(QuoteParma Jio)Sikh = Learning. Is that not what all life is each day you develop to be what you are.
Sikh’s learning starts with a goal, an evolution of soul, if that doesn’t occur, learning and all associated words with it, are empty even though look decorated philosophically. Improvement is not final goal, evolution is.
I guess you are never fully developed into being who you are until the moment you die.
Very depressing statement, often quoted by those scholars who have little or no knowledge of spiritual experience. Certainly the ones with elevated spiritual experience will laugh at it. Learning is it self nothing if there is no progression and goal is not obtained. In a race all participants run but all do not win, does it mean, all others should give up thinking" we all are not going to win, lets give up hopes" No offense, this is the way I feel after reading your nice statements.
Sikh’s learning starts with a goal, an evolution of soul, if that doesn’t occur, learning and all associated words with it, are empty even though look decorated philosophically. Improvement is not final goal, evolution is.
I guess you are never fully developed into being who you are until the moment you die.
Very depressing statement, often quoted by those scholars who have little or no knowledge of spiritual experience. Certainly the ones with elevated spiritual experience will laugh at it. Learning is it self nothing if there is no progression and goal is not obtained. In a race all participants run but all do not win, does it mean, all others should give up thinking" we all are not going to win, lets give up hopes" No offense, this is the way I feel after reading your nice statements.
Canuck Singh
SPNer
Veer ji,
Twitchell, Paul. The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master from 1965 until his translation from the physical in 1971; he brought the modern teachings of Eckankar to the peoples of the world through his many books, lectures, and writings; as the spiritual head of Eckankar, he brought new life and hope to thousands. [Also known as Paulji or Peddar Zaskq.]
Paul Twitchell is the founder of a new religion called Ekankar. Does that look familiar to you? You can find information about him on the Internet. Here is a link from Wikipedia:
Source http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/
You can also refer to:Paul Twitchell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The issues raised in this belief system however are problematic for some; and would be a concern to any Sikh who believes that there is one God, and that God does not incarnate - ever, never. In my humble opinion, this is another example of how ideas are freely borrowed/harvested from several traditions and mixed together to form a new panth (so to speak). Because the ideas embedded in Ekankar are borrowed from traditions like Sant Mat or sound like concepts of Sikhi, the new panth assumes for itself a certain legitimacy (shall we way). The results can be puzzling. I am being diplomatic when I say this.
Eckankar calls itself a religion of light and the sound of God. Yes, light (jyote) and sound (naad). Yet it is registered as a corporation. It's leaders assume the title "Sri" and holy scriptures are guarded for thousands of years by living masters on other planes like the planet Venus.
I do not consider Ekankar in any way similar to a sect of an established religion (e.g., Nihangs within Sikhi); nor do I consider it a subdivision within a larger family of religions (e.g., Anglicans, Lutherans, Orthodox Christians, Roman Catholics belonging to the apostolic/episcopal tradition within Christianity). Forgive me.
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2006/12/jr_puri_commits.html
J.R. Puri commits plagiarism in a RSSB book
But I've discovered that at least one Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) author is guilty of his own plagiarizing. A few days ago I was reading along in a book that I’d gotten myself for Christmas, “Meister Eckhart: Mystic as Theologian” by Robert K.C. Forman.
On page 102 I came to a quotation from W.T. Stace. It seemed awfully familiar.
Yet you couldn't even plagiarize competently, adding an extra comma between "reasoning" and "processes" that confused me every time I read the passage.
I can’t stand plagiarism. I’ve written three books and have gone to considerable lengths to give credit where credit is due, quotation wise. I’m not the most organized author. Sometimes I’d include a quote in a draft, then fail to footnote it on the spot because I figured I’d never forget the source.
But I would. Then I’d have to spend a lot of time searching through my library, looking for the quoted passage. My commitment to crediting quotes is so deep, I almost always mention the author’s name in association with a quotation, rather than simply including a numbered footnote.
What was Puri thinking? I try to imagine him working on his book. He’s a long-time disciple of a RSSB guru who emphasized “honest living.” Yet he copies almost verbatim from Stace’s book, giving Stace absolutely no credit for ideas that Puri implied were his own.
When I used to give talks on behalf of RSSB I’d occasionally cite the passage from Puri’s book. I liked it a lot. I still do, but now I know that whoever else Puri was, he was a plagiarist. Apparently he lacked sufficient mystical understanding of his own and needed to borrow from Stace.
