|
|
|
Hi Godo,
As promised, here's my response to your post to me from below. You said:
I wasn't suggesting that being deceitful could ever be acceptable. To me Maharaji is definitely not deceitful, but I respect your opinion that you THINK he is deceitful, and rather than arguing with you that Maharaji is not deceitful, I was saying that even if you think he is deceitful, at the very least he reminds people (including you) that there is a power within (put your own label on it), and I think it's good that he reminds people about that, because so much in the world leads us to forget about that.
I don't believe there is a "power within," so I can't get into a discussion with you about it without arguing about religious/spiritual belief-systems. When you say "put your own label on it," it sounds to me that you're trying to convince me of something. Please don't forget, I was once a practicing premie with a deeply-held belief in Maharaji's divinity.
You said that you don't believe Maharaji is deceitful, but if he were deceitful, that would be okay. I'm trying to understand why Maharaji get's a free ticket (in your opinion) from living a moral life, even in the hypothetical, because you don't believe he is deceitful. He does promote himself as someone who shows people something that you characterize as a power that you need to be reminded of by him alone, because it's so, well, powerful! It also sounds to me that you're talking about your entire lifetime. You're assigning him a very high position among human beings and you're doing it on faith. How does faith fit into the practice of knowledge for you and do you believe that Maharaji has the power of "Grace?"
So if you don't like Maharaji, the important thing for you is to be nevertheless aware that there is a power within, a guiding light within, a power of love within, and maybe you might consider another way of getting in touch with it (maybe you are already doing that).
Godo, I don't think you have the right to tell me this because, as I said, I've already been a premie who believed in Maharaji's divinity. I practiced K exactly as he prescribed and I was intensely involved in doing service. With due respect, you are bordering on giving "satsang" here. What you are saying is exactly what I would have said five-six years ago, if Maharaji still allowed premies to give "satsang." It's exactly what I did say twenty-five years ago when "satsang" was given regularly, either in a community setting or one-on-one. I hope you understand that most of the folks who post here dedicated huge portions of their lives to Maharaji, so you're not saying anything we haven't heard before. In other words, you're not preaching to the choir on this particular forum because ex-premies have been on both sides of the fence. 
I received knowledge via a Mahatma. It was a Mahatma who "showed" me the techniques, and explained a little about them, etc., in the K session. But it was due to Maharaji that I received K. And it was he who sent and instructed the Mahatmas to give K to people such as me. So someone "showed" me how to look within myself and experiece what Maharaji talks about, and I give credit to Maharaji for this, not to the Mahatma. So that's why I said Maharaji "has the ability to show you and remind you of the power within you" - I don't want to be pedantic about it. Maharaji shows you, teaches you - via a Mahatma, Instructor, or himself on video - a way of focusing within.
What is it about Maharaji specifically as your teacher that would preclude him from ever allowing you to have, say, a casual conversation with him or to ask him a question? Have you ever had a one-on-one conversation with Maharaji? In a very literal sense, what you're saying is that Maharaji does have unique and special powers (that others may have, but not as great as him, in your opinion) to transmit the experiential "power within" through a second person or even a non-human medium (DVD). How exactly does he do it? Can you explain that without using the word "experience?"
Thanks!
Cynthia
Modified by Cynthia at Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 08:59:43
|
