Talk:Techniques of Knowledge/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

"A" spontaneous movement? I can't tell -- is this word singular or plural?

Kriya yoga article

We probably need from this "kriya" to cross-link or otherwise tie to or differentiate from the Kriya yoga article. --Gary D 00:45, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Clarification

The techniques of Knowledge were not taught by DLM nor by Elan Vital. These have been taught by Prem Rawat. -- ≈ jossi ≈ 20:55, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

okay, fine, I really dunno but please restore about kriyas in general because I have really good, reliable references for most of what I wrote. Andries 20:57, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I did. ≈ jossi ≈

Jossi, on second thoughts I do not understand it. I thought that Knowledge used to be taught by "Mahatmas", not only by Prem Rawat. [1] Right? Andries 21:08, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It is explained in the text, mahatmas (in India) and Instructors (in the west) were trained by Prem Rawat to teach the techniques. All of that stoped years ago. --≈ jossi ≈ 21:24, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

Object to the use of the word sect when relating to schools of Yoga. read the Wikipedia entry for sect. ≈ jossi ≈

Moving over material

I have moved over some kriyas material from the /temp1 candidate PR article so as not to lose it, as the biographical story pretty much fills that article completely, and substantive techniques stuff fits better here. I have smoothed the text after insertion but I have not gone back and studied what has been previously edited or removed from here, so please forgive me if I have inadvertently re-inserted anything that was previously removed by consensus. --Gary D 10:44, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Moving

I propose to move this page to "Techniques of Knowledge" and move the text about Kryias yoga aspects to the Kriya yoga article. --≈ jossi ≈ 05:13, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Dutch reference

Sorry Andries, but I cannot accept the inclusion o the reference in Dutch. There is no way to know who this person his, what are his motivations for writing that article, the context in which he made these statememnts, etc. Unless you povide a translation of that article, it cannot be included. I have the right to know what he said and produce a rebuttal if necessary. Without the translation, concensus is not possible. --≈ jossi ≈ 15:28, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

It is a good additional reference.. This reference comes from CESNUR affiliated scholar Reender Kranenborg. It is, I think, the best available in Dutch language. The author happened to write in the ex-forum recently [2] under the name Pompel. The reference comes from an almost impeccable source. Eileen Barker refers to this book series in the Dutch version of "Introduction to NRMs".Win Haan worked and works for the Bezinningscentrum/contemplation centre at the Free University of Amsterdam. http://www.bezinningscentrum.nl/english/english.shtml You can email him at wtgDOThaanATdienstDOTvuDOTnl He writes that he came from a Catholic background but was part of a critical community within the Catholic church. [3] He fell in love with a premie and that is how he got involved in the DLM.

From Talk:Criticism_of_Prem_Rawat/archive8

paragraphs by Haan page 40

"4. The Initiation and the ascetic life of the premies

If the aspirant has been found fit and found "ripe" for the Knowledge, then a "Knowledge session" is organized, during which the aspirant is initiated in the four meditation techniques. That what happens during these initiation ritual is kept completely secret. The premies promise during the event not to talk with people from outside about the meditation techniques that they were taught.

The reason for the secrecy is probably the conviction that the meditation techniques and the initiation without the intention to live a life a devotion to Maharaj Ji does not make any sense. Apart from that, knowledge of the fact that the techniques are also used by other groups will probably not help to increase the interest in the DLM. The relationship that will be started between the disciple and guru is of central importance. Literally it is said that the meditation without this relationship is of "no value"."

Andries 03:10, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Here is some of what Pompel/Wim Haan wrote on Forum8:

"Let me introduce myself first. I had some experiences with DLM/Maharaj Ji some 25 years ago (!!!) I did attend satsang for two years and attended a 'festival' in Paris, France. And I even wrote a long article about DLM in a dutch periodical about new religious movements. During the years that followed i did some research on new religious movements. "

"Thank you for your comment on my posting. No i didn't get the knowledge, probably because the combination of doing a meditation technique and worshipping a perfect master wasn't my thing at that time. It never was my thing in fact. My experiences with the movement and the guru weren't at all 'full of bliss' in fact. So my article was full of doubts and critical questions. Still i have met some very nice people during the few years i was in contact with the DLM, and some of them are still good friends this moment. My opinion is that a movement can be a 'cult' for one person, and have some positive effect on another. The reason i surfed the web for some actual info was that i discovered a fascinating website on The Peoples Temple a short time ago (http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/), reading some of the articles made me wonder whether the groups i had contact with (Hare Krishna for example, the Moonies, Children of God, 'Osho') are still alive and well. "

"Unfortunately i haven't written much in English, but this article: http://www.bezinningscentrum.nl/teksten/wim_eng/oracle.htm makes my own view more clear i think. It is the only article which is translated in English. "

"Thank you for your friendly words. Many things that happen in life happen 'by coincidence'. My two years with DLM were in fact the result of me falling in love with a premie i met in the village where i have been born. The article about the Ifa oracle was a result of the fact that i had a close friendship with one of the 'deprogrammers' who were engaged in that case. In fact all my 'academic' interests are the result of a personal interest and commitment that existed before i started to write about my experiences. "

Andries 19:16, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for the translation Andries. Given the information you gave, the article cannot be included as a valid reference IMO. This is why: His did not received Knowedge, so it is all a speculation and speculation is hardly a good reference, in particular in such a short article. If you want to keep it, we will need to add a ton of disclaimers. Hardly worth the effort. If you do not NPOV that entry yourself, I will. So go ahead and NPOV it, including the fact that the article was written on information he got 25 years ago.--≈ jossi ≈ 20:36, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, I agree that the article should state that things have changed in 23 years. But I do not agree that the reference is invalid because Haan did not personally receive Knowledge. He did a lot of reading on the matter, which he listed at the end of his article. Andries 20:54, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Com'on Andries. Somebody that did a lot of reading on the matter is not a reliable source. I will sleep on this but my feeling is that this reference needs to go, unless it is re-written in a manner that reflects the time context (25 years not 23), the fact that it is speculation on his part, and the fact that the person is by his own words, biased against it and hardly neutral. --≈ jossi ≈ 21:25, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

