where is Gurumayi
WokDok
intensive, and it struck my eye that it is being directed by the Siddha Yoga
swamis, not Gurumayi. So she doesn't do darshans or intensives any more. I was
wondering if she's even in the ashrams any more. Has anybody seen her lately?
What does she do with her time?
WokDok
whereabouts? She's pulling herself back from public view. What is she doing
with her time. Some of you people that have recently been close to her must
know. All I want is basic information, is that too much to ask. Where is
Gurumayi and what does she do? Is she retired for all intents and purposes. Are
the swamis running the show. Who is really in charge?
xs10sual
WokDok queried: Who is really in charge?
Certainly NEVER malty shetty (being a 'puppet-guru'). THEY have always been
in charge of HER. Perhaps THEY are finally 'pulling' her off the throne
(for all [whatever] intents and purposes. Maybe they just got tired of her
shit.
a_jugg...@hotmail.com
For the whereabouts of Malti Shetty aka Gurumayi, you can try joining
the SGMKJ onelist, or sending your question directly to the SYDA
Foundation webmaster. As of a few weeks ago, I've heard she was in
Ganeshpuri. Try calling them, or call South Fallsburg.
In my experience, the devotees who frequent this area and choose to
post rather than lurk, are more comfortable arguing against the
contributors who post on-topic to alt.support.ex-cult-siddha-yoga. I
happen to believe that the ones who do post here have very little if
any direct contact with the Siddha Yoga (tm) Guru, and are not in a
position to give a truthful, rather than wishful answer.
Even when her public appearances were more frequent a few years ago,
there was still a policy for those who had reasonable knowledge of her
location, to *not* make that info available to the masses. All the
better to conceal a tony Swiss resort where the wealthy heal from
plastic surgery perhaps. Or count your money. Or roll in the Shakti.
Good luck.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
aminsi...@my-deja.com
JyotiK2052
You said:
the swamis running the show. Who is really in charge?
"
This is a question a lot of people are asking, but it's hard to get a real
answer. You might try calling the SYDA headquarters in South Fallsburg, NY, but
again, you might not get the 'real' info. She has been gradually decreasing
the amount of time she spends with crowds of devotees for some time now. There
are some pro-sy sites online; perhaps you might get more information there.
Good luck, and thanks for posting.
Respectfully - Jyoti
xs10sual
xs said:
>> (for all [whatever] intents and purposes). Maybe they just got tired
>of her
>> shit.
>>
>> Who are 'THEY'?
what-not's, and whose-its...
...and just in case you still don't 'get' it: They = THE SYDA ORGANIZATION,
of course!
He (Muktananda) was a sly old devil!!! Installing Maltie and her bro as
Co-Guru's was purely political. Baba never intended for the pair of them to
actually represent HIM; but he knew that the *money* within the powers that
were the administration/organization [SYDA] would *back* such a maneuver.
He also knew that they/she could never 'pull it off' (the enlightenment
*act*) for long. He wasn't STUPID, for C****t's sake...he didn't become
*King* of his Siddha Kingdom by being 'dumb'! None can dispute that he was
very good at playing *King*, and that he played the role to the hilt! The
truth of the whole matter is, that the REAL *lineage* (and I'm using the
word loosely here) was given away long before brother and sister Shetty ever
had their 'official' initiation as *Guru's* in charge. Wake up and smell
the sour cereal...it's about to burn!
aminsi...@my-deja.com
"xs10sual" <xs10...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> aminsi...@my-deja.com asks Shri "xs10sual" :
> xs said:
> >> (for all [whatever] intents and purposes). Maybe they just got
tired
> >of her
> >> shit.
> >>
> >> Who are 'THEY'?
> The bee hive behind Queeny...she is nothing without her workers,
drones,
> what-not's, and whose-its...
> ...and just in case you still don't 'get' it: They = THE SYDA
ORGANIZATION,
Dear Xs10sual
I have not been following your discussions on this board and my question
was simply that, a question, not trying to be a stickler or anything
like that.
This is the closest I have ever come to being flamed. I can see where
you thought I was giving you a hard time.
Peace,
Aminside
xs10sual
>
>Dear Xs10sual
>
>I have not been following your discussions on this board
lately)
>and my question
>was simply that, a question, not trying to be a stickler or anything
>like that.
OK - cool.
>
>This is the closest I have ever come to being flamed. I can see where
>you thought I was giving you a hard time.
