|
|
|
HI Saph,
Do you consider this excerpt from David Premanand's memoire "From Dark to Really Dark" to give an accurate picture of life in Prem Nagar?
Excerpts from Between Dark and Dark by David Lovejoy
{ 12 } Prem Nagar
The border was halfway between the big dusty city of Lahore on the
Pakistani side and the small elegant other, and the Indian checkpoint
was a table under a banyan tree.
The line of people waiting for entry moved slowly and, although
it was late in the year and the latitude was high, it was uncomfortable
in the direct sun. At last we reached the banyan tree and its deep pool
of shade. Glen was our spokesman and explained to the official that we
were travelling to Guru Maharaji's ashram.
The border inspector looked bemused for a moment. He was
probably trying to compute the title 'Maharaji'; in northern India it
was commonplace and it would have been like saying at London airport,
"We've come to see Mr Smith." Then he smiled broadly and inn pure Peter
Sellers tones said, "You are all chelas of Guru Maharaji? Then you are
welcome to India!"
In our innocence we felt specially honoured that our master's
name, had been recognised here, still hundreds of miles from his home,
and we tumbled back into the van in high spirits.
We arrived at 'Prem Nagar', Maharaji's ashram on the outskirts
of Hardwar, late on the evening of November 22, 1970, after a journey
of exactly seven weeks.
David Thorp was there to meet us. His windowless truck had
pushed on through without distractions and they had arrived in good
time for the festival on November 7. Which meant that he and his
passengers had already seen and heard Maharaji, who was
now back in his home of Dehra Dun, eighty miles to the north. We were
disappointed: if only we had hurried more, detoured less, or left
England earlier!
The next morning we explored our new environment. We were first
addressed by the senior mahatma, whose name was Premanand. He was a
stooped figure with a stick to lean on, a long white beard and no
English. I think Premanand was chiefly concerned to lay down the ground
rules for living in the ashram, but somehow those parts of his speech
were not heeded. The young Indian who translated for him was much taken
by my surname which was identical to that of the venerable mahatma, and
indeed throughout nay travels in India this equivalence of my name with
a common Hindi one was a useful icebreaker.
Prem Nagar was bounded on one side by the road to Hardwar, and
on the other by a canal that left the Ganges at Hardwar and helped
distribute water from the melting snows of the Himalayas. These
mountains were quite visible from the ashram even though they were
three hundred miles to the northeast. The canal was freezing cold and
very fast flowing, an invigorating but dangerous place to swim, as you
could only make it back to the bank, several hundred yards downstream
from where you plunged in.
The ashram consisted of three main buildings: the residence of
the mahatmas, with the upper floors reserved for Maharaji and his
family, the satsang hall and the three-storeyed main accommodation,
appropriately divided into plain monastic cells. There was a vegetable
garden, a herb garden where ayurvedic (from the Sanskrit, science of
life) remedies were grown and a garden of remembrance for Shri Sant Ji
Maharaj, Guru Maharaji's father. Leading up to these buildings from the
gates on the Hardwar Road was a wide driveway lined with well-tended
flowerbeds.
The bits of Premanand's speech that we missed concerned working in the gardens from an hour before dawn till lunch,
The western pilgrims at Prem Nagar ashram: Peter 1-re is on the far
right a blanket. Jam fourth: from the right clutching my hands. hands.
Glen stands next to
me, Suzie Bai sits at my feet and on her right is Jeannette and next to
Jeannette is
Anne Lancaster, Next to Glen is Patrick and next to him Saphalanand. On
the far
left is Venetia Stanley-Smith, second from her left is Peter Potter and
third firm
his left is George. David Thorp can he glimpsed behind Saphalanand.
regular attendance at, satsang, an hour's meditation morning and night,
and no smoking in the ashram. It wasn't that we deliberately flouted
these rules; we simply had no comprehension that there could be such
things as rules, much less that they, could apply to us. Instead we
passed the first few days walking along the canal bank to Hardwar and
hanging out in chai houses, drinking in the local culture.
The first batch of westerners had come to a compromise with the
rules and were observing most of Premanand's requirements. Indeed David
Thorp made it clear that he was not associated with these undisciplined
later arrivals. This made it doubly unfortunate when, one afternoon as
we (including David) sat playing cards and smoking in one of the rooms,
Mahatma Premanand made the long climb up the stairs and appeared at the
door like some old testament prophet. I thought he would explode with
wrath, but he mastered himself and silently turned away with an
expression of such contempt and disgust that we actually began to
consider how we should behave.
Rising at four in the morning wasn't a serious option: for the
first week or so of my stay I slept too soundly to even hear the bell
that was rung at that hour. But I was willing to make myself useful in
other ways. One of the younger mahatmas had translated all the talks of
Shri Sant Ji Maharaj into fractured English. There, were shelves of
these manuscripts and I volunteered to make a start on editing them.
I was also given, a glimpse of the political difficulties the
arrival of several dozen westerners had given the ashram
administration. Other establishments in Hardwar were jealous, and there
was always the threat from the hardline religious right who wished to
circumscribe what Hindus should believe, in much the same way
as fundamentalists everywhere. It was thought that a bit of political
lobbying would be beneficial, and so Saphalanand and I took a train to
Lucknow, where we were given audiences with various state politicians
and demonstrated, I hope, that we were serious truth seekers and not a
fifth column of neocolonialists.
On the platform of the Lucknow railway station on our way back,
Saphalanand introduced me to the mango, a fruit I had heard of, read
about, even seen before, but never tasted. "Tasting the mango" became
for me a somewhat subjective tool for examining competing religious
concepts. If the truth is there you can taste it, and all the argument
in the world won't change that experience.
{ 13 } Maharaji
When we got back to Prem Nagar there was great excitement in the
air. The next day, December 10, was Maharaji's thirteenth birthday and
the latecomers, we of the green van brigade, had been invited to visit
him in Dehra Dun.
It was a birthday for a thirteen year old, and we had no way of
procuring presents. We spent the evening creating birthday cards, and
we took those, and ones from all the other westerners not so lucky as
us, to Maharaja's residence.
I don't know what I expected. Mahatma Charanand literally
worshipped this child, calling him the incarnation not just of those
footling prophets Buddha, Krishna and Jesus, but of the Creator
Himself. It, was, according to him, supreme good fortune for a human
being to live on the planet as the same time as this Master, let alone
have the privilege of his darshan, that is, of seeing him directly.
We were invited into the inner courtyard of the house. We may
have met Maharaji's mother, Mata Ji, and his three older brothers, Raja
Ji, Bhole Ji and Balbhagwan Ji, but I only recall the stillness
emanating from the form of Maharaji himself. He was small of stature,
quite plump, with huge, eyes which were seemingly all pupil. His face
was almost Tibetan in its broadness and certainly nothing like the
Indians of the plains. Perhaps he looked more like his mother than his
father, pictures of whom we had seen in Prem Nagar, but I can't say I
noticed his physical being very much. All the energy and activity in
that place seemed to descend on him, started and finished with him,
while he never moved at all, wrapped in this profound stillness. Except
of course that he did move. He took our collection of cards, he glanced
at one or two and smiled. He asked Peter, who had been introduced as
the owner of the van, about the journey and listened politely to the
stammered reply.
I don't suppose we were there very long, but time, seemed to
have been suspended as it does at times of great emotion. Speaking for
myself, I did not accept then and there a divine origin for Maharaji,
but I was deeply and inexplicably moved by his presence.
However, the others in my party did seem to make some sort of
commitment. When it was time to go I took the wheel, as Peter had asked
me to, and Maharaji gravely watched us prepare to leave. Suddenly the
others climbed out of the van again and one by one prostrated
themselves before him, with their heads at his feet. I remained at my
post while they performed their pranams. When they got back into the
van we drove slowly away down the drive and Maharaji watched us out of
sight.
We were all learning in our different ways. As if to emphasise this, Maharaji sent Balbhagwan Ji to the ashram several times.
Now BBJ, as we called him (but not to his face), seemed to fit
the part of Perfect Master better than his youngest brother. He was
about twenty years old, looked like his father and was proficient in
English and hence more intelligible than Maharaji. He would give talks
about Knowledge, relating it to science in an exhilarating way.
I kept a notebook and wrote down things that impressed me.
Looking at the entries much later I could not discern how BBJ differed
from all the other plausible Indians who misuse scraps of physics to
push their mystic barrows. Isolated from his compelling personal
presence the thoughts seem quite inane, for example:
"Divine light is everywhere. It has no speed because
it fills the universe so completely that there is no room for it to
vibrate."
"Excite atoms by removing the protons and electrons and matter
turns into energy in the four manifestations of Indra's dart: light,
heat, sound and energy."
Bhole Ji on the other hand was a large, clumsy-looking
youth who was supposed to be the incarnation, of music. When he came to
Prem Nagar he didn't speak much, even in Hindi, but he would always
take the tablas in the satsang hall when there was a meeting. I knew
little of drumming from the performance point of view, and the musical
conventions of India and the West are so different that comparison was
difficult, but to my ear he seemed always to be slightly out of time
with the rest of the musicians. Raja Ji was, closest to Maharaji in age
and seemed closest to him as a brother. His supernatural role, assigned
I am sure by Maharaji as a joke, was as Shiva the Destroyer.
Fortunately we saw no evidence for the accuracy of this identification.
The mood of the visitors taking advantage of the hospitality of
Prem Nagar was confused. Many of us accepted this presentation of the
'holy family' at face value, many could not, and grumbled quietly about
it. Moreover, one or two westerners were now arriving every week, lured
by the spiritual bush telephone and the buzz that Prem Nagar was a
happening ashram.
The original green van brigade had spread out a little. Pamela
took off for a tour of Rajahstan where she bought fabrics and
established trading contacts for a promising import business. Suzie Bai
needed to visit the ashrams of other holy men before she could satisfy
herself about Maharaji - returning in the end to become a staunch
follower.
The rest of us, along with David Thorp and one or two others
from the truck, took refuge at night in the chai shop that some
enterprising local had pitched just outside the ashram gates on the
Hardwar Road. The chai was good, but the pathetic selection of biscuits
led to long food fantasies at which George and Glen were the
acknowledged masters.
A couple of weeks after his birthday, Maharaji himself came to
Prem Nagar. He called us into a room with a blackboard and invited
questions.
A young woman called Anne Lancaster was the first to find her
voice. She hadn't come on one of the original buses from England but
had flown in from America. I understood she was from a political family
in Washington and I had noticed her because she always seemed to be
weeping from some private grief. She was crying now as she asked, "Why
don't we live longer? Why do people have to die?"
Maharaji looked at her silently for a moment. Then he raised
the little finger of his right hand and placed the index of his left on
the tip of it.
"Why does my little finger, end here?" he said, and squinted
along the finger as though it were a gun barrel. "How I would like my
little finger to go on for ever!"
His voice was high, even for his age, but extremely sweet, and
it was accompanied by a smile in her direction in which were mixed
love, understanding and playfulness. I looked over at Anne and saw for
the first time a degree of peace in her countenance.
