|
|
|
I love this Larry Lustbader. I've copied all his posts and will bring them out and savour them if ever I'm feeling uninspired.
|
|
|
|
Sorry. If you knew the guy, you wouldn't use "Brilliant." He is a New York original who would scare the average person on the street. He's been going on and on now for over 35 years at this. Though he was and always will be the cult's first BONGO, his aura seems very bright and light. But, so what. Even the Lord of the Universe couldn't help him in his day (Lord's). Today, who cares about Larry and his New York intellectualism. Reading him is a big waste of time. Ocker you appear to me to need a lot of help. Are you getting it?
|
|
|
|
This place is fun. And just wait 'til we get old ...
|
|
|
|
Hi OTS,
I like the insider info you provide when required but maybe you are one of the people "who doesn't understand the subtleties of British/Australian irony/; as JHB so kindly put it.
Unless of course you are trumping my Aussie irony with a full house of your own Los Angeles poker face.
Whichever? 
But seriously I love Lustbader's stuff, it's so despicable that it leaves me in awe. It seems to come off the end of his pen as fast and furiously as if he's on a perpetual amphetamine jag. As a person who has been spending a lot of time going through the apparent infinity of mediocre boredom that Prem Rawat produces, slowly and labouriously with great pauses between his breaths while his alcohol dulled mind labours for another piece of platitudinous crap it is a real treat to switch to the quick and dirtyn nastiness of Larry.
|
|
|
|
>supporting discussion would no doubt be welcome< An acquired taste suitable only for those with strong constitutions. My take is that attempting discussion with premies is like trying to knit with wet spaghetti. Nik
|
|
|
|
>supporting discussion would no doubt be welcome< An acquired taste suitable only for those with strong constitutions.
My take is that attempting discussion with premies is like trying to knit with wet spaghetti.
Modified by Lp at Sun, Feb 25, 2007, 17:00:44
|
|
|
|
I felt sick after reading only a few premie responses, and couldn't continue. The hatred and nastiness coming from them is so strong, that I couldn't possibly engage in discussion with them. Once upond a time, a premie told me that Jai Satchitanand meant "I see myself in you" (not literally of course) -- and now they seem to see their own hatred everywhere and it comes out of them like pus from a boil....
|
|
|
|
That was the first time I have read direct responses with premies. I've only read about them on the forum apart from the few who have posted here.
It feels so hopeless to try to explain the slightest error in perspective, but it's interesting, though disturbing the amount of accusation and projection that explodes forth.
And the cynical, sarcastic, supercilious tone of put-down and disrespect. Apart from the wall of satsang images, or fridge door, held out like a shield to prevent any word from penetrating, that might disagree.
But worse, in a way, and more cruel is the barrage of assorted hits at varieties of quite possible mental ailments, hoping, and some do, that some will hit.
We are accused of being lonely, depressed, isolated, embittered, and finally crazy, exactly as they did before the first westerners came, well they should know, they arranged it to be so. And we're all herded together into one group to economise on lists of accusations.
But I guess it is to render any adverse witness invalid, that this instinctive reaction is invoked, in the herd of devotees who graze on his gracelands. The give away is they all use the same accusations and their perspective is clearly a well rehearsed one.
So sure are they of their guru Maharaji that they can dismiss the possibility of reason or logic in our words and so not hear them, but to search for ways to ridicule, which they feel entitled to do because they are more lucky in finding m & k. and now stand on a step halfway between the step they place the guru on and the floor they leave for everyone else.
.
