|
|
|
Those quotes are just amazing, and fit Rawat to a "T." I think "The Guru Papers" (from my perspective) was the most significant book in helping me understand the Rawat/devotee phenomena. Thanks for posting that.
|
|
|
|
"A primary goal in therapy is to free clients from their need to transfer unresolved issues onto others. This need makes people particularly susceptible to authoritarian control. Good therapists aim at being very conscious of how they deal with transference." What's that?
|
|
|
|
It's the "transfer" of an unresolved or other relationship in the past onto a new relationship. I think for most people it's looking for Dad, or Mom, or someone to take care of them like a child. I think Freud talked about how especially his female patients would treat him as a parent, (transfer their relationship with their parents onto him), and also fall in love with him. With Rawat, I think the implications are obvious. As premies, you can relate to Rawat as a perfect parent, who ultimately takes care of everything, loves you unconditionally (as long as you surrender completely to him, never doubt him, and never question anything he ever does). It's like getting from Rawat the things that ordinary parents can only provide imperfectly, if at all. It's sick is what it is. And as Kramer and Alstad say, it's authoritarian, and regressive. You relate to Rawat like a child.
Modified by Joe at Tue, Feb 14, 2006, 13:27:32
|
|
|
|
'Transference' is where the the psychoanalytic patient (or 'client' as they're now called) acts out to the therapist repressed memories and emotions associated with someone significant in their past or present life (usually father/mother) Thus, if the client doesn't like therapist and reacts negatively towards them, it is not because the therapist is crap, it's because they are transferring emotions from elsewhere into the consulting situation. Which is not to detract from the Guru Papers, which is a (mostly) brilliant book. I just don't like the authors' occasional references to psychoanalytic concepts that lack any scientific foundation.
Modified by nigel at Tue, Feb 14, 2006, 14:50:27
|
|
|
|
I think there are such phenomena as transference and projection, but I agree that it can be used to defect criticism. It goes both ways. For example, I believe that some of us at least looked at Rawat as the ultimate, loving, accepting parent we either didn't have, or were trying to regain, and then developed all these "childlike" mannerisms (Kind of like those Julie Smyth displays) in order to relate to him that way, and think I that probably is transference. On the other side, the cult sometimes says that ex-premies are "transfering" the failures and problems in their lives onto Rawat -- blaming him for things that are our own fault. This is used as a means of giving Rawat dispensation for having to take responsibility for anything.
Modified by Joe at Tue, Feb 14, 2006, 13:56:32
|
|
|
|
But I don't agree on the matter of transference, or projection. Acceptable as metaphors, maybe, but not in the way that the Guru Papers seems to refer to them as well-established phenomena. >For example, I believe that some of us at least looked at Rawat as the ultimate, loving, accepting parent we either didn't have, or were trying to regain, and then developed all these "childlike" mannerisms (Kind of like those Julie Smyth displays) in order to relate to him that way, and think I that probably is transference. So much of the past cult dogma promulgated ideas of 'being simple' or 'become like a child' ('Twameva Mata' etc.) that it's not really surprising that many premies did, and still do. It's a way of getting your followers to be submissive, for sure - a way that works for some, no doubt. But I don't think that's the same thing at all as 'transference' in my understanding of the term. One can become passive and child-like without this unnecessary and unwarranted explanation that premies are somehow making the guru a surrogate for their own parents. I think it's counter-productive when Kramer et al use that sort of language - especially since the whole Freudian psycholoanalytical movement has cult-like qualities and hand-me-down dogmas of its own. (And victims, of course...) Did you ever read Jeffrey Masson's 'Against Therapy' ? - highly recommended.
Modified by nigel at Tue, Feb 14, 2006, 14:41:59
|
|
|
|
I did read Masson's book and I do not believe therapy (to the extent that means psychoanalysis) is worth very much. Mostly, I think it's a waste of time if not pretty negative. Actually Freud thought transference was something that only happened in psychoanalysis and was actually sort of part of the process. It's been since then that people have tried to apply it to other parts of life, and I agree that it is ripe for abuse. But I think it just means that one transfers feelings from the past onto a new subject, even when there is no basis in reality for doing so. I think there is something to it, and I think it applied to Rawat, as well as to rock stars, etc. But with a guru, the thing is, like a therapist, people sometimes think he has the power to perceive you in ways others don't, that he can fulfill you longing and needs without you even knowing what they are, and so like a therapist you can give over your power to them, and in both situations one is very vulnerable to abuse. I think that's what Kramer and Alstad are saying. I don't know if in the UK you are subjected to the "Dr. Phil" phenomenon, but it is all over television here, and it is just ghastly, the worst kind of exploitation, group-think etc. Everytime I see it, I just cringe, because the group-dynamics, and the cult and cult-leader aspects to it (not to mention confessional, shaming, and all the rest) are just like a cult, only on national television, and involving real people. True, there were the childish aspects of the cult ideology, but I think there needed to be a fantasy there in the first place for that to take root. Even with that, I was always a bit embarrassed by it.