I found much of W.T. Stace’s book online, courtesy of Dave Woodward. The material plagiarized by Puri is in the “Introvertive Mysticism” section (Puri also shamelessly copied that title, along with some other prefatory language).
Now I can’t help but wonder how much unattributed copying is present in other RSSB books. I’ve written one myself (“Life is Fair”) and can say that my book is clean. However, who knows about the many other titles published by Radha Soami Satsang Beas?
For a long time I thought that these books had more credibility than most other mystical literature. Increasingly I’m thinking differently, especially after coming across this plagiarism. Again, I find it difficult to understand how someone with so many years of meditation and spiritual devotion under his belt could so easily steal another writer’s words.
Yet at the same time I also find it easy to understand.
Organized religions like Radha Soami Satsang Beas emphasize outward rather than inward spirituality, notwithstanding the lip service paid to direct mystical experience. Most RSSB initiates simply go through the motions, like the vast majority of other religious believers.
Such as J.R. Puri. I don’t know if he is still alive. If he is, I’d like to learn how he explains his plagiarism. Which is, whatever the reason, inexcusable.
Astoundingly, the book jacket of “Guru Nanak” says about Puri:
[12/30 update: Here's a scan of the pages in question. Several commenters to this post have claimed that the mention of Stace on page 58 somehow absolves the plagiarism on page 59. That's ridiculous.
Puri mentions both Walter Stace and Rudolf Otto on page 58. And he gives no indication on page 59 that the third paragraph is cribbed directly from Stace's book. Puri simply changed a few words. Yet he gives no credit to Stace. As I noted in a comment of my own, according to the Indiana University Campus Writing Program, this is a textbook case of plagiarism.
Am I making too much of this? Maybe. But what I find as interesting as the plagiarism is the reaction of some Puri defenders. In my opinion, they aren't looking at the facts clearly. Which is precisely my objection to the True Believer
J.R. Puri commits plagiarism in a RSSB book
The tables have been turned. David Lane (a.k.a. the Neural Surfer) has documented how Paul Twitchell , the founder of Eckankar, massively plagiarized from books published by Radha Soami Satsang Beas (notably Julian Johnson’s “Path of the Masters”).
But I've discovered that at least one Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB) author is guilty of his own plagiarizing. A few days ago I was reading along in a book that I’d gotten myself for Christmas, “Meister Eckhart: Mystic as Theologian” by Robert K.C. Forman.
On page 102 I came to a quotation from W.T. Stace. It seemed awfully familiar.
Suppose that, after having got rid of all sensations, one should go on to exclude from consciousness all sensuous images, and then all abstract thoughts, reasoning processes, volitions, and other particular mental contents, what would there then be left of consciousness? There would be no mental content whatever but rather a complete emptiness, vacuum, void. One would suppose a priori that consciousness would then entirely lapse and one would fall asleep or become unconscious.
But the introvertive mystics—thousands of them all over the world—unanimously assert that they have attained to this complete vacuum of particular mental contents, but that what then happens is quite different from a lapse into unconsciousness.
On the contrary, what emerges is a state of pure consciousness—“pure” in the sense that it is not the consciousness of any empirical content. It has no content except itself.
It was familiar because I’d quoted almost the exact same passage in my first book, “God’s Whisper, Creation’s Thunder.” I’d found it in J.R. Puri’s “Guru Nanak: His Mystic Teachings,” published by RSSB (page 59).But the introvertive mystics—thousands of them all over the world—unanimously assert that they have attained to this complete vacuum of particular mental contents, but that what then happens is quite different from a lapse into unconsciousness.
On the contrary, what emerges is a state of pure consciousness—“pure” in the sense that it is not the consciousness of any empirical content. It has no content except itself.
Having eliminated all sensations, the mystic next excludes from consciousness all sensuous images, and then all abstract thoughts, reasoning, processes, volitions, and particular mental contents. One may ask, what then would be left of consciousness? In the absence of any mental content whatsoever, there would be a complete emptiness, a void, a vacuum. One would suppose a priori that consciousness would then entirely lapse and one would fall asleep or become unconscious.
But the introvertive mystics unanimously assert—and there are thousands of them all over the world—that they have attained to a complete vacuum of particular mental contents, and what then emerges is a state of pure consciousness.