Modified by Lp at Sun, Feb 25, 2007, 17:47:39
|
|
|
|
With the exception of what Larry L. said to Marianne yesterday, which was crude and disgusting, what these premies are saying is mild when compared to what premies have said in the past online.
|
|
|
|
I thank my luck I was busy doing college work during some years, a year ago I read everything I could find. My eyebrows were kept busy.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for acknowledging my stance on this forum - it's quite bizarre to see some of their replies - my comments must be hitting home in some respects as they are keen to get the last word and wear me out but I can play their game indefinately. Trying to denounce us all collectively as a 'hate-cult' seems to be central to their philosophy now. After years of using duck and cover tactics whenever criticised, they are going on the offensive - trying to find anything they can that can discredit their critics - they are starting to follow a course set by the Scientologists for relentless attacks on their critics. It is turning into a war. We need to be cautious now in what we say and write to them and to / about each other as they will increasingly try to use the slightest imperfection, no matter how minor, against us. It is a stance that can intimidate many opponants to cults into silence. I for one will certainly take the struggle right to the wires of no man's land. Guru Maharaji’s followers are now continually referring to their growing body of critics as a ‘hate-cult’. Hate-cult is their latest in-cult propaganda buzz word - it's like they have all been instructed to use it at every turn by Maharaji and his minions - Cagan fired the biggest salvo in her book - Maharaji the puppet master pulls the strings and they all dance to his tune – Casually using emotive words like ‘hate’ is extremely dangerous. It actually hurts me to think someone regards me as hateful. It makde me question my motives quite closely. I was surprised by whatt conclusions I drew. As an ex-follower of Maharaji’s, I have to ask myself if my own campaign against his work is fuelled by personal hatred. Do I hate Maharaji? Yes and no! It depends what we mean by hate. Nazis hated Jews. People hated the Nazis for their anti-Semitism. Were those two hatreds the same thing? No. The anti-Semitism at the heart of Nazi ideology was based on demonising and dehumanising and scapegoating a whole race of people for personal political and financial gain (Lebensraum mentality) and grew out of sheer prejudicial ignorance. It was inexcusable. Conversely, hating the Nazis for what they stood for was justifiable hate – the hate of the nazi war machine galvanised people into doing something to bring the thousand years Reich to its knees within fifteen years of its creation. Hate drove the allied forces and resistance movements to help stop the nazi war machine taking over the whole world. Hate actually saved us. Hate proved to be a positive force for progressive change, at least under that set of circumstances.
I also think the concerns felt against cults by anti-cultists and ex-cultists are a form of justifiable hatred. Cult practices can be extremely destructive, and there is some justification for warning the world about the dangers which cult leaders like Maharaji present.
I happen to have a lot of good friends still trapped in DLM - what needs to be hated is the extortion, exploitation and outright deception that comes from a cult and its leader - to hate something makes us want to change it - if you hate your old wall-paper you strip it down and put up better stuff - if we liked or loved everything we would never need to change anything - Thomas Hobbes, the 17th century philosopher, in The Leviathan, noted that human dissatisfaction drives human progress. If you lived on an island with fresh fruit in abundance and fresh water to drink, attractive people to love and be loved by you would never leave – there would be no need or incentive to do so but a drought dries the water up – the fruit dies on the vine – we have to move and look for other sources of nourishment and satisfaction - that we live in a world of economic and material scarcity, means we are never ultimately satisfied - we move, we change - we evolve - at least most of us do. The trouble with Maharaji's teaching is that it teaches its followers to stop moving - it deludes people into thinking they are satisfied – it’s inner light and peace is a trap - the rest of the world goes on round the meditation practitioner who feels a mind numbing peace and inertia while people still fight, struggle and even die fighting for freedoms and rights and needs – The follower of the cult is effectively already dead from that struggle that is life because s/he doesn’t contribute to life while s/he meditates - and Maharaji’s meditations vegetate minds - its the sheer mental atrophy of his teachings that is so dangerous. He makes people satisfied with a great big shiny nothing. While his followers atrophy, he is out there, having a party, laughing all the way to the bank and living the life he effectively takes off them. He's a vampire - he drains people’s life force and money to fuel his self-indulgence. Hate? Do I hate? Should I hate? - Yes in some ways - Would you have hated Hitler? Would you have done all