« Religion is like a placebo with no active ingredient | Main | "The Ultimate Twist" -- honest, creative, appealingly unconvincing »

May 21, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"Transformation Day is ... about seeing beyond the limitation that you have created which you think is how life really is. When you see beyond those limitation - a whole new world opens up - you realize you've been living in a box - but the box is not real - it is a construct."

says who? who says i've been living in a box? who says my view, as opposed to your view or transformation days', is more limited? How do you know the box is just a construct?

In short, where is the evidence or proof? All I see is sourceless unsupported conjecture and rhetoric.

"George - that's not even logic. You are saying that if most roads don't lead to Rome - it means that no roads lead to Rome."

What i was saying is that there is absolutely no evidence that "Rome" even exists. In the absence of any evidence, all we have to go on are subjective claims. In the absence of any evidence, it is logical to conclude that the existence of "Rome" is more likely if such subjective claims were in agreement. Instead, not only do the roads point in different directions, but Rome itself is described differently. Thus, the logical conclusion must be that a claim for the existence of Rome, and a valid road leading to it, is even less likely due to the sheer contradictory nature of these subjective unsupported claims.

On the issue of logic itself, I agree that it may be limited (you have the zen masters, i prefer Godel), but a quite seperate issue from logic, is empericism (science or evidence-based reason). Where is the evidence for "Rome" or the road leading to it, or any means by which we can decide whether one of the roads is more valid than another?

On the issue of self-help, robotics, enlightenment and/or awareness; how do you know your particular worldview (or perception of reality) is either true or beneficial? How do you know that your view of reality is not distorted by your mind, like all the other limited views? How do you know that spreading your worldview is not ROBOTISING ppl by infecting them with your potentially faulty programming? Are you happy to charge fees and claim knowledge for something totally unsupported, which might potentially cause more harm than good?

Where is the evidence?

"Transformation Day is ... about seeing beyond the limitation that you have created which you think is how life really is. When you see beyond those limitation - a whole new world opens up - you realize you've been living in a box - but the box is not real - it is a construct."
says who? who says i've been living in a box? who says my view, as opposed to your view or transformation days', is more limited? How do you know the box is just a construct?

I am saying that ALL VIEWS are limited. Mine - yours - everyones. If it is a view - it is limited. However - everyone experiences that HIS VIEW is the TRUTH. You think that YOUR OPINION and VIEWPOINT is the truth or shall we say VALID - or we could say IMPORTANT. You think you have a VALID point to make - and that what you are saying is CORRECT.

However - it isn't TRUTH, VALID, CORRECT or even IMPORTANT. It is just YOUR VIEWPOINT. It is just your opinion - the way you see the world.

YOUR VIEWPOINT is NO MORE valid, correct, true or important - THAN MINE.

You are talking about VIEWPOINTS, OPINIONS, BELIEFS.

In Transformation Day I make it clear from the outset that I don't care what your opinions, ideas or viewpoints are,
and I don't want you to care about what MINE are either.

Why? because I don't have a teaching to impart during Transformation Day. It is an EXPERIENCE. Your or anyone else's opinions about IT don't matter in the slightest. Opinions ARE the limitation and the BOX that I am referring to.

You live your life through a VIEWPOINT - and that view taints your experience of life. That is the BOX I am talking about.

And then you say - What box? YOUR OPINION is the box.

Transformation Day is about YOU DISCOVERING for yourself. It's not about some theory I impart to people.
So - there are no VIEWPOINTS that are any more important than others - including mine.

On the issue of self-help, robotics, enlightenment and/or awareness; how do you know your particular worldview (or perception of reality) is either true or beneficial? How do you know that your view of reality is not distorted by your mind, like all the other limited views? How do you know that spreading your worldview is not ROBOTISING ppl by infecting them with your potentially faulty programming?

I am not giving you a worldview. ALL VIEWS of reality are distorted by the mind. That is what the mind does.
It creates a MAP OF REALITY (A concept) and then proceeds to assume that the MAP = REALITY.

I am not programming anyone. I get them to see that they are already programmed and that the program is running their life.

Its patently obvious in this blog - when some R.S. programmed robot appears and gets offended - his deep programming kicks off - and he attacks - because he feels that his view IS THE TRUTH. He really believes that G S Dhillon REALLY is the big guy incarnated into a human form.

Transformation Day is not some new religion - or some new age philosophy. So I have no new beliefs to give anyone.

Because I think Gurinder himself does not see himself as a bad guy (who does?) my interpretation of the SM3.0 is that he tries to bring the Satsangi's back on their feet by realizing that they will not mysteriously go to sach kant or whatever if they are just initiated. I think he wants to make it clear that there are logical consequences to our actions. If we meditate in exactly the right way as described in the veda's than we might experience what is described there. But in the past during 1.0 Satsangi's believed that the guru would do their meditation and such bs. It was the result of good teaching becoming a religion. I think Gurinder is in fact trying to release his Satsangi's and I hope he will end with saying that he simple doesn't know just like us but that he believes in a tradition just like his preceding guru's. It is up to us to try the tradition.

Your videos are wonderful and accurate.

I believe Tao once said he was a crusty old
hippy, if I am not mistaken.

Now if a person knows Tao is crusty and old
ones reads his posts in a different light.

Crusty people are supposed to be crusty.

Now the reader does not take it personally,
but neutral. Understanding this is his nature.

Tao is unusual because he talks about moving
beyond the jnani state.

FEELING the Presence.

So, it seems Tao and I are in the same camp,
although our personalities are different.

People should ask Tao more about the Presence.

Therefore moving outside the box.

Experience is indeed the result of the mind.

But, the Presence is beyond experience.

The Presence is FELT now.

In whatever condition the person is in. People can
do little to nothing to help themselves.

That being known, only the Presence can solve the riddle.


What would be an example of a "feeling" of the Presence?

What would be an example of a riddle, you mentioned? I'm not into riddles.

Is the Presence, now, a non-experienced FELT? Or, it is FELT without having any kind of experience?

I can resonate with a non-conceptual type of experiencing of a presence of now.


you and i have pretty similar views, but different syles of expressing our views. but i rather like your style. but we know each other since way back when we both lived under that rainbow bridge. man, those were the dayz. *grin*

one small thing though... i'm definitely not any "crusty old hippy". i'm a bad-ass old biker dude. i haven't been a hipster since way back when tucson and i were trippin and surfin the pacific coast down in SoCal. and i may be a bit older than these other dipshits, but i sure as hell ain't crusty. *frown*

thanx for explaining to all the folks who are insulted, that i am not actually insulting them, but rather that they are choosing to feel insulted. i don't need to insult them, as they themselves are doing a fine job of feeling insulted anyway. its really funny how some people feel insulted, even though there are no actual insults present in my comments.

you are alright with me dude, so don't take it all so seriously. i don't dislike you. and i'm happy for you if you feel positive towards me. i don't see any problem. you simply had a couple of mistaken assumptions about me, that i tried to correct. nothing personal against you.

I told you what i think. i felt you were being a bit trollish and narcissistic. that was my observation. you were defending GSD and RS, but then disregarding core aspects of the RS doctrine. thats trollish imo. thats playing both sides. thats disingenouous.

You say that you trust and believe GSD is a sant sat-guru, but also that he can change and alter sant mat, even though all of his predecessors said that sant mat has remained fundamentally the same and unchanged for thousands of years, and that it will never change... yet now its quite alright for GSD to change it. thats blatant hypocrisy.

And then you turn around and say that you like to pick and choose what aspects of santmat and RS you will accept and which you will reject. thats not the teaching and doctrine of sant mat. not at all. according to sant mat, nothing ever needs to be changed, and the practice of sant mat is not a matter of personal opinions or whims.

As Tara has rightly pointed out, GSD is simply acting and treating RS and sant mat like a business. he is obviously adapting it and changing it and making it more loose and liberal in order to appeal to a better and broader market. but as far as being a supposed true sant mat guru, he is clearly a fraud. and so your whimsical mentality and attitude towards the traditional sant mat, is nothing more than a product and a result of GSD's bogus 'modernization' of sant mat. again, according one of the core tenets of sant mat, the teaching and doctrine of sant mat has remained unaltered since time immemorial, and there is nothing in it that needs to be changed. all of GSD's predecessors have stood on this foundation. but now you (and GSD) say that you can chage it and make up your own version of sant mat. i say you are both clowns.

And so thats what i find trollish and jokerish about you Marina. the utter hypocrisy of you claiming to be an RS satsangi, and yet you're not adhering to the RS doctrine. you say that you take only the parts you like and leave the rest. you are a fake disciple of a fraudulent master.

Just like the old parable of Jesus, about the blind leading the blind... they both fall into the ditch.

GSD has no authority to change the doctrine of sant mat. none whatsoever. he claims to be a humble disciple of his master, Charan. but if thats true, then he would never attempt to change or or alter or 'update' or 'improve' the sant mat doctrine. in doing so, he has disregarded one of the fundamental principles that RS and his own master have stood upon. just because he is now the new master of RS, that does not give him the authority or ability to change the timeless doctrine and foundation upon which RS rests.

Hey, this is not fair!

You'se all know each other. Ye are all going to stick up for each other. I am at an unfair advantage here.

All I got to go on is your 'words'!!

Marina ;)

Sant mat is based on GURU BHAKTI.

A few verses from Sar Bachan ( written by Rai Saligram but official attributed to Swami Ji)

Gur ko Manukh mat jaan – yeh hai sat purush ki jaan
Do not consider the Guru to be a man – he is the darling of Sat Purush

(not sure if this is from sar bachan – but I think it might be)
Gur ko manukh jaanti – teh nar kahiyee aandh
Those who consider the Guru to be a man – call these people blind.

Gur bhakt na jin ko payari – then jeeti baaji haaree
Those who do not love GURU BHAKTI – They have lost when they had virtually won.

(meaning that they had the human birth and met the guru – but lost the opportunity)

Sant mat firmly puts the guru on a very high pedestal. Once Gurinder de-values the guru – it is no longer the same sant mat.

Zen for example does not put the zen master on a pedestal. In fact the zen master has a very real and down to earth relationship with his disciple. He wants no respect or reverence. He is interested only in doing whatever it takes to awaken the disciple.

Gurinder is combining these two approaches – but they cannot be combined because they are opposites. Zen does not say that meditation is the way – rather it says there is no way because there is no path – and no destination.

Gurinder teaches people to meditate – and at the same time tells them not to be concerned about the results. This is clearly impossible for his sangat to do. They need a reason for everything. Why meditate? The answer in sant mat 1.0 used to be: in order for the soul to leave the body and get to sach khand. The answer in 2.0 / 3.0 is : because your master told you to – and that is enough.

But look a little deeper: Why is the disciple obeying the master? Because he WANTS something – do he has a reason. He has a desire: he wants to get somewhere. The very act of meditating means that the disciple is seeking – and therefore cannot realize the truth because as long as seeking is going on – you cannot realize the truth.

Hey tAo,

Ok, I hear what you’re saying and I could add that it’s a fair point from your side.

Can I give you a wee example.

I was again in the company of my grandson today and when my daughter came to pick him up he was sleeping like a lil angel that he is. She asked if he was good and without thinking I told her yeah of course he was. When she had gone, my darling husband brought to my attention, what my daughter had asked, ‘was he good?’ We then had a discussion on what good meant. He pointed out that asking if a 2 year old was good, was the same thing as asking if the moon or the chair was good. The moon being just as it is, a moon and the chair being well, just a chair. Same with any 2 year old – just being a 2 year old which includes exactly how they are be it happy, sad, crying, throwing tantrums etc.

Ok, so my point?

Marina is being exactly what Marina is, tAo being exactly as tAo is, BJ being exactly as BJ is and so on with us all.

How can we say anything shouldn’t be as it is? We may not like it, we may not want anything to do with it, but can we just not accept it is as it is until it’s not?