It is pure in the sense that it is not the consciousness of any empirical content. It has no content except itself.
So, who is the plagiarizer? Obviously, J.R. Puri. W.T. Stace’s “Mysticism and Philosophy” was published in 1960. “Guru Nanak” was published in 1982. Shame on you, Mr. Puri! But the introvertive mystics unanimously assert—and there are thousands of them all over the world—that they have attained to a complete vacuum of particular mental contents, and what then emerges is a state of pure consciousness.
It is pure in the sense that it is not the consciousness of any empirical content. It has no content except itself.
Yet you couldn't even plagiarize competently, adding an extra comma between "reasoning" and "processes" that confused me every time I read the passage.
I can’t stand plagiarism. I’ve written three books and have gone to considerable lengths to give credit where credit is due, quotation wise. I’m not the most organized author. Sometimes I’d include a quote in a draft, then fail to footnote it on the spot because I figured I’d never forget the source.
But I would. Then I’d have to spend a lot of time searching through my library, looking for the quoted passage. My commitment to crediting quotes is so deep, I almost always mention the author’s name in association with a quotation, rather than simply including a numbered footnote.
What was Puri thinking? I try to imagine him working on his book. He’s a long-time disciple of a RSSB guru who emphasized “honest living.” Yet he copies almost verbatim from Stace’s book, giving Stace absolutely no credit for ideas that Puri implied were his own.
When I used to give talks on behalf of RSSB I’d occasionally cite the passage from Puri’s book. I liked it a lot. I still do, but now I know that whoever else Puri was, he was a plagiarist. Apparently he lacked sufficient mystical understanding of his own and needed to borrow from Stace.
I found much of W.T. Stace’s book online, courtesy of Dave Woodward. The material plagiarized by Puri is in the “Introvertive Mysticism” section (Puri also shamelessly copied that title, along with some other prefatory language).
Now I can’t help but wonder how much unattributed copying is present in other RSSB books. I’ve written one myself (“Life is Fair”) and can say that my book is clean. However, who knows about the many other titles published by Radha Soami Satsang Beas?
For a long time I thought that these books had more credibility than most other mystical literature. Increasingly I’m thinking differently, especially after coming across this plagiarism. Again, I find it difficult to understand how someone with so many years of meditation and spiritual devotion under his belt could so easily steal another writer’s words.
Yet at the same time I also find it easy to understand.
Organized religions like Radha Soami Satsang Beas emphasize outward rather than inward spirituality, notwithstanding the lip service paid to direct mystical experience. Most RSSB initiates simply go through the motions, like the vast majority of other religious believers.
Such as J.R. Puri. I don’t know if he is still alive. If he is, I’d like to learn how he explains his plagiarism. Which is, whatever the reason, inexcusable.
Astoundingly, the book jacket of “Guru Nanak” says about Puri:
The author has also lucidly brought forth the close relationship that exists between the mystic experience and ethics as well as religion, drawing on his rich background in Western philosophy. The mystic experience has been shown to be the cause as also the effect of ethical living.
It seems that plagiarism also is the effect of mystical experience. Or at least the ability to write about mysticism. Also astounding is the fact that Puri spent a lot of time in academia, which puts much emphasis on crediting your sources.Prof. J.R. Puri was head of the Department of Philosophy, Punjabi University, Patiaia from 1969 to 1976. Earlier, he was head of the post-graduate Department of Philosophy, Mahendra College, Patiaia for more than a decade. After his retirement as a teacher of philosophy for more than thirty-five years, his present interest centers mainly on the study and practice of mysticism.
Well, when that was written I think Puri needed a lot more practice. Not at plagiarizing—he was already expert at that. But at the ethics that supposedly accompanies mystic experience.[12/30 update: Here's a scan of the pages in question. Several commenters to this post have claimed that the mention of Stace on page 58 somehow absolves the plagiarism on page 59. That's ridiculous.
Puri mentions both Walter Stace and Rudolf Otto on page 58. And he gives no indication on page 59 that the third paragraph is cribbed directly from Stace's book. Puri simply changed a few words. Yet he gives no credit to Stace. As I noted in a comment of my own, according to the Indiana University Campus Writing Program, this is a textbook case of plagiarism.
