|
|
|
Ex-Premie.Org |
Forum II Archive
# 6 |
|
From: Feb 13, 1998 |
To: Feb 20, 1998 |
Page: 2 Of: 5 |
|
|
Rick -:- Miss
Y -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:53:32 (EST)
___Nigel
-:- Re:
Miss Y -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:26:47 (EST)
Selena -:- love
and respect aren't the same thing -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:32:18
(EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re:
love and respect aren't the same thing -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 19:48:00
(EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re:
love and respect aren't the same thing -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 00:06:57
(EST)
___VP -:- The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 07:37:12 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:37:00 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 13:00:06 (EST)
___VP -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 13:48:45 (EST)
___VP -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:04:25 (EST)
___VP -:- English
101 -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:19:22 (EST)
___JW -:-
Re:
The Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:33:42 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:43:15 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:49:53 (EST)
___Selena -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:51:05 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 19:24:08 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 19:39:13 (EST)
___Nigel -:- Sid
-:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 21:49:30 (EST)
___VP -:- Evolution
-:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 22:28:21 (EST)
___premie? -:- Re:
Sid -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 22:31:34 (EST)
___Mr Ex
-:- What is
a mature premie? -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 06:03:16 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re:
What is a mature premie? -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 10:49:48 (EST)
___Student -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 14:46:44 (EST)
___Student -:- Re:
What is a mature premie? -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 14:56:28 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: The
Terrible Twos -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 01:58:28 (EST)
___Mr Ex -:- Re:
What is a mature premie? -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 12:13:35 (EST)
___Student -:- Re:
What is a mature premie? -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 15:26:48 (EST)
___Student -:- Re:
Evolution -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 17:00:12 (EST)
___Premmey -:- Re:
What is a mature premie? -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 17:54:03 (EST)
Anon -:- LA
community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 16:58:39 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: LA
community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:18:20 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re: LA
community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:35:15 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: LA
community circa 1975 -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:46:34 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re: LA
community circa 1975 -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:54:54 (EST)
Brian -:- White
Pages, Journeys additions -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 12:11:34
(EST)
Jim -:- New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 10:41:51 (EST)
___John Cavad -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 11:17:16 (EST)
___JW -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 13:28:59 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 15:22:58 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 19:23:14 (EST)
___Miss 'Y' -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:09:34 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:20:26 (EST)
___Miss 'Y' -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 21:56:39 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 22:55:33 (EST)
___Mili -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 03:06:02 (EST)
___ex-mug -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 03:27:03 (EST)
___Miss'Y' -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:25:01 (EST)
___ex-mug -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 11:56:55 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:14:16 (EST)
___StephenB -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 23:32:55 (EST)
___Miss'Y' -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 00:23:55 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 10:58:44 (EST)
___Brian -:- Re: New
Yorker Piece -:- Thurs, Feb 19, 1998 at 07:37:26 (EST)
Mr Ex -:- Surat
Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ... -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 10:25:51
(EST)
___Anon -:- Brian
please read this. -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 16:41:59 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Library
of Congress Reference -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:14:35 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re:
Library of Congress Reference -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:20:50 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re:
Library of Congress Reference -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 17:50:55 (EST)
___Brian -:- Re:
Brian please read this. -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 23:32:11 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re:
Brian please read this. -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 07:15:08 (EST)
___Brian -:- Re:
Brian please read this. -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 07:51:37 (EST)
___Anon -:- Re:
Brian please read this. -:- Wed, Feb 18, 1998 at 12:53:20 (EST)
Mili -:- Jim's
Fundamental Confusion -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 02:38:24 (EST)
___Miss 'Y' -:- Re:
Jim's Fundamental Confusion -:- Mon, Feb 16, 1998 at 22:17:41 (EST)
___Mili -:- Re:
Jim's Fundamental Confusion -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 09:54:08 (EST)
___Scott T. -:- Confusion:
A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 10:20:36 (EST)
___Jim -:- Re:
Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 14:19:28
(EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re:
Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 15:17:50
(EST)
___JW -:- Re:
Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:40:47
(EST)
___JW -:- Re:
Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 18:46:32
(EST)
___Jim -:- Re:
Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:11:16
(EST)
___Scott T. -:- Re:
Confusion: A slight correction -:- Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 20:22:47
(EST)
Date: Tues, Feb 17, 1998 at 08:53:32
(EST)
Poster: Rick
Email: [email protected]
To: Everyone
Subject: Miss Y
Message:
Miss
Y, What is it you want to say here at ex-premie.org? Reacting to Jim is nice, he
ain't perfect and never claimed to be. Being sarcastic to Jim, about Jim...
okay, that's amusing, but Jim doesn't operate a cult. Maharaji operates a cult
and claims to be God; people believe this and change their lives and give him
their money. Then they get pissed when they realize he ain't God. Do you think
he's God? Do you think he doesn't operate a cult? Are you a devotee? Do you have
the great gift of devotion? Is that what you want to say?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 20:26:47 (EST)
Poster: Nigel
Email:
To:
Rick
Subject: Re: Miss Y
Message:
Miss Y,
What is it you want to say here at ex-premie.org? Reacting to Jim is nice, he
ain't perfect and never claimed to be. Being sarcastic to Jim, about Jim...
okay, that's amusing, but Jim doesn't operate a cult. Maharaji operates a cult
and claims to be God; people believe this and change their lives and give him
their money. Then they get pissed when they realize he ain't God. Do you think
he's God? Do you think he doesn't operate a cult? Are you a devotee? Do you have
the great gift of devotion? Is that what you want to say? Well put,
Rick. From the style, I think you will find that until recently Miss Y was
posting as 'a premie'. She will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but the style
is identical.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:32:18 (EST)
Poster: Selena
Email:
To:
Everyone
Subject: love and respect aren't the same thing
Message:
I jusst read an interesting quote in a book: 'Love and
respect aren't the same thing. Love is fusion. As a baby, you belong to your
parents, you're an extension of them; and fusion is good for the survival of
infants. Respect is differentiation: you belong to yourself, and you're an
extension of no one. Differentiation is essential for the happiness of
adults'. No wonder the new term for darshan is 'showing respect'. Good marketing
strategy. Although, it seems to me both M and premies prefer the love definition
over the respect one, and fusion over individuality.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 19:48:00 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To:
Selena
Subject: Re: love and respect aren't the same thing
Message:
I jusst read an interesting quote in a book:
'Love and respect aren't the same thing. Love is fusion. As a baby, you belong
to your parents, you're an extension of them; and fusion is good for the
survival of infants. Respect is differentiation: you belong to yourself, and
you're an extension of no one. Differentiation is essential for the happiness of
adults'. No wonder the new term for darshan is 'showing respect'. Good marketing
strategy. Although, it seems to me both M and premies prefer the love definition
over the respect one, and fusion over individuality. Selena: Gee,
wish I'd figured that out that balance a long time ago. Would have avoided a lot
of wound reconstruction. -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 00:06:57 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Selena
Subject: Re: love and respect aren't the same
thing
Message:
Selena: 'Love and respect aren't the same thing.
Love is fusion. As a baby, you belong to your parents, you're an extension of
them; and fusion is good for the survival of infants. Respect is
differentiation: you belong to yourself, and you're an extension of no one.
Differentiation is essential for the happiness of adults'. I've been
pondering this for awhile... and am not sure I know how to cut it? I understand
the bit about infancy and fusion. If we were 'fused' in the womb then a
re-experience of fusion would be reassuring. I guess that we begin a process of
differentiation as soon as we 'pop.' So the fulfillment comes in bringing that
process under our control. At one end of the spectrum, when we're helpless, we
seek re-assurance. At the other we seek fulfillment, like the big smile a child
gets when he/she stands on his/her own two feet w/o support. Then steps. etc.
etc. But, what I'm thinking is that opportunities arise from bonds and from
freedom. This is a tough one. Wouldn't complete freedom also be complete lack of
purchase--like a space-walker or something? Nothing to grasp. No direction. The
freedom to spin all your wheels at once, and go nowhere? All of this is why I
sort of gave up on freedom, and started to think in terms of sovereignty,
instead. Sovereignty is the capacity to be bound, and to be released, or let go.
If you have mastered this you are more than 'free.' You don't have to be
bound... you don't have to be free... but you can be both. -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 07:37:12 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To:
Scott T.
Subject: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the
same thing)
Message:
We do begin the process of differentiation
when we are born, but most babies don't even begin to see that their parent is
not just a physical extention of them until a lot later. (I can't remember the
exact figure, but I believe-someone correct me if I am wrong-that seeing the
adult as a seperate physical being starts at around 5-6 months?) Even when the
child understands that the adult is seperate physically he/she will still
believe that they are both experiencing the same emotions until much later. The
process of becoming a seperate emotional being manifests itself into what has
often been called 'the terrible twos'. The child wants to be independent and at
the same time wants to remain a baby. This can be a terrible struggle within the
toddler's psyche that can result in tantrums, crying jags, etc. I think that
this is akin to what we feel as we let go of M. There is a struggle between
wanting to move ahead with our own lives and make our own choices and wanting to
be 'safe' and loved (not that M ever loved one of us-sorry, everyone). We aren't
two anymore and I do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this
devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the
world making our own choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you
can if it makes you feel good) just realize this and live it.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 09:37:00 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and
respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
VP: We aren't two
anymore and I do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this
devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the
world making our own choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you
can if it makes you feel good) just realize this and live it. I'm not sure
where I stand, ultimately, on the devotion thing. Wouldn't you have to call what
Simon Peter did, devotion? Of course, if we can trust the accounts, Peter's
devotion was in part legitimated by his witnessing the resurrection. Prior to
that he was pretty self protective. I chose to use the word 'sovereignty'
because I'm a political sociologist, and because there's this big 'to-do' over
the concept of Liberty as a basis for civil society. Sovereignty also means
being able to 'exit' when you feel the need. Most of the great leaders that I
credit with having 'good charisma' were willing to let people go, and to let go
of their power over people. In other words, they respected our sovereignty.
-Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 13:00:06 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email: [email protected]
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and
respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
We do begin the
process of differentiation when we are born, but most babies don't even begin to
see that their parent is not just a physical extention of them until a lot
later. (I can't remember the exact figure, but I believe-someone correct me if I
am wrong-that seeing the adult as a seperate physical being starts at around 5-6
months?) Even when the child understands that the adult is seperate physically
he/she will still believe that they are both experiencing the same emotions
until much later. The process of becoming a seperate emotional being manifests
itself into what has often been called 'the terrible twos'. The child wants to
be independent and at the same time wants to remain a baby. This can be a
terrible struggle within the toddler's psyche that can result in tantrums,
crying jags, etc. I think that this is akin to what we feel as we let go of M.
There is a struggle between wanting to move ahead with our own lives and make
our own choices and wanting to be 'safe' and loved (not that M ever loved one of
us-sorry, everyone). We aren't two anymore and I do agree with you that we can
have both love ( love and this devotion sap aren't the same thing- sorry
premies) and be a grown-up in the world making our own choices. We don't even
have to give it a name , (but you can if it makes you feel good) just realize
this and live it. Very well said, VP. And what you are saying is in
line with those who have studied the devotion/surrender phenomenon in relation
to cult leaders like Maharaji. Essentially, for the 'experience' to continue for
the devotee, and the related taking advantage of the devotion to continue for
the 'master,' the 'devotee' has to maintain a role with the master that is
essentially that of a child. What happens is the devotee accepts a simplistic
solution to the meaning of life and life's contradictions and problems, is not
allowed to question that, and then gets to feel superior to others for having
the solution. Since questioning and objectivity are relinquished, there is a
certain good feeling that comes from this, perhaps a better feeling than one has
ever had. [By the way, I think Miss Y is an excellent example of this phenomenon
-- simplistic, illogical solutions, and attendant feeling of spiritual
superiority over others e.g. ex-premies and the 'people of the world.'] The
problem is this 'devotion/love,' although it feels 'safe,' is very immature and
truncated. A part of the devotee wants to grow up, but since a mature love
relationship with the master is impossible, because the devotee has likely never
even met the master, that need has to be repressed, of the devotion relationship
would be lost entirely. So, devotees will protect it, either by making
illogical, revisionist arguments like Miss Y, or more usual, refuse to discuss
the issue at all, prehaps get angry and name-call, especially to ex-premies who
have gone through the process and come out the other side. Therefore, M has an
interest in doing things like giving darshan, dancing at programs, having
devotional love songs sung to him, etc., because it reinforces the immature love
relationship. But this is a problem for him too, because those things tend to
scare interested people away, despite aspirant/introductory programs that
carefully hide that stuff. Because he keeps losing devotees, he needs new ones,
and he also needs to try to hold on to the ones he has. It's a real dilemma for
him, and I surmise, according to Malibu Mole, that it's also very frustrating
for him as well.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 13:48:45 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To:
Scott T.
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
VP: We aren't two anymore and I
do agree with you that we can have both love ( love and this devotion sap aren't
the same thing- sorry premies) and be a grown-up in the world making our own
choices. We don't even have to give it a name , (but you can if it makes you
feel good) just realize this and live it. I'm not sure where I stand,
ultimately, on the devotion thing. Wouldn't you have to call what Simon Peter
did, devotion? Of course, if we can trust the accounts, Peter's devotion was in
part legitimated by his witnessing the resurrection. Prior to that he was pretty
self protective. I chose to use the word 'sovereignty' because I'm a political
sociologist, and because there's this big 'to-do' over the concept of Liberty as
a basis for civil society. Sovereignty also means being able to 'exit' when you
feel the need. Most of the great leaders that I credit with having 'good
charisma' were willing to let people go, and to let go of their power over
people. In other words, they respected our sovereignty. -Scott Scott
T., It sounds like you are saying that sovereignty is freedom with
responsibility to yourself and to others. If this is true, I am all for it. I
don't believe in walking out on your responsibilities just because they don;t
'feel good' or appeal to you anymore or just because the going gets hard. I do
think that there are times when a situation is unhealthy for one person or
another in the relationship (whatever kind) and that is a different story.