Modified by Joe at Tue, Feb 14, 2006, 16:39:31
|
|
|
|
I think we did project onto Prem our fantasies of the perfect parent in whom we could find perfect comfort - that we were loved perfectly despite all our failings. The flipside to this is that we probably also projected all our personal problems onto the imperfect world we lived in, rather than sometimes facing up to them. Maharaji did say things to indicate you will always fall down here and there despite having Knowledge. It is really in this sphere that the 'philosophy' of K really breaks down. There is the notion that just being with K you will avoid all problems, that everything will naturally sort out, while any problems you face will really be your own, and you weren't with it enough. This is the smudgy line in the system. You can rise above it all through being focused, but you fall on your face on your own. This is probably one of the cagey elements in the system that no one wants to face. Whereas, to any intelligent participant, it's the lack of any coherent sensible ethical and rational relationship to everyday reality which eventually confounds and screws people up.
|
|
|
|
I think we did project onto Prem our fantasies of the perfect parent in whom we could find perfect comfort - that we were loved perfectly despite all our failings Isn't another word for this.... "God"? So, now that brings us to the further question, is God a fantasy of the perfect parent, and is that what we transferred onto Maharaji? So, what do premies do, now, without God as a factor any longer? Could it be that they've removed God from their need for a perfect parent but still rely upon Maharaji as that, only as a human? Yeah, maybe that's why premies can still believe in Maharaji? What they really wanted was a perfect parent and that meant God. But now it no longer does. It just means Maharaji. Hey, I'm getting pretty Freudian, here, but I'm with Nigel. You have to proceed with caution into this domain. A lot of ideas can pop into your head, but if the premises are debatable, which they are, any line of thought you have as an offshoot has to be debatable too.
|
|
|
|
One of the bits of ourselves we have to deal with when rejecting Maharaji is the love and devotion we had for him as the Lord. For some ex-premies, they seem to transfer this to God and/or Jesus. I find little fault in this as the feelings are powerful, and there does seem to be a need to direct them somewhere. It's a bit like the old saying about the problem with being an atheist is when you feel grateful and have no one to thank. Staying true to myself I cannot transfer my feelings of love for Maharaji to God or Jesus, so the feelings just sort of hang around with no target. Until some rationally satisfying target or other resolution comes along, I'm quite happy with the situation.
John.
|
|
|
|
Staying true to myself I cannot transfer my feelings of love for Maharaji to God or Jesus, so the feelings just sort of hang around with no target. I don't understand how you can have feelings you once had for Maharaji "just hanging around". How do you do that? I can understand needing a target for love, but I'm confused by the context you're using it in. What kind of love are you talking about? Is it that you need a God to love but just haven't found a suitable replacement for Maharaji? Seriously, I don't get it.
|
|
|
|
I know, I'm mixing theories here (again), but I think premies can get addicted to the feeling of devotion, and the feeling of "love" for this distant "superior power in person," who they think "loves" them as well. So, when you reject Maharaji, you also lose that "feeling." Now, I think that "feeling" is stunting and destructive, and when I stopped having it I felt liberated and excited about living my own life without those delusions. But then, when I look back at it, I think I lived in the cult for a couple of years during which I felt none of that stuff for Rawat. It was long gone, and I didn't really believe Maharaji knew I even existed, let alone "loved," me, and I didn't feel any devotion for him, either. I spent a lot of time blaming myself for that, so when I left the cult, the relief was really just freeing myself from the obligation to feel devoted to Rawat, and that was very freeing. But I think if you were feeling "devotion" to Rawat, and then read EPO, and it all came crashing down, one might feel a real lack in that regard, and perhaps seek to replace the object of devotion. Now, I coudl see how you could actually call that "transference," but that's another issue. 
Modified by Joe at Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 11:47:13
|
|
|
|
I agree that it's liberating to stop having feelings of devotion to Maharaji, or at least to stop feeling obligated to have those feelings. That's when the real liberation begins, when you decide that you don't have to do this anymore. But that's not what John is saying. He's saying that his feelings for Maharaji are just hanging around because he hasn't found anywhere to transfer them. Sorry, but that doesn't make sense. What annoys me, somewhat, is John seems a little smug about this - other ex-premies "transfer" their feelings to God or Jesus, but John's above that. He's true to himself. He won't allow himself to transfer those feelings. But what the hell does that mean?
|
|
|
|
I don't think there's anything smug about what John was trying to describe, Jerry, if you read the thread where he said it - though maybe his choice of words didn't quite fit what he meant (if what he meant is what I think he meant!). John feels emotional responses to hearing (or even thinking about) old premie songs. I get the same thing on a Sunday when I hear the morning church service on BBC radio 4. It's not for the idiotic prayers, Bible readings or sermons, which wash over me, but for the hymns and choral singing which trigger very strong memories from childhood, because of my upbringing. I get this strong sense of safety and warmth and dinner in the oven and mum and dad being home and everything being all right with the world. It's like classical conditioning (Pavlov's dogs etc.), where it is your body or nervous system which is responding, even when the intelligent part of you knows that fer damn sure God ain't in his Heaven and everything is certainly not all right with the world... (I also get off on the late-night shipping forecast!) So in a sense, there are these deeply-embedded, but logically misplaced feelings which can feel ok, even though they are no longer attachable to anything. Though I don't see why you need to attach them to anything if you understand why they're there. I think that's what John meant. I suspect he'll reply in a minute either way, running his text through the Microsoft Word smug-check tool before posting
Modified by nigel at Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 16:50:58
|
|
|
|