Am I making too much of this? Maybe. But what I find as interesting as the plagiarism is the reaction of some Puri defenders. In my opinion, they aren't looking at the facts clearly. Which is precisely my objection to the True Believer
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
Jungian psychology points out that institutions (religious, government, medical, you name it) eventually become obstacles to the very purposes for which they were created. They take on a life of their own and survival becomes the first priority. Anyone who questions the institution is a threat, and those who depend on the institution for their livelihood, power, or self-image are likewise threatened and take appropriate action.
In the end, perhaps the institution becomes the crucible (or part of it) in which self-realization is forged as one encounters the limitations and flaws of the institution and those in it, including oneself. The more adherents behave in deluded and unenlightened ways, the more opportunities one has for self-inquiry, self-awareness, enlightenment, developing humility, and all that.
Church of the Churchless: More criticism of Radha Soami Satsang Beas
In the end, perhaps the institution becomes the crucible (or part of it) in which self-realization is forged as one encounters the limitations and flaws of the institution and those in it, including oneself. The more adherents behave in deluded and unenlightened ways, the more opportunities one has for self-inquiry, self-awareness, enlightenment, developing humility, and all that.
Church of the Churchless: More criticism of Radha Soami Satsang Beas
quote: Am I making too much of this? Maybe. But what I find as interesting as the plagiarism is the reaction of some Puri defenders. In my opinion, they aren't looking at the facts clearly. Which is precisely my objection to the True Believer /quote
No you are not making to much of this. (Or maybe I mean the writer in the blog, but it doesn't matter as you are making the same point rhetorically.) A lot more needs to be said in response to your post above. But starting with the statement quoted above.
We have to ask ourselves for the sake of our own emotional, psychological, moral and spiritual balance a question. When we read information about spiritual identity and growth, what are the motivations of the person who wrote the information? Maybe the question cannot be answered with concrete evidence. Who knows what a person's motivations are? But sometimes the agendas are evident -- peddling spirituality leads to followers and followers feed egos and bank accounts. You are compiling a number of examples where something very inspirational and likely to attract those who are seeking to heal spiritual wounds will be moved -- by the words -- and think that the "master" is the source of their sudden insight. When instead the "master" intuitively or directly recognizes the pull that the words have, and manipulates the injured souls.
Plagiarism is rampant you know.* And it takes many forms. It goes beyond forgetting to give credit to an original author. It is a form of theft. Could it be that it rises from the plagiarist's own needy ego -- a bottomless pit of need? Power, fame, money, followers?
* Plagiarism is rampant in academia. In academia, haumei is the immediate culprit. But there is another thing to consider always in life. You never look bad when you give credit to another person. One of my professors/mentors told me that and I have never forgotten.
No you are not making to much of this. (Or maybe I mean the writer in the blog, but it doesn't matter as you are making the same point rhetorically.) A lot more needs to be said in response to your post above. But starting with the statement quoted above.
We have to ask ourselves for the sake of our own emotional, psychological, moral and spiritual balance a question. When we read information about spiritual identity and growth, what are the motivations of the person who wrote the information? Maybe the question cannot be answered with concrete evidence. Who knows what a person's motivations are? But sometimes the agendas are evident -- peddling spirituality leads to followers and followers feed egos and bank accounts. You are compiling a number of examples where something very inspirational and likely to attract those who are seeking to heal spiritual wounds will be moved -- by the words -- and think that the "master" is the source of their sudden insight. When instead the "master" intuitively or directly recognizes the pull that the words have, and manipulates the injured souls.
Plagiarism is rampant you know.* And it takes many forms. It goes beyond forgetting to give credit to an original author. It is a form of theft. Could it be that it rises from the plagiarist's own needy ego -- a bottomless pit of need? Power, fame, money, followers?
* Plagiarism is rampant in academia. In academia, haumei is the immediate culprit. But there is another thing to consider always in life. You never look bad when you give credit to another person. One of my professors/mentors told me that and I have never forgotten.
- Jun 7, 2006
- 1,323
- 145
there are only 26 alphabets
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
What if there were 27 ? It would increase expression of thought, which makes me think why 26 alphabets aren't enough to find the right words to express thoughts which are esoteric in nature. To give a certain portion of plagarism a benefit of the doubt, it is said that one is always at a loss of words so he conveniently borrows another's writings to express what he's experienced.
But Aad Ji, who can tell for sure if he has had real experience ?
There were at least 22 fakes gurus for every real one.