Are we then not at odds with reality and what actually is happening (or not) versus how we see it, or how we see it should be? Now tAo, I am not trying to be smart here. To me, arguing with reality is a fools game.

We can each of us under the circumstances we find ourselves in do as we wish or what we think best, but to say someone else should do or not do something............well that sounds a bit controlling or off to me.

I am not defending BJ, I am saying what is true for me at this moment, how I see it. For instance you say I am defending BJ/RS but then disregarding core aspects of the RS doctrine.

How can that be the case if BJ (as a lot of people are saying), is now changing these core aspects? As the present guru, is one not ‘supposed’ to listen to what he says? So from my perspective that statement doesn’t add up that I am playing both sides.

I am not saying you or anyone else is wrong. Again, we all have our own experiences to go on, so what’s the big deal if we all have different ones – seriously? Who is perfect anyway? All I can go is from where I am at.

And hey tAo, what is wrong with clowns? I like clowns. They make ME laugh. :))

Marina ;)

Hi Tao and Roger,
Whoops, sorry Tao, your not a crusty old hippy,
your a "bad-ass old biker dude". My mistake (grin)

Yes, we are on the exact same page. But how do we
explain the Presence to anyone else ?

Hi Roger,
I believe kundalini yoga is a big trap. Looking
for experiences is a big trap. Thinking a kundalini
master can help you is a big trap.(surat shabda yoga)

As Ramana Maharshi stated, there is only one reality.
You are either 'there', or not. It is very unfortunate
he used the word Self for the Presence. This may be
a transliteration. Ramana stated the Presence is
here now and can be had directly now. No steps,
or stages to reality. Go direct.

But, how is this possible ? If it's here now, why don't
we know about it, or FEEL it ?

The reason why, is the Presence will only let itself
be felt by honest people. They can be bad people,
but they must have a good heart. No matter how messed
up a person is, if they have a good heart, they can
FEEL the Presence right now.

The true seeker finds their way to a place on top
of their head. They FEEL Something there. They
instintively realize it is the Presence.

They know the Presence is a positive Force.

They know they can do nothing in life and
inwardly ask the Presence to help them.

By FEELING the Presence on the top of their head,
they know they have made direct contact here
and now.

They know the Presence has to do everything.

So, no religion, or code of ethics. No church.

They know that just by FEELING the Presence,
that the Presence will handle everything.

The presence actually FEELS good. So, the person
FEELs the Presence throughout the day.

After a few weeks, part of their attention
is on the top of the head, while all the other
attention is in the world.

They know the Presence will only let happen
to them what must happen. They know they are
protected, until the day they must die.

They don't try to make any changes in their life.

If the Presence wants, it will change the person
without the person even knowing he has changed.

So, the person does not fight with life.

No struggle, no battle.

The journey ends at the exact moment a person
FEELS the presence on top of the head.

They are now in Reality. Just that fast.

Marina wrote:
He pointed out that asking if a 2 year old was good, was the same thing as asking if the moon or the chair was good. The moon being just as it is, a moon and the chair being well, just a chair. Same with any 2 year old – just being a 2 year old which includes exactly how they are be it happy, sad, crying, throwing tantrums etc.
Ok, so my point?
Marina is being exactly what Marina is, tAo being exactly as tAo is, BJ being exactly as BJ is and so on with us all.
How can we say anything shouldn’t be as it is? We may not like it, we may not want anything to do with it, but can we just not accept it is as it is until it’s not?
Are we then not at odds with reality and what actually is happening (or not) versus how we see it, or how we see it should be? Now tAo, I am not trying to be smart here. To me, arguing with reality is a fools game.
We can each of us under the circumstances we find ourselves in do as we wish or what we think best, but to say someone else should do or not do something............well that sounds a bit controlling or off to me.
Life IS exactly what life is. What IS, simply IS. What ISN’T, simply ISN’T.
This is dealing with LIFE AS IT IS. Everything is exactly as it IS.
GOOD or BAD are simply what you are bringing to it. They are your personal JUDGEMENTS. The good or bad is not part of reality – it is your version of reality – tainted with your personal view of how life, things, people SHOULD BE.
A two year old child is perfectly living his life. He or she doesn’t give a shit about what is convenient to you or anyone else. He is too busy considering himself and his very full and busy life.
He has not yet acquired any beliefs about life. “nothing is good or bad – but thinking makes it so” ( from Hamlet). The two year old doesn’t think as you think. Therefore he doesn’t live in the same world. In his world – there is no RIGHT or WRONG and therefore nothing is GOOD or BAD.
So he might do something that is inconvenient to you – which you might consider bad. But in reality – you are adding the value BAD.
An example. My 20 month young nephew is always playing about with everything. So he plays with my desktop – but it is switched off – so it’s okay – or so I think. Anyway – the next day – when I switch on my desktop to see what churchless comment has been posted – so I can add my twopence worth to the comments – the desktop goes BANG. Frightens the shit out of everyone including me.
On taking a closer look – the little Buddha had put his little Buddha fingers in the hidden voltage selection switch and moved it over. So it was now set to 120V instead of 240V. So the power supply blew.
So – is he naughty? Is he bad? Or is he just having fun? He is just playing around. Good or bad does not exist – yet.
Check out my article about good/bad and the adam and eve story: http://tinyurl.com/whatisgood
The little Buddha is in a state of INNOCENCE by default – because guilt does not exist. So when I say ‘innocence’ I don’t mean the opposite of guilt.
I mean there is no possibility of good or bad or innocent or guilty. This is the same as the state of enlightenment. Enlightenment is a return to your natural state of innocence – where you realize that YOU CREATED the whole right/wrong and good/bad values. So they just drop off and – you are innocent.
Then life is as life is.
In the japji it states – everything happens in hukam (His Will) and nothing is outside his will and if you realize this – your ego will disappear.
Of course there is no HIM as such – but when you recognize that life is happening exactly as it is – then you flow with life.
Part of this flowing is that all emotions and feeling are perfect – including sadness, anger, etc. What this means is that no emotion is WRONG because nothing is wrong.
Krishna is explaining things to Arjuna on the battlefield and he says to him – you’ll never be able to figure it out – you are confused – and he offers a solution – leave all the thinking and surrender to me.
Surrender means let go and let it be.
So everything is perfect – including the fact that Gurinder is upgrading sant mat. Including EVIL BUSTER coming on here and telling us how evil we are. Including what Tao says and what Marina says.
A zen story to finish off.
Three people go to a zen judge. Person one states his case. Judge says – You are Right!
Person two states HIS case – and judge says – you too are Right!
Person 3 says – they can’t BOTH be right! Judge reflects and then says – You are Right!
If that doesn’t fry your brain – nothing will.

Another thing that came to awareness yesterday was this blog and how I have been interacting with it - sometimes.

(Great take on things Osho)

I left work just over 2 months ago now and I am loving it.
I have seen however ‘part’ of me was still at ‘work’ in some way.

How? I have seen the dynamics of my beliefs here on the blog the same way they had been at work when I had started there 3 years ago. Some people on this blog I believed, reminded me of my boss, always telling me what to do. Others were treating me ‘badly’. Others thought I was clowning around. Others got on my nerves telling me what to do. On and on it went, oh at times it felt like a struggle. It felt like a battle field for sure. Arjuna I am with you there. ‘I’m right, they are wrong or vice versa, or confusion’. Hey, hey, hey, all my own beliefs!

Yep, believing in right and wrong, good and bad, judgements, assumptions. Oh boy, did I struggle at work sometimes ). Now all these things at work were very subtle; it wasn’t as if all hell was breaking loose. I just looked at my beliefs and fears..... I didn’t try to change anything or anyone, just noticed. Eventually I saw what I was doing and in the process life at work became very, very pleasant. No longer was there fear of people, trying to control, trying to change people or things. I actually started to have fun and allowed others to have fun or not. Far less beliefs that things should be the way I believed them to be. So I did think to myself, I have learned all I can about myself here.

I sent my boss (one of them, it was a family run business) an email saying goodbye and thank you, as he was away the day I was leaving. Part of his reply back was .......”who am I going to give out to now? And better still, who is going to answer me back!” lol

I had ‘answered’ him back on many occasions, not fighting with him but also no longer fearing him in any way, though always with respect that I would give to myself. If something did not feel right, I would ask why he wanted me to do ‘it’ that it didn’t make sense to me. If he explained his purpose and it felt right, it was done. If it didn’t he would end up saying something like ‘don’t worry about it, I’ll get back to you.’ No longer had I the belief ‘do as you are told unquestionably’ out of fear or from my store of beliefs.

Wow, I found myself doing the same thing here on the blog! Sometimes taking things back to my referential point – me, and my beliefs!

I had thought I had dealt with these beliefs, but it turned out I hadn’t seen them apply to the whole only to one part that of work. lol

One thing I am looking at is when I hear that someone had told my grandson to sit on the “bold” step or punish him by putting him outside the door for making a ‘mess’ by emptying his breakfast on to the table after he decided that he had enough of eating them and choose instead to play in the puddle of milk he had created on the table, with the swimming cherrios all being moved about to his great satisfaction and amusement and they cannot see the great adventure the way he sees it.

I must confess I do want to change them and tell them to leave him fucking alone and stop conditioning him to this fucking ‘right or wrong’ according to our standards. I am not sure on this point because there is some belief there that they ‘shouldn’t’ do that.!?!? Why does he have to be told (brainwashed) into being bold? Even if he was told the real reasons, ‘I don’t want you to spill your breakfast all over the table because I see it as a mess and I don’t want to clean it up’. Now to me that, is taking responsibility.

I am not saying let him do what he wants. But to bring it back to ourselves and ‘own our own mess). If he is at something I would rather not have him play with, I move it. I don’t see him ‘wrong’ if it happened to be within his reach.

If he hits me, which he can :) I don’t tell him he is bold, I just say ‘please don’t hit gany mena, that is sore or that hurt. Or I may say, ‘I don’t want you to hit me’. He usually hears what I have said and doesn’t seem to want to hit any more. But to punish him for being him – how could I? Impossible!!

Ah there is a point here. Osho said in his comment:

” Krishna is explaining things to Arjuna on the battlefield and he says to him – you’ll never be able to figure it out – you are confused – and he offers a solution – leave all the thinking and surrender to me.
Surrender means let go and let it be.

This can apply to RS/BJ in some way for me. I was and still can be confused. I meet someone who offers a solution - leave all the thinking and surrender to me, surrendering meaning let go and let it be. Things change, beliefs change. No wonder there is so much seemingly ‘discrepancy’.

Yes we can all take our own meaning out of even that. For instance we can take it literally.

Again it reminds me of the ‘ghost’ story in Ramana. Some of us hold onto our fathers hand (which can mean anything from BJ to our beliefs) feeling that we are being protected from the ghost. Once we don’t ‘believe’ in this ghost (self, assumptions, beliefs, identities) anymore we can let go or some may get angry and blame our father for misleading us. But it is only our selves(our own beliefs) which has mislead.

Osho quoted Hamlet:
”Nothing is either good or bad thinking makes it so.”

I would see it as “Nothing is either good or bad but believing makes it so.”

For me there is nothing wrong with thinking. It happens all the time. But when I start believeing what I am thinking ......that is when the ‘problem’ ‘conditioning’ programming’
‘Adam & Eve’ thing starts.........

For me ‘rules’ are just guidelines to help when one is confused and to keep one from going completely insane until one NO longer BELIEVES in INSANE.

Alas, I ‘believe’ I may have gone on too long so I will stop.