Yes - i did think you were another one of those pro-sy idiots; attempting to
start some shit. I thought it (the jist of my post) rather obvious to whom
i was referring. Doesn't everyone know that queen-ey is just a puppet-goo?
anyway...nice 2 meet another 'insider'.....amin, iaminside2.
(sorry i almost 'flamed' you, but it's been strange out here on the NG at
times)
:) peace, xs
S235108
I believe that she thumbs through fashion magazines, looks at the contact
sheets with a magnifying glass and chooses pictures of herself and sometimes
she tries on hats.
****************************S235108*********************
"The charisma of certainty is a snare which entraps the child who is latent
in us all." Anthony Storr , FEET OF CLAY (1996 Free Press Paperbacks)
Satdesh
>Date: Mon, 30 August 1999 03:54 PM EDT
>Message-id: <7qenhs$7558$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>
xs10sual writes:
>He (Muktananda) was a sly old devil!!! Installing Maltie and her bro as
>Co-Guru's was purely political. Baba never intended for the pair of them to
>actually represent HIM; but he knew that the *money* within the powers that
>were the administration/organization [SYDA] would *back* such a maneuver.
>He also knew that they/she could never 'pull it off' (the enlightenment
>*act*) for long. He wasn't STUPID, for C****t's sake...he didn't become
>*King* of his Siddha Kingdom by being 'dumb'! None can dispute that he was
>very good at playing *King*, and that he played the role to the hilt! The
>truth of the whole matter is, that the REAL *lineage* (and I'm using the
>word loosely here) was given away long before brother and sister Shetty ever
>had their 'official' initiation as *Guru's* in charge.
*************************
This is certainly an interesting alternative theory to the one that he was
foolish and lacked perception in the choice of successors. In a way your
theory resurrects Baba somewhat. You give him the benefit of the doubt to the
degree that you feel he was sly and knew what he was doing in this regard.
I am not clear on who is calling the shots in that organization. Is GM a
puppet? Possibly so as you suggest. Maybe she does feel insecure in her
position. Maybe that insecurity lead to her unfortunate infatuation/reliance
on GA's strong personality. Perhaps he provided her with a sense of security.
That would explain why she kept him at her side long after prudence would have
dictated that he should be jettisoned (or at least removed from any positions
of authority and from public visibility).
Dan Shaw once stated that Bro. Charles was expecting to be successor. In his
book he (Chalres) takes partial credit for having built SM's empire (along with
some others). Bro. Charles didn't make successor so he obviously was not
calling the shots. But who was or is? It isn't clear. Maybe it's a give and
take between Sri Guru and the trustees.
Your theory about the "long before" disposal of the successorship is
interesting. LarryOm once chided me (sort of) for believing/suspecting that
there was some other legitimate successor out there (i.e., other than Nit or
Chid). I guess his point was that if Mr. Big was corrupt, how could he have a
virtuous successor? It is food for thought. But your theory is interesting
too. I would be interested in hearing more of your thoughts about the other
"long before" successor if you care to share them.
Otherwise, an interesting post.
Satdesh
Sikaan
You wrote:
"I am not clear on who is calling the shots in that organization. Is GM a
puppet? Possibly so as you suggest. Maybe she does feel insecure in her
position."
I don't think Gurumayi is a puppet, she is very much in command, now more so
than ever. And more secure than ever. In fact, no need to ever feel insecure.
As for the whole co-guru thing. Gurumayi's parents, the Shetty's are a
traditional Hindu family from the old school, i.e., the only way they would
allow a daughter to spend time away from the home would be if they send a
brother to be with her, to act as a chaperone, which is what I think Nit Jr
was. And Baba had to make him the co-guru to appease Mr. and Mrs. Shetty, for
the sake of form, even though he was not interested or qualified to be guru.
History has shown which of the two siblings achieved the guru state. (Note:
solely my opinions.)
In this newsgroup people post ad nauseum about events that happened before most
of us were born, but the bottom line to me is whether my Kundalini was awakened
or not, and in my case it is a resounding and overwhelming YES. What do I care
what Mr. Charles, Da Avibashi, Sw. Chetananda, or a zillion other pretenders to
the SYDA throne did, or failed to do. Life is better spent on kindling one's
flame, than in regurgitating "alleged facts" and putting others down. (This is
not aimed at you, Satdesh.) Some people seem to be here for a long time, even
longer than they were in Siddha Yoga. Too bad they also missed the bull
market.
Sikaan
Satdesh
>Date: Wed, 01 September 1999 11:04 PM EDT
>Message-id: <19990901230436...@ng-ft1.aol.com>
Sikaan writes:
>I don't think Gurumayi is a puppet, she is very much in command, now more so
>than ever. And more secure than ever. In fact, no need to ever feel
>insecure.
