Don't forget to rate this post down below!

Date:  

Thurs, Jan 20, 2000 at 11:16:32 (GMT)

From:  

Anon

Email:  

To:  

All

Subject:  

To Carol. re: judging M
Message:
I am reposting this re-edited response to some of your previous comments, since I think you may have missed it buried down below! Apologies if this is not 'new-thread-worthy' but as it took me a while to write and I'd quite like you to read it.

Carol wrote:

Did his mistakes or his abuses change the fact that he taught us an excellent way to meditate (and for some of us, a way to connect to the deepest love we'd ever known inside of us)? I don't think so.

Maybe not, but I think that the fact that he has not had the strength of character (moral integrity or whatever) to admit or apologise for his mistakes, or furthermore try to really help those who have been affected or confused, says something about his trustworthiness as a Master. I cannot help but see this reluctance, or inability of his to discuss past woes, as being a display of avoidance, which all the more suggests that he has feet of clay. Let's face it, he is still very arrogant and dismissive of people who complain. As I said lower down. If there was nothing to complain about there would be no complainers. I frankly suspect that his admonition to people to stop complaining is partially an attempt to keep any skeletons firmly in the cupboard!

What worries me slightly about your attitude (albeit very forgiving and kind) is that by continuing to give the benefit of the doubt to Maharaji (who although he would clearly like us to be impressed that he has 'moved on' and positively reformed, has not yet truthfully cleared up the mess he has left in his wake) one is potentially further bloating his self-confidence, which is already amply empowered by his many unquestioning followers. This could not only be bad for his character, but it could also be harmful to those who continue to put their trust in him (should he decide to repeat his mistakes)

Another thing is that although we may judge him generously by virtue of our personal experiences of Knowledge and trust him all the more because of the 'goodness' of our experiences, I strongly feel that this is naive reasoning, since our association of our inner experiences with him is so emphatically suggested to us by the external 'packaging'. (more on this another time I think)

I still fail to see why the Knowledge has to be only available from him. The imparting of Knowledge and the secrecy, and much of the other stuff, suggests to me that this monopoly of his, is more a thing of his own design than of Holt Writ!

Who really knows after all?

Maybe in future the knowledge could be broadly known and taught. Since I have suffered much indoctrination, and have had so much difficulty in following Maharaji in the 'devotee' mode (what with all the fear-mongering when I was younger and being pressured by him to give up so much to live in ashrams etc. which I have great difficulty in accepting now) I truly wonder if these past traditional ways of 'spreading knowledge' may have been no more than the highjacking of a commodity, that should have been freely available (with no strings-attached), for the benefit of the Guru's and their immediate families, at the expense of their trusting followers. There is no doubting the religiosity of DLM and all the past gurus. One cannot help but see how religion is indeed the 'opiate of the people.' We except things to be as we are told because we don't want to rock the boat, especially since we are afraid that the captain may be God, and an ill-tempered one at that!

There really was so much fear mongering in the words of SatGurus to their followers...you know..'you'll come back as an insect if you dare cross your Guru' stuff. Read Shri Hans Ji's words on JM's website, if you doubt it. Maharaji repeated this indimidating sort of line when he was younger and it worked. All us god-fearing westerners fell for it too!

I think Maharaji does, on principle, owe us some straight answers to release us from the bonds of fear that he seems to have (by current evidence) successfully managed to traumatise us with when we were kids -for example: Does he really now still think that, if you don't practice, you will experience the equivalent of tons of rotting vegetables in your life?
I know this particular quote always gets cited as the example of 'Heavy Satsang' but of course, there were many other such insinuations, suggestions made at the time. This is just the infamous one. I mean, what does he really mean? Really??

Did his mistakes or his abuses change the fact that he taught us..... a way to connect to the deepest love we'd ever known inside of us.

Who's to say that he is really indispensible in the teaching of this deepest of experiences?(apart from him of course!)
Maybe if he hadn't enforced such a tight monopoly on the distribution, then we could all share this thing magnanamously with our fellow men. (It has to be said that Maharaji has inadvertantly created a society of people who are demonstrably lacking in many of the human virtues that other people, without the benefit of his knowledge, have in plenty.)

It seems to me that premies sometimes assume they are on the right track, relegate responsiblity for their morals as a result, get lazy about their integrety, and before long end up as selfish, developmentally-arrested, unkind, thoughtless towards others zealots, who preach about the virtues of the Master who has enlightened them to their true natures! (I am being Devils Avocate here because I know most premies are very beautiful, sincere people underneath, however I think you'll agree there is a disturbing element of truth in this)

A quite impartial non-premie friend of mine came round, even just now, saying (quite without us being on the subject) that he found that of those people who he deals with, who are the most friendly when they want something from you but don't even cast a friendly glance in your direction if you have nothing they want-'vampiric' is a word that comes to mind- 'They...' said he, with a healthy relunctance to quickly criticise others but tangible honesty, 'usually... turn out to be Premies, I'm afraid'.

Carol, even though your better nature urges you to judge Maharaji generously and further to forgive him his bad old ways, please do not lose sight (maybe because he has just bliss-bombed you with his home-spun and uncontentious video transmission!) that it is our duty as seekers for ultimate truth, not to compromise, and that it may be a nobler thing to be unrestrained in our criticism or even Devils-Advocatish towards he who once wielded enormous power over others in sometimes very questionable ways. For he may continue to do so if left unchallenged. God knows he is surrounded by people already who agree with his every word. If you indeed have some love and respect for him, it is surely only best to reproach him frankly, particularly if his behaviour is, or was, in any way offensive to you or others.

One fundamental reason that I decided to back off from him and allow myself to be critical of him here, was that I was sick of trying to introduce people I cared about to Knowledge, only to have them baulk at the samekind of things that went against the grain for me, but which I tolerated out of a perversion of the word respect. Also how could I, in all honesty, recommend Maharaji's 'path' to my loved ones, when I personally suffered so much humiliation in the aspirant process. I would not wish the same on those I love, despite whatever feelings I may have that they may benefit from knowledge.

This is the struggle I have and which compels me to try and change things, or at least make Maharaji and those who help him prepare aspirants etc. to see how their attitudes can cause dreadful suffering and confusion to sincere people.

5 Brighter than 1000 suns as seen through night vision goggles
4 As bright as the lights on Maharaji's jet
3 As bright as a 60 watt light bulb
2 As bright as a pile of burning ghi on a swinging arti tray
1 As bright as the inner light as seen by the third eye
Other