He was barely thirteen years old, and he had just touched and
healed the heart of a grieving woman with a simple childlike
explanation. Philosophically you could say he had resolved her question
by reference to the different categories of being, which is how I put
it to myself in my over-intellectual way, but in fact it was the manner
of his answer which stilled her tears.
There were some other questions and then Maharaji went through
the meditation techniques which Mahatma Ji had shown us. One of them
involves turning the sense of hearing inwards. After a few minutes of
this he suddenly looked at Glen and asked, "Did you experience the
divine sounds?"
"Er no, Maharaji," said Glen, "when I do the sound technique I get such good divine light that I get lost in it!"
"Don't get lost, get found," said Maharaji gently.
There was another round of questions, several of them from an urgent woman with a strong religious background.
"Yes, I am. a reincarnation of Christ; but if I came in Christ's
shape they would throw me out of the churches." As half the males in
the room looked like pre-Raphaelite images of Jesus I think we
understood his point.
"But I have to know," said the woman.
"God is one love is one; come above the languages," replied Maharaji.
"Did the crucifixion hurt?" persisted the woman.
"No, the crucifixion did not hurt. The people were innocent.
Does it hurt when a little child slaps you? No, because he doesn't know
what he is doing."
Was he serious? Well, I don't believe he meant that he
literally remembered being Jesus, but his answers were nonetheless
seriously insightful. But who can say - be was a child with a child's
delight in the new and a child's relish for fun. After the questions he
took a piece of chalk and drew an elaborate diagram; on the blackboard,
which. purported to show that we had all been removed from "long-term
storage" in order to be born at this time, with him.
"But that means we have no karma to work out!" I recognised my own voice, surprised and incredulous.
"That is right," said Majaraji looking at me with mischief in his eyes.
For a long time after this first session we argued to and fro
among ourselves. Back in the chai shop Glen was inclined to believe
that we were already realised souls, free of the cycle of birth and
death, brought back from Nirvana ("long-term storage" to be with the
Lord.
Silently examining my confused and certainly impure
consciousness I could not believe that proposition. "I thought for a
while that maybe I had been accidentally caught up with a group of
saints" by being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that my
imposture would be found out at any minute.
David Thorp said, "It's simple: either we're here because we've
recognised the truth and we have, an important role to play, in
Maharaji's work, or we're here because we've run out of road and we've
got nowhere else to go." After a moment he added, "of course, both
those statements could be true."
Those few weeks at Prem Nagar were a life-altering time for all
of us, with consequences extending three decades or more into the
future. But it is easy in retrospect to underplay the degree of doubt
which some of us experienced. And even where there was not doubt there
was culture-shock and homesickness. As well as the chai shop at the end
of the drive, another source of comfort was Saphalanand simply reading
aloud at night from The Lord of the Rings, with men and women in their
early twenties clustered round his feet like, well, like thirteen year
old children.
A fundamental element of Maharaji's earthly manifestation; if I
can put it in an Indian way, was the concept of lila, which means
"play". It is a Hindu concept that the, universe is essentially a play,
not in the dramatic sense of a plot and denouement as Christians see
it, but in the sense that many forces play and interplay to create the
world our bodies live in. The supreme being enters into this play, for
the sake of having some fun, some say to the extent of even forgetting
its own identity, and can therefore be surprised by discovering that
she/he is not just a human being but the Lord himself.
Whether he was consciously living up to this concept, or
unconsciously fulfilling it by the very nature of his being, or just,
playing like any ordinary child, Maharaji was full of fun.
One day he swam fully dressed in the huge water tank at the
ashram, thus making not only our drinking water but also our ablutions
holy. It started to rain while he was doing this, so he called for an
umbrella and did a respectable backstroke while sheltering himself from
the rain.
On the same day he got into an argument with his mother, Mata
Ji. They were standing on the verandah of their residence talking about
something and gradually their voices increased in volume until they
were screaming at one another. A storm had come in from the northeast
while their anger waxed, and thunder and lightning did a full circle of
the ashram while they fought.
Another time we followed him out to the dunes by the banks of
the Ganges canal and played a game of king of the castle, which
consisted of Maharaji pushing us off the top of the dunes. For most of
us, rolling down a sandbank propelled by the Perfect Master was not a
hardship, but one democratic westerner crawled up behind Maharaji and
heaved him down the dune instead.
With considerable physical grace he was on his feet in a flash
with his hands raised. "No reprisals!" he said in English and Hindi,
"no reprisals." I looked at the faces of the Indians and realised how
quick-thinking Maharaji had been. They were ready to tear the offender
limb from limb; clearly the lila had rules.
Sometimes the lila became institutionalised, as it were into a
common custom. After we had been at Prem Nagar for a few months the
festival of Holi arrived on the calendar.
In the morning the ashram was transformed. A big water cannon
was set up and tarpaulins were hung down the side of the building
opposite. In the middle of the day, when the sun was hottest, Maharaj
Ji appeared (we all having gathered in front of the cannon,
half-knowing, half-guessing what was to come) and began spraying us
with cold water pumped from the canal. Mahatmas helped him by pouring
dyes into the jets so that our white vests and dhotis became Maharaji"s
rainbow coloured canvases.
|
|
|
|
|
this is like looking back into the origin of the universe, & seeing the 1st few minutes after the big bang...........maybe that analogy is a little overblown on 2nd thoughts, but  ..............interesting all the same.
I heard about some of these things, second hand & chinese whispered, after I got initiated in March '72, but already they were fading into irrelevance as the trajectory of the 'mission' accelerated ever upwards, & getting old in the excitement of taking over the world.
Forgetting is always the result of trying too hard to live in the present, but those old memories can't be permanently erased.
|
|
|
|
It seems pretty accurate of his experience to me. Of course we each remember different things which stand out in our memories. I was reminded of some things that had slipped from my memory.
I immediately recognised:- the part in italics as the picture you posted months ago: the knowledge review I posted about where my beragon squeeked: The American lady who was an emotional christian, asking Maharaji what it was like being Jesus. Yes quite accurate.
I had forgotten the incident of Maharaji being pushed off the hill, I found it very funny but stifled my mirth. It was a small drip for me to see how seriously perturbed Maharaji was and how seriously the Indian followers took it. No sportmanship I thought. Had he been a high ranking military officer or the headmaster of an English school he would have taken it in good sporting spirit. I thought it was a pretty poor show the way it suddenly became heavy and serious and even looked like turning nasty.
A game of "king of the castle" in which he and his mahatmas and servants presumed Maharaji stayed on the hill (castle): his "subjects" were only supposed to make a half hearted attempt to remove him, and dutifully allow themselves to be sent rolling down the hill, (hell it was only sand). David Lovejoy did not exagerate when he said they looked ready to tear the offender limb from limb. He did not want playful, harmless reprisals from us, and fortunately he saw the wisdom of stopping much more serious reprisals from them. It could have sent a seriously negative message back with us to our Western Countries.
David Lovejoy and I made that train journey which I have already mentioned in an early post, where he lectured me for hours (as I snoozed on my home-made, squeeking beragon), for speaking of the holy family as if they were humans with human feelings. How does he stand now, premie or ex-premie?
For him it was just a train ride. I was being made to return to a scene of life threatening proportions to try to calm a whole town, and was terrified. Because it is worth a whole chapter in my book, I will only hint at what it was like and, with John's Braun's hoped for approval, I will copy some excerpts from our early emails on this subject.
....the mahatma's were all asking the family to leave for their safety." ....the words "Jao Maharaji: jeldi jao" were being yelled from all sides by a sea of mahatmas around the throne as a torrent of bricks were raining on the stage at Deveria, but Maharaji, mother and brothers, sat resolutely, refusing to obey lesser mortals.
The rain of bricks started from the back of the field, creating a surge forward which threatened to crush women premies with babies against the stage. They were forced to climb up, or hide under it, thinking they'd be saved by the 'lotus feet'. (The stage had a canopy which afforded some cover.) As mothers with their children were clambering up on the stage the vast crowd of rioters pushed forward, also attempting to climb onto the stage yelling "Kill them, kill them", while some mahatmas were doing a valiant job of repelling them.
I could take it no longer and stood up tall among the (still sitting) mahatmas. Turning my back on the mob, I looked Maharaji and Mataji straight in the eyes and roared those words, which mean: "Go Maharaji: quickly go." in my loudest Air Training Corps corporal, parade ground voice. To my surprise, like humble, obedient children, (or a squad of ATC cadets) the whole family rose as one and started to leave. (Residual, subconscious response to the British Raj authority days, perhaps?)
Gurucharanand and I linked hands and circled the whole family in our arms. (Bal Bhagwan ji wasn't there) We shuffled and dragged them through the hordes, shielding them with our bodies till we reached Bihariji's car. He floored it through the crowd. Gurucharanand and I sighed a short-lived sigh of relief, turned round to see the approaching angry multitude, and said "Oh shit!" Well I don't know how he put it exactly, but the tone was the same.
The mahatmas were all on the stage surrounding the thrones, in a last stand. We were being pelted by red house bricks, which had been piled at strategic positions around the program site by the residents of the town of Deveria, spurred on by the Arya Samahj, sworn enemies of D.L.M., and further alienated and enraged by the dulcet tones of Mahatma Fakiranand who had been sent one month in advance to prepare the town for the program. I guess he didn't do too convincing a job of it.
The program was in the afternoon, I finally got back at three in the morning. I was in saffron robes at that time.
Eventually, after hours of horror, police (army) trucks came, saying they had come to pick up the injured, myself included, and to take us to hospital. Instead we were told we were all under arrest, and taken to a police compound with a barbed wire fence around it. Some people had gaping head wounds. I demanded water and cloth from the police chief, to try and do something to stop their bleeding. Gurucharanand had a vertebrae displaced.
Rajeshwar then 'Magistrate Sahb' got some to create diversions while a hole in the fence was made and one by one we escaped. When I arrived back at the residence in the small hours, Maharaji who was already glaring madly, looked at me and said: "More blood on saffron, nothing makes me more angry!"
We Westerners were smuggled out in the night and put on a train.
(Earlier that day Westerners had been told not to attend the program as already there were soap box reactionaries with megaphones threatening us outside the residence. Foolishly I had begged Maharaji to let me come with him to the program, as "I was his mahatma first and only a Westerner second, and was not afraid." He had allowed it.)
When we finally escaped the residence, under cover of darkness: before dawn, I was told to disguise my robes, I pulled my "Nehru" overcoat around me. On the platform was a Mahatma, whom I had seen earlier on the stage, fending off dozens at a time, with a brass pitchfork. Some people recognised that we were Westerners, on the platform.
This Mahatma threw off his coat and revealed his saffron robes, "I am a Mahatma of Guru Maharaji", he said proudly to create a diversion, to those, who earlier were yelling "Kill the mahatmas." He still had his pitch fork, which dismantled into a musical instrument. I don't know what happened to him.
The train came and we started back. After some other harrowing adventures on the return jouney, (which took days). I walked safely and much relieved back through the gates of Prem Nagar, and into the welcoming embrace of Charles Cameron, the poet.
