Don't forget to rate this post down below!


 Date: 02/18/2004, 09:50:19
 Posted by: Cynthia
 Original URL: Click here (However, the link may be stale.)
 Subject: Lets look at that interesting thread...

Hi Roger,


I found that thread on C&M immensely interesting.  Sakda had sincere questions about Maharaji and what he does (or doesn't do) in the world in terms of helping others less fortunate than him:  Charity.


Without chiding the premies or ridiculing their responses I observed the underlying message in all of the premies' responses to be exactly what has been taught by Maharaji from the very beginning of his career as a guru in the west. 


'One must not question the teacher' is one (a completely incorrect attitude in the real world); 'Maharaji is both human and the Master' demonstrates a particular and pecular belief that not only is he not to be questioned but also that his teachings can never be scrutinized.


The responses to Sakda of whether or not Maharaji is obligated to give money to charitable causes are inadequate.  Sakda points out that it's been thirty years and why not more charity from Maharaji?  The consistent answers are that first Maharaji reveals something on the inside to people and once that is accomplished good deeds will follow.  There is a lot of circular thinking going on here as well as avoidance because it's been a long time since Maharaji promised to bring peace to the world and feed the people.  He's failed and premies cannot face that, but they continue to believe his never-ending new schemes or "phases" to start propagation anew.


However, there is no evidence for that.  And to top that off,  responses to Sakda are that Maharaji's private life is none of her business, yet, her questions about "why so little" are about the the eye care and rice are based upon The Prem Rawat Foundation's PR releases -- public announcements. 


Also mentioned is that only those who have left the "70s" mentality and entered the 21st Century can truly understand Maharaji.  This is a fallacious arugment because it assumes that all premies who have left Maharaji did so for one reason:  missing the old days.  It simply isn't true.


Most interesting is the fear of argument about Maharaji and any faults he may or may not have.  By argument, I mean pulling all facts out into the light of day and discussing them, not pissing matches, but rational discussion. 


The statement by Georgio to the effect 'Maharaji didn't come for that,' implies that somehow Maharaji forced his own birth (and purpose in life) and is indeed quite different than other human beings in that regard.  After all, everyone is born -- we don't "come" -- we're born.  Georgio implies that Maharaji has more power than any ordinary human being.


Once again, it doesn't appear to be possible, even when the questioner is civil and the responders are civil, to get to the heart of the questions themselves.  It's impossible because it is the basic premise of the Maharaji religion that he is above reproach.


I found that exchange to be so revealing and sad at the same time.  Because Sakda kept pushing her point it became evident that the comfort level of the premies was deterioriating more and more until the conversation had to end.


Putting all my personal feelings about those particular premies aside, I see how difficult it is for them to see outside of the box of Maharaji's World, and it's such a limited world because the philosophy depends upon premies to continue to be quite egocentric -- go within first -- then help the world outside, etc.


Very interesting to observe.  It all boils down to "Never question the Master or his students.  Maharaji is above reproach."


Cynthia




 Date: 02/18/2004, 12:14:38
 Posted by: NAR
 Original URL: Click here (However, the link may be stale.)
 Subject: This is really sad and I hope.....
I hope that Sadka reads this site. I've got a few "facts" to share with regard to this issue.

1. Premies never "grow up" to be philanthropists, nor has/will M himself. Sadka is quite correct that after 30 years, no real charity appears to be evident. Well, no kidding. The first attempt at it was DUO, as many of us remember. We thought we were going to be doing good things with that...... it disappeared as soon as it was evidnet to M that it would take "our" money and efforts away from him, personally. It has never returned, nor anything like it.

2. The comment from premies with regard to "get Knowledge first, then the goodness will follow" is pure bunk. I say to the premies, each and every one, PROVE IT! Where is the proof of that statement? When premies spend every last dime, and are strongly encouraged to do so, on silly overseas trips to see "the speaker," exactly how much is left to spend on charity. If the premies' statement was true, with regard to "goodness following the reception of Knowledge," then they would give their money to charity instead of selfishly spending the little cash most of them possess on Amaroo and other rediculously extravagant things, like M's personal yachts and mansions, etc. This comment from them is an outright lie. There is NO truth to the statement about goodness automatically following the receipt of K! Again, my challenge is...... prove me wrong!

