|
|
|
Ok then... Here's the next page.
Modified by Hilltop at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 02:14:49
|
|
|
|
And here's the third page from Prem Rawat's wife. Please, someone stop me!
Modified by Hilltop at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 03:50:54
|
|
|
|
Too late, Prem Rawat's wife continues her talk...
Modified by Hilltop at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 02:29:52
|
|
|
|
Thank Goodness! We're almost done with his wife's talk!
Modified by Hilltop at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 02:18:53
|
|
|
|
Look guys, I know the rules. I am only welcome here if
I am respectful and am willing to answer robust questions.
Can I also propose a robust question of my own?
If so, how do you justify this type of post?One thing I have noticed in this forum is that there
are a lot of ex-premies about whom, back in the day,
I would have felt much humility and respect. Would
probably not have dared say a word in their presence.
Could one of you have given satsang just like
this, anytime during the 70's? If so, then what is
the point of this post now? Would it be just as
humorous to post blissful 70's satsang from one of you?
Or is the humor in the context of Marolyn being cheated
on even while she was giving satsang about him? That
seems mean spirited to me, as in making a public spectacle
of someone who may not have done anything to deserve this
treatment. I do understand, I think, the posts that criticize, mock,
remind us of what Maharaji said in the early days, and
take him down a peg or two. But why are you including his
wife? Do you have any satsang of his children that you
would like to post next? Sorry, IMHO it is shameful
to treat her like this. Hilltop, I have a wife, and
whatever my own sins, I would not appreciate them being
visited on her. I hope this post strikes a chord with someone, it is not
meant to inflame. I just want to speak out when something
seems morally wrong.
|
|
|
|
Is it OK to at least post a few words by Prem Rawat's brother? Rata Ji? Or is that morally wrong too? Forgive me!
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean,
I rarely read Hilltop's posts of this kind. It's just too unpleasant to remember in such detail that mindset which is so typified here by Marolyn. I was that way too ( though thankfully, never quite as gushing ).
I don't think the main point of these posts is for the sake of humour. Rawat has never apologised or tried to explain how he handled the devotion towards his divine being that was poured his direction. He acts like premies just stuck some Hindu/messiah labels on him, and there was nothing he could do about it, but it isn't worth mentioning now because we have all grown up. That is totally inadequate. People handed their lives and money over to him, abandoning careers, relationships, engagement with the world in a real way. We need reminding of his duplicity, and the new 'Knowledge lite' premies need to know of hs former glories.
If I had been a famous premie, and some of my 'satsangs' had been printed this way, it would no doubt make me cringe to see it trawled up like this. But I'd have to get onto the forum, and just apologise. I have done so previously on this forum for my own small part. Yes, I was trapped in a cult mindset, but I did my part. I too, 'spread this knowledge'. Sorry again, to all those I affected.
Marolyn? It would be nice to hear from you...
Modified by 13 at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 03:21:00
|
|
|
|
I gave exactly the same kind of satsang in those days. I don't think the objective here is to make a mockery of Marolyn. I know, in my heart, that I, and we all, in some way feel tremendously for her.
The tales I hear always leave me with a feeling of concern and unease for Marolyn. She must be so strong to hold out all this time.
If her holding out is anything; I would say that it is for the love of her children that she is hanging in there. Just guessing though. We don't know all the facts here.
Thanks for this balanced and sensitive post 13
Lp
Ps. Sean, if you look back at posts without any bias, I think you'll find, with only occasional exceptions, most of the criticism is directed fairly and squarely at rawat and the whole guru histrionic.
Sometimes it is essential to remember the confused, rambling, illogical theories we took for truth back then.
But I am with you all the way in your defense of Marolyn, and I ask, here and now myself;
That we defend her honour, and not subject her to any ridicule for her devotion to guru maharaji. I can tell you I have given as much satsang as she has, so I am also partly responsible for these convoluted knots in our perception of reality.
Please forgive me for my previous satsangs and please forgive Marolyn for hers.
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 06:40:29
|
|
|
|
Unless you were an X-rated PAM and haven't come clean.Firstly it is immaterial if mockery was intended. You and Sean have already validated any possible mockery by your total acceptance that anyone making those statements is deserving of mockery. And this is very strange to me. It appears that any criticism of the wife of the man who claimed to be God incarnate and then "retired" into a career of being a secret God incarnate to his followers but trying for a false public image to delude new, innocent, well-meaning, idealistic people into becoming his devotees is well deserved. Has she made any public statements about this deception and especially this vilification? Has she done anything to prevent this false publicity. Apparently she just goes on living in incredible luxury and supporting her husband and his followers in his deceitful campaigns. See it's one thing to believe he is the Perfect Master and to accept "white lies" in the belief that propagation requires them and that people "deserve' to be lied to and put on a path of coercive indoctrination "for their own good". But it's another thing altogether to accede to his campaigns against his realised followers, those who understand the truth of his position sometimes after 20 or 30 years close association and who have the integrity to try to alert anybody else to the situation.
|
|
|
|
"Apparently she just goes on living in incredible luxury and supporting her husband and his followers in his deceitful campaigns."
I tend to think of her as trapped, I suppose.
But you make a strong case. I just don't know how free she feels or actually is, to do anything about it, or what degradation of her will and esteem, what bitter disappointments or fears might have rendered her stoically accepting of his apparently absolute power over her. I only know how I feel, and I have kept my distance.
We do not have all the facts. We don't know what private exchanges have taken place between them.
I know him as a cruel, tyrannical megalomaniac, without compassion.
I only remember Marolyn as a beautiful, Californian, blonde hippie/surfer girl with a VW bus who got a good job as an air line stewardess, and had a very nice personality, and a warm heart.