"I will never go back there again I said". Fat lot I knew, I met Mata ji and she said "Now you must go back and tell the papers and the town council our side of the story." I nearly fainted. She added "Take David Lovejoy with you, for company". That return journey, was one of the most terrifying journeys I have ever made. However, as is usual in India: once storms blow over, things quickly return to normality. But, once we got there, I was still pretty scared to be riding around town in saffron, in an open horse drawn "Tonga" with David, visiting various influential dignitaries and pleading the case for Divine Light Mission.
There was much fear at Prem Nagar after that, or at least in me. I roomed with Maurice Gleeson and Jeff Segal, (with whom I had left the other, earlier (white) van in Iran, walking and hitch hiking the rest of the way and getting there weeks before both vans). In case of Arya Samajh attack we kept a supply of stout staffs in our room.
Later I asked if I might change my saffron for white robes, and with much displeasure, the switch was made. Then we three obtained permission to do a tour of the South. We found a Christian mountain area where St. Thomas had reached and had a pleasant time climbing mountains and visiting small communities, giving unsuccessful satsang and telling them: "No I was not St. Thomas: returned".  (Although one of my middle names is Thomas and I do doubt stuff.)
We heard that there was to be a program in Meerut. We returned and found ourselves besieged by more angry mobs. A premie was arguing at the gate with one of them, I don't remember which way round it was, but one was wagging his finger as he argued and the other grabbed his hand and bit his finger clean off! "Maharaji said: "I didn't expect to see you again".
I eventually obtained Maharaji and Mataji's permission to give knowledge on my own and we three took the six monthly hippie bus back, that in those days ran a faultering service between London and New Delhi. When we reached Amsterdam to begin our work on our own, we heard that a child god had appeared in Glastonbury. We went to check it out, knowing it was Maharaji and then my troubles began anew........
to be continued.
Jao Maharaji: Jeldi Jao!!
Modified by Lp at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 06:04:05
|
|
|
|
And at last the hardback of "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins falls on the mat behind the door. That's more like a book.
Modified by Lp at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 05:47:57
|
|
|
|
I just realized Dave my comment: "That's more like a book" was in no way intended to refer to your book, which as far as I can tell from this extract is well written, beautifully descriptive, and accurate.
This comment was meant entirely for the book I opened the thread talking about, by Andrea Cagan, which arrived at exactly the same time last Saturdy morning.
I just wanted to make that clear.
Modified by Lp at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 23:13:24
|
|
|
|
I appreciate the trouble that someone has taken to type out a substantial extract from my book. Inevitably there are typing mistakes, but none that change the intent of my writing. Next time I will be happy to provide a text file of whatever part of the book is required.
I thank Brian (Saphalanand) for acknowledging that my account is quite accurate For my part, although is a small point, I must remind him that he was not in those days someone that a lowly premie like me could ‘lecture’, on the nature of the holy family or anything else. My own memory of our relationship is Saph reproving me for leaning back against the wall while practising in the house where we stayed in Lucknow. He was right, I was physically too lazy and inept ever to have made a proper yogi. I also remember him dealing very expertly with the politicians, and I had no idea that he felt any fear in returning to the town. Now that I have been reminded of what went before I am even more impressed with how he handled himself in the Lucknow government offices we visited.
The only other thing I would query in his account is attributing a scheming motive to Maharaji for quickly forbidding reprisals when he was toppled from the sandbank. He said the right thing without thinking, but even doing the right thing is glossed as ‘fortunately he saw the wisdom of stopping much more serious reprisals from them. It could have sent a seriously negative message back with us to our Western Countries.’ This is not evidence of something sinister in Maharaji, it is evidence of inveterate prejudice against him. After all, none of us stop to calculate what to do in such situations, or we would always act too late. We follow our sense of right and wrong (and where that comes from is debatable, but I incline to follow Richard Dawkins’s argument about it in The God Delusion).
Of course Brian’s question of where I stand now must be answered if I post on this site. Premie or ex-premie? Well, I would say ex-premie, if that merely meant that I have moved on and adopted new ways of thinking about Maharaji and Knowledge. I am certainly not practising bhakti (devotional yoga) any more! But on the ex-premie websites the term doesn’t just mean that, it seems to mean something more like ‘anti-premie’. So I should state that I have no quarrel with Maharaji, having received nothing but good at his hands. Down the years I have frequently disliked aspects of his organisation, but my knowledge of other organisations is sufficient to acquit DLM, DUO, Elan Vital, etc of being any worse than average. I do not say these things in order to invite argument, I am just explaining where I’m coming from. I am a religious sceptic who, emerging drug-addled and incipiently schizoid from the sixties, derived great benefit from following Maharaji. As I still derive benefit from occasionally practising the techniques, without believing that they have anything to do with God or religion, I see no reason to publicly revile him.
I enjoyed writing my memoir, and in fact almost half of Between Dark and Dark deals with Maharaji and the early days of DLM. I tried to make it as honest as possible with regard to my feelings at the time, and how I see things now, and of course historical accuracy was the prime concern.
If the site moderator will allow a commercial plug, the book is available by mail order from Echo Publishing, PO Box 439, Mullumbimby, New South Wales 2482. Post inclusive prices (in Australian dollars) are $38.50 to the UK, $36 to the USA and $23 within Australia. I believe it is also being carried by Amazon UK.
I look forward to reading Brian's account of the early days when it is published.
|
|
|
|
Of course Brian’s question of where I stand now must be answered if I post on this site. Premie or ex-premie? Well, I would say ex-premie, if that merely meant that I have moved on and adopted new ways of thinking about Maharaji and Knowledge. I am certainly not practising bhakti (devotional yoga) any more! But on the ex-premie websites the term doesn’t just mean that, it seems to mean something more like ‘anti-premie’. So I should state that I have no quarrel with Maharaji, having received nothing but good at his hands. Down the years I have frequently disliked aspects of his organisation, but my knowledge of other organisations is sufficient to acquit DLM, DUO, Elan Vital, etc of being any worse than average. I do not say these things in order to invite argument, I am just explaining where I’m coming from. I am a religious sceptic who, emerging drug-addled and incipiently schizoid from the sixties, derived great benefit from following Maharaji. As I still derive benefit from occasionally practising the techniques, without believing that they have anything to do with God or religion, I see no reason to publicly revile him. First, you know damn well that, if ex-premies are considered to be "anti" anything, it's Rawat, not other premies. Second, and why not? If you were honest, you'd incorporate Rawat's years of threats and misrepresentations into your analysis of how exactly you "derived great benefit from following" him. Sorry, dude, but I have no patience for liars, regardless of how intelligent or articulate they may be.
|
|
|
|
Thank you for pointing out that people here are anti-Rawat rather than anti-premie. I acknowledge that my sentence was careless. I did not 'incorporate Rawat's years of threats and misrepresentations' into the statement of my position because I have not experienced any of that. You may have entrenched and immovable ideas, Jim, but that does not make a liar out of anyone who does not subscribe to them. How about posting under your full name and engaging me in argument instead of just flinging abuse?
|
|
|
|
David,Yes, Jim's post was a little abusive (although he did put a smilie in there), but Jim has posted openly as Jim Heller since the internet first started discussing Prem Rawat, and has been the subject of abuse from premies ever since, including serious attacks on his livelihood. And if you do seriously want a rational discussion about Rawat, then Jim's your man, although I'm also ready to contribute! John.
|
|
|
|
Thank you for pointing out that people here are anti-Rawat rather than anti-premie. I acknowledge that my sentence was careless. Thank you for that acknowledgement. But may I ask, was that careless in writing or careless in thinking? Have you never considered the difference before? I ask because I think the issue's particularly relevant, given your customary premie (sorry, you're an ex -- I forgot!) willingness to blame Rawat's organizations for this, that or the other. As do many of us here, I see that as transparent scapegoating. Ironic, really, when you think of it. If anyone's "anti-premie" that would be you then, wouldn't it? I did not 'incorporate Rawat's years of threats and misrepresentations' into the statement of my position because I have not experienced any of that. Ah, the big premie brain-freeze, conversation killer: "experience"! When you say you didn't "experience any of that" are you saying you didn't see the shit fly or it just never landed on you? David, I don't know you. I know your name, having heard it over the years as a rank-and-file Canadian ashram premie in the seventies. But, regardless of your specific sojourn through the land of Rawat then or later, regardless of your unique, privileged vantage point and the more common ones you shared with people like me, it simply beggars belief to suggest that you don't know what I'm talking about. I called you a liar because I inferred from your post that you've already committed a good two decades at least to perpetuating the gross misconception that Rawat didn't stomp on peoples' minds in his ongoing thunderous passion play of Guru Maharaj Ji, Lord of the Universe. Your saying that you know of no such threats or misrepresentations -- if that's indeed what you're saying -- proves I was right. You may have entrenched and immovable ideas, Jim, but that does not make a liar out of anyone who does not subscribe to them. How about posting under your full name and engaging me in argument instead of just flinging abuse? Who said I have entrenched and immovable ideas? I think, if anything, that personal limitation might be yours, not mine. See, I once respected, admired and trusted Rawat immensely. But I've most radically changed my thinking on that. You, on the other hand, seem to have just drifted a bit. As if your boat's still tethered ... As for who I am, sure, my full name's Jim Heller and I have indeed been threatened and lied about by Rawat's cult for years now. My clients, their parents, friends, colleagues, regularly tell me about the defamatory lies they read about me on Rawat's organizations' websites and those hosted by anonymous premies. I've been threatened and harrassed and had my professional life hit straight on by this lovely man's underlings. Even now, his new hagiography, rather wanly this time, tries to discredit me amongst others for simply speaking our minds: "...there were bound to be a few among them, who for reasons of their own, would make him a target of their antagonism.
And so in 1997, a handful of disgruntled former students, disappointed not to have received the preferential treatment they had hoped for, joined up on the internet with a few radical extremists.
Together they launched a Web site from which they started defaming Maharaji on a regular basis, Since the internet was not regulated, and since most of them were posting anonymously, they could write whatever they wanted without fear of legal consequences. Misinformation, slander, and outright fabrications were all permissible, and they had no hesitation engaging in these practices....
Much of the original impetus for the detractors' web site had come from a lawyer from Vancouver, Canada, who made his living defending arsonists and murderers. ....
The group soon recruited a garbage collector from Australia, who later did prison time for illegal weapons and drug sales, and a notorious cyberhacker ....
And then there was an unemployed surfer found liable by the Supreme Court of Queensland, Australia, for theft of private credit and financial data, and a San Francisco lawyer.....
This motley group of misfits was determined to put an end to Maharaji's work, as they started flooding the search engines with thousands of messages defaming him. Over time, their slandering developed into an all consuming obsession.... etc ...etc...."
Hm?