3. With regard to the above, I hope Sadka realizes quickly that K does nothing to imporve anything in "this world." If it did, premies would be the most selfless people on the planet and thos that were selfless BEFORE K would be downright SAINTS upon the revelation of this so-called Knowledge of knowledges. Yet, it hasn't happened at all. IF YOU POSSESS a good heart before K, you will still probably possess a good heart after, unless the master's greed makes you turn away from the principles that have guided your "heart" til now. The cult is insidious, so that will likely happen to all who trust his "way." On the other side of the same coin, if you DON'T possess a good/kind heart, K will NOT give it to you, either. If you weren't charitable before, you will NEVER BE charitable after. In other words, the premie statement with regard to goodness following on the heels of K-revelation is just bullcrap! Plain and simple! Again, a challenge to premies: PROVE mewrong. How many of you spend time at a food bank, or give your excess monies to same, vice travleing on your selfish way to see M in Australia, at an incerdibly exorbitant cost? How many? ow many of you are so blissed-out by K that you will forego your creature comforts to give more to those with less? How many of you think of anyone other than yourselves and M?

4. Where is M in all of this? DOes he strongly encourage or cajole his worshipers to give to charitable causes until it hurts? Does he tell premies to get a higher education so that they can get the jobs that allow them to do even MORE for the needy of "this world?" Does he, using his millions of dollars, tell premies to give to charitable causes and NOT to worry about seeing him becasue he will foot the bill to bring the premies where they can be together with him? Hell, does he even set a good example of charity?

I remember a film called "Who is Guru Maharaji," and in that misbegotten piece of crap it said one thing "right." What was it? It was a quote from the bible...... while M is shown kissing a lamb on the neck, the quote is, "by his fruits you will know him." Well, guess what? His charitable fruit from both himself and his worshipers isn't present anywhere in "thins world." The opening of the heart to mankind is NOWHERE to be seen. In fact, if we were to even look in the bible and find the section concerning the "fruitages of the spirit," the very same fruits that are expected and talked about in EVERY holy text, NOT ONE is displayed by M or his followers.... NOT ONE! So, I say again to Sadka or anyone else..... watch out! If you take the K-trip and turn into a worshiper of the lotus toes, you will probably lose any real humanity that you ever possessed. Stronger people than "thou" have have likely succumbed to the siren song of M's "liberation." The ONLY liberation you will receive is from your money AND your humanity. Don't listen to premies unless they can PROVE, by their FRUIT, that they speak true! Don't worry, I'm on really safe ground here..... they won't be able to do so.... just check for yourselves.

A few tons of rice given by M(?), doesn't make up for 30 years of continuous GREED! In fact, I'd make a bet that the average "rotten vege's ex-premie" gives more on average to charitable causes than M, himself...... on a daily basis. So who is it that has a heart? The answer, from the fruit, is plain for all to see.




 Date: 02/18/2004, 13:51:36
 Posted by: Will
 Original URL: Click here (However, the link may be stale.)
 Subject: Yes, that thread is very interesting

Personally, I am a bit surprised by Sakda's concern over charity.  Certainly the Perfect Master's role is very clear and has nothing to do with charity.  Jesus said the poor will always be with us, and that is Rawat's attitude as well.  Rawat, very early on, correctly pointed out the futility of one man trying to "correct" or alleviate much of the physical suffering in this world.  It's far too big a challenge.  Whatever little help one person or one organization could accomplish, it would be all inadequate. 


This is why both the donated rice and the free eyecare were so mystifying, and even Giorgio admits that he wondered about it: what was Rawat's motivation in making these apparent token attempts at charity?  I wondered, too.  My answer is that it was to improve his public image, and Giorgio finally came up with the explanation that it was a simiple humanitarian gesture by Rawat the individual, because he was moved to do a little something as a man, not as the Master.


Whatever the truth about this issue, it really is a minor point.  What is much more to the point is what the Perfect Master actually IS supposed to be all about, and that is the process toward "enlightenment" or, to put it in current Rawatese, "inner peace."


Carlos, to his credit, turns the conversation to this precise point.  And he give his own personal answer quite clearly, in fact much more clearly than premies usually do.  Here it is:


"Now I walk in Music most of my day. I see Light, sometimes, merely by closing my eyes when I can feel that gentleness within calling to me. And Nam lifts each breath, and I catch her at it on many, many of them. I still have decades of practice to go before I come to the state he described once as ' All you can see is Light, all you can hear is Music, all you can feel is Nam and all you can taste is Nectar', but my daily experience confirms that he knew of what he spoke.