This estimate was during the time of the 9th Sikh Master. Today, ਪੁੱਛੋ ਹੀ ਨਾਂ (don't even ask)!!!
But Aad Ji, who can tell for sure if he has had real experience ?
There were at least 22 fakes gurus for every real one.
This estimate was during the time of the 9th Sikh Master. Today, ਪੁੱਛੋ ਹੀ ਨਾਂ (don't even ask)!!!
NamJap ji
ਪੁੱਛੋ ਹੀ ਨਾਂ (don't even ask)!!!
Ok, I won't
Glad you covered it up with script.
Am a bit confused by your question - Whether one can tell if he has had a real experience? Do you mean whether Twitchell has had a real experience, or anyone at all, or any one of the "masters" during the time of the 9th Guru? Can't understand the question.
Maybe I am veering to the wrong side of the highway with my answer, until I am more certain what you mean. But let's say it doesn't matter who 'he' is for the sake of discussion.
If someone has had a real experience, in the sense that Buddhist's use -- has become a buddh -- now you are a teacher. But a buddh? Is an enlightened person highly motivated to attract students? Sometimes a buddh will refuse to give answers. Sometimes a buddh will even refuse to teach an aspiring student. Discernment rather than personal promotion seems to make a difference. Does that make sense? Correct me if I have missed the point.
One says, "listen to me for I have found it!" The other waits quietly for the question. My reference for this: Janaamsakhi - Chauda The Cannibal.
ਪੁੱਛੋ ਹੀ ਨਾਂ (don't even ask)!!!
Ok, I won't
Glad you covered it up with script.Am a bit confused by your question - Whether one can tell if he has had a real experience? Do you mean whether Twitchell has had a real experience, or anyone at all, or any one of the "masters" during the time of the 9th Guru? Can't understand the question.
Maybe I am veering to the wrong side of the highway with my answer, until I am more certain what you mean. But let's say it doesn't matter who 'he' is for the sake of discussion.
If someone has had a real experience, in the sense that Buddhist's use -- has become a buddh -- now you are a teacher. But a buddh? Is an enlightened person highly motivated to attract students? Sometimes a buddh will refuse to give answers. Sometimes a buddh will even refuse to teach an aspiring student. Discernment rather than personal promotion seems to make a difference. Does that make sense? Correct me if I have missed the point.
One says, "listen to me for I have found it!" The other waits quietly for the question. My reference for this: Janaamsakhi - Chauda The Cannibal.
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
The 22 fake gurus is linked to the sakhi of Makhan Shah Lobhana, who having being deceived by 22 fake gurus, eventually shouted, I have found the real guru - Guru Teg Bahadur Ji.
This is what you asked
Instead he spent alot of time in deep meditation.
This is what you asked
Guru Teg Bahadur definitely did not find any reason to do so.
Instead he spent alot of time in deep meditation.
Discovery of Guru Teg Bahadur
As expected, none of the imposters could recognise him, which still left him the problem of having to find the rightful Guru. Then he heard of the solitarian Teg Bahedur, son of Guru Hargobind. Makhan Shah was taken to see him on August 10, 1664 by a local youth. When Makhan placed the two Dinars before Tegh Bahadur, he remarked "God bless you, my man, why only two Dinars after pledging five hundred? The Guru is never in need of any thing but a Sikh is expected to keep his pledge to the Guru." Thus the issue was clinched and the real Guru was discovered by Makhan Shah.
Makhan Shah proclaimed that he would inform everyone upon discovering the True Guru. Guru Teg Bahadur was still desiring to meditate in solitude and told Makhan Shah not to tell anyone. The Guru tried to discourage him by saying his face would be blackened if he did so. (meaning dishonour will be obtained). Makhan Shah took this as a challenge instead of a curse and put ash on his face and climbed to the roof top to announce to all that he had found the Guru.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhai_Makhan_Shah
A study in waiting quietly for a question.
As expected, none of the imposters could recognise him, which still left him the problem of having to find the rightful Guru. Then he heard of the solitarian Teg Bahedur, son of Guru Hargobind. Makhan Shah was taken to see him on August 10, 1664 by a local youth. When Makhan placed the two Dinars before Tegh Bahadur, he remarked "God bless you, my man, why only two Dinars after pledging five hundred? The Guru is never in need of any thing but a Sikh is expected to keep his pledge to the Guru." Thus the issue was clinched and the real Guru was discovered by Makhan Shah.