That's a funny and well put post.With regard to music, though, I think that's a special area of debate in itself. From a little child Catholic hymns have done it for me but I don't, for a minute, believe in a single word of them. That was the one thing I loved about going to church more than anything. The music. You know ..the " Ave, Ave, Ave Ma-ri-a, Ave, Ave, Ave Maria-a" or another one of my faves, " Faith of our Fathers Holy Faith, we will be true to thee till death". Also, I did get off on the Indian bhajans and on the odd occasion had a little jam with the Gujerati Premies ....they with their tabla’s, harmoniums etc and me with the guitar. Funnily enough, some Gujerati bhajans/ballads remind me of some Irish ballads...maybe there's some long historical connection there via the roving Euro Celts and what not....but I'm not sure about that. I worked as a driver delivery man once for a Sikh business and used to go from one Sikh factory to another and would really love to hear the Sikh bhajans too. Then there're all the Premie songs....yeah, they got tiresome after a while but they could trigger off the emotions. Now, though, they genuinely do irritate me more than uplift me but, generally speaking, I think music is a special case when considering all this devotional shit we went through. It’s no accident that pretty much all religions revel in it, ( well, apart from the Sufi’s, most Muslims don’t embrace it…but their call to prayer is sort of getting there) Nations, Political Party’s, cults, you name it. Obvious, really, it being so primal and universal. As an afterthought, I recall going up on the train when my father took ill ( actually he died the minute I stepped on a train but I didn't know that at the time)but, from all reports, I knew it was serious. Anyway, I found myself singing that bhajan : " Leaving this world when you go away-ay-ay, none will accompany you, on that day....why do you say this is mine? Everything will be left behind. Nothing is going to remain, you will stay for a very short time ...the soul will fly away-ay-ay-ay ....Leaving this world..." and so on. It made sense at the time. And summing it all up? No need, you've done so already, IMO. >>>>"It's almost like classical conditioning (Pavlov's dogs etc.), where it is your body or nervous system which is responding, even when the intelligent part of you knows that fer damn sure God ain't in his Heaven and everything is certainly not all right with the world... (I also get off on the late-night shipping forecast!) So in a sense, there are these deeply-embedded, but logically misplaced feelings which can feel ok, even though they are no longer attachable to anything. Though I don't see why you need to attach them to anything if you understand why they're there" <<<<<<< Or something like that. Put it this way, I’m no longer bound to the music as I used to be when it was some re-affirming and/or inspiring aspect of “ Devotion”. The Bhajans and the Western Premie songs are now as distant ( in terms of living reality) as those long ago sung Catholic hymns. One or two will trigger something or other but not in any devotional sense….many will get on my tits….but none will really speak to me in any real sense. Not anymore. It feels a lot better as a result, too.
Modified by Dermot at Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 16:56:35
|
|
|
|
That's the one I loved, and we Catholics didn't sing it because it was written by Martin Luther (supposedly). There was a Sunday Morning kid's show called "Davey and Goliath" on American television, and the music for that hymn was the theme song for the show. It was a kind of crude animation with little jointed dolls and I can't tell you how many people I have talked to remember that show and always watched it. It was sponsored by the American Lutheran Church. Anyhow, later, in my rebellious teenage years, I was a church organist and played that song. It was accepted because it was the age of John XXIII and ecumism, but I got some rater dirty looks from some of the nuns. But I still get goose-bumps with a lot of sacred music, for example, Panis Angelicus. Great song.
|
|
|
|
I find it hard to recall that one, but it seemed to be solid and workmanlike, sort of very Lutherish. One of my favourites was always My Song Is Love Unknown (my saviour's love to me, love to the loveless shown that they might lovely be. Oh who am I, that for my sake my lord should take frail flesh and die?) We used to sing that at grammar school assembly, 600 boys and teachers, and everyone seemed to like it, even the thugs. I guess it was the unusualness of the tune, which is incredibly plaintiff and sinuous, combined with such clever phrasing: love to the loveless shown that they might lovely be is a beautiful evocative phrase. Also a bit of the alliteration in frail flesh. Lovely subtle change from the major to the minors. Ave Maria by Gounod is moving, with its diminisheds and augmenteds and whatever, working through to the finale. I guess it's the skilful musical composition which itself may be the basic pleasure and zoning factor. Best by far remains Dear Lord and Father of Mankind. Whatever one may think of religion itself, it would be difficult to think of many hymns in which the melody complements so well and naturally the restrained emotion involved. I guess its appeal is in its total opposite of pomposity.
|
|
|
|
A lovely choice of hymns there Anthony. Two more to add, if I may: the Lifeboatmen's one (which ends "for those in peril on the sea"), and "O sacred head, sore wounded" (Bach, I think).On second thoughts, I'm not too sure of the one about the festering burger. tee hee.
Modified by cq at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 06:47:02
|
|
|
|
ever singing round thy throne of light." Is my sweet and jolly favourite ( hymns Ancient & Modern). Here is verse three: Thou who art beyond the farthest mortal eye can scan can it be that thou regardest songs of sinful man? Can we know that thou art near us, and wilt hear us? Yea, we can.
It's a bit like "Bob the Builder" at the end. "Can he fix it? Yes he can!" "My song is love unknown" is lovely too Anthony.
Modified by Lexy at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 11:48:30
|
|
|
|
I always preferred Wallace and Gromit, though I have never seen a whole episode of them. I was sorry to see that the warehouse went up with all the cast and equipment a couple of months back, and reckon it was probably one of the chickens playing silly buggers with a box of matches. Devotion to the life force, whether we see this as God or some more objective power is a really deep rooted facet of human nature, and we should let it out in any way we see fit - in great hymns or art or through blissing out over imagery of galaxies and planets or whatever, so long as we aren't harming others in the process.
|
|
|
|
Just click on it. According to this history, this song has been called “the greatest hymn of the greatest man of the greatest period of German history” and the “Battle Hymn of the Reformation.”