Modified by Jim at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 19:39:55
|
|
|
|
I'm still waiting for my copy of PIP but I am going to assume I was the person classified as an "unemployed surfer". That's fantastic, they could have called me an unemployed "public servant" or an "unemployed former bricklayer" but both "unemployed surfer" or "unemployed former banana grower" wer what I would have liked. Though actually I was performing home duties at the time though very poorly as I was suffering from a pretty severe surfing injury. And I was not found liable for "for theft of private credit and financial data" and the honchos well know that if there was any private credit data I certainly didn't see itand if I did I ignored it. Actually as far as I recall I wasn't liable for anything but the whole process certainly taught me an awful lot extra about Elan Vital ethics and had an extremely significant effect on my attitudes and beliefs and life for that matter.
|
|
|
|
Jim,
I apologise for assuming you were anonymous. I didn’t know your identity because I have not much trawled the websites either pro or anti Rawat. But yes, I was irritated by your adoption of scurrilous language towards a complete stranger and I responded in kind.
My statement about where I am coming from, in response to Brian’s question, was not an attempt to begin a grand defence of Maharaji, it really was just a personal thing. You may say that I am obliged to take on board all the criticisms in this and other places before saying that my experience was good, but I say that life is too short to buy into your worldview. The example I quoted from Brian’s posting shows that everything Rawat has ever done, even the simplest and most harmless remark, will always be examined through a lens of loathing.
I was deeply involved with Maharaji only between 1970 and 1976. No, I didn’t see anybody get hurt or threatened. Except, come to think of it, myself and that was by Bob Mishler. I suppose you’ll say I’m just scapegoating but I suggest you read my book before jumping to conclusions about why I criticise the organisation.
As for my boat being tethered (to the past I assume), well I hardly give these matters a thought, whereas you are still giving Rawat the same amount of energy as when you respected, admired and trusted him. It may be negative energy, but it is still obsessive.
|
|
|
|
Come on David, use those finely honed mental skills. I agree that Brian's take on Rawat's past action on the sandhill was overly critical. It seemed to em that Rawat should be given credit where credit was due and a young kid can be excused for not teaching his Indian devotees a sense of proportion. After all, if he done that he might have warranted some of the respect you were giving him back then. But every action viewed through loathing, maybe Brian does, I can't speak for him but "loathing" is really going too far and it just looks like you're trying to demonise the ex-premie critics so as not to have to take them seriously.
And giving Rawat the "same amount of energy as when you respected, admired and trusted him" is just plain silly. Many of these ex-premie critics were ashram premies who must have been giving inordinate amounts of energy. Now they scan a web site forum and post occasionally. Speaking for myself, I've given lots of time and energy in the last year to researching Rawatism and preparing information but that is not negative energy obsessed re Rawat. It is positive energy devoted to researching the truth about a minor religious figure of the early Gnostic revival of the second half of the 20th century. It's the only guru and cult I've had a personal input into and I find the whole thing great fun. It's still sat cit anand to me and boy oh boy are the premies missing out on that - listless and demoralised as they are in their attempts at propagation.
You've got an unfortunate gift, you seem to find snide putdowns come naturally to you. At least you seem to have improved from that letter of a few years back that Roupell posted for you.
|
|
|
|
David, You're absolutely right. I do tend to get a bit critical of Maharaji at times. Must be a personality defect or something. Mine, I mean -- of course. Frankly, I think I'm obsessed and, like you say, it just may be negative energy. I'll get it checked out. Hey, I just can't wait to read your book. Again, like you say, life's short. Let's cast aside the lens of loathing for once and for all! Maharaji wasn't that bad, not really. If it weren't for him, I'd have never seen the Ally Pally. Kissimee would have been a mere place near Disneyworld. Hell, I'd have never learned arti. (You do remember arti, don't you?)
|
|
|
|
Jim,
So that's how you make a living! Defending defending arsonists and murderers. You're bad.
On the other hand, if what you really do is defend people accused of arsony and murder, that is really quite a reasonable occupation...
|
|
|
|
It doesn't quite work that way but, sure, thanks anyways.  BTW, I'll take murderers over arsonists any day of the week. Arsonists are freaky and dangerous.
Modified by Jim at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 12:40:34
|
|
|
|
David, You can not reasonably claim on the one hand to have written an accurate history, and on the other to avoid any acknowledgement of contexts other than your own experience. Your position sounds exactly like the standard Rawat cult mindset. Here's what you have written -: >I tried to make it as honest as possible with regard to my feelings at the time, and how I see things now, and of course historical accuracy was the prime concern.< >I did not 'incorporate Rawat's years of threats and misrepresentations' into the statement of my position because I have not experienced any of that.< Nik
|
|
|
|
I had to look that one up:
extreme preoccupation with and indulgence of one's feelings, desires, etc.; egoistic self-absorption.
and
- The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified.
- The theory or view that the self is the only reality.
This fits with a most basic assumption of Rawatism, that whole 'one reality that can only be experienced' stuff. Other 'isms' don't count - by definition, someone who is into solipsism isn't going to make any comparisons with anything else. It is a philosophical black hole ( of course, it isn't a philosophy! . No wonder it is so hard to get out of! Solipsism - a word to play with while I clean out the hen house.
Cheers Nik.
|
|
|
|
Solipsism does have some credentials in the Social Sciences - and so long as one acknowledges that 'this is my story only' a solipsistic approach may be a fair and reasonable way to communicate - but the only historical accuracy that it provides is that of the "recorded personal experience" - which of course is not even the historical "personal experience". In this case David's story stands as 'his story' and it is as good or bad as he has written it - but (based on his own comments) he can not claim that it has historical accuracy. Nik
|
|
|
|
Sure, I wasn't suggesting solipsism doesn't have a place. My own recently posted journey is nothing but. It is perpective viewed through someone else's eyes, how things appeared to them at the time, and it can be fun and informative on many levels.
I think there is a tendency though, amongst premies and new age types as well, to give too much emphasis to their own experience and their interpretion of it, as if it was all happening in a vacuum, and as if no other points of view were valid - all those dusty books full of philosophy and history are written off as the ramblings of people who failed to find their own personal reality.
Maybe critical theory needs to be a much bigger part of basic education.
|
|
|
|
Contrary to what Rawat and Elan Vital say, most of us here are not anonymous -- that's the cult's spin. I use my real name and have done so for eight years. Moreover, most of us regulars know who the others are that post under handles. Prem Rawat and his honchos have tried very hard to silence ex-premies through defamation on the internet (using our real names, photos, false defamatory info) so that's one reason I still post after all these years. You wouldn't believe how callous, nasty, mean-spirited, and litigious Rawat has gotten to be. The problem with Rawat is that he's not allowed to be questioned or criticized by his followers, so part of leaving him behind and moving on in one's life includes making sure that he doesn't silence me anymore in my life, nor allow him and his cult rewrite the true history of my life as they do every day. A large part of my life, in fact 20 years of it, was consumed by that ego- and mind-eating creep during the time when I was his devotee. Over eight years I've been witness to hundreds of premies that have left Maharaji behind and didn't just "walk" as Maharaji says to do, "and be silent." They have processed the enoumous mindf**k he perpetrated upon vulnerable them, and it sometimes takes an herculean amount of courage, and inner psychological strength for anyone to deconstruct the Rawat religion. People do this on the forum every day. It's easy to "just walk." That's not being anti-premie -- not by a long shot. Addendum: David, there have been many, many premies who have been so tortured mentally by maharaji that they have committed suicide. I also had a friend, Debbie Katz of West Hartford, Connecticut. She jumped off a bridge in New York. She had many doubts about Maharaji but she was censored. She lived in the ashram. I remember her crying a lot over years. It wasn't acceptable for me to ask about her and be told about her well-being. Hell, we were only just all living together in the ashram, ear to ear, three and four to a bedroom. All of us got synchronized by getting our periods the same time of the month usually to the day. Talk about a twightlight zone of stuffed emotions: the sisters' ashrams. That could be an interesting reality show. I've had to intervene by phone on a few occasions when ex-premies were having suicidal ideations. Fortunately, no one that I know of has been successful. That's a far cry from DLM instructors and honchos that treated premies with apathy when they were having a difficult time. "Meditate and pray to Maharaji for surrender. Don't focus on your mind." David, doing the Knowledge meditation and listening to Maharaji is to surrender one's free will; that kind of emotional living is tantamount to being mentally bound and gagged for years. You'd be surprised how many former premies are critical of Prem Rawat. It's a lot. So, for some exes, it's a longer haul to "leave Maharaji -- just walk," as you have done. It's easy to put it out of your mind, just like Maharaji says, move on, la-de-da, la-de-da. Hell, even one of the techniques tells you to shut up and put your tongue back. That one's tailor made. Maharaji was negligent because of his fucked religion, and especially the way he manipulates people with words and power. It's insidious, what he does to people. You ought to acknowledge that. Otherwise, it's like you're in a coma, David, now really! How do you remain so steadfastly apathetic about this issue? Bliss is the consciousness of the truth, Cynthia Gracie Vermont
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 14:07:59
|
|
|
|
very nice to see you here - I read the pieces you wrote recently in the echo with much interest. Haven't managed the book extract at the top of the thread yet...but saw your name and had to reply straight away!
It's seven years now since you visited at that beach holiday cottage and I did my best to explain what had made me leave premiedom. And I can understand that some of the less than flattering remarks about Rawat (think I've made a fair few of late ) must strike you uncomfortably.
But I also feel like in a very real way I have also been championing the heart of a premie. I was a premie and there are aspects of that that I am proud of.
I consider the dividing line between premie and ex is when you can say something critical of Rawat, however minimal, like you don't like his aesthetic sensibilities for instance, or that he's not as good at chess as you are...
Feel very much for you over the loss of your cat, mine has had to swear in triplicate not to go near cars or play with snakes.
Lesley.
|
|
|
|
Hi Leslie
I am devastated that you haven’t read my book yet, and not even the extract on this site! No wonder there are still so many copies unsold…
By your definition of ‘ex-premie’ I am an ex-ex-premie, as I think Maharaji’s poetry sucks (although his prose can often be very poetic) and I know for certain, without having tested the prejudice, that he wouldn’t be as good at chess as I am, or as good at Scrabble as you are.
Keep your cat safe. I have just acquired two little kittens to replace the irreplaceable Chaos, and they are interfering with the keyboard as I write this.
Has it really been seven years? Give Bill the slip and meet me again : )
|
|
|
|
Do you remember that? The first bit I was thinking gee I'm glad this is early in the morning (not having taken in before how silly it looks), the next bit I'm having fun, then okay enough fun, that's plenty, to is this woman insane, doesn't she realise she has rookies on board...don't spose you fronted up again either!..sore foot the next day.
I don't think you can get to be an ex ex premie unless that means you're kissing the feet again, which you aren't, are you.
It's a simple definition. Okay, his poetry was bad enough that I remember when he read one from the stage in Sydney a premie nearby could not restrain his shock and said how bad it was out loud during the recital!
But what do you think about his aesthetic sensibilities in general? The furnishings he likes, etc.
I remember when I first exed thinking I better make sure I haven't just gone into some sort of reverse cycle and try and think of something complimentary to say about Rawat.
I thought and thought. Ah there's something - what I came up with was that I thought that when he was younger he genuinely had thought that he would treat his devotees better than his father with his stick had.
But to be honest, I don't believe that idea has any credibility anymore. At most a passing fancy about what a wonderful adorable Lord he was going to make...even better than his father.
Can you come up with a genuine specific compliment?