Makhan Shah proclaimed that he would inform everyone upon discovering the True Guru. Guru Teg Bahadur was still desiring to meditate in solitude and told Makhan Shah not to tell anyone. The Guru tried to discourage him by saying his face would be blackened if he did so. (meaning dishonour will be obtained). Makhan Shah took this as a challenge instead of a curse and put ash on his face and climbed to the roof top to announce to all that he had found the Guru.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhai_Makhan_Shah
A study in waiting quietly for a question.
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
But today, Gurus have an association to protect them from law suits.
They constantly seek the company of many people who become their
agents to increase their bank accounts.
See what's happening Eckankar and you'll know.
http://www.geocities.com/eckcult/chapters/tmsm10.html
Look at Prem Rawat and his guru puja ritual. Sabh drama baaj hai.
Paise Pheko, Tamasha Dekho.
http://www.ex-premie.org/pages/streetlife76.htm
They constantly seek the company of many people who become their
agents to increase their bank accounts.
See what's happening Eckankar and you'll know.
http://www.geocities.com/eckcult/chapters/tmsm10.html
Look at Prem Rawat and his guru puja ritual. Sabh drama baaj hai.
Paise Pheko, Tamasha Dekho.
http://www.ex-premie.org/pages/streetlife76.htm
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
An Open Letter to Maharaji from Mike Finch
Mike Finch was one of the first Western followers of Maharaji, and in the early years spent a lot of time in his company. He counted Maharaji as a close friend, as well as his teacher and Master. Mike still meditates regularly, and values the extraordinary experiences that can be achieved through meditation. Mike originally posted this letter on the public ex-premie forum, and has requested that it be posted here.
This letter, and other essays from Mike about his time with Maharaji, can now also be found on his personal website.
Maharaji,
You are known now to the public as Prem Rawat, but for the 30 or so years that I gave my life to you, I knew you as Maharaji, or Guru Maharaji, so that is how I will continue to refer to you.
I have had a long and involved relationship with you, ranging from sublime moments of incredible beauty, good times, mediocre times, through boredom and frustration, to pain, abuse and feelings of desertion.
I have withdrawn from you in stages.
For the 20 years up to 1990, you were my Lord - someone who could reach into my heart whatever my situation, and rescue me. I practiced Knowledge almost everyday, and begged and prayed for your grace to make the Knowledge work, in full confidence that you could and would do this if I were open to it. And if it didn't happen, well then I was obviously not open enough, and needed to surrender to you more.
In the early 90's, I had my first doubts that you were the Lord; perhaps you did not control this amazing grace that could enlighten me. But that was OK, because the Knowledge was internal, between me and God, and could still take me to the deepest place; even if your role was just to give the Knowledge, and remind me of the importance of it periodically, that was enough.
In the mid 90's I met you briefly backstage at the Atlantic City event, and that was the last time I spoke to you. Since then, the accumulation of 30 years pursuing an impossible goal - or to be precise, pursuing two goals which are mutually impossible to fulfill - had become an overbearing weight from which I had to escape.
The two goals I refer to that a premie has to fulfill are these: The inner goal of finding their heart or center, and the outer goal of being connected with you. The essence of your message for 30 years has been that you need to pursue both goals, and that you cannot get one without the other.
I see now that achieving these two goals together is an impossible task. It is quite possible to achieve either goal on its own. I believe that the first goal, the human search for ultimate meaning and freedom within the human consciousness, is both possible and a worthwhile endeavour; in doing this, other people can be teachers, but no other person can become the master to whom you dedicate your life.
It is also of course possible to attain the second goal - a connection with you as a person, devotion to you as the Master. For most premies this meant being near you physically, or at least having access to you; selling family and career to be with you at an event on the other side of the world, selling anything to be seated near you, and so on. A particularly virulent form of this devotion was the urge to be in the inner circle around you. During my 30 years as a premie I have observed this phenomenon closely and intimately - sometimes from the inside, as someone in the inner circle, but usually from the outside, as someone who was trying desperately to climb up the ladder to the inner circle.
The interesting thing about this phenomenon, is that I really did not want to be near you, or rub shoulders with other inner circle players - I only did so because I thought it was the passport to the first goal of inner contentment. I now see that it actually prevented inner contentment. Ironic.