Don't mistake me. I am no saint, nor lay any claim to such thing. I don't know if there is one soul and many bodies, or one God and many Aspects of God, each as Immortal as the Godhead Himself. But I know that the deepest part of me, and of you, and of him, is the Immortal. And I know that because I have drunk of it enough that it shows me, clearly and simply, what its nature is.

And he is the teacher without whom this would not, for me, have been. That is my test of him as a teacher. And he passes it with flying colors."


This is very interesting to me.  It explains why Carlos remains a premie, in a very basic way, and why I am no longer a premie.  Rawat does not pass this test for me.  I think Carlos is simply mistaken when he credits Rawat with the fact that the techniques "work" for him better than they did when he learned them from another source.  The real answer is obviously his own inner potential rather than Rawat's influence.  To thank Rawat is nothing but magical thinking.  How could that work?  It simply does not work that way.  Instead, whatever belief and effort that a person gives to his own inner practice, that provides for the results, perfectly naturally, and not supernaturally at all.  It is all potential within us.  Rawat deserves NO credit, except for the encouragement that he gives.  He DOES deserve that credit, but it is a minor one compared to the vastly exaggerated credit that he gives himself and has successfully programed the premies like Carlos to give him. 


Carlos also has accepted the teaching that experiences of light, music, breath, and nectar are what brings him fulfillment in this life.  That is one of the hallmarks of Rawat's teaching, and it is a fallacy.  What brings us fulfillment is the love we feel and share, and the self-actualization that we accomplish; and this is independent of effort we might make in trying to go deeper and deeper into states of consciousness other than the one that we are naturally in.


This question about finally attaining the desired state of consciousness is discussed in the Sakda thread in terms of "graduation."  Carlos clearly expects his ultimate fulfillment in life to be attained after decades more effort in going deeper and deeper into a conscious state that he has not yet achieved.  He accepts Rawat's teaching that he must practice, practice, practice.  I say that only when we give up this constant practice to improve, and this misbegotten goal of transformation into constant divine bliss, only then can we mature into our real self and find our real fulfillment in the here and now.


The fault with the Perfect Master is not that he fails to alleviate worldly concerns, but that he fails to teach his students that right way to fulfillment.  His way is actually the ironic sidetrip that only leads the student to constant effort and failure, false dependence, and fake fulfillment.  It is exactly opposite of what it purports to be!


One last issue brought up in the thread was the question about how many of Rawat's students have given up the practice of Knowledge.  Carlos accepts the actual situation while Giorgio still refuses to look at the numbers in a realistic way.  Most premies do finally give up the practice, and find substantial relief when they do.  They are then free to grow in the way that people are natually and inherently capable of growing.  And so many opportunities and varieties of pursuits and expressions then become available.  The all-too-narrow path prescribed by the guru is seen for the confinement that it really is.


 



(Printer Friendly Version)




 Date: 02/18/2004, 14:25:11
 Posted by: NAR
 Original URL: Click here (However, the link may be stale.)
 Subject: Will, I disagree to a point
You said, ".... Jesus said the poor will always be with us...." which is quite true, apparently. But I propose that this comment is taken WAY out of context.

Remember, Jesus supposedly said some other things about charity..... alot of other things. Including "thanking" those that visited him while he was in jail, brought him food when he was hungry, etc, etc, but then the KEY COMMENT when asked "when did we visit you in prison" he states that those things that were done to the LEAST of men were done to him! In other words, he very poignantly extolled the virtue of charity and drove-it-home by saying if you do those things to others..... you are doing them to ME, personally. If someone thought he was god or a prohet that speaks with god, that would be something you'd WANT to do..... even if you were kinda "guilted" into actually doing it.

Whether Jesus REALLY said those things or not doesn't matter because THAT was the lesson, whether the bible is real or fable.

M, on the other hand, is not anything like this. He never extolls the virtue of kindness..... even between premies. If the charity and kindness aren't directed TOWARDS HIM ALONE, then he mentions them not...... that is pretty unique among "religions," as religions go. Most of them have stories very similar to the Jesus story above...... M and his current-day ilk are completely differnt, IMHO.