Marina :)

There is a part of the story from Osho that is especially interesting. A child can not do wrong because his intellect is not developed yet. That is why children are generally excused for the crimes they accidentally or experimentally do. However the child does not excuse himself when daddy gets angry. His survival mechanism demands that his daddy remains his good god and good gods don't get angry our beat their children because they don't see things in the right perspective, so the child concludes that there is something wrong with himself when daddy is making a violent mistake towards the child not recognizing its innocence. The father in fact is projecting his own developed consciousness and guild feelings on the child when he reacts in anger. Very good Osho did not get angry at his child for the fried battery on his notebook! Wish we all had daddy's like that.
Now the child concludes he is wrong but he does not know why yet...How will this end? Just fill in your stories. What thoughts became evil, what is it about yourself that you were going to hate? Most likely the development of sexuality is the victim and is from then on the bad feeling because it was always a difficult subject anyway. Great are the parents that talk to the child openly about those feelings that are perfectly natural and come with life and educate their children that there is a right way to express them in an intimate relation and that they can enhance that relation into a dance of forgetting your identity and finding it back.
To all the children out there. There is nothing wrong with you!
(shall I really post this one aaah what the...)

Yo, yo! TAO, TARA, MARINA, MIKE, BRIAN, OSHO, NIETZsCHE and anybody else i am again going off line now due to the hard practice i will now take with my music instrument so it is been a pleasure to talk with you and if anybody wants to stay in contact with me, here is the mail: [email protected]
I wish you all peace and full happy life.
Your brother!

But based on what evidence do you conclude that everyone's views are limited or boxed?

Moreover, such a conclusion is itself a viewpoint and an opinion - and therefore equally valid or invalid.

In any event, I don't buy into this postmodern nonsense that every viewpoint is equally correct, it is not. A person may be of the view that the earth is flat, but such a view is not as correct as a person who has the view that the earth is roughly spherical. There are certain views which are a more accurate desription of reality than others, and the way that we ascertain this is by evidence.

As for transformation, unless you are remaining completing silent and not imparting any information - you most certainly are imparting a worldview, one that you happen to subscribe to - however much you might want to wrap it up in meaningless terms like 'experience'.

Afterall if there were no 'teaching' going on you and transformation day would not be needed, and neither would your charges.

non-duality, oneness or cosmic consciousness - these are all worldviews.

If you provide some of your material for transformation day, Im pretty sure i could pick out a worldview fairly quickly and immediately recognise some baseless inherent assumptions contained therein.

Hi George,
It's a funny thing when I read your posts.

I think I have wrote them at first, until
I realise you wrote them. We are thinking
exactly the same thing. It's uncanny.

Are you my twin double in a parallel
universe ?

You said, "non-duality, oneness or cosmic consciousness - these are all worldviews.
.......recognise some baseless inherent assumptions contained therein."

The idea of surrender means we give up
all beliefs and move from the heart.

The Heart has no philosophy, religion,
or code of ethics. The Heart sees the pain
beliefs have caused in this world. The
Heart sees the seperation beliefs cause
amoungst people.

The Heart cuts the Gordian knot of the

Hi Nietzsche, you wrote:

"However the child does not excuse himself when daddy gets angry. His survival mechanism demands that his daddy remains his good god and good gods don't get angry our beat their children because they don't see things in the right perspective, so the child concludes that there is something wrong with himself when daddy is making a violent mistake towards the child not recognizing its innocence. The father in fact is projecting his own developed consciousness and guild feelings on the child when he reacts in anger...........Now the child concludes he is wrong but he does not know why yet...How will this end?

How will this end? Well if 'good god daddy' took responsibility for his anger and told the child 'daddy is angry, very angry because daddy wants things to be different. Nothing to do with you child. Daddy loves you.....'

Maybe then child will see daddy as just daddy and maybe not come up with any 'bad' conclusions about himself. But it will learn child to take responsibilities for his own feelings (he sees his father doing it, right) instead of 'blaming ' others out there and he won't take on 'others' stuff as his own.

Marina :)

Thinking back on this trait and others on the Church of the churchless I realize how wrong it is to tell people not to use their mind. I would like a discussion on that vow. Did I misunderstand it? Did Gurinder and all the former guru's not tell people that the mind is kall and that kall has to shut up? Did he perhaps mean that only during meditation the mind had to shut up?
When you build a company and everything runs like a human when he reaches the age of lets say 21. Can we say after that now we can stop the management department and we are going to continue production only? Can we stop a 21 years old in further development of the mind, in the unravelling of the emotional knots from childhood? Can we just say kall has to shut up now we are only going to use our hands from now on?
It seems so mean and stupid to me to teach people that they should stop thinking. The results are clear that people do not develop any more like a company not introducing new products anymore, not searching for new markets. That company will go bankrupt just like the person. Hope I misunderstood the teachings and I hope this misunderstanding only affected me. Even in the Indian society there must be a need for wise or smart people telling the younger people how to develop, how to deal with life. How can a society of zombies maintain itself?
I can hear the satsangi next door saying, it is all the ego why are you trying to think for yourself. Can not the master think for you. You should submit yourself to the master and he will piss for you, he will eat for you and he will think for you.
So I vented some of the satsangi shit again I hope ;)

Mike W.

Thanks for your reply, above. As usual, it was very good and informative. A blogging informative. All Good.


"bad-ass old biker dude"

--tAo, you are a bad-ass yacht dude too!!!
or, are the yacht days gone?

Tara, are you drunk, a bit intoxicated???:)))

My plans include going to India next December - if it happens.

Does that include me? Or am I branded eh, untouchable.....

Marina :0

I blame my daddy for making me blame others! If only he would have been more insightful like Marina than I would have been more tolerant of stupid blind daddy's but then there would be no stupid daddy's to blame. Seems like the stupid daddy's are the reason we are all blaming each other. Damn I'm in a loop here. Marina how can I stop blaming my hypothetic daddy if he is stupid teaching me to blame? Especially when I'm in the hypothetic age of lets say 10?

As for India. Incoming!!!!


I hear you! Unfortunetely I cannot help you out with that question as that was not a big thing for me. Oh yes, I seen my mind as bad - because I had bad thoughts. So I was always telling my mind to 'shut the fuck up'
But honestly, I can recall BJ saying one time that we blame this poor chap kal for everything......or something like that. So I always er 'blamed' myself. Just a habit of mine - which I am looking at. Thoughts are only thoughts Nietz until we believe them. That's all.

Marina x


Just a wee question, what was your experience like with your parents?

I know it is personal and you may not want to go there, so feel free to answer or not or tell me to mind my own beeswax.


Hi Marina,

The solution for me is really simple. I conclude mistakes are made. I try to let go of habits like blaming myself. I don't really blame others. It would be projection of my own guild feelings if I needed to blame others. But that is only one part of the story, the blaming. The second part is the building. I try to develop the things that my environment never let me develop. It is a kind of research and development and I do my own management too ;) Might seem pathetic now but in time it is the only way to get out. Doing nothing or stopping the thinking is certainly not working.
I suddenly think of a song from Bjork with the lines 'I play death', 'It is sometimes just like sleeping', 'I curl up inside'.
Perhaps we're no zombies, we're just playing death..

My parents?
Just like RSSB. Here eat this delicious cookie, it will only poison you because we love you. We love you so much that we have to cut you in little pieces. To get our love you have to stop eating eggs. We only hurt you to stop your evil ego from taking over. We humble you because we care for you. That sort of parents ;) ;(


Perhaps it means great minds think alike, but if you agreeing with me, its more likely that fools seldom differ, no offense.

I must say tho I am not convinced that the heart or intuition (as somehow being above or unaffected by mind or the intellect) is the best, or even a valid, instrument for assessing the validity of reality.

Critical thought seems the best we can do if we accept that it is actually impossible to percieve without the individual mind (with its inherent bias' whether recognised or not). Critical thought allows the view of differnt minds to be compared openly and weighed up against the evidence.

Im not sure I really believe in perception without mind, in pure awareness or in intuition - how could this be? What we describe as intuition mind simply be another deeper manifestation of our psycholigies which is shaped depending on our particular life experiences, nature and disposition.

So when ppl say they are able to perceive things without the mind, (i.e. with the heart), I think their mind is just fooling them into believe that they have escaped their mind. I dont think we can escape, still or circumvent our mind, only perhaps some of the higher cognitive processes, which is precisely why critical thought and objective evidence is so important so that we can test and weigh up different viewpoints against one another and challenge our own.

For those who wish to speculate, and to interpret in their own way about what is the actual meaning of what Osho was referring to regarding Krishna advising Arjuna to "surrender":

Osho was referring to a particular chapter and verse in Bhagavad-gita where Sri Krishna advises Arjuna to simply abandon all varietes of religion, and surrender unto Lord Sri Krishna. It is from Bhagavad-gita, chapter 18, verse 66:


sarva-dharmān parityajya
mām ekam śaranam vraja
ahaṁ tvām sarva-pāpebhyo
moksayisyāmi mā śucah

sarva-dharmān—all varieties of religion; parityajya—abandoning; mām—unto Me; ekam—only; śaranam—surrender; vraja—go; aham—I; tvām—you; sarva—all; pāpebhyah—from sinful reactions; moksayisyāmi—deliver; mā—not; śucah—worry.


"Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reaction. Do not fear."


Lord Krishna has described various kinds of knowledge, processes of religion, knowledge of the Supreme Brahman, knowledge of the Paramatma or Supersoul, knowledge of the different types of orders and statuses of social life, knowledge of the renounced order of life, knowledge of non-attachment, sense and mind control, meditation, etc. Krishna has described in so many ways different types of religion.

Now, in summarizing Bhagavad-gita, Krishna says that Arjuna should give up all the processes that have been presented and explained to him; that he should simply surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krishna. That surrender will save the living entitity from all kinds of sinful reactions, for Krishna personally promises to protect him.

In the eighth chapter of Bhagavad Gita it was said that only one who has become free from all sinful reactions can take to the worship of the supreme, Lord Krishna. Thus one may think that unless he is free from all sinful reactions he cannot take to the surrendering process. To such doubts it is here said that even if one is not free from all sinful reactions, simply by the process of surrendering to Sri Krishna, he is automatically freed. There is no need of any strenuous effort to free oneself from sinful reactions. One should simply and unhesitatingly accept Krishna as the supreme lord of all living entities. With faith and love, one should surrender unto Him.

According to the devotional process, one should simply accept such religious principles that will lead ultimately to the devotional service of the Lord. One may perform a particular occupational duty according to his position in the social order, but if by executing his duty one does not come to the point of Krishna consciousness, all his activities are in vain.

Anything that does not lead to the perfectional stage of Kṛṣṇa consciousness should be avoided. One should be confident that in all circumstances Kṛṣṇa will protect him from all difficulties. There is no need of thinking how one should keep the body and soul together. Krishna will see to that. One should always think himself helpless and should consider Krishna the only basis for his progress in life. As soon as one seriously engages himself in devotional service to the Lord in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness, at once he becomes freed from all contamination of material nature. There are different processes of religion and purificatory processes by cultivation of knowledge, meditation in the mystic yoga system, etc., but one who surrenders unto Kṛṣṇa does not have to execute so many methods. That simple surrender unto Krishna will save him from unnecessarily wasting time. One can thus make all progress at once and be freed from all sinful reaction.

One should be attracted by the unparalleled beauty of Krishna. His name is Krishna because He is the supreme all-attractive. One who becomes attracted by the beautiful, all-powerful, omnipotent vision of Krishna is fortunate.

There are different kinds of transcendentalists - some of them are attached to the impersonal Brahman vision, some of them are attracted by the Supersoul feature, but one who is attracted to the personal feature of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and, above all, one who is attracted by the Supreme Personality of Godhead as Krishna himself, is the most perfect transcendentalist. In other words, devotional service to Krishna, in full consciousness, is the most confidential part of knowledge, and this is the essence of the entire Bhagavad-gītā.

Karma-yogīs, empiric philosophers, mystics, and devotees are all called transcendentalists, but one who is a pure devotee of Krishna is the best of all. The particular words used here, ma sucah, "Don't fear, don't hesitate, don't worry," are very significant. One may be perplexed as to how one can give up all kinds of religious forms and bewilderments, but such worry is unnecessary. Simply surrender directly unto Krishna.