So that in a nutshell is why I no longer consider you my master, nor practice your Knowledge. The first goal of inner discovery I have always wanted, and still want. I took you as my master to help me fulfill that goal, which you promised to do; but you introduced another goal, centered around yourself, which in fact made it impossible to fulfill the first goal. Unfortunately, for 30 years I accepted your message that the second goal of a connection or devotion to you was necessary to attain the first goal.
To see and logically understand the dynamics of the last 30 years is one thing, but of course there is a lot of emotion and feeling too. As I have said, there were good times and profound experiences. At the time, I thought the deep experiences I had were due to your grace; now I think they were due to my grace, meaning that I had them independently of you. I did of course learn much from you; the problem is that I had to invest so much - way too much - to learn what I did.
So my predominant feeling now is one of grief and anger. I grieve for the last 30 years: for the careers given up to be ready to go anywhere anytime to do your bidding; for the relationships given up to be in the ashram or 'available for service'; for the money given up in order to be free of ego (I gave you a house, inheritances, wages and enough spare cash over 30 years that would have left me financially comfortable for the rest of my life had I not given it all to you.)
I grieve for a book I wrote that was suppressed after writing it, because the initial suggestion for writing it came from your brother SatPal. I grieve for the lost thoughts and dreams, my own thoughts, lost because they were not allowed to exist in a premie, otherwise he was 'in his mind'. I grieve for what might have been, had I not been marching up a dead-end alley, all the time proclaiming to myself and the world that I was marching along the golden highway to liberation. I grieve for all the people that I tried so earnestly to convince that this dead-end alley was the glorious road that they should be marching on too.
I am not sure how you see yourself these days. Do you see yourself still as the Perfect Master, needing of course to tone it down for public consumption, but still the living embodiment of that grace, without which no one can really benefit from the Knowledge techniques ? Or do you privately think of that as a Hindu myth, and you are content to live off it - and live very well off it, like a family business, as your detractors maintain ? Or was it a gradual change over the years from one to the other ?
To be honest, I don't really care - my grief is felt and expressed, and now I intend to move on. As the English expression says, there is no point in crying over spilt milk. Although I left you 18 months ago (I first publicly posted on the ex-premie Forum in January 2001) it has taken me these 18 months to fully extricate myself from your influence.
So I thank you for the good times; for all the rest, and the grief I have expressed in this letter, I drop them from my shoulders - thus ! The dream I had before I met you, I still have; and I am going for it, unencumbered and feeling very much lighter.
-- Mike
This letter, and other essays from Mike about his time with Maharaji, can now also be found on his personal website.
Maharaji,
You are known now to the public as Prem Rawat, but for the 30 or so years that I gave my life to you, I knew you as Maharaji, or Guru Maharaji, so that is how I will continue to refer to you.
I have had a long and involved relationship with you, ranging from sublime moments of incredible beauty, good times, mediocre times, through boredom and frustration, to pain, abuse and feelings of desertion.
I have withdrawn from you in stages.
For the 20 years up to 1990, you were my Lord - someone who could reach into my heart whatever my situation, and rescue me. I practiced Knowledge almost everyday, and begged and prayed for your grace to make the Knowledge work, in full confidence that you could and would do this if I were open to it. And if it didn't happen, well then I was obviously not open enough, and needed to surrender to you more.
In the early 90's, I had my first doubts that you were the Lord; perhaps you did not control this amazing grace that could enlighten me. But that was OK, because the Knowledge was internal, between me and God, and could still take me to the deepest place; even if your role was just to give the Knowledge, and remind me of the importance of it periodically, that was enough.
In the mid 90's I met you briefly backstage at the Atlantic City event, and that was the last time I spoke to you. Since then, the accumulation of 30 years pursuing an impossible goal - or to be precise, pursuing two goals which are mutually impossible to fulfill - had become an overbearing weight from which I had to escape.
The two goals I refer to that a premie has to fulfill are these: The inner goal of finding their heart or center, and the outer goal of being connected with you. The essence of your message for 30 years has been that you need to pursue both goals, and that you cannot get one without the other.
I see now that achieving these two goals together is an impossible task. It is quite possible to achieve either goal on its own. I believe that the first goal, the human search for ultimate meaning and freedom within the human consciousness, is both possible and a worthwhile endeavour; in doing this, other people can be teachers, but no other person can become the master to whom you dedicate your life.
