|
|
|
Thanks Cynthia!, that was a pretty fair assessment. a nice post IMO.
Modified by LP at Thu, Jun 22, 2006, 10:45:27
|
|
|
|
I prefer the more balanced and better informed interpretation of Mr Rawat's activities that we find in these forums. 'sign-of-the-times' is a hint at the religious types behind this website, who seem to be awaiting the apocalypse. The false guru is just another sign, more evidence of the veracity of their own warped view. Sigh.
|
|
|
|
and they think that he was invited by the UN to speak (as opposed to only hiring the hall)
|
|
|
|
and they think that he was invited by the UN to speak (as opposed to only hiring the hall)
|
|
|
|
>more evidence of the veracity of their own warped view< Given that most of the rest of the human world is going to have its own peculiar take on what reallity is, all that we can hope for (and I would say welcome when it happens) is that anyone who has a view on Rawat, at least attempts to get some accuracy into any picture they are inclined to draw. In fact this latest article is far more likely to be read by a large chunk of Rawat's prospective victims than are the pages of these 'informed' forums. Nik
|
|
|
|
I don't know - maybe sign-of-the-times gets a bigger readership than these forums, and maybe some of those readers won't be fooled into becoming a student of his. But if instead they get into all that stuff about hyperdimensional realities, dividing the world into goodies and baddies depending on whether they are psychopaths ( having no conscience ) or not, and having with the expectation of catastrophe as such a prominent aspect of your life, well, I reckon they may as well just sign up for the 'Keys' anyway. Frying pans, fires, etc
|
|
|
|
Hi 13, That website is pretty extreme, I've gotta agree. I liked the article though. I have to take my Mom's advice on this one (pre-Alzheimer's) that I can't control anything and worrying won't do anyone any harm but me. She was smart in some ways, bless her heart. Cynth
|
|
|
|
Worried? No, just mild exasperation as my own notion of the soup of strange beliefs we live in gets another little validation.
Btw, my mother has Alzheimer's too, and strangely, she is wittier than ever with her one-liners. Laughs a lot too.
|
|
|
|
>maybe sign-of-the-times gets a bigger readership than these forums< I wasn't thinking so much about total readership, but rather about the nature of the respective audiences. >I reckon they may as well just sign up for the 'Keys' anyway. Frying pans, fires, etc < On that basis, it seems to me, that much of humanity spends its time 'in the fire'. I think there is a tendancy for us ex Rawat followers to recreate the ivory tower of Rawatism in terms of a purist rationalism where we who have transcended the confusion of religiosity, can look down on those still trapped in the maya of irrational belief. Personally I would much rather see the failings of each and every cult, sect and religion openly discussed by the competing factions and, where ex premies have some insight, we actually contribute to those discussions rather than simply waiting for lost souls to find their way to our intellectually pure domain. Nik
|
|
|
|
I agree Nik.
And it is possible to forget, sometimes, (feeling like escapees), that most people are "caught up" in something or other. Perhaps until one has gone through something as totally polarizing as we have, one is still 'easy' on the subject, (still vulnerable to entrapment by belief.)
Which in rawatian equates to "easy 'keys'" fodder.
Lp
Modified by LP at Fri, Jun 23, 2006, 06:53:51
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that humanity does indeed spend much of its time in the fire. I still think it is reasonable to point out flames where we see them, in the hope of avoiding them.
My ivory tower of 'purist rationalism' gets pretty warm sometimes too. I am not sure if such an approach is what I am aiming at, or even if it is a worthy aim at all. Purist rationalism must be based on some assumptions?
I just crank up my critical thinking when I see apparently reasonable argument coming from duboius sources. Nothing purist about that.
|
|
|
|
Hi 13, good to see you,
As one who was quite unaware of the site before, and just happened to read Cynthia's link before Mike's, (it was shorter),
I was gratified to see how much of it he did get right.
Though I think he really went off on one when he attributed the term higher self to maharaji, I don't recall him ever using it nor for that matter do I think he would approve of it.
I know many premies who used such new age models, as a tool at least, or a bridge to ween them off dependence on m's "grace". It does, in fact make maharaji sound more than one dimensional, which of course he isn't. It makes him sound more multifaceted: more tolerant of other names than his own, than we know him to be.
Lp
Modified by LP at Fri, Jun 23, 2006, 06:44:31
|
|
|
|
I've been reading. Didn't feel like writing. Often someone else says what I might have said, often better, and usually with more to add too. I have enjoyed your posts especially - too much punctuation (!) sometimes, but just the right words, and all in the right order too. You could be some kind of professional wordsmith I am sure.
I'll follow that forum thread in a while - to be honest, I didn't delve too deeply into sign-of-the-times - I just reacted when I came across the stuff about the psycopaths, and the pending catastrophe and so on.
|
|
|
|
Thanks 13, I have always aspired; this means a lot to me,
I'll try to moderate my punctuation, where I see the chance.
It's the first time I've heard of Sign of the Times but will keep an eye open now.
|
|
|
|
Thanks Mike, I never would have seen this one. Looks like it is mostly right on, I agree with the prior post that there may be an agenda of a different kind behind it. That doesn't prevent the analysis from being accurate in this case, and very thorough . (is there a spell checker built into this that I cannot find? ) Stephen B
|
|
|
|
While Gurdjeffian esotericism is certainly not something I have any interest in, it was reassuring to see that anyone with some intelligence (and admittedly this Henry See has more than just some intelligence) prepared to spend some time on the Net to research the claims of Prem Rawat to teacherhood and Masterhood will easily get enough information to put Prem into the appropriate category. They may come from different conceptual frameworks and explain his negatives in different ways but it's pretty obvious what sort of credibility he has and what sort of decision will be made about him. Now if we can just get the same information to people who are approaching Rawatism from an introduction from a friend or acquaintance then viola! Poof to Premianity!
|
|
|
|
Thanks for posting the article Mike. I especially liked the part about the blissful experience being caused by brain chemistry. This reinforces what I posted about that last winter. It was nearly always the case at programs with M that the depth of my experience was a function of the length of the program. Bliss that is time dependent is most likely due to physical processes rather than being a result of something that is eternal. Also after programs ended the experience would degrade to nothing in usually one to three days. This suggests that the body was metabolizing the brain chemicals that caused the bliss. So if I were to speak with a practicing premie who might say, "Okay M has his faults but what about the beautiful experience that I am having?" I would reply "Experience of what? That eternal reality or a brain chemical high?". Kabir
|
|
|
|
"Okay M has his faults but what about the beautiful experience that I am having?"That's the way all cults of personality develop. In that sentence above, substitute M (for Maharaji) with any charismatic speaker - even Herr H (guess who), and the mind-set is much the same.
Modified by cq at Fri, Jun 23, 2006, 15:44:36
|
|
|
|
I hope that you have sent this to Prof Ron for a 'scholarly' review
|
|
|
