Hi all: Robert Bruce has created a video blog at AstralBob.com. Interesting stuff.

S.

Have you been following this? I tried listening to some of the videos but the sound is too low; can't seem to turn it up.

Is RB getting commercial or has this always been his style?

That said, hmmm some is interesting.

Lucy wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 4:15am:

Have you been following this? I tried listening to some of the videos but the sound is too low; can't seem to turn it up. Is RB getting commercial or has this always been his style? That said, hmmm some is interesting.

Hi Lucy: Yes, he is... he has decided to build a brick and mortar institute or spiritual center (higher self instruction so he says) like the Monroe Institute... it will be interesting to see if he can accomplish it since he doesn't seem to want big money investors and of course he doesn't have a Tv cable company to sell.

S.

In this audio clip at 41:05 - 47:10, RB speaks about his future institute. He also mentions meeting Monroe twice in the year 2006.

Important notice, once RB realized that "his" institute was TMI, he says he doesn't know if he ever will have a physical institute.


Audio Clip -> http://blog.astraldynamics.com/2008/10/22/vancouver-excerpts-3/


---

Also, much of RB's material seems to be for free, but he apparently needs some money to build his institute if it ever will become physical... So I guess that's why he starts to charge some stuff. :)

  I recently checked out this site.  I did not like how when i tried to exit the main page without signing up for the blog, that i was redirected to another page ala spyware/spam like ways which asked me if i was sure if i wanted to exit without signing up for the blog. 

  The above does not speak of integrity to me. 

I still don't buy Robert Bruce's story about Sai Baba materializing to him as a being of light (before Sai Baba died). It was found that Sai Baba, a self-proclaimed incarnation of God, molested some of the male children of his followers. At first Robert Bruce wrote that this wasn't true, but eventually he had to admit that it was.

This put him in a difficult position, because how could a child molesting fraudulent guru appear to him as a being of light? So Robert Bruce ended up defending Sai Baba's child molesting ways by claiming that Avatars (incarnations of God) are hard to figure out, and that the boys agreed to be molested.

Even if children are emotionally mature enough to agree to have sex with an old guru (they aren't), permission had nothing to do with it, because after a boy would enter Sai Baba's room he would immediately start molesting the boy.

But I suppose Robert Bruce had to cover his tracks.

recoverer wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 4:33pm:

I still don't buy Robert Bruce's story about Sai Baba materializing to him as a being of light (before Sai Baba died).

In one of RB's sound recordings on his blog, RB says that the person materializing looked like a photo of Sai Baba which RB saw some time later, but...

It seemed to me that RB didn't fully think it was Sai Baba, but some kind of image similar to him.

Maybe it was just some kind of guide, taking on the appearance of a tall black man?

I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there.

I don't remember Robert Bruce's exact words--he said something such as, "I was working on some papers and suddenly the room filled with light and SAI Baba appeared."

Regardless of the above, why did he find it necessary to defend Sai Baba's child molesting activities by saying things such as it was okay for Sai Baba to have sex with the children because they allowed it?

Why did he continue to refer to Sai Baba as an Avatar?

recoverer wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 9:29pm:

Regardless of the above, why did he find it necessary to defend Sai Baba's child molesting activities by saying things such as it was okay for Sai Baba to have sex with the children because they allowed it?

Could you please provide the clip.

Lakeman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 9:27pm:

I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there.

Would not disagree with the above, but maybe enlarge the view a little.  I suspect that a number  guru's and teachers probably started off with some good intent at the beginning, but became corrupted by power. 

  It's a hard, seductive trap to not fall into, the guru & power trap.   

  I have a lot of respect for RAM. Monroe (from what i know) was pretty consistently good about not falling into that trap in a general way, but to be fair, if his biographies (especially the latter) are to be believed, the man had fairly autocratic and controlling tendencies at times when it came to the people more close to him personally.  True, it wasn't necessarily about belief systems, but ways of interacting socially, etc such as "I'm the boss and you WILL DO what i say, by my way, or it's the highway".  This, in it's own ways is part of the Guru trap.  Perhaps in the light of his many positive accomplishments and general good, this part of RAM wasn't seen so much by outsiders and more casual acquaintances. 

  But yes, he was good at, and should be lauded for avoiding the more obvious guru traps.  Though sometimes i suspect his automatic "find out for yourself" was partially also about his being uncomfortable with responsibility in connection with others and a self defense mechanism.  The simple truth is that we do influence each other, and we shouldn't seek to avoid this per se, but to do it only in the right ways with respect to other peoples freewill and their unique growth processes and needs.  Take your average high level nonphysical guide type to see the kind of responsibility that i'm talking about, and how they go about influencing in the right ways.

  For maybe it's like comparing apples and oranges, but i do note that there was a pretty big difference in example and lifetime patterns between Monroe and someone i respect even more so than him, Yeshua.  The latter took on more responsibility for his influence on others, and maybe it was a case of he really knew deep down that he was fit for that role, and Bob knew that he was all to human to take on such a role?   In that case, thank goodness for the wisdom and simple self honesty of RAM. 

Justin


Quote:

I recently checked out this site.  I did not like how when i tried to exit the main page without signing up for the blog, that i was redirected to another page ala spyware/spam like ways which asked me if i was sure if i wanted to exit without signing up for the blog.

When I am at work, I do not bookmark THIS site so I usually go to here from Google. The same thing often happens with this site; I get hijacked to a search site. After a few tries, or sometimes initially, I get a message that the site is blocked (by the workplace) because malware has been detected and this is not a safe site.

So I go in under "cached" but the point is, this happens all the time, so is this site being used by malware?

I realize RB's site does this on purpose, but to me it is just as annoying that this (afterlife knowledge) site always has a problem.

Just to point out that I have only ever had kindness & assistance, not to mention distance healing, from Robert Bruce. . . who knows what really happened with the Sai Baba manifestation. . . spirits are as capable of misrepresenting themselves as we meat-bound beings are. :(

Hello everyone!

After years of lurking and rarely posting, my Afterlife Knowledge Guidebook has arrived in my mail. I'm a bit scared, so wish me luck everyone...

Since we're on the topic of Sai Baba, I would like to recount an experience I had about fourteen years ago. I was in my school library, reading an article in a large encyclopedia-like book about Sai Baba.

All of a sudden, a strong pungent smell of sandalwood hit me in the face. I say "hit", because it seemed to suddenly manifest in front of my nose and fill my head with its scent. I was completely taken by surprise and looked around my friends reading and studying, to see if anyone noticed anything. Nobody seemed to.

So I went back to the book to see if it would happen a second time. It did!

When I was a child in primary school, I had a friend whose mum/stepmum (can't recall) believed in Sai Baba. She said that when it was her mum/stepmum's birthday, her home would be filled with the fragrance of sandalwood.

Is he a fraud? How do I account for this experience?

Elanor x

Lucy wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 3:00am:

Justin Quote: I recently checked out this site.  I did not like how when i tried to exit the main page without signing up for the blog, that i was redirected to another page ala spyware/spam like ways which asked me if i was sure if i wanted to exit without signing up for the blog. When I am at work, I do not bookmark THIS site so I usually go to here from Google. The same thing often happens with this site; I get hijacked to a search site. After a few tries, or sometimes initially, I get a message that the site is blocked (by the workplace) because malware has been detected and this is not a safe site. So I go in under "cached" but the point is, this happens all the time, so is this site being used by malware? I realize RB's site does this on purpose, but to me it is just as annoying that this (afterlife knowledge) site always has a problem.

  That is interesting Lucy.  I've never had a problem like that with this site.  For the most part i check out this site from home, but i've occasionally checked in from work and i work for a state agency which is pretty strict about what sites they allow and don't.  But then, i wouldn't google search this site from there, but directly type in www.afterlife-knowledge.com. ; I don't know if that would have any influence or not.

Elanor wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 6:37am:

Hello everyone! After years of lurking and rarely posting, my Afterlife Knowledge Guidebook has arrived in my mail. I'm a bit scared, so wish me luck everyone... Since we're on the topic of Sai Baba, I would like to recount an experience I had about fourteen years ago. I was in my school library, reading an article in a large encyclopedia-like book about Sai Baba. All of a sudden, a strong pungent smell of sandalwood hit me in the face. I say "hit", because it seemed to suddenly manifest in front of my nose and fill my head with its scent. I was completely taken by surprise and looked around my friends reading and studying, to see if anyone noticed anything. Nobody seemed to. So I went back to the book to see if it would happen a second time. It did! When I was a child in primary school, I had a friend whose mum/stepmum (can't recall) believed in Sai Baba. She said that when it was her mum/stepmum's birthday, her home would be filled with the fragrance of sandalwood. Is he a fraud? How do I account for this experience? Elanor x

  I don't know what is true or not in your case, but here are a couple of alternative possibilities that you may not have thought of. 

  Many well known Gurus like Sai Baba, had while they were alive, and even when they die, many loyal and ardent followers. 

  Think collective thought form, and the power of group intention and focus. 

Imagine yourself standing amongst many people worshiping the same guy, and expecting a "miracle" manifestation from him.  With so much group focus and intent, so much Faith, then such a material "miracle" manifestation may very well happen, but be less due to the actual Guru's "power", but more to the collective power of such group focus, faith, and intent. 

  Similar to in some ways of how sometimes when Yeshua healed some people, he stated, "your faith has made you whole."  Except that in his case, he was really acting as a channel of Divine consciousness and didn't have all that group back up to help him out. (contrary to popular Church promoted belief, during his public ministry, there wasn't huge crowds that followed him around for the most part).  But as he said, their own faith and belief played an important part in their healing. 

  So when someone tunes into Sai Baba, they may so may be tuning in to the collective thought forms built up around him.  

  Another possibility is this:  From experience and guidance, i've learned that there are both unfriendly nonphysical consciousnesses and at least one unfriendly E.T. group that tries to mess with people on spiritual paths and try to mislead them in various ways. 

  One such way is leading them to the belief in a mostly false teacher (i say mostly because i believe that even most rather erring would be teachers have their moments of clarity, wisdom, or help to others--rarely is someone or some being completely negative in nature).  Both nonphysical former humans and especially that E.T. group can create such experiences for humans.   

  Such manifestations are in no way proof of Divine attunement.   

  However, if an individual human comes to have and demonstrate at times a complete mastery over physical matter and so called "laws", like walking on water, complete and instantaneous healings, etc. etc. without a lot of group back up, then chances are, there is probably something to that person, especially if these correlate with constant loving actions and vibe from the person.  And the greatest depth and purity of PUL attunement and channeling is often seen in self sacrifice for the benefit of others/the Whole.

  Such individuals and beings, will radiate an incredibly pure, vibrant, White Light, though at times it may be more towards the Golden shade (often when interacting with humans who cannot take such a powerful and pure radiation.)   This is another way to know whether or not a teacher is the realest deal & fully attuned to Souce and PUL.

I did not mean to imply that Monroe was a saint--only that, with respect to the guru role that others wished him to play in their spiritual lives, he was not into that game. In my book, that's a huge net plus. But that's the point: even saints aren't saints. I don't know Robert Bruce, and I didn't know Sai Baba. Could one learn from people or experience benefit even from those who are imperfect? Of course, since we are all imperfect. Whether the good outweighs the bad in any particular case will be a mater of judgment, and in some cases legitimate disagreement. Not every teacher is good for every student. We are all individuals. I think it's important, however, not to lose sight of one's own critical faculties and to keep handy, at all times, what Sam Keen calls one's "spiritual bullshit detector."

  I agree on all points Lakeman.  I also don't resonate at all with RB, and never have.  It's the developement of that "spiritual b.s. detector" that you talked about is why when it comes to outer sources, there only a small handful of sources i listen more deeply too.   RAM and B.M. are some of the relative few.

Justin,

"So when someone tunes into Sai Baba, they may so may be tuning in to the collective thought forms built up around him."

This is what happens with belief system areas in the astral, and sai baba is merely a grain on the beach. Eons worth of incarnations have created the areas and their "masters". And when the areas and lords don't receive energy/worship anymore, they fall apart and start to fade away, take a look at valhalla for reference if interested. While the areas serve many purposes, one of the bad ones is that it acts as a second stage or continuation of confusion for incarnations withdrawing from earth, with their discs yet being in the blind spot.

Why would someone with even a semi-open heart chakra stand up for a child molesting incarnation? Unconditional submission, and no or little use of measurement to notice the cracks. The offender and defender would be on opposite extremes of the spectrum, and yet walk hand in hand into the sunset.

Something to have in mind is that if one dares to take a peek at the other incarnations of one's disc it can be somewhat shocking to some, and a current incarnation thinking pul's the ultimate is no exception. As time is a 3D construct, one could be smelling roses in one decade and at the same time burning down a village in another decade.

Here's the link.  Toggle down if you want to read the post where he seems to be defending Sai Baba's actions in order to defend himself.

http://forums.astraldynamics.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=3954&start=0



PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 10:16pm:

recoverer wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 9:29pm: Regardless of the above, why did he find it necessary to defend Sai Baba's child molesting activities by saying things such as it was okay for Sai Baba to have sex with the children because they allowed it? Could you please provide the clip.

Lakeman:

I agree with what you say. I have had a lot of exposure to the guru scene. The tradition basically originates from India, and people basically surrender their lives to their gurus including much of their ability to think for themselves. People do things such as drink the water that was used to wash a guru's feet.

My feeling is that a person who lives according to love would never allow others to treat him (or her) in a worshipfull way, nor claim to hold the key to their spiritual welfare.



Lakeman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 9:27pm:

I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there.

Guru based books from India often have a strong smell of sandlewood.  I don't know the details, but they are put through some process that makes this so.

Also, if the book used to be owned by a person who used to burn incense, or was sold by a bookstore that did so, the book might end up smelling this way.

Sai Baba has been caught doing sleight of hand tricks where he makes things such as flowers and watches appear. When one watch company stopped doing business in India the brand of watches he supposedly materialized changed. If you check youtube you can find a video where he is caught doing a sleight of hand trick.



Elanor wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 6:37am:

Hello everyone! After years of lurking and rarely posting, my Afterlife Knowledge Guidebook has arrived in my mail. I'm a bit scared, so wish me luck everyone... Since we're on the topic of Sai Baba, I would like to recount an experience I had about fourteen years ago. I was in my school library, reading an article in a large encyclopedia-like book about Sai Baba. All of a sudden, a strong pungent smell of sandalwood hit me in the face. I say "hit", because it seemed to suddenly manifest in front of my nose and fill my head with its scent. I was completely taken by surprise and looked around my friends reading and studying, to see if anyone noticed anything. Nobody seemed to. So I went back to the book to see if it would happen a second time. It did! When I was a child in primary school, I had a friend whose mum/stepmum (can't recall) believed in Sai Baba. She said that when it was her mum/stepmum's birthday, her home would be filled with the fragrance of sandalwood. Is he a fraud? How do I account for this experience? Elanor x

I don't know what Robert Bruce is all about, and it could be that he has some abilities. I do question his discrimination. Outside of Sai Baba, he also recommends books by Da Free (goes by various names) and Chogyam Trungpa.

Da Free John was one of the most corrupt American gurus ever. He too claimed to be an Avatar, incarnation of God. He claimed that there has never been a person as high as him and there never will be again. Back in the 80s he wrote that eventually all of the slugs of this world will follow him. Never happened.

Chogyam Trungpa was an alcoholic who had affairs with his followers. Osel Tendzin was his supposed enlightened successor, yet he had sex with his followers even though he knew that he had aids. He didn't tell his followers that this was the case.

Both Trungpa and Da Free spoke of themselves as if they are crazy wisdom teachers. Blah, blah, blah.



kirolak wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 4:41am:

Just to point out that I have only ever had kindness & assistance, not to mention distance healing, from Robert Bruce. . . who knows what really happened with the Sai Baba manifestation. . . spirits are as capable of misrepresenting themselves as we meat-bound beings are. :(

Another thing that bugs me about Robert Bruce is his thing about attacking negs with a sword. I thought light workers seek to help beings caught up in a negative state of mind rather than destroy them.

Plus, how precisely do you harm a non-physical being with a psychic sword? Do you chop off their astral head? Do they blead astral blood?

wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 4:21pm:

I recently checked out this site.  I did not like how when i tried to exit the main page without signing up for the blog, that i was redirected to another page ala spyware/spam like ways which asked me if i was sure if i wanted to exit without signing up for the blog.    The above does not speak of integrity to me.

Hi Justin: Why not send a message to Bruce about your concerns... I don't think he has a really high powered technical staff... this may be an issue of competent internet programers as opposed to people who use standardized internet software and are unable to do modify it.

S.

Lakeman wrote on Feb 16^th, 2011 at 9:27pm:

I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there.

Hi: This may be a missrepresentation of Robert Bruce.  Everything he puts out there is intended to be reproduced by the student. He is not espousing dogma that is to believed... each person is to practice and prove for themselves the validity of the work... either you are moving energy or you are not... RB can't demand that you do so.

So there should be more careful understanding of the work before back door condemnation and accusation.

S.

kirolak wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 4:41am:

Just to point out that I have only ever had kindness & assistance, not to mention distance healing, from Robert Bruce. . . who knows what really happened with the Sai Baba manifestation. . . spirits are as capable of misrepresenting themselves as we meat-bound beings are. :(

Well said Kirolak.

S.

Justin, thanks for your thoughts. I bought Astral Dynamics several years ago when it came out, and was in contact with the author who considered publishing my OOBE experience in the book. I thought RB was the "real deal", but then I'm just a newbie and still honing that "spiritual bs detector"...

Recoverer, I'm positive that the book itself did not smell of sandalwood, the fragrance simply seemed to materlise (and very strongly so) out of thin air, and after a while disappeared completely.

E

recoverer wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 7:34pm:

Here's the link.  Toggle down if you want to read the post where he seems to be defending Sai Baba's actions in order to defend himself. http://forums.astraldynamics.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=3954&start=0 PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 10:16pm: recoverer wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 9:29pm: Regardless of the above, why did he find it necessary to defend Sai Baba's child molesting activities by saying things such as it was okay for Sai Baba to have sex with the children because they allowed it? Could you please provide the clip.

That link didn't support your words.

recoverer, you are the only source claiming that RB would have said what you wrote above.

You don't seem to be able to make your claim valid.

recoverer wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 7:55pm:

I don't know what Robert Bruce is all about...  ... he also recommends books by Da Free (goes by various names) and Chogyam Trungpa.

I did a search (of those names) on the AD forum and found nothing backing your claims. Could you please provide links for those two claims of yours?

Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 9:57pm:

Lakeman wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 9:27pm: I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there. Hi: This may be a missrepresentation of Robert Bruce.  Everything he puts out there is intended to be reproduced by the student. He is not espousing dogma that is to believed... each person is to practice and prove for themselves the validity of the work... either you are moving energy or you are not... RB can't demand that you do so. So there should be more careful understanding of the work before back door condemnation and accusation. S.

I was not trying to represent Robert Bruce (so I cannot be accused of misrepresenting him, let alone of making accusations, etc.), I was merely giving my personal impression of his presentation, based on what I have read. I did not know about his Sai Baba connection, and I do not know if he recommends works by Chogyam Trungpa or Da Free John (though I have read about all of their now well-known transgressions). People will find value where they do, as I said in my previous post. I know people who love books and authors that I find boring and trite, and vice-versa. But I do stand by what I said above concerning the dangers of giving away one's authority and judgment to others, as well as the dangers of resorting to defensive moral rationalizations and other such evasions when the behavior of the guru is questioned or revealed as suspect. It's dangerous and unwise, in my view. As to whether an individual is surrendering themselves in this way or not, ultimately it's their choice to do so. Everyone is free to give away--or to claim (or reclaim)--their own freedom. Sartre once said that people have to be forced to be free--a neat paradox if there ever was one. Cheers!   

Lakeman wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 10:08am:

Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 17th, 2011 at 9:57pm: Lakeman wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 9:27pm: I once heard Joseph Campbell talk, many years ago, about the dangers of the guru practice and concept (both in Asia and as it is imported here). He said that in the east, the idea is that the student should submit absolutely to the guru’s authority, even turning over moral decision-making to the teacher. He pointed out the dangers that such submission poses, and how the idea of individual decision-making and personal authority has been a cornerstone of the western consciousness. It seems to me that the Sai Baba case provides a vivid illustration of what Campbell was talking about, and also how followers will try to rationalize the most despicable behavior as “crazy wisdom” or evidence of some higher values that mere mortals and peons like us are not supposed to question. This is authoritarian and totalitarian thinking, pure and simple mind control. I have also read some of Robert Bruce’s books. It seems to me that he likes to come off as a “Man of Knowledge”--a guru-like authority who Knows and Has Experienced It All. This is very different (or so it seems to me) from Bruce Moen’s “here try this and see if it works,” and Bob Monroe’s “check it out for yourself,” approaches. I think all guru-types wind up painting themselves into a corner, and, for the sake of the rest of us, they should be left there. Hi: This may be a missrepresentation of Robert Bruce.  Everything he puts out there is intended to be reproduced by the student. He is not espousing dogma that is to believed... each person is to practice and prove for themselves the validity of the work... either you are moving energy or you are not... RB can't demand that you do so. So there should be more careful understanding of the work before back door condemnation and accusation. S. I was not trying to represent Robert Bruce (so I cannot be accused of misrepresenting him, let alone of making accusations, etc.), I was merely giving my personal impression of his presentation, based on what I have read. I did not know about his Sai Baba connection, and I do not know if he recommends works by Chogyam Trungpa or Da Free John (though I have read about all of their now well-known transgressions). People will find value where they do, as I said in my previous post. I know people who love books and authors that I find boring and trite, and vice-versa. But I do stand by what I said above concerning the dangers of giving away one's authority and judgment to others, as well as the dangers of resorting to defensive moral rationalizations and other such evasions when the behavior of the guru is questioned or revealed as suspect. It's dangerous and unwise, in my view. As to whether an individual is surrendering themselves in this way or not, ultimately it's their choice to do so. Everyone is free to give away--or to claim (or reclaim)--their own freedom. Sartre once said that people have to be forced to be free--a neat paradox if there ever was one. Cheers!

Hi Lake: I have worked with Robert Bruce and I know that he takes people as he finds them... he is a voracious reader and he alludes to others work if he finds value in what that put in print... but, he is also capable of making rational decisions about character if he encounters them presonally... RB's explanation of Sai Baba as I encountered it was that the being that appeared to him was unknown to him at the time... his mother had a book or picture of Sai Baba which he stumbled on at a later date and he believed at the time there was a striking resemblence... but, don't all black people and Indians look alike  :D... RB was not and is not a follower of anyone... to my knowledge he never even personally met the man... I personally don't attempt to dig into the background of every writer I read... one just picks up information and gossip as one goes alone... in the end, the validity of the work is expressed in your personal ability to have a direct experience of the goal of any given exercise...

S.

PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 6:56am:

recoverer wrote on Feb 17th, 2011 at 7:55pm: I don't know what Robert Bruce is all about...  ... he also recommends books by Da Free (goes by various names) and Chogyam Trungpa. I did a search (of those names) on the AD forum and found nothing backing your claims. Could you please provide links for those two claims of yours?

Hi Pauli: I am with you... in RB's lectures he sometimes acknowledges some part of another's work that he has read and found agreement with... sometimes he recommends the books... for example Eckhart Tolle recently... but this is not a call to become a disciple of any guru... it is merely a reference to related work...

S.

PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 6:43am:

recoverer wrote on Feb 17th, 2011 at 7:34pm: Here's the link.  Toggle down if you want to read the post where he seems to be defending Sai Baba's actions in order to defend himself. http://forums.astraldynamics.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=3954&start=0 PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 10:16pm: recoverer wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 9:29pm: Regardless of the above, why did he find it necessary to defend Sai Baba's child molesting activities by saying things such as it was okay for Sai Baba to have sex with the children because they allowed it? Could you please provide the clip. That link didn't support your words. recoverer, you are the only source claiming that RB would have said what you wrote above. You don't seem to be able to make your claim valid.

Hi Pauli: Thanks for following up on recoverer's accusations against robert bruce. I must admit I ran into the accusations against Sai Baba independently and I worked with a guy who worked for Da Free John and he found John to be a fraud... (by worked for I mean an independent contractor for office work not a follower.)

S.

Elanor wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 2:25am:

Justin, thanks for your thoughts. I bought Astral Dynamics several years ago when it came out, and was in contact with the author who considered publishing my OOBE experience in the book. I thought RB was the "real deal", but then I'm just a newbie and still honing that "spiritual bs detector"... Recoverer, I'm positive that the book itself did not smell of sandalwood, the fragrance simply seemed to materlise (and very strongly so) out of thin air, and after a while disappeared completely. E

Hi Elanor: Don't let anyone debunk your experiences... how can recoverer know what you experienced... I've been following recoverer's posts for a long time and he seems to by his own admission to have been duped by some guru type so his response to every spiritual teacher is a knee jerk condemnation.

The truth is that getting 'powers' and moral behavior are not mutually exclusive... plus there is the cultural norms of the earth's human population... recoverer seems to want to impose a fix moral code on every being and it is his moral code... 

Caveat Emptor...

S.

And now, for something completely different.... :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2VCkornS6k&feature=related

Garden Party         just love this song

You know you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself...

------------


Songwriters: Nelson, Rick

------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLm9KX-LvMM

the story behind the song

wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 11:45am:

And now, for something completely different.... :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2VCkornS6k&feature=related Garden Party         just love this song You know you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself... ------------ Songwriters: Nelson, Rick ------------ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLm9KX-LvMM the story behind the song

:D ;D 8-) ::) Thanks for the breather... LOL!! I guess you are the peace maker b2.

S.

Yes, it was quite a rough ride reading all those differences of opinions. Did everyone make it through? ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z4m4lnjxkY

Pauli Effect wrote: "That link didn't support your words.

recoverer, you are the only source claiming that RB would have said what you wrote above.

You don't seem to be able to make your claim valid."

Recoverer responds:

Even if something happened such as some being tried to fool Robert into believing Sai Baba appeared to him, why did Robert defend Sai Baba's immoral actions in the way he did? Below are his words (my comments are in brackets).


"Baba's behaviour is an enigma. He seems to have incredible spiritual and psychic abilities, but he surrounds himself with corrupt advisors and etc. I have heard first hand accounts of miracles and etc that I have no reason to doubt."

[What was his reason for mentioning corrupt advisors etc? If he's suggesting that Sai molested his followers' children because his advisors had him do so, well, that's ridiculous. It seems to me that Robert was grasping for straws with this lame excuse. Why didn't he mention having heard first hand accounts of sleight of hand tricks?]

"It is well known to those around Baba, according to what I have been told, for him to have occasional intimate contact with young men. This aspect of his behaviour seems to have been open to interpretation over the years. From what I was told, his interactions with young men are entirely voluntary, eg, the young men are not forced."

[What a bunch of B.S! As far as I'm concerned Robert is insulting people's intelligence if he expects them to expect this lame defence of Sai's actions. First of all, children aren't emotionally ready to give such consent. Second, a young boy would enter Sai's room, and right away Sai would start molesting the boy. Therefore, there wasn't time for consent to take place. Third, why would a supposed incarnation of God find it necessary to molest children?]

"Also consider that swami is around 80 years old."

[What does Sai's age have to do with it? Once again Robert grasped at straws to a ludicrous extent.]

"I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc."

[There have been numerous unethical men who have claimed to be Avatars. Again, I think Robert was so desperate to defend his own reputation after making up the Sai Baba appearance story, he went out of his way in order to cover his tracks.]

"From what I have heard and read, Baba's explanation for the corruption and scandal around him appears to be that he wants people to focus on his teachings, and not on him as a person. It is said that he does not want to be deified, and this kind of behaviour will lessen that possibility. Given the many millions who follow Baba, this seems a reasonable concern."

[Give me a break! Sai Baba presented himself as an incarnation to God, and he didn't want to be deified? In fact, I remember reading about a man who said Sai told him that he did sleight of hand tricks in order to attract followers.

Plus, would a moral person with love in his heart resort to doing something as low as molesting children in order to stop people from deifying him? Certainly there are much better ways to do so. The fact of how Robert chose to use such a lame excuse is very questionable.]

"I do not have a firm opinion on this matter. At the time Baba materialized to me, I did not know his name nor even know who he was. I am not a follower of his and never have been. So this event remains an enigma to me."

[Robert came up with the ridiculous and irresponsible justifications he came up with, and then he tries to present himself as if he has no firm opinion on the matter.]

Volu:

I for one choose to not be indifferent about this matter. This world has a lot of problems and they need to be fixed. The more people grow spiritually, the more the world will improve because the outer is a reflection of the inner.

Misleading sources of information interfere with the spiritual growth of many people.

Perhaps many people who could help don't because they mistake indifference for transcedence.



Volu wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

Yes, it was quite a rough ride reading all those differences of opinions. Did everyone make it through? ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z4m4lnjxkY

"Backing your claims" such strong words. Have you done a lot of internet searches during your life? If so, you probably realize that it isn't always easy to find information you've found before. When it comes to the below, Bruce's site has been redone so the referrals I spoke of aren't there.

Going by what I can remember, he had a page that was about overcoming the ego and he recommended books by Da Free John and Chogyam Trungpa.  Because Da Free John and Chogyam were very narcissistic (especially Da Free John), I wouldn't want to learn about ego loss from them. Both of them have led many people astray.

If I had the choice of being a person who can astral project a lot or being a person with good discrimination, I'd choose the later any day of the week.

I believe techniques are quite secondary when it comes to spiritual growth. Just about anybody can learn about some techniques and then teach them. I'm impressed when people have a big place in their heart for that which is divine.



PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 6:56am:

recoverer wrote on Feb 17th, 2011 at 7:55pm: I don't know what Robert Bruce is all about...  ... he also recommends books by Da Free (goes by various names) and Chogyam Trungpa. I did a search (of those names) on the AD forum and found nothing backing your claims. Could you please provide links for those two claims of yours?

recoverer,

"I for one choose to not be indifferent about this matter. This world has a lot of problems and they need to be fixed. The more people grow spiritually, the more the world will improve because the outer is a reflection of the inner."

Wanting to change the world is a big task when one cannot change one's own underwear. Not directing this at you, just that - we all make mistakes - and in this very moment we might think we're right, a year later not. Did one change the world for the better when one was wrong? I like that you don't want to shove guru issues under the rug, and you got many valid points about gurus, in general. I don't care enough about the people mentioned to examine whether the claims are assumptions or knowns.

"Misleading sources of information interfere with the spiritual growth of many people."

Yes, but it's many times too easy to forget that spiritual growth has different roads leading to the same exit. It's easy to forget that others have a right to grow on their own. Pushing it too hard, and the pusher might become a guru him/herself. The other way around:

"Perhaps many people who could help don't because they mistake indifference for transcedence."

Speaking up isn't popular when a gang thinks otherwise. One learns to stick to what seems right despite might makes right though, and extra exp. gained in the process for every party involved. And extra exp. makes for refinement.

recoverer wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 2:21pm:

Pauli Effect wrote: "That link didn't support your words. recoverer, you are the only source claiming that RB would have said what you wrote above. You don't seem to be able to make your claim valid." Recoverer responds: Even if something happened such as some being tried to fool Robert into believing Sai Baba appeared to him, why did Robert defend Sai Baba's immoral actions in the way he did? Below are his words (my comments are in brackets).

Recoverer you are flailing a dead horse. Besides Robert Bruce is amazingly accessible... why not be nice when you contact him and attempt to in a civilized manner to sort out your problems with him directly rather than besmirch his reputation on this forum with innuendo and speculation.

S.

Elanor wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 2:25am:

Justin, thanks for your thoughts. I bought Astral Dynamics several years ago when it came out, and was in contact with the author who considered publishing my OOBE experience in the book. I thought RB was the "real deal", but then I'm just a newbie and still honing that "spiritual bs detector"...

  Hi Elanor,

  I don't know if Robert Bruce is the real deal or not.   I just stated that I don't resonate with him or his work.  I will say that I do happen to agree with the issues that Recoverer has brought about him worthwhile to consider.  Also, i found the way he or his friends set up that site that Seraphis1 shared the address to, to be suspect and lacking in integrity. 

  What i would suggest to you, or anyone, who is seriously interested in knowing the truth about this or any other source is this. 

During meditation, ask for help & guidance from, and ask to attune only the most PUL attuned, creative-constructive, spiritually helpful guidance energies, whilst bringing up feelings of love and gratitude, and then ask whether or not a particular teacher or source is spiritually helpful to you or not.  Even a simple yes or no question can work.

  Developing that spiritual b.s. detector is a process, and i've been duped in the past, and have learned by mistake. I once got into a well known channeled book, and the only thing that un-entangled me from it was a clear dream message about said work (which when i awoke, i just knew dealt with that source).  Yet, looking back, i somewhat feel like i should have seen the more obvious signs, like my "ego" getting bigger rather than decreasing.  But i got duped.  Lesson learned, pick yourself up and brush yourself off, and start back on the path. 

  It's a process i'm still refining, but i tend to use my intuitive sense more now.   But it also important to keep one's "left brain hemisphere" active and balanced with the right, and i think Recoverer's latter posts do just that pretty nicely.  He brought up some very valid, logical, specific, detailed issues, and yet no one answered him as they expected him to answer them.

   In any case, that method i recommended to you is universally helpful, and one we can call anytime upon for such discrimination help. 

Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 11:14am:

Hi Elanor: Don't let anyone debunk your experiences... how can recoverer know what you experienced... I've been following recoverer's posts for a long time and he seems to by his own admission to have been duped by some guru type so his response to every spiritual teacher is a knee jerk condemnation. The truth is that getting 'powers' and moral behavior are not mutually exclusive... plus there is the cultural norms of the earth's human population... recoverer seems to want to impose a fix moral code on every being and it is his moral code...  Caveat Emptor... S.

  Quite an over generalized statement wouldn't you say?   Not too mention inaccurate.  I seem to remember Recoverer speak well of people like Bob Monroe, Bruce Moen, and Christ, people whom others consider spiritual teachers. 

    The fact that he questions other sources when gaping holes come up in their logic and their teachings, and dares to speak up about this despite the popularity of such sources...    Find personal fault all you want, but my sense is that you are really more so defending yourself rather than these sources.

When we become let's say, very interested in a particular source, very immersed in it (dare i say, emotionally attached), then it becomes an extension and reflection of oneself (at least the personality level).  If someone else comes along and honestly speaks up about concerns about same, then its easy to become defensive, irrational, and subjective about said source and the person questioning same.  Soon we may even find our selves condemning or marginalizing in a round about, kind of manipulative manner, the one questioning and pointing holes in our sacred cows.

  Perhaps you could try logically and impersonally replying to the specific issues and points that Recoverer has brought up about RB and his illogical defense of Sai Baba, rather than coming up with huge generalizations with more than a hint of manipulation and untruth to them about Recoverer himself? 

Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 10:57am:

PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 6:56am: recoverer wrote on Feb 17th, 2011 at 7:55pm: I don't know what Robert Bruce is all about...  ... he also recommends books by Da Free (goes by various names) and Chogyam Trungpa. I did a search (of those names) on the AD forum and found nothing backing your claims. Could you please provide links for those two claims of yours? Hi Pauli: I am with you... in RB's lectures he sometimes acknowledges some part of another's work that he has read and found agreement with... sometimes he recommends the books... for example Eckhart Tolle recently... but this is not a call to become a disciple of any guru... it is merely a reference to related work... S.

  I think you're kind of missing the point.  Recoverer didn't once say that RB was a guru follower, or was trying to get people particularly hooked on a particular guru, but rather that, logically speaking, he questions the discriminative abilities of someone who sets themselves up as a spiritual teacher and yet who would recommend such patently non PUL attuned, unbalanced, etc. outer sources.  In RB's case, apparently multiple times if DaFreeJohn and Chogyam Trungpa were previously recommended in some way. 

  Like Recoverer, this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  This doesn't make him a bad person, or a completely fake teacher, but when he makes a mistake or error of judgment, and then instead of turning around admitting a misunderstanding or miscomprehension, but in a rather convoluted, irrational manner defends a known child molester and practitioner of sleight of hand based "miracles"...well yes, i do wonder about RB and his depth of discrimination.   

  But that's all really, otherwise i know very little about him and could care less one way or the other.  I'm certainly not trying to ruin his reputation or good name.  I have no ill feelings towards him. 

  I both feel and think that if you could look into Recoverer's Heart, see him for how he truly is, you would see that he speaks out 99 percent at least out of concern for others and their spiritual well being.  The truth is, that there are many spiritually misleading, unhelpful, and/or ignorant sources out there which help to keep humanity stuck & suffering.   And he is passionate about this issue which is rather insidious for it's subtle and non obvious nature. 

Volu wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

Yes, it was quite a rough ride reading all those differences of opinions. Did everyone make it through? ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z4m4lnjxkY

  On a lighter note.  Just watched that youtube video Volu. 

   Is that you singing so seductively in this video?! :o
   :D ;D

I needed to cut down your flow of text to get to the core of your claim. So here goes:


wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 11:29pm:

...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester...

Could you please provide a link for that claim of yours?

Specifically the part where you write "defends a known child molester".

recoverer failed to support his claim.

So..?

Can you, Justin?

Justin,

"Is that you singing so seductively in this video?!"

Haha. Njet dude, then I'd prolly be too busy sharing the wonders of lol. Would be fun to see him do a trololo cover of leper messiah. A loungy classical version perhaps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muPg_Ny-_8g

Hi Justin and Seraphis,

Just to say that I appreciate your replies and kindness.

E

If one has concern for others and their well-being, then why limit one's fight to one minor player that most of the world does not care about and yet not seem to hold others to the same level of scrutiny on the same issue? Most people do not even know who  Sai Baba is, yet child molestation is a general problem in our world. Speaking out against Sai Baba does nothing to fix that. He's a tree in a big forrest.


Quote:

The truth is, that there are many spiritually misleading, unhelpful, and/or ignorant sources out there which help to keep humanity stuck & suffering.

Like, most of organized religion????

That doesn't mean there are not great individuals and saints in all religions, just that the body of the work is lacking.

I mentioned before that I find Mother Teresa lacking because she was a mouthpiece for the Roman Catholic Church. She undoubtedly did many things to help many helpless people, but she did it in the name of the Church.

So to me, when you talk about something being insidious in its manifestation of purporting to do good when it actually furthers evil, then I think of her.

When it comes to the issue of child molestation, surely the Catholic Church takes the cake (though having read Kite Runner, I don't think Islam is doing much better. and if it is the Buddhists in Thailand and other SE Asia countries who sell their daughters into prostitution, then I have an issue with that religion too). Catholicism has long maligned women who "stray." yet look at the history of the priesthood! The abuse of children by the clergy and the systematic hiding of that by the ruling men in the clergy has been well documented (unlike Sai Baba's transgressions which we seem to have trouble finding proof of?) in the press and in court. And in the book Sex, Priests, and Secret Codes, there is a desctiption of how this coverup works and an argument that this sort of thing has systematically been used for centuries to bind people to the society of the priests and keep control over them (this process includes relationships between older priests and younger priests, which can then be used to emotionally blackmail the younger priests). This far out does anything Sai Baba could have done.I don't support him but why are we picking on him? Why make a career of picking on him when there are much bigger fish in the ocean?

The comments above on gurus (from Joseph Campbell) made me realize that I think the Pope acts like a guru. He makes the moral decisions for his flock. What's the difference between what he does and what a guru does? Look at how that church controls people by having them go to confession (to a priest who may also be a child molester!). What I recall from my (Protestant) upbringing was a movie we kids once watched at church. It was a dramatization of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection. In the movie, at the moment the Christ died, one thing that happened was that a veil in the synagogue that separated the rabbis from the people was split. The message was explained to be that  that meant each person should be going directly to God for advice and whatever, that nothing should stand between the individual and God. * Surely the Catholic Church has been a vehicle for evil if it teaches that there should be someone between the individual and God.

(* they just didn't do well in telling us how to accomplish that, though I don't think I was exposed to a really good prayer or Bible study group, which could have taught me a little about that. I don't want to drag Justin into my argument, but I thought Justin's above description of asking for guidance was a good one).

The problem with child abuse is so univeral (especially when you include teenagers forced into protitution) that I think we are asking the wrong questions about these issues if we just focus on a few individuals. In one of his books. Jared Diamond discusses a variety a subcultures in I think it was Borneo. This place remained out of the main track for decades and when anthropologists found it, it was a gold mine. One subculture he described had a lifestyle pattern of segregating the men and the women. As I recall, the houses were 2-story group houses. The men lived upstairs and the women downstairs. They seemed to only get together to make babies (literally). The men enjoyed freely interacting sexually with each other. The young boys were sent upstairs at a fairly young age and particiapted in the lifestyle. What we would call pedophilia was normal for them That freaks me out! What does that mean about humans?

Is this something in all our DNA? How can we change the world if it is in our DNA? (...did Sai Baba grow up in a culture like that?) I doubt we can change the world. At least not by moral action. Moral action can give personal strenghth but it does not change the world, other than that to change one's self changes the world.

Also, I would never interfere with anyone's right to choose their religion. This is Catholic Boston. Some people take great comfort in their relationship to their church. Every group has saints and sinners. It is the church policies that stun me. I have read the quotes of those who talk about childhood experiences of being told by a man that he represented God and then he raped them. In the name of God. Where do you go when God's representative rapes you? What hope can you have when you get out of bed the next morning?

That's the real issue with any of this, isn't it? Surely breaking one down to empty their cup makes them open to truly receiving God. But it doesn't seem to work when the one doing the breaking claims to represent God. Who can one really trust?

I agree with you Lucy. Well put.

Lucy wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

If one has concern for others and their well-being, then why limit one's fight to one minor player that most of the world does not care about and yet not seem to hold others to the same level of scrutiny on the same issue? Most people do not even know who  Sai Baba is, yet child molestation is a general problem in our world. Speaking out against Sai Baba does nothing to fix that. He's a tree in a big forrest. Quote: The truth is, that there are many spiritually misleading, unhelpful, and/or ignorant sources out there which help to keep humanity stuck & suffering. Like, most of organized religion???? That doesn't mean there are not great individuals and saints in all religions, just that the body of the work is lacking. I mentioned before that I find Mother Teresa lacking because she was a mouthpiece for the Roman Catholic Church. She undoubtedly did many things to help many helpless people, but she did it in the name of the Church. So to me, when you talk about something being insidious in its manifestation of purporting to do good when it actually furthers evil, then I think of her. When it comes to the issue of child molestation, surely the Catholic Church takes the cake (though having read Kite Runner, I don't think Islam is doing much better. and if it is the Buddhists in Thailand and other SE Asia countries who sell their daughters into prostitution, then I have an issue with that religion too). Catholicism has long maligned women who "stray." yet look at the history of the priesthood! The abuse of children by the clergy and the systematic hiding of that by the ruling men in the clergy has been well documented (unlike Sai Baba's transgressions which we seem to have trouble finding proof of?) in the press and in court. And in the book Sex, Priests, and Secret Codes, there is a desctiption of how this coverup works and an argument that this sort of thing has systematically been used for centuries to bind people to the society of the priests and keep control over them (this process includes relationships between older priests and younger priests, which can then be used to emotionally blackmail the younger priests). This far out does anything Sai Baba could have done.I don't support him but why are we picking on him? Why make a career of picking on him when there are much bigger fish in the ocean? The comments above on gurus (from Joseph Campbell) made me realize that I think the Pope acts like a guru. He makes the moral decisions for his flock. What's the difference between what he does and what a guru does? Look at how that church controls people by having them go to confession (to a priest who may also be a child molester!). What I recall from my (Protestant) upbringing was a movie we kids once watched at church. It was a dramatization of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection. In the movie, at the moment the Christ died, one thing that happened was that a veil in the synagogue that separated the rabbis from the people was split. The message was explained to be that  that meant each person should be going directly to God for advice and whatever, that nothing should stand between the individual and God. * Surely the Catholic Church has been a vehicle for evil if it teaches that there should be someone between the individual and God. (* they just didn't do well in telling us how to accomplish that, though I don't think I was exposed to a really good prayer or Bible study group, which could have taught me a little about that. I don't want to drag Justin into my argument, but I thought Justin's above description of asking for guidance was a good one). The problem with child abuse is so univeral (especially when you include teenagers forced into protitution) that I think we are asking the wrong questions about these issues if we just focus on a few individuals. In one of his books. Jared Diamond discusses a variety a subcultures in I think it was Borneo. This place remained out of the main track for decades and when anthropologists found it, it was a gold mine. One subculture he described had a lifestyle pattern of segregating the men and the women. As I recall, the houses were 2-story group houses. The men lived upstairs and the women downstairs. They seemed to only get together to make babies (literally). The men enjoyed freely interacting sexually with each other. The young boys were sent upstairs at a fairly young age and particiapted in the lifestyle. What we would call pedophilia was normal for them That freaks me out! What does that mean about humans? Is this something in all our DNA? How can we change the world if it is in our DNA? (...did Sai Baba grow up in a culture like that?) I doubt we can change the world. At least not by moral action. Moral action can give personal strenghth but it does not change the world, other than that to change one's self changes the world. Also, I would never interfere with anyone's right to choose their religion. This is Catholic Boston. Some people take great comfort in their relationship to their church. Every group has saints and sinners. It is the church policies that stun me. I have read the quotes of those who talk about childhood experiences of being told by a man that he represented God and then he raped them. In the name of God. Where do you go when God's representative rapes you? What hope can you have when you get out of bed the next morning? That's the real issue with any of this, isn't it? Surely breaking one down to empty their cup makes them open to truly receiving God. But it doesn't seem to work when the one doing the breaking claims to represent God. Who can one really trust?

Hi Lucy: LOL! When are you going to let Charlie Brown kick the football.  :D ;D ;) :) 8-)

The devil made me do that.   ;D

All kidding aside very well thought out post. Keep up the good work.

S.

PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 3:22am:

I needed to cut down your flow of text to get to the core of your claim. So here goes: wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 11:29pm: ...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester... Could you please provide a link for that claim of yours? Specifically the part where you write "defends a known child molester". recoverer failed to support his claim. So..? Can you, Justin?

  Hi PauliEffectt, i disagree, i think Recoverer has already done a good job of pointing that particular part out.  I don't think i can help you see that. 

I think Albert has given a very hardy opinion of what he believes and certainly there is nothing wrong with that, but without the links for this information I have to side with Pauli and feel that there is no proof here that would warrant me making any kind of judgment. It just seems to be a lot of finger pointing and heresay so far...That's here say, but it may be heresy ...I just can't tell from what's be put out here so far.

So bottom line, I'm just saying it doesn't seem to me that any evidence has been forthcoming yet, but I don't doubt Albert's sincerity at all.

wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 10:55am:

PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 19th, 2011 at 3:22am: I needed to cut down your flow of text to get to the core of your claim. So here goes: wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 11:29pm: ...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester... Could you please provide a link for that claim of yours? Specifically the part where you write "defends a known child molester". recoverer failed to support his claim. So..? Can you, Justin?   Hi PauliEffectt, i disagree, i think Recoverer has already done a good job of pointing that particular part out.  I don't think i can help you see that.

No.

No. No.

No. No. No.

No, Justin.

You made the claim. You.

So.

You prove it. Recoverer has not done so. He has done noting, than provided misinformation.

Misinformation.


You wrote:


wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 11:29pm:

...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester...

So...

You prove it. Because it's your claim. Or it's your lie.

Lucy wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

If one has concern for others and their well-being, then why limit one's fight to one minor player that most of the world does not care about and yet not seem to hold others to the same level of scrutiny on the same issue? Most people do not even know who  Sai Baba is, yet child molestation is a general problem in our world. Speaking out against Sai Baba does nothing to fix that. He's a tree in a big forrest. Quote: The truth is, that there are many spiritually misleading, unhelpful, and/or ignorant sources out there which help to keep humanity stuck & suffering. Like, most of organized religion????

  To address the first part.  My take is that instead of just taking on Sai Baba, Recoverer is more so addressing the issue of being entrenched in Guru based belief systems in general, rather than just picking on one guy.  He's mentioned a number of known to be misleading, selfish Guru leaders before on this site.

  I think if you tally up all the numbers of people in this world who follow a Guru, or Guru based belief system, then I think you will understand that it's a significant amount of people in the world that do so.  (On a side note, i think if you do more research into Sai Baba, you will find that he is not such a small fish because for a long while most of the Indian Gov. supported and defended him despite the many child and adult molestation accusations and the footage showing sleight of hand tricks.) 


  Regarding the second point about religion.  First off i would say, for the most part i agree with you about the traps and issues behind religion.  It surely is a mixed bag.

  However, during this thread Recoverer and I are addressing people on the Afterlife Conversation Board, most of whom are familiar with, or to some extent resonate with Bruce Moen and his work. 

  While some of us here seem to have some religious leanings, most of us here seem to be more primarily on a "spiritual" or non-denominational path.   Hence if Recoverer and i were to bring up the many issues and pitfalls of more mainstream, conventional religion (especially the major forms of Christianity), well we would be just preaching to the choir no (and truly wasting our breath)?   Many of us are already not particular fans of such ways and belief systems. 

  Also, while probably a subjective perception, i find that more mainstream, larger, more organized religions are slowly but surely dying in most areas of the world, except in the case of Islam.   It seems to me that more people are walking either an atheistic, agnostic, or more spiritual, non-denominational or open minded nonphysical oriented path.  Even those who profess a "faith in Christ" aren't necessarily religious though it may seem that way to some more hardcore New Age types.

   There seem to be many Westerners on this site, at least a significant amount of active posters seem to be based out the U.S., Europe, and other areas wherein Christianity, for an example, has reigned in a religious form for a long time. 

  I've noticed in my own observations here in the U.S., that often what happens when a person becomes disillusioned with the mainstream dogmatic beliefs around them, in my case primarily religious Christianity, but they still feel there is something out there, often they turn to Eastern based beliefs. 

  It's more exotic, seems rather different on the surface, possibly has less history of twisting as a political weapon and construct.   

   Personally i think there is plenty of worth to be found in all the major religions if one actually looks for it, Western and Eastern, though i do not personally follow one specific belief system.   Ultimately, i think it's most helpful for people to learn how to go within for wisdom and connection with Source and guidance. 

  Hence, i think, eventually all religion, both Western and Eastern must eventually die off, or radically transform to a more open ended, much less authoritative approach, if this World is to be transformed. 

But we consider the public we are speaking too in the here and now.   RB seems to be popular on this site.  What Recoverer and i are simply saying is why not use your discrimination a little more when it comes to him or any other sources.   If one sees "red flags" surrounding a person who has set themselves up as a spiritual or nonphysical authority of some kind and especially someone who to some extent makes a living off that reputation... then why not speak up about one's concerns and insights? 

  I outlined a rather fool proof method of spiritually discriminating about any source.  I challenge people here to start applying it to RB or any outer source, and to see what you get.  Whether or not you want to report back what you got is a personal decision.

  If everyone in the world interested in spiritual or nonphysical issues honestly practiced this, i think we would find that many voices out there that are currently quite listened too, would eventually trail away for the lack of interest, and i can't see how this wouldn't help the world and the state of same.  Maybe to even a significant degree. 

  Maybe more intune/spiritually helpful Guidance energies, both inner and outer, would have an easier time of helping people if more people practiced such discrimination and going within methods?   Maybe this would help to speed up the spiritual transformation of this world? 

   I would remind everyone that Like attracts and begets Like.  Often we resonate with outer sources not necessarily because they are spiritually what is most helpful for us, but because they are closer to the level that we are already at.  That's fine if one is really, really intune, but how many of us are really that intune in this world? 

  So we need methods of getting past ourselves.  Methods which help us reach beyond that Like attracts and begets Like reaction and tendency.  One of the reasons i like Bruce's work because he seems to be about teaching such methods.   

To anyone interested, here is the full quote of Robert Bruce the "Site Admin." of Astral Dynamics web site.  This is the site link, and the same one that Recoverer earlier shared. http://forums.astraldynamics.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=3954&start=0 ;  Scroll a little more than half way down to see the "updated" Robert Bruce take on Sai Baba.  If you read from the beginning of the page, you will see his older quotes.


Quote:

Sai Babba Postby Robert Bruce on Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:03 am G'day! The quotes of mine that you have used in this thread are ancient. My understanding of this matter has changed since that time. I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba for over thirty years, and they lived on Sai Baba's ashram for over ten years, and in that time they had a lot of close contact with Baba. They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami. They still follow Baba, but more lightly and they do not live on the ashram anymore. Baba's behaviour is an enigma. He seems to have incredible spiritual and psychic abilities, but he surrounds himself with corrupt advisors and etc. I have heard first hand accounts of miracles and etc that I have no reason to doubt. It is well known to those around Baba, according to what I have been told, for him to have occasional intimate contact with young men. This aspect of his behaviour seems to have been open to interpretation over the years. From what I was told, his interactions with young men are entirely voluntary, eg, the young men are not forced. Also consider that swami is around 80 years old. I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc. From what I have heard and read, Baba's explanation for the corruption and scandal around him appears to be that he wants people to focus on his teachings, and not on him as a person. It is said that he does not want to be deified, and this kind of behaviour will lessen that possibility. Given the many millions who follow Baba, this seems a reasonable concern. I do not have a firm opinion on this matter. At the time Baba materialized to me, I did not know his name nor even know who he was. I am not a follower of his and never have been. So this event remains an enigma to me. RB.

  Earlier, Recoverer took apart the above quoted material, and pointed quite clearly at the lack of logic and rationality in his off and on again defense of Sai Baba.   This is on the 3rd page of this thread, about half way down, and is reply #38.  I suggest re-reading that, after reading both the old quoted material of RB's, and the latter update given personally by him, which i quoted entirely in the above. 

For me, i will take only one small parts of the above quote and examine it a bit.

  RB wrote,
Quote:

I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc.

  This was after RB mentioned this,
Quote:

It is well known to those around Baba, according to what I have been told, for him to have occasional intimate contact with young men. This aspect of his behaviour seems to have been open to interpretation over the years. From what I was told, his interactions with young men are entirely voluntary, eg, the young men are not forced.

  But wait, this is what RB said before any of the above,
Quote:

I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba for over thirty years, and they lived on Sai Baba's ashram for over ten years, and in that time they had a lot of close contact with Baba. They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami.

  So which is it RB--were you told these were voluntary encounters OR were you told, as by that family you directly talked about that most of the allegations against him were true?  Let's remember that "Most of the allegations" with Sai Baba involve not particularly willing males.  If one does some research on this, one will find that a number reported various kinds of threats being made, threats from the spiritual kind of, "if you don't do this, your life will be filled with suffering." 

  To the more straight forward and mundane, "i will cut your thingy off."  Watch the BBC's expose on Youtube on Sai Baba to see what i'm talking about.

  Let's again examine that first RB quote in light of all the above. 


Quote:

I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc.

  Do you see the implying and implications in the above?  Are you following the same holistic logic train i am?  See how he is covering his tracks but with twisting of the real issues being presented?

  Now i want to state that i don't see anything spiritually limiting or immoral about bisexuality.  Unlike RB is trying to twist, the problem is not about Sai Baba's bisexuality.  If it were solely an issue about bi sexuality, i wouldn't and i doubt Recoverer would speak out about it. 

  Rather it's the issue of child molestation, and the molestation in general, both with children and adults, which was often manipulated and forced by methods of fear.  Things like telling many to keep it a secret, or the various threats he had used as reported by a percentage. 

  Why can't RB just plainly, directly, and honestly own up to having been duped, mislead, or what not, rather than come up with such illogical and irrational arguments and so called "points."

  Why, because as Recoverer has pointed out, mostly likely what he is defending is not really Sai Baba, but really himself and his own rightness. 

He earlier had associated himself with Sai Baba, a so called "Avatar", but then after more and more allegations came out about said figure, well he turned around and kind of changed his tune, but was still trying to defend his earlier position.

  Doesn't bespeak of integrity or honesty to me. 

Anyways, this is my last post on this thread as I think all this debate is taking away from the deeper purpose of this site. 

 

Yeah, that's more like it. But I still take issue with rejecting someone's spiritual ideas just because the physical aspect of their Self can't keep it in their pants. As to child molestation the only evidence I see of that in this stuff is based on the phrase "Young Men". So where is the evidence of this heinous accusation?

There have been plenty of great thinkers who devoted their life to "all things spiritual" who were fallen by the flesh. And even if he were Hitler (oh, god I hope we don't go there) if he had some insights that spoke to someone and moved them along in their OWN journey I just don't see the harm of that. To me its like outing a celebrity. I would still listen to Michael Jackson's music and enjoy it even though someday it might be proven that he indulged in the forbidden taboo... because it is his journey not mine and if something he had to say at a point in his life resonates so be it.

I don't equate having an interest in someone's spiritual works the same as condoning their "impure" actions. And btw I'm not trying to imply that anyone here is saying the opposite.

Justin, you still haven't proven anything.

You claimed:


wrote on Feb 18^th, 2011 at 11:29pm:

...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester...

Then you pick some quote from RB and you still fail to support your claim:


wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 1:02pm:

But wait, this is what RB said before any of the above, Quote: I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba... They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami.

So Justin, do you consider that highlights of yours as "defends a known child molester"?

Do you?

What RB in fact states is that most of the allegations against Sai B are basically true.


God Lord!

RB seems to consider most of the allegations basically true!

BASICALLY TRUE!


ALLEGATIONS

ARE

BASICALLY TRUE

!!!


If RB doesn't put his words carefully here, I would say that he could get sued.

In my opinion RB says that Sai B is guilty to almost whatever he is accused for!

ALMOST anything!

Is that statement a defense of Sai Baba?!!!!

A DEFENSE???!!   D-E-F-E-N-S-E ? ? ?

Good riddance!


So.

Justin, do you still consider it a "defends a known child molester"?

Well?

wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 1:02pm:

To anyone interested, here is the full quote of Robert Bruce the "Site Admin." of Astral Dynamics web site.  This is the site link, and the same one that Recoverer earlier shared. http://forums.astraldynamics.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=3954&start=0   Scroll a little more than half way down to see the "updated" Robert Bruce take on Sai Baba.  If you read from the beginning of the page, you will see his older quotes. Quote: Sai Babba Postby Robert Bruce on Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:03 am G'day! The quotes of mine that you have used in this thread are ancient. My understanding of this matter has changed since that time. I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba for over thirty years, and they lived on Sai Baba's ashram for over ten years, and in that time they had a lot of close contact with Baba. They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami. They still follow Baba, but more lightly and they do not live on the ashram anymore. Baba's behaviour is an enigma. He seems to have incredible spiritual and psychic abilities, but he surrounds himself with corrupt advisors and etc. I have heard first hand accounts of miracles and etc that I have no reason to doubt. It is well known to those around Baba, according to what I have been told, for him to have occasional intimate contact with young men. This aspect of his behaviour seems to have been open to interpretation over the years. From what I was told, his interactions with young men are entirely voluntary, eg, the young men are not forced. Also consider that swami is around 80 years old. I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc. From what I have heard and read, Baba's explanation for the corruption and scandal around him appears to be that he wants people to focus on his teachings, and not on him as a person. It is said that he does not want to be deified, and this kind of behaviour will lessen that possibility. Given the many millions who follow Baba, this seems a reasonable concern. I do not have a firm opinion on this matter. At the time Baba materialized to me, I did not know his name nor even know who he was. I am not a follower of his and never have been. So this event remains an enigma to me. RB.   Earlier, Recoverer took apart the above quoted material, and pointed quite clearly at the lack of logic and rationality in his off and on again defense of Sai Baba.   This is on the 3rd page of this thread, about half way down, and is reply #38.  I suggest re-reading that, after reading both the old quoted material of RB's, and the latter update given personally by him, which i quoted entirely in the above.  For me, i will take only one small parts of the above quote and examine it a bit.   RB wrote, [quote]I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc.

  This was after RB mentioned this,
Quote:

It is well known to those around Baba, according to what I have been told, for him to have occasional intimate contact with young men. This aspect of his behaviour seems to have been open to interpretation over the years. From what I was told, his interactions with young men are entirely voluntary, eg, the young men are not forced.

  But wait, this is what RB said before any of the above,
Quote:

I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba for over thirty years, and they lived on Sai Baba's ashram for over ten years, and in that time they had a lot of close contact with Baba. They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami.

  So which is it RB--were you told these were voluntary encounters OR were you told, as by that family you directly talked about that most of the allegations against him were true?  Let's remember that "Most of the allegations" with Sai Baba involve not particularly willing males.  If one does some research on this, one will find that a number reported various kinds of threats being made, threats from the spiritual kind of, "if you don't do this, your life will be filled with suffering." 

  To the more straight forward and mundane, "i will cut your thingy off."  Watch the BBC's expose on Youtube on Sai Baba to see what i'm talking about.

  Let's again examine that first RB quote in light of all the above. 


Quote:

I have been told by followers that it is not unusual for an avatar to have enigmatic problems, including bisexuality and etc.

  Do you see the implying and implications in the above?  Are you following the same holistic logic train i am?  See how he is covering his tracks but with twisting of the real issues being presented?

  Now i want to state that i don't see anything spiritually limiting or immoral about bisexuality.  Unlike RB is trying to twist, the problem is not about Sai Baba's bisexuality.  If it were solely an issue about bi sexuality, i wouldn't and i doubt Recoverer would speak out about it. 

  Rather it's the issue of child molestation, and the molestation in general, both with children and adults, which was often manipulated and forced by methods of fear.  Things like telling many to keep it a secret, or the various threats he had used as reported by a percentage. 

  Why can't RB just plainly, directly, and honestly own up to having been duped, mislead, or what not, rather than come up with such illogical and irrational arguments and so called "points."

  Why, because as Recoverer has pointed out, mostly likely what he is defending is not really Sai Baba, but really himself and his own rightness. 

He earlier had associated himself with Sai Baba, a so called "Avatar", but then after more and more allegations came out about said figure, well he turned around and kind of changed his tune, but was still trying to defend his earlier position.

  Doesn't bespeak of integrity or honesty to me. 

Anyways, this is my last post on this thread as I think all this debate is taking away from the deeper purpose of this site. 

[/quote]

Hi All: Why is this relevant if whatever took place was between consenting adults? Is there some kind of homophopic issue going on here. The child abuse thing is of concern and children under the age of say 12 - 15 or you could go as high as 18... should not be subjected to sexual acts of any kind... but, of course, they should be told the facts of life about the stork and bird and bees...

Recoverer seems to be equating spiritual evolution, non-physical powers with moral behavior... and it HIS personal moral code he wants to impose on the world... ( I suggest that Recoverer was an Inquisitor in some mediaval life time and has not given it up... he considers himself the spiritual policeman of the world and he is doomed to failure on that count)...

The truth is there is no relationship between spirituality and non-physical powers and morality... one of the most powerful hermetic magicians of the the late 20th centuries was Aleister Crowley and he was by all accounts the most evil of men. He was amazingly competent and capable and turned his powers to what most of us would consider evil works... tho there is some dispute about whether he was ALL bad.

There is more to 'sex' than anyone on this board seems to be conversant with and that is a shame... but the world at large is ignorant of 'sex' and at best they only kind of know what to put where because the world population continues to grow... but... I tell you there are.... ' more things in heaven and earth concerning 'sex' that is ever dreamt of in your philosophy Horation...(opps I mean recoverer)'

S.

PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 2:19pm:

Justin, you still haven't proven anything. You claimed: wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 11:29pm: ...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester... Then you pick some quote from RB and you still fail to support your claim: wrote on Feb 19th, 2011 at 1:02pm:   But wait, this is what RB said before any of the above, Quote: I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba... They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami. So Justin, do you consider that highlights of yours as "defends a known child molester"? Do you? What RB in fact states is that most of the allegations against Sai B are basically true. God Lord! RB seems to consider most of the allegations basically true! BASICALLY TRUE! ALLEGATIONS ARE BASICALLY TRUE !!! If RB doesn't put his words carefully here, I would say that he could get sued. In my opinion RB says that Sai B is guilty to almost whatever he is accused for! ALMOST anything! Is that statement a defense of Sai Baba?!!!! A DEFENSE???!!   D-E-F-E-N-S-E ? ? ? Good riddance! So. Justin, do you still consider it a "defends a known child molester"? Well?

Hi Pauli: Fantabulous post! Do you solicit clients I have a case I'd like you to litigate.  :)

S.

Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 4:18pm:

Hi Pauli: Fantabulous post! Do you solicit clients I have a case I'd like you to litigate.  :) S.

Hehe, I was just pointing out the obvious.

To another side, the sad part of this story is that the Indian justice system doesn't work. My hope is that all Sai Baba followers that have been tricked, manage to open their eyes.

Problem is, as Robert Bruce mentioned, many followers may feel guilt and embarrassment for having been duped and after several years in the ashram may have problems realizing what's the reality.

And as Robert Bruce wrote, his vision only lasted 30 seconds, so the guy with that big, dark hair could very well be any other black person - discarnate, incarnate or just a pure thought-form of his.

Still today, that 30 seconds vision remains an enigma to Robert Bruce.

I don't understand why, when certain topics or people come up, the discussion does NOT turn to an inquiry on whether or not the techniques or teachings are viable or useful or why or when they work, but instead becomes a witch hunt over whether or not the person should be followed. I would like to know if Robert Bruce's methods work. That's all.

Nobody should be followed. if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him. If you meet the Christ on the road, kill him. You stand on sacred ground, because God resides in YOU.

That doesn't mean free will doesn't kick in. We all act like jerks at one time or another.

It's all about the ideas. Not about the person.

Neither a follower nor a leader be.

Here's my take on why there is a bad boogey man, Satan, devil, whatever:


Quote:

I would remind everyone that Like attracts and begets Like.  Often we resonate with outer sources not necessarily because they are spiritually what is most helpful for us, but because they are closer to the level that we are already at.

I think the devil is a mental construct that exists because humankind has created this structure. It's pretty useful for lots of things. Crowd control. Blame:  "the devil made me do it." An easy way of explaining fears rather than having to examne how we collectively use thought to create our psychological/social reality.

If you meet the devil on the road, see him not there.

Sin, evil, is separation from God. If you find evil, try to find the inner God.

Hi All: What is getting lost in all this concern about morality, validity of guru’s, et al is the fact that as evolving spiritual beings…

It boils down to the story of Satan taking Jesus to a mountain top and showing him the power and wealth he could bestow on Jesus if he worshiped him.

As you evolve spiritually you will arrive at a place where you will be tested… with spiritual evolution comes ‘power’, clairvoyance, bilocation, ability to control the minds of lesser individuals… at every evolutionary advance you will have to chose between the Divine and Mammon.

Which will YOU choose…??? What you think at this moment may not be what you actually choose when you are confronted with ‘unlimited power’.

Beware!!

S.

And this is probaly not the place to do it, but I still would like to see an ongoinf discussion about male sexuiality. (oh dear, how many women have ever lamented that one...)

but seriously, though I don't know if they are "provable", I take the charges of child abuse against this Sai baba seriously, but I think they exist in a bigger context and we miss the boat by not examoining the bigger context.

And I still don't understand what the charges against him have to do with whether or not the techniques RB teaches work.

I was saddened to open th epaper and read that the pediatrician Melvin Levine had died. He possibly suicided because he was in the middle of a mess. A highly successful and effective and respected pediatrician, once at a prestigious hospital in Boston and then in Chapel Hill, he was later in his career (after the priest thing broke ; those suits opened the floodgate, not the Sai Baba accusations) accused of olesting boys in his care. Suits against the hospital were not allowed so recently (the day before he died) a suit was brought against him.

If it is logical to avoid gurus and all things around Sai Baba, then is it not also logical to avoid all pediatricians because of potential molesters?

here's a piece on his death:

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/articles/2011/02/19/former_childrens_doctor_in_sex_abuse_suit_dies/

Why is there so much child abuse in our species?

Then, last week, our esteemed Republican senator, Scott Brown, released a book in which he revealed child abuse he experienced as a child. I think he's going to be on the radio show "On Point" tomorrow (2/21). Here's the link in case this interests anyone, and podcasts are available after the broadcast (but not until after):

http://onpoint.wbur.org/

And Sean O'Malley (local Catholic bishop) is in Ireland today trying to smooth things out with the faithful there. It just goes on and on.

I don't think the people who call themselves followers of Sai Baba have a substantial voting base here in the US. Don't know about India, but the population there is so large that I don't think they form a large % of the populatiuon.

Should the beneficiaries of Sai Baba's largesse give back the things dome for them in protest? Even ostracizing him would not change the underlying problem.

Then there ar e the stories of underage girls brought in ot Superbowl cities to "service" the men who go, only to be abandoned later. Should we not stop the Superbowl because of this?

It just goes on and on...

By the way, the comment about Aleister Crowley was interesting. I've read a little of his work and it is clear he was highly intelligent. It's frightening. Talent has no morals.

I can't judge Crowley but his Toth Tarot deck is outstanding and so was how he viewed the Tarot. I learned a lot from his work and I don't regret the experience. My morality has to do with the Golden Rule. If you abide by it you don't need laws...and making laws breaks the Golden Rule, but sadly in order to have order we subject ourselves to laws that hinder Rule abiding experience that could actually facilitate growth because if you have one law you must have a million. If you can't live by the Golden Rule (do no harm, Love thy Neighbor as thyself, Do unto others as you would have done unto you, do infringe on another's free will, etc) You are experiencing your reason for being here in the first place. If you can live by it then you're just practicing a bit more each day.

Perhaps some confusion is created in this type of discussion because people believe it is about sex. It is not really about sex, but the use and 'misuse' of power. Each of us has power within us to move, to create, to use our biological 'possession' which is our body and the mind which lives within it. Our need for 'control' is the issue, our need for 'security', our need for pleasure and sustenance. We are not divorced from our biology, and the more that we 'know', the more we find we do not know. This is why I really cannot involve myself in a discussion of 'morality' or what is 'right' or who is 'following' who. We all walk the path, and we all experience its difficulty from time to time, its joys, its sorrows. That is really the only knowledge I will take with me from this journey. I can, seriously, no longer trust 'knowledge', but only compassion. In this long walk, it is really all that matters at the end of the road.

  It seems the thread has taken a rather different direction.  I'm not going to comment anymore on the RB issue on this thread, as i said earlier. 

But in Lucy's ramblings, she asked an interesting, broad question. 


Lucy wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 11:17am:

Why is there so much child abuse in our species?

  The simple answer, which comes from the fundamental core issue, is that there is so much separation of humanity from Source in OUR collective consciousness. 

  The greater the degree of separation from same, the greater and more varied the perversity that will be found.  Source is pure and purely Loving, but it allows such different expressions than Itself to arise for it gave the gift of choice, which was necessary to create true companions and co-creators.

  Flesh and Spirit, are like oil and water, they don't mix particularly well.  Only through attunement to PUL can and will they begin to harmonize and balance. 

Until then, that Source separation consciousness that is so prevalent of humanity, allows the power and influence of the flesh to largely control us in so many ways.  The more we hearken to that influence, the darker, more fractured, selfish, materialistic, less spiritually clear perceiving, and more imbalanced we become.

  As above (within), so below (without), and like attracts and begets like also applies.  When we choose such slower vibratory paths, we then open ourselves up to outer voices best not listened too.  Voices more separated than most of us.   

  If we ignore and sweep the shadow side under the rug both collectively and individually, then that's what one of the things which limits us and keeps us from full attunement and balance. 

  Yes, it's important to focus on the constructive and creative, the beauty, within others, within life, within self, but that doesn't mean to don the rose colored glasses all the time.  It's the intention that matters as in all things. 

  Some focus on beauty, not for beauty's sake, but because they fear or find that which is non beautiful is unpleasant to directly face.  It's more about avoidance.

  Some are aware of, and speak about the shadow not because that is what is most important to them, but because they know it is a barrier to greater Source attunement, and they love Source. 

    I'm beginning to realize that perhaps PUL and what attunement to same means isn't fully understood. 

The more one attunes to PUL, the more purely moral, ethically, the more responsibly, the more kindly, the more honestly one will live.   The more integrity and sincerity one will have within and live.

   One does no one, nor the world a favor, when one advocates for, recommends spiritual sources or "experts" that are far off from attunement and expressing of that.   It only helps to keep the world stuck.  Course, in most cases, we don't know better which is why we do it.  Like i said before, we need methods to help us to get beyond ourselves and to really sincerely practice them. 

    The more consistent attunement to PUL, the more remembrance and growth towards Source Consciousness, the more developed the spiritual discrimination.  The more one can see clearly the degree or lack thereof, the attunement of the outer to Source.

  Everything, everything in this life and journey is about re-awakening back to that full Source at-one-ment. 

Lucy wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 10:16am:

I don't understand why, when certain topics or people come up, the discussion does NOT turn to an inquiry on whether or not the techniques or teachings are viable or useful or why or when they work, but instead becomes a witch hunt over whether or not the person should be followed. I would like to know if Robert Bruce's methods work. That's all.

Hi Lucy: Recoverer is a particularly vicious offender in this regard. Robert Bruce simply told an anecdotal story of his experience with an non-physical entity in one of his lectures… and recoverer is attempting to hang this like an albatross around Roberts neck and drown him without regard to Roberts true purpose as a spiritual teacher and researcher.  I’ve heard RB mention Sai Baba as part of a lecture setup… it is not even a part of his teaching program. Robert Bruce is particularly magnanimous in praise and acknowledgement of other writers and teachers… many teachers and lectures like to have an audience believe they are the ONLY teacher and no others exist.

But I believe that Robert Bruce is one of the most accurate practical theoretical metaphysical thinkers alive and practicing to day. I believe that his discovery of the exact mechanism of the Astral Projection mechanics alone will eventually get him a Nobel Prize when the Nobel prize people begins recognizing achievement in Metaphysics:

Here is a brief description of his discovery:

There is a fundamental energy body which resides within the physical body and does not leave the body until death. The fundamental energy body however generates an etheric double which leaves the body when it (physical body is asleep) and does a number of things during sleep… its primary function is to recharge with divine cosmic energy thus maintaining life in the physical body… in the course of a controlled projection one becomes aware of the etheric double as it enters and interacts in the astral plane. One only remembers the events when one can shift one’s point of consciousness into the etheric body, this results in the phenomena of becoming aware of having two bodies… because when the poc is shifted all your cognitive faculties are in the poc… so it becomes aware of separation from the body and can look back and see one’s own body.

Well here is how I verified for myself personally that this is a true analysis of the mechanism. A few years ago I decide to see if fasting and sleep deprevation was a valid method to do obe’ing. After seven days of water only and getting up a hour earlier that my normal time to waken… I watched my etheric double leave my heart chakra float out in front of me… then, I consciously shifted my poc into the etheric double… to say the least I was astounished (much later) when I realize that I had just verified Robert Bruce’s brilliant discovery and delineation of that exact astral projection sequence.

S.

    I had a verification of a different kind and different source. 

  Long time "explorer" with Bob Monroe, Rosiland A. McKnight, wrote a book called Cosmic Journeys based on her experiences with Bob during their sessions on nonphysical exploration, guidance, etc. 

   Rosiland McKnight worked with various guidance energies during these sessions, but it seems that often a particular "Guide" seemed to be involved as a leader sort, and Bob both humorously and fondly gave him the name of "Ah So" for a couple of reasons.   The information that came from this Guide always seemed so expanded and enlightening to both Bob and Rosie, and because when he sometimes spoke directly through Rosie's body, her voice would have a slight Asian accent.  The Being refused to give any earth based name, and Bob at the time was apparently attached to needing a name or label of some sort..

  Anyways, this guide outlined quite a lot behind nonphysical exploration, and talked at length about OBE's from various perspectives, as well as dreams, and the interrelation between various energy levels and the kinds of experiences linked with same. 

   Quite frankly, with knowing what i now know about all this phenom. as outlined by "Ah So", and has verified by some combo of experience and self guidance, i wouldn't listen to any teacher who primarily has experiences via the classic OBE phenom. 

  Ah So, outlined that we have 5 main "bodies" or levels of experience and perception within the total human energy system (which i find includes the total Solar System).  These main levels could be called the physical body, the etheric body, the emotional body, the mental body, and the spiritual body. 

    These levels though have sub levels within them.  Kind of like different graduations, one flowing from one into the other.   Each body and level, from the physical towards the spiritual, is faster vibratory than the last. 

  He mentioned that beings like Jesus Christ, could do what they could do (disappear amongst crowds, etc), because they phased fully into their spiritual body and lived from that or rather merged the physical and spiritual bodies together.  The spiritual body or level being the fastest vibratory, it is the all inclusive consciousness and can control or redirect any reaction or what not in any of the slower vibratory bodies or levels. 

  Ah So seems to be of the opinion that the classic OBE is about phasing primarily into the "etheric body" or level from the physical and that this is a limited means and usually accompanied with it is fear, attachment to sexual energies, and various other baggage issues  (hmm ring a bell of RAM's early days at all??).   

  Or in other words or by inference, it's a slower vibratory process that comes about by lack of greater attunement to PUL. 

  This was quite proved to me personally.   About 4 or so years ago, I had my 1st classic OBE quite spontaneously.   I had that very distinct experience of being "separated" from my body, in another seeming "body".   

    Around this time and during this time, I was not my usual self.  In hindsight i saw i was more egostical, self centered, imbalanced, caught up in sexual energy (i was unusually horny during this period and too attached to sexual stuff), etc.

   Interestingly from an astrological perspective, at the time I had both the Planets Saturn and Mars going through my 1st House at the same time, and Pluto closely square the ruler of my Sun Sign.  If you know astrology, you will know that Saturn, Mars, and Pluto all represent the slower vibratory aspects of human consciousness.  By those above positions at that time in my life, it shows they were all quite prominent, which only is an outer reflection in a symbolic language of what was going on internally at the time. 

   In other words, it was an unusually slow vibratory period for me and i'm not surprised, especially in light of Rosie's Guide's teachings that my only classic OBE took place then! 

   So, if Ah So teachings are to be believed, then personally I wouldn't follow any teacher whose primary interest and exploration of the nonphysical lies via the classic OBE that happens from primarily phasing the physical to the etheric level.  Such a person is by inference is spiritually limited until they attune much more to PUL.

  It's only an "octave" above the physical, and carries so much of that distortion with it because it's so "close" in vibratory wavelength.

   
  There is such a consistent, internal holistic logic to AhSo's teachings and system, that it's bit of a shame that more don't deeply consider this work.   After all, it's rumored that Bob developed aspects of the Gateway Voyage program partially on some of what came through Rosie's sessions. 

  For example, the REBALL comes from AhSo and Rosies guidance and sessions. 

 

wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 2:51pm:

I had a verification of a different kind and different source.    Anyways, this guide outlined quite a lot behind nonphysical exploration, and talked at length about OBE's from various perspectives, as well as dreams, and the interrelation between various energy levels and the kinds of experiences linked with same.     Quite frankly, with knowing what i now know about all this phenom. as outlined by "Ah So", and has verified by some combo of experience and self guidance, i wouldn't listen to any teacher who primarily has experiences via the classic OBE phenom.

I am glad you said (i) wouldn’t as opposed to nobody should… but, the implication is that the somehow classic obe’s are inferior… which is obsurd…

1. Every individual coming to the work is going to have a natural tendency…

a) My natural tendency is the mindsplit.
b) I do phase especially when using Monroe’s disc.
c) I am challenged to do the classic obe ‘just because… the mountain is there.’ And I personally believe every skill set you acquire makes you more power and in control. (by the way I am very close now to doing fully controlled obe’s. haven’t posted about it because it is too subtle to be of interest to a general audience.)

But I urge readers to find their own personal path and follow your bliss… don’t allow smug superior types to influence you in anyway.

Here is why: William Buhlmann the noted obe’er for years followed the classic obe path and is a prolific writer and teacher and now on staff at the Monroe Institute… recently in an obe’ing session he had the experience of going inward rather than outward… without getting too technical… this IS the phasing model… both he and Monroe naturally acquired the phasing skill AFTER many years of working with the classic obe skill… be assured whatever your natural inclination is you will eventually by shear evolution arrive where you need to be…

S. 

Seraphis1,
"Hi Lucy: Recoverer is a particularly vicious offender in this regard."

Haven't examined the bruce story and could care less if you were willing to walk a mile on hot coal for him, but THAT'S out of proportion.

Justin,
"Flesh and Spirit, are like oil and water, they don't mix particularly well.  Only through attunement to PUL can and will they begin to harmonize and balance."

Affection is part of it but many other experiences make up for getting to be in control of the experience rather than going along on a flesh ride, the more crowded mode of being, by design? The flesh suits are what they are, and stay that way until they're disconnected. It's not that some "ppl" have been lucky with their bodies, but that their spirits are more in charge, which various degrees of flesh controlled members of a disc pave way for.

Sourcespeed to your source attunement though I reckon source isn't really understandable while being in a body. Me thinks connecting to the disc is a great start.

A tune for the road
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyXuVx-t-jM

Good Song!

Seraphis1 wrote,
Quote:

I am glad you said (i) wouldn’t as opposed to nobody should… but, the implication is that the somehow classic obe’s are inferior… which is obsurd…

  Possibly.  However, a Being (Rosies Guide) much more intune and conscious than i seemed to imply that there were much better ways of exploring the nonphysical. 

  Classic OBE is a type of phasing as i've explained to you before.   It's often the starting point for many people when they first start having nonphysical experiences (like training wheels), but often, as they spiritually grow (by attuning more and more to PUL and via life experience), such limited ways get left largely by the wayside.   By largely, i mean one still may have the occasional etheric body phasing experience (classic OBE), but it doesn't become the primary way.   One lessens the need for such physical like bells and whistles.   That's for people who need to be convinced, and who are still very physically centered.  One might say, overly "grounded". 

   Don't take my word for it, modify that earlier affirmation I recommended, and ask about this issue. 



Quote:

But I urge readers to find their own personal path and follow your bliss…

  I often urge the same, and i give good tools and methods to help people get past themselves, like that earlier affirmation for spiritual discrimination of outer sources.  I don't expect people to take my word on things, i don't want that.  I really wish they would seek deeper guidance on it, but here is the caveat--under the ideal circumstances and set up.  There are effective methods for getting and receiving guidance, and not so effective and more limiting methods. 


Quote:

don’t allow smug superior types to influence you in anyway.

 

  Oh so subtle dig.   ;) ;D  Don't worry, i don't feel any need to get personal with any of this.  I care more about the information, and communicating in a kind (but albeit firm) and more impersonal way. 


Quote:

Here is why: William Buhlmann the noted obe’er for years followed the classic obe path and is a prolific writer and teacher and now on staff at the Monroe Institute… recently in an obe’ing session he had the experience of going inward rather than outward… without getting too technical… this IS the phasing model… both he and Monroe naturally acquired the phasing skill AFTER many years of working with the classic obe skill… be assured whatever your natural inclination is you will eventually by shear evolution arrive where you need to be…

    Not sure what the above "proves" about your point?   If anything, it argues more for what Ah So, and i am trying to outline and explain. 

  Speaking of Monroe  :), he is a great example of what i'm talking about--including his successor Bruce Moen. 

  When Monroe wrote his first book, he was as a personality, spiritually immature and unaware in many respects.   His 1st book is filled with fear and materialistic interpretations, nor was he particularly interested in service and retrievals, PUL-Oneness, Source, or higher level things like these at that point.  He was a firmly C1 entrenched business man who was quite fond of money and the material.

   Yet, his Disk/I-there, wanted to shake him up out of it all and it did that via practically almost forcing the classic out of body experience on him. 

  But the Bob Monroe in the 3rd and last book is a very different, MUCH, much more mature, spiritually aware, loving, and service oriented kind of person.   A lot of time and life experience happened between those stages.   And like you said, the Bob of this latter time, primarily explored the nonphysical through a more subtle phasing. 

  Hey, classic OBE as training wheels and/or as a start up thing, i see nothing limiting with.   We all need to start somewhere in the beginning.  I'm not necessarily trying to discourage people from being interested in or trying to have a classic OBE.   

My earlier statements were in the context of looking at people who have set themselves up as a spiritual or nonphysical source of expertise, know how, wisdom, etc.--so called spiritual teachers, and said that if they haven't gotten past the classic OBE yet, chances are they are limited spiritually for lack of greater attunement to PUL.   The degree of attunement to PUL is the yardstick of spiritual maturity or lack.    

  The "point" is, that you are not seeing, is that as someone attunes more and more purely and consistently to PUL, the more they will start to phase via their faster vibratory bodies or levels of being to explore and experience the nonphysical. 

  The ultimate "trick" is to pull a "He/She" and phase the physical body (& all other) vibrational pattern fully into the spiritual "body" or level, which is pure Light.  That takes a complete and pure attunement to PUL. 

  I don't expect the average would be teacher to be at that degree of maturity of He/She, BUT let's hope they've outgrown their training wheels at least.   ;) ;D

  See, if vibration is properly understood in terms of the balance between relativity and the absolute, then one understands that the more they attune to PUL, the fastest vibratory level there is, the more they speed up their inner vibratory patterns. 

  For exploring the nonphysical, this translates to "phasing"; phasing into ever higher "octaves" of dimensions, levels, bodies or whatever you want to call it.   

  Take Monroe again, and compare his successor Bruce Moen.  Part of the same Disk we are told.  Moen, by his own words and accounts has had a lack of experience with the classic OBE. 

  Why, surely a person so connected to Mr. classic OBE should have an easy time of it, no?   Well, i happen to believe that Moen came in as a faster vibratory personality to begin with than Monroe.  In a sense, he had a bit of a "head start" or started off as if he had the greater maturity of Bob Monroe to pull from in his own experiences and developement.  That's the great thing about being part of the same Disk, that degree of connection and inter-influence.   This is seen in various ways in Bruce compared to Bob.  For example, a much earlier interest in the nonphyscial and spiritual--especially in the all important things like PUL, Oneness, and helping others along their path. 

  So, no wonder, despite earlier yearnings, wishes, hopes, etc. that Bruce has had a hard time with having the classic OBE.   

  He's, on average, vibrationally beyond it, simply put.   It seems from the kinds of experiences he has reported, that he phases from the physical primarily into the upper emotional to the upper mental levels of self--speaking on average, though one wonders if maybe with his PI experiences and the PI raising his vibratory patterns in the temporary, that if Moen didn't get a taste of phasing into the spiritual body or level of self?    It seems like when Bob Monroe had that experience he related in his last book, wherein he went to the aperture and communicated with some completed Beings, that maybe he also had temporarily phased into his "spiritual body" or level of being, as well.

   

  Thanks Volu.  Hmm,  not sure about that, maybe you should try communicating with He/She about that one?

I don't believe it would be good to keep going on and on about what Justin and I are able to see. People are free to believe what they want.

After all, it isn't about wanting to infringe on somebody's freedom of religion. Rather, it is a word to the wise for people who are interested.

If it is wrong to offer such information, perhaps Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen were wrong to let people know about belief system territories. How dare they share information that questions the validity of what other people believe (sarcasm).

If we get into a psychological trap where we don't allow ourselves to see the writing that's on the wall, how will we find what's true?

Regarding my having a knee jerk reaction to gurus, that's just an allegation.

Regarding somebody's comment about my beating a dead horse, for some of my posts I responded to requests for more information. When you respond to requests for more information are you beating a dead horse, or is that just an allegation?

Beau:

Even Robert Bruce reached the point where he had to admit that Sai Baba molested boys. Before one irresponsibly dismisses such allegations one should do some thorough research.

If we were talking about child molesting Catholic priests, I bet you people wouldn't be so quick to use the word "allegation." It seems as if this word is used to establish innoncense without really knowing.


Beau wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 1:41pm:

Yeah, that's more like it. But I still take issue with rejecting someone's spiritual ideas just because the physical aspect of their Self can't keep it in their pants. As to child molestation the only evidence I see of that in this stuff is based on the phrase "Young Men". So where is the evidence of this heinous accusation? There have been plenty of great thinkers who devoted their life to "all things spiritual" who were fallen by the flesh. And even if he were Hitler (oh, god I hope we don't go there) if he had some insights that spoke to someone and moved them along in their OWN journey I just don't see the harm of that. To me its like outing a celebrity. I would still listen to Michael Jackson's music and enjoy it even though someday it might be proven that he indulged in the forbidden taboo... because it is his journey not mine and if something he had to say at a point in his life resonates so be it. I don't equate having an interest in someone's spiritual works the same as condoning their "impure" actions. And btw I'm not trying to imply that anyone here is saying the opposite.

It may seem that "allegations" is used to establish "Innocence" to you, Albert, but that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying without a report firsthand it is heresay. I'm not saying its not true, but I am saying that even if it is true it does not mean that what he states about enlightenment is wholly false. You could be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Anyone is capable of higher thinking and lower actions.

The  below is from J.M. Pardy’s book “Awakening to the Reconnection” (pages 184-185). Balance recommended it at the below thread. I believe it relates to some of what we discussed.

http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1287573466

-When I first saw this man, I could see as he stood in front of me that behind him were hundreds of  souls, followers of his. They were all asleep. They looked like zombies. They were awake, yet they were asleep. This man had taken a position of leadership, yet he himself didn’t have the answers to help them awaken. It was like the blind leading the blind, so to speak.

Actually, I had another dream along the same lines as this one where I was taken to another well-known leader in the spiritual community. This was a much nicer encounter, but the same message was in it. In the dream I was taken to this man. He was holding meditation classes. I do use his meditation CDs; I love them and have ever since I started using them.
He walked up to me, and we were facing each other. Once again I noticed that the souls he was training were all walking around as if they were asleep, just wandering aimlessly.

He asked me, “How did you get the code?”

I said I couldn’t tell him.

“But how did you get it? I need that code,” he said.

I said, “I’m sorry, I just can’t tell you.”

He then handed me his meditation CD, saying, “You have changed it.”

“Yes,” I said, “I have changed a few things.”
He said, “That’s fine.”

With that, the dream ended. The code they were looking for was the one to awaken the soul to the dream world. I don’t know why during this encounter my higher self would pass it on, but I know there must have been a reason and I will leave it at that for now.

Beau:

When it comes to Sai Baba, there are lots of reports of the wrongs he did. When it comes to Robert Bruce, I simply shared something that to me makes his discrimination, honesty and integrity questionable. There are other stories he has shared that I find questionable. But I won't go there since even what I did share isn't being taken seriously by some people even though it seems quite clear that something is amiss.

Regarding throwing out the baby with the bath water, my feeling is that unless a person has been changed inwardly in a meaningful way, he (or she) won't have anything to share that is truly worth hearing.

I believe that we can get along quite fine without having to rely on what people who intentionally mislead have to offer.


Beau wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 11:16pm:

It may seem that "allegations" is used to establish "Innocence" to you, Albert, but that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying without a report firsthand it is heresay. I'm not saying its not true, but I am saying that even if it is true it does not mean that what he states about enlightenment is wholly false. You could be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Anyone is capable of higher thinking and lower actions.

If one looks at the photo of Sai Baba on the link I provided, one is likely to see that he has a very distinctive look.  Plus, on the same link, Robert Bruce didn't state that he saw somebody other than Sai Baba.

recoverer wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 11:29pm:

When it comes to Robert Bruce, I simply shared something that to me makes his discrimination, honesty and integrity questionable. There are other stories he has shared that I find questionable.

If that's the case, go to RB's forum and question him, so he gets a decent chance of giving you an answer, instead of throwing sh!t in my face with claims you fail.

RB is capable of answering you. Okay?

RB has a special forum section called "Ask Robert Bruce", you know.

I think it is absolutely your right to feel the way you do Albert and even to express it here. When I first started coming here some of your posts would sway me into a fear mentality that I wasn't working my stuff out correctly, that maybe you were telling me what I needed to hear and I  was just attempting to somehow ignore it... I realized that that was not what  was going on, but I lost time thinking it thru because not many people at that time here were providing much retort to your style of thought. I think it was stuff you had to say about Seth (which I hadn't read at the time).

I think you have a very stringent rule set for what can pass as enlightenment. I would say that anything that gets us off our asses and in the Now is viable if only for at least a short while as we evolve. I do not think a person's actions are necessarily The Whole of that person.

I don't know anything about The Baba guy really and its not him that personally interests me but if I had taken your advice and not read Seth or Course in Miracles or whatever because of your reasoning and objections I would have missed out on some excellent points that have made profound gains for me. Right now I'm reading Tolle and it took me a bit to get into it but I really like it now. I don't know what you think of him but I would hazard a guess that because he sites A Course in Miracles you would not approve of his writings either.

Is it possible that you are ONLY looking for what you already know? I'm getting a little off the beat here, I guess, but when I see all this back and forth about how spiritual someone is and whether they are "dangerous" to listen to or god forbid- "Follow", I think
each person should move to the center from where they are. If I make a mistake along the line it is mine to make and my experience to gain from it.

The Church has always been quite good at disqualifying and discrediting any source other than its own microscopic view of things. Perhaps because of this fact it makes me jump in when someone is saying "don't believe it! This person did such and such so they and or their words can't be holy. Their information is tainted by their actions." We would have precious little to work from if this law were applied to all sources.

Bottom line: If one is looking for reasons to negate someone or something it is very easy to find it, especially these days. A lot of valuable information goes down the drain when a person's weaknesses become their whole identification. I would rather read from the experienced perspective than the from the perspective of the person who sits in judgement of the experiencer.

Well written Beau. I like how you put heart into reasoning.

  Hi there Beau, 

  Most of the outer sources of info I like, i know aren't perfect and come from people that aren't perfect.  People who have failings, people who make mistakes, people who don't know everything, people not completely attuned to PUL and Source, etc.

  There is nothing wrong with that, it's "ok", and very few sources or beings in connection with this world are perfected (fully Source attuned) and only correct about everything. 

   But that's not the real issue for me, the issue is deliberately misleading and/or extra ignorant or limiting sources, which when overly listened too, help to keep people stuck. 

Beau, Beau, if you could only see how many real, nonphysically based Helpers (for an example) or Guidance in general tries to either help steer people clear of these, or try to disentangle them from such influences, and see how much energy they spend on this overwhelming and at times seemingly fruitless task, it might make you stop and ponder a different perspective on this.  But they respect our freewill, and will only try to steer us in the right direction or help in deprogramming limiting beliefs. 

  It takes us to listen, to hook up to the more helpful and aware guidance energies to begin with, and then to follow through on the necessary inner changes and choices.   

  Anyways, Bruce Moen teaches good methods which help out in this whole process.  I think if people stick with practicing such methods that Bruce teaches, they will eventually be ok or much better than that.  Bruce came pretty highly recommended by my guidance, and despite the fact that he is not a He/She type yet.   ;)

Justin:

Of course you mean Bruce Moen, not Robert Bruce.

recoverer,

"Of course you mean Bruce Moen, not Robert Bruce."

Justin just wrote Bruce at the end of his last post, so it remains to be seen if people flock and worship the right bruce. Since this is one of the bruces' website, here are the other bruces' books:

http://www.glidewing.com/astraldynamics/products_home.html

Happy bruceday!

Seems to me the Robert Bruce thread has officially jumped the shark.

R

No, Rondele, please don't switch channels. The other shows are more of the same too. Hmm. Just needs more dirt.

Robert Bruce admits being a liar huckster but then blatantly tries to hide it for all to see:

http://robertbruce.com/

RB is certainly getting a good mud slinging on this thread.

For me, it makes no difference what some well informed , experienced people on here say. I already have his Energy Work and Astral Dynamics books and determine views and questions on the content alone. Of the two, I think the energy work book stands out better.

As an aside, his  ex-wife has the forums http://forums.riverofenlightenment.com/index.php

sanatogen wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2011 at 7:40pm:

RB is certainly getting a good mud slinging on this thread. For me, it makes no difference what some well informed , experienced people on here say. I already have his Energy Work and Astral Dynamics books and determine views and questions on the content alone. Of the two, I think the energy work book stands out better. As an aside, his  ex-wife has the forums http://forums.riverofenlightenment.com/index.php

Hi San: Have you done the exercises yet...? Do you feel the energy flows? Have you identified the energy points... and feel energy in them? Keep us posted on your progress with it... start a new thread so you don't get into the meaness of some of the jealousy expressed against RB.

S.

Seraphis:

If you "actually" believe that Justin and I are jealous of Robert Bruce, you are so off base it's ridiculous.

With such a statement it seems to me that you are so attached to being right about Robert Bruce that you'll resort to just about any statement to make it seem as if there is nothing questionable about him.

I do not believe that any person who uses any degree of discernment would be impressed.

Perhaps you should take a breath and seriously consider why Justin and I took the time to write what we wrote.



Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2011 at 10:43pm:

sanatogen wrote on Feb 22nd, 2011 at 7:40pm: RB is certainly getting a good mud slinging on this thread. For me, it makes no difference what some well informed , experienced people on here say. I already have his Energy Work and Astral Dynamics books and determine views and questions on the content alone. Of the two, I think the energy work book stands out better. As an aside, his  ex-wife has the forums http://forums.riverofenlightenment.com/index.php Hi San: Have you done the exercises yet...? Do you feel the energy flows? Have you identified the energy points... and feel energy in them? Keep us posted on your progress with it... start a new thread so you don't get into the meaness of some of the jealousy expressed against RB. S.

Volu wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2011 at 3:01pm:

No, Rondele, please don't switch channels. The other shows are more of the same too. Hmm. Just needs more dirt. Robert Bruce admits being a liar huckster but then blatantly tries to hide it for all to see: http://robertbruce.com/

If you read a page or so along you will see that this person denies being the "astral projection Robert Bruce" - it's not the same person!

I know, kiro. Was going for comic relief. :p

My bad, didn't get that one, sorry!  ;D

A little comic relief would not hurt this thread in the slightest IMO.

Seraphis1 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 1:03pm:

[quote author=7B42544E370 link=1294677881/63#63 date=1298211410] But I believe that Robert Bruce is one of the most accurate practical theoretical metaphysical thinkers alive and practicing to day. I believe that his discovery of the exact mechanism of the Astral Projection mechanics alone will eventually get him a Nobel Prize when the Nobel prize people begins recognizing achievement in Metaphysics: Here is a brief description of his discovery: There is a fundamental energy body which resides within the physical body and does not leave the body until death. The fundamental energy body however generates an etheric double which leaves the body when it (physical body is asleep) and does a number of things during sleep… its primary function is to recharge with divine cosmic energy thus maintaining life in the physical body… in the course of a controlled projection one becomes aware of the etheric double as it enters and interacts in the astral plane. One only remembers the events when one can shift one’s point of consciousness into the etheric body, this results in the phenomena of becoming aware of having two bodies… because when the poc is shifted all your cognitive faculties are in the poc… so it becomes aware of separation from the body and can look back and see one’s own body. Well here is how I verified for myself personally that this is a true analysis of the mechanism. A few years ago I decide to see if fasting and sleep deprevation was a valid method to do obe’ing. After seven days of water only and getting up a hour earlier that my normal time to waken… I watched my etheric double leave my heart chakra float out in front of me… then, I consciously shifted my poc into the etheric double… to say the least I was astounished (much later) when I realize that I had just verified Robert Bruce’s brilliant discovery and delineation of that exact astral projection sequence. S.

Seraphis1,

Just because one method works, doesn't mean it's the only method that works, nor the best method.  I read some of RB's stuff years ago, didn't agree with some of the stuff he claims is the "only" way it works, so I stopped reading.  Maybe he does have some good stuff to share...but to comment on what I quoted you saying...

I'm a diabetic, and there's no way I can or will starve myself just to have an OBE.  It's not even necessary.  Why put myself through agony and near death when there are way more easier methods for OBE than that??  I'm not saying it doesn't work, I believe it does, you are correct.  However, you can also have OBEs on drugs and painkillers....is that a great method too just because it works?  No, certainly not. 

I will always support Bruce Moen's methods, especially here since this is his website, but from my own personal experience, Bruce's teachings and techniques have been the easiest to induce an OBE.  I know that he doesn't teach that his methods cause OBEs, but I have noticed from my own personal experience that his methods easily led me into having an OBE. 

I have other methods too, besides Bruce Moen's work, that also induce OBE that I didn't learn from RB and that RB doesn't teach. 

At the end of the day, I go with what works for me, and if it's easiest and healthiest, then that makes the most sense to me. 

Vicky

Just got this email:




G'Day Family,

This is Robert Bruce's partner, Timothy here.

We need to have a talk...

Since we started this new online venture
and movement, we've gotten loads of
emails and comments about what we're doing.

And the feedback we get falls clearly
into two distinct categories:

1. Those that LOVE what we're doing.
2. Those that don't.

The long and the short of it is:
The people in group 2 don't like that
we make money selling spiritual training.

They tell us that they want us to give
them all our hard work totally for free.

They believe its immoral to charge
money for spiritual goods.

But you must understand how impractical
that demand is. It's utterly unrealistic.

Let's pretend we did do everything for
free.

How would our company fund the production
of all the programs, websites, and people
that work on this team?

The fact of the matter... and this is
something that the people in camp 1
understand, and the people in camp 2
need to learn... is that on planet Earth,
we all participate in what's called
an economy.

In an economy everything has a cost.
When I choose to invest thousands of
my own dollars into creating a course for
you, I cannot just give it to you for free.
That would cause my company to collapse,
and I would be forced to stop making
the content that you so treasure and
appreciate.

It's flattering that you love my work,
but I literally need to ask you to pay
for it simply so that we can keep
growing the business, and achieve the
physical spiritual institute toward
which we are working!

Not to mention I need to eat, and
pay the bills in my own life!

To the people in camp 2, I say that it's
immoral for you try to put me out of business
by demanding we give you our life's
work for free without any fair compensation.

And to you in camp 1, that respect the nature
of economics, and spirituality...

Thanks for your loyalty.

Here's the bottom line: if you really want
to see this work succeed, and have spiritual
abundance, then tell all of your friends
to get our programs, and sign up for this
newsletter. Because the more wealth
we bring into "The Family", the sooner
we can give you MORE free stuff!

For goodness sake, we've already committed
to giving you a free video training blog
for ever!

Be reasonable. And some thanks would be nice, too.

Yours,
Timothy

I Am Dude wrote on Mar 12^th, 2011 at 2:59pm:

Just got this email: G'Day Family, This is Robert Bruce's partner, Timothy here. We need to have a talk... Since we started this new online venture and movement, we've gotten loads of emails and comments about what we're doing. And the feedback we get falls clearly into two distinct categories: 1. Those that LOVE what we're doing. 2. Those that don't. The long and the short of it is: The people in group 2 don't like that we make money selling spiritual training. They tell us that they want us to give them all our hard work totally for free. They believe its immoral to charge money for spiritual goods. But you must understand how impractical that demand is. It's utterly unrealistic. Let's pretend we did do everything for free. How would our company fund the production of all the programs, websites, and people that work on this team? The fact of the matter... and this is something that the people in camp 1 understand, and the people in camp 2 need to learn... is that on planet Earth, we all participate in what's called an economy. In an economy everything has a cost. When I choose to invest thousands of my own dollars into creating a course for you, I cannot just give it to you for free. That would cause my company to collapse, and I would be forced to stop making the content that you so treasure and appreciate. It's flattering that you love my work, but I literally need to ask you to pay for it simply so that we can keep growing the business, and achieve the physical spiritual institute toward which we are working! Not to mention I need to eat, and pay the bills in my own life! To the people in camp 2, I say that it's immoral for you try to put me out of business by demanding we give you our life's work for free without any fair compensation. And to you in camp 1, that respect the nature of economics, and spirituality... Thanks for your loyalty. Here's the bottom line: if you really want to see this work succeed, and have spiritual abundance, then tell all of your friends to get our programs, and sign up for this newsletter. Because the more wealth we bring into "The Family", the sooner we can give you MORE free stuff! For goodness sake, we've already committed to giving you a free video training blog for ever! Be reasonable. And some thanks would be nice, too. Yours, Timothy

and your opinion is???

S.

What's to love about making up stories and then steeping so low you defend child molestation in order to protect your reputation?

The money making issue is besides the point.

Changing the subject doesn't nullify what Robert Bruce did.

I posted on this site for many years and the interactions, though often contentious, were invaluable in helping me sort out my views on astral projection and the afterlife.  I seldom post now, mainly because over 10 years, I have said almost everything I have to say here.  I do want to ask a question about the Robert Bruce issue.  What does the character of a child molester like Sai Baba have to do with the genuiness of his astral appearance to Robert Bruce?  Psychic gifts need not be a reward for a commendable character.

As an aside, a school psychologist named Craig regularly conducted outstanding children's moments in my church.  Our conversations were generally about projects he could perform to serve the church and make our town a more loving place.  In recent months, he seemed to be growing spiritually in leaps and bounds.  Then the bomb!  He is a serial child molester and is now serving 14 1/2 years in jail for his crimes.  I always sensed that he was keeping something from me, but I never dreamed that it would be child molesting.  Craig was one of the most respected men in our community, very compassionate to anyone who was hurting--but obviously not compassionate towards children.  We lost members when I insisted that we should still try to love Craig.  I visited him weekly in our local jail before he was shipped out to Spokane.  Many were horrifed that I wanted them to sign a birthday card to Craig.   I guess they want his life in jail to be an unrelentling Hell.  That is why I appreciate the desire to perform retrievals on this site.   People who lose their way should have the chance to resume their journey of progress towards pure uncondtional love. 

By the way, I have posted material from my threads about verfications of OBEs and NDEs on a liberal Christian site.  Most liberal Christians think that such experiences have no validity at all.  They even generally dismiss Swedenborg's awesome verifications.  I am realizing that, on issues that matter most to me, I feel more affinities with posters on this site than on Christian sites.  That is a hard thing for a Christian pastor like me to admit.   

recoverer wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 5:38pm:

What's to love about making up stories and then steeping so low you defend child molestation in order to protect your reputation? The money making issue is besides the point. Changing the subject doesn't nullify what Robert Bruce did.

recoverer, you are not coherent any longer.

_Exactly_ to whom are you directing your hate?

Berserk2 wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 6:10pm:

I posted on this site for many years and the interactions, though often contentious, were invaluable in helping me sort out my views on astral projection and the afterlife.  I seldom post now, mainly because over 10 years, I have said almost everything I have to say here.  I do want to ask a question about the Robert Bruce issue.  What does the character of a child molester like Sai Baba have to do with the genuiness of his astral appearance to Robert Bruce?  Psychic gifts need not be a reward for a commendable character.

Hi B: It doesn't have anything to do with spiritual abilities. I have posted in earlier segments in this thread that there is a testing phase that occurs as one progresses on the spiritual path... one is offered choices... the belief system complex that you personal have developed over the millinium will present themselves for resolution... your ability to distinguish subtle rights from subtle wrongs get tested by these belief systems... how you resolve the belief structures determines how you progress or digress.

S.

Berserk2 wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 6:10pm:

By the way, I have posted material from my threads about verfications of OBEs and NDEs on a liberal Christian site.  Most liberal Christians think that such experiences have no validity at all.  They even generally dismiss Swedenborg's awesome verifications.  I am realizing that, on issues that matter most to me, I feel more affinities with posters on this site than on Christian sites.  That is a hard thing for a Christian pastor like me to admit.

Hi B: Most Christians cherry pick the scriptures... Eccleisaties is loaded with references to obe's and the like... but one has to be able to understand what one read... most so called Christians don't have a clue what their Bible is telling them.

S.

Uh, Seraphis, did you really mean, Ecclesiastes.  If so, please provide an example of an OBE allusion there.

Seraphis:

It seems as if you are cherry picking what you want to read on this thread.


[/quote]

Hi B: Most Christians cherry pick the scriptures... Eccleisaties is loaded with references to obe's and the like... but one has to be able to understand what one read... most so called Christians don't have a clue what their Bible is telling them.

S.[/quote]

Pauli Effect:

First you're going to say that I am no longer coherant, and then you're going to acuse me of hate? If you took a moment to seriously consider why I bother to write what I write, you would see that hate has nothing to do with it.



PauliEffectt wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 6:20pm:

recoverer wrote on Mar 13th, 2011 at 5:38pm: What's to love about making up stories and then steeping so low you defend child molestation in order to protect your reputation? The money making issue is besides the point. Changing the subject doesn't nullify what Robert Bruce did. recoverer, you are not coherent any longer. _Exactly_ to whom are you directing your hate?

Don:

I won't take the time to explain once again how Robert Bruce's honesty and integrity become questionable when you consider the entire Sai Baba issue that has been written about.

Regarding his skills, I'm sure there are some demons that have pretty good skills too, but I have no interest in learning of them.  I would much rather learn about something such as the purity of the heart of Christ.  Such knowledge is what truly matters. If a man will make up a Sai Baba story and then defend Sais' child molesting ways in order to protect his own reputation, I doubt that this man understands about the purity than can be found in a being like Christ.

It troubles me that what could be a key spiritual center is being started by a person who doesn't live according to the honesty, integrity and purity that Jesus lived according to.

Skills are a dime a dozen, the knowledge that beings such as Christ have to share is priceless.



Berserk2 wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 6:10pm:

I posted on this site for many years and the interactions, though often contentious, were invaluable in helping me sort out my views on astral projection and the afterlife.  I seldom post now, mainly because over 10 years, I have said almost everything I have to say here.  I do want to ask a question about the Robert Bruce issue.  What does the character of a child molester like Sai Baba have to do with the genuiness of his astral appearance to Robert Bruce?  Psychic gifts need not be a reward for a commendable character. As an aside, a school psychologist named Craig regularly conducted outstanding children's moments in my church.  Our conversations were generally about projects he could perform to serve the church and make our town a more loving place.  In recent months, he seemed to be growing spiritually in leaps and bounds.  Then the bomb!  He is a serial child molester and is now serving 14 1/2 years in jail for his crimes.  I always sensed that he was keeping something from me, but I never dreamed that it would be child molesting.  Craig was one of the most respected men in our community, very compassionate to anyone who was hurting--but obviously not compassionate towards children.  We lost members when I insisted that we should still try to love Craig.  I visited him weekly in our local jail before he was shipped out to Spokane.  Many were horrifed that I wanted them to sign a birthday card to Craig.   I guess they want his life in jail to be an unrelentling Hell.  That is why I appreciate the desire to perform retrievals on this site.   People who lose their way should have the chance to resume their journey of progress towards pure uncondtional love.  By the way, I have posted material from my threads about verfications of OBEs and NDEs on a liberal Christian site.  Most liberal Christians think that such experiences have no validity at all.  They even generally dismiss Swedenborg's awesome verifications.  I am realizing that, on issues that matter most to me, I feel more affinities with posters on this site than on Christian sites.  That is a hard thing for a Christian pastor like me to admit.

P.S.

You know why people make up stories?

Because it's damn easy to get away with them.

Berserk2 wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 8:38pm:

Uh, Seraphis, did you really mean, Ecclesiastes.  If so, please provide an example of an OBE allusion there.

Hi B: You will have to read the whole of Eccleisates and look at it from the point of view of what you now know about obe's and nde's"

Ecclesiastes 12 (New International Version, ©2011)

Ecclesiastes 12

6 Remember him—before the silver cord is severed,
   and the golden bowl is broken;
before the pitcher is shattered at the spring,
   and the wheel broken at the well,
7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from,
   and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

Of course, you know what the silver cord is... the golden bowl is the crown chakra.

S.

You will find no scholarly commentary that considers it even possible that there is life after death.  Life after death is clearly implied in only one Old Testament  text, Daniel 12:1-3.   Your chakra and golden cord interpretation of course represents a reading of later New Age thought read back into Ecclesiastes where it was never intended.  But his point is irrelevant to the key points made on this thread. 

Sai Baba was probably an astral adept, but I agree that his character flaws make him a dubious guru on the nature of afterlife spirituality. 

recoverer,
why are you spreading this?


recoverer wrote on Mar 13^th, 2011 at 8:58pm:

I won't take the time to explain once again how Robert Bruce's honesty and integrity become questionable when you consider the entire Sai Baba issue that has been written about. Regarding his skills, I'm sure there are some demons that have pretty good skills too, but I have no interest in learning of them. If a man will make up a Sai Baba story and then defend Sais' child molesting ways in order to protect his own reputation, I doubt that this man understands about the purity than can be found in a being like Christ.

Aren't there _any_ moderators that can take care of recoverer?

I have already posted what RB has written, but I'll obviously have to quote myself again:



PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 19^th, 2011 at 2:19pm:

Justin, you still haven't proven anything. You claimed: wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 11:29pm: ...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester... Then you pick some quote from RB and you still fail to support your claim: wrote on Feb 19th, 2011 at 1:02pm:   But wait, this is what RB said before any of the above, Quote: I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba... They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami. So Justin, do you consider that highlights of yours as "defends a known child molester"? Do you? What RB in fact states is that most of the allegations against Sai B are basically true. God Lord! RB seems to consider most of the allegations basically true! BASICALLY TRUE! ALLEGATIONS ARE BASICALLY TRUE !!! If RB doesn't put his words carefully here, I would say that he could get sued. In my opinion RB says that Sai B is guilty to almost whatever he is accused for! ALMOST anything! Is that statement a defense of Sai Baba?!!!! A DEFENSE???!!   D-E-F-E-N-S-E ? ? ? Good riddance! So. Justin, do you still consider it a "defends a known child molester"? Well?

Hi Pauli: You are beating a dead horse. There is a rule in the world of reincarnation... the thing you hate the most is the thing you have not resolved within your own personal universe... and the thing you will have to go through at some point... the thing you have sympathy for is the thing you have already resolved in your own universe.. in short recoverer is cruising toward a waterfall... and at some point he will become the thing he hates.

S.


PauliEffectt wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 2:52am:

recoverer, why are you spreading this? recoverer wrote on Mar 13th, 2011 at 8:58pm: I won't take the time to explain once again how Robert Bruce's honesty and integrity become questionable when you consider the entire Sai Baba issue that has been written about. Regarding his skills, I'm sure there are some demons that have pretty good skills too, but I have no interest in learning of them. If a man will make up a Sai Baba story and then defend Sais' child molesting ways in order to protect his own reputation, I doubt that this man understands about the purity than can be found in a being like Christ. Aren't there _any_ moderators that can take care of recoverer? I have already posted what RB has written, but I'll obviously have to quote myself again: PauliEffectt wrote on Feb 19th, 2011 at 2:19pm: Justin, you still haven't proven anything. You claimed: wrote on Feb 18th, 2011 at 11:29pm: ...this to also makes me wonder about RB's spiritual discrimination.  ...when he... ...defends a known child molester... Then you pick some quote from RB and you still fail to support your claim: wrote on Feb 19th, 2011 at 1:02pm:   But wait, this is what RB said before any of the above, Quote: I met and became friends with a family that has followed Sai Baba... They told me that most of the allegations against swami are basically true. These people are highly spiritual and I have no reason to disbelieve their person experience. They are as confused and embarrassed as anyone else who follows this swami. So Justin, do you consider that highlights of yours as "defends a known child molester"? Do you? What RB in fact states is that most of the allegations against Sai B are basically true. God Lord! RB seems to consider most of the allegations basically true! BASICALLY TRUE! ALLEGATIONS ARE BASICALLY TRUE !!! If RB doesn't put his words carefully here, I would say that he could get sued. In my opinion RB says that Sai B is guilty to almost whatever he is accused for! ALMOST anything! Is that statement a defense of Sai Baba?!!!! A DEFENSE???!!   D-E-F-E-N-S-E ? ? ? Good riddance! So. Justin, do you still consider it a "defends a known child molester"? Well?

Dear longtime friend, Recoverer, perhaps your words would be better taken if you spoke more 'for' the victims and less 'against' the accused. Even your greatest Teacher was put to death on account of the accusations of others, in fact chosen by the people themselves over another. It does happen that those who are accused can be so unjustly. And it does happen that those without a 'voice' are unjustly abused. When one looks at the behavior, and not so much at the 'person', it is easier for all to agree that the behavior must not be repeated. How to accomplish that task is the work of many, but there are also 'many' rivers to cross. When we cross that last river, who will we be? No one can count the good deeds of another while on this earth, nor can they know all of the bad deeds. For this reason, I believe we must be cautious to judge, but swift to protect, for all of our sakes.

Don (Berserk) wrote:

Sai Baba was probably an astral adept, but I agree that his character flaws make him a dubious guru on the nature of afterlife spirituality.

Recoverer responds:

Below is what Robert Bruce wrote. It sounds like something other than astral projection "allegedly" took place. Notice the words "high-level spirit plain energy." There is also the matter of why Robert defended Sai Baba's child molestation in more than one way.


"Later that evening while revising my original notes (a few hours after making the initial discovery) Sathya Sai Baba, materialised before me in my office. He is said to be an avatar. There is a lot of controversy surrounding this Indian mystic, but regardless of this he does appear to be an incredibly powerful spiritual presence on this earth.

I was sitting alone, gazing blankly at my notes while I pondered the enormous implications of my new discovery. Suddenly, and for no apparent reason, the dimensional veil rent and the brilliant-silver light of high-level spirit plane energy flooded the room. Sai Baba stepped out of this light and materialised in front of me, solid and life sized. He beamed at me, smiling and gesturing animatedly towards me, as if saying: "Now you've found it what are you going to do with it? Baba stayed visible only for about thirty seconds, but this event had a lasting effect on my work, not to mention upon myself, greatly encouraging me.

After Sai Baba left, I pondered on what had happened, the importance of it all, and what I should do about it. I decided to act according to my nature and give it away to the world, just as Baba seemed to have been suggesting."

B2:

Victims? If you mean the many people who are misled by false gurus etc., I'm speaking up for them.



wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 9:08am:

Dear longtime friend, Recoverer, perhaps your words would be better taken if you spoke more 'for' the victims and less 'against' the accused. Even your greatest Teacher was put to death on account of the accusations of others, in fact chosen by the people themselves over another. It does happen that those who are accused can be so unjustly. And it does happen that those without a 'voice' are unjustly abused. When one looks at the behavior, and not so much at the 'person', it is easier for all to agree that the behavior must not be repeated. How to accomplish that task is the work of many, but there are also 'many' rivers to cross. When we cross that last river, who will we be? No one can count the good deeds of another while on this earth, nor can they know all of the bad deeds. For this reason, I believe we must be cautious to judge, but swift to protect, for all of our sakes.

Seraphis1, if you knew me, you'd see how inapplicable your below words are. If you think it's okay for a person who makes up stories to be a leader of perhaps a key spiritual center, that's your choice.

If a person doesn't have a closed mind, he (or she), even if he doesn't choose to agree with what Justin and  I wrote,  would at the very least see that what we say has some merit.

Seraphis wrote: Hi Pauli: You are beating a dead horse. There is a rule in the world of reincarnation... the thing you hate the most is the thing you have not resolved within your own personal universe... and the thing you will have to go through at some point... the thing you have sympathy for is the thing you have already resolved in your own universe.. in short recoverer is cruising toward a waterfall... and at some point he will become the thing he hates.

S.

One needs to ask one's self is it actually loving to not speak up when one person misleads others. One needs to make certain that one doesn't buy into a concept of being loving, rather than actually being loving.

I say this with the viewpoint that some people won't say anything anything against others because according to the pattern of mind they use when they try to be loving, you can never say anything negative about another.

It isn't a matter of saying negative things about others  for the purpose of putting them down. It is a matter of trying to make it so people who mislead others do so less.

I have no negative feelings towards Sai Baba and Robert Bruce. I wish them the best. If you knew about some of the people and beings I helped retrieve, you'd understand that I'm not into punishing people.

My feeling is that once Sai Baba reaches the point where he can consider what he did honestly, he would have no problem with what I say. The negative results of what he did still continue today. When he becomes a responsible soul he'll want such negative effects to go away. He'll greatly appreciate people who spoke against him and therefore helped minimize the negative effects. 

Berserk2,
"People who lose their way should have the chance to resume their journey of progress towards pure uncondtional love."

My two best friends and several other friends have experienced abuse from adults and I've got to know how they've coped with it. While I don't spend time with abusers that I know of, I do know that every body is commanded or tried commanded by a little spark some call spirit, which may be severely immature. The kick in the groin though is that this spirit is one of many projections which can be traced back to a so called disc or oversoul. WHY this is; WHY some body is saved from a car crash by the disc and not saved from abuse is hard to grasp. Without the label, it's experience which seems to be the ultimate goal for everything here, but this is something which I find very, very creepy. To some degree I think unconditional paves way for an OK to dark actions. Sometimes a NO or a rejection is what makes somebody aware of their actions and learn from it.

These days I find it easier not to hate, but I very much reserve my right NOT to like something. And you certainly have your life with your choices, which I really cannot weigh with anything other than my own scale. That is, I don't know what your or craig's lives are about in a spiritual sense.

"I am realizing that, on issues that matter most to me, I feel more affinities with posters on this site than on Christian sites.  That is a hard thing for a Christian pastor like me to admit."

Non-conformity can be a lonely path, but one I think that is more aligned with the inner world and the world beyond this one. Following a path where people pat one's back can be even lonelier if one knows one shouldn't be walking on it but didn't have the guts to make that decision.

One last thing I will say, Recoverer, is that if you are trying to communicate on such an important subject as 'abuse by gurus', perhaps listen to the responses that you receive. It is clear to me by listening to the responses to your posts over the years, that, by a large margin, your message seems to be grudgingly acknowledged, and often taken as a hostile one towards people that you don't actually know. If you have good feelings toward these people, it does not come through in a way that is understood, if you understand what I'm saying. But, it's really none of my business. I simply feel that it might be worth considering what message is actually getting through to people, if your heart is in the right place, as you see it. Take care. That's all I really have to add.


recoverer wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 1:16pm:

One needs to ask one's self is it actually loving to not speak up when one person misleads others. One needs to make certain that one doesn't buy into a concept of being loving, rather than actually being loving. I say this with the viewpoint that some people won't say anything anything against others because according to the pattern of mind they use when they try to be loving, you can never say anything negative about another. It isn't a matter of saying negative things about others  for the purpose of putting them down. It is a matter of trying to make it so people who mislead others do so less. I have no negative feelings towards Sai Baba and Robert Bruce. I wish them the best. If you knew about some of the people and beings I helped retrieve, you'd understand that I'm not into punishing people. My feeling is that once Sai Baba reaches the point where he can consider what he did honestly, he would have no problem with what I say. The negative results of what he did still continue today. When he becomes a responsible soul he'll want such negative effects to go away. He'll greatly appreciate people who spoke against him and therefore helped minimize the negative effects.

recoverer wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 1:04pm:

Seraphis1, if you knew me, you'd see how inapplicable your below words are. If you think it's okay for a person who makes up stories to be a leader of perhaps a key spiritual center, that's your choice. If a person doesn't have a closed mind, he (or she), even if he doesn't choose to agree with what Justin and  I wrote,  would at the very least see that what we say has some merit. Seraphis wrote: Hi Pauli: You are beating a dead horse. There is a rule in the world of reincarnation... the thing you hate the most is the thing you have not resolved within your own personal universe... and the thing you will have to go through at some point... the thing you have sympathy for is the thing you have already resolved in your own universe.. in short recoverer is cruising toward a waterfall... and at some point he will become the thing he hates. S.

Hi R: From my point of view you seem to be bailing the ocean with a teaspoon... the cosmos is quite self-correcting without a lot of help from puny human intrusion... that said there are laws that govern the ebb and flow of personal issues... on a cosmic level which you fit like a glove... attacking Robert Bruce, Eckhart Tolle and others is unworthy... Bobert Bruce someday will be seen to be a major theoretician in the metaphysical field... there are at least three discoveries he has identified that would achieve major awards if there where such metaphysical entiites to make such award of peer reviewed research.

S.

Seraphis:

If everybody does their part then what needs to be accomplished will be accomplished. If everybody does nothing with the thought that one person can't do anything, then nothing will be accomplished.

I did not attack Robert Bruce and Tolle in a malicious way. I simply wrote about behavior I consider questionable. If a person doesn't want people to say negative things about him, then he shouldn't become a public figure and then do unethical things.

Is it okay to speak about the unethical things George W did, or should everybody keep quiet with the concept they are being loving?

Perhaps a future president would be less likely to do as George W did if he (or she) understood that he would be held accountable.

Perhaps fewer people would become false gurus if people had enough gumption to stand up to them.

Perhaps what took place in Egypt is a better example of what works, than when people act as if everything is a-okay when it isn't.



Seraphis1 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 2:47pm:

recoverer wrote on Mar 14th, 2011 at 1:04pm: Seraphis1, if you knew me, you'd see how inapplicable your below words are. If you think it's okay for a person who makes up stories to be a leader of perhaps a key spiritual center, that's your choice. If a person doesn't have a closed mind, he (or she), even if he doesn't choose to agree with what Justin and  I wrote,  would at the very least see that what we say has some merit. Seraphis wrote: Hi Pauli: You are beating a dead horse. There is a rule in the world of reincarnation... the thing you hate the most is the thing you have not resolved within your own personal universe... and the thing you will have to go through at some point... the thing you have sympathy for is the thing you have already resolved in your own universe.. in short recoverer is cruising toward a waterfall... and at some point he will become the thing he hates. S. Hi R: From my point of view you seem to be bailing the ocean with a teaspoon... the cosmos is quite self-correcting without a lot of help from puny human intrusion... that said there are laws that govern the ebb and flow of personal issues... on a cosmic level which you fit like a glove... attacking Robert Bruce, Eckhart Tolle and others is unworthy... Bobert Bruce someday will be seen to be a major theoretician in the metaphysical field... there are at least three discoveries he has identified that would achieve major awards if there where such metaphysical entiites to make such award of peer reviewed research. S.

Yeshua occasionally spoke critically about the erring behavior of some people and of groups, and he was according to Rosiland McKnight's guidance, "the highest vibratory being born into the Earth". 

  So, even such a loving and Source attuned person as he addressed the shadow in others, in life, and in human interactions. 

    In fact, if he hadn't spoken critically about the behaviors, actions, limited beliefs and mind sets, etc. of the Pharisees, Sadducees, Scribes, etc., chances are they would have been less likely to have plotted his murder.  It's what angered them the most. 

   One doesn't have to be coming from a place of typical human judgment, negative feelings, unlove, etc. to speak critically about such things.  I would suspect that Yeshua spoke about those things precisely because he was a very loving and aware person, and he wanted to the average person to wake up and take back some of the power they had handed over to the Pharisees, and other "authorities" or so called experts of the time. 

So, sometimes it can be a good thing to address the lacks of a particular authority, if done with the right intent, motivation, and feelings.  The Teacher of teachers example shows this pretty plainly.

  Such inner, heart realities are often very hard to read from anothers typed words over the I-net unless the person reading is a very clear, balanced, and intune sensitive/intuitive who is not emotionally involved with or hung up on the subject or interaction at hand. 

  With that said, there is also wisdom in knowing when enough is enough, and not continuing the same old same old.

Speaking of addressing lacks and of impersonal criticism.  If you read "Cosmic Journey's" by Rosiland A. McKnight, you will probably note, like i did that Rosie's guidance was generally very supportive, gentle, and loving when it came to interacting with Rosie and Bob Monroe. 

But, this wasn't always the case.  There is a chapter in that book called something like, "Control: The Foods We Eat." 

At one point in Rosie's guidance's work with Bob and Rosie, they got very serious with both of them about their need to clean up their act when it came to health and diet lifestyle choices. 

In fact, at one point they made it clear that if Rosie and Bob didn't do this, that they would stop working in manner they had been working with Bob and Rosie till that point. 

They were both told they needed much more discipline and consistency in those areas.  That it was important to do if they wanted the information to come through in a more clear and less distorted way (reminds me of Edgar Cayce's guidance and their occasional admonitions to him to clean up his act when it came to health, food, etc).   

  But wait, criticism coming from such aware and loving Guidance energies??   Not possible!   

Ah, but Love is so much more and bigger than we realize, and there is a such a thing or aspect of the big PUL as tough love, of which Rosie and Bob tasted with "Ah So" and her guidance team. 

  Just something to think about before putting Love into little rose colored boxes of the Venusian tint. 

  Btw, just a quick note to Don regarding RB and the Sai Baba issue.   

I completely agree with Recoverer's take on this issue.  If you read the account closely and carefully, you will understand that RB was not describing a typical, run of the mill astral visitation, but rather a full, instant materialization that it's rumored in various esoteric and occult sources that only the "Masters" /completed Beings or Angels can do.  Meaning, they can re-create or materialize a physical body on the spot from within Consciousness. 

   This makes it a very different issue than what you seem to have been presupposing.  Also, there is the other issue that Albert brought up which you don't seem to be taking into account. 

  I suspect this is because you more or less like or "resonate" with RB's material, as i've seen you speak positively about him on several occasions in the further past, and seem to hold him and his work in higher esteem than Bob Monroe or Bruce Moen and their work.

Justin,
what are you doing?


wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 4:06pm:

Btw, just a quick note to Don regarding RB and the Sai Baba issue.    I completely agree with Recoverer's take on this issue.  If you read the account closely and carefully, you will understand that RB was not describing a typical, run of the mill astral visitation, but rather a full, instant materialization that it's rumored in various esoteric and occult sources that only the "Masters" /completed Beings or Angels can do.  Meaning, they can re-create or materialize a physical body on the spot from within Consciousness.

Why do you throw sh!t in my face?

I let you get away with it before because I clearly remember you say:


wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 12:34pm:

I'm not going to comment anymore on the RB issue on this thread, as i said earlier.

But now you _are_ commenting on it.

Why do you lie?

Pauli:

You are "really" grasping at straws here. To call somebody a liar because he changed his mind about talking about something further, seems a bit off-based. Perhaps Justin decided to talk some more because he figured that the need that exists now is different than the need that existed before. Certainly a person can see that needs have changed without being a liar.





PauliEffectt wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 5:04pm:

Justin, what are you doing? wrote on Mar 14th, 2011 at 4:06pm:   Btw, just a quick note to Don regarding RB and the Sai Baba issue.    I completely agree with Recoverer's take on this issue.  If you read the account closely and carefully, you will understand that RB was not describing a typical, run of the mill astral visitation, but rather a full, instant materialization that it's rumored in various esoteric and occult sources that only the "Masters" /completed Beings or Angels can do.  Meaning, they can re-create or materialize a physical body on the spot from within Consciousness.  Why do you throw sh!t in my face? I let you get away with it before because I clearly remember you say: wrote on Feb 20th, 2011 at 12:34pm: I'm not going to comment anymore on the RB issue on this thread, as i said earlier. But now you _are_ commenting on it. Why do you lie?

  Recoverer, that is exactly what i felt and thought.  Almost a month ago, when i stated what i stated, it was because i was seeing too much hostility and personalness involved in the discussion and thought it would be better to be silent on the specific issue.  Plus it seemed to be going in circles.

  But the "point" Don brought up, i thought was an important one to address since it seemed to be glossing over certain important facets of this issue. 

  I will go back to silent mode though on this issue, since when people start swearing at me it seems to be an indication of what i was talking about earlier when i explained why i stopped talking the first time.

  P.S., i can take it just fine for myself, but i'm also thinking of others and the forums best interest. 

recoverer wrote on Mar 14^th, 2011 at 3:15pm:

Seraphis: If everybody does their part then what needs to be accomplished will be accomplished. If everybody does nothing with the thought that one person can't do anything, then nothing will be accomplished. I did not attack Robert Bruce and Tolle in a malicious way. I simply wrote about behavior I consider questionable. If a person doesn't want people to say negative things about him, then he shouldn't become a public figure and then do unethical things. Is it okay to speak about the unethical things George W did, or should everybody keep quiet with the concept they are being loving? Perhaps a future president would be less likely to do as George W did if he (or she) understood that he would be held accountable. Perhaps fewer people would become false gurus if people had enough gumption to stand up to them. Perhaps what took place in Egypt is a better example of what works, than when people act as if everything is a-okay when it isn't.

Hi R: If what you wrote was not meant to be malicious it sure comes across that way and doesn't laud or acknowledge the real work that RB does the important stuff... I personally don't like the Australian accent... some american females think it is cute... so it is certainly a matter of style... and opinion... but, that does not stop me from recognizing a brilliant mind at work... RB also looks like the sinister Satanist... Aleister Crowley... but, does that make him Aleister Crowley... hell no... Robert Monroe looks like a slick automobile salesman... is that a reason to dump on his work... no!!!

S.

Pauli, in reading many of your posts on this thread, I have wanted to say to you:  "Who died and made you God?"  Or, perhaps, more accurately, "Why do you think you have the right to scream, yell and throw tantrums on this forum when you don't like what others say?"  Be part of a civil discourse or go rant, rave and throw tantrums somewhere else.  And I really don't have a dog in this fight because I don't know much about Robert Bruce or Sai Baba (or Ali Baba or whatever his name is) beyond what I've read here.

Pat E. wrote on Mar 15^th, 2011 at 1:02am:

Pauli, in reading many of your posts on this thread, I have wanted to say to you:  "Who died and made you God?"  Or, perhaps, more accurately, "Why do you think you have the right to scream, yell and throw tantrums on this forum when you don't like what others say?"  Be part of a civil discourse or go rant, rave and throw tantrums somewhere else.  And I really don't have a dog in this fight because I don't know much about Robert Bruce or Sai Baba (or Ali Baba or whatever his name is) beyond what I've read here.

Come now Pat... you know who Ali Baba was...

;D

S.

Don

I appreciated seeing your comment about feeling more welcome here in posting on afterlife topics than on a forum of fellow Christians. I imagine that was a big disappointment to you. but I'm not surprised that the Christian posters weren't interested. As I wrote in another thread, when I went to a talk by author and hospice nurse Elissa Al-Chokhachy, several people were moved to tell about the things that happened to them that they believed were communications from a loved one who had recently "died", and often the comments included saying that they couldn't talk to others about this, including clergy or others in their church. I find that both puzzling and understandable.

Quote:

What does the character of a child molester like Sai Baba have to do with the genuiness of his astral appearance to Robert Bruce?  Psychic gifts need not be a reward for a commendable character.

I don't think this has been genuinely addressed. I think Don makes a good point. It is not a new idea that talents and spiritual growth are not necessarily tied together. But sometimes it is difficult to keep things separate. I'm not sure anything Monroe did is about spiritual growth. It is about developing talents (like obe). I'm not sure studying afterlife knowledge is about spiritual growth. It is about developing a state of conciousness.

Who you meet in your adventures may make a difference in your life, but I'm not sure being able to make the journey is a sign of enlightenment.



I don't think RB's making a comment about Sai Baba and then not condemning him to someone else's satisfaction  invalidates RB's work. Still haven't seen a discussion on whether or not RB's techniques work for anyone.

Lucy wrote on Mar 15^th, 2011 at 5:22am:

[quote] Still haven't seen a discussion on whether or not RB's techniques work for anyone.

I guess that has a higher chance of being detected by reading threads at RB's site, both in any of the general forums and in the Ask Robert Forum.

The trouble is, that the harsh criticism such as that of bagging RB for not vehemently condemning Sai Baba even though he saw a "vision" of Sai Baba (or however you want to put it) creates a judgemental environment in which people who may wish they could describe some non-conventional experience and discuss it become reluctant to do so here because of the criticism they may face. That seems to me to run counter to the raison d'être of this site.

Pat E. wrote on Mar 15^th, 2011 at 1:02am:

Pauli, in reading many of your posts on this thread, I have wanted to say to you:  "Who died and made you God?"  Or, perhaps, more accurately, "Why do you think you have the right to scream, yell and throw tantrums on this forum when you don't like what others say?"  Be part of a civil discourse or go rant, rave and throw tantrums somewhere else.  And I really don't have a dog in this fight because I don't know much about Robert Bruce or Sai Baba (or Ali Baba or whatever his name is) beyond what I've read here.

Well, there are several reasons:

1. RB isn't here and can't give answers, so it's kind of unfair of you to join the squad that tells me to keep quiet, as I think it would be better for you to ask RB at his own site where he has a decent chance of answering.

2. RB wrote that most of the allegations against Sai B are basically true. This statement is repeatedly ignored by some people in this thread and accusations of supporting a child molester is repeated over-and-over and over again. Why do you think this is fair? Why do you want me to keep quiet?

3. One person takes stabs at RB. Then declares that he will leave the discussion and later cowardly sneaks up and takes another stab and again declares that he has left the discussion. I object as the stabber uses a very unfair discussion method. Why have you suddenly become the judge to quiet me?

Would you like to be stabbed in the back on a forum you don't have the time to defend yourself? A forum where no moderator trims down the attacks on your person.. And no one takes your party..

"Who died and made you God?"

Hi All: What is getting lost in all of this wringing of the hands about seemingly innocent children or innocent seekers who get duped is the the Karmic package that we bring into the physical plane... no one on this board should be deluded into thinking that there are beings on this planet at any time who are innocent and have NO past... that is ridiculous... we are all interconnected through eternity... we have been interacting with each other in good and evil ways for millenia... so no one is wholy innocent or wholy evil... for every act there is an equal an opposite reaction... what you did to others will be visited upon you in full... in the fullness of time.... the hairs on your head are numbered and you shall not come out thence til every farthing be paid.

Remember that when you get self righteous...!!!

8-)

S.

Seraphis, I remind you that Bruce Moen echoes Robert Monroe's perspective in championing parallel rather than sequential incarnations with no karmic debt accumulated from incarnation to incarnation. 

Berserk2 wrote on Mar 15^th, 2011 at 5:40pm:

Seraphis, I remind you that Bruce Moen echoes Robert Monroe's perspective in championing parallel rather than sequential incarnations with no karmic debt accumulated from incarnation to incarnation.

Hi: It depends on the level of confront.

S.

This was the answer to my question of Sai Baba's pedohile reputation.

S.


Aunt Clair wrote on Mar 30^th, 2011 at 1:30pm:

I agree. But he is not that man that is smeared in bad publicity. I had heard pretty nasty things about him once too. But Robert Bruce told me that he met and corresponded with a man who lived at Sai Baba's ashram as a publicist pr photographer for 17 years with his wife and child. They both told Robert that Sai Baba had male and female lovers but always adults and that he never hurt children. He gave their daughter a baby elephant as a pet and was very kind to all children but not a pedophile.  He was generous to the poor and very loving in nature. He also would do fake sleight of hand legerdemain magic for parlour trick fun like pulling coins and eggs from children's ears but he did this to amuse people and not to demonstrate real magick. He would also make a watch appear in his hand but he had taken it off the wrist of the skeptic to be drole . I met him when he projected into my house when i was in a hurry on the way to work. He was  wearing a long orange gown with a big bushy hairdo and I was startled. He was so clear that I assumed he was a dead man not a live projector. I asked him who he was and why he was in my home. He replied "I am  love" . I said that was not an answer. He repeated "I am love " and I felt hugged even though he was opposite me still on the other side of the room. I asked him to leave and he did . He appeared a few times in the next week so I asked a friend who told me about him. This was before Google lol. Many knew him by the description and told me he was Sai Baba which I looked up on the Dogpile and Yahoo search engines . Anyway we had a series of lessons with him and he only taught healing , ascension, forgiveness and love and nothing about him was negative , creepy or suspect. http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTdPvGBa19ZOqtyyc33lg2eyErunzzl6jhSNtmgK2wCaesnJPgJUg A local magician here has a healing centre where he heals for free . This man has authored 2 books and has travelled to meet John of God and Sai Baba and other healers . He has hung a photo Sai Baba gave him in his healing sanctuary and this photo grows dhbuti so thickly he must remove it routinely . He harvests this and mixes it in his tea and eats it raw too. After the photo began to grow this then a statue of Christ began to grow it too. It feels like fine soft ash but it smells like orchids or lotus or peaches or saffron . Each time I visited it smelt differently always lovely though. This magician healer  Jim Booth is a kind old widowed veteran from WWII . He is a good healer , he reduces pain and boosts the immune system. He can not cure cancer but he helps to heal all manners of illnessess and he sees into the body and was one of the teachers who taught me to do this. After my spine surgery , he was a blessed friend. I have had chronic pain issues and he never ever charged for healing . His wife always made us a cuppa too but Joyce

Seraphis:

All your recent post shows is that Aunt Clair's words are very questionable. Even Robert Bruce eventually admitted that Sai Baba molested children. Check the earlier posts.

Regarding her claim that Sai did sleight of hand tricks for children, he did such tricks in front of crowds in order to impress them.

A previous Frank Kepple thread shows that Aunt Clair has a connection to Robert Bruce.

The question is, how did a child molesting self-proclaimed incarnation of God manage to manifest to her in the way she claimed?

recoverer wrote on Mar 31^st, 2011 at 12:57pm:

Seraphis: All your recent post shows is that Aunt Clair's words are very questionable. Even Robert Bruce eventually admitted that Sai Baba molested children. Check the earlier posts. Regarding her claim that Sai did sleight of hand tricks for children, he did such tricks in front of crowds in order to impress them. A previous Frank Kepple thread shows that Aunt Clair has a connection to Robert Bruce. The question is, how did a child molesting self-proclaimed incarnation of God manage to manifest to her in the way she claimed?

True... it is just an opinion that itself is hearsay except if you believe Aunt Clair had a visitation which I have no way to refute. I was a bit surprised that here insistence that Robert Bruce did not include the pedophile charge in her statement of what RB actually said... not sure what is true... except that from an independent source I got bad reports about Sai Baba but, even those reports were hearsay but the person I got them from was a basically sound person of integrity tho a bit too trusting and proven wrong a couple of times as to the character of his connections. But, the preponderance of the evidence is that Sai Baba had character issues not withstanding that he 'may' have had some power developement.

But, he was probably a con man.

S.

I read accounts of people who shared their experiences of being molested by Sai Baba as boys. To me, these accounts  sounded quite compelling.

Some people might say these boys are making false accusations, just as some people might say the same of boys who were molested by priests or women who were raped. It is important that victims don't end up being pointed to as the guilty ones.

I believe this is what happens when exposers of false gurus and such speak up. They the take the time to share what they experienced with an unethical guru with the hope of benefiting others, and then some people accuse them of being dishonest malcontents.

recoverer wrote on Mar 31^st, 2011 at 2:38pm:

I read accounts of people who shared their experiences of being molested by Sai Baba as boys. To me, these accounts  sounded quite compelling. Some people might say these boys are making false accusations, just as some people might say the same of boys who were molested by priests or women who were raped. It is important that victims don't end up being pointed to as the guilty ones. I believe this is what happens when exposers of false gurus and such speak up. They the take the time to share what they experienced with an unethical guru with the hope of benefiting others, and then some people accuse them of being dishonest malcontents.

Where there is smoke there is fire and then you have the pattern of behavior syndrone.

S.

Some quick notes. 

Since i've worked with children with disabilities, i've had various trainings, and some trainings which talked about sexual abuse in relation to children. 
One thing i found interesting that i learned during one of these trainings is that though kids sometimes make up things about different things, repeated research and statistics shows that it's rare and unusual for a child to make up stories about being sexually molested/abused.

  So, if many kids are saying the same or similar thing about a particular person, chances are that quite likely it has some truth to it. 

   But really, i don't get something about this site and some of the people here. 
This is a site devoted to the afterlife, and psychism and psychic experiences are a big part of this site and what people discuss.  Many people here report they have psychic sensitivty or have had psychic experiences. 

  Then why cannot these same people, look a photo or video of someone, tune into them and get that some of these purported "spiritual teachers" are anything but?????

  Where is your psychism and intuition when it counts??? 

  It is so plainly obvious to me, intuitive wise, that this Baba guy is not only a phony, but also a rather sick and unbalanced person.

  I'm not saying one needs to personally dislike the guy or anything, but there is nothing "wrong" or "unspiritual" with being aware of this kind of stuff or speaking about it if there is corroborating, suggestive evidence that supports such perceptions. 

I figure if people will make up stories about Sai Baba appearing to them in an illustrious way, perhaps they'll make up stories about other things.

(I started writing a reply to the Bible thread and then realized what I was saying really belonged here, though as usual, I find topics overlap a little. I think I'll post it all here and only partly on the Bible site.)



Quote:

We are in a never ending battle with the Christian community in this country to prevent them from establishing Christianity as a State religion... if and when that does happen... I think even you will be very upset... the price of liberty is eternal vigilance against all vicious fanatics.

Well the Christian community is not one entity, though it is surprising that the fundamentalist types have established such a foothold in these times. I'm not so sure Christianity was interpreted quite the same way in the 1700's or so, when the country got started. Freedom of religion mixed with freedom of speech are sometimes explosive.

I was searching for some info on the real Nat Turner one time, and came across some information indicating that around 1800, close to the time Turner was born, I think, there was a BAptist preacher in Virginia who was strongly against slavery on religious grounds. The point was made that it was the strongly held belief in freedom of speech that enabled the debate on slavery to be carried out. Slavery was not a new human phenomenon but having the institution co-exist with an active debate on its legitimacy was. The price of liberty is having to allow all this open discussion to go on. I bet that baptist preacher back in 1800 had an ornery side, but that ornery-ness probably served to keep driving the discussion forward.

That is true even here. I just wish the concepts could be argued. It ends up being done in a way that makes it feel unsafe to some people to discuss their personal experiences because they might be criticized as falling sway to some teacher who is unpopular with another board member or having an experience that is not in line with someone else's guidance. Those arguments start to sound narrow, like all fundamentalist arguments. I don't see the logic in discounting everything that Robert Bruce says because he happened to have a psychic encounter with a person who he later learned had by many accounts engaged in sex with boys. Something seems out of perspective in that. Robert Bruce does not do what he does in the name of Sai Baba.

I don't discount the veracity of the spiritual experiences people report, i.e. that they had a spiritual experience,  because of what I see as faulty arguments in their analysis of that experience.

And discounting Robert Bruce does nothing to help those boys. What's the issue here, helping victims of sexual abuse? The priesthood of the Catholic Church systematically allowed far more sexual abuse of children than even Sai Baba could accomplish. Mother Teresa did everything she did in the name of the Catholic Church. To me, that is far more supportive of child abuse than anything Robert Bruce ever did, yet she is never criticised for that.

Is the issue abuse of children? How about asking how we can have spiritual development through action in the world? How many folks here are attached to their cell phones? Apparently there is a precious metal needed for the parts of a cell phone and that metal is found in the Congo region in Africa. And that metal is part of the reson for the unrest in that region. That metal could be said to be behind the rape and mutilation of women and girls that constantly goes on in that region. I think cell phone use is unspiritual for that reason. If you want to be spiritual, put that cell phone down! Oh but wait, that's girls getting machettes up their vaginas, not nearly as serious as Sai Baba having sex with boys. I almost got things out of perspective.

But I still end up wondering, is it logically consistent to avoid Sai Baba because he diddled with boys but then to use a cell phone?

(ps I don't own a cell, and of all the people I know, I should have one because of driving late at night to go to work).

Lucy:

If I made up a story about an experience I had, and then something happened to reveal that I made up a story, would you be inclined to believe the other stories I share?

If I defended a child molestor in order to save my reputation, would you be inclined to trust my honesty?

I think you are overstating your case.

If you don't like Robert Bruce that's fine. If you choose to not try any of his techniques based on this dislike, that's fine, that's your perrogative. I don't disagree with that. Why should anyone have to pay tuition to take a course with a professor that he/she finds obnoxious?

I imagine that what evolved was that RB said something about Sai Baba and then found out later he put his foot in his mouth and then took it out rather awkwardly. ...(Been there, done that myself). I can't imagine he would support any kind of child abuse. Didn't he have a child who died? He must be sensitive to issues with children.

To be blunt, I hestitate to argue with you on this because you are so adamant on this issue that I think you must have personally suffered something, but it isn't my business to ask that or to know; I just wanted you to know that I worry about that a little. It is such a personal issue for you.

I am more interested in whether or not RB's techniques work. I am more interested in "Comparative Techniques 201" than I am in sticking to any one person's writings.

And there are still unanswered questions on this. So let's all agree that Sai Baba was an unrepentant letch or diddler or whatever you call it. Then why was he able to manifest to people the way he did? That is a very curious to me.

Years ago, when all this Eastern guru stuff was new in this country on a big scale, I knew a woman who was a "devotee" of one of these Indian guys. I don't remember which one because they all look the same to me (except for Gandhi and Ramanujan) . So I asked her why she was interested in this person; how did this interest come about. And she related the story that one night before she had any knowledge or interest of Indian philosophy, this Indian guy appeared standing at the foot of her bed for a brief period. Later, when she saw a picture of the guy, she knew he was the one she had seen that night. I could understand how that could influence her choices. Not my cup of tea, but it is interesting. I lost contact with her years ago so I don't know how things turned out. So when people say they "saw" Sai Baba, well, I think it is interesting.

If Robert Bruce had been a student of Sai Baba's and had let Sai Baba molest his kids and then had defended Sai Baba, I would have a problem with that. But that is not what happened.

Maybe the lesson is that we can't assume anyone is without stain, or whatever. Maybe everyone makes up stories. Gee I hope the Dalai Lama has a clean record. But as far as world leaders go. I imagine there is alot more Sai Baba type stuff out there than we would like to admit.

That's why I prefer to discuss the ideas and the conjectures and the techniques. You made your point. Can we just talk about the techniques now?

I repeat once again:


PauliEffectt wrote on Mar 15^th, 2011 at 6:22am:

RB wrote that most of the allegations against Sai B are basically true.

What happened was, many years ago:

1. RB discovered (rediscovered?) an energy body technique, he called; NEW.

2. RB saw a black guy with big hair for 30 seconds, possible of astral origin, who mentally asked RB what to do with his discovery.

RB saw the black guy for 30 seconds. That was the total length of RB's experience.

Lucy wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2011 at 7:55am:

I think you are overstating your case. If you don't like Robert Bruce that's fine. If you choose to not try any of his techniques based on this dislike, that's fine, that's your perrogative. I don't disagree with that. Why should anyone have to pay tuition to take a course with a professor that he/she finds obnoxious?

Well said lucy!!! That is precisely the true and actual fact.

S.

Yes, well said Lucy. To each his (or her of course) own.

Just my 2c worth here - it is quite possible to mistake one spirit for another, I think.  I once met a flowing, strange but very noble being in the astral, & later googled to find a picture that would represent his appearance.  I found one Adi Da, whose writings, when I investigated further, did not attract me spiritually at all. 

But on a later occasion, I came across a photo of Yogananda, in almost the same pose, & realised it was he, not Adi Da, who I had met in the astral, & to whom I had said that I was 'with him" (meaning I agreed with him) "lock, stock, barrel & insence" (at which he chuckled) 8-)

I admit that I find Robert Bruce's latest advertising rather disappointing, & put it down to his being poorly advised by some "promoter"; but that does not detract from the fact that he definitely helped me with healing on more than one occasion.

As to the efficiency his techniques, I can personally attest to the fact that they do work; but  I also use mantras from the S A Weor school of Gnosticicsm, which also "work";  & so do the totally non-mystical techniques taught by Michael Raduga. 

It seems many different means can be used with similar results, & in the end it is a matter of what/who appeals to one's dominant personality structure.  I mix & match; no idea whether that is a good or a bad thing, or whether it even matters.

edit: typos

For those of you interested:  http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110405/wl_sthasia_afp/indiareligionhealthsaibaba;_ylt=AstsqUhw8DrAud1PRRLSRBpH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTNia3NyM2swBGFzc2V0A2FmcC8yMDExMDQwNS9pbmRpYXJlbGlnaW9uaGVhbHRoc2FpYmFiYQRjY29kZQNyYW5kb20EY3BvcwM0BHBvcwM0BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDaW5kaWFuMzlsaXZp

Bardo wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 3:42pm:

For those of you interested:  http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110405/wl_sthasia_afp/indiareligionhealthsaibaba;_ylt=AstsqUhw8DrAud1PRRLSRBpH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTNia3NyM2swBGFzc2V0A2FmcC8yMDExMDQwNS9pbmRpYXJlbGlnaW9uaGVhbHRoc2FpYmFiYQRjY29kZQNyYW5kb20EY3BvcwM0BHBvcwM0BHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDaW5kaWFuMzlsaXZp

I wonder what exit he will choose.

S.

Perhaps with Sai Baba's death this thread can finally be put to rest.

Beau,
No doubt it will reincarnate!

May it rest in peace.


Beau wrote on Apr 5^th, 2011 at 6:30pm:

Perhaps with Sai Baba's death this thread can finally be put to rest.