniques of Knowledge were called "mahatmas". As Maharaji matured from boyhood to adulthood, he made it clear that his message had nothing to do with Indian or any other cultural tradition. In the early 1980s, he began to dismantle the remnants of Indian culture and adopted an approach more universal in style. The Western ashrams were closed. He asked to be referred to as "Maharaji" instead of "Guru Maharaji." The organization created by the Indian heritage, "Divine Light Mission," evolved into Elan Vital. Today, Maharaji's message is the same as it always was, albeit presented without the Indian cultural overtones. | | | (7) | What is Elan Vital’s relationship to the Divine Light Mission?
When Elan Vital was originally incorporated in the U.S., it had the name Divine Light Mission, which was brought over from India, but in the late 1980’s that name was changed to Elan Vital. | | | (8) | Why was the Divine Light Mission name changed?
The name Divine Light Mission was one of many things that came from India to the United States with Maharaji. After Maharaji spent some time in the States, he saw that these things were a hindrance to people who might otherwise be interested in his message. It was with this understanding of removing obstacles to people, that he suggested various changes. The Board of Directors of the organization also felt the need for change and the name was just one such change, many of which have been made over the years and will continue to be made, as needed. | | | (8) | Is it true that a former instructor engaged in sexual misconduct in the early '70s?
In 2000, Elan Vital first received a complaint of alleged sexual misconduct in the ’70s by Jagdeo, a former instructor. An investigation was launched by Elan Vital even though Jagdeo had not been associated with any organization promoting Maharaji’s teachings for many years and had not performed any duties as an instructor in the U.S. since the 1980s. With help from the organization in India (where Jagdeo had returned) Jagdeo was located and his whereabouts were communicated to the authors of the complaint against him. A resolution was reached and the complainants chose not to pursue the complaint further. Although nothing can undo what happened in the past, every effort was made to find a healing solution. Elan Vital is committed to providing an environment that is free of sexual harassment or any form of sexual misconduct and enforces a strict policy accordingly. Employees and representatives of EV undergo compulsory training to ensure that each individual fully understands this policy. EV promptly responds to any complaints it receives in this regard. Appropriate disciplinary action is taken against anyone who violates the policy. | | |
Related link: http://elanvital.org/faq/faq_history_j.htm
|
|
|
|
Rennie, I was at the Houston Millennium event in the early 70's, and your words there must have influenced a LOT of people: "The Lord is on the planet. He’s in a human body and he’s about to usher in the greatest change in the history of human civilization".
Yup, that's what you said, in the full glare of the biggest publicity DLM and Maharaj/Rawat had ever received. You believed it at the time, as did many of us. Well, no praise, no blame, I guess (though accountability must surely have a prominent place in any responsible society - not least one that takes its cue from Buddhist teachings). The fact is that we premies were all, to varying degrees, blinded by the light. And it's not my intention to salt your wounds about someone you (and I) once believed in. A pillar of society is what Rawat aspired to back then, and still does, however illicitly. What bugs me (and quite a few others) is this: since then, Rawat himself has seen fit to blame anyone and everyone - mostly the mahatmas (you got off lightly) - for the messianic claims that got him where he is today, yet which he now denies were ever made in the first place! And that's what this thing is all about (for me, at least) - getting the KingPin to acknowledge his part in the deception that led to many of us wasting our time, our energy, and (not least) our trust on a fiction that he was ultimately responsible for. And getting the history of those days comprehensively chronicled - from all points of view. Perfect Master? Even Wikipedia isn't allowed to state that he claimed to be that, thanks to a zealous (full-time?) premie editor there. Is this the sort of revisionist reality you wanted the Maha to usher in, back in the 70s? It's reality now - though he still has yet to acknowledge responsibility for his part in creating that reality. Yet you're apologising to him? That's what really sticks in my craw about your letter. Nevertheless, I hope dialogue between us (i.e. this forum and yourself) is still possible, despite our current apparent differences. Regards, cq
Modified by cq at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 08:28:11
|
|
|
|
Frankly, I think Davis should just come out and say "I love capitalism." Why? Because there's nothing wrong with loving money. And Rennie Davis obviously does love money a lot, but he seems to have these notions in his head that it's some kind of sin that he needs to explain away -- and in a really boring way. He's so rapped up in his strange self-image as a radical, he can't even become a capitalist without couching it in psychobabble. I think it's funny. The Forbes article about him was hilarious. What a wanker. However, what I find sort of sinister about Davis, even more so that his strange, quantum-theory-new-agey mentality and rationalizations for liking money, is that he had a position of power in the world of Maharaji, by virtue of his name recognition and status as a celebrity. And what he said publicly and in print. Rennie Davis was used by Prem Rawat to recruit more cult members and for a long, long time. In fact, his name was used long after he left the feet of Guru Maharaj Ji, himself. He ought to know know and understand what that really meant to many people who considered M legitimate because of Rennie Davis and lost so much of themselves because of it. He does have a responsibility there, even if he can't face it. His so-called apology reeks of...something...oh yeah, bullshit!