Hey Nietzsche,

Very strong emotional song!

We can only do our own thing and what feels right for us. Yeah, we can listen to others ‘give’ advice but we always go by what we want ourselves anyway. Your solution sounds simple :)
Ah, they say we are all the same all one, though I marvel at the unique expressions of this ‘oneness’.

You reminded me of a song, yep, by Bjork that I use to listen to years back ;) Brings back parachuting day memories.....

.....'til it's over and then
it's nice and quiet
but soon again
starts another big riot

you blow a fuse
zing boom
the devil cuts loose
zing boom
so what's the use
wow bam
of falling in love


AActually there is no upgrade to SantMat 3.0 etc outside the mind of some individuals.

Thus what relatively exists, is a lot of thinking about an upgrade: which is in effect a self created cyber-discourse sustained by a handful of people, addicted to blogging, who talk about an upgrade.

OshoRobbins disregards a few points in his talk. SM does not place Satlok as the ultimate level.
The ultimate is UN-NAMEABLE.

Sat lok, is the "ONE". The undifferentiated ONE which leans against nothing. And off-course its a level of consciousness and not an astral disney land…

its not a place you go into and say hi! with a smile to people :)...

Off-course…I presume, when one is at this non-dual level of consciousness while in the material body,,,one then has to be in a society and deal with social people (with identities)... with whom he or she looks exactly alike phenotypically while inwardly (speaking) are tuned into completely different frequencies. Personality comes with the package btw… as long as you are in the theatre you need are ascribed (to ) a character. In this sense…then yes…you can be in Satlok and in Disney Land and in Manhattan and say hi with a smile to people who ask a lot of social questions. Off-course that is when someone is in Sat-lok…I cannot even comment (beyond this comment) about entities beyond it. Or Gurus who are beyond it while in matter. Really does matter matter for them?

What is beyond the One? There is nothing beyond the One. My mind cannot conceive of it. In fact Sat look is beyond the ONE that I can conceive. The mind fails there…before the truth… Milllions and millions of thoughts and IT cannot be reduced to thought. The mind cannot conceive it…. the mind fails and sees that it fails..


If I say it is ONE….it is not so
If I say it is TWO…. its a blasphemy

What a meditator holds as a hypothesis and a praxis which follows it, is that to BE IT (Since he or she cannot understand it or reduce it to thought), he or she has to travel towards the direction that the music comes from…the same directions that make fruits ripen (as tabriz wrote)….from the direction that flute is heard (as Rumi wrote). There is nothing more to understand beyond this.

I guess entities, ARE, their focus of attention.

Shit, piss, philosophize, make love and war, smile and cry, in the theatre of the social life….but a seeker should keep his or her attention towards this inner direction while engaged in all these. A flower has to bloom in order to taste the full floweriness… A human can, if she or he, is found by a Shabd Bee, bloom too.

There is no Sant Mat 3.0. There is Mind 3.0 yes. But no Sant Mat 3.0

BE Human


Here's an idea... how about all the Churchless folks doing a group trip to India for the Maha Kumbh Mela in 2013? Its going to be on the Ganges in Allahabad. Perhaps you could somehow make arrangements for Brian and any of the Church of the Churchless who want to come, to have our own tent at the Mela. Just like a real sect/cult/ashram.

We could all fly over to Delhi, and you could arrange to have a van pick us up at the airport and then take us to stay at a previously booked hotel somewhere right near to your home, for a day or two of irreverent churchless partying at your house, and then we drive on to Allahabad to the Kumbh Mela.

I heard its possible to arrange for a group tent at the Mela for a few hundred dollars. And Brian could have some cool Churchless tee-shirts made up, and you could supply the wine (if you don't drink it all before we get there).

What do you think, how about it?

Who's up for doing a Churchless contingent at the big Maha Kumbh Mela in 2013??

oh btw, EvilBuster most likely got busted for being too evil... and he will probably be hanging out over at the RSSB tent anyway.

Hi George,
That's correct, it all comes through
the brain. The Heart means the selfless
state in action of the jnani. Compassion.
Nothing mystical.

Hi Tao,
I can see how someone could misinterpret your post.

Because if the Presence is there,
there is no need for surrender. The Presence
does not require a belief in its existance, like Christians have to do.

It is not the hypercharged emotional
state they sometimes frenzy themselves into.

The Presence makes itself known by action.
It proves itself out, just like a scientific

The person has absolutely no doubt what has happenned.

So, there is no need for belief.

The Presence does not work from a placebo effect.

The antiquated symbologies of Krishna, are
of course stated to relay a deeper meaning.
Without symbology they could not be communicated.

So, the avearge person would look at what you just posted
and think it's more of the
same stories we have already been informed of.

Ramana called it the Presence, the Self.
He said it opened one from top down without
the person generally being aware.

So, while the words Krishna and Self are used,
they cannot name the Nameless. The Nameless being formless.

All that can be said about it is... it is there.

No religion, or dogmas can be built around it.

Nisargadatta Maharaj called it THAT.

Social-Name (incorrectly) asserts:

"SM does not place Satlok as the ultimate level. The ultimate is UN-NAMEABLE."

-- No, satlok is merely a reference to the entirety of the so-called imperishable region, beyond time and the material universe. according to sant mat, satlok contains three subtle subdivisions... alakh, agam, and anami. but it is still all satlok. btw, have you experienced satlok ? if you haven't, then you shouldn't talk about things that you have no direct experience.

"Sat lok, is the "ONE". The undifferentiated ONE which leans against nothing."

-- no, thats not what it is, or what it means. in vedanta and sanskrit, the teachings of the sanatana dharma, it literally means the realm or plane of eternal being/existence, the realm of the absolute. it doesn't mean the "ONE". its also not "a level of consciousness".

"its not a place you go into and say hi! with a smile to people"

-- how would you know? have you been there?

"I presume, when one is at this non-dual level of consciousness while in the material body,,,one then has to be in a society and deal with social people (with identities)"

-- you mean... like you?

"while inwardly (speaking) are tuned into completely different frequencies."

-- hmmm, what uh freak-quency are you tuned into?

"Personality comes with the package"

-- does it really?

"as long as you are in the theatre you need are ascribed (to ) a character."

-- is that where you are? what theatre are you in? and what character are you?

"you can be in Satlok and in Disney Land and in Manhattan and say hi with a smile to people who ask a lot of social questions."

-- well, i've been to all three of those places, and they are each very different from the others.

"Off-course that is when someone is in Sat-lok"

-- how is satlok being off course.

"cannot even comment (beyond this comment) about entities beyond it. Or Gurus who are beyond it"

-- then why are you commenting?

"What is beyond the One?"

-- the Two.

"There is nothing beyond the One."

-- thats news to me. in my experience, there is a whole infinity beyond the one.

"My mind cannot conceive of it."

-- well gee, thats too bad. perhaps you should open up your mind a bit.

"Sat look is beyond the ONE that I can conceive."

-- that would be your conception.

"The mind fails there…before the truth"

-- whose mind? what truth? the truth of what?

"Milllions and millions of thoughts and IT cannot be reduced to thought."

-- what are trying to reduce?

"The mind cannot conceive it…. the mind fails and sees that it fails."

-- thats not my experience. ime, the mind is it. there is no difference.

What a meditator holds as a hypothesis [...] he or she has to travel towards the direction that the music comes from"

-- and where is that?

"the same directions that make fruits ripen"

-- that would be the earth and the sun.

"There is nothing more to understand beyond this."

-- i doubt that.

"a seeker should keep his or her attention towards this inner direction while engaged in all these."

-- are you a seeker? what are you seeking? and why are you seeking?

"if she or he, is found by a Shabd Bee'

-- is that similar to a spelling bee?

"There is no Sant Mat 3.0."

-- well how about a sant mat version 2.987654321987654321987654321987654321987654321987654321 ?

There is a Formless Potential from which this dream springs.

Life is lived as this dream.

There is no differentiation except as interpreted by this body-mind locus which seves as a point of reference for this particular manifestation. But body-mind is not the Source, only a defined particle in/as It.

This self-defintion is brought about by objectifying the functioning of Source and calling it 'me'.

In infancy, definition is yet to manifest. All is a homogenous field of vascillating light/sound. Nothing is named and thus has no objectivity. There is no this nor that.

Gradually, certain repeated patterns are identified and named, such as 'mama'.

This process expands until a world is identified and organized.

This interpretation is solidified and becomes the life view. The world manifests and conforms to this life view depending on its strength.

It is possible for this life view and interpretation to change.

Some life views are rigid and impenetrable while others are maleable.

Nevertheless, all are merely interpretations, attempts to give structure and organization to an undefinable, ever-changing, unpredictable flux.

These attempts at interpretation and organization become problematic when they do not always conform to what is happening. Suffering and frustration set in.

There is no problem when no attempt is given to rigid interpretation, when flux is simply allowed to manifest and pass.

There is no problem when it is seen that what would control manifestation is just a phantom that has no roots and is being blown helplessly about like a tissue in a breeze.

The only problem is resistance to flux when it does not confirm to the chosen interpretation or life view.

It can be realized that there is no definition, no absolute conforming pattern to adhere to. There is just manifestation.

Just this.

Eventually, the body-mind ceases to function, either suddenly or gradually, as an identified locus in the current dream manifestation. Identified forms return to the homogenous field of light, a light that isn't such except as Formless Potential, potent yet unmanifest.

A life was lived by no one except an idea.

But life remains infinitely manifesting in/as/from the unmanifest Formless Potential.

Reply to Tao:

Off-rourse, believing in blue people that look like Smurfs , and "letting go" to the Blue Lord of Smurfs (Papa-Smurf), for an "instant" release from the "contamination" of "material nature" is an another idolatric option for one's monkey mind.

I was having this vision (not really) of the RSSB party versus the Churchless playing football. The RSSB were mostly sitting in meditation but some wandered around like mindless zombies. Gurinder was standing in the goal and tried to control the zombies by pointing at the ONE bal. On the other hand the Churchless where deep thinking and looking at the sky, they where studying their feet and the shoes they where wearing and Brian posted a question 'why do we play footbal?'.
Now the referee was whistling and some of the zombies slowly came dangerously near the ball but suddenly a Churchee got an idea and ran to the ball hitting it with his hand. Clearly a foul and all of the zombies started their slow laughs in the process some of the other zombies awoke and it became quit frightening as all the zombies where now standing in front of the goal making intimidating sounds in CAPITALS.
Than tAo came along with his shotgun and I woke up :)

I have noticed that any intelligent discussion about RS beliefs and anybody pro RS, is found mainly unacceptable on this blog because as soon as someone brings up some of their beliefs, instead of a discussion about them, certain people start in with personal attacks & personal insults.

Most people will then just leave rather than have an intelligent discussion turn into a pissing match,which most intelligent people won't engage in.

Yes it is true nobody can be attacked, we take it or leave it, all according to our beliefs, but there is such a thing as manners.

If these certain people fail in having a good arguement they usually resort to personal insults.(defence)

I think Brian could have a point that some very interesting bloggers could be lost due to this behaviour. I have no problem with strong criticism, strong colourful fucking language, though against the ideas, not against the person.

Marina :)

Hi Tucson,

Really, really love your post - it kinda says it all! Nothing to add, nothing to take away.

Marina :)


Interesting post as usual - the idea of absolute reality being unmanifested potential in constant flux seems to be the crux of many of the less religious forms of mysticism and deism.

There are many questions raised tho:

1) if the unmanifest is all there is, and we are all part of it, why is there even the appearace of manifestation, i.e. of objects and us?

2) what has caused some localised parts of this formless potentiality to manifest into forms, and moreover, caused a particular type of manifestation having a consciousness that is able to perceive other localised parts of the formless reality?

3) how do we know that this formless unmanifest potentially actually exists? How can we 'realise' it?

Tucson, do you know as a fact that 'the identified forms return to the homogenous field of light and sound?' Everything could possibly get sucked into a dark hole.