Thanks for your posts! On the devotion issue, I think of devotion to a cult, or
any other form of obsession, as being very one-sided. I am very 'devoted' to my
family, to my job, to other causes that I believe in (I like to use the word
'love' for these things rather than 'devotion') but the difference is that I am
loved and valued in return. In the case of M, he needs and values others as a
means to an end-not for the inherent value that they possess as a human being. I
agree with you about Simon Peter.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 14:04:25 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same
thing)
Message:
JW, Well put! That's exactly what I was getting at
above. I am sure that what I am about to say will anger someone out there, but
it was my experience. Many of the premies who I knew were practising back in the
70's were very child-like. I think that this was partly why DLM appealed to me
and why premies were so irresistible to be around. Irresistible until there was
a controversy. Until there was a problem or an adult situation to be
handled-something that you needed your mind for. Then it was a whole different
ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure out how to fend for
themselves in situations like this, because they were used to being a child and
wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could get into some serious
funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old will do.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 14:19:22 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To:
all
Subject: English 101 (Re: love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Oops! That last sentence should read: ' In the case of M,
he needs and values others as a means to an end- not for the inherent value that
they possess as human beings.' VP
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 14:33:42 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email: [email protected]
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and
respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
JW, Well put!
That's exactly what I was getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to
say will anger someone out there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies
who I knew were practising back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that
this was partly why DLM appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to
be around. Irresistible until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem
or an adult situation to be handled-something that you needed your mind for.
Then it was a whole different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure
out how to fend for themselves in situations like this, because they were used
to being a child and wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could
get into some serious funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old
will do. I agree entirely. A lot of us got involved with M right at
the juncture in our lives when we were on the verge of having to become adults,
something that seemed daunting to me, for example, especially given the
complicated and confused state of the world, with the Vietnam war, racial
tensions, nuclear weapons, and the like. M and his cult felt very attractive
because the premies seemed to be free from concern about all of that. Yes, they
seemed child-like, accepting of me without having to prove I was worthy of their
acceptance, etc. That was very attractive to me and I mistook that child-like
quality with the experience of truth and love. Of course, as time went on, most
of that feeling went away, and M became much more demanding, negative, and dark.
He started talking about surrender, that your mind was the devil and that all
kinds of terrible things would happen to you if you even left the ashram, let
alone the cult. Service was grinding on, and M wanted more and more from the
premies. So, what had been motivation that seemed essentially positive, became
essentially negative, sort of like my recollection of the Catholic Church in my
youth, in which 'sin' and 'hell' we the motivating forces to keep on on the
straight and narrow, despite lip service to a 'loving' god. I found the same
with M, and reacted in much the same way. I got high at programs, but in between
I longed to have my life back, but was scared by what M threatened, into staying
and serving him. Even now, the thought of that period kind of gives me the
creeps.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 18:43:15 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: VP
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and
respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
JW, Well put!
That's exactly what I was getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to
say will anger someone out there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies
who I knew were practising back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that
this was partly why DLM appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to
be around. Irresistible until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem
or an adult situation to be handled-something that you needed your mind for.
Then it was a whole different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure
out how to fend for themselves in situations like this, because they were used
to being a child and wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could
get into some serious funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old
will do. This is my first post - ever. As a brief introduction, I'll
just say I've loved Maharaji since I was 3, had Knowledge 15 years, and
practiced regularly for about 1 year. I agree with VP about the child-like
reference. There are positive and negatives that go with being child-like. A
child is primed for learning, for enjoyment, and for evolution. There is also
the natural need to assume responsibility more and more as one matures. This
duality could better be viewed as a balance. A productive, critical thinker who
holds onto some child-like qualities chooses to keep a sense of wonder and
curiousity within themselves. Only a child-like heart knows the thrill of life.
Knowledge is not required to maintain this particular balance. This kind of
balance can be found in happy, healthy adults all around you. A person who is
off balance, with or without Knowledge, will have difficulty leading a happy,
healthy life. On one side you can find the adult-child that will not assume
responsibility. Conquering this form of laziness is a personal challenge that I
am witnessing in a friend now. On the other side you find the workaholic that
has no child left in their heart. There is no thrill. There is only
responsibility. I have a premie friend like this who looks to Maharaji as his
only source of joy. Maharaji is not a psychologist. He does not offer to solve
personal imbalances. Another post referred to the Malibu Mole who claims
Maharaji is experiencing frustration. Apparently he is presenting himself
filling two different roles, that of the parent/Guru to 'old-timers,' and that
of the spiritual sensei to the new-comers. Maybe this is true. With so many
premies nurturing a love relationship with him, it would be very painful for
them to give up darshan, dancing, singing devotional songs... Much like a parent
has trouble giving up hugs and kisses. Fortunately for parents, puberty weans
children off of the clinging. Ex-premies have trouble seeing that love
relationship as safe. Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging is a premie ignores
the opportunity to mature. We have to be critical thinkers, but I still hug and
kiss my parents. Maharaji evolves. His role to premies evolves. Premies must
evolve. If you want to question Maharaji's role to his premies, fine. Maybe they
need to do the same thing. Why practice Knowledge? Why have a relationship with
Maharaji in the first place? It is an opportunity to evolve as a human race.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 18:49:53 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and
respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Correction: Clinging to
Maharaji is only damaging IF a premie ignores the opportunity to mature.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 18:51:05 (EST)
Poster: Selena
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and
respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
Student Thanks for your
thoughtful post. When I started this thread, I had in mind some of the premies I
know, and how they refuse to think critically; the very term seems to be a
profanity. I am happy to read input like yours. It makes me see that not all
premeis refuse to think. Maybe I just know some extreme cases. I hope that's
what it is.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 19:24:08 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To:
Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
Correction: Clinging to
Maharaji is only damaging IF a premie ignores the opportunity to mature.
Thanks also from me for your throughtful post. I just have one or
two questions. Does Maharaji actively promote the 'opportunity to mature?' And
if so, how? Does Maharaji actively promote this, even if it means the premie
'matures' out of the relationship with M? Have you ever heard M say that
rejecting him to go on to something else as part of an individual's growth is a
good thing? Somehow, I never heard M ever suggest that individual growth and
development was the goal in regard to him and knowledge. Rather, the goal was
just to understand more how incredible K is, and how devoted or 'grateful' you
should be to HIM. And by 'mature,' do you include in that thinking M is god, or
the lord of the universe, and then 'maturing' and realizing he isn't, but is
just a man who teaches meditation? Is that the kind 'maturing' you mean? Is that
what it means to be a 'mature premie?'
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 19:39:13 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To:
Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
Hi Student, Thanks for your post although
I'm a bit confused. What do you mean you've 'loved him since 3, had Knowledge 15
years and practised regularly about 1 year'? Could you explain? I appreciate
your thoughts about balance. Yet I wonder if it really works like you say. That
is, I don't think one needs to cultivate childlikeness. Indeed, that kind of
artifice is antithetical to childrens' natural state, isn't it? Instead, I think
we're lucky if we can just stay involved with things that turn our crank. It's
the things, then, that make us happy and enthused, not any effort to be or
appear that way. You say 'Maharaji evolves.' No one could argue otherwise.
That's what life's all about. The question, though, is where is Maharaji
evolving from. In other words, was he or was he not a 'perfectly realized soul'
or 'Lord' or 'satguru' or whatever when he claimed to be at age eight? If he
wasn't, then what was he? If he was just a regular eight year-old, then nothing
he's done since can bootstrap him up into respectable avatarship, can it? At the
risk of repeating myself, I like to compare Maharaji to Sid Vicious who, by the
time he died, had actually learned to play bass a bit. Started as a complete
know-nothing, kept on playing and, before you know it, actually turned into
something of a rudimentary musician. Being Lord of the Universe, on the other
hand, doesn't work that way. If Maharaji wasn't that, way back when, then he
simply is a fraud and nothing he can do, short of admitting that simple point,
can enlighten his followers about anything.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 21:49:30 (EST)
Poster: Nigel
Email:
[email protected]
To: Jim
Subject: Sid (Re: love
and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
>At the risk of
repeating myself, I like to compare Maharaji to Sid Vicious who, by the time he
died, had actually learned to play bass a bit. Started as a complete
know-nothing, kept on playing and, before you know it, actually turned into
something of a rudimentary musician. Being Lord of the Universe, on the other
hand, doesn't work that way. If Maharaji wasn't that, way back when, then he
simply is a fraud and nothing he can do, short of admitting that simple point,
can enlighten his followers about anything. > M as Sid Vicious? Love it. Good
analogy. It all falls apart, though, when you remember that the Pistols did
their best stuff (Anarchy, God save the Queen) BEFORE dear old Sid mastered his
arpeggios. I'm not quite sure what that means for M, though.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 22:28:21 (EST)
Poster: VP
Email:
To:
Student
Subject: Evolution (Re: love and respect aren't the same
thing)
Message:
JW, Well put! That's exactly what I was
getting at above. I am sure that what I am about to say will anger someone out
there, but it was my experience. Many of the premies who I knew were practising
back in the 70's were very child-like. I think that this was partly why DLM
appealed to me and why premies were so irresistible to be around. Irresistible
until there was a controversy. Until there was a problem or an adult situation
to be handled-something that you needed your mind for. Then it was a whole
different ballgame. The premies I knew often couldn't figure out how to fend for
themselves in situations like this, because they were used to being a child and
wanting/ needing to have their needs met by M. They could get into some serious
funks at times like these. Sort of like a two year old will do. This is my first
post - ever. As a brief introduction, I'll just say I've loved Maharaji since I
was 3, had Knowledge 15 years, and practiced regularly for about 1 year. I agree
with VP about the child-like reference. There are positive and negatives that go
with being child-like. A child is primed for learning, for enjoyment, and for
evolution. There is also the natural need to assume responsibility more and more
as one matures. This duality could better be viewed as a balance. A productive,
critical thinker who holds onto some child-like qualities chooses to keep a
sense of wonder and curiousity within themselves. Only a child-like heart knows
the thrill of life. Knowledge is not required to maintain this particular
balance. This kind of balance can be found in happy, healthy adults all around
you. A person who is off balance, with or without Knowledge, will have
difficulty leading a happy, healthy life. On one side you can find the
adult-child that will not assume responsibility. Conquering this form of
laziness is a personal challenge that I am witnessing in a friend now. On the
other side you find the workaholic that has no child left in their heart. There
is no thrill. There is only responsibility. I have a premie friend like this who
looks to Maharaji as his only source of joy. Maharaji is not a psychologist. He
does not offer to solve personal imbalances. Another post referred to the Malibu
Mole who claims Maharaji is experiencing frustration. Apparently he is
presenting himself filling two different roles, that of the parent/Guru to
'old-timers,' and that of the spiritual sensei to the new-comers. Maybe this is
true. With so many premies nurturing a love relationship with him, it would be
very painful for them to give up darshan, dancing, singing devotional songs...
Much like a parent has trouble giving up hugs and kisses. Fortunately for
parents, puberty weans children off of the clinging. Ex-premies have trouble
seeing that love relationship as safe. Clinging to Maharaji is only damaging is
a premie ignores the opportunity to mature. We have to be critical thinkers, but
I still hug and kiss my parents. Maharaji evolves. His role to premies evolves.
Premies must evolve. If you want to question Maharaji's role to his premies,
fine. Maybe they need to do the same thing. Why practice Knowledge? Why have a
relationship with Maharaji in the first place? It is an opportunity to evolve as
a human race. Student, Thanks for that post. I would like to say
that I think this kind of dialogue is very good. (Assuming that you will
continue to answer tough questions and not just offer some thoughts and then
disappear.) I am struck with wonder at a couple of your insights: 'Only a
child-like heart knows the thrill of life. Knowledge is not required to maintain
this particular balance.' and 'On the other side you find the woraholic that has
no child left in their heart. There is no thrill. There is only responsibility.'
I can relate to these statements. I am a little confused as to what M does offer
now. If you have been reading, I was exposed to M during the DLM days when M was
perfect master who was going to explode the peace bomb. At this time he DID
offer to solve personal imbalances-that was kind of the whole point. I have
tried to ask other premies on here this question in all sincerity (what is M
offering now?) and have been evaded each time. You said it was a chance to
evolve and I am already evolving all of the time, with or without M, so maybe
you could elaborate on this point a bit. I can accept that all people change and
evolve, M included. I just think that a person who has made certain promises and
portrayed himself as something to his following goes and changes this agenda or
evolves as a person, it would behoove him to discuss this. My final question for
you now is this: How is the human race going to evolve if they practise K? If
they have a relationship with M? I asked another premie on here earlier if EV
was taking any pro-active steps to make this a better world. (DLM was claiming
to do this in the 70's and I think that it never materialized.) I also asked if
practising K was the way that the world would be changed. What are your
thoughts? VP
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 22:31:34 (EST)
Poster: premie?
Email:
To: Nigel
Subject: Re: Sid (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
>At the risk of repeating
myself, I like to compare Maharaji to Sid Vicious who, by the time he died, had
actually learned to play bass a bit. Started as a complete know-nothing, kept on
playing and, before you know it, actually turned into something of a rudimentary
musician. Being Lord of the Universe, on the other hand, doesn't work that way.
If Maharaji wasn't that, way back when, then he simply is a fraud and nothing he
can do, short of admitting that simple point, can enlighten his followers about
anything. > M as Sid Vicious? Love it. Good analogy. It all falls apart,
though, when you remember that the Pistols did their best stuff (Anarchy, God
save the Queen) BEFORE dear old Sid mastered his arpeggios. I'm not quite sure
what that means for M, though. It means M might commit suicide,
along with his mistress/girlfriend, in a seedy hotel room in New York, by
gorging himself on large quantities of burfi.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 06:03:16 (EST)
Poster: Mr Ex
Email:
To:
Student
Subject: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect
aren't the same thing)
Message:
>Clinging to Maharaji is only
damaging IF a premie ignores >the opportunity to mature. Of course, you’re
absolutely right! Premies and exs will agree. BUT As I’m a very practical
person, I can’t resist elaborating on what is really a ‘mature’ premie, you’ll
correct me if I’m wrong. What is a mature premie: Obviously the ‘mature premie’
practices knowledge as he’s been taught by his master (meditation), he comes to
watch videos regularly, he helps his master out of gratitude, he goes to see him
when he can. 1/ A mature premie has understood that devotion is something
private between himself and his master: he won’t talk about it, he will keep his
emotions inside, he will express them in front of his master only when it’s
allowed (pranam, dancing on the stage) in a reasonable and correct way, he will
‘behave himself’. 2/ A mature premie will help his master the way he is offering
it. Meaning doing ‘service’ in Elan Vital, or one of these private special
projects (if you don’t know about them, I’ll invite you to one of these private
meetings), or financially supporting EV, the lands, one of the residences, the
EV Foundation. He won’t speak about maharaji’s personal support, because he’s
been given his account # and he knows he can send as much money as he can, this
is a direct service and there is no need to speak about it. 3/ A mature premie
won’t talk about knowledge to anybody. He will invite the persons he knows could
be interested by maharaji’s teaching, and let them make up their mind. He will
let grace do it’s job if the person is ‘open’. 4/ Knowing that maharaji needs
his help in order to do ‘his service’ which is bring knowledge to interested
persons, he will be very proud to have a good job, to make as much money as
possible without getting lost ‘in this world’ (which is still a big challenge
for most of the devotees). He will dedicate a reasonable amount of his income to
Maharaji’s needs, and be a reasonable person regarding his own needs. Etc etc He
will be a good boy, or a good girl. Maharaji is a good father after all. No need
to say what that type of Kosher repressed behavior implies....... This is a very
reasonable lifestyle after all. If devotion to Mr Rawat is what you want, then
you have it. You are really a good premie if you get to find a balance in all
this, which is completely questionable. AND finding what you wanted in the first
place! What was it? Did you find it?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 10:49:48 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Mr Ex
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
Beautiful!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 14:46:44 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't the same
thing)
Message:
Your first question refers to what Maharaji
'actively promotes.' I won't debate semantics. The best reference I can remember
from videos is Maharaji's encouragement to 'evolve.' The only way to understand
Maharaji's perspective would be to listen to him for yourself. When is the last
time you heard Maharaji speak? Remember, he matures too. I can only respond from
my own understanding of life. I said earlier that clinging to Maharaji (at the
expense of maturing) is damaging. Clinging to anything, (food, t.v., spouse,...)
at the expense of maturing is damaging. The process of maturing is unique to
every person. Changing jobs could mean maturing to one person. Getting married,
having a child, getting a divorce, any of these things could mean a person is
maturing, depending on what that person is going through. I would never presume,
even to another active premie, that their growth needs to include viewing
Maharaji a certain way or putting labels on him. My personal concepts and
feelings of God are just that, personal and (in my own mind) unique to me. My
relationship with Maharaji does not even require me to agree with every word out
of his mouth. I have no problem disagreeing with people I love dearly. I still
love them, as long as our disagreements don't reach to the core of my values.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 14:56:28 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: Mr
Ex
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
>Clinging to Maharaji is
only damaging IF a premie ignores >the opportunity to mature. Of course,
you’re absolutely right! Premies and exs will agree. BUT As I’m a very practical
person, I can’t resist elaborating on what is really a ‘mature’ premie, you’ll
correct me if I’m wrong. What is a mature premie: Obviously the ‘mature premie’
practices knowledge as he’s been taught by his master (meditation), he comes to
watch videos regularly, he helps his master out of gratitude, he goes to see him
when he can. 1/ A mature premie has understood that devotion is something
private between himself and his master: he won’t talk about it, he will keep his
emotions inside, he will express them in front of his master only when it’s
allowed (pranam, dancing on the stage) in a reasonable and correct way, he will
‘behave himself’. 2/ A mature premie will help his master the way he is offering
it. Meaning doing ‘service’ in Elan Vital, or one of these private special
projects (if you don’t know about them, I’ll invite you to one of these private
meetings), or financially supporting EV, the lands, one of the residences, the
EV Foundation. He won’t speak about maharaji’s personal support, because he’s
been given his account # and he knows he can send as much money as he can, this
is a direct service and there is no need to speak about it. 3/ A mature premie
won’t talk about knowledge to anybody. He will invite the persons he knows could
be interested by maharaji’s teaching, and let them make up their mind. He will
let grace do it’s job if the person is ‘open’. 4/ Knowing that maharaji needs
his help in order to do ‘his service’ which is bring knowledge to interested
persons, he will be very proud to have a good job, to make as much money as
possible without getting lost ‘in this world’ (which is still a big challenge
for most of the devotees). He will dedicate a reasonable amount of his income to
Maharaji’s needs, and be a reasonable person regarding his own needs. Etc etc He
will be a good boy, or a good girl. Maharaji is a good father after all. No need
to say what that type of Kosher repressed behavior implies....... This is a very
reasonable lifestyle after all. If devotion to Mr Rawat is what you want, then
you have it. You are really a good premie if you get to find a balance in all
this, which is completely questionable. AND finding what you wanted in the first
place! What was it? Did you find it? What did I want? Did I find it?
A different perspective, a way to step out of day to day situations and take a
peaceful breath, a way to focus on the peace and quiet inside when I need to...
and reminders of how important this opportunity is... Yes.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19,
1998 at 01:58:28 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To:
Student
Subject: Re: The Terrible Twos (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
Your first question refers to
what Maharaji 'actively promotes.' I won't debate semantics. The best reference
I can remember from videos is Maharaji's encouragement to 'evolve.' The only way
to understand Maharaji's perspective would be to listen to him for yourself.
When is the last time you heard Maharaji speak? Remember, he matures too. I can
only respond from my own understanding of life. I said earlier that clinging to
Maharaji (at the expense of maturing) is damaging. Clinging to anything, (food,
t.v., spouse,...) at the expense of maturing is damaging. The process of
maturing is unique to every person. Changing jobs could mean maturing to one
person. Getting married, having a child, getting a divorce, any of these things
could mean a person is maturing, depending on what that person is going through.
I would never presume, even to another active premie, that their growth needs to
include viewing Maharaji a certain way or putting labels on him. My personal
concepts and feelings of God are just that, personal and (in my own mind) unique
to me. My relationship with Maharaji does not even require me to agree with
every word out of his mouth. I have no problem disagreeing with people I love
dearly. I still love them, as long as our disagreements don't reach to the core
of my values. I saw a video of Maharaji speaking at a program in
Long Beach in 1996. He didn't say anything much different than I heard him say
15 years ago. The only difference I noted is that he substituted the word
'gratitude' for what he used to call 'devotion.' He said nothing at all about
personal development or doing any kind of evolving. He said to experience 'that
beautiful place inside' and to have gratitude to him. He also said he couldn't
understand why anyone would do anything else. Then there were many devotional
love songs sung to him and he danced and the premies went nuts. It seemed still
very much a personality devotional-type of scenario. The reason I asked the
question had to do with whether one 'matures' at the direction of M as a
'master' or really in spite of him. And I would agree that clinging to M is
probably damaging. I think it was to me. I found that to mature I had to leave
him entirely, because his whole trip seemed to keep premies, and me, on an
immature basis. Actually, when I was a premie, he openly disparaged getting
personal growth or fulfillment anywhere than from him. If he has 'evolved' from
that, that can only be an improvement. To the extent you can disagree with M,
and are willing to take the good and reject the bad parts of him and what he
does, that sounds very healthy to me. But my main question you didn't answer.
Has M ever suggested that to 'evolve' you might need to leave him and the
practice of K entirely? Anyhow, that's what I think happened to me, by the way.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19,
1998 at 12:13:35 (EST)
Poster: Mr Ex
Email:
To:
Student
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love and respect
aren't the same thing)
Message:
>What did I want? Did I find
it? >A different perspective, a way to step out of day to day Why would you
escape? >situations and take a peaceful breath, a way to focus on >the
peace and quiet inside when I need to... No need of Mr Rawat to do that! >and
reminders >of how important this opportunity is... What do you mean?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19,
1998 at 15:26:48 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: Mr Ex
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re: love
and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
If you don't
understand the benefits of a fundamentally different perspective from inside
then I'm sure you'll keep the one you have. Remember to enjoy.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19,
1998 at 17:00:12 (EST)
Poster: Student
Email:
To: VP
Subject: Re: Evolution (Re: love and respect aren't
the same thing)
Message:
Offering Knowledge has always been
Maharaji's agenda and it always will. The love relationship between premie and
Maharaji adds inspiration through a devotion that scares so many. Critics will
always question devotion. Evolution through Knowledge...All I can tell you is
that I am not a stagnant being when I am practicing Knowledge. I no longer feel
that I just have to 'play the cards that I've been dealt' in this life. It is my
life. I refuse to waste any moment of it. Knowledge makes me fully appreciate
that statement. In savoring each moment of my life through the practice of
Knowledge, I find myself giving more than taking in relationships with people I
care about. I find myself needing less, and enjoying more. I find myself being
grateful more, and frustrated less. I see obstacles as learning experiences. I
see tragedy as part of a natural cycle. I can be grateful for the natural cycles
of life and death. Sometimes I direct that gratitude toward Maharaji. Sometimes
I call it grace. Sometimes I call it my own clarity. I don't call it luck
anymore. I'm not superstitious. For me, that is an evolution. Without Knowledge,
these lessons would have to come on a logical level instead from my 'inside.' I
feel these lessons, they are not explained to me. I believe Moses 'felt' the ten
commandments and then shared them. It begins with the feeling.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19,
1998 at 17:54:03 (EST)
Poster: Premmey
Email:
To: Student
Subject: Re: What is a mature premie? (Re:
love and respect aren't the same thing)
Message:
If you
don't understand the benefits of a fundamentally different perspective from
inside then I'm sure you'll keep the one you have. Remember to enjoy.
I am impressed by the depth of this statement, aren't you? Remember
also that a stitch in time saves nine and a watched pot never boils. Enjoy, and
don't you ever forget it, either.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 16:58:39 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Scott
T
Subject: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott
wrote: 'I have to say that another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed
to schizophrenia after receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was
Valentine Vargas. Don't know what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed
to deepen his confusion, rather than help it. -Scott ' I lived at 2017 North
Argyle Apartments, Hollywood with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was
a crazy scene. Does anyone rememeber this place and the premies that lived
there. I remember there was a Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of
some guys truck, and there was a Baskins and Robbins next door. It was a hell of
a time.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:18:20 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
[email protected]
To: Anon
Subject: Re: LA
community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to
say that another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia
after receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas.
Don't know what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his
confusion, rather than help it. -Scott ' I lived at 2017 North Argyle
Apartments, Hollywood with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a
crazy scene. Does anyone rememeber this place and the premies that lived there.
I remember there was a Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some
guys truck, and there was a Baskins and Robbins next door. It was a hell of a
time. Anon: I remember it very will. I lived there. Do you recall
Craig and the boys from 'Wire and Wood?' Richard Lavi? -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:35:15 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Scott
T.
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to say that
another friend of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia after
receiving Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas. Don't know
what became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his confusion,
rather than help it. -Scott ' I lived at 2017 North Argyle Apartments, Hollywood
with Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a crazy scene. Does anyone
rememeber this place and the premies that lived there. I remember there was a
Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some guys truck, and there was
a Baskins and Robbins next door. It was a hell of a time. Anon: I
remember it very will. I lived there. Do you recall Craig and the boys from
'Wire and Wood?' Richard Lavi? -Scott You bet. I think if I get to
carried away with memories here I will no longer be Anon. However Vargus was a
really nice guy, an artist if I recall. We became quite good friends. Richard
Levi was also a cool guy and a good painter. I shared an apartment with a hang
gliding expert for a while who built his own glider in the apartment! We had to
take the window out to get it out and down to his VW bus. I knew many of the
musicians. I was one of the English guys there. We ended up there after driving
from the Orlando festival. There were a bunch of us including Johnathon Mills
(son of Sir John Mills, the actor) who had stayed in Daytona Beach with a premie
called Stacey Gonder (another whole scene with those Krishna Dancers etc.) As
well as Wire and Wood (who were very good) I also remember the guys from Jiva
who were the sort of Premie Rock Stars of the day. They were signed to Dark
Horse records (George Harrison) They faded into obscurity I guess. I am sorry to
hear Vargus went off the rails, he was a nice gentle soul. I was only just 18 at
the time . So it all seemed very amazing to me meeting all these characters!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:46:34 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To:
Anon
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Scott wrote: 'I have to say that another friend
of mine in the LA community succumbed to schizophrenia after receiving
Knowledge. If anyone remembers him it was Valentine Vargas. Don't know what
became of Val. Knowledge and meditation seemed to deepen his confusion, rather
than help it. -Scott ' I lived at 2017 North Argyle Apartments, Hollywood with
Vargus (if it is the same guy) in 1975. It was a crazy scene. Does anyone
rememeber this place and the premies that lived there. I remember there was a
Satsang hall that we used to go to in the back of some guys truck, and there was
a Baskins and Robbins next door. It was a hell of a time. Anon: I remember it
very will. I lived there. Do you recall Craig and the boys from 'Wire and Wood?'
Richard Lavi? -Scott You bet. I think if I get to carried away with memories
here I will no longer be Anon. However Vargus was a really nice guy, an artist
if I recall. We became quite good friends. Richard Levi was also a cool guy and
a good painter. I shared an apartment with a hang gliding expert for a while who
built his own glider in the apartment! We had to take the window out to get it
out and down to his VW bus. I knew many of the musicians. I was one of the
English guys there. We ended up there after driving from the Orlando festival.
There were a bunch of us including Johnathon Mills (son of Sir John Mills, the
actor) who had stayed in Daytona Beach with a premie called Stacey Gonder
(another whole scene with those Krishna Dancers etc.) As well as Wire and Wood
(who were very good) I also remember the guys from Jiva who were the sort of
Premie Rock Stars of the day. They were signed to Dark Horse records (George
Harrison) They faded into obscurity I guess. I am sorry to hear Vargus went off
the rails, he was a nice gentle soul. I was only just 18 at the time . So it all
seemed very amazing to me meeting all these characters! Anon: I was
the third artist in that group: Richard, Val & Scott. I think Richard was
the sanest of the three, but that's not saying a great deal. I moved out to
Balboa Island after that, and that's when I really started to drift away. Val
came out to stay with me a few times, and we even painted some watercolors
together. His problem was not just MJ, but also the fact that he was from the
Argentine during the Peron era. All of that pretty much messed him up. -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 09:54:54 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Anon
Subject: Re: LA community circa 1975
Message:
Anon: I was only just 18 at the time . So it all
seemed very amazing to me meeting all these characters! I think I remember
you, though that memory has to compete with quite a few 'characters,' against
which we all appear in bas relief. I don't recall the names, but there was a
couple, who used to play in Bole Ji's band. The woman was beautiful (Laura?),
and the guy was an Okie who played guitar on the level of Jimmy Page. There was
an outspoken jeweller, who lived next door to me, and who made his living
selling his wares at swap-meets. He had long talks with the bugs, attempting to
convince them to leave him alone. Didn't you used to wear a scarf, or something?
-Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 12:11:34 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email: [email protected]
To: Everyone
Subject: White Pages, Journeys additions
Message:
I've updated the White Pages, breaking them into 4 pages
to speed up loading. Updated entries for: William O. West Bob Ingram Added
entires for: Robyn D'Anna Luis Sanchez Scott Talkington (Jones) Also added a
Journeys entry for: Scott Talkington
Here's a link to Robyn D'Anna's
entry too, while I'm thinking of it.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 10:41:51 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To:
Everyone
Subject: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt
Anderson emailed me today saying that the piece about Maharaji is finally going
to run the week after next.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 11:17:16 (EST)
Poster: John Cavad
Email:
To:
Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the
piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next.
Please keep us posted, thatnks.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 13:28:59 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email: [email protected]
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the
piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next.
Jim, did a 'fact checker' ever contact you regarding the information
you gave for the article? Kurt told me one would 'definitely' call me because he
was 'definitely' using stuff I gave him and no one has contacted me. I guess
I'll believe the article when I actually see it.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 15:22:58 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: JW
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Hey Joe, No, I
never heard from a fact checker. My thought is they're running the piece as a
sidebar to their extensive Clinton coverage: 'Are Monica Lewinsky and Monica
Lewis (Maharaji's FRIEND) one and the same?' My response to Kurt: >I think
it's finally going to appear, the week after next. > >Kurt > Kurt, A
further note. The talk on the ex-premie 'street' is pretty skeptical.
'We've been burnt so many times, why should we believe him?' But then ex's
always talk like that. By the way, I only found out recently that Michael Bolton
himself first learned to emote excessively (not unlike your brother) as a
singing premie. Rich, huh? Jim
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 19:23:14 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt replied and
so did I: >By the way, I only found out recently that Michael Bolton himself
first > >learned to emote excessively (not unlike your brother) as a
singing premie. > >Rich, huh?>> > >'Burned' how? Like there
are a lot of positive stories in the media on >Maharaji? That said, as I've
told you, the piece concludes lots more >positively than you would write
it. My bottom line is: no ashrams, no cult- >like coercion post 1982,
no Jonestown, no Heaven's Gate--it's a lot less >creepy tha, say Scientology
or Rev. Moon. > Kurt, The 'burn' comment was a joke (although, I must say,
it's good the magazine's finally going to run the piece. My family and
half the criminal lawyers in Victoria think I was just making shit up. 'So
where's the New Yorker article you keep promising us, Jimbo?' I hate
'Jimbo.' Wouldn't you?) But your bottom line concerns me. Well, the
piece is written and we'll just have to see. I'm sure it will be
well-written. I've really enjoyed a number of things you've done.
And I even agree that being a premie is probably better than being a
Scientologist or Moonie. .... Or is it? Did you know that Greta Van
Susteran's a $cientologist, as they say? Weird, huh? And Moonies? At
least they have big weddings. Kurt, is it possible that you've curbed your
tongue a bit because of your siblings? That would be absolutely
understandable if true. Maharaji's culpability is apparent with even a bit of
historical context. We premies joined a cult and wasted various amounts of
time, money and energy on his empty promises. There aren't too many ways
to cut that. If the mob starts donating lots of money for noble causes does that
vindicate their past? It's one of those situations, I think. The
premies today -- like your brother and sister -- will do all they can to make
you think the past is irrelevant. I don't think it is, especially not when
Maharaji bunkers up in Malibu, hiding from those who would question him -- like
yourself -- but with a hand stuck out through his fence for donations.
This past year Maharaji had a gathering in Australia where he revived a practise
his people have spent several years laughing away as some quaint Indianism -- he
had his followers line up to kiss his feet. Ask your brother and sister
about that. As the website gets more traffic we're hearing story after story of
people whose minds and aspirations were fucked up by the one-time Lord of the
Universe. A lot of them since got things happening for themselves.
That's not to say that his lack of accountability isn't dreadful. I guess it
depends on how much you want out of life. A bunch of idealistic kids, for
the most part, wanted as much as they could get. But only if it was
real. Maharaji trapped us for years and still exploits anyone as much and
as indiscriminately as he can. Sure, his grip has weakened. But
that's not to his credit. Take care, Jim P.S. Will I ever get my book
back?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 21:09:34 (EST)
Poster: Miss 'Y'
Email:
To:
Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the
angel of darkness always concern himself that God doen't know that he's alive
nor answers his correspondence? Why one so bitter blames every one but himself
for were he is at? Why does he say such hurtful things to his fellow commrades
in pity and when they acknowledge the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar
typical Jimbo escape 'I was only joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful
victim who has had no control over his life and was forced for so long, with no
free will ,totally powerless to do what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and
say poor little Jimbo , poor little boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate'
such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait
for your witty spuing forth of that ever so dismal out look that is so
characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should and are truly thankful for in your
darkness the light truly shines brighter! Could the light even exist if there
were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail jim booo! Name , email address
Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on this forum !
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 21:20:26 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Miss
'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Hey Miss Y,
my email's on the white pages: [email protected] And my name's 'Jim.' What's
yours and where's yours (not that I care)? Light? Darkness? Hail? Who are you?
Prince Valiant?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 21:56:39 (EST)
Poster: Miss 'Y'
Email: [email protected]
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why is does your surname contain the name of that place
you perpetuate ? A coincidence ? Me thinks not! Oh by the way JIMBO I was only
joking, Isn't that the way it goes?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 22:55:33 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To: Miss
'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Brilliant!
Absoltuely stunning!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 03:06:02 (EST)
Poster: Mili
Email:
[email protected]
To: Miss 'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker
Piece
Message:
OK, surprise, everyone - please get off Jim's case.
He is just acting in good faith according to the data he has been presented with
(Mishler interview). I think he went through some real pain because of it, and
is still struggling. Inquiry should be directed at whether the data in Mishler
interview is trustworthy, or is it all an ancient Mataji scam? Jim, chill out.
Premies, chill out.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 03:27:03 (EST)
Poster: ex-mug
Email:
To: Miss 'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always concern
himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his correspondence? Why
one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is at? Why does he say
such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when they acknowledge
the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo escape 'I was only
joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has had no control over
his life and was forced for so long, with no free will ,totally powerless to do
what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor little Jimbo , poor little
boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves
company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for your witty spuing forth of that
ever so dismal out look that is so characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should
and are truly thankful for in your darkness the light truly shines brighter!
Could the light even exist if there were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail
jim booo! Name , email address Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on
this forum ! Hi Miss 'Y' Sounds to me as if you have a few doubts
about big GM judging by the tone of your posting. Just before the 'penny
dropped' about my true feelings re.GM, my reaction to ex's was similar to yours.
Jim and the rest of us ex's have good reason to be a little upset about the way
GM led us up the garden path, so to speak. Were you around GM in the 70's? Ever
in his ashram? Jim and a lot of us were around at the time of GM as 'Lord of the
Universe'. If you are a recent convert then you have probobly bought in to the
latest revisionist preaching of GM and EV. By the way, are you saying that GM is
god? It sounds that way from the first sentence of your posting. All the best
ex-mug
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 08:25:01 (EST)
Poster: Miss'Y'
Email:
To: ex-mug
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always concern
himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his correspondence? Why
one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is at? Why does he say
such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when they acknowledge
the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo escape 'I was only
joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has had no control over
his life and was forced for so long, with no free will ,totally powerless to do
what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor little Jimbo , poor little
boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such ' love(NOT)? Misery sure loves
company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for your witty spuing forth of that
ever so dismal out look that is so characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should
and are truly thankful for in your darkness the light truly shines brighter!
Could the light even exist if there were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail
jim booo! Name , email address Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on
this forum ! Hi Miss 'Y' Sounds to me as if you have a few doubts about big GM
judging by the tone of your posting. Just before the 'penny dropped' about my
true feelings re.GM, my reaction to ex's was similar to yours. Jim and the rest
of us ex's have good reason to be a little upset about the way GM led us up the
garden path, so to speak. Were you around GM in the 70's? Ever in his ashram?
Jim and a lot of us were around at the time of GM as 'Lord of the Universe'. If
you are a recent convert then you have probobly bought in to the latest
revisionist preaching of GM and EV. By the way, are you saying that GM is god?
It sounds that way from the first sentence of your posting. All the best ex-mug
Flushing Meadows '73 , Lived in four Ashrams,Lived with Jimbo as
well , Doubt count as of late, zero Sorry if you misread my tone,you know if you
dropped a penny you can always pick it up or I'd be glad to give you one of
mine!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 11:56:55 (EST)
Poster: ex-mug
Email:
To: Miss'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Why does the angel of darkness always
concern himself that God doen't know that he's alive nor answers his
correspondence? Why one so bitter blames every one but himself for were he is
at? Why does he say such hurtful things to his fellow commrades in pity and when
they acknowledge the pain he inflicts, then the all to familiar typical Jimbo
escape 'I was only joking' I guess Jimbo is just a poor pitiful victim who has
had no control over his life and was forced for so long, with no free will
,totally powerless to do what he wished ! Everyone take amomment and say poor
little Jimbo , poor little boy ,poor lost soul!Why does he propagate' such '
love(NOT)? Misery sure loves company! Wait a go Jimbo! I just can't wait for
your witty spuing forth of that ever so dismal out look that is so
characteristic of Shri JIMBO, but we should and are truly thankful for in your
darkness the light truly shines brighter! Could the light even exist if there
were no darkness,for this we thankyou!Hail jim booo! Name , email address
Omitted like all the other cowardly posters on this forum ! Hi Miss 'Y' Sounds
to me as if you have a few doubts about big GM judging by the tone of your
posting. Just before the 'penny dropped' about my true feelings re.GM, my
reaction to ex's was similar to yours. Jim and the rest of us ex's have good
reason to be a little upset about the way GM led us up the garden path, so to
speak. Were you around GM in the 70's? Ever in his ashram? Jim and a lot of us
were around at the time of GM as 'Lord of the Universe'. If you are a recent
convert then you have probobly bought in to the latest revisionist preaching of
GM and EV. By the way, are you saying that GM is god? It sounds that way from
the first sentence of your posting. All the best ex-mug Flushing
Meadows '73 , Lived in four Ashrams,Lived with Jimbo as well , Doubt count as of
late, zero Sorry if you misread my tone,you know if you dropped a penny you can
always pick it up or I'd be glad to give you one of mine! Peace,
Sorry if I misread your tone. Thanks for the penny offer :-) likewise from me.
all the best ex-mug
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 14:14:16 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To:
Miss'Y'
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Miss
'Y': You started off ranting about the cowardice of posting anonymously. Who are
you? Saying that you know me, while we don't know who you are, is pretty
pathetic. Well?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 23:32:55 (EST)
Poster: StephenB
Email:
To: Mili
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
OK, surprise, everyone - please get off Jim's
case. He is just acting in good faith according to the data he has been
presented with (Mishler interview). I think he went through some real pain
because of it, and is still struggling. Inquiry should be directed at whether
the data in Mishler interview is trustworthy, or is it all an ancient Mataji
scam? Jim, chill out. Premies, chill out. I for one, can vouch for
the sincerity of Bob Michlers interview. Although I did not hear the interview
in person at the time, I did speak with Bob Mishler at a mutual aquaintances'
house shortly after the interveiw. I personally found Mr Mischler, pompous and
very full of himself (as always) but quite sincere about the topic of the
interview as printed in this forum. I was in the procces of breaking away at
that time. He did give lots of good information. The friends house I was at was
one of MJs bodyguards untill the Astrodome. Stories of parties with alcohol and
many other things to curl a premies' hair were discussed. Though 20 years ago, I
remember it as certainly enough for me to question what the heck was going on!
MJ doesnot live anything like any Saints I know described in history. StephenB
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 00:23:55 (EST)
Poster: Miss'Y'
Email:
[email protected]
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Miss 'Y': You started off ranting about the
cowardice of posting anonymously. Who are you? Saying that you know me, while we
don't know who you are, is pretty pathetic. Well? Who is Miss 'Y'?
or is that MIS-(TRE)-Y or just another Mr-ex ,anon,vp,cd,abcd,efgh or just plain
old 'i'or just a playful premie?( not confronting his adult self?hmmm) I'll show
you mine'IF'you'll show me yours ! A coward ? only to my 'self'! No trips from
me no grand illusions of superiority, just a plain old human being fortunate to
have had and still experiance a love that can not be denied .A devotee Oh if
only I could be! A premie considered by the Ex's ,an Ex considered by the
premies, A soul without a flag? Who pray tell is Miss'Y' and why do' I 'ask, for
if I knew ,I'd be Satguru! But each day the beauty of this life is to be lived
to it's fullest and to be true to one's own self,and live each day without
regret , for lifes to short and tomorrow has no guarranties, for I'm one of the
lucky ones to have known Satguru! No offence is meant by these words of mine for
I am just a visitor here and not a prisoner of words that confine. Be at peace
for that is a noble purpose, a goal,a state of mind and seek that which is
Devine! Oh by the way the Misstrey ends for this is just plain old' Diver Dan'
not affraid of you, but of me ,ahh but don't we all love just a little
mystery?'Just kidding Jimbo, it's a just a joke,get it!!Pathetic only for a day.
Now I've shown you mine ,naked as babe, unfortunately not as innocent, let the
games begin ,the arrows fly or just a simple Hi? A traveller!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 10:58:44 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To:
StephenB
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Stephen, First, as Mili already knows, it's a complete
joke to question the authenticity of the Mishler interview. I've got the tape
itself, for God's sake! Rick sent it to me two years ago. As for your stories,
please share them. This is not just regular gossip. When Maharaji paraded as the
Wizard of Oz anyone who saw anything backstage behind the curtain is doing a
public service sharing it. Even trustworthy second-hand reports, clearly
identified as such of course, are fair and welcome.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Thurs, Feb 19,
1998 at 07:37:26 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email:
[email protected]
To: Jim
Subject: Re: New Yorker Piece
Message:
Kurt Anderson emailed me today saying that the
piece about Maharaji is finally going to run the week after next. In
sorting through the Forum I archives, I came across Kurt's original post. It's
dated April 22, 1997. Your White Pages entry is dated March 19. What a year!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 10:25:51 (EST)
Poster: Mr Ex
Email:
To:
Everyone
Subject: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...
Message:
Here is something interesting about m's hidden lineage.
This confirms some of the information previously published on the web-site ....
(very helpful for me) http://www.inlink.com/~rife/tmsma1 Appendix One THE NEW
PANTHS: SHABDISM IN NORTH AMERICA There are now several popular religious
movements in North America which owe their existence, either partially or
wholly, to the Radhasoami tradition of India. The spectrum ranges from immediate
connections, as in Eckankar and the Divine Light Mission whose founders have
taken initiation from one of the Satgurus, to associative influences where sects
have borrowed (and, in some cases, plagiarized) writings and spiritual lineages
from Radhasoami. All of these new panths , though, have one thing in common:
they give significant emphasis to the Shabd , the transcendent power which is
believed to be the creative and sustaining force of the universe (it is also
known as the 'Audible Life Stream' or the 'Music of the Spheres'). And though
there are groups which speak of this 'Sound Current' which are both anterior and
exterior to the Radhasoami tradition, all of the new movements under discussion
have based their knowledge and writings on Radhasoami's own particular
interpretation of Surat Shabd Yoga, the practice of uniting the soul with the
internal sound energy. In this article, I will describe the relationship of
these American religious movements to the Radhasoami tradition and then will
examine the reasons why there is such a strong tendency in these new panths to
deny their living religious heritage. The Radhsoami Tradition of India The name
Radhasoami has been generally applied to those gurus and gaddis (the
seat/residence of a saint, living or deceased) who trace their spiritual
lineages back to Shiv Dayal Singh (1818-1878), the proclaimed founder of the
movement who resided in the city of Agra, in the Uttar Pradesh District of
India. 'Soamiji Maharaj,' as Shiv Dayal Singh was called by his disciples, came
from a family of Nanak-panthis and was primarily influenced in his religious
upbringing by the nirguna bhakti poetry of such Sants as Kabir, Nanak, Paltu,
and most significantly Tulsi Sahib of Hathras. What distinguishes Soamiji's
teachings (and subsequently those of the Radhasoami tradition) from Vaishnavism,
Tantrism, Goraknathism, Saivism, and other forms of Indic piety is essentially
the emphasis he gives to three cardinal precepts: 1. Satguru, both as the
Absolute Lord (nirguna) and the living human master (saguna). 2. Shabd, which
encompasses both varnatmak (spoken or written) and dhunyatmak (transcendent
melody) expressions of the Supreme Lord (Sat Purush). 3. Satsang, the
congregation of earnest devotees of the truth. Upon Soamiji's death, several of
his disciples served as gurus, resulting in a proliferation of satsangs. Today
there are at least thirty different Radhasoami centers in India with direct
lineage connections to Shiv Dayal Singh. For the purposes of this paper,
however, we will only be concerned with two of the largest and most influential
of these: Radhasoami Satsang Beas and Ruhani Satsang. For it is these two sects
which have been instrumental in the development of a number of popular American
religious movements. Ruhani Satang and its parent Radhasoami Satsang Beas trace
their lineages back to Shiv Dayal Singh through Jaimal Singh, Soamiji's only
Sikh successor who eventually settled on the banks of the Beas river in the now
thriving farm community of the Punjab. After Jaimal Singh's demise in 1903, his
chief disciple and successor, Sawan Singh (1858-1948), founded a spiritual
colony in honor of his guru. It was Sawan Singh who has been the most pivotal
force in the spread of Shabd Yoga related panths in North America. His impact
can be directly seen in the teachings and writings of the Divine Light Mission,
Mishra's Yoga Society, Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind's metaphysical groups, and the
Movement for Spiritual Inner Awareness (M.S.I.A.). Although when Sawan Singh
died, he was eventually succeeded (via Jagat Singh) by his grandson, Charan
Singh, a number of his disciples founded their own movements. Eminent among
these was Kirpal Singh who established Ruhani Satsang in Gur Mandi, Old Delhi.
Kirpal's influence on popular Shabd Yoga groups in America is second only to
Sawan Singh's. Both Walter Baptiste and Paul Twitchell (the late founder of
Eckankar) were disciples of the Delhi master and have incorporated his teachings
into their respective organizations. In the following section, we will examine
some of the more prominent panths in America which have an affiliation in one
way or another with the Radhasoami tradition of India through the aegis of Sawan
Singh or Kirpal Singh. Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind In the early part of this century,
many Sikhs immigrated by way of Canada to the United States. Outstanding among
these was Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind, who was both a spiritual teacher and an
activist for Indian rights. He was involved in the famous 1923 court case
'United States vs. Bhagat Singh Thind,' wherein he attempted to escape
restrictive racial causes by arguing that Indians are Caucasian. During the
twenties and thirties, Thind wrote a number of books and conducted classes
throughout the country on metaphysics. Thind claimed at that time, as he did
before his death in the late 1960's, that his spiritual inspiration came from
the Sikh religion. According to Kirpal Singh, however, Thind was actually an
initiate of Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas and derived his teachings
from him without due reference. Instead of utilizing Sikh doctrines, Thind was
allegedly borrowing Radhasoami precepts, and in so doing was covering up his
real religious theopneusty. Comments Kirpal Singh: When I went to America there
was one gentleman, he's passed away now, a Sikh gentleman who was giving talks
on payment. His name was Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind. He married a French lady. He
was initiated by Baba Sawan Singh, I know, definitely. When he wrote his first
book, Radiant Road (sic: Thind had written several books before 1939) he sent a
copy to Baba Sawan Singh. He gave it to me. It was a copy of what I had written.
I wanted to meet him but he always evaded me. I was in America four months, I
asked him for his program but he would change his program. We never met. He said
he never even saw Baba Sawan Singh, and never knew that Radiant Road , his book,
is the exact translation of a portion of the book I had written. Part of the
reason Thind has been accused of plagiarism over his book, Radiant Road to
Reality (1939), was not because he used similar concepts as found in Radhasoami
but because of the style and form with which he conveyed his message. The
confusion over which book he actually plagiarized from ( Sar Bachan Radhasoami ,
Gurmat Sidhant, or With A Great Master in India ) sidelights the real issue: Why
would Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind wish to employ almost all of Radhasoami's specific
parmarthi doctrines but deny their origin and his disputed association with the
satsang? It is a question which we will examine at length in the last part of
this article, for the denial of allegiance, as we shall see, is not an uncommon
occurrence, especially with certain neo-gurus and movements. Paul Twitchell and
Eckankar Perhaps the most controversial of the new panths associated with
Radhasoami and Ruhani Satsang is Eckankar. Today the group, under the leadership
of Harold Klemp (the present 'Living Eck Master') and Darwin Gross (the previous
Master) does not admit that their founder, Paul Twitchell (1908-1971), was
initiated by Kirpal Singh in 1955, although there is overwhelming documentary
evidence to support it. Rather they claim, as did Twitchell from about 1966
onwards, that their founder was initiated by Sudar Singh of Allahabad and
Rebazar Tarzs, a Tibetan monk supposedly over five-hundred years old. Though
these claims would usually go by undetected (from lack of primary materials),
this book (1978, 1979, 1983, and 1988) and the SCP Journal: Eckankar, A Hard
Look At A New Religion (1979) have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Paul
Twitchell was indeed a follower of Kirpal Singh, as well as Swami Premananda and
L. Ron Hubbard. Sudar Singh and Rebazar Tarzs, though their existence is factual
to some extent as 'cover names' for real gurus, are actually mythological
characterizations of Twitchell's genuine and imagined biography. In order to
start a 'new' movement, Paul Twitchell attempted to cover up his previous
association with Kirpal Singh (while continuing to use him and the books of Dr.
Julian P. Johnson as his primary source) and tried to create a mythology which
made him and his group, Eckankar, a fulcrum for a unique and superior spiritual
revelation. Today, the movement has somewhere between thirty and fifty-thousand
paid members. Most 'Eckists,' as followers are usually called, have never even
heard of Kirpal Singh, Ruhani Satsang, Radhasoami Beas or Dr. Julian P. Johnson.
According to the materials published by the group, most members are informed
that Eckankar is the fountainhead of all religions. Though its inception only
traces back to 1965, the movement's living masters have taught that, if
anything, Sant mat, Radhasoami, Shabd Yoga, and other forms of Indic spiritual
discipline based upon the 'Sound Current,' are offshoots from the ageless path
of Eckankar. However, the hidden history behind Paul Twitchell's life and work
has recently been coming more well-known to the reading public which will
inevitably lead to a confrontation between what is 'believed to be true' and
what is 'actually the case.' John-Roger Hinkins and M.S.I.A. In 1968, John-Roger
Hinkins, a Mormon and ex-high school teacher, started his spiritual ministry. He
was associated with Paul Twitchell and Eckankar, having been a mail
correspondent member, and, to Eckankar's records, a second initiate. In several
long, personal interviews with John-Roger at his house in Mandeville Canyon, I
learned that he did not see his connection with Paul Twitchell as a
master/disciple or teacher/student relationship. Be that as it may, the fact
remains that his group and his teachings are almost exactly the same as
Eckankar's, not even excepting particular Twitchellian nuances. It should also
be noted that M.S.I.A.'s organizational structure is almost parallel to
Eckankar's with regard to initiation, discourses, and cosmology. John-Roger is
known to members of M.S.I.A. as the physical manifestation of the Mystical
Traveler Consciousness (a concept quite similar to the Satguru in the Radhasoami
tradition and the Mahanta in Eckankar). According to Roger's account, the
mantleship of the MTC was passed on to him in or around 1963. During this time,
Roger claims to have met Sawan Singh, the late Radhasoami Satsang Beas master.
'J.R.', as he is affectionately called, holds that the Great Master of Beas was
the previous carrier of the Mystical Traveler Consciousness and passed on the
'keys to the Kingdom' to him on the inner spiritual planes. However, 'J.R.' at
that time did not recognize the luminous being as Sawan Singh. It was only later
when he saw a photograph of the guru that he placed the picture of the Great
Master with the powerful entity he encountered in meditation. John-Roger's group
has grown considerably in the last ten years, and now has centers throughout the
United States and in several countries across the globe. M.S.I.A. publishes its
own newspaper, The Movement , and runs several sister-organizations, the most
visible of which is Insight Transformational Seminars. Divine Light Mission Of
all the movements under discussion, the one that fewest people know has a
connection to the Radhasoami tradition is the Divine Light Mission. As
Juergensmeyer notes: It is reported that the 'Divine Light Mission' of the boy
guru, Shri Hans Maharaji , is derived from Radhasoami teachings and the
Radhasoami community. According to some accounts, the father of the present boy
guru had been a follower of one of the Radhasoami branches, but split off from
them to start his own following. With the emergence of Balyogeshwar (alias Guru
Maharaji), the mission came to the attention of the general public in India and
North America. The movement had its biggest impact in the early 1970's when it
attracted thousands of devotees. The initial growth, however, has since
subsided, and the group is currently enjoying a relative stability, with neither
a significant influx of new members or a substantial exodus. The most striking
parallel between the Divine Light Mission and the Radhasoami Tradition concerns
their teachings on the 'Divine Word,' the inner-spiritual melody. Both groups
employ meditational techniques for initiates to concentrate their attention on
this current of 'light and sound' which is believed to free the soul from its
attachment with the physical body. Though both groups have similar theological
teachings concerning the nature of this 'Divine Word,' each differ in their own
way on how exactly to approach the Supreme Abode. Walter Baptiste, Dr. Ramamurti
Mishra, and Ray Stanford There a number of lesser-known individuals and groups
which have had alliance with Radhasoami. Walter Baptiste, for instance, was
initiated by Kirpal Singh in the mid-1950's. He now runs a yoga facility and a
vegetarian restaurant in San Francisco, where his wife gives classes on Hatha
Yoga. Baptiste also conducts spiritual counseling, and, I am informed, gives
initiation using the same five holy names ( panch nam ) that all Radhasoami
satsangs linked with Jaimal Singh (including Kirpal Singh's Ruhani Satsang) have
given out as their meditation mantra. Other people have been influenced by
Radhasoami but in less dramatic ways. Dr. Ramamurti Mishra, the famous yoga
teacher, was initiated by both Sawan Singh and Baba Somanath. But their impact
should not be overestimated as Mishra has adopted many gurus. Nevertheless, he
does teach Nada-yoga (union of the soul with the interior/primordial sound) and
lays emphasis on much of the Radhasoami teachings. Today there exists a
multitude of organizations which reveal a striking compatibility with Radhasoami
teachings concerning the 'Sound Current.' And though perhaps most of these
movements have no direct link, they have somewhere along the line utilized
practices or beliefs from the many Radhasoami publications. Groups in this
category include: A.U.M. (Association for the Understanding of Man), whose
founder, Ray Stanford, was initiated by Charan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas;
Morningland, which appears to have been influenced by some of Eckankar's
distinctive doctrines; and Jerry Mulvin, former professional bowler and long
time follower of Eckankar, who now claims to be an enlightened master and
competent to 'connect' disciples to the sound current (for a hundred dollars, no
less!). Genealogical Dissociation: Emergence and Repression in the New Panths An
important question arises when one reviews the startling tendency inherent in
many of the new panths and their founders to deny their religious heritage--a
denial which has taken on the form of name-deletions, plagiarism, and cover-ups.
Why? Though there may indeed be many answers [like SCP's skepticism of
Eckankar's late founder: 'Twitchell was a one-eyed man who preferred his own
fabrications to the truth' ], it becomes quite apparent on closer inspection
that there is one fundamental reason. Simply put, it is not that the new panths
are in all instances concerned with suppressing their historical roots, but
rather that they are overly anxious about their own distinctiveness as a new
movement. It is primarily because of this emphasis on becoming established as a
separate entity that the given group and its founder disconnect instead of
integrate the past out of which they arose. This severance, which has its basis
in developmental psychology, I have coined as 'genealogical dissociation.' Ken
Wilber, in his books, The Atman Project and Up From Eden , sees this
predisposition towards disunion as an underlying psychological problem in man's
development, both individually and socially. When attempting to differentiate
from a particular state of awareness or stage of development, for instance, man
has two options: either integrate the lower order where the emergence takes
place or repress it. If it is integrated, then that stage remains conscious and
pliable; if it is estranged or disconnected, however, then it turns unconscious
and threatening. In terms of the mind/body dualism, Wilber explains it thus: The
mind/body dissociation was a natural result of the increasing death-terror that
emerged with the mental-egoic phase, around 600 B.C. As the mind began to emerge
in a clear way for the first time in history, the ego, in flight from death,
simply alienated, dissociated, or repressed the body. And it did this for a
simple reason: the mental-ego is composed of ideas, and ideas seem permanent,
unchanging and fixed, whereas the body, composed of mortal flesh, obviously
dies. For example, all real trees grow, live and then die--but the word 'tree',
the symbol 'tree', stays the same. So if ideas seem fixed and unchanging,
whereas bodies are fleshy and mortal, and you're in flight from death, which of
those two do you identify with? The minds, of course. You identify with words,
symbols, concepts--the ego--and you deny, alienate, repress the mortal body.
Ideas become the new immortality project, and the body becomes the new threat,
the new enemy. Applying Wilber's elucidation to the development of new panths
(specifically Eckankar), we can see that it becomes a 'fear' of losing that
emergence--that step forward--which prompts suppression or attempted
annihilation of the lower order where the differentiation first took place. In
our case, historical-religious genealogical dissociation. This disunion in many
of the new panths (e.g., like Paul Twitchell's denial of his association with
Kirpal Singh and Ruhani Satsang), springs forward not so much out of ignorance
but out of hope for a separate, distinct and lasting survival--an autonomous
tradition. But as Freudian and Jungian theories about personality maturation
demonstrate, the unconscious or shadow self cannot be disregarded because it is
part of the entire organism. It, quite simply, must be dealt with. Religiously,
we can see the attempt for 'integration' in the early history of Christianity,
especially with the influence of St. Paul. There was an effort on behalf of the
newly emerging Church to include (not obliterate) parts of the Judaic religion
and culture. Thus, even today Roman Catholicism acknowledges its indebtedness to
the Jewish heritage. And so is the case with Radhasoami (particularly the Beas
branch in the Punjab and Sawan-Kirpal Mission) towards Sant mat. There is both
an acknowledged link and a proud remembrance in Radhasoami and Ruhani Satsang of
its ancestry with the medieval nirguna bhakti poet-Sants. In the context of some
of the new panths, however, there is an endeavor to dislocate, dissociate, and
even destroy their antecedents. Instead of an admission to their actual
religious heritage, we instead find a denial of it--even in the very face of
incredible contradictory evidence. Take, as an illustrative example, the case of
Paul Twitchell and Eckankar. When the group first started, Twitchell did not
completely deny his association with his guru, Kirpal Singh. In fact, in many
articles Twitchell wrote at length about his admiration for the Ruhani Satsang
Master. However, from about 1966 onwards we find an accelerating cover-up. What
prompted this shift of allegiance? The answer is perhaps simpler than we might
expect: the growing popularity of Eckankar. When Twitchell came to grasp the
significance of his new religious movement--the fact that it could draw in
thousands of followers-- he decided to subvert anything which would hinder
Eckankar's progression and potential popularity amongst the masses. He wanted
his group to be self-determining, marking its own future course as a viable
spiritual tradition. And the most serious threat to this much desired autonomy,
at least to Twitchell's purview, was his past. Hence, Twitchell invented a new
mythology, one which intertwined fact, fiction, legend and imagination into a
confused complex that exhibited only one truly consistent theme: the Living Eck
Master (in this context, Paul Twitchell) as Hero. Now the disturbing problem in
all of this is that Eckankar's attempt for a neo-mythology is not based upon
some prior authenticated historical tradition, but upon its founder's own
creative impulses. Impulses which at times plagiarized whole chapters from
copyrighted Radhasoami Satsang Beas texts, lied about biographical details, and
commenced vast cover-ups concerning the origin of Eckankar's doctrines. However,
it is not solely a repression of the past which prompted Paul Twitchell to deny
his spiritual roots, but rather his heightened concern for the future, for the
continuing growth of his new movement. It was this obsessive anxiety which
outweighed--instead of integrated--Twitchell's authenticity to his actual past,
the real heritage which brought forth his group Eckankar in the first place.
Though the psychological modus operandi of 'emergence by repression' is age-old
and is itself instrumental in the evolution of religion, in the case of some of
the new panths (particularly Eckankar), it remains an essentially immature and
disunifying attempt for genuine autonomy. NOTES 1. Paul Twitchell and Dr. Bhagat
Singh Thind are two significant examples of spiritual teachers who have
extensively plagiarized from Radhasoami texts. See Plagiarism in Review for a
more in-depth look. 2. Most of this research is based upon my eight trips to
North India. First, in the summer of 1978 with Professor Mark Juergensmeyer of
the University of California at Berkeley; and, most recently, in January of
1990, where I saw for the first time Twitchell's extensive correspondence with
Kirpal Singh. See The Delhi Connection for more information. 3. I have employed
the word panth (lit., 'way, path, or course') because of its neutral and
non-derogatory meaning and use--in contradistinction with the word 'cult',
which, if anything, has become the mass media's buzz word for the religiously
off-beat. 4. The term Shabd has a variety of meanings depending in which context
it is used. In Radhasoami terminology, Shabd represents the eternal 'force and
vitality which permeates the whole universe; it is the cause and sustainer of
the entire creation.' Refer to Glossary of Radhasoami Faith (Agra: Sant Das
Maheshwari, 1967), page 227, under the word Shabd. 5. It should be noted that
the phrase 'Audible Life Stream' did not come into popular usage until Julian P.
Johnson's The Path of the Masters (1939), a book which has been extensively
plagiarized. 6. Surat Shabd Yoga (lit., 'the union of the soul/consciousness
with the internal spiritual sound') is an ancient discipline designed to enable
the soul (or consciousness) to ascend beyond the body to higher spiritual
regions by means of the internal sound or life current. It appears that Shabd
Yoga has its roots in the pre-Vedic period of India. However, the yogic practice
has only become clearly articulated and well-known in the last five-hundred
years. Major works which describe or illustrate Shabd Yoga techniques include:
Hathayoga Pradipika, Nadabindu Upanishad , and the writings of the nirguna
bhakti poets of the Sant tradition such as Anurag Sagar (attributed to Kabir but
most likely of a later time period) and Ghat Ramayana by Tulsi Sahib. However,
the clearest and most detailed treatment of Surat Shabd Yoga practices comes
from Shiv Dayal Singh's Sar Bachan (including both the prose and poetry
volumes), the main scripture of the Radhasoami movement. 7. This is the first
paper of its kind which has examined the close link between the Radhasoami
tradition and such popular American religious movements as the Divine Light
Mission, Eckankar, M.S.I.A., and Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind's group. Those scholars
which have been pioneers in opening up this area of investigation include
Professor Mark Juergensmeyer and Dr. J. Gordon Melton. 8. I have spelled the
word 'Radhasoami' (with the 'o' instead of the transliterated 'w') in deference
to the Soami Bagh Satsang in Agra which consider it an affront not to spell the
words Radha and 'Soami' together (thereby dropping the capital in the last
word). The Beas Satsang and other branches spell it variously and do not mind
how 'Radhasoami' is spelled. In almost all cases, I have followed Soami Bagh's
procedure for spelling, primarily because of their vocalness in the matter. For
more on this small, but interesting, controversy see S.D. Maheshwari's
Correspondence with Certain Americans (Agra: Soami Bagh), Volumes One through
Five; and Lekh Raj Puri's Radha Swami Teachings (New Delhi: Pvt. published,
n.d., 1967?). 9. Ibid. My spelling is again in deference to the Soami Bagh
Satsang in Agra. 10. There exists a controversy between the 'Beas' and 'Agra'
satsangs over whether or not Tulsi Sahib was Shiv Dayal Singh's guru. The 'Beas'
satsang (and those connected with them, including Tarn Taran and Ruhani Satsang)
argue that Shiv Dayal Singh was indeed initiated by Tulsi Sahib of Hathras at a
young age. The 'Agra' satsangs (which include Peepal Mandi, Soami Bagh, and
Dayal Bagh) deny any spiritual connection between the esteemed masters, claiming
instead that both were swateh Sants (born perfect) and did not, therefore, need
the assistance of any guru. 11. Refer to P.D. Barthwal's The Nirguna School of
Hindi Poetry: An Exposition of Medieval Indian Santa Mysticism (Benares: Indian
Book Shop, 1936) and Dr. Mohan Singh's Goraknath and Medieval Mysticism (Lahore:
1937). 12. The colony is named Dera Baba Jaimal Singh and is one of the largest
spiritual communities in all of India. 13. Charan Singh had the largest
following of any Radhasoami guru in the world before his death on June 1, 1990.
He had initiated over one million and two-hundred thousand people in his
thirty-nine year reign as Sant Satguru. 14. Mark Juergensmeyer, 'The Ghadar
Syndrome,' Sikh Studies: Comparative Perspectives on a Changing Tradition
(Berkeley: Graduate Theological Union, 1979), page 182. 15. My parenthesis;
Thind had written several books before 1939, including House of Happiness (Salt
Lake: Pvt. publication) in 1931. 16. Kirpal Singh, Heart to Heart Talks, Volume
One (Delhi: Ruhani Satsang, 1975). 17. Although Kirpal Singh claims that Dr.
Thind plagiarized from Gurmat Sidhant (which was originally published in Punjabi
with Sawan Singh's name as author), most of Thind's literary 'borrowing' comes
from Julian P. Johnson's With a Great Master in India (1934). See Plagiarism in
Review for more on this topic. 18. In 1977, I talked with Mrs. Thind about her
husband's relationship with Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas. Mrs. Thind
was informed by her husband that he did not know of Sawan Singh; rather, he
claimed to have been initiated by a Himalayan priest and was a disciple of Guru
Nanak in a previous incarnation. Although Mrs. Thind had met Kirpal Singh
personally and knew about the supposed connection of her husband with the
Radhasoami Satsang in Beas, she was never told by Dr. Thind that such a link
ever existed. 19. 'Mahanta consciousness', as used in Eckankar terminology,
means the Divine Master within. It is very similar in usage to the esoteric term
'Radiant Form' as spoken of in Radhasoami teachings. 20. See Plagiarism in
Review . 21. See Part Five. 22. Already several hundred devotees have left
Eckankar because of the findings presented in earlier editions of The Making of
a Spiritual Movement and SCP Journal's 'Eckankar: A Hard Look at a New
Religion.' In fact, several world-wide memos have been issued by Eckankar's
international headquarters in Menlo Park, California, warning its membership
against the 'untrue' accusations of researchers 'who have not done their
homework.' See Preface. 23. Personal interview with John-Roger Hinkins at his
home in Mandeville Canyon (1978). 24. Roger's cosmology is exactly the same as
Paul Twitchell's. This is unusual because of Twitchell's own creative
implantations. Compare the following charts: Eckankar's cosmology (as found in
The Spiritual Notebook by Paul Twitchell, dated 1971]: 1. Physical/Thunder 2.
Astral/Roar of the Sea 3. Causal/Tinkle of Bells 4. Mental/ Running Water 5.
Soul/Single Note of Flute 6. Alakh Lok/Heavy Wind 7. Alaya Lok/Deep Humming 8.
Hukikat Lok/Thousand Violins 9. Agam Lok/ Music of Woodwinds 10. Anami Lok/Sound
of a Whirl pool. M.S.I.A.'S cosmology (as found in The Sound Current by
John-Roger, dated 1976): 1. Physical/Thunder 2. Astral/Roaring Surf 3.
Causal/Tinkling of Bells 4. Mental/ Running Water 5. Soul/Sound of a Flute 6.
{Regions above Soul are not named in the book--only the Sounds} Sound of Wind 7.
Humming Sound 8. Ten Thousand Violins 9. Woodwinds. The previous cosmologies are
almost exactly the same. Twitchell came up with his own unique schema of how the
universe is structured, giving a particular sound to each level. John-Roger
copied the same verbatim. Both cosmologies, however, represent a radical
departure from the Radhasoami esoteric version. 25. I made this observation to
John-Roger personally (in 1978, op. cit.) who told me that he had great love for
Twitchell and his work. Roger went on to say that he does garner ideas (and
organizational procedures) from other spiritual teachers and traditions, while
remaining true to his own personal direction and understanding. John-Roger has
been the subject of an intense scandal for the past ten years. See The J.R.
Controversy and The Criminal Activities of John-Roger Hinkins (UCSM, Volume One,
Number One and Volume Two, Number Two) for more on J.R.'s nefarious escapades.
26. Personal interview with John-Roger Hinkins at his home in the summer of
1979. 27. Ibid. 28. Insight Training is quite similar in structure to EST, the
popular seminar group founded by Werner Erhard. 29. Mark Juergensmeyer,
'Radhasoami as a Trans-National Movement' (unedited version); unpublished. In
confirmation with Juergensmeyer's contention that Guru Maharaji's father was
associated with one of the Radhasoami sects, I was informed personally in July
of 1978 at Sawan Ashram, Old Delhi, India, by Bhagwan Gyaniji (who was a
disciple of Sawan Singh and personal secretary to Kirpal Singh) that
Balyogeshwar's father was indeed initiated by Sawan Singh of the Radhasoami
Satsang Beas and later branched off to start his own movement. It also appears
that Balyogeshwar's father was a disciple of another Sant mat guru named
Sarupanand, who worked in the tradition of Sri Paramahans Advait Mat --a surat
shabd yoga lineage apparently connected to Shiv Dayal Singh which was founded in
the latter part of the 19th century and is now centered in Guna. 30. Ibid. 31.
Telephone interview with Harold Ross, personal follower of Walter Baptiste
(1978) and one-time follower of Radhasoami Beas, Soami Bagh, and Eckankar. 32.
This same mantra of the 'Five Holy Names' is also given out by John-Roger
Hinkins of M.S.I.A., though in an altered fashion. 33. Personal letter from Dr.
Ramamurti Mishra to the author, dated October 30, 1980. 34. Ramana Maharishi
stands out as a classic example. 35. See Plagiarism in Review . 36. Radhasoami,
though much of its terminology is from tantric-yogic schools of thought, has a
distinctive vocabulary. Phrases such as 'Ringing Radiance' and 'Audible Life
Stream' have come into popular usage because of their frequency in Radhasoami
Beas publications. 37. Woodrow Nichols, 'Eckankar: The Ancient Science of
Deception' (later incorporated in SCP Journal--Eckankar: A Hard Look at a New
Religion (Berkeley, 1979). 38. The phrase 'genealogical dissociation' is a
useful one in that it clearly illustrates what happened in the evolution of
Eckankar in the late 1960's and early 1970's. Twitchell attempted to severe his
past by not only denying his genuine religious heritage but also by implanting a
new spiritual genealogy--one which allegedly traces back to the Master Gakko,
who brought the true teachings of Eckankar from the planet Venus. 39. I am not
utilizing developmental psychology in order to 'reduce' Twitchell's motives to a
Freudian or Jungian paradigm, but rather to establish a sympathetic foundation
where new religious movements are not just relegated to the academic outposts of
'social aberrations.' Instead, like most traditional religious groups, these new
movements represent basic human drives and emotions. If phylogeny in some way
recapitulates ontogeny (or vice versa; refer to Carl Sagan's Broca's Brain ,
1979), then groups such as Eckankar can be more fully understood in light of
human psychology. This, of course, should not be solely an attempt to reduce
religion to its neurological roots, but as a partial means for a clearer
understanding. See Ken Wilber's Up From Eden (New York: Doubleday, 1981) for
more on this perspective. 40. Ken Wilber, op. cit. 41. Although in Twitchell's
case ignorance does play a part. Eckankar's founder had a short and, oftentimes,
inaccurate memory. Once when questioned about his personal guru, Rebazar Tarzs,
Twitchell forgot who he was. This could be due to the fact that Rebazar Tarzs is
a fictional character, and his autobiographical byline changed year-to-year with
the growth of Eckankar. 42. This 'integration' of Judaic culture and religion by
the Roman Catholic Church, though, must be contrasted with its 'dissociation' of
certain Gnostic schools in the Second Century A.D. The Church also tried to
destroy some of its own religious roots, including the highly mystical texts
produced by 'heretical' Gnostic authors. 43. Even though the Church has many
times persecuted its religious brothers and sisters in the name of God,
anti-semetism, though now formally disdained, has much of its impetus and basis
in Catholic history, theology and tradition. 44. The Radhasoami Satsang in Beas
has even established a 'Mystics of the East Series' which is designed to publish
monographs on the life stories of famous Sants in the medieval nirguna bhakti
tradition. 45. The secretary of Eckankar once issued a world-wide memo declaring
that the works of Julian P. Johnson (from which Twitchell was accused of
plagiarizing) were not copyrighted. This, of course, is false since Johnson's
Radhasoami books were all copyrighted and remain so today. 46. Including 'The
Flute of God' which was published in installments in Orion Magazine in the
mid-1960's. 47. By 1967, Twitchell had shifted his center of operation to Las
Vegas, Nevada, to avoid heavy taxation. 48. See SCP Journal--Eckankar: A Hard
Look At A New Religion (Berkeley, 1979). 49. Twitchell's paranoid concern
reached a pinnacle when he wrote a personal letter to Kirpal Singh in late 1971,
threatening the Ruhani Satsang Master with a lawsuit if he continued claiming
that Eckankar was derived from Sant mat teachings. Twitchell died of a heart
attack shortly after the letter was received in Old Delhi, India. 50. See my
article, 'The Hierarchical Structure of Religious Visions,' op. cit. Final Note:
This paper was first presented to the American Academy of Religion's Western
Region Conference at Stanford University on March 26, 1982.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 16:41:59 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Mr Ex
and Brian
Subject: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and
Paramhans ...)
Message:
Here is something interesting about m's
hidden lineage. This confirms some of the information previously published on
the web-site .... (very helpful for me) Yes, but there are still some
historical errors on the background page which need to corrected. Ok, you guys
are finally discovering the stuff written by David Lane and Mark Jurgensmeyer
which is of course very relevant and interesting since they are uniquely
well-informed on the matter. I was in contact with Lane a few years ago. The
thrust of my questions to him was, who were Shri HansJi's main influences? The
short is answer is probably Sarupanand who was a lesser known Guru, not directly
in the Radhasoami line. If anyone of you Californians are interested, as I
certainly am, perhaps you would go down to the UCLA melvyn library where, Lane
informs me, there is a book called 'Shri Paramhans Advait Mat' I would be very
interested to know what it says. Anyway here is what David Lane wrote to me. I
have tried to get hold of this book but it is very difficult making full use of
the online services of the 'melvyl library system' from the UK. I did however
order and read all of the other the books that Lane and Jurgensmeyer have
written on the subject. As I pointed out in my post below (entitled 'Radhasoami
connection') this site still portrays Shri Hans' guru eroneously as being the
well-known Radhasoami guru AnandSwarup. I want to correct that. This is
evidently not the same man as Sarupanand as I have pointed out to Brian who
obviously hasn't got around to correcting that bit of the 'Background History'
yet. (Brian, do you finally see the relevence of that section about Kirpal Singh
that I put in my 'Journeys' entry, and which you saw fit to remove because you
personally did not understand the relevance? Believe me it is highly
relevant, though I confess that to appreciate why, I had to wade through all the
aforementioned books which took ages.) I now see that I am no longer alone in
pursuing this line of enquiry. ---------------------------------------- Date:
Sat, 13 Apr 1996 23:09:22 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lane
Subject: Re: maharaji thanks for your nice note.... The
Divine Light Mission is essentially a branch-off of the Shri Paramhans Advait
Mat Group in Guna..... Sarupanand was Hansji's guru...... Hansji was also
apparently initiated by the late Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas. There
is a book entitled Shri Paramhans Advait Mat published in India (Guna) and
available at UCLA in Los Angeles, CA., which tells about their lineage.... It is
quite informative..... keep in touch dave Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 10:32:19 -0800
(PST) From: David Lane Subject: Re: Book on Divine Light
Mission thanks for your note. I am in London on sabbatical and doing some
research. If you cannot connect via melvyl you may want to try other library
systems in the USA.... Try gopher and I think Harvard and Berkeley have the book
as well. Yes, it would be delightful to meet. I am in London, but my stays here
are punctuated with frequent trips to Paris and the South of France (surfing!).
keep in touch. Juergensmeyer's book is quite helpful. I was his assistant on
that project for many years. My book on Radhasoami focuses on succession
disputes--it was published by Garland is also available through inter-library
loan (I have also included it in full on the Net). thanks dave
-------------------------------------- In Mark Jurgensmeyer's book 'Radhasoami
Reality The logic of a modern faith'(Princeton ISBN 0-691-01092-7) I
notice that there is the following footnote: For a summary of Maharaji's
teachings, see Jeanne Messer, 'Guru Maharaji and the Divine Light Mission' in
Robert Bellah and Charles Glock, eds; The New Religious Consciousness
(Berkeley:University of California Press,1976),pp.54-55. Anon
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:14:35 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
[email protected]
To: Anon
Subject: Library of
Congress Reference (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Hi: Living in the 'NetPlex' has it's advantages. I
discovered the following reference in the Library of Congess. We civilians can't
check out the book, but my committee chair is a Wilson Fellow and can check out
books from the LIbrary of Congress. Will see if I can get access: Title: Shri
Paramhans Advait Mat : a life sketch of the illustrious master of the mat.
Edition: 1st ed. Published: Shri Anandpur : Shri Anandpur Trust, 1975.
Description: viii, 730 p., [1] leaf of plates : col. ill. ; 25 cm. LC Call No.:
BL2018.7.S3 A387 Dewey No.: 299 B Notes: Translated from Hindi. Includes
quotations in Hindi. Subjects: Advait Anand, Swami, 1846-1919. Sant Mat --
Biography. Other authors: Shri Anandpur Trust. Control No.: 78908403
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:20:50 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Scott
T.
Subject: Re: Library of Congress Reference (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga
and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Hi: Living in the 'NetPlex'
has it's advantages. I discovered the following reference in the Library of
Congess. We civilians can't check out the book, but my committee chair is a
Wilson Fellow and can check out books from the LIbrary of Congress. Will see if
I can get access: Title: Shri Paramhans Advait Mat : a life sketch of the
illustrious master of the mat. Edition: 1st ed. Published: Shri Anandpur : Shri
Anandpur Trust, 1975. Description: viii, 730 p., [1] leaf of plates : col. ill.
; 25 cm. LC Call No.: BL2018.7.S3 A387 Dewey No.: 299 B Notes: Translated from
Hindi. Includes quotations in Hindi. Subjects: Advait Anand, Swami, 1846-1919.
Sant Mat -- Biography. Other authors: Shri Anandpur Trust. Control No.: 78908403
Cool. If you get hold of it I am really keen to know what it says
about Sarupanand. Mind if I email you privately?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 17:50:55 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
[email protected]
To: Anon
Subject: Re: Library of
Congress Reference (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Cool. If you get hold of it I am really keen to know
what it says about Sarupanand. Mind if I email you privately? No problem.
Have attached my email address. -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 23:32:11 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email:
[email protected]
To: Anon
Subject: Re: Brian please
read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Here is something interesting about m's
hidden lineage. This confirms some of the information previously published on
the web-site .... (very helpful for me) Yes, but there are still some
historical errors on the background page which need to corrected. Ok, you guys
are finally discovering the stuff written by David Lane and Mark Jurgensmeyer
which is of course very relevant and interesting since they are uniquely
well-informed on the matter. I was in contact with Lane a few years ago. The
thrust of my questions to him was, who were Shri HansJi's main influences? The
short is answer is probably Sarupanand who was a lesser known Guru, not directly
in the Radhasoami line. If anyone of you Californians are interested, as I
certainly am, perhaps you would go down to the UCLA melvyn library where, Lane
informs me, there is a book called 'Shri Paramhans Advait Mat' I would be very
interested to know what it says. Anyway here is what David Lane wrote to me. I
have tried to get hold of this book but it is very difficult making full use of
the online services of the 'melvyl library system' from the UK. I did however
order and read all of the other the books that Lane and Jurgensmeyer have
written on the subject. As I pointed out in my post below (entitled 'Radhasoami
connection') this site still portrays Shri Hans' guru eroneously as being the
well-known Radhasoami guru AnandSwarup. I want to correct that. This is
evidently not the same man as Sarupanand as I have pointed out to Brian who
obviously hasn't got around to correcting that bit of the 'Background History'
yet. (Brian, do you finally see the relevence of that section about Kirpal Singh
that I put in my 'Journeys' entry, and which you saw fit to remove because you
personally did not understand the relevance? Believe me it is highly
relevant, though I confess that to appreciate why, I had to wade through all the
aforementioned books which took ages.) I now see that I am no longer alone in
pursuing this line of enquiry. ---------------------------------------- Date:
Sat, 13 Apr 1996 23:09:22 -0700 (PDT) From: David Lane
Subject: Re: maharaji thanks for your nice note.... The
Divine Light Mission is essentially a branch-off of the Shri Paramhans Advait
Mat Group in Guna..... Sarupanand was Hansji's guru...... Hansji was also
apparently initiated by the late Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas. There
is a book entitled Shri Paramhans Advait Mat published in India (Guna) and
available at UCLA in Los Angeles, CA., which tells about their lineage.... It is
quite informative..... keep in touch dave Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 10:32:19 -0800
(PST) From: David Lane Subject: Re: Book on Divine Light
Mission thanks for your note. I am in London on sabbatical and doing some
research. If you cannot connect via melvyl you may want to try other library
systems in the USA.... Try gopher and I think Harvard and Berkeley have the book
as well. Yes, it would be delightful to meet. I am in London, but my stays here
are punctuated with frequent trips to Paris and the South of France (surfing!).
keep in touch. Juergensmeyer's book is quite helpful. I was his assistant on
that project for many years. My book on Radhasoami focuses on succession
disputes--it was published by Garland is also available through inter-library
loan (I have also included it in full on the Net). thanks dave
-------------------------------------- In Mark Jurgensmeyer's book 'Radhasoami
Reality The logic of a modern faith'(Princeton ISBN 0-691-01092-7) I
notice that there is the following footnote: For a summary of Maharaji's
teachings, see Jeanne Messer, 'Guru Maharaji and the Divine Light Mission' in
Robert Bellah and Charles Glock, eds; The New Religious Consciousness
(Berkeley:University of California Press,1976),pp.54-55. Anon
(Brian, do you finally see the relevence of that section about
Kirpal Singh that I put in my 'Journeys' entry, and which you saw fit to remove
because you personally did not understand the relevance? Believe me it is highly
relevant, though I confess that to appreciate why, I had to wade through all the
aforementioned books which took ages.) I now see that I am no longer alone in
pursuing this line of enquiry. First off, this is very sloppy wording
that implies to those who do not know differently that I saw fit to
remove part of your Journeys entry for my own personal reasons. I do not
edit peoples Journeys entries other than to clean up obvious typos (words run
together due to missing spaces, etc) and to format them into paragraphs. I do
not remove phrases from them, whether I see any relevance or not.
Journeys entries are the one area outside of the Forum where people say whatever
they want to. But neither do I take on any responsibility to maintain the links
that people might include in their entries. Your Journeys entry was modified by
David with a part of it removed and made into a separate page on the site. He
then linked to that new page from your entry. I only know about this
because you told me after I removed that page, and modified the link so that it
would point somewhere relevant to the surrounding text. You expressed your
unhappiness at where it now points and I told you to send me an entirely new
entry and I would update it. You haven't seen fit to do that for whatever
reason. As for the page in question, I will or won't restore it based on some
future evaluation of it. I am busy with other areas of the site at present, and
will get to the history stuff when I can devote the time required to do it
right. You either will or will not approve of what is there afterwards.
Secondly: I'm tickled pink for you that you derive so much personal enjoyment
and satisfaction by knowing Hans Ji Maharaj's guru's name. You perhaps find some
personal proof there that MJ must be a fraud. I have already arrived at that
conclusion through personal experience that didn't require wading through books.
To each his own. I have told you in email that I will get to the history pages
when I get to them - or words to that effect. You are free to post anything you
want here, as is everyone else. But no amount of pressure exerted through this
forum for me to make the immediate changes that you deem necessary to protect
this site's credibility will in any way sway me to hop right off and fix
your pet sentence on a badly flawed page. You will note that the page in
question makes no reference to Millennium. I should stop what I'm working on and
fix that too? We don't get to vote on how I spend my unpaid time
ensuring that credibility. It is my responsibility. Your concern is noted.
Again.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 07:15:08 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Brian
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and
Paramhans ...)
Message:
I told you to send me an entirely new
entry and I would update it. You haven't seen fit to do that for whatever
reason. Ok Ok. I'm not that bothered about it; if I were I would have
emailed you my 'Journeys' entry of course. As it stands it's not a high priority
for me. I am busy also. I will get around to it.(sound familiar) regarding:
I'm tickled pink for you that you derive so much personal enjoyment and
satisfaction by knowing Hans Ji Maharaj's guru's name.You perhaps find some
personal proof there that MJ must be a fraud. Very funny. I don't think it
is petty of me to take some responsibility to correct that bit, as I said,
because I was the one who told David Stirling that it was Anand Swarup when
he asked for that information. Of course it doesn't prove anything about
Maharaji being a fraud. It is not my sole intention (nor do I see why it should
be this websites) to prove Maharaji a fraud. You will note that the page in
question makes no reference to Millennium. I should stop what I'm working on and
fix that too? I would say that it is a higher priority to address mistakes
that are already published than to start adding other stuff. Just my opinion. Of
course it is a matter of credibility to a degree. It isn't my intention to
hassle you, but as somebody who has offered some input towards this site I think
I am entitled to be as slightly persistent in my objections as I have been,
especially if I perceive them to be taken lightly. Ok so my concern is noted. I
took the trouble to compose and email you a corrected version of that paragraph.
It couldn't possibly be construed as a hassle to insert that especially as I
have provided the text for you. I would like you to appreciate that I am also
slightly irritated to have spent time writing stuff like this which is shelved.
I really won't mention this again as I think your efforts are actually
applaudable and I don't want to seem over-critical. It would be good if we could
resist the temptation to engage in a slanging match about what pompous idiots we
think the other is etc. No hard feelings.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 07:51:37 (EST)
Poster: Brian
Email: [email protected]
To: Anon
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat
Shabd Yoga and Paramhans ...)
Message:
Look, maybe I'm being
over-sensitive. I don't mean to. I have a keen sense of awareness of what the
site isn't right now versus what I want it to be, and I feel driven to
get it there. So I'm putting in long hours working on parts of it, and
partitioning my own desires regarding the rest of it behind a mental wall marked
'This I Do Later'. I'm also aware that other people are affected by the results
of my efforts. But rather than freeze-up at the responsibiity that involves, I
downplay its importance so that I can make decisions about whatever is in front
of me at the time, get something accomplished, and then move on to the next
thing on the list. The last thing I can afford to do is to take a scattered
approach to site-building by running around patching cracks in walls that are
going to come down later anyway. I am very unhappy with the History
pages. But pretending that they're good enough for now so that I can work on
other parts undistracted seems to work for me. Maybe I just hate being reminded
what hasn't been done yet since that makes it harder to concentrate on
what I'm currently attempting to do. The problem is that I agree with you about
the History, and I agree with others about the Techniques, etc, but can only do
one thing at a time if I want to leave a trail of finished work behind me when
facing such a long trail of unfinished work stretching out ahead. I'm aware of
your contributions, although maybe not all of them, and I appreciate them for
having helped make the site I inherited so much more than the site I first
browsed one year ago. I also understand that you have high standards, and that
you sometimes can get irritated to not see them realized at each point along the
way and abhor compromising them. Just try to be patient with me if you can, and
I'll try to be more tolerant of any apparent criticism in the face of long hours
of effort. For the last week I've been plodding through the Forum I archives on
a post-by-post basis trying to make some sense out of what is there and fix
what's broken. It's a mess, and I'm a bit weary of the hand editing of the HTML
files. Each one seems to have been worked on with a different editor and I can't
use the utility that I wrote for Forum II archives until I have gotten them into
a standard format. In the meantime, I'm repressing desires to veer off to
something more glamorous and immediately gratifying. So I'm a bit testy I guess.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Wed, Feb 18, 1998
at 12:53:20 (EST)
Poster: Anon
Email:
To: Brian
Subject: Re: Brian please read this. (Re: Surat Shabd Yoga and
Paramhans ...)
Message:
Look, maybe I'm being
over-sensitive. I don't mean to. I have a keen sense of awareness of what the
site isn't right now versus what I want it to be, and I feel driven to
get it there. So I'm putting in long hours working on parts of it, and
partitioning my own desires regarding the rest of it behind a mental wall marked
'This I Do Later'. I'm also aware that other people are affected by the results
of my efforts. But rather than freeze-up at the responsibiity that involves, I
downplay its importance so that I can make decisions about whatever is in front
of me at the time, get something accomplished, and then move on to the next
thing on the list. The last thing I can afford to do is to take a scattered
approach to site-building by running around patching cracks in walls that are
going to come down later anyway. I am very unhappy with the History
pages. But pretending that they're good enough for now so that I can work on
other parts undistracted seems to work for me. Maybe I just hate being reminded
what hasn't been done yet since that makes it harder to concentrate on
what I'm currently attempting to do. The problem is that I agree with you about
the History, and I agree with others about the Techniques, etc, but can only do
one thing at a time if I want to leave a trail of finished work behind me when
facing such a long trail of unfinished work stretching out ahead. I'm aware of
your contributions, although maybe not all of them, and I appreciate them for
having helped make the site I inherited so much more than the site I first
browsed one year ago. I also understand that you have high standards, and that
you sometimes can get irritated to not see them realized at each point along the
way and abhor compromising them. Just try to be patient with me if you can, and
I'll try to be more tolerant of any apparent criticism in the face of long hours
of effort. For the last week I've been plodding through the Forum I archives on
a post-by-post basis trying to make some sense out of what is there and fix
what's broken. It's a mess, and I'm a bit weary of the hand editing of the HTML
files. Each one seems to have been worked on with a different editor and I can't
use the utility that I wrote for Forum II archives until I have gotten them into
a standard format. In the meantime, I'm repressing desires to veer off to
something more glamorous and immediately gratifying. So I'm a bit testy I guess.
I hear you. Putting in the time you do without being paid would
drive me insane let alone testy. No..correct that...I just couldn't do it
period.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 02:38:24 (EST)
Poster: Mili
Email: [email protected]
To: Everyone
Subject: Jim's Fundamental Confusion
Message:
That's it, folks - the title of the post is the message.
Get it?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998
at 22:17:41 (EST)
Poster: Miss 'Y'
Email: [email protected]
To: Mili
Subject: Re: Jim's Fundamental Confusion
Message:
That's it, folks - the title of the post is the
message. Get it? Sheer Profoundity! I see at least one other, sees
JIMBO 'Hell'er's true inner turmoil manifesting it's self. Oh ,um Sorry Jimbo
,only joking!
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 09:54:08 (EST)
Poster: Mili
Email:
[email protected]
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Jim's Fundamental
Confusion
Message:
Your tirade against rationality, Mili, might
as well be against math or electricity. All the evil geniuses of the twentieth
century, I'm sure, have depended on both. So what? I am not saying that
rationality is a good or bad thing. I agree with you that it is just like math,
or electricity. If rationality is just a method, a cognitive technology, what is
the basis of morality then? Jim, the conclusion of this argument, however
strange it may appear to be, is that irrationality is the basis of morality. Get
it?
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 10:20:36 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Mili
Subject: Confusion: A slight correction (Re:
Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Mili: In regard to: Jim,
the conclusion of this argument, however strange it may appear to be, is that
irrationality is the basis of morality. If I might be so bold as to offer a
slight correction, I'd say that non-rationality, coupled with the rational, is
the basis of morality. Irrationality, by definition, can't be the basis for
anything, because it doesn't allow result to follow cause. -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 14:19:28 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To:
Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's
Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Reciprocal altruism explains
morality at an instinctive, sub- or pre-cognitive level. Rational to the extent
it 'makes sense' but not as the result of an actual thought process. E.g.
maternal love is 'moral', makes good sense for both mom and the kids (i.e. is
'rational') but isn't taught or calculated.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 15:17:50 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re:
Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Jim: Well... I think so. But
it's more than a little controversial. What about systems of
morality? The Scottish moral philosophers? The so-called altruistic genes?
'Giving one's life for a friend?' The guy confronting the tank in Tiennanmen?
Simply referring to these phenomena as 'reciprocal altruism' avoids the whole
issue of methodological individualism. How did such group oriented systems
evolve? What occasioned the 'quantum leap' to the discovery that what was good
for the group is good for the individual. How did the stuff get programmed?
Reciprocity explains the difference between the relationship of Robinson Crusoe
to Friday vs. Crusoe's relationship to the environment, but if we go to larger
systems we need a magic wand of some kind, like culture. And how do cultures
come into being? To take a very simple example, why do people vote, when their
impact on the outcome is so minimal compared to the cost of going to the polls?
There is simply no rational calculation of advantage that would support such an
individual act of altruism. There are mutual benefits to voting, but you can get
those even if you don't vote. Saying that this is pre-cognitive expresses
precious little about the process. -Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 18:40:47 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To:
Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's
Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
To take a very simple
example, why do people vote, when their impact on the outcome is so minimal
compared to the cost of going to the polls? There is simply no rational
calculation of advantage that would support such an individual act of altruism.
There are mutual benefits to voting, but you can get those even if you don't
vote. Saying that this is pre-cognitive expresses precious little about the
process. -Scott Well, first of all, the majority of people don't
vote, at least in the U.S. And the 'voting class' is older, richer and whiter
than the general population of potential voters. Those who vote tend to have the
most to protect and/or lose by what elected officials might do. Hence, they are
more interested in who gets elected and what bond measures, etc. are passed. If
there is interest, there is more likelihood that one will vote. It is generally
a consideration of self interest. Although one vote can be considered
inconsequential, I think there is still a self-interest in contributing to a
result that a voter wants. This demography also has an idea of itself as 'good
citizens' and voting is a part of that. This is a psychological benefit. Also, I
think there is a fear among many voters that their vote could, in some unlikely
scenario, make the difference. It's the same rationale people have for playing
the lottery, but the payoff is certainly different.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 18:46:32 (EST)
Poster: JW
Email:
To:
Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's
Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
To take a very simple
example, why do people vote, when their impact on the outcome is so minimal
compared to the cost of going to the polls? There is simply no rational
calculation of advantage that would support such an individual act of altruism.
There are mutual benefits to voting, but you can get those even if you don't
vote. Saying that this is pre-cognitive expresses precious little about the
process. -Scott Well, first of all, the majority of people don't
vote, at least in the U.S. And the 'voting class' is older, richer and whiter
than the general population of potential voters. Those who vote tend to have the
most to protect and/or lose by what elected officials might do. Hence, they are
more interested in who gets elected and what bond measures, etc. are passed. If
there is interest, there is more likelihood that one will vote. It is generally
a consideration of self interest. Although one vote can be considered
inconsequential, I think there is still a self-interest in contributing to a
result that a voter wants. This demography also has an idea of itself as 'good
citizens' and voting is a part of that. This is a psychological benefit. Also, I
think there is a fear among many voters that their vote could, in some unlikely
scenario, make the difference. It's the same rationale people have for playing
the lottery, but the payoff is certainly different.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 20:11:16 (EST)
Poster: Jim
Email:
To:
Scott T.
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re: Jim's
Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Scott, A whole slew of
evolutionary psychologists theorize mightily about how such a simple directive
such as reciprocal altruism can explain the myriad subtleties of morality,
small-scale and large. I really like their theories. They make a lot of sense to
me especially as they explain -- or attempt to explain -- the broader social
effects of this key function of natural selection. The Reciprocal Altruism
('RA'?) kicks in at a micro-organism level and extends out past the individual
through the culture at large. Dawkins explains this succintly in a River out of
Eden. As for voting, it might not be irrational for us to vote if one considers
the secondary effect of voting which is to maintain the custom and keep everyone
else going to the polls. Further, even if that weren't true, and it was actually
'economically' unssportable for the individual to vote, that's not to say we all
know that. People who haven't figured that out and who mistakenly think their
vote is worth casting are making a rational choice based on a faulty premise.
Still rational.
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index
Date: Tues, Feb 17,
1998 at 20:22:47 (EST)
Poster: Scott T.
Email:
To: Jim
Subject: Re: Confusion: A slight correction (Re:
Jim's Fundamental Confusion)
Message:
Jim: A whole slew of
evolutionary psychologists theorize mightily about how such a simple directive
such as reciprocal altruism can explain the myriad subtleties of morality,
small-scale and large. I really like their theories. They make a lot of sense to
me especially as they explain -- or attempt to explain -- the broader social
effects of this key function of natural selection. I haven't heard of
'evolutionary psychology.' Will have to check into it. It sounds almost like a
contradiction in terms. Is this related to the 'human ecology' point of view?
-Scott
Back To
Index -:- Top of
Index