That one was my best try. I can't think of anything else.
|
|
|
|
David, you wrote:-Of course Brian’s question of where I stand now must be answered if I post on this site. Premie or ex-premie? Well, I would say ex-premie, if that merely meant that I have moved on and adopted new ways of thinking about Maharaji and Knowledge. I am certainly not practising bhakti (devotional yoga) any more! But on the ex-premie websites the term doesn’t just mean that, it seems to mean something more like ‘anti-premie’. So I should state that I have no quarrel with Maharaji, having received nothing but good at his hands.
If you have read the ex-premie sites, although there are criticisms of current premies, ex-premies frequently temper those criticisms with admissions that they too were premies. The primary criticism is levelled at Prem Rawat, and the specific cricisms have not been countered by Elan Vital, current premies or Rawat, in spite of repeated attempts by them to get the sites closed down. Ex-premie means former premie, and the best definition of premie I know is someone who holds Prem Rawat in such high regard that he is beyond criticism. Are you an ex-premie by this definition? Given that vast amount of critical evidence against Prem Rawat, it is odd that you 'have no quarrel' with him. Is this because you dispute the evidence, or do you feel that because you feel you personally were not hurt, then Rawat should not be criticised? You do know that several people committed suicide because they felt they could not do what he asked, don't you? And I'm sure you are aware of the damage Rawat's instructions caused to premies' families, education and careers. So what is the basis of your 'no quarrel' position? Maybe it's time you did have a quarrel! John.
Modified by JHB at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 18:20:12
|
|
|
|
On reflection I think that ‘anti-premie’ is accurate, John, as a term meaning the opposite of premie, as anti-matter is the opposite of matter. With that meaning in mind I am an ex-premie, not an anti-premie. I am also an ex-premie in your sense, as I do not hold Rawat above criticism.
I was not specifically aware of suicides. The number of premies being a high number, it will be statistically inevitable that there have been suicides in their ranks, just as there will have been pedophiles and perhaps even murderers. I am not seeking to downplay human suffering here but to establish whether the accused is actually responsible for it.
When you speak of ‘the damage Rawat’s instructions caused to premies’ families, education and careers’ are you saying that he gave inept instructions and that a better guru would have given better instructions? Or do you hold the position that none of us should ever accept the relationship of guru-chela, and your quarrel is not so much with Rawat but with the whole concept of spiritual teaching?
If I try to answer all your questions here I think I will be repeating myself, having already replied to Tim.
My object in posting in the first place was to reply to Saphaland's generous assessment of the extract from my book, and to plug it. I won't be able to heal the rift between premies and ex-premies, and as someone says here I have an unfortunate knack of the putdown phrase, so I will only exacerbate matters if I continue.
Best wishes to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Who suicided in a Sydney ashram not long before I arrived here in 1975. Or were you already in England by then - you had arrived just before I left.
When it comes down to blame or responsibility of course it is a wide canvas. We are all born a consequence of what has gone before. And much as Rawat might like to think he is the be all and end all of a person's experience, naturally enough he is not likely to be the only thing affecting a person at any given time. We do have lives you know!
Okay I haven't given any other gurus a shot and there are people around, particularly buddhisty types, who would convince me that there are better ones than Rawat, who are less ignorant and brutish. But I'm so not interested.
When I hear of that bally dally llama speaking in Sydney to a throng of 20,000 and how he tells them he's not god but some of his silly followers (the ones who paid for the hall no doubt) think he is, well been there done that.
Rawat is the one whose cult we lot got caught up in though, isn't he.
At one point I spent a fair bit of time thinking about all the things Rawat had said and what I thought about it at the time.
Inept is an inept word to express my disgust at his brutish selfserving ignorant baloney. And doesn't even start when it comes to the recognition of how ill-served I was by listening to his lies.
Perhaps beneath the inability to assess Rawat there is a subterranean event line - the point at which a person starts to acknowledge they had (with a lot of help from him for starters) decided they loved a person they don't like at all.
That they believe they owe a fealty to a person who is cruel to others.
And it is not far from there to recognising that the fear that starts up at the mere mention of Rawat not being a really really good and loving person quickly dissipates in the relief of knowing he is no longer of relevance to you.
I make that sound pretty easy but it isn't. It's just easier than not doing it. Whilst you think Rawat was 'good' to you then the only explanation for your feelings is self blame. Or somebody else if you're in the mood.
Might as well spread it all out and apportion as correctly as you can in my view.
Heal the rift between premies and ex-premies? No thank you. Once my friends understood that I was not just having some temporary 'crisis of faith' the concession was made that I would still be accepted if I would keep my mouth shut.
Even tho at the time I did recognise the very real feelings of friendship in that I also realised my need for friends who didn't want me to keep my mouth shut. Let alone friends who would not want to shove his largeship down my metaphoric gullet. Friends who would not in subtle and large ways show me how little I meant to them as a person rather than as a fellow premie. And quite frankly I know that anybody who is religious, who believes in some sort of god - from a 'vibration' to a hindu businessman - is capable of putting that goddiness above the everyday 'right thing to do'.
I have spoken to numbers of people who just stopped. Stopped doing service first. Stopped going to the videos second. Stopped going to programs third. In every case it has been because they (for reasons that they don't care to examine too closely) don't want to do it anymore.
And I have had more than one come and thank me for putting the ground under their feet by my insistence that Rawat is an ugly buffoon. And that it really was a good decision to back away.
The subterranean line between an active or inactive premie and an ex-premie is one of fear. Like a paper tiger it growls yet dissipates so easily as you walk through it.
I remember once meeting Carol R in the street (now there was one heck of a fab person, I can only remember her with an enormous amount of affection), and I remember she was uncharacteristically a little nervous of me. We chatted about this and that and she loosened up and it wasn't long before she was laughing at a joke I had made. Ah it was not easy to watch the stab of fear that went through her at the recognition she was enjoying my company more than before when I was a premie.
See, David, from my perspective premies are like spouses in a bad marriage. Heal the rift? that sounds to me like saying it is okay for Rawat to relate to 'his' premie in the demeaning and destructive way he has. No it's not.
Modified by lesley at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 15:56:25
|
|
|
|
Too much "florid" language Lesley. Keep it in perspective. Rawat has never spoken to 20,000 people in Sydney and never will unless he gets himself into some gathering that has nothing to do wth him for a quick speech. And Rawat has a religion based completely upon being God. How on earth can poking your eyes, putting your thumbs in your ears, poking your tongue backwards and concentrating on your breath while imagining him pushing you in a swing be of any value otherwise? After all he's saying it's the bast thing in the whole wide world.
The Dalai Lama comes from a 700 year old tradition in which millions of people actually believe he is God and here he is saying he isn't, openly and publicly. What a contrast.
Carol R. had plenty of life problems, bright and brassy though she might have been. If she wasn't a victim of Rawat's, who was? The reality is that no matter how much you believed or how much you "practised" it's still bullshit and it doesn't work and she experienced that as much as everybody else.
Great post by the way. I wish Mr Lovejoy would respond in the same manner.
|
|
|
|
to think I used to quite enjoy using it at one time...
You miss my point Ocker re the Dally Llama. It is the putdown delivered to those silly followers who incidentally are the ones providing the money and labour. It is the sly way he brings that topic up - there would have been plenty of people there who had no thought at all that he was god or even godlike, now they must ask themselves if he is.
Same MO as Rawat.
And yes, I too hope David replies. But won't be too surprised or hurt if he doesnt.
In these matters we all must take charge of our own journey of understanding. And David is certainly doing that.
Sometimes you have to back off and sort out other stuff before facing some aspect of the Awful Truth of Rawat. - I see it like ant trails. You gotta stick on your own line of thought, work it out for yourself. And by this stage in our lives there's a lot involved.
Modified by lesley at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 19:56:49
|
|
|
|
Hi Lesley,
I only know what you posted about the DL and what he said in Sydney. If you are referring to the DL and saying he slyly brought up the topic then can there be anybody who isn't aware that the Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of Chenrezig the Bodhisattva of Compassion and while that mightn't be strictly considered "God" or "godlike" by intellectual purists he certainly has been considered close enough not to worry about the finer points of theology. So if he is publicly stating he isn't God I really cannot see that in the light you are proposing. Mind you I have no interest in Tibetan Buddhism or particular regard for His Holiness.
I will be really surprised if Mr Lovejoy responds. However I do find the progression in his public statements heartening. That initial letter that Roupell posted was really slithery and slimy though pretty clever, the stuff in Between Dark to Dark a lot less slimy but still absurdly respectful of Rawat and left the question of his relationship to Rawatism open and now he openly states he is no longer in a bhakti relationship to the gooroo.
But my goodness gracious whenever he actually concentrates on his breath a while he feels ... well the sort of thing that concentrating on your breath does and that means Mr Rawat can't be all bad doesn't it? But maybe this is still all lila and David is still a really wet log that the LOTU is pushing as close to the fire as he can and maybe those footprints in the sand are Rawat's and they're so deep not cause the little bugger is so heavy but cause he's carrying the wet Logjoy so insightfully.
PS I'll drop the 6 letter word starting with 'f'
|
|
|
|
Don't enlighten me though please!
Colourfully yours, Lesley.
|
|
|
|
Hello David, The excerpt from your book looked very interesting and well written! I remember you (from an audience perspective) as one of the leading lights of DLM back in Palace of Peace Days. IMO 'Ex-premie' covers a broad range of viewpoints. But 'anti-premie' is not accurate; 'anti-Rawat' certainly but this according to individual experiences and life stories ('nothing but good' may fairly represent your story but others can equally fairly represent their own). PR does appear to have a charismatic but also narcissistic personality that is apparently typical of cult leaders. It is reasonable to suppose that this is not his fault and that much about him is likely a result of his upbringing. So it is not really a question of blame. You have yourself rejected devotional yoga. This of course is what Prem Rawat has offered in the past and still offers today (albeit less honestly and with different words). Premies accept his 'authority' and in return he offers reassurance ... a parent/ dependent child relationship is established. Clearly you think that there was some benefit in having subscribed to such a relationship and that was all part of the 'good at his hands'. I do find that difficult to reconcile. There is surely no benefit in losing ones self-respect or in wasting many years believing that which is false to be true. Today he continues to cultivate the same devotional behaviour and dependency in those that continue to follow him. He has certainly become very wealthy. His organisation continue to hide information that is highly pertinent to fair and informed judgement regarding the credibility of his 'authority'. It is surely necessary (and indeed a duty) to revile or at least to expose such behaviour? best Tim
Modified by tommo at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 19:07:00
|
|
|
|
Hi Tim
I guess one of the reasons I am not so critical of Rawat as, obviously, the people on this site are, is precisely because of those insane and hectic Palace of Peace days.
I was dealing with a giant slice of Indian culture that had been transplanted on to the hippy millenarian philosophy, with chunks of Nostrodamus and UFOs thrown in, and most of the time I didn’t have a clue what was happening. All I had to go on was the fact that everyone seemed to be happy, in fact deliriously so.