The reference to the article should stay IMO, just needed some NPOVing that I have done with the hope both of you would agree to keep as is. This reference confirms the need for a relationship between teacher an student as presented by the supporters. The request for secrecy is NPOV'ed by explaining that this was a speculation on his part. In the early part of the article, the secrecy is explained from the supporter's POV. Hope this edit settles this. --Zappaz 03:48, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

new material

Pursuant to discussion on other page, herewith material written by current student. Richard G. 02:21, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Changed link to Techniques Description

I've changed the paragraph linking to the description of the techniques to more authorative descriptions on ex-premie.org. --John Brauns 22:33, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I do not believer that their practice has no impact on a student's religion

From the article

The techniques are universally applicable and their practice has no impact on or relationship to a student's gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, economic status or national origin[1] (http://www.tprf.org/faq.htm).

I think that an orthodox Christian would disagree. Andries 19:07, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sorry to dissapoint you, Andries but that is the case. People from all religions, as well as skeptics, and atheists can and have received Knowledge and enjoy its practice. ≈ jossi ≈ 20:22, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

yes, they can, I believe that, but I find it very implausible that their belief system will not be influenced in the long run. And the opposite, is it realistic to expect that a funamentalist Christian will not have certain problems with certain aspects of the Knowledge? Can you please provide references for your assertion? Andries 17:51, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't have "references" because we are talking about individual's experiences that cannot be 'measured'. I ony have anecdotal information as I have traveled the world extensively in every continent and met people of all religions that practice Knoweldge Hindu, Christian, Muslims, athesists, etc. I am myself a Jew, and I observe many of the traditions of judaism with my family. Religion deals with a belief system and a liturgy. The practice of Knowledge does not have either. I would agree that a very religious person such as an evangelical christian may have a pre-conceived idea about Maharaji and thus a resistance in accepting a teaching from him. But if they would, they will not find anything in that teaching and practice that will jeopardize their belief and liturgies.

My concern is your "I believe" and "realistic to expect" assertions. These are of no relevance to this artilce. ≈ jossi ≈ 18:24, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to see you say any of this on a lie detector, Jossi. LOL!

Jim Sunday, October 17, 2004

Andries edit

Your behavior in Wikipedia is abhorrent. In one article, you fight Zappaz's addition of a relevant quote and in here you do as you please and add a quote that is not relevant. That is unacceptable and show your negative bias. Reverted. ≈ jossi ≈ 18:20, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

I could not put this quote in Wikiquote because I didn't know where to put it. Andries 18:22, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Jossi, okay, I put the vow in Wikiquote. Andries 18:29, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

thanks ≈ jossi ≈ 18:34, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

Recent Andries Addition

I do not agree with the comment that the Maharaji has changed his teachings over the years. I have been listening to Maharaji for over thirty years and the core teaching, that there is peace within each person and that he can show them how to get to it, has never changed. So I went in and edited Andreies recent addition by changing a few words to reflect my feelings and experience on this matter. Chuck J 21:10, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I do not agree that the teachings have not changed. There is a huge difference between the early DLM period and the teachings in Elan Vital now. Anyway, I will try to word it so that everybody will be happy, which is not easy with such a polarized subject such as Prem Rawat. Andries 21:14, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I look forward to working with you on this topic. While I would agree that there have been significant changes in way DLM or Elan Vital might have described issues and concepts, we must agree that they were not the "teachers". The subject is Maharaji's teachings - not the teachings of DLM or Elan Vital. Chuck J 21:52, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Chuck_J, yes, I agree that the teachings of Prem Rawat and the teachings of the DLM and Elan Vital are not identical, in spite of the charismatic authority that he possessed but failed to use fully in this matter. But still, he personally used to make statements that he has now dropped. So that is a difference in his teachings. See e.g. for the changes in the course of time http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Prem_Rawat user:Andries 21:59, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Having heard a common message from him over these many years, I must confess I find it easy to see of the other comments and expressions as different from "the message". Even so, I will think about what you have written and look at your reference and then get back to you. Thanks. Chuck J 22:28, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Andries - I have added a short phrase to the techniques of Knowledge sentence indicating that, in fact, they have never changed. It is important to realize that this can be viewed as the promised "gift" from Prem Rawat to his students and I think, to be balanced, we should make sure no one thinks this has ever changed. Chuck 16:19, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

reverting vandalism of 140

140, deleting the link to ex-premie.org concerning the technics, seem to be the task for you left over. As a followup you do a little editing so that when i control my watchlist i only see that change. You did this twice by now. I won't conserve your followup edits now, because i see them just as a tactic to hide your vandalism.And let me tell you, there are other possibilities to check that page, than having it on the wiki-watchlist. Thomas h 10:19, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why do you call my edit vandalism? That was not vandalism at all. It was fixing the text that was erroneous and removing a link to the website of the ex-premie hate group. --64.81.88.140 19:07, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Is not vandalism, but of course, thomas and other ex-premies find it so. This has been a contention for quite a while. You deleted it a few times, Zappaz and thomas added it back. Boring game. ≈ jossi ≈ 20:07, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

there is no reason why this link shouldn't be there, even zappaz had a insight to that. So i readded it.Thomas h 22:35, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)