I never knew her as "Durga ji". (except of course, from the back of the hall)
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 17:45:36
|
|
|
|
Hi sean, Yes, I do have some satsang from his children that I would like to post next. So What!
Modified by Hilltop at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 03:22:15
|
|
|
|
Thank You sean for helping me think about the children!
Modified by Hilltop at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 03:21:23
|
|
|
|
Thanks Hilltop I remember those pictures. Those kids were beautiful. It's actually, for me, a fond memory of those little kids frolicing on the stage.
|
|
|
|
Hi Susan, They were beautiful kids, I have to agree! I found this picture with Prem Rawat's big fat feet messing up the pic. Thank You Susan... for your worthwhile posts! Hilltop
|
|
|
|
"I don't know the difference between you...and you....and you...and you"
|
|
|
|
Sean,Posting Marolyn's old satsangs isn't about humour or mockery. The point is that it illustrates the belief system at the time (and still in place for many). Whereas Rawat and his current PR machine could and do argue that premies somehow were mistaken when they worshipped Rawat as God, Marolyn had, at the time of this stasang, lived with him as his wife for four years. There is not a chance in hell she could have mistaken his message, but there it is - she is saying stuff like this:- Guru Maharaj Ji was giving satsang to the initiators and he said, "No-one ever refuses to accept the breath I give". So here she is, quoting Rawat making it very clear that he is the giver of breath. After four years of marriage, of sleeping together, of having his children, this is the message she either believed because that's what he told her, or, if she didn't believe, then she was complicit in allowing us to believe it. Either way, this is yet more direct proof of the accuracy of the objection to Rawat on EPO where it states that:- When Mr. Rawat came to the West in the early 1970's, he proclaimed himself to be an Incarnation of God, equal to Jesus Christ and Buddha, the Satguru, the Avatar, the Perfect Master of our times. He claimed that salvation depended on complete surrender to his grace. Mr. Rawat now tries to cover-up and mitigate these earlier claims. He blames others for misrepresenting him. But hundreds of direct quotes from Mr. Rawat put the blame squarely on himself. See the ex-premie website for a collection of these quotations. Sean, you sound like a man of honour - will you accept that this statement on EPO is true? And if not, why not? John.
|
|
|
|
Hi John,Thanks for giving me something to respond to. I appreciate
you saying that I sound like a man of honor, but that is not
the case. I am someone who has utterly failed to do the
simplest and most basic things that I have been asked
to do. Regarding your question, I would just say, how could
anyone who received knowledge in the 1970's, and who still
calls himself a premie today, fail to agree that the
EPO statement is true? I think that what you are really
asking me to do is to "sign my work". If so, then yes, I
believe that Maharaji really meant what he said about
himself in the 70's, and I think it is still true today,
regardless of his current public persona. Perhaps this renders my understanding of what really
matters to be an illusion or a dream; I don't know. I do
think that at the end of the day, most people have a sense
of what is right and wrong. Based on this sense, I
think throwing Maharaji's wife and children into
the fire as these posts have done, is fundamentally wrong. I wish this was just a case of me interpreting mockery where
there was really just an illustration of Maharaji's duplicity.
But I don't think so. I think these posts were intended to
hurt, for whatever reason, with no consideration given to
innocents. That, to me, counts as shameful. Regards,
Sean
|
|
|
|
I don't see how this constitutes 'throwing Maharaji's wife and children into
the fire'.
Does his wife stand by what she said, or has something changed? Why the embarrassment? Because she was so naive? As John pointed out, naivety would be a hard case to support, given that she had been living with Rawat for four years and bore his children. If she wasn't naive, she was as duplicitous as Rawat. Which was it? I am sure she's welcome to post here and set the record straight.
And the children? Of course, they themselves were innocent ( at the time at least ) - but they were trawled out as some sort of divine family for the premies to admire. We've never been given an explanation for such stuff - it was all just put down the the 'sari brigade', which never existed as I remember it.
|
|
|
|
"yes, I
believe that Maharaji really meant what he said about
himself in the 70's, and I think it is still true today,
regardless of his current public persona."
So you regard yourself as a character in his dream?
You believe he is the lord of the universe still?
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 05:02:52
|
|
|
|
"yes, I believe that Maharaji really meant what he said about himself in the 70's, and I think it is still true today, regardless of his current public persona.">You believe he is the lord of the universe still? I don't know what terms like "lord of the universe",
"satguru" and "perfect master" mean. I don't generally
use them in my internal thoughts or external conversation
anymore, although I did use them pretty indiscriminately
in the early 70's. I also did not know what they meant
then.
I do believe that there is a connection between Maharaji
and an internal experience that premies sometimes refer to
with terms like "Maharaji within", "experience of perfection",
etc. I also believe that it was necessary for a person of
some exceptional quality or ability to teach me to meditate.
I don't understand how either the connection or the teaching
works, which is why I refer to them as beliefs. >So you regard yourself as a character in his dream? This is a very interesting question. If I understand
what you mean, it is a context I usually associate with
God creating and sustaining what we understand to be
reality. Let me think about this awhile.
|
|
|
|
'I do believe that there is a connection between Maharaji
and an internal experience that premies sometimes refer to
with terms like "Maharaji within", "experience of perfection",
etc.'
That's the crux of the problem Sean. You know you don't have any objective evidence for that. So it should be reasonable to consider that this might not be the case, that M is not at all connected with those experiences. It could be that those experiences are not so different to what 'ordinary' people experience - but you have learned to associate them with M, give them a different name. Many people without knowledge sometimes experience great peace, great joy, and so on. Give yourself a break - allow yourself to imagine that M has nothing to do with your internal experiences. It might be uncomfortable, or worse, but if you want real liberation, I suggest you try it.
|
|
|
|
Thank You 13 for your Great Points! and Great advice too!!!
|
|
|
|
13, Sorry for not responding sooner, yours was one
of the posts I really felt needed an answer, but
it got lost in the other chaos.