At the time I trusted that Maharaji had it all under control. Now, 30 years later, I don’t believe that for a minute. It may be premie orthodoxy to say that he doesn’t make mistakes (a very ‘shri’ kind of premie I think) but I don’t think he had much idea about what was going on in London. Now people are saying that they weren’t having a good time, but I find that hard to quantify. It may have been just my bad stewardship that I did not know this then, but I suspect it is rather because bad times were not in large supply. Anyway, to the extent that people had it tough, he was responsible, as the author of the whole phenomenon, but I don’t believe he cynically set up the whole deal to gratify his ego or his pocket.
The benefit I received in the years 1970-76 when I was involved with Rawat was clear to people that knew me. I changed from being a withdrawn and feckless drifter to a competent human being able to take care of my family. He picked me up when I was hurting and let me go when I was healed. That is what I mean by only receiving good at his hands. I don’t think it is my responsibility to set up as a judge now, simply because other people think it is my duty.
Best wishes
|
|
|
|
Whatever credit Rawat really deserves for "healing" you from your drifting youth is questionable indeed. I'm sure members of any cult, from the relatively innocuous to the worst, might feel the same. The real work begins when you attempt to sear through the goassamer curtains and see the facts. How ironic that you've written this book of yours without first doing that! Ironic, unfortunate and potentially quite embarrassing. Yes, David, many lives were ruined. Just one example was my friend Dave Wener who hung himself when he began to doubt his capacity to clear the speed of sound, as Rawat analogized, and properly surrender. Rawat's advice was to hang in there, not give up, keep trying and, with a little grace and maximum effort, finally "realize Knowledge." So what? You can't judge that?! Look, either it was righteous advice or it wasn't. If it was good advice, too bad for Dave. He just couldn't walk the razor's edge. But if it was bullshit, Rawat, at minimum, must apologize. Instead, he pretends he never pressured anyone, no way, no how. You were a prominent premie -- that's why I know your name and you don't know mine -- and you were a party to all this junk. Now you're writing your sweet, lovely little memoire and sidestepping the real work indeed. Now I'm angry. ... [expression of anger omitted by poster for the hell of it]
Modified by Jim at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 01:21:51
|
|
|
|
"He picked me up when I was hurting and let me go when I was healed" I got a fair bit of stick for complaining about Lp's "florid" language but this sort of language is ridiculous. David Lovejoy was a withdrawn and feckless drifter (and in his book he certainly has an overblown picture of what a wild character he was, he was milquetoast by Aussie youth standards of the day) when he stumbled into the Divine Light Mission cult and during the next 6 years of religious belief he matured into a reasonably competent human being and then he withdrew from almost all activities involved in Rawatism except the social group.
Virtually none of these activities were "received" from the hands of Rawat. Rawat was not the author of the whole phenomenon, he just inherited the organisation and divine position from his family, ran with it with a single minded devotion to his own comfort and whims. Of course he didn't set up "the whole deal", he damaged it so severely that there is just a shell left.
Lovejoy is one of the most cerebral premies I heard give satsang over here but appears to still be living in a magic / superstitious view of Rawatism. His book and premie gossip claims that alcohol is his drug of choice but otherwise I'd be thinking he was still making free and easy with Northern Rivers' mushrooms. And it wasn't a giant slice of Indian culture, it was a small part of one small slice of Indian culture and I suspect he's building it up so much as he'd rather not acknowledge, as so many of us have, how pathetic we were to be caught up in it.
|
|
|
|
............I must remind him that he was not in those days someone that a lowly premie like me could ‘lecture’,...............
Yeah, well, I'm sure some of us have our beefs about the behaviour of the long forgotten Ist Western Mahatma of Guru Maharaj Ji, if we'd happened to have come across him at the time, but at least he's said he's sorry, unlike you.
Isn't it the case, that unlike the 'spaced out' Saphlananad, you, & others like you, set up & officered the barely legal structures of DLM etc, which you now say are no worse than average?
You've got a fucking nerve.
What's the isbn of your book, btw.
|
|
|
|
but unfortunately due to the quality of the paper used in the book there may have been more than the normal amount of errors. I'll do some proof-reading. And while I found the book disturbing in some of it's ethical viewpoints I enjoyed the sections dealing with DLM in Australia and England very much and heartily recommend it to anyone with an interest in those fields and the price was quite reasonable.
David Lovejoy has shown no interest in debate in the past and as far as I can see he is indicative of the great majority of once-were-premies. He is quite happy to accept the good he derived from involvement with DLM (as I am too) but doesn't seem to realise that this had nothing to do with any positive actions or powers or teachings that Rawat had or has or if he does ignores it.
Some of us believe that a person (Rawat) who ignorantly claimed to be divine and then later tried to disguise that publicly while living off those of his followers who were prepared to carry on as if he is divine should be publicly reviled. And some of us feel a certain contempt for people like David Lovejoy who accept his career and it's deceit and vulgarity with apparent nonchalance no matter what other qualities he may possess.
David, I'd like to interview you for a web site I am working on. Would you prepared to answer some questions, face to face from a friendly though critical person?
Modified by ocker at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 20:44:10
|
|
|
|
It is nice to hear from you, after so long. I greatly enjoyed this extract of your work. It really did bring back memories.
I didn't mean to make our trip seem so bad, and I could never have gone without your company, and I really enjoyed some memories we had together.
I am particularly grateful to remember the mango we shared on the railway platform at Lucknow. I had forgotten it for decades.
But now I can see it in my mind's eye, the light slipping in between the separate roofs over the platforms, the beggar boys being chased off by the policemen, who might have been inspired by Baden Powell, I showed you the right way to cut it so as to get the stone out. And I would inevitably have shared the satsang that finally convinced me, delivered by Shalakshana on the lawn of Maharaji's home in Dehradun. "How do you tell the difference between a stone mango and a real one? Try eating it."
With such profound reasoning who could resist, and Shalakshana was very persuasive, even as a young lady. That halted my plans to continue up into those mountains North East you described so well. I was tired from a deeply moving and frightening experience, but there was more.
That incident in the afternoon with the Arya Samahj was not what was distressing me. It was physically frightening, yes, and I was shaken and I had not had time to get my energy back after my journey from Deveria, which took all week.
But as you know it should not have taken that long. I was saving this but, what the hell.
When I left Deveria, I was given very clear agya from Maharaji. It was to go directly to Hardwar with the few western premies all of whom were spared the riot scene and to stay together until we reached there. Travelling through the last hours of night and the morning we reached Lucknow by lunch time. Sue Ratcliffe wanted to go by the Lucknow ashram and visit them, as she had done so before, and knew they made good food. I told her I had clear agya to keep us all together and to get back as quickly as possible, there were still enemies about and Lucknow, besides being a seat of government, was also an Arya Samahj stronghold.
Sue became adamant and said she would go alone if I didn't agree, I was torn between two agyas. I made a judgement based on the safety of the whole group, considering, a bit like a mother hen I admit, that I could keep my eye on them if we stuck together. Besides by then her descriptions of Lucknow ashram food had split the group up.
We got off the train with me strutting and clucking about this giving me a bad feeling, "I was breaking agya," etc. But most westerners were able to tell me to shut up when they felt like it.
We got to Lucknow and there on a cot lay Gurucharanand, groaning and still saying "Saphlanand: Maharaji has given me bitter prashad", just as he said when I found him lieing in the field the day before. We took lunch and afterward, with Mahatma Ramanand, Gurucharanand received a phone call from Benares. It was from Mataji. She called to say that they had got away from the residence at Deveria and were now safely ensconced incognito at a premie's home, and they invited them there.
"Are you coming too" he said to Sue and the western premies. "No," I interjected. "I was given clear agya." But I was over-ruled even by the mahatmas who assured me Maharaji and Mataji would be pleased to see us. I argued with them also but was over-ruled.
With a very bad feeling, and figuring that, at least, I will eventually see that I get them all safely back to Hardwar, I relented.
Benares was actually going in the other direction. We arrived in the early evening.
When the door opened, my worst fears were realised. Bholeji opened the door and was filled with rage to see us. the two mahatmas were ushered in, and so were we but in that fertive way, looking up and down the street with much anxiety lest we were seen arriving.
Gurucharanand was given a bed, the premies were parked in a sort of hallway. By now I could hear all the voices except BBJ's, screaming and yelling with rage that sounded pretty much like hindi expletives, punctuated every so often with my name.
They were all livid with me and my heart sank lower than the floor. They could not speak to me. They were so angry they could only speak hindi for about ten minutes. I was told to wait on the stairs, while their angry voices went on it seemed interminably. Eventually I was called into Maharaji's room. He sat staring; as black as thunder.
He indicated for me to sit and put his foot up in front of my face. I had seen the Indian mahatmas in this position and knew what to do. I went to work massaging his foot for 5 or 10 minutes, while he boiled. He changed feet and I massaged the other one. Eventually he was calm enough to say "Now explain what you are doing here." There was a strong atmosphere of paranoia in the house and I realised we might have blown their cover. They were there in hiding. A band of westerners, as you know, cannot travel on a train, get off at a station and walk down a road without the whole town knowing about it in five minutes.
He scolded me severely, saying that I might have endangered the whole holy family. I thought I was going to be sick I felt so bad.
I was sent back to the premies, I couldn't speak I was so petrified. The family shouting continued as they argued what they were going to do with us. The next train went in the early morning. We were told to put our sleeping bags there in the hall which connected the stairs to the other rooms dowstairs and go to sleep.
We did this, but I could not sleep, I was so agitated. So was the family and they were walking through every so often past the foot of our bedding. When they went by, dimly lit by the lights in the room beyond, I pretended to be asleep. Gradually their agitation turned to the familiar fast talking and impish laughter I sometimes heard from Bholeji and Rajaji.
The premies were all asleep and snoring, but I was very freaked and pretended to be asleep when they went by. Mataj ji had retired. At some point lying with my eyes closed I realised that someone had stopped, and was looking at us and whispering.
Thinking we were asleep, though I can't be completely sure which it was because of the dim light, I saw one or both of the brothers, giggling and making wrathful deity faces and brandishing a sword above their head at the foot of my bed. I peered through the merest slit of vision and froze. Eventually they went up stairs and to bed. I dozed and had a nightmare that Lord Shiva was going to kill me. Early in the small hours we were told to get up and this time go straight to Hardwar.
As we passed through Lucknow, around midday, again all the premies voted to get some of the Lucknow ashram food.
I could have had an embolism, but now more terrified than ever, I found out the time of the next train and insisted we make that, one an hour or so later. Eventually we got back to where I get hugged by Charles and the rest you know. I was shaking inside and I still don't know if that nervousness ever went away. I suffer even now from irrational fear. Just last April I had a similar nightmare, in the worst of which I pranamed, in my dream to the brothers in the hall. My post, which I made as soon as I awoke, sweating in the middle of the night was called help!
Several ex-premies flew to my rescue. I was surprised to find others in my own region awake at that hour, but now I know that they frequently cannot sleep either. I still awake most nights sweating with nameless fear.
It is odd that you don't remember the first evening of our train ride, I clutched my home made beragon which had been constructed with a double purpose, the male and female parts of hard teak being crafted as well as for fitting together, were shaped to fit into my hand with a widened portion so that there was a grip, to provide hand weapons in case of the need for self defence.
To hide my fear, a made some sort of attempt at light conversation. I began with something like. "(Nervous chuckle) They (the family) must think we're a weird bunch, they're not used to having a crowd of misfits like us around". Your response was quite similar to your response just now, where you chastised me for putting thoughts into Maharaji's head. True he might not have thought anything, but I now know he is not beyond thinking. He just didn't want a fight to happen. OK.
On the train you said: (I'm cool with it but it does make an interesting example of typical premie brainwashing) "It's the height of disrespect to think of the holy family as having thoughts like ordinary people, They don't think like us, they are in a state of divine consciousness." I don't think you went on about it as long as I might have suggested, but the utter smallness and lack of devotion that this projected upon me stayed with me all that night. As you slept I squirmed and propped myself up on ol' squeeky trying to catch some sleep, with it seemed to me, your words resounding in my heart and in my head all night long. And even on the sunny tonga ride it clouded the next day.
I never quite forgot, I don't blame you, I blame the Rawat family. I experienced a great loss of self confidence during those months: aided monstrously of course by the two traumas I had already experienced that week. The Benares one being by far the worst. This judgement seemed to come, and eventually did come, from several who were on the green van. And now it is in print on page 135 of Peace is Possible. It was one of the beginnings of the end of my career as Mahatma Saphlanand. My self esteem has plummeted inexorably since, until friends here, I won't mention names: everyone here has made me feel like a whole man again.
Anyway I do not blame you and I am warmed to the heart to see your name there on the thread. I have always admired your excellent writing skills. No I blame this whole ugly scene from Hans ji till the present day, and the enormous error all premies make to think that the Rawat family are anything more than ordinary. But less is possible, devoid of humanity they hardly register on the scale of real human beings, and yes: they all think.
But I apologise, you are right, I do not know what they think, it is true. Don't worry, most of the sting came from Glen, Peter P. and co., who's accents even now seem to haunt the pages of the 'Lord's' latest tome.
Anyway Dave, bygones, good to see, sincerely. But I think you are still a bit premie-ish.
By the way I don't remember if I told you, if a mango is too soft and ripe, you can make a small hole in the top and squeeze it out, or did one of those little railway platform children show us that. I forget.
Good luck to you David, in gathering back all that is your own self.
Saph.
And I think you're quite right about Bholej not even being able to keep a beat.
Modified by Lp at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 23:31:20
|
|
|
|
Saph I truly do not remember saying such asinine things to you about the 'holy family', but you seem to remember it clearly so I apologise for my naivety (36 years late!). After such a terrifying experience as you describe, anything I could say would be superfluous. I had no idea that you were suffering in this way as you always seemed a beacon of good sense to me, as I hope is made clear in the book. All the best David
|
|
|
|
And I was pleasantly surprised, as I still thought you might harbour a poor opinion of me.
Again thankyou for your kind words
And really I wish you all the best too.
No problems: I'd take another tonga ride with you anyday.
Saph.
Modified by Lp at Sat, Feb 17, 2007, 22:49:46
|
|
|
|
If I had told you anything of how I was feeling then, on that train, I would have need a bigger beragon.
|
|
|
|
Hi Brian,
I was not able to find your book on www.amazon.com
(USA version). If your publisher has an alternate online site,
please let me know.
LP, I would like to say that if you ever want to publish your
experiences about the early days with Maharaji, I will be waiting
in line to be first to buy your book.
Very Best Regards,
Sean
|
|
|
|
Modified by Lp at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 05:21:02
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean I too could not find the book in Amazon or Abebooks or through Alibris which searches every online book dealer. It seems to be only available through the address given by D Lovejoy at the end of his original post - did you notice? "If the site moderator will allow a commercial plug, the book is available by mail order from Echo Publishing, PO Box 439, Mullumbimby, New South Wales 2482. Post inclusive prices (in Australian dollars) are $38.50 to the UK, $36 to the USA and $23 within Australia. I believe it is also being carried by Amazon UK." I could not find a web site or email address for Echo Publishing. Hope this helps Z
|
|
|
|
and the website is http://www.echo.net.au/
I bought it with a simple phone call and I must say the lady answering the phone was extremely nice
|
|
|
|
Hi Ocker Ok Thanks for link. I live in UK, don't know if I'll splash out $38.00 Aus - I wonder how much that is in UK Lsd? Cheers Z
|
|
|
|
Hi Ocker Ok Thanks for link. I live in UK, don't know if I'll splash out $38.00 Aus - I wonder how much that is in UK Lsd? Cheers Z
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean Yes I look forward to Saph's tome too. I hope there will be a hard back edition, maybe even a limited edition, interesting fine binding, signed and incribed by author, profusely illustrated in colour and b/w, with index, glossary of Indian, Hindi, Sanskrit, Premie Cultspeak terms, Bibliography, Suggested futher reading; as well as a true ripping yarn in his words. Is the bigest book fair in the world still held in San Antonio,Texas? Best Z
|
|
|
|
What was Maharaji's age during that king of the hill game, 12, 13? Did either one of you have a conscious thought or did it ever occur to you retrospectively that you were a bunch of grown men playing with a kid? Did he have any playmates as a child? Pals or friends his own age when you knew him? Always around grown-ups? I'm just curious about it because he's such a narcissist and it seems like he's been that way most of his life. I suppose he didn't have any peers from whom to learn any socialization skills expecially with everyone kow-towing to him and (God, Saph!) massaging his feet. Yuck. That's enough to give anyone recurring nightmares!!!
Modified by Cynthia at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 00:26:23
|
|
|
|
Hiya Cynth.
I was too shy to participate, or too aloof (agya).
But I watched, I confess, with envy: as premies always seemed to be able to abandon themselves more than me to playing with the kid.
I was in too deep to be able reach the place of "play", and already harboured many secret fears and doubts.
No matter how I tried to throw myself into flying pranam, or attended endlessly, tirelessly to the details of service and love for the premies, I always felt it was not enough.
I, like my father, would always "do anything for anyone", but Maharaji was never pleased with me. I couldn't understand and tried to hit the ground more horizontal, from a greater height with even more forward momentum, grinding to a halt against his shoe. But no matter how much I tried he was not satisfied.
But don't forget though, he looked taller on the hill of sand.
Modified by Lp at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 06:49:55
|
|
|
|
(photo by Balyogeshwar.)
Modified by Lp at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 07:07:51
|
|
|
|
Thanks for posting the pic.
Scary and devastating position to be in.  fuck you Rawat.
One of the biggest doubts has to be when you think about how you look to him.
I remember once coming out of one of those 'participation' meetings at the ranch - he had been saying how we needed Him to feel friendly towards us or He couldn't deliver.
By that stage I knew enough of his personality to know that I simply wasn't his type. Should he meet me, no way was he going to like me at all, way too english and egalitarian... and not even blonde hair!
So there I am thinking this out going hhmmm - then cultworld must have taken over again.
|
|
|
|
You mean Rawat took that of you?! I apologise in advance knowing that it is a likeness of your good self, but I must admit to finding this a disgusting picture. It affects me somewhat as some porn does. Once again sorry and I appreciate you publishing it here. But what an image! Yuch. Snuff movies. The grotesque thing about it to me is that it was snapped by the object of adoration himself while his besotted slave was in the full throes of worship of him. There's got to be something deeply chilling about that. I think Rawt's self perception is perverted to the core by the idea that he is a guru! I'm sure stuff like this is all in a days work for gurus and pornographers God if anyone ever looked at me like that ...!!.AAAArgh (Iknow I've looked at him like that but never been photographed doing it. I'm blushing.) Love Bryn
|
|
|
|
I know what you mean, Bryn I put it in to contrast with this from P.I.P. by Andrea Cagan: following on from a glorious portrayal of all the wonderful old time honchos:-
"On the other hand, Saph, had never really acknowledged Maharaji as his teacher or master."
Pg. 135.
Modified by Lp at Mon, Feb 19, 2007, 12:26:00
|
|
|
|
LOL! If that isn't acknowledgement at least!
|
|
|
|
LP,
This is a beautiful and awesome photo. I think you
look like you were answering the highest calling of a
human being, to devote your whole self to that which
you perceived at that time to be divine. Thank you so
much for sharing this.
Sean
|
|
|
|
(A little yoghurt might help to settle the dyspepia.)
Modified by Lp at Tue, Feb 20, 2007, 01:29:14
|
|
|
|
"that which you perceived at that time to be divine"
Modified by Lp at Tue, Feb 20, 2007, 01:43:52
|
|
|
|
A funny little story for you... I printed and placed that pic
on the wall of my office, as I might place a picture of
Krishna, or a GreenPeace ship. This resulted in my
emphatically non-premie spouse and my kids asking who
that guy was. I have given up a lot of my personal goals
and desires so that they would have a secure and stable
life. I had not thought they would even notice this little
pic, but they did. I told them, "Oh, just a Yogi", and was
embarrassed enough to remove it a few days later. But
thank you for reminding me that in my lifetime, in this
horrible Western world obsessed with money and fame
and power, there were indeed people like you, filled with
truth, whether you were aware of it or not.
I doubt there is a single other person on this forum who
has any idea what I am talking about.
Sean
Modified by sean at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 00:28:59
|
|
|
|
"I told them, "Oh, just a Yogi", and was
embarrassed enough to remove it a few days later."Why couldn't you just be honest and tell them the truth, that it is a picture of someone taken when they were a devotee of Rawat who now left that following because he couldn't live the lie any more.
"I doubt there is a single other person on this forum who
has any idea what I am talking about." This demonstrates the 'spiritual ego' you are stuck in.
|
|
|
|
Stripped of all Bhakti components, Anjanaya-Asana, with the hands in Anjali Mudra is an excellent position for the body as a part of a series of positions, in a quieter sense of a salutation to the sun exercise.
For one who has maintained forms of padma -asana through the night, or just awakening from sleep, it is an excellent alternative and is useful as a prelude to more active movements, such as walking.
Modified by Lp at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 07:21:45
|
|
|
|
In the sense that there is an ecstatic state arising from the mood of Bhakti which is indendent of it's intended target.
Even with an unworthy focus the attention of devotion itself produces an enjoyable sensation of focused mind.
The down side is that all positive attributes will be attributed to the object of focused attention.
Which may or may not be worthy of such abject love. If the latter: then a life is hit amidships, in full sail.
A devastating blow: which undermines a position in the universe it has taken billions of years to evolve into. And dismantles the natural familial constructs which had come into place genetically, and since birth.
Modified by Lp at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 07:46:17
|
|
|
|
Yes well put. It does certainly sometimes seem to 'work' and that is and has been the draw for all of us. Real love wells up irrespective of whether the object of devotion is worthy or not. When you think about it though this is unremarkable. The tendency to love is naturally within us, we feel it and it arises as a deepfelt response to what we sincerely believe the object of devotion to represent. But, however overwhelming, private feelings directed toward (maybe quite beautifully painted) private inner representations are no guide to accuracy. This is what premies are failing to understand. i.e. Just as it says on this site ...truth is a lot more than a feeling (arising from wishful and wilfully blind belief). best Tim best Tim
|
|
|
|
So it's better in the East? I think not.