It is also of course possible to attain the second goal - a connection with you as a person, devotion to you as the Master. For most premies this meant being near you physically, or at least having access to you; selling family and career to be with you at an event on the other side of the world, selling anything to be seated near you, and so on. A particularly virulent form of this devotion was the urge to be in the inner circle around you. During my 30 years as a premie I have observed this phenomenon closely and intimately - sometimes from the inside, as someone in the inner circle, but usually from the outside, as someone who was trying desperately to climb up the ladder to the inner circle.
The interesting thing about this phenomenon, is that I really did not want to be near you, or rub shoulders with other inner circle players - I only did so because I thought it was the passport to the first goal of inner contentment. I now see that it actually prevented inner contentment. Ironic.
So that in a nutshell is why I no longer consider you my master, nor practice your Knowledge. The first goal of inner discovery I have always wanted, and still want. I took you as my master to help me fulfill that goal, which you promised to do; but you introduced another goal, centered around yourself, which in fact made it impossible to fulfill the first goal. Unfortunately, for 30 years I accepted your message that the second goal of a connection or devotion to you was necessary to attain the first goal.
To see and logically understand the dynamics of the last 30 years is one thing, but of course there is a lot of emotion and feeling too. As I have said, there were good times and profound experiences. At the time, I thought the deep experiences I had were due to your grace; now I think they were due to my grace, meaning that I had them independently of you. I did of course learn much from you; the problem is that I had to invest so much - way too much - to learn what I did.
So my predominant feeling now is one of grief and anger. I grieve for the last 30 years: for the careers given up to be ready to go anywhere anytime to do your bidding; for the relationships given up to be in the ashram or 'available for service'; for the money given up in order to be free of ego (I gave you a house, inheritances, wages and enough spare cash over 30 years that would have left me financially comfortable for the rest of my life had I not given it all to you.)
I grieve for a book I wrote that was suppressed after writing it, because the initial suggestion for writing it came from your brother SatPal. I grieve for the lost thoughts and dreams, my own thoughts, lost because they were not allowed to exist in a premie, otherwise he was 'in his mind'. I grieve for what might have been, had I not been marching up a dead-end alley, all the time proclaiming to myself and the world that I was marching along the golden highway to liberation. I grieve for all the people that I tried so earnestly to convince that this dead-end alley was the glorious road that they should be marching on too.
I am not sure how you see yourself these days. Do you see yourself still as the Perfect Master, needing of course to tone it down for public consumption, but still the living embodiment of that grace, without which no one can really benefit from the Knowledge techniques ? Or do you privately think of that as a Hindu myth, and you are content to live off it - and live very well off it, like a family business, as your detractors maintain ? Or was it a gradual change over the years from one to the other ?
To be honest, I don't really care - my grief is felt and expressed, and now I intend to move on. As the English expression says, there is no point in crying over spilt milk. Although I left you 18 months ago (I first publicly posted on the ex-premie Forum in January 2001) it has taken me these 18 months to fully extricate myself from your influence.
So I thank you for the good times; for all the rest, and the grief I have expressed in this letter, I drop them from my shoulders - thus ! The dream I had before I met you, I still have; and I am going for it, unencumbered and feeling very much lighter.
-- Mike
Sounds like a good plan, NamJap ji.
You see how pathetic this is. The other mythology that is promoted and really needs to be exploded is the idea of how wrong it is to be "in the mind." This is brow-beating to get people who are hungry and thirsty for spiritual change to become passive and unquestioning dupes of another human being.
Guru Teg Bahadur did not ask for 500 dinars, he asked Lobana to be true to his pledge. Money is the symbol of something much greater in the sakhi. And thanks for reminding me of the sakhi by the way. It has more gold nuggets than Lobana could buy for 500 dinars.
How do these satgurs decide on their fee schedule?
You see how pathetic this is. The other mythology that is promoted and really needs to be exploded is the idea of how wrong it is to be "in the mind." This is brow-beating to get people who are hungry and thirsty for spiritual change to become passive and unquestioning dupes of another human being.
Guru Teg Bahadur did not ask for 500 dinars, he asked Lobana to be true to his pledge. Money is the symbol of something much greater in the sakhi. And thanks for reminding me of the sakhi by the way. It has more gold nuggets than Lobana could buy for 500 dinars.
How do these satgurs decide on their fee schedule?
- Jun 7, 2006
- 1,323
- 145
i don't charge
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:
