END OF THREAD [Rajneesh, the true story of siddhi corruption]

[Guest guest]

Unfortunately, we've received a number of off-board messages from

members asked us to close this thread. The latest, just received:

 

**********

 

Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:51:31 -0000

 

devi_bhakta

discussion between om prem and Swami

 

Please ... this slander is getting out of hand and no longer

interesting..

 

pls calm them down or stop this some how...

 

regards

 

**********

 

With all due respect to both parties (and I do respect them both),

could we take this debate off board?

 

Thanks

 

DB

 

 

, "omprem" <omprem> wrote:

> OM Swamiji

>

> That was fast footwork but you only reveal how deep-seated your

> prejudice against women is.

>

> It was not Swami Sivananda Radha who referred to herself as

> 'Swami' but her initiator, Swami Sivananda. For her to do

> otherwise, is to question her Guru.

>

> Swami Sivananda was one of the first to initiate women into

> Sannyasa. And he faced a lot of objections from traditional,

> narrow-minded people such as you.

>

> The whole idea of Sannyasa in the Saraswati order is to rise

> above names and forms. You seek to maintain names and

> forms. It is interesting that you seek to maintain set roles for

men

> and women especially when those roles tend to treat men better

> or view them as somehow being more capable of being a

> Swami and closer to the Divine. Try to get over your inferiority

> complex. What do you have to fear if women are swamis? Who

> cares what they or they initiator calls themselves.?

>

> It does not matter whether you agree with Swami Sivananda

> Radha's teachings or whether those teachings or how she

> refers to herself differs from your lineage. She was called Swami

> by her initiator. That is all you need to know.

>

> To say that because you consider her teachings to be spurious,

> therefore she is not a Swami is ridiculous. On that basis, we

> could dismiss you as a Swami. Your teachings are not only

> spurious but inconsistent and not logically valid.

>

> Because your lineage treats female renunciants differently from

> the Saraswati order does not invalidate the methods of the

> Saraswati order. To claim that it does, as you do, is to claim

that

> your order is the ultimate standard by which all is to be judged.

> How ridiculous. Those kinds of claims undermine the validity of

> either your order or yourself. Which is it?

>

> OM Namah Sivaya

>

> Omprem

>

>

>

>

> , Swami Anand Nisarg

> <swamiji_nisarg> wrote:

> >

> > Beloved Omprem,

> >

> > Now I understand your statement, though I hope to

> > correct it. I did italicize "swami" for sivananda

> > radha, for two reasons. I find her "teachings" to be

> > spurious, and in my lineage as well as many others,

> > the female moniker for an initiate is ma or mata, not

> > swami. Unless Radha wanted to reject her femininity

> > and be masculine for some reason?

> >

> > This is not misogynous however, it is on the contrary

> > a deep veneration for the feminine, for Devi. A woman

> > who seeks to reject her femininity to be more "male"

> > is dropping to a lower level, in my opinion. If Radha

> > really wanted to, I suppose she could call herself a

> > Swami, no problem. But I as a male could not be a Ma.

> > That Radha felt she had to "legitimize" herself by

> > taking on a male title is sad.

> >

> > And though I do not accept her teaching, I still bow

> > at her feet as a representation of the divine

> > Feminine.

> >

> > Love

> > Nisarg

> >

> > --- omprem <omprem> wrote:

> > > OM Swamiji

> > >

> > > You asked, so I respond. Please see your post 8655

> > > and my

> > > response 8662. Can you explain your italicizing

> > > 'swami' when

> > > referring to Swami Sivananda Radha as something

> > > other than

> > > misogyny?

> > >

> > > OM Namah Sivaya

> > >

> > > Omprem

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.

> > http://taxes./filing.html