you could to bring down everything he stood for? Some people are worth hating. Maharaji has earned hatred and animosity - not blind invective - but a recognised constructive need to do what can be done to warn people of the mental stagnation that comes of adopting his way of life - the one he preaches - not the one he practices - Maharaji never practices what he preaches. Hate is a practical emotional reaction - if we didn't hate bad things badly enough we wouldn't do anything about them - and Maharaji is way up on my list of the bad things that need changing - so yes, I hate him, in the same way that I hate mediocrity, second best, hypocrisy, ignorance, bigotry, bad television and green wallpaper. Hate is not just "vitriol" and no ex-Premie is a 'terrorist' – as one recently accused me of being - that is the kind of statement on their part that generates hatred – their hatred of anyone and everyone who wishes to make them accountable for their actions. It’s excessively pointlessly antagonistic and emotive - An insistence on straight answers to long outstanding questions is a demand for justice - not an act of vitriol. Maharaji must be made accountable for his actions. Many of his ex-followers should receive compensation for the hurt they have been left with. I can get reparations for faulty electrical goods, a badly wired house, etc. I can sue an employer if I am injured due to poor safety standards in his workplace. But people can't get compensation for bad religion and meditations that failed to satisfy them. Maharaji's shop has no proper customer complaints department - it fails to offer adequate refunds. Maharaji should have 'Caveat Emptor - Buyer Beware' up on big notice boards at every meeting to promote his Knowledge and the keys. I for one actually don't want compensation. I feel as though my life was improved by my quiet solo escape from the clutches of the Maya that is Maharaji's World, - I found my own inner strength in picking up the pieces and making a life for myself - I became more articulate and intelligent in teaching myself to think again. The cult did me bad, but breaking free liberated me in more ways than I imagined - in some paradoxical way I benefited from the intense hurt Maharaji's teachings did to me - as the proverb goes - That which doesn't destroy us makes us stronger'. Sadly, many people do get just destroyed by Maharaji - and that hurt, pain and destruction - yes, I hate that - and I will continue to fight against Maharaji to help free more minds and hearts from his evil repulsive clutches. Yes, I hate him, in a funny, positive constructive kind of way.
http://www.lulu.com/content/757452 My book on Maharaji - BRAINWASHED! A CULT SURVIVOR'S TALE
Arthur Chappell arthur@chappell7300.freeserve.co.uk
My Space. http://www.myspace.com/56954240
Web site www.arthurchappell.clara.net/
|
|
|
|
But one criticism that was made of you there is valid to my eyes.
Find it very hard to follow all your arguments when the paragraphs are so long.
Find myself skimming, which is a bit unfair to you, but then I'm a lazy bugger.
Short and succinct does it every time for me.
|
|
|
|
Well almost.
If I had loads of time I can think of no more noble place to put effort, but all my time seems, taken up with it already.
I can think of no better use for the application of concerned attention than to the problem at hand.
I am not obsessed with it, but history is writing itself, these things which are true must be said and your ability to keep cool and keep thinking and writing on the subject in hand, without being too thrown off balance by the barrage of personal put-downs that are woven into the adverbs and adjectives, is brilliant.
Because we have left Maharaji it does not mean we have forfeited our human dignity. To ride those inevitable harsh waves and keep one's mind on the topic is a challenge and, in your case, a gift I envy.
Going beyond the obviously distracting and hurtful nature of being demeaned, treated as if we could be mentally dismantled and discarded piecemeal as a variety of hurtful sounding references to human conditions, which should have been coming up in a compassion orientated conversation rather than being used in a tirade of offensive sounding defensive slur; of all opponents of the philosophy of their master.
As if all were coming from one angle and all were part of a hate group: anyone arguing at any age, coming from any walk of life, premie or non-premie, hurt, merely intrigued, or actively concerned from a social or professional basis.
Whether we research this from any angle you can imagine, no-one in any field in their right minds would discount the many, unique, individual, moving, worthy, noble stories that exist of those for whom the guru spelt doom.
Just because the guru trained them up-front: to say;
"Lies;; it's all lies I tell ya..."
So in a way that cloud of words, some praising their god and guru, and some demeaning to the rest, who won't: that exagerated form of satsang: is just a smoke screen, which, having stocked up well, they have many canisters of.
It is hard when a person that you knew and grew to love for the sake of their individual character, could accuse one of hate in a second, if one let on that one didn't enjoy the Maharaji ride, though we had some fun between ourselves at his fair.
They hate because they think we should always be giving satsang and bringing people to the lord, as they see themselves doing ever so slowly.. Any other activity is subterfuge. I don't type here because of hate, but out of concern and a sense of duty and responsibility.
I would be greatly concerned about what would happen to all the premies if, say, Maharaji was forced to shut down for legal reasons or something. I would my put name forward to offer to help out in any small way in, like, in an addiction recovery program or something.
To see minds thus programmed and to remember being there, is enough to know the object of attention is the guru.
We should feel urgency to prevent another mass enlistment as we saw in the sixties; but I'm often assured by those who study the trends more scientifically, that there's little chance of that.
So, yes, eventually a day may come, when the next biggest concern will be how to repair the conceptual damage of a mind that has been trained to think only in a particular way. But now this book is a perfect debating table.
How did we do it? How did we walk away: see through honest eyes again?
Modified by Lp at Mon, Feb 26, 2007, 04:52:02
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the positive fedback folks - Hamzan, good point about the value of brevity - I tthink I am being tactical in replying at length and in detail. It exaughts their energies keeping up and they make telling mistakes and just get rude to compensate for not being able to keep pace. It's like a fox hunt with the fox - me - calling the shots. They'll either burn out or import more people to try to bury me sooner or later. I'm a compulsive writer with 200 items in print and over 700 web pages - this is a good outlet for my creative fever - i won't burn out. They might well do though. The more i and we write, the more our words hit the search engines too - so our point of view is stronger for anyone looking up Maharaji or Andrea Cagan online.
http://www.lulu.com/content/757452 My book on Maharaji - BRAINWASHED! A CULT SURVIVOR'S TALE
Arthur Chappell arthur@chappell7300.freeserve.co.uk
My Space. http://www.myspace.com/56954240
Web site www.arthurchappell.clara.net/
|
|
|
|
"They hate because they think we should always be
giving satsang and bringing people to the lord, as they see themselves
doing ever so slowly.. Any other activity is subterfuge."
Saph, you must have been away from premies an awfully long time. Maybe you don't understand statistics very well but I'll remind you of what we read recently. The community of Brisbane-Ipswich in Australia, the largest in Australia of around 150 of the most committed premies in Australia who live close to Amaroo were able to get 16 people to "receive Knowledge" last year and half of those 16 didn't bother to come to the next "Knowledge Review" and that nearly certainly means they're gone and won't be coming back.
And most of those people heard about Rawat from the local public TV so the 16 might have cost the community as much as $1,000 each in TV fees, publication fees, postage,etc and of the 16 only four knew premies. So in whole year only 4 "friends of pwks" became pwks.
Do you honestly think the premies care two hoots about "satsang and bringing people to the Lord"? They're so embarassed about propagation they pray it'll go away and leave them in peace. These are mainly long term premies. Imagine if "Knowledge" actually worked, those 150 would be 150,000 by now. in their hearts they know that and if they hate us it's because we keep reminding them of their failures and Rawat's and Knowledge's uselessness. Maybe in their minds they use us as scapegoats but they're not fooling us and they're not fooling each other.
|
|
|
|
Theorum: Premies have never been good propagators.If someone who became a premie, say 30 years ago, brought one person a year, every year, then today there would be 536,870,912 more premies due to this one person, assuming each person brings another each year. Then taking say 2000 premies,and there were ceratinly a lot more than 2000, there would be alot more than on the Earth today via these 2000 premies.
QED If Rawat really wanted to 'bring knowledge' to the world, he would have moulded premies to propogate, but instead he moulded them to his own self-serving-image. Profanity at it's utmost.