But if you are correct about the idea of returning to a Formless Potential, potent yet unmanifest, then on the same basis, you could say that the Formless Potential lives to manifest. Possibly, it longs to manifest in a spectrum of ideas made physical and mental- solidified temporarily only to return after a period, to the source. Then what you would be looking at is creation and you would subscribe to Creationism. Would the concept you are describing be Creationism?

Bear in mind though, that what you are presenting cannot be tested here and now, because we would each be in an idea.

The rootless phantom has to be something potent if it is controlling the manifestation. It would have it's starting point in the formless and be one of it's or it's main impulse.

Never-the-less, on a basic human level, we can see from observation that the idea we live in will pass- it has a time limit. Also, that our manifestation is dependant on all else around us.

In addition, while we are manifesting, it seems that certain behaviours make the manifestation more enjoyable. Those behaviours may include altruism, maintainance of the body and mind, further creativity, problem solving and so on.

"A life was lived by no one except an idea."
quote tucson

That's why Nisargadatta Maharaj called it THAT.

Nisargadatta correctly depesonalizes the Substance
of the universe.

The self was a myth. The self was a belief.

It is because we all thought we had a self that we
ran out looking for salvation.

WHO can be saved ? How can a Guru save a self that
never existed ?

The myth, or belief in a self, causes all the problems.

The self waxes and builds an image. The self wishes
to dominate and control, to possess.

But, the wax image of the self melts in the sun.

The self is a sand castle, built on the seashore.

Just waiting for high tide.

Will we survive death ? Or, will only THAT survive
death ?

If one identifIes with THAT, can one ever die ?

THAT ..... which sits on top our heads.

", why is there even the appearace of manifestation, i.e. of objects and us? "
quote George

I was watching a science documentary.

Science has now figured this out. To make
a long story short, there is a
positive and negative. If either is out of wack,
it produces what we know as matter.

They say our universe is rare, because
most universes never appear, because they
are neutral.

They estimate our universe is off balance
less then 2 %

Other wise nothing would exist.

It has to do with dark matter balancing
the positive.

Yo, yo! TAO, TARA, MARINA, MIKE, BRIAN, OSHO, NIETZsCHE and anybody else i am again going off line now due to the hard practice i will now take with my music instrument so it is been a pleasure to talk with you and if anybody wants to stay in contact with me, here is the mail: [email protected]
I wish you all peace and full happy life.
Your brother!

For you guys:

Does God use fake Gurus to preach about him ?

Does God use fake Gurus as a means for people
to find their way to him ?

Why do God's messengers always turn out to be
prone to scandal ?

Can't God find any honest people to relay
his message ?

Why do God's messengers always preach one
thing and do another ?

Why do God's messengers keep changing the
teaching ?

Why are God's messengers teaching so many
paths to Him ?

Why can't anybody find God, except for
the messengers ?

Why doesn't God get off His ass and come
down to earth ?


yip the big bang is based on the idea of a vaccum fluctation caused by positive and negative virtual particles popping into and out of existence. I think the idea of a quantum field is probably not dissimilar to tucson's notion of a formless unmanifest potential. You are right there are a handful or so of very finely balanced parameters that appear to have resulted in the creation of the universe.

But it seems to me that Tucson's is a fundamentally different model or method of insight into reality, as opposed to science. Many of the concepts Tucson describes have been advocated from various philosophers from heraclitus, xeno and the neoplatonists - who perhaps think of reality as a process, rather than in the discrete material terms of science.

Its an interesting philosophical alternate viewpoint on the nature of reality, metaphysics, though i'm not sure how accurately it can actually model reality as compared to science.

Afterall, what can you actually say about a reality that is formless unmanifest potential? It is neither measurable (and hence verifiable) nor does it offer any explanatory power in terms of describing the various forms and manifestations that appear however illusorily them may be, or their behaviour. It also does not really explain why there is pattern or order, or at least the appearance of this in the world around us.

All you can say is, 'just that' or 'just this'.

To George, Catherine, etc....

Somehow, it is just "known", but not in a conventional sense of knowing. There is no word for the knowing I speak of. I can't explain it. No "one" realizes it. What would realize it would be other than it. There is no method to grasp air, yet there is air. I just write because the mood hits me. Don't take it too literally. (I won't flatter myself by saying don't take me too seriously.) All words and concepts fall short but that is all we have here. Really, everything I say is false, but words sometimes can be a springboard into formlessness.


i don't know what you've been smokin, because you sound like a nit-wit who wandered into la-la-land.

what gives you the odd idea that I believe in "blue people that look like Smurfs" or the "Blue Lord of Smurfs (Papa-Smurf)" ??

are you friggin nutzo? apparfently so.

however, it does seem like you are the one who needs that "instant release from the contamination of material nature", that you mentioned.

here is what i posted, that may be what has got you so goofy:


Mike asked:

"Why doesn't God get off His ass and come
down to earth ?"


The Supreme Lord descends from time to time in this material world to re-establish the teachings of the Vedas.

In Bhagavad-gita, chapter 4, verse 7, Lord Krishna promises:

yada yada he dharmasya
glanir bhavati bharata
abhutthanam adharmasya
tadatmanam srjamy aham

"Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion - at that time I descend Myself. To deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to re-establish the principles of religion, I Myself appear milleniumm after millenium."

Lord Krishna therefore appears by His own will whenever there is a predominance of irreligiosity and a disappearance of true religion. Principles of religion are laid down in the Vedas. In the Srimad Bhagavatam it is stated that such principles are the laws of the Lord. Only the Lord can manufacture a perfect system of religion. The Vedas are also accepted as originally spoken by the Lord Himself to Brahma.

Therefore, the principles of dharma, or religion, are the direct orders of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Sri Krishna (dharmam tu saksad bhagavat-pranitam). These principles are clearly indicated throughout the Bhagavad-gita. The purpose of the Vedas is to establish such principles under the order of the Supreme Lord, and the Lord directly orders, as revealed at the end of the Gita, that the highest principle of religion is to surrender unto Him only, and nothing more. The Vedic principles push one towards complete surrender unto Him; and, whenever such principles become disturbed by the demonic, the Lord appears to re-institute the sanatana dharma.

Mike wrote:
Why doesn't God get off His ass and come
down to earth ?

I can't answer the other questions - but I can answer this one.

It's because He sent his Son (The Jesus dude) to kind of test the waters before he made a personal appearance.

And when he saw what they did to his son - he thought - fuck this. I aint going down to earth if you fucking pay me! Absolutely no fucking way.

I mean - if this is how they treat my only begotten and beloved son - what the fuck will they do to me.

So he stayed in heaven and just has a peek down at earth from time to time.

And - unless things change drastically - he has no plans to come down - ever!

And who can blame him?

Hi George and Tao,

George says, "All you can say is, 'just that' or 'just this'."

I will pick just THAT. (grin)

Hi Tao,
I was formally initiated by a sant into
Krishna about 35 years ago. His name is so
long I can't repeat it without finding his book.
Personally initiated.

The concept is ok. Better than most I
have seen.

Typically the Presence I am speaking of
will occur in a jnani. Not always, but
often. The jnani is void of belief and
has seen through the illusion of the self.

But, most people are not jnani. So, for them
Krishna might be ok. The problem is not so
much surrendering to Krishna,
but making the mistake of surrendering to a Guru.

When I was initiated in this long ago, I
was told to visualize my preferential form
of Krishna. That form should come to life.

I have seen many objects of affection in
my years, many Gods in various groups.

The Presence a jnani can entertain is
not a belief, nor is there surrender.
The surrender has turned into confidence
in the Presence. The Presence is so
competent one just falls into its arms.

But, it is not impossible at all, if the person is a true seeker, for the
Presence to be with those whom surrender, no matter
the faith.

Hi Osho,
It's funny I grew up Catholic and saw
thru the fiasco at age 17.

Now I am its biggest critic. They killed
untold millions of people in their religious
ambition and corruption.

Lets face it Osho, most people are not
very smart religious wise. Most people
don't have a clue.

Even Radhasoami has turned into a Mafia.

Look at the Jehovahs, Mormons, Muslims
and Catholics.

Religion is incredibly scary. Fanatics
run the show. They are often lunatics
whom think they are in touch with God,
or God has chosen them.

The best thing a person can do is trash
everything. Then if they start out again,
at least they will not be deceived, or hurt.

Such things as Zen and jnani are a good
start. The person realizes if anything
is to happen to them, it must start
from themself. It must happen in themself.

That's why Ramana Maharshi, Jiddo and U. G.
krishnamurti are so popular today.

The Gurus and masters have all failed.
Exotic inner experiences have failed.
Ways and methods have failed.

The logic itself was a complete failure.

So, the person ends up with themself, alone.
If they are a true seeker, they realize
they have made a mistake. If they are not
a true seeker, they continue in their
misguided ways.

So, the people on this club have come
back to themself, after long journies.

Very few people are smart enough to do
even this.

At least they are free.

Tucson, the idea or feeling of knowing is experienced by all, for all sorts of possible and also bizarre senarios. You're saying things come from one thing then go back to it and that thing creates it all. The manifestations or creations that we are in at the moment are small parts of it and they'll come to pass. So keeping that in mind, live life.

While living life, are you saying it really doesn't matter what happens or how we make things happen or how we perceive things because ultimately it all goes back to the 'creative ocean' and manifests again and again in different ways.

Going back to sound and light can mean going back to a cacaphony of jarring sounds and blindingly unpleasant light or a more pleasant version of the two.

If death is the opposite to life, then maybe it's all the opposite after this life.

What you are writing there is what has been written before in guiding texts, esp. reminiscent of Buddhism.

Grasping air is possible for sure; open your hand and grasp; or open your mouth and close- just being literal!

If you look at what you wrote, you made some clear assumptions which are perspectives afterall- dream ons, wishful thinking.

Just playing with possibilities Tucson; it's always thought-provoking to read your comments.

Mike says:

"...Zen and jnani are a good start. The person realizes if anything is to happen to them, it must start from themself. It must happen in themself. That's why Ramana Maharshi, Jiddo and U. G.krishnamurti are so popular today."

But isn't this what all the gurus, sants and mystics all say, 'know thyself'?

Its just there methods of getting there are different. But I don't even know what 'know thyself' means, how could anyone? How can one know thyself or even come to the realisation that there is no self and that we are in fact all part of the One (formless unmanifest potentiality)?

And even if one were to arrive at such a realization, what difference does this make to your life or death or anything else? you are still going to live a life governed by the senses and when you die thats it, back to the oneness or nothingness potentiality.

Hi Evilbuster and any other RS followers here,
i have been to this blog long back,and had many rounds of conversations,and even i had online conversation with osho,
well brother just a piece of advice to you,(well anyhow its upto you whether you follow it or not),
well dear,this blog is regarding individual understanding and their own perception,
you no need to defend offend or have a long arguments with these bloggers,as they have their own idea about their own understanding,
being here,just believe me you will gain nothing,ok if you have lot of time you can come here,its an public platform,anyone can come,but if you are spending your valuable time here then better ignore this blog,
just have faith in what you are following and just be with it,
these talks about santmat changing and stuff is very natural and common,it has been happening from the day of human existence,
its just now because of information technology we get to read a lot and can do lot of research,nothing else much changed,in guru nanak devs times there were people who have been indifferent to santmat,same in bulleh shah's time,paltu,dadu,sheikh farid,and many more..there has been always people who have been raising question towards santmat and openly criticizing it,but then let them do their work and you do yours,
i have all the answers for osho,but i have long back made the judgment that he wont understand at all.what he says santmat 1.0 and 2.0 and further up gradation,this is all their own mind creation,nothing else,if he himself look inside his ownself,he will find that coming years osho have also changed a lot,and may be the present osho version would be around 10.00 or so,so change is the need for life,whether in teachings,whether in understandings its very natural activity,
but then one should have the ability to understand that change,but few like osho get confused and create their own theories,and i say let them do it.
to all rs brothers,let this blog lovers do what they are doing,and you do what you are said to do,
being getting out of path is a very natural n normal activity,you need not pay that attention to those who leaving,let them.
bulleh once said a very nice sayings,if anyone can translate in english can do it,i m telling it in punjabi,
Tenu chor nal ki,Tenu sadh nal ki,
Tu apni nepadh Tanu hor nal ki.

i shared about bulleh shah sayings because he was also a kind of GSD of his times,at that time also tara like people were there,
and what is the fuss in sharing the sayings of saint like bulleh shah,you people are after GSD because he is alive and available,if bulleh shah would be have been alived..you guys would have not spared him,instead of GSD,you would been talking abt BS,that would be the only difference.
and bolo tara tara you can put down your thoughts as per your own understanding i have nothing to do with it..i said what i felt and what i liked..i m not at all here to offend or defend GSD,i just alerted a fellow friend who was acting the way,i actually did long back.
till then you guys can be busy counting and creating with more versions of santmat...