>That's the crux of the problem Sean.
>You know you don't have any objective evidence for that. Agreed. >So it should be reasonable to consider that this might not be >the case, that M is not at all connected with those >experiences. It could be that those experiences are not so >different to what 'ordinary' people experience - but you have >learned to associate them with M, give them a different name. Yes, this is reasonable and possible and it has to be
considered. >Many people without knowledge sometimes experience great
>peace, great joy, and so on. Agreed.
>Give yourself a break - allow yourself to imagine that M has >nothing to do with your internal experiences. It might be >uncomfortable, or worse, but if you want real liberation, I >suggest you try it. I think I have already had a lifetime of that. But your post
is well meant, I think. I will try it and let you know if it
changes anything for me.
|
|
|
|
I think these posts were intended to hurt, for whatever reason, with no consideration given to innocents. That, to me, counts as shameful.
You want consideration given to the “innocents” here huh? Well Sean who exactly are the innocents? The gullible premies who just wanted to spread peace and harmony in the world, or the people at the top who were secretly raking in millions, getting drunk, doing dope, eating steak, having affairs, buying luxury cars, houses, planes, yachts etc?
Who is innocent and who is guilty of shameful behavior here?
I don't know what terms like "lord of the universe", "satguru" and "perfect master" mean. I don't generally use them in my internal thoughts or external conversation anymore, although I did use them pretty indiscriminately in the early 70's. I also did not know what they meant then.
Back in the 70s you didn’t know what terms like "lord of the universe", "satguru" and "perfect master" meant? Well jeez there Sean, you sure don't sound like you were a very with-it devotee. You should have asked your fellow premies what these terms meant, or a mahatma, or you could have read And it is Divine a little more closely where they were very clearly defined. And if you still don’t know what terms like "lord of the universe", "satguru" and "perfect master" mean then read EPO, or at the very least, spring for a dictionary.
I get angry when I read these satsangs from Marolyn and Maharaji, which according to EV never happened. I don't find them funny at all. IMO, Maharaji and his family took four very practical and useful meditation techniques and attached all kinds of nonsense to them.
What a load of bullshit they dumped on us naive, unsuspecting, seekers of truth and love and light. WE were the ones hurt!
Do you still believe that Maharaji "gives you your breath" and that Marolyn is "your new mother?" What do you think about this baloney? And please don't respond by saying that you are not sure what the word believe means?
Related link: http://ex-premie.org/pages/glossary.htm
Modified by Steve at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 15:48:17
|
|
|
|
There's this one little thing that I let pass so many times, that after a while it went away.
There was this question I kept meaning to ask a mahatma or maharaji.
I could feel my face wrinkle up a bit, my head tilt slightly to one side,
eyebrows lowered for an instant, as if trying to see into the distant,
try to ignore the feint (?) (question mark) off to the left of the inside of my head:
but (not wanting to make a fuss) I would let pass the moment for asking this...
"How do you figure by telling me to breathe,
which I was already doing;
by just making me a little more conscious of it",
(for better or worse) where was I? Oh yeah..
"How do you figure that by making me more conscious
of the fact that I breathe, you have given me my breath?"
It, of course, then would never have occurred to me to also ask...
(I was too polite,) but I should have,
and Hilltop should have been there with a video camera, but no.
"And how do you figure that by doing that, (telling me I breathe,) that makes you divine?
But it was like going up to an office worker on the London Underground and saying:
"Why do you wear a bowler hat and carry an umbrella?"
We already knew enough in the west to know that guru's
had a certain amount of unfamiliar paraphernalia they brought with them,
we didn't like to ask really.
So we all played sheep and let the collies herd us in,
thinking it was for our benefit; for our protection, but no.
Lp
Modified by LP at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 18:00:42
|
|
|
|
Sean,First of all, thank you for your honesty in your beliefs, and thanks for agreeing that EPO is correct on the issue of how Rawat presented himself. Perhaps you could tell Jossi Fresco who missed those years. Regarding what is fundamentally wrong, either Marolyn was sincere in what she said in 1978 or she wasn't. If she was, then she has a responsibility to speak out and state what her current views are. Many of us had our belief reinforced by eloquent and emotional satsangs from those close to Rawat. Let's be honest, many of those people spoke far more coherently than Rawat. It is in my view 'fundamentally wrong' that she doesn't either correct what she said, or confirm that she still believes. If she wasn't sincere then, then giving that satsang was clearly 'fundamentally wrong'. Why do you think Marolyn deserves to be left alone on this? She spoke out many times in the 70s and early 80s. If she had always been in the background I could agree with you, but she used her position as Rawat's wife to cement our beliefs, so she has a responsibilty to speak out and set the record straight. What EV write on their website and in their publications regarding our criticisms, the mental state of critics, and the early days of Rawat's mission is 'fundamentally wrong'. Rawat asking people who believed he was God to drop everything and dedicate their lives to him and then abandoning them is 'fundamentally wrong'. Rawat living in a palace and then boasting about spending a few thousand dollars on rice by spending money issuing vanity press releases is 'fundamentally wrong'. There are many things that are fundamentally wrong but publishing speeches by Rawat's wife isn't one of them. John.
Modified by JHB at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 05:31:29
|
|
|
|
Amen: Fundamentally.
But with great respect, John you have to admit that she is in a very difficult position,
I can practically feel him from here, and that I know exists entirely in a ridiculous imagination which has still got a toe, ready to stick in the door of perception and get folks to say "thankyou maharaji for all that's good and I'm sorry maharaj for all that didn't work and for my silly, silly doubts! "
Imagine having been that close to him for that long, anyone who has endured that deserves a pair of kid gloves.
But the truth old friends is the truth, lets not get too pedantic while in our efforts to think of a better line of defense.
We are challenging the idea of maharaj ji being god: or not.
Both. Because he said one them. We are challenging him on that. We are challenging him on the other, because his actions prove that in his and several other hearts he is believed still to be god.
Oh yes, I am becoming more and more convinced that he himself believes it, The most difficult parts of tying the mental pretzel he achieves; by deferring some of the more difficult esoteric gymnastics onto his other hard disc: Shri Hans. Otherwise he'd be accused of talking to himself and we don't want to accuse him of that as well do we?
Sometimes he speaks of 'guru maharaji, I suppose in a way in which, in his mind, the two are fused as one: even weirder and scarier.
So in that case we are challenging him on lying, while telling the truth!
No he is not god, quite correct, but he believes he is!
That's even worse than being a fraud. And a lot more dangerous.
Lp
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 08:00:19
|
|
|
|
When Premies put my home address on the Internet and named my kids along with allegations about me ? or When a leading light in EV UK called on an old mate who had done time for GBH and asked them to 'find out' who was exercising their constitutional right to contact the Charity Commission about EV, and 'stop them'. or When premies actually published a photo of the young daughter of an ex premie. Rawat's family are surrounded by security, and all have benefitted materially from Rawat's gig as a 'teacher'. Or perhaps you can't tell the difference between that premies do and the discussions that take place here. Hmm seems I was a bit inflamed after all. N
|
|
|
|
>When Premies put my home address on the Internet and named my >kids along with allegations about me ? >When premies actually published a photo of the young daughter >of an ex premie. I hope that I would not make excuses for a premie who does
such destructive things. If it occurred in a context like
this forum, where I could see it happen and raise an
objection, then I hope that I would not hesitate to say so.
|
|
|
|
Since you are obviously a concerned person, tell us what Prem Rawat/EV has done about the apprehension of Jagdeo.
I am sure you will agree this is more importatnt than whether Marolyn is being made fun of or not. Or is that a wrong assumption?
|
|
|
|
I don't have any personal information about this, but
I am going to let Mike Dettmers, who I think believed it was
true, be my proxy. Maharaji should not have tolerated even
the hint of a suggestion of this kind of behavior in any premie
or mahatma, ever, period. I apologize if I did not make this
clear when I first heard about it 6 years ago.
|
|
|
|
"Maharaji should not have tolerated even the hint of a suggestion of this kind of behavior in any premie or mahatma, ever, period."Is that it? Have you complained to Rawat? Don't you premies even care that your leader did NOTHING, after knowing that His appointed staff(Mahatmas), who he told us to obey as if they were Him, used their positions to commit unspeakable acts on children? His silence over the years is astoundingly loud. Do any of you premies have any real human values? Jethro
|
|
|
|
I don't see how anyone will be helped by responding
to you, but I intended from the start not to dodge
any uncomfortable questions.>Is that it?
Yes. >Have you complained to Rawat?
No. >Don't you premies even care....
I care. >Do any of you premies have any real human values?
Yes, although I doubt that anything will convince you of this.
|
|
|
|
"I don't see how anyone will be helped by responding to you, but I intended from the start not to dodge any uncomfortable questions."And exactly who are you trying to help? Poor Marolyn? Your non-answer says it all. All Rawat would have to do is to issue an agya in India, to those protecting Jagdeo, to give him up.
|
|
|
|
Do you want me to say I am a hypocrite? Yes, I am.
Sometimes I see what is right to do and fail to do it.>And exactly who are you trying to help? Poor Marolyn? God forgive us for posting on this subject, I am trying to
help anyone who was abused. They are the ones who
matter now, not you or me or Jagdeo or Maharaji. You are
making it very clear to me that I am not succeeding.
|
|
|
|
People here on this forum are individuals. I have seen that not all premies take the Jagdeo issue lightly at all. Many are and were upset about it. I personally believe, ( and you can read why on the ex-premie.org site) that Rawat did hear about Jagdeo in 1977 ( if not before). There is fairly good evidence to support that. My guess, is that he did try in some way to stop Jagdeo, but that, Rawat, being a human being and not LOTU as I believed he was then, had as little education and insight into pedophiles as the rest of the world. He may have thought he could threaten and scare him out of it. ( This part is speculation, what he did I have NO idea). But Jagdeo stayed in the West at least until the mid 1990's. He stayed on EV's staff in India, in an exalted role, right up until A and I started talking openly about it here. In fact, I posted with someone here who had seen Jagdeo treated very well in an Ashram in India, and had also seen a young premie girl crying because she had the service of serving Jagdeo, and the older women laughing at her. At the time, the premie thought it was because Jagdeo was so stern, of course, when she heard what A and I had to say, she became very afraid about why that young girl may have been crying. So was I. What really really bothers me is that Rawat way of dealing with sick Mahatmas was always to send them back to India. Now I know that India is a different culture, but don't his Indian premies, and the Indian people, deserve the same protection that we have? Fakiranand tries to murder a reporter......send him to India. There was some Mahatma at Coll molesting boys.......to India.....a rapist Mahatma in the Norwest.....to India....and Jagdeo, maybe too late..but really, does it really matter to anyone but Jagdeo,...back to India? You see what I mean? Why is it justice to send these criminals back to India? Mostly I think, because he doesn't have to deal with criminal prosecutions and embarrassment in the West. Can you think of any other reason? Do the Indians deserve murderers, rapists and child molesters more than we do? It wasn't until I wrote to EV, the THIRD time I had tried to report Jagdeo, but the first time I did it with an audience of the WWWeb, that Jagdeo was confronted by Deepak and supposedly left the Ashram and walked off into the sunset. Some justice.
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean,
Thanks for your post, you ask clear questions, so I can happily give you answers!!
Is the humor in the context of Marolyn being cheated on?
How do
you justify this type of post?
I don't know what you mean by Marolyn being 'cheated on', perhaps that's
why I don't find it humorous. I thought Marolyn sounded like a very sweet and
devoted young person – nothing wrong with that! But what I was thinking about when I read it, were the kinds of
impulses and feelings that would have been invoked in many people who
were around in those days, and I find are very much invoked in us still -
albeit it more subtle ways. My experience is that the sentiment is still the
same. Ultimately there is still a call for total surrender to M. I am a 'premie lite', and at the time I found out about M it was impossible
to get a word out of anyone about what he was teaching, but I have been
surrounded by 'premie heavies' at 'Events' and socially. So I am also finding
it very interesting to really get to grips with what was affecting you people.
Clearly 'doubts' were constantly there, as was the mind that held them. Someone
in Marolyn's position discussing with a 'that's-how-it-was' general acceptance,
re: doubts v.s faith etc, adds validity to what could otherwise simply be a one
off, or argued to be a, 'match-that-didn't-light' point of view. The views, expressed by Marolyn in this satsang, also support a lot of the
writings by psychologists and psychiatrists (on the www.infocus.com site) who
describe their research findings into the attributes of cults, along with the
process that has been described as 'thought reform' (as introduced by the Chinese
Communists after their 1949 takeover & found in cults & focus groups).
There are a lot of similarities………... Best wishes,
Alice
Modified by Alice at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 05:49:14
|
|
|
|
Hi Alice, Welcome here. I've been enjoying your posts. My experience is that the sentiment is still the same. Ultimately there is still a call for total surrender to M. Would you mind elaborating on this? What do you mean by "premie lite?" I'm curious about when you got knowledge, too, if that's not too dear to say here. I think you meant to post refocus.org, not "infocus." Refocus is a very good site, imo. Bests, Cynthia
|
|
|
|
Hi
Cynthia
Thanks for your comments. Oh yes, 'refocus' not 'infocus', I think you
recommended it in the first place. Premie Lite - heard it here, made me laugh,
a soft drink lite on sugar is the idea (I guess??), because it came without the
overt 'Lord of the Universe’ & surrender stuff. Although every new premie I
know, feels that’s what is required - and most remain in conflict with the
idea. Knowledge, not sure, some time around 2000.
Alice
|
|
|
|
Alice, Premie lite...because it came without the overt 'Lord of the Universe’ & surrender stuff. Although every new premie I know, feels that’s what is required - and most remain in conflict with the idea. Knowledge, not sure, some time around 2000. It's not surprising to me at all and I knew this when I left the cult in 1999 because in my small community there were three women who received k in Montreal. Belki was the instructor at the K selection and "a recognition of who Maharaji is" was a prerequisite to being selected. Do you know how aspirants are selected now that the Keys are out? Come on, inquiring minds want to know.  Cynthia
|
|
|
|
Hi Cynthia,
Do you know how aspirants are selected now that the Keys are out?
No I don't, I have very little contact these days, & the Keys were after my time.
Alice
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean and welcome to the forum, Could one of you have given satsang just like this, anytime during the 70's? If so, then what is the point of this post now? I gave satsang like that all of the time and I'm sorry for it. That's the difference between Marolyn and myself: I've copped to what I did that was injurious to others while I was in that cult, Marolyn has not. I don't think that Hilltop posted the scan of Marolyn's satsang to mock her. I do think it illustrates very well, the type of beliefs that were openly talked about in the early days of the cult that are now denied by Prem Rawat, Elan Vital, TPRF, and all the inner circle people. Btw, all Hilltop did was post a scan of a magazine published with Maharaji's approval back then. He didn't even make much editorial comment so I guess the way you took the post, is simply the way you took the post. If you saw it as mocking Marolyn, that's your point of view, not mine and from what I read, not the view of others who responded to you. It's a DLM publication, after all. Btw, I generally have a minority opinion here about Marolyn Rawat. I don't like her much because I think she's been complicit in perpetuation of the belief-system that Rawat is the LOTU, which is not only false, but denied by the cult now, too. Where I part ways with other exes usually is that I also think she's a very weak-charactered women. I think some exes excuse her complicity too much. I don't like weak charactered women at all. This is about adults, both Marolyn and Prem Rawat, who are as responsible for their actions and words just as anyone here or in the world is responsible for their words and actions. The Rawats don't get an exemption from personal responsibility. Why would they? Btw, I also think Marolyn was informed about the Jagdeo affair back in the 1970s, when he was sexually abusing children of premies, and she did and said nothing to protect those innocent kids. There are people who still suffer because of it, so no, I don't cut Marolyn Rawat any slack whatsoever. So no, this isn't about mockery at all. This is about dead-serious stuff. Was Marolyn aware that premie children were being raped by an adult man in the 1970s, and she did nothing about it to protect those kids? Durga Ji, aka Marolyn, aka Mom? I want to know. I also think the excuse that she's stayed around Maharaji for her own kid's sake is a flimsy argument. If she had been strong, she'd have left Rawat long ago. Now her kids have been brought up in a belief-system that their father is the Lord Incarnate come again on Earth, and the two daughters (now adults) are helping him con more people out of their money, by saying their father can offer them something (also false), and they prey on especially young people in colleges. Finally, Marolyn Rawat has reaped the financial benefits that came to her off the backs of premies. She is answerable to us for that. Hey, I just gave you a lot to think about! Thinking is very good. Best, Cynthia
Modified by Cynthia at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 06:27:48
|
|
|
|
I have never felt that blaming of Marolyn. I tend to feel sorry for her more than anything. I don't know if being a famous actress means Navi is more successful than Wadi and Daya..but at least Navi is living in a much wider world than that of the cult. I don't know that Wadi and Daya are not also, or Hansi and Amar, but you do wonder if Claudia being strong enough to make a life for herself outside the cult was a strong message to her daughter. For all I know some of Prem and Marolyn's children have escaped. But I worry when I hear about the girls promoting the game for Daddy.
|
|
|
|
Susan, I know how you feel about Marolyn, and lots of other exes feel the same as you. I understand that pov, but, I have a history that makes me much harder on a mother than other people might be. I must be predisposed to think and feel this way. On a much tinier and much more extreme scale, my own mother was much like Durga Ji. Everything that happened in our house was concealed and private, and Ma would dress up beautifully after (cough) WWIII had taken took place and pretend. In a way, it's like Marolyn going out on stage, pretending, play-acting before the public, while she let her kids grow up around a drunk. I admire Navi Rawat. She and her mother are the only Rawats that work for a living! She's pretty good at acting and very beautiful. Seems like Claudia did a good job with her kids. But, Claudia was in on the act for a time, too, and owes us an explanation, IMO. These people got their money from us! I don't know what the other kids are doing, but Premlata was doing stuff with the young premies and Daya is still singing at current programs. She sang to him very recently and is listed as one of the contributing writers/photographers on Michael Wood's Maharaji blog. If you look at the website, her name is listed to the right. http://innerlink.typepad.com/connect/ Notice the awful pix of Rawat. He looks really baaaad. I don't worry about the kids at all. They're adults now, they can decide what they want to do. Compared to my life, theirs is a cake-walk. C
Modified by Cynthia at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 14:59:54
|
|
|
|
I appreciate your point of view too, and I listen. I don't know for sure if Marolyn ever really wanted to try to leave. I have heard Prem was mightily affected by Raja Ji's divorce and DID NOT want that to happen. Just to reiterate my defense of her staying...I don't think she could have spirited the kids away and lived in hiding. About the best she could have hoped for was 50 percent custody. Leaving your kids with someone you don't trust 50 percent of their lives is not always a loving maternal choice. Knowing how Prem and his premies would have villified her had she left, knowing the influence he could use in so many ways to threaten her life, safety, their emotional safety and their love for her....I think had I been her I might have simply gone nuts....gone nuts, sucked it up and stayed by my children's side..I believe she may have made the best choice if she was deciding something like this while they were children. My biggest reservation about her has become the very existance of her romance with the 15 year old boy Guru at 24 or how ever old she was when it began. Even if he's LOTU, most normal adult women would find the idea repugnant and wrong. The intersection of being a cult member and forgiving her that and his age and how she would have treated ( I hope ) any other 15 year old boy ..its all just too weird. Yep, lets say she wakes up to the reality she married a 16 year old pompous megalomaniacal boy god.....now has four precious children with him and he is NOT letting them go. Yep....I think I would lose my marbles if that was the cost of my cult memebership....wouldn't matter how fancy my house, jet or how many servants....she sold her soul and IMO paid a horrible price.
|
|
|
|
That's how it feels to me, Susan, just on a gut feeling level
I was at breakfast, in the ashram the fateful day a green rolls appeared in the drive with maharaji and rajaji. Marolyn was told she had 5 mins to get her stuff and get in. Maharaj ji had service for her on his cabinet.
She dropped her toast, ran upstairs and packed a suitcase, got ready and was back in 5. Everyone stood agape as she got in the car and they drove away. The breakfast things were forgotten, we were abuzz with wondering and amazement. Many were congratulatory, but I had a bad feeling.
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 16:22:45
|
|
|
|
that's really pretty creepy
|
|
|
|
Yeah, that's what I thought.
It's kinda like the Bhagavad Gita crossed with Dallas.
Episode two: Krishna goes shopping for a consort.
|
|
|
|
Hi LP,You love to play with words. Were you making a deliberate play on 'agape' or didn't you love her as a sister in the Lord? So he drove up in a green Rolls - in 1974? Did he have more than one Rolls? He was still underage wasn't he, did he drive?
|
|
|
|
No play on words intended, and sometimes I notice subliminal plays that I didn't mean or notice earlier; happening from trying to be poetic. Sorry if that has occurred.
We were amazed because the lard had just been driven, by his driver, up to the ashram, we had all gathered round, hands clasped and he had chosen one of us to take with him!
She was my and our ashram sister, and my private thoughts are my own!
Modified by LP at Tue, Jul 04, 2006, 09:50:48
|
|
|
|
This event sounded the death knell of our ashram which was the best sense of a working ashram community I have experienced. It all collapsed for me, soon after. It brought chaos to our concepts and confusion soon replaced devotion.
But that wasn't even a consideration in his world.
|
|
|
|
Well, it's up to the forum mangement to decide what's acceptable but historically I'd say that being 'inflamed' is not what has bothered most exs about pro Rawat posters - its the avoidance of honest responses to questions. I have three uninflamed responses - first the relevance of morality to the treatment given to a movement like Rawat's which has been founded on amorality and which has prospererd on immorality is necessarily limited. Secondly, Marolyn Rawat is culpable - she has been a facilitor of cult behaviour for over thirty years and has benefited materially from her husbands wealth which has accrued primarily from gifts from followers whose beliefs Mrs Rawat has encouraged. If premies are finally finding a 'moral voice' it would be a lot more convincing if that voice was first applied to the way Elan Vital and the rest of the cult apparatus operates. Demanding that Rawat's critics observe a morality defined by Rawat's followers just looks like the usual premie opportunism that on this forum we are all too familiar with. Nik
Modified by Nik at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 06:07:50
|
|
|
|
I think I understand your feelings. But I also think that posting Marolyn's satsangs is historically important. They influenced us and reflected strongly the environment and tone of the time. It's the truth and let the chips fall where they may. Some of the PAMs who post here have had the experience of reading their own words back then. You are right, its similar. The difference is we are facing our past honestly. Also, I think posting the pictures of the kids back then is legitimate. They were used to promote their father. He allowed them on the stage, to be photographed and allowed the photographs published in cult magazines. I for one felt a special "fairy tale" relationship with those kids I never met, and it could have been a factor in keeping me in the cult as long as I stayed.
|
|
|
|
Sean, I don't know why, but I still feel what I would call affection or even a form of love for Marolyn and the kids. I truly do. All these years later I still feel that. But I really don't think posting her words or these photos is below the belt. I remember well this satsang, her satsangs, how they affected me, and how the kids affected me. I don't feel much blame toward Marolyn, and despite seeing a video of Daya singing with Rawat, I can't bring myself to blame her either. But I think these are historical documents and they tell an important part of the story of what happened in the seventies. I don't feel that Marolyn is being mocked at all. Its just how it was.
|
|
|
|
One thing I have noticed in this forum is that there are a lot of ex-premies about whom, back in the day, I would have felt much humility and respect. Would probably not have dared say a word in their presence. Could one of you have given satsang just like this, anytime during the 70's? I don't understand what you're saying here, Sean. Are you saying that you could or couldn't have given satsang like this? What's your point exactly? If so, then what is the point of this post now? Would it be just as humorous to post blissful 70's satsang from one of you? It might not be just as humorous as none of us, ridiculous as we were, none of us were lifted to the same heights of absurdity as the Lord's California-bred Durga Ji, Goddess of Love. But, yes, it would be humorous and that's why I have, in fact, posted some of my own crazy stuff from way back then. You gotta laugh sometimes, eh Sean? Laugh, cry, shrug ... these are the three stages of grief.  Or is the humor in the context of Marolyn being cheated on even while she was giving satsang about him? That seems mean spirited to me, as in making a public spectacle of someone who may not have done anything to deserve this treatment. Yes, I admit, that's all part of it. But don't you see that that's just another aspect of the absurdity of this whole god-in-human-form nonsense? The Lord makes this one particularly juicy -- yes, I mean juicy. That's who she was, that's what she was selling. Big, voluptuous, hmm-hmm good, hot, sizzling, mama love for her little teenage guru. He bought it. We all cried at the wedding and fought our dirty minds at the slow-mo beach shots -- follower his number one, pretty-faced, "Trust me! Trust me!" spokesperson/patsy for a while. Meanwhile, years later, he discards her like any other aging Malibu trophy wife. She won't leave. She can't. Think of the money ... It's Tom Robbins material, Sean. It's one big, f**king joke and you're in it too. You're damn right it's even that much funnier that Rawat played her that way. Sick, sad, funny. The other three stages of grief. I do understand, I think, the posts that criticize, mock, remind us of what Maharaji said in the early days, and take him down a peg or two. But why are you including his wife? Do you have any satsang of his children that you would like to post next? Sorry, IMHO it is shameful to treat her like this. Hilltop, I have a wife, and whatever my own sins, I would not appreciate them being visited on her. Satsang of the kids? Great idea! You bet that stuff's hilarious. Why? Because of how we thought they were divine too! And, to date, none of the little beneficiaries of Rawat's ill-gotten gain have had the guts to say a single honest word about any of it. Your analogy to your own private affairs is completely off the mark. Lots of reasons. Too obvious to list, really. I hope this post strikes a chord with someone, it is not meant to inflame. I just want to speak out when something seems morally wrong.
You've entered the ring on this one, Sean, and now you really do have an ethical obligation to address the various other "moral" issues in and around this Rawat business. Otherwise, you're just taking hypocritical pot shots.