Modified by Jethro at Tue, Feb 27, 2007, 02:52:17
|
|
|
|
I've posted this sort of table before but "real propagation" works as a geometric progression. First year 1, 2nd year 2, 3rd year 4, 4th year 8, etc.
| 1 |
1 |
| 2 |
2 |
| 3 |
4 |
| 4 |
8 |
| 5 |
16 |
| 6 |
32 |
| 7 |
64 |
| 8 |
128 |
| 9 |
256 |
| 10 |
512 |
| 11 |
1,024 |
| 12 |
2,048 |
| 13 |
4,096 |
| 14 |
8,192 |
| 15 |
16,384 |
| 16 |
32,768 |
| 17 |
65,536 |
| 18 |
131,072 |
| 19 |
262,144 |
| 20 |
524,288 |
| 21 |
1,048,576 |
| 22 |
2,097,152 |
| 23 |
4,194,304 |
| 24 |
8,388,608 |
| 25 |
16,777,216 |
| 26 |
33,554,432 |
| 27 |
67,108,864 |
| 28 |
134,217,728 |
| 29 |
268,435,456 |
| 30 |
536,870,912 |
|
|
|
|
I used arithmetic progression instead. (You wouldn't believe I have a Maths degree  ( ). (Hamzen is not allowed to comment on this)Anyway, Rawat said he only needed 4 premies to shake down the world. Do you think he is still searching?
Modified by Jethro at Tue, Feb 27, 2007, 02:52:54
|
|
|
|
mindy! Oh Maharaji, you were so in your mind when you said that.
|
|
|
|
It was always like that. Once I passed through UK on route from Canada to USA, and was foolish enough to enquire how propagation was going. In two years there were 3 aspirants but one was of questionable mental health, I was told.
I put down my knapsack, and started giving satsang there in the foyer, the next day, within a few hours it filled up. I sat on the stairs.
Within a few days Guru Charanand arrived. Saying.. "I hear there is some energy here".There was always around 100 people sitting on the floor in the foyer. We quickly set up a premie house and for about a month I sent 25 almost every day to him and he gave them knowledge. It was like a conveyor belt. (My sincere apologies to humanity.)
After that; continuing my journey, I hear it fell off to almost zero again.
Modified by Lp at Tue, Feb 27, 2007, 04:52:52
|
|
|
|
And what bullshit were you telling them?
|
|
|
|
'76. My usual satsang I guess, which I believe was always weighted more towards knowledge and self realization than maharaji and the organisation, though I don't remember any specific sentences now.
But yes; bullshit, it seems now to me now 31 years later, that's what I find the most scary, only under hypnosis or subtle training would so many be able to fall into the same trap in such a similar way, though of course not all and some quite differently. . Guilty as charged, though I believed it at the time. Satsang was the old DVD's.
For some years, though rejected, I tried to show Maharaji I was still useful to him. Though unsupported by the mission I got little bouts of service to do at times. It was during those years that I was a mission outcast but still believed, knew only communities of premies, and tried to be of some service. A form of unrequitted love drove me on. Yukkh.
Modified by Lp at Wed, Feb 28, 2007, 06:24:17
|
|
|
|
The worst of it isn't in the archives because it came from the ex-ex-premie crowd that had their own forum called the catbox (Cat's Whisker) and commented daily for about three years about some of us. Your eyebrows would have fallen out if you had read some of those... 
Modified by Cynthia at Mon, Feb 26, 2007, 09:47:33
|
|
|
|
Blimey...I didn't know there were ex exes. I suppose it is only a matter of time before the ex ex exes burst onto the scene. Seriously though what on earth happened or is it something no-one wants to be reminded of? best Tim
|
|
|
|
The few people that called themselves ex-ex-premies had posted on the ex forum, but they became upset about one thing or another, and disagreed with exes on some things so they joined forces with some seedy anonymous Australian premies and online engaged in a word-war against some of us exes. I don't think anyone went back to the cult, but they went on a 3+ year campaign of disgusting libel and character assassination on their own premie forum against us. It's all over and I'm glad of it. It's hard to explain what happened.
Modified by Cynthia at Tue, Feb 27, 2007, 05:39:35
|
|
|
|
There have been lots of premies who've wavered at times in their lives though I only know of one real person (there might well have been lots) who actually identified as an ex-premie and then returned to being a premie.
However what Cynthia is referring to is what was associated with the Roupell/Harper/Lady Lovejoy group at Byron Bay which still have the one-reality site (yep, http://www.one-reality.net/) ) which is the lowest form of premie abuse. I have my doubts as to how many of those so-called ex-ex-premies were genuine and how many were "plants" because Cat's Whisker was as low as premies go, I hope.
|
|
|
|
Actually, despite all the suspicion that's been bandied about at various times since we began discussing and exposing Rawat online, only one person ever really seemed possibly a "plant", i.e. a premie posing as an ex to spy or cause mischief. His name is Barry Shaw. There are several other people, though, who, while not going back to the cult, have fallen out with other exes over various interpersonal issues. At one point, some of them became rather votriolic, to say the least, and took pleasure in taunting other exes from this "catbox" forum which was initially set up by Chris Dickey, a premie, and eventually taken over by Derek Harper, a particularly viscious prick who posted under the name Catweasel. Hence "catbox". The big, fat general trend over the past decade is this. We exes started talking with one another and inviting premies to debate Rawat. Many tried for years as some continue to try over on Amazon now. Of course they could never square the circle and the discussions were frustrating, pathetic, hilarious and informative. Kind of. Eventually, Rawat himself set the tone for a much more cyncial, unprincipled interaction with former followers than we ever expected. Premies loosened their belts and allowed themselves to settle down to comfort in Rawat's no-integrity zone.
|
|
|
|
thanks for the history Cynthia, Ocker and Jim ... that explains some references which I didn't quite get. Describing ex-premies as a hate group and resorting to personal attacks is certainly a childish and insecure response to questions and criticism. I guess that Rawat must indeed have given at least tacit approval because a) he must be aware and b) if he gave the word it would certainly stop immediately. Maybe he really does believe his own hype (and the premie sycophants) to such an extent that he cannot rationalise straight rejection of his teaching and his message except to believe that there must be some fundamental fault with the 'failed' receptacles? Maybe he therefore really does believe that ex-premies are a hate group and 'hardly representative of a normal cross-section of humanity'? That would, of course, 'divinely sanction' the attack strategy and make it 'service' . Who knows? It is all madness. It is hard to tell anything for sure about PR, EV or TPRF. The opacity tells its own story. Nowadays all reputable organisations need operate with transparency and accountability. BTW ...I don't see how anyone could join our 'group' as a plant because we aren't one? We are simply individuals participating in an internet conversation. best Tim
Modified by tommo at Tue, Feb 27, 2007, 18:21:27
|
|
|
|
I left in 2000 and once I showed myself unwilling to keep quiet I was amazed at how rapidly I was culled from the flock.
|
|
|
|
It is certainly the achilles heel of any relationship or friendship one might have been in with a believer the first time one found oneself stifling a moan that might have been about to jump out.
Such as oh... no .. not another program.. or:
I don't care where we sit frankly....
Once I admitted to a close friend that I disagreed with something an initiator said and felt an urge to shout out, but resisted the temptation. That was just silly.
If a person is serious about ascending the devotional ladder in the world of Prem, they must always move among devotees, like stepping stones, reaching higher, closer, and carefully avoid nay sayers.
Finding myself to not be such an unquestioning student, at heart, after all, but one that could disagree, was an exit sign for both sides. But in my case one that was ignored.
Modified by Lp at Wed, Feb 28, 2007, 08:24:47
|
|
|
|
It's a question of acceptance by the rest of the flock, and I kinda went what the f.. we're in a cult!!! To which the reply from my friends initially was bemusement and tolerance and then it turned just like that to closed minds as the local sheepdog badmouthed me.
I cannot complain though on my behalf, saved me from all that hurt by a thousand cuts.
One friend in particular had been such a good and staunch friend that I remember thinking that I could not bear to argue with her, that in terms of saving our friendship it would be better not to see her for a while so I wrote her a letter and left it at that....um seven years ago now.
Seven years of hearing her sometimes dire news second hand and no real way of being there for her in the same way she had been for me.
And unless things have changed she was like me and has no idea she is in a cult.
|
|
|
|
I guess I got greedy. Perfect as friends could be, I had to think that all they needed is this knowledge to just make them perfect.
It changes a person's life. It is the hardest fence to cross before deciding to throw fear to the wind.