Related link: A Mighty Fortress is Our God
Modified by Joe at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 19:54:47
|
|
|
|
Let’s not forget “ The Dark Night of the Soul” by St.John of the Cross. Very much enhanced by a beautiful Celtic-type tune and sung by Loreena McKennit. Can’t seem to get a copy online for listening so you’ll just have to take my word for it. The lyrics alone don’t do the thing full justice. An ex-girlfriend of mine sent me a copy many moons ago when I was still a mystical devotee , ho hum. And was that you on the piano, Joe, hehehe ? No I know it wasn’t, really. It must have been on a loop, though, as it never seemed to end. Thanks T for your little pieces. Solviegs song is something I’d very, very occasionally have on low volume while I’m pottering about pre-occupied with something else with my mind elsewhere but not in the mood for some high volume raucous rock or whatever. Also, Costello’s piece was not so much “laid back” more “ flat on your back”. Still, a time and place for everything. Eclecticism rules and all that. THE DARK NIGHT OF THE SOUL Upon a darkened night
the flame of love was burning in my breast
And by a lantern bright
I fled my house while all in quiet rest Shrouded by the night
and by the secret stair I quickly fled
The veil concealed my eyes
while all within lay quiet as the dead Chorus Upon that misty night
in secrecy, beyond such mortal sight
Without a guide or light
than that which burned so deeply in my heart That fire t'was led me on
and shone more bright than of the midday sun
To where he waited still
it was a place where no one else could come Chorus Within my pounding heart
which kept itself entirely for him
He fell into his sleep
beneath the cedars all my love I gave
And by the fortress walls
the wind would brush his hair against his brow
And with its smoothest hand
caressed my every sense it would allow Chorus I lost myself to him
and laid my face upon my lovers breast
And care and grief grew dim
as in the mornings mist became the light
There they dimmed amongst the lilies fair
There they dimmed amongst the lilies fair
There they dimmed amongst the lilies fair
Oh night thou was my guide
oh night more loving than the rising sun
Oh night that joined the lover
to the beloved one
transforming each of them into the other
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 23:06:02
|
|
|
|
don't really go for the tune much. However, I admire Luther himself, for his determination to buck the system vigorously, go to the original sources of his subject rather than the officially interpreted versions, and to examine these through his good sense and the promptings of his conscience. The whole foundation of the Reformation which he helped begin was about personal conscience, and the word resounds everywhere during that period. In England, as you know, there were floods of outdoor preachers, including Bunyan, who received 12 years in Bedford Gaol (the established church defending vigorously its monopoly of conscience). I guess I should mention Who Would True Valour See as one of my favourite hymns also (especially Hobgoblin nor foul fiend can daunt his spirit). Nowadays, the idea of conscience might be knowing right from wrong, but to those people it meant really feeling for truth deeply within, and acting according to the response received, as an ongoing learning process. It is this form of conscience which must not be stifled through any form of autocratic belief system, whether cultish, fundamentalist religious or secular. The real truths come from inside us, through a caring presence which may be the soul, or if you are materialist, an evolved process of consciousness. However, as far as I am concerned, the import and method of delivery are highly loving and caring and without judgement or humiliation to us. And this seems to me to be the essence of what the Reformation was about - that the teaching plan and delivery are naturally inside us, if we try to be open, and the end is about becoming a loving and socially-oriented person. Take care, Joe
Modified by Anthony at Fri, Feb 17, 2006, 05:21:31
|
|
|
|
That's okay Anthony, although I doubt you could be a good Lutheran without liking AMFIOG. I grew up in an area in the American Midwest that was heavily German, (like much of the Midwest), and there were large groups of German Catholics and German Lutherans. The Midwest is littered with Catholic Colleges and Lutheran Colleges, for example. Anyhow, some of the tension from the reformation was carried with them, and I recall. There was quite a bit of division, mostly below the surface. But I fear that both are moving in the direction of fundamentalism, arising from a kind of fascist fear.
|
|
|
|
all the suckers for sacred music are piping in too I agree with Anthony re the -Ave maria- he mentions which is, of course, a different hymn to the one I referred to. Also, the Anglicans came up with some good stuff. - How great thou are -, Blake's Jerusalem-, and , of course, the anthem of the FA cup football final ( soccer) - Abide with me - in fact there are so many from various denominations. A well done Catholic service for conjuring up the mystical is hard to beat, though. Music, mass, communion, bells, incense.....not forgetting the stations of the cross and all that mumbo jumbo... hehehe.
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 12:21:41
|
|
|
|
Love that song, especially its reference to the "green and pleasant land," something that seems to have made it into the vernacular. I think "Chariots of Fire" made that song popular in the US. I also loved "Oh God Our Help in Ages Past" As an organist, I liked it because it was easy to play and sounded like a million bucks. Of course, as a Catholic, we didn't sing hymns in church that weren't in latin until the mid-60s.
|
|
|
|
To Blake, of course, it was a subversive response to the callousness and recklessness of the Industrial revolution and to the rapid rise of values that were fundamentally at odds with his own. Hence the reference to " dark, satanic mills" etc. I guess it could be classed as a mystical/Christian Socialist anthem but time has, rightly or wrongly, mellowed it somewhat...with a damn good tune helping it along the way...and now it's accepted by many as an unofficial anthem of England with little real regard paid to its message. Unfortunately the " official" anthem of England is the anthem of Great Britain....God save the Queen...yuk!. Why only England is lumped with that hymn to Royalty and the other countries aren't is beyond me. That's the English for you, though ..................... And did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon england’s mountains green?
And was the holy lamb of god
On england’s pleasant pastures seen?
And did the countenance divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was jerusalem builded here
Amongst these dark satanic mills?
Bring me my bow of burning gold
Bring me my arrows of desire
Bring me my spear: o clouds unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire.
I will not cease from mental fight
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand
Till we have built jerusalem
In england’s green and pleasant land.
Words: william blake music hubert parry ...................................................... "Oh God Our Help in Ages Past" ...yep, that's a good one too.