I don't like using Catholics (or any other specific religion) to make the point, but remember how many St. Mary's Food Banks there are. Remember how many other organizations or groups have a "Saint's" name in them. These are normally Catholic or Episcopal (since they use the "saint" title). They can point DIRECTLY to places in the bible where Jesus supposedly told them to do those very things. They may not be perfect at it, but I'm glad they are around for that purpose. People always do things better, IMHO, if there is an overrriding moral need to do so. They wouldn't DARE make a dime off it, either..... otherwise it no longer qualifies as charity.

Again, I think M (and other current day gurus, etc) aren't even following THEIR OWN religious texts in this regard. Krishna was quite verbose on this issue, too. In his parlance, it was called Karma Yoga..... or the yoga of "action" without concern for the "reward" for that action. This current crop of gurus just suck.....




 Date: 02/18/2004, 16:02:53
 Posted by: Will
 Original URL: Click here (However, the link may be stale.)
 Subject: Re: Will, I disagree to a point

Hi Nar,


Thanks for the clarification.  But I don't think we really disagree.  It's just that I was making a point about the role of the supposed Perfect Master, and that it is not the role of a supposed savior figure to save people from worldly poverty. 


It's certainly true that Jesus, as you say, taught his students to be charitable to others, and Rawat does not teach that, except in the tiniest asides nowadays. 


What Rawat has taught about loving kindness and human charity is actually worse than has been so far stated in these current two threads.  He has badmouthed every sort of human love, even the love between a mother and her suckling child, (see the Pinata Satsang).   He has taught that human love is founded on selfishness and that the only true love is for the guru.  I am not exaggerating his teaching in any way.   In the passing years, Rawat has toned down his rhetoric but the basic philosophy is still intact.


When I was in the ashram, a family in our commmunity experienced a period of hard times.  Some premies wanted to help them out, but others insisted that we should only do service directly to the Master.  Helping that family in any sort of "worldly" way was firmly prohibited by the philosophy of Divine Light Mission.


Although Rawat will currently give lip service to the importance of being kind to each other, he does not acknowledge that normal human love and kindness can be fulfilling to anyone.  In fact, human kindness doesn't really fit in with Rawat's life philosophy -  which states that our happiness is dependent on attaining an inner state of mind, that we can never be fulfilled or complete unless we look within.  Consequently, when we look to any sort of human kindness, that love comes to us from outside ourselves so we are looking in the wrong direction.   


As far as I can tell, this philosophy is dead wrong.   We do not find love by routinely closing ourselves off to the world and dedicating ourselves to some idea of perfect consciousness within us.  My observations tell me that whatever love premies experience, they experience it just as any other person does, within the context of our natural state.  They feel love for Rawat because they have opened up their hearts to him, not because of any other reason that I know about. 


I don't think that premies experience something inside themselves that I somehow missed out on in my thrity years of practice.  I certainly don't see any evidence for that.  I only see them experiencing the very same good feelings that I experienced, and then misidentifying the source.




 Date: 02/18/2004, 16:41:50
 Posted by: NAR
 Original URL: Click here (However, the link may be stale.)
 Subject: ABSOLUTELY Agree! :)
I must have misunderstood your point. I thought you were generalizing ALL religions, not just M. My apologies.

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with you that he has perverted and/or ridiculed every relationship other than with himself. "Selfish love" my arse! He wouldn't know selfless, or anything even close to it, if it sat in his lap.

Unfortunately, I notice that it rubs off on the premies, too. THAT is of much greater concern to me than one greedy guru. It hurts me to know that some of these folks, that I knew prior, have been turned into a bunch of uncaring, selfish, sprirtually egotistical lotus-toe lickers. They sure as heck didn't start out that way. I think they have lost all touch with their humanity....... It really does suck!

As to your experience, Will...... I think you have nothing to worry about. Given the length of time you spent with him and his Special-K (uh, oh..... might be a trademark infringement there), if there were "liberation," you'd likely know by now AND you'd be seeing others popping into it like the so-called christian "rapture." Yet....... we see nobody "making it." I like to make the point that with as many dedicated followers as he has had, there should be a potfull of liberated souls running around. Nope......... not a single one to be seen. In fact, I don't recall seeing anyone in that group that has even slightly improved their "spiritual standing." They look and sound and act just like they always did. No difference, at all.

Jeez.... you'd THINK that they (premies) would catch on to THAT fact. They haven't moved one iota...... not the slightest hint. Just the same old, same old.


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


Additional Comments 

© Copyright 1999 - 2004 Roger eDrek™