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic
which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed
with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of theircharacter by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. .

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

Posted 1 month ago #

Key Master
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

by H. Michael Sweeney 1997, Revised April 2000 - formerly SEVEN Traits)

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.

8) BONUS TRAIT: Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:


Wow! Just how many of those rules does Babaji-G get to use in just one Q&A session ... he's gotta at least have a Masters in Disinformation!

Hi Seeker,

Arguable rumors is interesting. Without
Gurinder going in print we cannot use
references. He cannot be quoted as
no note taking is permitted.

Did you know notes are admissable in court ?
And, hearsay is not.

Gurinder is protecting a legal position.

Charan was a barister (lawyer) . His
books were full of omissions, which
is the keyword in fraud.

You would think someone who was a vegetarian
and an artist would be a nice person.

Until you learned it was Hitler.

Rajinder makes a fool out of himself
constantly, every time he opens his
rhetorical mouth.

He makes the mistake of printing his
garbage in his supreme arrogance.

Hi Tara and Brian and Osho,

first tara,
I was wondering if you could write an
article for me on the Dera culture.
The same things you are writing now,
all put together including the money
problems with documentation.

Maybe Brian could add his experiences
and money documentation.

And, Osho and Brian's the new sant mat
is very important. If Brian could write
an article, or take what has been written
and put it in one article.

I could then take these two aricles
and add new pages to Radhasoami Beas
Secret History and feature them on front page.

About 175 new people every day read
this web site and it may exist for hundreds
or thousands of years.

It would greatly help to use (center)xxx(/center) for titles and (p)xxx (/p)
for paragraphs. Don't use ( ) brackets,
but sharp brackets. I cannot put them
on this post or they won't show up.
Sideway V's..

You people have already written most of it.
I would only edit to make it legally correct
with words like may, possibly, I believe, etc.

Brian might have to use an email attachment
for the sharp V's, sideways brackets to come
through. Assume Brain has my email, but not sure,
I can send on a post that would not be printed with my email.

Yes, Mr Williams, what might be cited as 'evidence' & what remains 'hearsay'...

Guess you could say over the years Babaji-G has become quite astute at handling 'information' vis-a-vis the mob. And, it's only on rare occasions that he lets his guard down; for instance when confronted with a familiar face he can forget the public context & come out with the odd 'Rubbish' then it's a matter of a quick-recontextualisation etc.

However, could say that by default 'evidence' of much disinformation is there if what the hierarchy consider the muggins of the sangat were to open-their-eyes & dig a bit deeper. Just consider the stream of RSSB literature Babaji-G continues to dumb-down & propagate for the masses.

There was, way back, a great article entitled something like 'Alienation; the career of a concept' ... it traced the way in which that particular concept had been 'used' & re-defined & etc over the centuries to its most recent association with Marx. Now, while not being a language scholar, it still seems pretty obvious - looking back to early SM/RS literature to the more recent RSSB take - that there's been a whole shift in the use/definition/contextualisation of the concept 'sat guru' over the last 150 odd years. Indeed, that very concept has had an interesting career!

And, perhaps, it could be said that it took the current RSSB family lineage - from the patriarchal, stick-wielding, Great to the current great g'son (who, his very humble self, described his ancestor's take, Phil o' Masters, on the inner as 'Rubbish') to actually cement that very concept to the 'physical'.

So, why this 20th century career shift? Perhaps we need look no further for an explanation than the rise of the current patriarchal regimes of the Middle East. How better to retain a line of authority? Indeed, whether a spiritual/economic/social/cultural/military community or whatever ... evidence throughout history suggests it tends to work just the same and, inevitably, they become grounded in what is no more, no less than a culture of disinformation dressed-up, in the specific case of RSSB, as some secret, superior, top-notch form/method of spirituality.

As I've sorta said before ... and I appreciate that I'm 'preaching to the converted' ... you need only look back to the recent likes of Ramana, Nisagadatta, fakir-C et al, to know that anyone who had experienced what ever Truth there is to be known would simply be incapable of engaging in or propagating such practice. In other words, that isn't-where-it's-at for them! So, no wonder they didn't end their days as multi-millionaires, ruling over billion-dollar foundations, driving Bentleys, flying first-class and, most importantly, being anal about what was recorded, written, photographed & made public about what they had to say, what they thought, what they believed & had experienced to be the Truth, and simply how they lived their daily lives!

That's an interesting post seeker,

Nisargadatta ( and his disciple Ramesh
Balsekar, whom books I recommend)were
quite remarkable.

Nisargadatta used to sell packs of
cigarettes outside his small flat
in a cart stand !

Gurus are parrots. They change and adapt
eveytime someone comes up with a better
mouse trap.

Gurinder is changing with the times.

It is good people become agnostic
and dump all religion.

Although I believe in a negative and
postive power, I do not believe in God.

I really blame Charan and Kirpal about
all the bogus Radhasoami history.

They were flat out deceivers and liars
beyond what anyone can imagine.

They were literally criminals.

Mike you do not know anything about the radhasoami history and what all you claimed and mentioned in your website ...is nothing but tons of BS.
but it doesn't matter though because who know the truth anyhow and anyways knows the truth,
so you can carry on with your BS,you are free to do it,because its very normal a person who himself is full of crazy thoughts and greed and jealous of a particular path,well he have to get into BS era,so mike carry on with your non-sense claims and fake writings,it will fetch you nothing,
brain blog is far much more better than yours,because what you all have is just fake,i do not want to prove it as soon a website will be hosted,where people will come to know the clear truth of RS,where every reply and answer would be mention step by step comparing your own BS written in ur own Website.
what brian does in his blog,he pen down his personal experience,frustration,his own level of understanding,and his not able to lead the path,his getting of track from RS,his hatred for rs guru,etc etc..all what he is doing atleast he is being true to himself,but what mike you are doing is just 3.0 version of BS nothing else,
you do not know RS gurus more closer than me.
but anyways..you please carry on with your ranting and chanting it will anyhow would not effect...
in any path its very natural people getting into it..for some reason,getting out of it for some reason,more people joining in for some reasons..so this will go on dude.

"you do not know RS gurus more closer than me"

Your talking about this region I imagine ?

I m posting an video link of a self claimed saint who can be termed as brother concern-to this blog as he is doing something more profound :P by bashing every path and religion if you guys can understand hindi
then enjoy more videos of this guy available on youtube

I belive, i belive i belive in negative amazon reviews.

Hi tara, email transfered.

Mia, All I hear is opinions from satsangis
in rebutal. Never facts.

Put your facts on the table.

Mike,its M L A not M I A
Mike you would anyhow not believe my words,in i put it on table,
because like i have always heard this word related for a rs follower that rs follower all are"Brain washed" which is completely incorrect,I have all the answers for Brian,
but mentioning it here on a blog is of no use,
because there are many to distract,discriminate and divert the facts in their own ways.

mike i do not have any clue,what you write all about the secret history is something you have got it from a first hand knowledge,or else this all gains are from some one else head or some other books.
but my belief and faith in RS is first hand and not just from others head and any books,
i have first hand experience from RS,
though at the very beginning when i visited this blog i acted in a very harsh,rude way which i already have apologized to brian,
though it was natural,but still what i did was incorrect.
i have seen someone planning for KUMB MElA
if someone can add my name that would be really nice meeting all these blah blah speakers and weird thinkers,physically,then perhaps i can have the real discussion and conversation.
And once again for osho i wanted to say.he is charging some money in order to transform the other,but i really doubt..a man who is still not aware of the true meaning of transformation,is really capable of making others understand.
thats really a question? Mark? on osho..
his knowledge is very limited..which is again very natural.
he sees something,differentiate something and then he feel so nice and relaxed for finding out this differences ,but in these process he miss out many other points,which if at all he would have concentrated he would have got more profound knowledge.

but thats again a matter of chance n choice.

i really have no issue.if some one leaves a particular path and someone joins a particular path,
my only single concern is,if truth not known,one should keep it for self,instead of making false and fake statements and posts ..
thats it for now..

well tara for you rs is bs
but for me it is not,
and about knowing GSD,
well my dear,he stays 10 months in india,
any westerner can never have the chance of being with him more than any indian can have,
so i know him more personally than you,and been with him,and i know all the people involved my dear,you no need to go ga ga over it.
and its completely natural for being voted out from your meet in kumbh mela,
well for that you guys would have been fortunate,but poor guys you are not so fortunate,this shows that you people are not willing to know the truth at all,and you guys just wanted to rant your self acclaimed intellect and ideas,which i do not qualify them at all,
and i have not put down any pile of dogma,,
its just your limited understanding capacity that you found no other reason to pin point me,
and i know the truth much better than you dear,tara you really do not know the truth or real reality.

But anyways you can continue with your own version of dogma,i never mind,
what all i know is
You cannot run away from truth...
either u will get caught or either truth will catch you one day for sure..

because spirituality doesnt just belong to GSD,
its something which is there from the time of existence of this earth..and will be there till end..

enjoy your furstration and ranting for rs..
please carry on,but with dignity...

mla first of all Tara is from India and is GREAT person.

mla: ...any westerner can never have the chance of being with him more than any indian can have

---first of all that is a total of your imagination.

mla:well for that you guys would have been fortunate,but poor guys you are not so fortunate

---and with your approach we would not get any richer

mla: which i do not qualify them at all,

--totaly your problem

mla:and i know the truth much better than you dear,tara you really do not know the truth or real reality

---this sentence shows that you have no clue at all but mla be cool there is nothing wrong with being clueless do not beat yourself up that much

mla:because spirituality doesnt just belong to GSD,
its something which is there from the time of existence of this earth..and will be there till end..

---a little better

mla: enjoy your furstration and ranting for rs..
please carry on,but with dignity

---mla do you know what this behavior means? look yourself in a mirror or take a photo of your self and ask that person on a photo... What kind of a person you are wishing someone else to enjoy frustration? Do you dare to ask that person on a photo this question deeply and honestly? Do you dare? If you dare you will never come on anyone like you did in the past you will be fresh and happy.

On the 'Rules of Disinformation'...

I laughed heartily at these rules and more so with the implication that they apply only to a select few 'groups' of people.

Look carefully and apply them to oneself would be the best medicine!

From the cradle to the grave, we have or are all been disinformed. We can blame someone else for it but who is the one who has these thoughts or beliefs or identities running around in their own head, Now.

We all have an identity which can change and update like the weather but underneath there is a root identity, usually poor self-worth, a fear of being 'nothing', that drives all our needs or desires - to become more whole, to fix, to 'find' the truth.

I AM gathers add on's such as I AM Marina, I AM a mother, I AM not good enough, I AM evil, I AM, bad, I AM confident, I AM good, I AM superior, I AM inferior......

....and so with this never ending list one may feel the need to be saved, to get to Sach Khand, heaven, nirvana, enlightenment and lo and behold along comes something that promises us freedom/liberation.