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 13:38:59
|
|
|
|
Hi Joe, Dermot, Lexy et al… Jerusalem is still a moving poem two hundred years after Blake wrote it – and the tune’s not bad either. Both will bring an irrational tear to my eye. It’s fascinating the different groups of people who have claimed it as their own (which is a very good reason it should be the UK national anthem.) > http://www.icons.org.uk/theicons/collection/jerusalem/biography/sir-hubert-parry All things to all people Jerusalem occupies a unique place in the annals of English popular music, in that it has been appropriated by many different organisations and served many different causes, from women's rights to modern sporting occasions. It has found political favour with groups across the spectrum, from the Labour Party to the British National Party.
The biopic of English athletes Harold Abrahams and Eric Liddell, Chariots Of Fire (1981), takes its name from one of the lines of Blake's poem, and the hymn appears in the soundtrack.
For many years, it was sung, along with the Red Flag, at the close of Labour Party conferences.
In sport, it has been the anthem of choice at the Rugby League Challenge Cup finals, and in 2005 was adopted by supporters of the England cricket team in their victory over Australia in the Ashes tournament.
As a hymn, it has been a mainstay of public school assemblies almost since it was first composed. It is heard being sung lustily in Lindsay Andersons anti-establishment film If.... (1968) at just such an institution. >
http://www.thebrpage.net/index.htm?http&&&www.thebrpage.net/answer.asp?heading=English poet (1757-1827) >God Song borrows heavily from his poem And Did Those Feet In Ancient Time (composed ca 1804-1808 and published ca 1808), which says "And did those feet in ancient time / Walk upon England's mountains green? / And was the holy Lamb of God / On England's pleasant pastures seen?". The same poem is used in its entirety in the song "Blake´s Jerusalem" of the english singer-songwriter Billy Bragg (released on "The Internationale" in the same year as Against The Grain / God Song). Bragg's commend to this poem: "My belief that Jerusalem is a left wing anthem has got me into arguments with public schoolboys at Eton and Trotskyist newspaper sellers in Trafalgar Square. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that this song does not belong alongside "Rule Brittania" and "Land of Hope and Glory" at the last night of the Proms. William Blake was a radical and a visionary. A friend of Thomas Paine, he was harassed by the Establishment of the day, eventually arrested for sedition. Written at the time of the Industrial Revolution, I believe this song is an attack on the new breed of capitalists that Blake saw in his midst. It asks how can the moral of Christ be compatible with the morality of exploitation, both of people and of the environment." Pretty badreligious. Billy Bragg also recorded an album called "William Bloke" released in 1996 by Cooking Vinyl. > > I’m with Billy Bragg on this one. Nige, the irredeemable old leftie…
Modified by nigel at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 15:47:38
|
|
|
|
Hi Interesting thread, lots of great songs and hymns. However why restrict it to religious based stuff? Tons of other really inspirational (am I allowed to use that word here?) stuff outside the domain of the church and that setting. For instance, Solvieg's song from Grieg's Peer Gynt. I'll try and attach a snippet here. (low bit rate so the file is not so big). Or something completely different. Elvis Costello did a bunch of experimental work in the 1990's, again I'll try and attach a snippet below. T
|
|
|
|
Oh, I could not post two attachments in the same message. So here is the second attachment, the Elvis Costello snippet. T
|
|
|
|
Hi there T, and everyone,Thanks for those snippets T. This is turning into one of Hamzen's Ex-Premie Desert Island Discs. What's happened to that Ham? I look forward to hearing Dermot's choices sometime soon, hopefully! Abide with Me and Jerusalem are certainly in my top 5 hymns and I'd like to include Cwm Rhondda - Guide Me Oh Thy Great Redeemer (or Jehovah). The Welsh equivalent of our Jerusalem, being their unofficial National Anthem. Cwm Rhondda Guide me, O Thou great Jehovah
Pilgrim through this barren land
I am weak but Thou art mighty
Hold me with Thy powerful hand.
Bread of heaven, bread of heaven
Feed me till I want no more (I want no more)
Feed me till I want no more. Open now the crystal fountain
Whence the healing waters flow
Let the fiery, cloudy pillar
Lead me all my journey through.
Strong Deliv'rer, Strong Deliv'rer
Be Thou still my strength and shield (my strength and shield)
Be Thou still my strength and shield. When I tread the verge of Jordan
Bid my anxious fears subside
Bear me through the swelling current
Land me safe on Canaan's side
Songs of praises, songs of praises
I will ever give to Thee (will give to Thee)
I will ever give to Thee. Wele'n sefyll rhwng y myrtwydd
Wrthddrych teilwng o fy mryd
Er o'r braidd 'rwy'n Ei adnabod
Ef uwchlaw gwrthrychau'r byd
Henffych fore!
Caf ei weled fel y mae. Rhosyn Saron yw Ei enw
Gwyn a gwridog, hardd Ei bryd!
Ar ddeng mil y mae'n rhagori
O wrthddrychau penna'r byd
Ffrind pechadur!
Dyma'r llywydd ar y mor. Beth sydd imi mwy a wnelwyf
Ag eilunod gwael y llawr?
Tystio 'r wyf nad yw eu cwmni
I'w gymharu a'm Iesu Mawr.
O! am aros
Yn Ei gariad ddyddiau f'oes.
|
|
|
|
Last time you posted In the Hall of the Mountain King, and I played it for some days. Peer Gynt is by Ibsen, as you know. As a story about a feckless youth who has to go through many adventures to understand himself, it is from the same tradition as Goethe, and later Hesse. And, of course, the great Novalis (Hardenberg), who died at age 28 after creating German Blue Flower Romanticism. Ah, student days, and look where it all led.