Even now, to know they will read every dark thought into my every word they read, brings pain with every key stroke.
But I have merely re-examined the meaning of loyalty. It was understood to be for the truth first, I made that clear when I met him.
After staring at the stars for a few minutes, ask ourselves: how credible is it that we should have a whole universe on automatic except for one little piece and a boy has it up his jumper.
Or have bodies and they almost work but someone else has the key to make them work just right. it is so silly that we did then, I suppose, think that it has to be true. I, we, were wrong: it was just silly.
Perhaps hardest of all is to admit all one has wasted: all one has invested in time, hope, effort, cash and life rewards; into an idea which turns out to be just self-hype, that one has to be taught to continually self-administer.
|
|
|
|
We grew up in a society riddled with these sacred places called churches where just such a myth is held to be true.
And parental and grandparental generations that had already paved the way via spiritualism and all sorts of new christian groups for the eastern gurus to wreak their revenge for colonialism. 
Yeah, could not agree more about the pain of knowing that one is going to be read badly by premies. But then I don't think they do read here. It's too freaky for them.
The ones that probably do like Mr Catweasel must have teflon-coated brains. Or they like the smell of hypocrisy on their breath.
|
|
|
|
They've been told not to read EPO or read the forum. It's part of the "hate group" meme. I wouldn't worry about it too much. Besides, if they are true friends, they must by definition, accept you as you are, right? (sigh)
|
|
|
|
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here" signs to hang over the door or the stairs.
But their usually topped by sales of:
"Myn' y'r 'e'd gwaine dru th' d'or"
signs round 'ere --- bump! __ (gets 'em ev'ry time).
Modified by Lp at Thu, Mar 01, 2007, 08:58:51
|
|
|
|
I know what a real friend is. My best friend (in the whole world) and I have known each other since birth (our mothers were friends). I even lived with her family twice over the years - once for six months when I was 14 and hated my own family, and once for a year when I was 19 and came back to the US for a visit from Australia, where I was living at the time. This friend has always accepted me exactly the way I am and has never tried to change me. I tried to change her (when I was in the cult) - but she never stopped loving me anyway. I remember always stopping by to see her when I would fly to the US for a program with the guru. One time I even got her to come see him. Her comments were that she could appreciate how I felt, but that it just wasn't for her. She didn't judge me or stop loving me. When I left the cult and apologized for trying to "convert" her, she commented that she would always love me, no matter what I believed in. She said that she knew I only tried to convert her because I loved her and thought that the guru would be good for her. She said she would always love me, no matter what, because she knows that I love her the same way. That is loyalty. That is unconditional love. That is something that Rawat will never understand.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for remining me what true friendship is. "love does not dominate or manipulate...but cultivates" (dunno who said it)
|
|
|
|
Hi LP, I am not sure if you will pick up on this comment as it is far down the page now, but your words resonated so delightfully with my memories. I think embarrassment is the emotion that I feel most, I had chance recently to read letters that I sent to loved ones thirty years ago when my devotion was in full flight. I cringed like Basil Faulty would clasping his head with both hands and “hopping” around the room in a crouched position, wanting to disappear from sight……. I was taking stock the other day and felt that if I could now believe in my self as I once believed rawat was the lord of all creation then I am convinced that those thirty years plus of misdirection will find its true and rightful destination. You are right about the universe stuff….tis right before our eyes. How could some thing so magnificent be reduced to the mumbo jumbo of rawats world………………nuts Peace and thanks Peter
Modified by peter jackson at Sat, Mar 03, 2007, 19:37:55
|
|
|
|
Nice to hear from you.
Thanks too for a reminder of one of my favorite Jon Cleese images, along with perhaps his funny walk for the Ministry of Funny Walks, or his slow waking in hospital:- "-- fire ...f.. Fire... FIRE! .... FIRE!" His 'Lancelot' Ahh... there are many.
Always glad to see your posts Peter.
|
|
|
|
and the very amusing photo of him at http://www.prem-rawat-bio.org/premies/auspremies.html
I found those three "premie biographies" last Christmas and was struck by how their pre-Knowledge lives had appeared to have a big influence on their premie careers. While all three were confused, drug-abusing teenagers only one appeared to be an ethics-free zone and surprise, surprise, that was the person who evolved in to the catweasel and the only one who has remained a premie to this day.
|
|
|
|
.... and Catweasel denies being Derek Harper. Catweasel has actually threatened libel action although how a fictional character can be libelled is a mystery to me, and why would being identified as Derek Harper be libellous anyway? Anyway, although I am generally opposed to speculation about the identity of anonymous posters, in this case I'll make an exception, and just say that the views of the posters here do not necessarily reflect the views of the forum owner.John.
|
|
|
|
I think the real catweasel, in his real form, can be seen in 'Last action Hero'(whiskers). One of Arnie's flops.
Related link: Last Action Hero
|
|
|
|
I neither know nor care. I can remember John MacGregor telling me that Harper, Roupell and the lady Lovejoy were one-reality but I can't remember, and couldn't be bothered anyway, about Caweasel. I occasionallly looked in on the Forum in those days but found all the Catweasel->ex-Premie Forum stuff tedious.
|
|
|
|
Humppff Ocker - I bet you never wrote anything so good when you were a young man.
|
|
|
|
I was not denigrating the style or it's deathlessness. As for the "deathlessness" I do believe I am the one who has now made it immortal by posting it on the internet.
As an old man, I now see this teenage angst and desire for liberation, childish, silly, misguided and foolish. But if you replace the basketball with surfing his story could have my name on it. It may just be the need to keep his story within DLM guidelines but at least in my life there was a fair bit more humour, probably cause I hung out in a crowd of young Aussie blokes at the beach and worked on building sites from the time I was 14.
And that was another thing, believe it or not, that I had: humility. I didn't write because, after all, as a teenager what could I know?
|
|
|
|
Yes, thanks for putting it up, - I found it very funny, intentionally so I believe.
He would have been in his twenties then, not a teenager.
I don't recall writing things til way later than that, maybe 40s. Always enjoyed a good read though.
I also found Nevilles tearfilled conversion with the 'somewhat embarassed' minister funny, in a sympathetic kind of way.
|
|
|
|
It reminds me of Steve Jones's observation that attempting to discuss evolution with a creationist was 'like wrestling with a greased pig'. Similar logic behind both analogies: nothing you can grapple with, if rational thought is your only weapon.
|
|
|
|
Yes. There is no point arguing rationally with someone whose religion blocks them from sincere consideration of any view of Prem Rawat or his message other than that which Prem Rawat teaches them to have. Obviously premies can never refute the observation that Prem Rawat is a personality cult leader. Secret foot kissing, calendars comprised entirely of pictures of the master and endless fixes of talking head videos of Rawat make his and their status perfectly clear. Most folk who pay them any mind at all quickly tag them clearly and accurately alongside the Moonies, the Scientologists, ISKD and all the rest. Mortified and idignant, premies have no answer other than the 'look at me I'm quite normal and I've been a premie for years ploy (that was my preferred rationalisation when I was a premie) or, the alternative and more worryingly passive/agressive 'leave me alone...if you say that you must be part of a hate group'. Nope it is just dispassionate straight observation...no hurt intended. It is interesting in a way. We all started on this journey with jai sat chit anand...which (I always thought) meaned 'Truth is the consciousness of bliss' Maybe we are dividing .....For the expremies, of those words 'Truth' is the one we held most dear and held to. For the remaining premies I am afraid it may be 'bliss' ..but, devoid of truth, and at what a price. best Tim
Modified by tommo at Mon, Feb 26, 2007, 18:14:50
|
|
|
|
And Tommo unless you were an incredibly unusual pwk, it wasn't all that blissful, was it?
I'd like to say that I've been happier than pretty well every premie I've known in the last 25 years because I've been closer to the truth but in reality I just think it was my good luck to be born with the genes that were passed on by my parents and my fortunate environment.
|
|
|
|
Yes I think the two pictures you posted it summed it up more eloquently than I ever could Tim
|
|
|