Starting from this point may seem as a non starter because it is stemming from the false belief in I AM blah blah blah or somehow lacking. But one has to start from where one is at until one 'sees the light' so to speak.

We try to fill this 'lack' just like one would keep trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it with water [validation, approval, money, sex, power, appreciation...]

But no matter how much we keep putting in water,[desire] the bucket never stays full and eventually will keep on leaking until we first realise the root problem - the hole. Even when we do realise there is a hole in our bucket, we try to get someone else to tell us how to 'fix it' or better (or worse) still, we try to get 'them' to do it for us.

Here is a classic link regarding this:


The conclusion reached by scientists is that the observer determines the experience of what is observed. Matter is then created by th intent or desire of the individual observer. This observation produces awareness, which is consciousness, which is thought. These things create matter.

"All that matters is what you make matter. Therefore, you make matter." ~ Howard Falco

Imagine if nature was able to disinform itself. A tree was ill treated by humans. A lot of its brances was cut down.The news would quickly spread to all the other trees who may then blanket every human being as dangerous and may refuse to give shade or bear fruit for human consumption.

To give a wee story, oh I do love wee stories on boats.

I use to think there was something wrong with me. I was doomed. Along came RS and promised salvation, freedom and liberation from all this suffering of 'mine'. It promised to give an experince of being good enough and accepted. Naturally, I felt validated and into the RS boat I eagerly jumped, so delighted that somehow I was alright that I would be saved. (Now I see a bit more clearly, that it been more like, being saved from myself:))

Well this boat of RS seemed so special. We were all given our own lil boat with the RS mark on them. Out into the big ocean we were told to go and row [meditate]! Oh, it felt so much better.

At first I felt really special coming from a place of low self worth at the time. I regularly ran into my mother in her lil boat. Now her lil boat was a different one to mine. Hers was a catholic boat. Many a time she accused me of rocking my boat too hard and told me I shouldn't do that. I felt sometimes that she could kill me for rocking my boat as both of us knew, neither was a strong swimmer. Well, I could float and not swim well, though she was really afraid of the water and didn't like me making waves.

Many a time I defended my boat and my rocking and even sneakily subtly, tried to put hers down! In the latter few years I didn't bother, not out of fear, but more out of respect. You see, I began to see my boat as less superior and more as, just different than her boat.
My mother and her boat has since passed on and I am still here on the ocean.

What about my boat? Well, let me say that I am now a confident swimmer and am more and more venturing outside my boat and have visited many other different boats to have a look around. I have found some similar boats, some really interesting boats, a lot of boats into being superior boats; some even have no boats and have claimed that they don't need a boat anymore that they are happy and not trying to get anywhere. Others claim too, no need for a boat, but one would wonder when they can be seen flailing about sometimes in the sometimes stormy ocean having to be rescued by some passing boat or just tossed and turned endlessly in the see of suffering.

There is also congregation of boats playing boat races and hoards of supporters cheering on their particular crew. Oh, some of this is taken very seriously.

Now my boat is never too far away from me. Sometimes I feel I have outgrown my boat but other times I realise that there is a different way to steer the boat from how I first thought.

I haven't reached the shore yet and my lil boat is still in the picture, but in the meantime if my lil boat gets waterlogged or sinks with too much use or bad use, or I outgrow my boat, I will not fall to pieces and drown in sorrow nor will I ever forget that lil boat and how much it meant to me on at that particular time on my travels.(Real or not)

On another note, I liked your story Brian about how you got into RSSB and others too. What a picture (in the hip shirt, dark hair and beard) Oh, you where a handsome devil! :)


On the Kumb Mela thing, I shall have my suitcase packed and ready to go!
One thing though, I am not sure about wearing Churchless t-shirts for no other reason than I would not want to wear a RS or a Marina t-shirt. Don't want to boxed.

A suggestion – we could all get our own t-shirts with our own slogan and says something about us, individually.

My 21 year old son was over the other day and he had a vest t-shirt on him. On his upper arm is tattooed ‘Never Give Up’. My husband (not his father) asked if I thought that summed him up. I thought about it and laughed as I felt thinking back, it definitely summed him up. It left me thinking. What tattoo would I get that wouldn’t outdate as years go by and one that I wouldn’t cringe in years to come either? I am still ‘looking’ for that word or slogan. If any bloggers has a tattoo, does it still mean the same thing as when ye first got it or do you cringe?


Question for Mike Williams, David Lane, Tara ...

Charities Commission, UK

1140041 -
Other names !
SOS (Working Name )

Governing document !
Area of benefit !
Charitable objects !
Date registered !
25 January 2011 !
Classification !



So, just wondering, is RSSB now undergoing a complete re-branding in UK/West, not just letter-headings & charity ref? Is the intention to eventually drop RSSB label/moniker in favour of Science of the Soul (SOS) Study Centre? A nod to JohnD maybe (joke!) … what with One-being-One?

Part quoted above by Seeker 2011:



I always felt that these guidelines already applied. Anything I have personally heard BJ say at Dera has always been consistent with these 2 guidelines.[granted, the old books may not have been so embracing]

On the churchless t-shirts Tara - I have no problem posing for foto in one of them. I will skip the ditching it though, just in case anybody at Dera gets up my nose, then out will come the t-shirt and with the pride of a peacock, I will strut my t-shirt![maybe] ;)


mungos my dear innocent,first u look into ur inner self and see your own behaviour,
before pin pointing on others look into urself,
you are full of EGO and self centered,
but thats natural,
why shud i look into mirror for what i have committed nothing,
its you who need a mirror urgently,
and if u want to get into "READY"
made discussion,i will welcome you,but only on personal email,not here in public domain,
if u are interested we can be in touch in emails,i do not want to discuss anything related to path in public,
you may ask reason why?
well because you people love RSSB so much that you are consistently after it,if the words of master is been not understood by you guys,
so how come you will understand my words.
you will again start the automated assault and rounds of rants,which i dont want to get into,
and mungos i saw a reflection of TAO in you,
keep it up u r learning to be another tao,
and about tara yes he is a good man but only according to you.
and why he is a good man,because he agrees with you ,
you people all belongs to same group where you like n love eachother for just agreeing on same topic and issues,
and same failures which you all have met with regarding santmat..

so dear mungos,if u want to share thru personal email then leave ur email id.
but in public i would not discuss anything in detail ...
no reasons mentioned for so..

Hi Marina,
your way of writing and expressing is commendable.
you are very intellectual,like brian you are writing have sense...

i admire the way you write n express.
something i need to learn from you.

Is OshoRobbins and Tim or Tom Robbins the same person? I like the messages, just not sure who is who?

mla aka Manish you are long here to know Tara is girl and not according to me she is great- she is just GREAT wether i want it or not.
And mla aka Manish do you think i am a new victim for your attacks and ugly words am i a fresh meat.No i don't want to drag that stuff out of you no i don't want for you to write tousands and tousands of bad words again and i am wishing you well even from my according to you big ego. And mla if i meat tAo in me should i say hello to him? Be well and try to stay out of that past language of yours i think Gurinder would be pleased.If you really love him that much you will never insult anybody here and everywhere. Peace

Well mla,

Thanks for your comments. Honestly? I don’t know about the intellectual bit – I had to look up the definition of commendable to make sure what it meant but believe me; you don’t need to learn anything from me, though we can all learn from ourselves. :)

And Georgie peorgie,

I will take this opportunity too to thank you for your last comments to me. [On being brutally honest. I forget which thread it was on]

I am realising that I have a thick skin built up regarding people disagreeing with me and I don’t know what to do or how to respond (or not) sometimes, when it goes to the other extreme. Sometimes it is hard acclimatising to the other side as it is fairly new and virtually uncharted waters ;)



you're a self-righteous condescending little snot.

you stink. that's right. nobody here likes you and your self-righteous prattle. so why don't you go find some other blog to dump you're crap on.

where i come from... if you were to talk to folks in same the manner that you do here, you'd literally get your face punched and your ass beaten, and then you'd get run out of town. no doubt about it.

people generally don't like assholes (like you) who have condescending attitudes (like you do).

i'm surprised that the owner of this blog has allowed your ass back on this blog, especially after all the disgusting preachy shit you posted here the last time.

so mla, you can kiss my country ass:



rebel are you a joker or a clone of tao mungos or mike
look into urself what language you are using,
please behave yourself..
or do not respond to my post when it anyhow havent addressed to you,
and about my past behavior i have been already apologize to brian twice,and i m far much better than you idiot,that i accepted my fault.
now this much of reply is enough for such a silly person YOU,you are completely out of sense while posting the reply on me,
better be in your senses next time while you post.

you urself using bad language and accussing me.reminds me like you are some joker of an circus...hilarious.

mungos you always try to act like a rat,why is that,
first you challenge me to get "READY" and then immediately you change your mind..is this kind of process runs in your blood,
you people continuously use bad words and bad language,and accuse me for no reasons,
i really do not understand with what motive you guys come on the blog and reply to a particular post,
why dont you guys learn some ethics and morals from brian,george,and marina,learn to behave with dignity like these three wonderful people does,
you all are full of self centered ego system running in your mind,and always accuse the other for being harsh and rude,
its just you do not find the way to talk to me,you fear that i may take out the truth from you guys,thats why you always divert the matter and start insulting me,
come dear find another good way,
dont act with so much of anger and frustration,i know you guys failed in santmat,it happens take it lightly,
dont be serious,and mungos whether guriender would be pleased by my language or not why are u so concerned you should be concerned of your ownself,
you people are very confusing all the time,
just need a chance to rant over rssb masters,
do it..but i said many times i think people here are half blind..cant read properly,
i said do it..but with dignity,like brain does..
you people are just spoiling the image of brain..

Marina can i have your personal email id?
would you like to share some personal messages with me?
please let me know.

mla where on eart you find my ugly words. where did i act like rat as you are now calling me where.I knew that calling me egoistical and self centered would not satisfied you now i am a rat.Can you come to my house after my 3hour of surat shabd meditation and after my two little children wake up and when me and my wife and kids are watching cartoon 'Up' as a happy family and when i will serve you a nice breakfast would you than stand up and say to my family and me that their daddy is rat and egoistical selfcentered would you go to all my friends whom we exchange help and support that their friend is rat would you go and tell them just because i said to you to not attack people with bad words and to not wish us frustration?
I never on earth came on you with attacks or i never judged you, you twisted that up. Even when someone is not attacking you you are making like one did.Go and read my posts i never insulted anybody including you. So once more and if you come again on hiting me for no reason this will be my last post to you.So once more peace and honesty from me.peace

mla, if you send Brian your email address, he can pass it onto me.


mungos,i do not have the idea of your age,
but you are acting like a child,
you mentioned about your happy going family,
thats good,i never said anything about you or your family,
and dear open your eyes and open your mind,
i do not know what is the process of reading post for you,
how can you find my post as attacking,instead most of your group people
like mike,tao,you,tara,etc post in a attacking way,i just reply to a particular post,thats it,if my words sounds attacking to you,that is completely your lack of understanding,not mine.Its all your fault not mine,
my dear grow up,its time for you to grow up,
i never wished you frustration,i said it directly that you post seems to be frustrated,
Orelse it can be that
like you are taking my words as attacks(by misunderstanding my words)
may be like that i would be taking ur words as frustration(may be my misunderstanding from your words)in blog and chatting and emails misunderstanding takes place very easily,
as i said many times but i do not understand what you people eat that you guys take so long time to understand,
through words you cannot exactly and accurately judge the other person point of view or point of expression,
because you read other peoples word,but with your own mindset and thoughts,
so you can sometimes understand other words with your own mind set,
now dear thats not my fault,
And tara(bolo tara ra ra ra)

now someone said tara is a lady and a nice lady?
I doubt the claim,
i never see anything nice in her,for any reason,
she how innocently with ignorance said,that i ran away ,from the topic of ,discussing GSD inner circle,
Tara put your glasses on and read the post,
i said it clearly if you can at all understand simple english,
that i m "READY" to discuss anything related to path but through private emails,
not in public,
you people have lost faith in path and are insulting the path or saying tom dick n harry stories,
i m not out of the path,neither i will be ever,
so i have some responsibilities over the path and master,
so i said i will discuss it in private emails
i welcomed you,but instead of replying me for it,you said i ran away,how innocent tara,
and you said insulting is my nature,
dear tara the lady,
how much do you know me that you are talking about my nature,
you do not know anything about ur ownself
you are completely a confused person,
when you are not even qualified of judging and understanding ur ownself
how can you understand me,
how innocent tara you are,
yes my comment may not make any sense,because they are simple and realistic,
its because you have have been failed in something which i haven't,you will obviously not like my reality and answers,
which once you urself followed dedicatedly(though i doubt).
and tara what is ur age,are you too young or too old,
i mean i cannot understand how you write a post or reply it,
you said RSSB criticizer are on my list,
so very much innocent you are tara,
yes i agree once my behaviour was actually not acceptable,and thats the only time i felt i was wrong and that is the only time i apologized ,but not again n again,i repeated that,so please first read all the post carefully,or get any good experienced person with you,who can read post on behalf of you and can make you understand,
yes at last ur rite in saying
tao,mungos and mike are not in my league,
and how can be they in my league,
I DO NOT BELONG to their LEAGUE at all,
i m very much happy the way i m ,
and yes dear i can understand them very much,
but sorry to say ,the out of league guys cannot understand me,
in this blog,i can relate with brian,george,marina these three guys,
even osho i really feel pity for him,
he is also very much innocent,

i always have stable view point tara,but you guys never have stable replies,
you guys keep on diverting the topics uselessly,
like you said i RAN AWAY FROM THE TOPIC<
instead read my post reply once again clearly with glasses on,
you will may be get the idea what i have posted,
and tara be a real person.
what ever i say,i said it many times on this blog its my personal individual opinion RSSB has nothing to do with it neither the master,
but you guys always pin point RSSB relating to my post,
that shows how cheap mentality guys u are,
would it be right if for your post i start blaming your family,father mother hubby or kids,
would it be right?
just think it twice?
you people are really frustrated,
and please grow up for ur own family sake,
i havent wish frustration,
because u guys are really frustrated,
insulting others and always letting others down like you guys do will never bring happiness,
and for god sake read my post atleast 10 times
because you guys always read something else and reply something else..
so much of confusion is created from you guys,
and tara i m still ready for the discussion but only on private emails,
and mungos i m always on peace,but may be it is not reflected through my words.

mla this is my last post to you cause you probably messed me with someone else cause i never bashed RSSB or any other master or any path or yoga or zen or anyhing else and i did not bashed nor you or anybody else. I cannot talk to you if you are puting your thoughts and words into my mouth only last time i am saying to you so you can clear your views about me. I am not a critic and never was you messed me with someone else but if critics are my friends that is none of else bussines.

brian you would have published my earlier post it was all written with pure intentions.
anyways your wish.this blog is urs.

and mungos dear...got it.
now this message of your was crystal clear.
nice to know that you never mess up with any path or vice versa..thats really good.
i liked that.

This You Tube video has been confirmed now
and has been added to Radhasoami Beas Secret History web site.


added to


Hopefully the financial material about Beas
posted on Church of Churchless will someday
be able to be added, but the source has
not decided to allow its release

If it can be confirmed, it will be added.

Congratulations to OSHO,
I estimate 12,000 new people a year
will view your videos and that may
expand over time. Your contribution
to Beas sant mat is invaluable.

I also estimate for every 1 RS person
whom learns the new RS philosophy, they
will tell 2 other people. (You can't
keep anything in sant mat a secret).

Really great videos Osho. You will help
many famalies and children for many many
generations to come.

Your videos are the best thing to come
out in the last decade and may be the best
thing to come out in public ever.

I have always felt the best people to
explain Indian religion, are Indians themsleves.

Us white people stink.

I also have problems with the oneness statement. If God and I am One than I have the same information as God. But that is not true. They say God dwells inside me meaning that there is not spacial difference between me and God. Okay but there is an information difference meaning God sees and hears and feels and uses other information processing than I do. So God and me are not the same seen from information point of view only. That we occupy the same space and time doesn't change that. Perhaps it is true that I can learn to process the same information God does on my place and in my time. Than there is Oneness. Do I need to sit down and let God teach me the process? Doe God have to open my eyes and ears?
I think it is RSBS to say God is here when the distance in information space is like infinite.
Just rambling ;)

I have to add something. What I noted is that sant mat 1.0 thinks in space and time when it says that we have to travel to Sach Kant and that Radha Soami is not here.
The latest insights in physics are that space is probable an emergent property of the information that is produced by an unknown underlying reality.
In other words there are measurable quantities, the things we hear and see and feel that are the result of an unknown microcosmos.
If we talk about God only as his information content than we have to say nothing about his nature and are still able to discuss some matters like sant mat 2.0.
The same thing happens in physics where we can only discuss an information content knowing nothing about the microscopic origin but still knowing what it will do in the macrocosmos. So the microcosmos is left as an unknown area from which we only assume that it produces information in our consciousness when we somehow interact with it.
This should make clear that the microcosmos has nothing to do with planets. The different areas however might be different experiences. There is no physical journey going on but there is a certain type of order perhaps in different planes of information that are 'crossed' and traveling refers to transcending that order. This makes the journey through the different planes a way of saying that our consciousness changes.
The notion of going to sach kant as a spirit after dead does only make sense when the spirit changes his consciousness after death. There is no other spirit taking it to a place in space because it is very unknown if space will still be there at all.
I must admit that I never knew that there where people that took the traveling literally like being a spirit that leaves the body and goes to a place in this universe. I think sant mat 1.0 is shocking to me but now I understand it I do understand some satsangi's better. They think they meditate on the forehead to leave the body and than they travel past there neighbors to the sun or the moon and than on... Wow that it is possible to take this so literally....
Is it really true do some satsangi's believe this? If so I never understood it at all but will abandon it from this day on. What a fairy tale! Worse that the heaven for christians that they will get after suffering injustice on earth.

And I have to ask something.
Is the original sant mat (I mean the 14th century version) like RSSB sant mat 2.0?

From this quote below I get that impression because God is inside the body in that quote from Baba Devi Sahab that was an original sant mat guru I think.


Blessed and adorable is he within whose body He reveals Himself (i.e. he who can see His true form within himself/ his body).

Hi nietzsche and tara,
"If God and I am One than I have the same information
as God. But that is not true. "
quote Nietzsche

Exactly, so perfect action can never be attained even
if you become enlightened. That's the problem.
OK, so we realize we don't have a self and maybe
not even a soul.

This shatters the subconscious mind because the
ability to act selfishly is gone. Why wax a self
you now know does not exist ? You won't lift a finger.

People don't realize it, but they block information
they have strong opionions about. That is hypnotism.
You are hyponotised completely never to look at the
other angle that contradicts your viewpoint.

An enlightened person realizes this. So, they look at
all sides of the story no matter how rediculous the
conflicting ideas are. They have HUMILITY. They
never trust their opinions. They always consider
themselves naive and stupid.

So, the best way to find out if you are enlightened
is to take an idea you are sure of.

Lets say you like Obama and are sure he is good.
Go out and look at negative information about Obama.

Negative information may show up he was not born
in the USA and had forged birth and selective service
documents. Evidence may appear his parents were CIA
and Obama first worked for a CIA company. You find
out Obama attended Bilderberg meetings. You find
out Obama passed NDAA which allows any person in the
world to be killed on his whim, or imprisoned
without habeus corpus. You find out Obama took
money from Goldman Sachs and J. P. Morgan.

OK, now you have more information. Information
that would be hypnotically blocked if you were
not enlightened.

The world is not black and white, but rather
shades of gray.

Do this for any subject you are absolutely sure of.

It could be anything, but must be something you are
sure you are 100% certain of.

So, how can we perform perfect actions even with
seeing all sides of a discussion ?

It can't be done, although you now have a better chance.

Only Something Else can enter the picture which
can provide the solution. The Something Else must be
nearly all knowing and be able to see the future results
of all actions. So, if you can contact this Something
Else.... and even if you do make a mistake, the Something
Else will correct it unbeknownst to you.

And, lets face it, we do not have the willpower or
knowhow to change ourselves for the better. This Something
Else would then have to change us for the better, without
us even realizing it.

Now, the question becomes, how do we contact this
Something Else right now, without any preperation ?

Right here and right now.

Again, this Something Else isn't interested in a
perfect philosophical world. The Something Else
would be interested in changing the world for the better.

I.E. You might all of a sudden become a protestor
for climate change, You might find yourself protesting
the New World Order. You might all of a sudden find
you will vote for Ron Paul.

And, this Something Else must by necessity move in
front of you. Because you will be in the extreme
minority of people whom perceive the problem.

Often "good" people will be the ones blocking your

You cannot change the world, only Something Else can.

And something Else can be reached by It's own reaching.

(continued from my post earlier today)
Hi Moongoes,

As I have said before, you are an incredibly rare person.

Your posts come from another dimension. Few people
ever know the Ultimate Simplicity. I will say no
more, as I don't want to embarass you, as these
people here may mistakenly think you are holy, or
a Saint, which I am sure would upset you.

But, we know Something Else is fully manifest now.
Besides the many it works through, it also
comes as a lone magnificent voice from England.

Witness the Supreme foreknowledge of the Ultimate
Simplicity. Witness the supreme glory of the
magnificent Simplicity speaking through the mouth
of a man.

It's great glory is here now. It is telling us our
time is short. It's predictions are perfect.

It has one message. WAKE UP.

For the people here who actually want to see
the Ultimate Simplicity speak through the mouth
of a man..... here it is.



Houdini is often thought of as a great magician.
But, that's not what he became famous for. When
his mother died he contacted mediums and attended
various seances.

Of course he quickly debunked them. But, he did
something unusual in the last years of his life.

He traveled the country and gave lectures about
the people whom scamed him. He reproduced the
tricks the charlatans were using to dupe the
public. This is what actually made him famous.

You Tube has reproduced many of the tricks Gurus
use such as levitation and materialization. So,
these are becoming known now.

And, in modern days Madame Blavatsky was debunked
in the book Blavatsky's Baboon, a brilliant effort.

I have seen Gurus do these tricks right in front
of me. And, one fellow, whos name I forget, actually
wrote a book telling the public how they were done.

There would appear to be nothing outside the realm
of science.

And, there is no evidence for a soul or God, or self.
(I have found none of these)

I would agree this is a logical conclusion.

There's only one problem. There is something called
the supernatural. Faquir Chand spoke of it happenning
around him without his knowledge. Wiliam James spoke
of it.

I have been studying it for 40 years now. And, it has
been in recent years that science is saying our
universe is multidimensional.

I am quite convinced now that there are supernatural
dimensions which can affect ours. It appears to explain
everything from flying saucers to miraculous cures.

But, because we do not know the science yet, does not
mean it is not scientific.

It appears mankind will someday make contact with
the inner dimensions.

Inner space may be the last frontier. But, it will
be nothing like we could ever conceive of it.

Hi Mike,

Glad you are back. I've been gone for a month or more, I've moved to Henderson, NV from Texas.

The Ultimate Simplicity








"How Sant Mat is moving from duality to oneness" ... ?

So strange that people object to reading the exact words written by the Master. Its not like the religious scriptures which were not written by the living Master at the time. To my understanding the following quote is about "oneness".

Quote Master Sawan Singh - "Man is an inexhaustible store of powers. The whole creation is within him along with the Creator. The drop is in the ocean and the ocean is in the drop. Creation is in the Creator, and the Creator is in all creation." Spiritual Gems, page 140.

Sorry, I wasn't going to comment anymore, just taking pot luck here to see if it might be posted.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.