Still, I didn't have the option then of David Beckham studies.
|
|
|
|
is superb and totally indivisible from the sentiment and import of Blake's words. It appears notably in the News Chronicle Song Book, which is probably a favourite nationally among musical households.
Out of print probably since the 1940s or 50s, it probably exists in the family pile of piano sheet music, lovingly passed down through the generations. It's a repository of well beloved songs from the UK and internationally. To take a few at random: The Ash Grove, David of the White Rock, The Londonderry Air, Early One Morning, Barbara Allan, The Minstrel Boy, The Vicar of Bray, Annie Laurie, The Oak and the Ash, O No John, The Keel Row, and so on. Then there are the sea shanties: A-Roving, Tom Bowling, Shenandoah, Whisky Johnny, Boney Was a Warrior, Spanish Ladies, Tom's Gone To Hilo... And the Hymns and Carols: Jerusalem, Eternal Father, When I Survey The Wondrous Cross, The Battle Hymn of the Republic (Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory), O Love That Wilt Not Let Me Go, Jesu! Lover Of My Soul, etc. This is not to mention the negro spirituals, children's songs and so on. The musical arrangements are all excellent and feel definitive. Though it contains all the well-known English favourites, some of the richest of the contents are Welsh (David of the White Rock), Irish (the wonderful Minstrel Boy, Londonderry Air) and Scots (Loch Lomond, Annie Laurie, other Burns). To really appreciate the News Chronicle Song Book it should have come done from a favourite aunt and uncle, and have a spine loosened through much loving use. Who can doubt that appreciating other people's music at an early age is a key to appreciating different cultures when we grow, and, in some small way, the universal human experience, or at least it would be good to think so.
|
|
|
|
...don't get me started on Latin Joe! Could "Latin" be another early premie common denominator ?
Modified by Lexy at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 17:00:09
|
|
|
|
Did the nuns make you read and translate that? They did me. Gaul is divided into three parts, you know. My favorite name from that text is Vercingetorix, some Gallic general. What a great name. I don't think Latin is a common denominator with premiedom, although VW Mini-buses and Earth Shoes might be.
Modified by Joe at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 17:04:40
|
|
|
|
'Abide with me'? - I thought it was 'You'll never walk alone' 
|
|
|
|
...don't forget the sacred and bleeding heart ripped out of the chest ,still dripping (never really understood all that).
|
|
|
|
Yep, that's true lexy...I wonder what all that was really about ? The Sacred Heart ...yep, memories, memories.
|
|
|
|
here's some info. If only I could be bothered to actually read it, hahaha.Not in the least bit inspired to.This thread is growing and is decidedly OT. Mike and John will have to seek out John Horton, or someone, to cope with the stress of it all.
Related link: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07163a.htm
Modified by Dermot at Thu, Feb 16, 2006, 16:58:29
|
|
|
|
I agree with what you said Nigel, but those feelings only make sense out of context, if you are in the Julie Smyth world of seeing only the positive and never the negative. So, I can get a kind of nostalgia by even listening to Arti, because I recall good but deluded feelings when I sang it sometimes to Rawat and his smug, fat, face, and the plentiful baby fat barely contained in that Krishna crown. But, then, I can also hear him speak, and hear the code words and destructive ideas and I can get literally sick to my stomach, and that's also a "nostalgic" memory, of the times my own soul was battered trying to cram myself into Rawat's destructive belief system. So, it goes both ways, unless one is still living with the cult filter.
|
|
|
|
I didn't mean sad longings for past happier times, which is always a waste of time, especially since those times weren't necessarily especially happy, much of the time - it's just a conditioned gut-reaction where you find yourself unexpectedly enjoying sounds that maybe trigger earlier embedded good feelings, even though the context is meaningless to your present life. I actually agree with the rest of your post, Joe - it's just 'nostalgia' I couldn't relate to.
Modified by nigel at Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 19:52:19
|
|
|
|
I started replying to Jerry earlier this evening, but got called away, and I've been busy since. Nigel, you came close to saying what I wanted to say but not quite. I remember one time before I'd heard of Rawat I had taken acid and gone to bed. I battled all night with my perceived childhood traumas, trying to face the fears I felt were stored in my body, especially in my stomach. After several hours I felt my spine dissolve in waves of pure bliss. I just lay there feeling so grateful, but I didn't know who to.
Then I got into Maharaji, and when similar feelings occurred there was no doubt as to the target. So skip forward 25 years, I read EPO, thought about it, and decided Maharaji had nothing to do with these feelings. At the same time, because of the discussions on the forums, the same questioning of Maharaji also applied to the existence of God. I didn't become certain God didn't exist as some here are, I just didn't know. (That's smug for you!)
Then I re-listened to the devotional music such as 'Focus'. I remember one time playing that in my car as I was driving a friend home. I had never mentioned Maharaji to him, but he said that was so beautiful, and asked me who the singer was. Yes, it is a beautiful song, and inspires emotions in me towards a benevolent creator. Other premie songs, and non-premie music, inspires similar feelings in me. The problem, if it is a problem, is that I don't recognise the existence of such a thing as a creator.
I sometimes think about evolution, and my understanding of it which is that as soon as a molecule existed that had the property of creating copies of itself with small random differences, then beings such as ourselves were not only possible, but inevitable; and I am in awe at this. But it doesn't give me a target for the feeling I get when I hear:-
" Freude, schöner Götterfunken
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische, dein Heiligtum!
Deine Zauber binden wieder
Was die Mode streng geteilt;
Alle Menschen werden Brüder,
Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.
Wem der große Wurf gelungen,
Eines Freundes Freund zu sein;
Wer ein holdes Weib errungen,
Mische seinen Jubel ein!
Ja, wer auch nur eine Seele
Sein nennt auf dem Erdenrund!
Und wer's nie gekonnt, der stehle
Weinend sich aus diesem Bund!
Freude trinken alle Wesen
An den Brüsten der Natur;
Alle Guten, alle Bösen
Folgen ihrer Rosenspur.
Küsse gab sie uns und Reben,
Einen Freund, geprüft im Tod;
Wollust ward dem Wurm gegeben,
und der Cherub steht vor Gott.
Froh,
wie seine Sonnen fliegen
Durch des Himmels prächt'gen Plan,
Laufet, Brüder, eure Bahn,
Freudig, wie ein Held zum Siegen.
Seid umschlungen, Millionen!
Diesen Kuß der ganzen Welt!
Brüder, über'm Sternenzelt
Muß ein lieber Vater wohnen.
Ihr stürzt nieder, Millionen?
Ahnest du den Schöpfer, Welt?
Such' ihn über'm Sternenzelt!
Über Sternen muß er wohnen."
|
|
|
|
John, I don't mean to get on your bad side by calling you smug, and I apologize because, apparently, I read you wrong. I do think this is an interesting topic - just what did Maharaji represent to us, and is it important for us to find something or someone in the aftermath of our cult exit to fill the hole left by that exit. I know for me Maharaji was, quite simply, the second coming of Christ. He played up to it and I bought into it. But dig this. I no longer believe in Maharaji or Christ. There's no need for a transference from my devotion to Maharaji to something else. I believed in God before I met Maharaji. I just saw Maharaji as the way for me to "realize" God. Remember that? Wasn't that what the whole thing was about? "Realizing" Knowedge, and by doing so "realizing" God? Yes, that's what it was always about for me, and I still consider "realizing" God to be a worthwhile endeavor, only now I'm on my own doing it. I'm not looking to Maharaji or anybody else to be my path to that goal. I'm just winging it on my own so long as I've got the drive to keep on striving to achieve that goal. Like you, I also have to be truthful to myself, and to be nearer to God is definitely a drive which runs deep within me. Maybe there are genuine, humble souls who have achieved that goal and can be inspirations to us who are still striving for it, but I'll never give them my power the way I gave it to Maharaji. That was a big mistake, and I learned from it. There's nothing for me to transfer from Maharaji to someone else. I'm just not into perfect masters anymore. To be truthful, I really always was a little skeptical of Rawat. I just regarded any misgivings I had about Maharaji as being "mind", something to quickly put out of it. But now, I'd like to consider myself older and wiser. If it smells like a rat, I ain't going near it until I'm certain it isn't.
|
|
|
|
That's OK, Jerry - I am sometimes smug and I know it can come across that way. Yes, I still have a desire to see the idea of God realisation through, but am also reluctant to put any energy into it, as I distrust any 'path' and of course it could all be a waste of time. As it is, just by carrying on with my normal life (if my life can be described as normal) I feel something happening to me that could be called 'growth'. I guess I'm getting a little zen-like with my chopping wood and making wine lifestyle.
John
|
|
|
|
I needn't have bothered failing it as badly as I did, now we have babelfish: "joy, beautiful God sparks daughter from Elysium, we entered feuertrunken, Himmli, your Heiligtum! Your charms bind again which the fashion strictly divided; All humans become brothers, where your gentle wing stays. Whom the large throw successfully to be a friend friend; Who interferes holdes a woman achieved, its rejoicing! Yes, who calls also only one soul its on that ground approximately! And wer's never skillfully, steal yourself crying from this federation! All natures at the chests of nature drink joy; All good ones, all bad consequences of their rose trace. Kisses it gave us and vines, a friend, examined in death; Wollust ward the worm given, and the Cherub stands before God. Gladly, like its suns fly through the sky praecht'gen plan, run, brothers, your course, joyful, like a hero for triumphing. Are umschlungen, millions! This kiss of the whole world! Brothers, ueber'm star tent must a dear father live. You fall down, millions? Do you suspect the creator, world? Look for ' it ueber'm star tent! Over stars he must live." > Trust me, John, I'm not taking the piss here - I think we're on the same wavelength re your post, and previous ones. I hitched up to London as a wee nipper to see Beethoven's 9th on the second-to-last-night-of-the-proms back in '73.. So I do know what you mean.
Modified by nigel at Wed, Feb 15, 2006, 20:02:43
|
|
|
|
I didn't read what John said like that, but if that what he meant, then I agree with you. I don't think people who leave the cult still feel residual devotional feelings for Rawat, but they may feel a lack of having the feeling (of being devoted) and might look to another object of devotion to try to get it back. There is also the phenomena of ex-premies feeling so burned by Rawat don't want to be devoted to anything, and certainly not anything quasi-spiritual or religious. For me, I think I was on my way to being an atheist before I became a premie, sort of falling for the idea that Rawat wasn't offering a religion. But of course, it was.
|
|
|
|
Jerry, I don’t think John is being smug. By saying he has to be true to himself I think he is just stating that for him to believe something to be true it must be acceptable to him rationally as well as emotionally.Whether one likes it or not, having just been through the process of realising that you thought a businessman from Hardwar was the Living Messiah, the parallels to believing a tradesman from Bethlehem is a maybe Dead maybe Living in a Special Way Messiah are hard to walk over. Plenty of people do. Personally I don’t like it, I wish people had more respect for their own mental processes. But I’m not going to get all riled up about it, I do understand the difficulties, or some of them at least. I remember at age 10 coming home from school and asking my mother what we were, did we believe in god or were we atheists? She replied that due to lack of proof, we were agnostics. Not bad eh? So please explain why she taught me to say The Lords Prayer at bedtime. How come I thought Jesus was some sort of sweet and special person that had some relevance to me. God did not figure in my life until the subject came up. Eventually like Auntie Bea, and shortly after exiting, I decided that even if I was wrong in thinking he didn’t exist, should I ever meet up with God I would be more interested in punching him out than anything else. Moreover, should he then consign me to seven circles of hell it would be a preferable fate to condoning his behaviour. Just being true to myself you understand. However the moment came when I was lying on a sand dune, the salt drying on my skin, the sun warm and delightful, when I felt the urge to say thank you to god. There it was, gratitude and no one to express it to. I suppose I could have become a nature worshipper and started thanking the sun, the sky the sea and the earth, but I wasn’t inclined to. Instead I wondered if I needed to say thank you at all.. if the feeling I was experiencing required it. I found it was entirely satisfactory to accept that I was feeling good. And most relaxing. In my opinion love of a devotional nature is a real and natural part of our emotional makeup. Without it we would not survive pretty obviously since babies are helpless. At times of crisis it makes heroes. Rawat both whined for and demanded it from us. He even went so far as to suggest that being devoted to him was for the good of all. In the exercise of devotional love you pay attention to the object of said love before yourself. When someone you love is in need this is a reasonable thing to do. And the feeling to do so will pass when the need is over or you are exhausted and need to rest and pay attention to yourself. And this is my point really. Yet another of the sins of god, self abnegation. One of the things I noticed over and over when coming out of the religious daze and not just with me, was that my world view frequently lacked me. As if I was an impartial disembodied observer rather than a player.
|
|
|
|
God did not figure in my life until the subject came up. That's an interesting statement in itself, lesley, along with all the other good thoughts you have in your post. Just how important is God to us until we get taught about him? I remember as a kid first being instructed about God. It was alien to me. How, then, did my search for God become so all consuming? Well, I think hallucinogens actually started the ball rolling when I was a teenager. But now I think it's more the classic type, sober minded mystical experiences which are the impetus for my continued search. To be frank, being in God's embrace is being home to me. I feel removed from who I really am if I don't feel God's presense in my life. I don't know how it got to be like that, but that's the way it is. And this is my point really. Yet another of the sins of god, self abnegation. Yes, that does play a part in the search for God, no doubt, but that's only because seekers see God as being everything, and themselves as nothing without him. But that's only a natural evolution of thought if in those moments you're close to God you feel complete, and otherwise feel empty when you don't sense his presense. That's the way it is for me, anyway. So, I live with that, acknowledge it, and proceed from it. I don't see it as a bad thing. I just see it as an acknowledgement of the reality of my life's experience. I don't know what else to go by. Gotta go by what I live, right? You've got to do the same. Best of luck to you.
|
|
|
|
...an interesting reply."I just see it as an acknowledgement of the reality of my life's experience. I don't know what else to go by. Gotta go by what I live, right?" I agree, It's a question of honesty isn't it, and I like the stuff. I like being able to say what I really think and hear what someone else does too. I do go by my experience but I find it necessary to cross check as it were. All the best, Lesley.
|
|
|
|
It is really in this sphere that the 'philosophy' of K really breaks down. There is the notion that just being with K you will avoid all problems, that everything will naturally sort out, while any problems you face will really be your own, and you weren't with it enough. Exactly, this is the bait and switch in the Rawat cult. Receiving knowledge is supposed to be the simple experience of peace..what you have always been looking for...and it's supposed to be something you can access anytime and it's "so beautiful." But then, there is the switch, "knowledge" being the bait. The switch was best documented in that letter from Maharaji the cult used to give people after a knowledge session. That's the one where Maharaji says "your mind is now going to start bothering you." So, now there is this catch, because you have a mind, and the mind is after you, is basically the devil and so, wow, it isn't enough to receive knowledge or even practicing knowledge, now you also need something to fight your mind (satan) and that's Maharaji, the messiah, the savior. You had better hook your wagon to Maharaji or you are doomed to never getting what you thought you already had because of your MIND. And, like you said, Maharaji reinforced dependence as well, by telling us we were always screwing up, never surrendered enough, never having the right "understanding" and always getting "distracted." And of course, this is obvious, because by "distracted" that just means living your life. So, it's a big, cruel joke this "knowledge" thing.
|
|
|
|
I think it's a very good appreciation of the process which can happen between a devotee and their teacher, when the teacher displays him/herself as synonymous with the experience had. The follower becomes completely suborned to the words, actions, good will of the teacher, while the guru becomes totally alienated into a position of unquestioning infallibility and consumed by the need for constant worship. The problem may be that, through the natural process of meditation we (ideally or occasionally) atune to a deep sense of natural psychological or spiritual integration, which is corrupted through the queer identification of this with another human. It takes time to work through this perversion of our natural responses. However, hopefully we can eventually disentangle the various paradoxes involved, and live fully in our own right. From where I am sitting, this doesn't preclude a future spiritual life based (to some extent) on meditation. However, this is only a personal perception, and whatever conclusions we make about things remain rightly individual. The main thing is to live a full life wholly according to our own consciousness, conscience and understanding. Certainly, there is no queer power waiting to assail us by being who we are - any perception of same is just unwholesome fantasy correlative to the same nutty type of belief system. I hope you received a Valentine from your personal love. The absence on my own doorstep this morning of general response I put down to a probable overload of the system in my own direction. Bests, Anthony
|
|
|
|
Very meaningful (and cute, too).
|
|
|
