Sorry Craig, but PR did not dictate this page. Many of us were around in the 1970s and would argue that the ex-premie material is inaccurate. Just because material appears on a website does not signify either 'documented' or 'evidence'. The claim that you and other ex-premies make about the executive of DLM in the 1970s (over 30 years ago) is a variation of the Nuremberg defence—"I was only following orders". According to your viewpoint, PR took away everyone's discrimination and responsibility for their own lives and actions, and they became just puppets. It won't wash. I was around at the time, and I saw those people making various claims. I never saw nor heard PR make those claims. So let's stop blaming PR for the moral and ethical laxity of the Mishlers and others. The fact is that any person who gave up their discrimination of what is right and wrong soon learned that. Whether they tried to cover it up by blaming someone else is their problem. That people make mistakes is not a problem; that they then try to blame others is. ∞∞ Errol V 00:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Errol: I saw and heard Prem Rawat ordering people around all of the time, in person. They obeyed him or heads rolled. I was there every day for a whole year on the B707 project working directly for the project managers who reported directly to Maharaji. He came to the project at least every day and most times several times a day, and came into the Design Dept. where I worked. When I was asked to break the law because Maharaji wanted something without paying for it (receiving the smuggled B707 specifications out of Boeing International by a Seattle premie), I broke the law, or I would have been out of the DECA project. It's as simple as that. I would challenge you to be standing next to Maharaji even today, and refuse a request he makes of you to your face. I challenge you and Jossi.
But, that's not addressing the issue at hand. The most important aspect of Rawat's teachings, after people listened to satsang at least from 1975 on, when I was an aspirant (people now watch 100 hours of the DVD "Keys,") was his initial request of people before they receive Knowledge in the K session. These days, he asks that they give K a fair chance, keep in touch, and not reveal the Knowledge techniques. In the past everyone had to recite this vow, which was a huge part of the initiation:
"Oh my Guru Maharaji, I dedicate myself to your Lotus Feet.
I am weak and ignorant and am filled with the impurities of this world.
Oh Guru Maharaji, please take my mind and purge me of the impurities I possess.
Reveal to me the Knowledge of all knowledges.
Strengthen me, uplift me and reveal the Kingdom of Heaven within inside of me.
Bring me from hate to love, from darkness to light, death to immortality.
I will obey you implicitly and will never reveal this knowledge to anyone for any reason.
I will keep in contact with you through my devotional love, satsang, meditation and service.
Thank you my Lord for everything."
And that was a vow given in physical prostration before a photo of Prem Rawat, not his father, on an altar in the presence of a Mahatma/Initiator/Instructor, a legal agent of Prem Rawat and DLM. There were the five commandments given to all newly initiated premies. In everyone's Knowledge Packet, a signed letter from Maharaji, issued by Divine Light Mission included Maharaji's agya (orders) that premies practice satsang, service, and meditation. Ashram premies were required to dedicate their lives to Prem Rawat by practicing poverty, chastity and obedience. Do you deny 'all' of this Errol? Btw, it's easy to dismiss Bob Mishler's testimony, the man's dead. Sylviecyn 12:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
But, Mariawiki, the article is not correct nor accurate, so how can any researcher benefit? That's the point and problem here. When the "Past teachings of" article was originally proposed, I was ready to write it, but I was sick with the flu so I told everyone I'd be back in a week. By the time I got back, someone's girlfriend who is a student of Prem Rawat had already written it. I lost my enthusiasm. Besides, having the discussion of those contents as reason for deletion railroaded onto the back page (as Jossi has done today) doesn't help foster a cooperative spirit on Wiki. Anyway, see the discussion page (of this page). Jossi continuously tries to censor/run-off any former follower of Prem Rawat who have tried to edit or discuss these issues. It's unacceptable and frankly, quite maddening. What I have stated on the talk page is the absolute truth. I'll swear to it under penalty of purjury. Sylviecyn
It can be interesting to a researcher to see how a group of people see and interpret their history even if it is implausible, selective, and not supported by facts. This is called revisionism, mythology, or foundation myths, I thought. Of course, being selective and making interpretations is to some extent unavoidable when describing history. Revisionism is quite common in new religious movements, I read in a book by Kranenborg and Rothstein. But of course, describing non-notable foundation interpretations is not what Wikipedia is for. Andries 18:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Besides, having the discussion of those contents as reason for deletion railroaded onto the back page (as Jossi has done today) doesn't help foster a cooperative spirit on Wiki.
It is standard operating procedure here on Wikipedia to put discussion on the talk page of an AfD. — goetheanॐ 18:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