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Feb 19, 2006, 06:35:22
|
|
|
|
....when you have the time, since you said this about Rennie's letter which made me think you had something positive to say. " he makes some excellent points which I will respond to in a separate post." When I read his response for the first time I thought some of his points were at the very least interesting and food for thought. It isn't the first time I have heard the explanation Rennie uses about embracing an entire belief system after having a spiritual experience whilst surrounded by followers of that particular religion or church . Personally I found it useful to be reminded about that as that is one of the ways that I was ensnared by the cult. Like many of us who post here ,I had some very lovely experiences whilst a devotee but now feel that Prem Rawat was not the source of them.I really am grateful for the good and warm experiences I had. Even though I now believe that to a certain extent, as a premie, I made up my own personal religion around Prem Rawat and the "knowledge" I don't think I was alone,during that time in trying to see the "good" , "love" or "perfection" in people and life. I learnt a lot from this and feel it made me a more compassionate and kinder person. The idea that there was a higher power mysteriously " taking care " of me often seemed to work extraordinarily well and made me very brave (sometimes foolishly so). In a way I can vaguely understand Rennie's "killing the guru" metaphor to describe the possible motivation of some who post here, but I don't feel it applies to me.Maybe that's why I don't always feel comfortable here and seem to annoy others by what I say. I don't think Rennie is deliberately lying.He wants to believe all that stuff ( for example: " I don't feel embarrassed for what I have done at any stage in my life....etc ). A lot of what he says sounds like "affirmations" which I think are supposed to make things become true even when they are not.IMO everybody feels shame and embarrassment about some of the things they have done in their life, (unless they are a psychopath that is.) Rennie expresses himself in a very professional and somewhat distant way,like Moses from the top of the mountain. Maybe in a previous lifetime he was Moses or , on second thoughts , just a Methodist minister. Lastly ,I would like Rennie to explain exactly WHY he thinks he should apologise to Prem Rawat.
|
|
|
|
I feel that the excellent critiques of Rene's solo post were on the mark. Those who say he was "ripped apart" here and such I feel are misunderstanding the deep-seated hatred brought up by his letter. Hatred for cult leadership just a level below the adored leader. Hatred for his pomposity. Hatred for the pain of being patronized over and over and over and again 30 years late once again. And finally for those who say "give the guy a break, he's probably a nice guy" well, back then, his history among the women he met with in his peaceful pursuits, campaigns and related endeavors and his treatment of them has been documented. Unfortunately, he was quite a pubic figure 38 years ago. Perhaps one day really soon Rennie would do two hour taped chat with a group of us in person [in a bar or not], via telephone or wih ALL of us computer typing right here on this very site,with an advertised date and time and we could have a good old fashion talk. Otherwise, really, many people have said it in this tread, over and over and over. He is just full of shit and can he please stop it. I guess, either stop it and speak with us further or get the heck out of town cause we just don't care to get into another empty-headed debate of nothingness.
|
|
|
|
That pesky eastern thinking is hard to get removed from. Rennie, if you are shooting for reality in this life, might I suggest you step away for a moment from the parade of people who wave the banner of personal achievement. Consider, why is it that we cannot find even one person who has managed to spiritually or rationally evolved themselves past human flaws and imperfections. No one can, using money, smarts, willpower, random chance, teams of assistants, extricate themselves from personal flaws and troubles. I know there is a wonderful movement, not new by the way, it goes back in history quite far. The message, is that you are the determiner. You are the maker of your reality, and you are basically on your own. What other power there might be, is just a oneness thingee, however defined, and there is no
|
|
|
|
I got as far as " and there is no" and I fell into the realm of nothingness.Or was it that oneness thingee? It was quite an experience anyways. : ))
|
|
|
