"Guru Maharaj Ji puts his case" -- 'The Age' March, 24, 1982
  Archive
Posted by:
Jim

03/08/2006, 20:19:38
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




Looking through this stuff yielded another find.� It's a very, very bad, faxed copy of an article someone sent me.� It's from a section of a paper called "Age Features" and it's by a writer named Michael Gawenda.� I'll try to make it out:

Johny Young looked nervous as the Guru Maharaj Ji walked into the hotle room flanked by two male devotees and extended his arm for what turned out to be a very limp handshake.

A short, overweight man with a round face and a pencil-thin moustache, Maharaj Ji, as he is known to his followers, looked a lot like the statues of Buddha they used to sell in the asian handicrafts shops around Melbourne in the early seventies.

His blue business suit seemed slightly incongruous garb gor a guru though this was no doubt simply prejudice.� There is no earthly reason why a messenger of the Almighty ought to be dressed in a loincloth.� [ed -- thank God for that!]

Mr Young, a former pop star and the [?] of the long running television programme "Young Talent Time", has been a devotee of Maharaj Ji for almost five years now.� What this means is that Mr. Young has received the "knowledge" and has experienced the divine light, which the guru insists lies formant in all human beings.

"It has changed my life," he said as we waited for Maharaj Ji to arrive.� "He taught me to look within myself for the source of everything, including love.� I had searched for meaning in the outside world when, all the time, all the answers were inside me."

"He is very special to me because he is my teacher.� I love him, not because he is a god or anything like that, but because of what he has given me the opportunity to experience.� Ask him what questions you like but treat him with respect."

Maharaj Ji sat down after the handshake and waited for the questions.� No doubt he expected to be asked about his financial position, about the allegations of brainwashing, about the structure of his organization, the Divine Light Mission.

But there seemed little point in asking those questions.� If Maharaj Ji was an authentic prohpet or perfect master who could be included in the same league as Buddha, Krishna, Moses and several others, did it really matter that his followers booked him into the Hilton Hotel for his stay in Melbourne?� Did it matter that he lived with his American wife and two children in a nice house in Florida?

So the job ahead was really to establish whether Maharaj Ji was a messenger of the Almighty or not.� This seemed like an awesome task, an impossible task in fact, given that he had only about an hour before his next interview.� The best [?] could do was to allow him to state his case and this he did pretty [?????ly].

"I have no doctrine to preach," he said, revealing the broad American accent he had acquired by living in the United States for the past decade.� "I am a guide, a teacher, who can show people how to look inside themselves for the source of all things.

"The source of this divine light as we call it, is inside everyone and has been spoken about by all the great prophets throughout history.� I am the messenger in this age chosen to spread the knowledge.� There can be only one messenger at any particular time, though there have been many before me.

"The people who accepted my role as guide and teacher are not fools who have been brainwashed.� They are intelligent human beings who live normal lives, have families, work at their jobs, but who have experiened something that has changed their lives."

Like most prophets, false and otherwise, Maharaj Ji tends to talk in parables.� Asked why some people are open to inner experience while others tend to think it is mumbo jumbo, he said that if a man is thirsty there is no point in offering him a plate of spaghetti and if he is hungry, therer is no point in giving him a glass of water.

"I'm not seeking recruits," he said.� "I am here for people who have searched everywhere, for answers, for the truth, and have been [unsatisfied ?].� If they want to come to me, I am here to help them."

Maharaj Ji received the "knowledge" from his father in India when he was six years old.� His father had been a guru preaching the divine light message to "millions of people" and had designated Maharaj Ji as his successor as perfect master before he died.

The late 1960s and early 1970s was a thousands of young, essentially middle-class people from America, Western Europe and Australia flocked to India in search of meaning, truth and cheap marijuana.� Some of them found the boy guru and were impressed:�they went back home to spread his message and naturally asked him to visit them.

"I left India when I was 14 because some of the people I had met asked me to come to London," Maharaj Ji said.� " stayed in London for a while and then went to America.� I am now an American citizen though I spend most of the year travelling around the world visiting my followers."

At 16, he married his 24-year-old American secretary, Marolyn Johnston, a [????] which upset his mother who was still living in India.