|
|
|
|
very nice sentiments jim
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 13:24:13
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it was hard for everybody, including the girls, to ignore those bouncing things in the movie. That was the first "motion picture" I ever saw -- was still an aspirant. It was played at least five times in a row in one night. Meanwhile, here's a post I wrote a couple years ago that kind of pertains to this subject. | Date: 03/20/2004, 10:24:20 | | Posted by: Cynthia | | Original URL: | | Subject: Prem Rawat's Adult Children and Hate Group... | RE: Prem Rawat, a/k/a, Guru Maharaj Ji, a/k/a Maharaji and Divine Light Mission (DLM) or Elan Vital (EV) It appears that there are some misconceptions about discussions taking place here concerning Prem Rawat's adult children. Accusations are being made by some devotees of Prem Rawat that people who are former devotees ("premies" ) of Maharaji, who may or may not call themseves Ex-Premies, all hate Prem Rawat and have formed a "hate-group." It's also evident by reading EV's recent press release concerning the John MacGregor case, that the Elan Vital cult itself would like the public to think that former "premies or devotees" of Prem Rawat have formed a "hate-group." This accusation is incorrect. Personally, I don't habor any feelings of hate towards Prem Rawat or any members of his family. This forum and EPO is not a group and certainly does not foster hate. Most of the people who post here have never met each other. The purpose of this forum is to assist people out of Prem Rawat's destructive personality cult. Some people who come here to read and/or post messages do feel anger because they were abused for many years (some for decades of their lives) by Prem Rawat by his thought-reform programs and his other coercive activities. It is a common after-effect for any former cult members to feel and express anger towards their former cult leader. Those feelings of anger and betrayal do not make it hate nor does it define all ex-premies as a "hate-group." I want it to be clear to any readers that the photos being published on this forum are from cult magazines that are over twenty (20) years old that were published and distributed by DLM/EV in the 1970s. The small children seated on the lap of Prem Rawat are now adults. The children in these photos, who are now adults, were placed on stage during large cult gatherings (where up to 20,000 cult members were in attendance) by their own parents, Prem Rawat and Marolyn Rawat. No premie ever had any decision-making power during the time when Prem Rawat's children were infants and toddlers, to dictate to Prem and Marolyn Rawat whether or not their own small children would appear on stage at cult gatherings in the 1970s. These decisions were made for these children by their own parents, not by premies. These photos were widely published and distributed by DLM and EV in the cult's own magazines. Around 1983, DLM/EV/Prem Rawat ordered his followers to destroy all "past" documents that were once freely distributed within the cult and also publicly used to recruit more cult members. This "burn order" included photos, documents, publications, films, cassettes tapes, and video tapes. Some devotees didn't destroy the materials they owned and that's why some still exist and are posted here. If Prem and Marolyn Rawat's adult children who have been discussed on this forum now have a problem with the fact that their parents placed them on stages to be photographed and published when they were small infants and children during 1970s cult gatherings, they might consider convening a private family meeting to discuss amongst themselves the obviously poor decisions made by their own parents, Prem and Marolyn Rawat. This forum and EPO are not about hating the Rawat family. These discussions are about telling the truth about a destructive personality cult leader, Prem Rawat, who used his own children to recruit and keep people within his control. We are discussing the history of the cult dating back to the 1970s and providing information to the public that Prem Rawat does not want discussed. That's why we are being called a "hate-group." |
|
Modified by Cynthia at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 14:31:34
|
|
|
|
Hey Hilltop you seemed to have missed a page or two or ...And I was finding the story about the fire in Malibu and young Rawat frightened so interesting ...
Modified by ocker at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 19:04:47
|
|
|
|
Hi Oaker, I'm sorry about that. I only posted Pages 15, 16, 17, 20, and 23. Pages 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, and 27 are the ones I didn't post because I don't have them scanned yet. Plus that might be too many attachments to be posting. My scanner is not hooked up at the moment, otherwise I would post more of them for you. Thank You for the responces that you have made here. Best Thoughts, Hilltop BTW... those pages come from the publication called The Golden Age. Number 51, February 1979. DLM.
|
|
|
|
We're his dream. He's dreaming us .... "Aahhh ..... madness reigns...... Clouseau!....."
God!... isn't there a name to describe a condition where someone thinks the people and everything around you are in your dream?
And is there a place for the confusing answers that would be thrown out by premies to defend this question?
Replies that go like...
"Oh he wasn't talking about guru maharaj ji in that sense but in the other sense. You know, come on, are you that dumb, he doesn't mean that literally, but in the sense of ....."
"Yeah what..?"
"................." "You know." "What he came here for, of course!"
Of course this is not aimed at Marolyn, who I have always liked as a person, having known her well as a friend and been in the same ashram as her, in some years.
Nor would I wish to get Marolyn into any more trouble with maharaji.
Lp
Modified by LP at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 08:04:03
|
|
|
|
Man, these rainy, rainy days are something huh? We've had violent storms this week, no damage and no flooding here, thankfully. In between the storms, we've been having perfect VT weather. How's your end of the block doing? See what you started here, Hilly? Just think. The only other place anyone can see these DLM pubs with photos and transcripts, is right here courtesy of you. Thanks, Hilltop, you're so good and I so think you're swell. We saw a American Bittern at our backyard pond. I'd never even heard of this bird, and the thing hung out for about an hour, wading, freezing it's neck up in a stretch, and eating a lot of frogs. It's from the tern/heron family and it was a treat to see it because apparently they're secretive and shy, making sightings rare. This is just for you, with love, Cynthia American Bittern, photo copyright somebody named Steve Pancol 
Modified by Cynthia at Sat, Jul 01, 2006, 15:53:43
|
|
|
|
It makes me proud to have friends like you two.
|
|
|
|
Thanks LP, I have to admit that I enjoy reading your posts. Your really good with words. I'm glad your here and I feel humbled to be considered your friend. Thank You for your kind words! Sincerely, Hilltop
Modified by Hilltop at Sun, Jul 02, 2006, 01:47:45
|
|
|
|
Hi Cynthia, Thanks for the nice American Bittern photo. I love ponds because of all the creatures that are drawn to them.The weather here hasn't been too bad. It's been on and off, but we needed the rain. No flooding here thank goodness. And today was real nice. Me and the girls went to the beach for most of the day and had a great swim. I was in the water so long that my fingers got wrinkly. Great fun! Your right Cynthia... Look what I started! Gulp. I should have known better than to post those last night. We had a bonfire party in our backyard and afterwards I got on the computer and started posting because I was in the mood. However, I should have had a designated typer. Sometimes I may come across as being abrupt or maybe even sarcastic but really I'm just trying to find a little humor in a not so funny cult when I post these things. Thank You Cynthia for thinking that I am swell. I haven't heard that one in a while, I almost feel like I'm back in the fifties Lol! And I don't have to tell you that I think your swell too! Best Thoughts To You Always... Hilltop
|
|
|