Considering most of the people on this forum once were premies my guess is there is a high level of understanding here.
And it puts me in mind of a time in my life not too long before I ceased being a premie.
I had a very graphic dream around that time. I was at Amaroo, in the final scene the LOTU was standing tall dressed in a white robe and I was as small as a six year old child, smeared all over with shit, my eyes tightly shut and face buried in the hem of his robe.
When I woke up that image still filling my mind, more real than the world I awoke to, I knew that I must return and rescue that little child from such a parlous state and open my eyes.
So yes, I was touched by the picture too. Nice to see the the good things that underlie such a position - the strengths of character and intention shine through.
|
|
|
|
I doubt there is a single other person on this forum who
has any idea what I am talking about.You know Sean, until I read your post here I thought you were reasonably open-minded. But that comment was plain arrogant. Too bad.
Modified by Fiona at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 19:07:47
|
|
|
|
Point taken. You're right, I was being arrogant.
Sorry, will try to avoid it in the future.
Sean
|
|
|
|
A little window dressing, is that what you're up for? Try some major renovations instead.
|
|
|
|
"that which you perceived at that time to be divine"Is that statement correct or should it have been "that which you believed at that time to be divine"
Modified by Jethro at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 01:07:40
|
|
|
|
It seems the question here is how close in meaning are the words perceive and believe.
Though from a dictionary sense; they are clearly different in meaning: how much do we actually believe what we see?
And perhaps more interesting: in converse:- How much do we not see what we do not want to perceive; when it differs from what we believe?
I'd say, in terms of the experience of a person in: as Bryn quite accurately described : the throes of worship: The words are very close, it is in the long, dark, rainy thoughts, walked alone; that they begin to differ.
Modified by Lp at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 05:37:02
|
|
|
|
To clarify a reference to position in the Universe, it is the right to consider one's self an equal part of it, with equal entitlement to any hidden rewards it might include in, say , the areas of:- right to be: or of any extended, connected, or Universal Consciousness or Intelligence: could there be such a thing: for example.
One might say one's right to not have positions of inferiority or inconsequence imposed upon one.
As much as one's right not to lorded over by any who might consider them elves to have greater worth or entitlement, or to have such delusive ideas imposed upon one by ones who entertain such beliefs about others.
Modified by Lp at Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 11:12:54
|
|
|
|
For:-
"As much as one's right not to lorded over by
any who might consider them elves to have greater worth or entitlement,
or to have such delusive ideas imposed upon one by ones who entertain
such beliefs about others."
Should read:
As much as one's right not to be lorded over by
any who might consider themselves to have greater worth or entitlement;
or one's right not to have such delusive ideas imposed upon one, by any who entertain
such beliefs about others.
|
|
|
|
"As much as one's right not to lorded over by
any who might consider them elves to have greater worth or entitlement,
or to have such delusive ideas imposed upon one by ones who entertain
such beliefs about others."
Sounds like a line from Gimli, in Lord of the Rings.
|
|
|
|
And them elves was flown in speci'ly too
Modified by Lp at Fri, Feb 23, 2007, 04:51:56
|
|
|
|
The hogwash sprayer we discuss on this board.
|
|
|
|
Ahhh, thought so. We need to tell people to duck!
|
|
|
|
David wrote: I thank Brian (Saphalanand) for acknowledging that my account is quite accurate For my part, although is a small point, I must remind him that he was not in those days someone that a lowly premie like me could ‘lecture’, on the nature of the holy family or anything else. My own memory of our relationship is Saph reproving me for leaning back against the wall while practising in the house where we stayed in Lucknow. I was a simple ashram premie in Sydney when you were a hot shot there David (I think you were some kind of community coordinator) and I would have loved a kind word from you, but the one time you did speak to me, you sneered at my ugly long skirt and said "why do you dress like a clown?" -- crushed me to death for ages! And since I had no money and got my ugly skirt from the jumble of Divine Sales, it was a pretty mean comment! So I think that being told you were leaning against a wall wasn't so bad after all! And lest you think I am claiming to have been any better, I wasn't. I remember hurting other premies feelings in the jealous quest to get the "good services". I remember once carrying two water jugs home from the store for a mahatma, and another premie asked if she could carry one to "share in the grace" and I said "no" because I wanted all that divine pleasure for me.... what a bitch I was! I don't think that Rawat encouraged us to know charity towards each other -- there was too much emphasis on self. I dislike what being his follower did to me. I was a much kinder and nicer person before I met him, and again now that I don't focus on all that guru worship. But it's good to know you made it out ok. I don't focus on rawat at all any more, but I do like to drop in every now and again to see who else has seen the man behind the curtain.
|
|
|
|
David wrote: I thank Brian (Saphalanand) for acknowledging that my account is quite accurate For my part, although is a small point, I must remind him that he was not in those days someone that a lowly premie like me could ‘lecture’, on the nature of the holy family or anything else. My own memory of our relationship is Saph reproving me for leaning back against the wall while practising in the house where we stayed in Lucknow. I was a simple ashram premie in Sydney when you were a hot shot there David (I think you were some kind of community coordinator) and I would have loved a kind word from you, but the one time you did speak to me, you sneered at my ugly long skirt and said "why do you dress like a clown?" -- crushed me to death for ages! And since I had no money and got my ugly skirt from the jumble of Divine Sales, it was a pretty mean comment! So I think that being told you were leaning against a wall wasn't so bad after all! And lest you think I am claiming to have been any better, I wasn't. I remember hurting other premies feelings in the jealous quest to get the "good services". I remember once carrying two water jugs home from the store for a mahatma, and another premie asked if she could carry one to "share in the grace" and I said "no" because I wanted all that divine pleasure for me.... what a bitch I was! I don't think that Rawat encouraged us to know charity towards each other -- there was too much emphasis on self. I dislike what being his follower did to me. I was a much kinder and nicer person before I met him, and again now that I don't focus on all that guru worship. But it's good to know you made it out ok. I don't focus on rawat at all any more, but I do like to drop in every now and again to see who else has seen the man behind the curtain.
|
|
|
|
"Did the crucifixion hurt?" persisted the woman.
"No, the crucifixion did not hurt. The people were innocent.
Does it hurt when a little child slaps you? No, because he doesn't know
what he is doing."
Was he serious? Well, I don't believe he meant that he
literally remembered being Jesus, but his answers were nonetheless
seriously insightful.
I don't know how anyone could write that & really believe it, unless they were taking the piss. Surely David you appreciate now, even though you might not have done when you were in spiritual rehab from the drug culture, that crucifixion was deliberately invented to inflict the worst possible pain for the longest time before death.
Why you should continue to think that the little prat's observation was 'seriously insightful' is beyond me..............
|
|
|
|
Lovejoy is a master of indirection.
"Was he serious?"- Well obviously yes, young Rawat was serious and deludely ignorant or he was a lying little bastard or he was making fun of these oh so serious new devotees. who were going to open up the honeypot for him or some combination and once you start to consider the ramifications uyou go to the heart of darkness at the heart of Rawatism.
But Lovejoy goes straight to how he thinks 30 years later and somehow comes up wiht "seriously insightful". I'll scan the sections in which Lovejoy talks about his present perceptions of Rawat and post them tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
On the book discussion page in reply to:
"If anyone wonders whether Mr. Rawat is a cult leader, just ask one of
his devotees to say something critical of Mr. Rawat. Now, you would
think that after 30 years of involvement, they might have a few tiny
criticisms of him. Well, they can't do it because they are afraid to do
it, thinking that any such thought is coming from their minds, which
are evil.
Mr. Rawat teaches the destructive and self-hating idea that your own mind
is evil, that your own mind is the cause of pain and suffering, and---
guess what -- even after you get "knowledge" your mind continues to
harrass you, so any "doubt" you have about Mr. Rawat is caused by your
evil mind and must be discounted. It's a teaching that is not only
ridiculously wrong, it's also a strong control mechanism.
Many followers of Mr. Rawat are wonderful people, people who are sincerely
trying to have meaning in their lives. They are not crazy or unhappy,
they are just deluded when it comes to Mr. Rawat. I was once one of
them myself.
Getting out of the Rawat cult and this destructive belief system is the best thing that ever happened to me."
Larry Lustbader says: "I got such a kick out of your posting that i laughed out loud. Speaking
for myself, after knowing Mr. Rawat formally and informally for 35
delightful years, the only reason I have nothing critical to say about
him is that I have never seen any reason or excuse to. That is not
because I am not a critical person, I train my mind [which can be your
worst enemy if left undisciplined which not only Mr. Rawat so kindly
warns people but which every even slightly wise person or even someone
in their "right mind" has ascertained] to see the potholes in life's
path and avoid them. Far from being one of those, Mr. Rawat is a bridge
over holes, obstacles and troubled waters, to coin a phrase, at least
for me, which is all anyone can honestly speak for. It is said that
when you love someone you don't see any faults in them and I gladly
admit that I do love him to death but I also don't find it a
coincidence or side effect of some insidious mind control that so many
perspicacious people who dont fall for anything that doesn't prove it's
value claim to love him just as unequivocably. I have no doubt in my
mind that if you had ever felt even a semblance of such a love for or
from anyone than you would not feel so jealous of him and the people
that do, and I hope for your sake that one day you do and then spread
that around to others who need it. Love, Larry L."
Modified by Lp at Sun, Feb 18, 2007, 04:34:58
|
|
|
|
"When you love someone you don't see any faults in them... I have no doubt in my mind that if you had ever felt even a semblance of such a love for or from anyone than you would not feel so jealous of him and the people that do..."Thanks for straightening us all out, Larry Lustbader. I got it now. Love is not ever seeing any fault in a person, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. Nobody who could see fault in Prem Rawat could ever have experienced the feeling of love from or for anyone. They certainly never got any from Prem. I think Larry made Joe's point.
|
|
|
|
"I think Larry made Joe's point." You're right of course Fiona ,but we who were blasted by Larry's style of brain rotting ,wall of sound satsang for years are almost imprinted like baby ducklings or Pavlov's dogs or whatever to take it seriously and believe it all over again. If Joe feels like replying I would appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
Do you mean that Larry Lustbader is a real person who used to give that sort of satsang or were you generalising?
|
|
|
|
"Do you mean that Larry Lustbader is a real person who used to give that sort of satsang or were you generalising?" Sorry Ocker,I've truly no idea.I think I lost the plot somewhere and I haven't got time to research and find out what I meant or what I thought others meant or whether "Larry" was real or unreal.IMO he might just as well be real 'cos I remember that kind of satsang. BTW Interested to know you're a retired surfer. So I wasn't far wrong with my guessed description of you as "honed and tanned" some time ago.Mmmm It's those psychic powers again
|
|
|
|
Larry Lustbader is a real person. I know him. Kabir
|
|
|
|
Modified by Lp at Mon, Feb 19, 2007, 23:15:11
|
|
|
|
Though it reminds me of a really nice premie we useed to call Larry Lunchbox
|
|
|