She [denigrated?] Maharaj Ji as a playboy and suggested that his older brother was, in fact, the person who had been chosen by his father to succeed him as perfect master.� Several attempts at a reconciliation were made -- his mother even visited him in Florida -- but they came to nothing.�

"I have no contact with my mother or brother," he said.� "They live in India and I think she was upset that I married a foreigner.� She thought I had married out of my caste or something like that."

At 24, Maharaji claims to have something like a million followers in India, South America, the United States and Australia.� He admits that many of them almost worship him.� He does not ask them to do this.

"I do not ask people to put me on a pedestal," he said.� "But I am their teacher and guide and they love me.� I love them too.�Did Jesus ask to be put on a pedestal?� Of course not.� His people were so grateful and�loved him so much that they wanted to do anything for him.� Of course I am not saying that I am�Jesus."� LOL!!!!!!

The trouble with this is that it's all words.� Can Maharaj Ji prove that he is what he says he is?� Obviously, he cannot.� He can point to his followers and say they are the proof.� But then so can countless other [gurus?].� This man has charisma and presence.� He knows all about alienation and [????] gone mad.� Don't we all.

Guru Maharaj Ji may well be a messenger of the Almighty but his claim seems far from proven.






Modified by Jim at Wed, Mar 08, 2006, 20:26:52

Previous Recommend Current page Next

Replies to this message

Notes
Re: "Guru Maharaj Ji puts his case" -- 'The Age' March, 24, 1982 -- Jim Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Jim

03/08/2006, 20:26:05
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




1)� I've been wrong for years saying that Rawat didn't do a proper interview after Millenium.� This seems to be a sign that he was testing the waters in the early '80s.

2)� This reporter really could have pressed the guy a bit.� Oh well ...

3)� This is proof that, at the ripe old age of 24, Rawat was claiming that he was the one and only conduit to God and that he'd been chosen for this role:

"The source�this divine light as we call it, is inside everyone and has been spoken about by all the great prophets throughout history.� I am the messenger in this age chosen to spread the knowledge.� There can be only one messenger at any particular time, though there have been many before me."

4)� It's downright hilarious the way he says he doesn't want to be put on a pedestal just like Jesus didn't want to be either.� God that's funny!� It's also a perfect example of Rawat sucking and blowing at the same time, as they say.







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Speaking as Platonist scum..
Re: Notes -- Jim Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Bryn

03/09/2006, 05:19:21
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




... and not a tight Aristotelean editor can I point out a simultaneous typo and theological fly in the ointment.

In his article his Lordship says:-

"The source of this divine light as we call it, is inside everyone

But in the notes it says:-

"the source this divine light as we call it, is inside everyone" (ie no "of"

So for Guru JI, the Divine Light has a source? And it is to that unidentified origin of�the light that PPSR suggestively points in his interview statement. More wiggle room for His Holiness.

For me as a new premo�I was quite literally mentally offbalanced by the divine light (not its source!)�and wide open to ambiguous suggestions that it�made me witness to the essence of all. I think this is a key superstition in the cult armoury of techniques to sweep you off your feet.

�You notice/see the light for the first time, you are not quite sure what your relationship to the phenomenon is yet, the Big Man vaguely hints at it being a "god like" source, you buy in and forget that you have committed yourself to a theological assumption."I am witness to the fount of all- the light divine"

The years have gone by for me and I am now certain that "the divine light" is not the fount of anything. Unfortunately I have to go along with Maha's hint in his interview article (not the notes)�and say that the divine light is itself a consequence and not a cause-which is a shame at one level.I don't like agreeing with him.

But it does also put him out of business as the great teacher of things ultimate.� I mean if he only reveals the light,and not the source of the light-well thats simply not good enough Prem is it.I mean which is it to be?Huh!�Leave it to those better qualified.In fact leave us all alone altogether thank you.You are just confusing everyone.

Love

Bryn







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: Speaking as Platonist scum..
Re: Speaking as Platonist scum.. -- Bryn Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Jim

03/09/2006, 10:51:23
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




In his article his Lordship says:-

"The source of this divine light as we call it, is inside everyone

But in the notes it says:-

"the source this divine light as we call it, is inside everyone" (ie no "of"

Yes, you're right.�When I first transcribed the article I couldn't make�out the first words.� But when I went back to clip that part I suddenly got it.� So then I went back to the first post and�filled in the blank but missed a word.��

This too will be scanned and sent to Gallery.

Interesting, astute�observations about Rawat's "theology".��But you sound confused.� Perhaps you need to see a mahatma.�







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Seriously, this IS Best of Forum material - and worthy of comment by ALL!
Re: Speaking as Platonist scum.. -- Bryn Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
cq

03/09/2006, 13:23:04
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




This HAS to be the "elephant in the living room" that all premies and exes need to discuss.

There can be no question that Maharaj said, of himself "I can show you God", even though his claims to being God incarnate might be disputed by some of his spin-doctors.

Before we were initiated into the techniques of "Knowledge", most of us had been indoctrinated/pre-programmed/conditioned into accepting the concept that the experience we were about to have was "Knowledge of God".

Then we got our eyeballs squeezed and we saw some pretty lights. At that point, most of us could be forgiven for thinking that we'd "seen God". It was the reaction that we were supposed to have.

The human body is designed to respond to physical pressure on the eyes by producing the illusory experience of the apparent generation of seeing "light". Any human can do the same, and experience the same, if they squeeze their eyes. (Note: doing so can cause eye injury - so don't try it!).

But for us "new-born" premies, the experience that we had been pre-prepped for was something much more - it wasn't just pretty lights, it wasn't just divine, - it wasn't "just" God - it was God incarnate - Maharaj Ji. (though he now denies he ever claimed that).






Modified by cq at Thu, Mar 09, 2006, 14:02:58

Previous Recommend Current page Next
Philosophically its a killer...
Re: Seriously, this IS Best of Forum material - and worthy of comment by ALL! -- cq Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Bryn

03/09/2006, 16:25:38
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




.. I mean a mighty experience of the light really cocks up your understanding of what constitutes "an object". Your faculty of representation becomes visible as an object in itself! Any reality to sense (visual at least)�experience becomes questionable as world all seems made out of the stuff of inner light. And looming and leering behind it all "The face", those chops wot I have watched on video,and strained to see for what must be thousands of hours.Oh Lawdy.

It rocked me I can tell you. The subtlties of cognition vis-a-vis form, ground, reality and likeness etc�are far from resolved among even sophisticated specialists. To the likes of Joe Punter (me as a youth)�a blast of the divine light was like instant promotion to Obiwan status.

Feel the force brothers and sisters in his love,

Bryn the self effulgent







Previous Recommend Current page Next
Re: Proper Interview?
Re: Notes -- Jim Top of thread Archive
Posted by:
Ocker

03/09/2006, 22:37:56
Author Profile


Alert Forum Admin




In 1980 Guru Maharaji, as he was then known, did a few interviews in Australia. He was also interviewed on a daily TV after-the-news-type magazine program. This was because Johnny Young, who was then a major Australian TV host of "Young Talent Time" in which young girls and boys sang the pop songs of the day in a very MOR and unthreatening to the oldies fashion, had beome a premie.

Mr Young had been an MOR pop singer in the 60's with some major local hits - very derivative and pretty mundane.

He seems to be a very nice and likeable fellow and used his considerable network of friends and industry clout to get this publicity for Guru Maharaj Ji and to ensure Guru Maharaj Ji would be handled with kid gloves. Neither Young's success nor his premiehood lasted, certainly not his business empire which collapsed due to changing publlc tastes and poor business decisions.

I remember being disgusted when Prem was asked on television about his mansion in Brisbane -� a building known as "the Residence" or "the Res" for short which had been the main focus of service in Australia for the past year - and he answered that he did not own the building which was undoubtedly technically true.

This "res" had been so "top secret" that at first premies going there to do service were taken in a bus blind-folded. As busloads of blind folded twenty somethings were unusual in Australia they created quite a neighbourhood stir.� Just one in the saga of really, really stupid premie ideas.

The Young Talent Time did produce one young girl called Kylie Minogue who went on to major stardom in Australian and English television soapies and pop music. While I consider her looks far outweigh her talent she is extremely popular amongst Australian gays to whom she is something of an androgynous icon.







Previous Recommend Current page Next