Guest guest Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 It is very sad isn't it. How a SYogi can think that spending 20 years in SY means that they are entitled take sly pot shots at newer SYogis just because they are doing a better job than they are. It's called professional jealousy and is a poisonous form of negativity that can destroy whole families. Beware VY!!, this is the same path that Yogi Mahajan took and it led him to where he is now. JSM On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 10:35:46 -0700 veteranyogi <veteranyogi wrote: >I dont know what this is all about, but I cannot believe that one >> >Sahaja Yogi can be this aggressive about another Sahaja Yogi. > >Weird (and sad). > >V > >shriadishakti , <ivanpavinsky@h...> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 20:55:25 -0700 sahajhist <sahajhist> >> wrote: >> >I will withdraw from this forum, just as I >> >> >> >withdrew from the response forum when Ivan began his sanitisation >> >of >> >the recent history of Sahaja Yoga. >> >> >> I don't know what on earth you are talking about John. >> >> Out of several hundred messages on the SYR i have only deleted >2 of >them. >> >> And this was because they both contained insults against Shri >> >Mataji. >> >> Perhaps you would prefer those two msgs remain? >> >> I have had no other editing in the archives at all, so what do >you >mean >> by " sanitation " ? >> >> If you mean the three ground rules we set down, then you will >note >that >> apart from rule 1, (no insults against HHSM), we have consulted >and >put >> to the vote the other protocols and we were democratic about that >> >and >> no-one objected. >> >> No-one at all. Including you, who actually wanted far stricter >> >discussion >> rules than myself. >> >> If by " sanitation " you mean the honest and sincere testimonies >of >SYogis >> that we have published then i can reveal here that you yourself >have >> written off list congratulating us on the success of our transparent >> publications. >> >> Especially over the School. >> >> With the exception of one single topic, which you since declined >and >> admitted you were wrong about, and conceded that i was telling >the >truth. >> >> Don't bear grudges in your liver, John. No-one is trying to take >> >away >> your mantle of number 1 historian in SY, but if you could let >go of >your >> attached ego about it you would start behaving honestly and not >> >taking >> sly pot shots at SYogis who have been doing a better job in the >last >> six months against Cult SDM than you and your peers have done >in the >> preceding six years. >> >> Jai Shri Mataji >> >> Ivan > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 John, Ivan has undoubtedly hit a raw nerve and you are fleeing the scene of your crime. Your own private agenda here is clearly evident. Your need to brand the WR episode as being the fulfilment of Sri Mataji's Prophecy in 79 or 80 is distorting your own judgment and good faith. You admit the Mooladara aspects of the SYR publication are true and yet you don't agree with the overall impression because it didn't include your own egotistical analogies off list. Your underhand attacks on Jagbir's credibility since then and on his children (subtle, but clear) are despicable and no-one is forcing you to stay in this forum. Simply yourself if you wish to, and leave the real work of dismantling the lies of Cult SDM and spreading the truth of the Adi Shakti to the real yogis who love Sri Mataji, and not their own egos and private agendas. With SYogis like you, who needs Cult SDM? Jai Sri Mataji Sat On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 11:30:43 -0700 sahajhist <sahajhist wrote: >Dear Ivan >Your aggressive response merely shows the correctness of my decision >> >to withdraw from the Response group. > >You know full well that I had and still have concerns about the >WR >chronology which is excellent for the specifics relating to the >> >Mooladhara problems, but rather less satisfactory regarding the >overall impression. (btw, others from that era I have contacted >also >have similar concerns) > >As to the 'sanitisation' of sahaja yoga history, the jury is still >> >out. There's a lot of vested interests here - as the Swiss >loan/donation/whatever is currently demonstrating. > >Having said that I applaud your rehabilitation of the late Rustom's >> >reputation. The response on the School also looks promising, though >> >SDM's witness statements still have to be dealt with. > >As to this 'no.1 Sahaj historian' garbage, it doesnt interest me. >I'm >still researching and learning, and yes, passing it on to others. >But >I still regard Dan Costian (Bible Enlightened) as the doyen in the >> >field (Gregoire also). One day I too will write my book, but until >> >then I have a commitment to sharing research through pdf and email. > >Ivan, do try to focus your aggression on the main target. > >Jai Shri Mataji > >John >Ps. Now please may I and get on with my life? > > >shriadishakti , <ivanpavinsky@h...> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 20:55:25 -0700 sahajhist <sahajhist> >> wrote: >> >I will withdraw from this forum, just as I >> >> >> >withdrew from the response forum when Ivan began his sanitisation >> >of >> >the recent history of Sahaja Yoga. >> >> >> I don't know what on earth you are talking about John. >> >> Out of several hundred messages on the SYR i have only deleted >2 of >them. >> >> And this was because they both contained insults against Shri >> >Mataji. >> >> Perhaps you would prefer those two msgs remain? >> >> I have had no other editing in the archives at all, so what do >you >mean >> by " sanitation " ? >> >> If you mean the three ground rules we set down, then you will >note >that >> apart from rule 1, (no insults against HHSM), we have consulted >and >put >> to the vote the other protocols and we were democratic about that >> >and >> no-one objected. >> >> No-one at all. Including you, who actually wanted far stricter >> >discussion >> rules than myself. >> >> If by " sanitation " you mean the honest and sincere testimonies >of >SYogis >> that we have published then i can reveal here that you yourself >have >> written off list congratulating us on the success of our transparent >> publications. >> >> Especially over the School. >> >> With the exception of one single topic, which you since declined >and >> admitted you were wrong about, and conceded that i was telling >the >truth. >> >> Don't bear grudges in your liver, John. No-one is trying to take >> >away >> your mantle of number 1 historian in SY, but if you could let >go of >your >> attached ego about it you would start behaving honestly and not >> >taking >> sly pot shots at SYogis who have been doing a better job in the >last >> six months against Cult SDM than you and your peers have done >in the >> preceding six years. >> >> Jai Shri Mataji >> >> Ivan >> > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2003 Report Share Posted June 21, 2003 Thanks Sattwa, But maybe i was a little hard on him. But if only we'd all concentrate more on dispelling the lies about SY we would possibly have made a lot quicker progress than we have so far. Some peoples right sides just get in the way and they think because they've been in SY for eons they deserve special favors. We're all ancient souls on this earth who've been around for roughly the same time and our love for the Adi Shakti should raise us well above these petty squabbles and pull us together. Please, all members here, can i remind any of you to simply yourselves if you don't like this forum or the SYR. Jagbir is a busy man and has better things to do than nursemaid our bruised egos and defend his children against subtle attacks that only serve to delight Cult SDM. See the whole picture NOW, or you will end up helping to destroy SY from within later on. Jai Shri Mataji Ivan On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 14:04:29 -0700 sattwa wrote: > >John, > >Ivan has undoubtedly hit a raw nerve and you are fleeing the scene >of >your crime. > >Your own private agenda here is clearly evident. > >Your need to brand the WR episode as being the fulfilment of Sri >Mataji's >Prophecy in 79 or 80 is distorting your own judgment and good faith. > >You admit the Mooladara aspects of the SYR publication are true >and yet >you don't agree with the overall impression because it didn't include >your own egotistical analogies off list. > >Your underhand attacks on Jagbir's credibility since then and on >his >children (subtle, but clear) are despicable and no-one is forcing >you >to stay in this forum. > >Simply yourself if you wish to, and leave the real work >of >dismantling the lies of Cult SDM and spreading the truth of the >Adi Shakti >to the real yogis who love Sri Mataji, and not their own egos and >private >agendas. > >With SYogis like you, who needs Cult SDM? > >Jai Sri Mataji > >Sat > > >On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 11:30:43 -0700 sahajhist <sahajhist >wrote: >>Dear Ivan >>Your aggressive response merely shows the correctness of my decision >>> >>to withdraw from the Response group. >> >>You know full well that I had and still have concerns about the >>WR >>chronology which is excellent for the specifics relating to the >>> >>Mooladhara problems, but rather less satisfactory regarding the >> >>overall impression. (btw, others from that era I have contacted >>also >>have similar concerns) >> >>As to the 'sanitisation' of sahaja yoga history, the jury is still >>> >>out. There's a lot of vested interests here - as the Swiss >>loan/donation/whatever is currently demonstrating. >> >>Having said that I applaud your rehabilitation of the late Rustom's >>> >>reputation. The response on the School also looks promising, though >>> >>SDM's witness statements still have to be dealt with. >> >>As to this 'no.1 Sahaj historian' garbage, it doesnt interest me. >>I'm >>still researching and learning, and yes, passing it on to others. >>But >>I still regard Dan Costian (Bible Enlightened) as the doyen in >the >>> >>field (Gregoire also). One day I too will write my book, but until >>> >>then I have a commitment to sharing research through pdf and email. >> >>Ivan, do try to focus your aggression on the main target. >> >>Jai Shri Mataji >> >>John >>Ps. Now please may I and get on with my life? >> >> >>shriadishakti , <ivanpavinsky@h...> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003 20:55:25 -0700 sahajhist <sahajhist> >>> wrote: >>> >I will withdraw from this forum, just as I >>> >> >>> >withdrew from the response forum when Ivan began his sanitisation >>> >of >>> >the recent history of Sahaja Yoga. >>> >>> >>> I don't know what on earth you are talking about John. >>> >>> Out of several hundred messages on the SYR i have only deleted >>2 of >>them. >>> >>> And this was because they both contained insults against Shri >>> >>Mataji. >>> >>> Perhaps you would prefer those two msgs remain? >>> >>> I have had no other editing in the archives at all, so what do >>you >>mean >>> by " sanitation " ? >>> >>> If you mean the three ground rules we set down, then you will >>note >>that >>> apart from rule 1, (no insults against HHSM), we have consulted >>and >>put >>> to the vote the other protocols and we were democratic about >that >>> >>and >>> no-one objected. >>> >>> No-one at all. Including you, who actually wanted far stricter >>> >>discussion >>> rules than myself. >>> >>> If by " sanitation " you mean the honest and sincere testimonies >>of >>SYogis >>> that we have published then i can reveal here that you yourself >>have >>> written off list congratulating us on the success of our transparent >>> publications. >>> >>> Especially over the School. >>> >>> With the exception of one single topic, which you since declined >>and >>> admitted you were wrong about, and conceded that i was telling >>the >>truth. >>> >>> Don't bear grudges in your liver, John. No-one is trying to take >>> >>away >>> your mantle of number 1 historian in SY, but if you could let >>go of >>your >>> attached ego about it you would start behaving honestly and not >>> >>taking >>> sly pot shots at SYogis who have been doing a better job in the >>last >>> six months against Cult SDM than you and your peers have done >>in the >>> preceding six years. >>> >>> Jai Shri Mataji >>> >>> Ivan >>> >> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.