*********************
You could be right. The persons here who worked for the SYDA have conveyed
sentiments to the contrary. I do not know her personally and have never worked
for the SYDA so I am not in a position to say that they are wrong. She strikes
me as someone with considerable strength and radiance (but some here have
nevertheless said that she is emotionally cold).
************************
>As for the whole co-guru thing. Gurumayi's parents, the Shetty's are a
>traditional Hindu family from the old school, i.e., the only way they would
>allow a daughter to spend time away from the home would be if they send a
>brother to be with her, to act as a chaperone, which is what I think Nit Jr
>was. And Baba had to make him the co-guru to appease Mr. and Mrs. Shetty,
>for
>the sake of form, even though he was not interested or qualified to be guru.
*************************
I have never heard this explanation before. It is interesting and I suppose
quite plausible. As I recall the Harris article referred to a concern that Nit
had about the influence of GA on his sister. This might indicate that he had a
perception or belief that he was there to look after or protect his sister.
***********************
>History has shown which of the two siblings achieved the guru state. (Note:
>solely my opinions.)
***********************
Gurumayi certainly revealed the greater resolution and fixity of purpose. Some
here hold that she is little more than a mantra chanting Barbie (separated from
her Ken). The main factor that makes me curious about her (i.e., that she
might have attained a greater than usual state) is the content of her talks and
writings. I am often impressed by the subtlety of her insights into the human
condition, especially as it pertains to the whole affair of sadhana and
spiritual growth. Her's is an uncommon understanding in my experience. I
personally find her writings more meaningful and insightful than those of her
guru. For this reason I an unable to to have the confidence and certainty,
that some here appear to have, that she is a mere charlatan. I just don't
know. I once asked whether she wrote her own materials or whether they were
ghost written by someone else. No one answered me.
Thanks for your interesting post.
Satdesh
xs10sual
Sikaan wrote
>I don't think ....
>Sikaan
That's all you really needed to say!
S235108
>In this newsgroup people post ad nauseum about events that happened before
>most
>of us were born, but the bottom line to me is whether my Kundalini was
awakened
>or not, and in my case it is a resounding and overwhelming YES.
This is not a new idea. actually it is very close to the Siddha Yoga "official"
answer to ANY requests for OBJECTIVE answers. What they say is, "Never mind
what those people are saying on the internet...just trust your own
experience..." (or something similar.) There is a problem with this answer,
IMO.
1) Does it matter if Swami Muktananda had sexual relations with female
devotees, some of whom were reportedly teenagers, while at the same time he
preached celibacy?
2) Does it matter if Gurumayi lies and covers-up for her Baba?
There are a lot of 'secrets' in Siddha Yoga. If a person imagines him or
herself on a spiritual quest, don't you think that getting truthful answers to
legitimate questions would be part of that quest? If you really don't care
"about events that happened before most
of us were born..." then what exactly do you expect to attain, what state of
"the guru,"
your guru...the one you are trying to be like...what state of your guru are you
trying to attain? If you don't care about the truthful state of your guru; if
you aren't concerned "about events that happened before most
of us were born..." then you're liable to wind up exactly like your Swami
Muktananda and your Gurumayi. The trouble is, you don't know who they really
are and you're trying to be just like them. Do you care now?
> Some people seem to be here for a long time, even
>longer than they were in Siddha Yoga. Too bad they also missed the bull
>market.
I was involved in Siddha Yoga for 18 years
and I 'graduated' myself a little over two years ago. Also I didn't miss the
"bull market," but I knew when to drop Siddha Yoga.
natara...@my-deja.com
currently being untruthful to her devotees conerning this matter of
molestation, than she is no worse than the politians running our
government. I think she should address the matter in a forthright
way. Than everyone will be that much closer to siddhahood.
Namaste
xs10sual
<snip>
>I think she should address the matter in a forthright
>way. Than everyone will be that much closer to siddhahood.
>Namaste
>
for others (not to mention herSELF)...being "forthright" is the very least
she should do! "Than everyone will be that much closer to
[plain,old-fashioned HUMAN-hood!]."
Shanti!
WokDok
what I have come up with. First of all, I think everyone's opinion has got to
have some validity because it is all about what we experienced. The reason we
are getting all these differences of opinion is because some of us are making
some aspects of our experience more important than others, and that is all
there is to it. Unless someone is intentionally lying, there is going to be
some truth in what they think, at least for them, whatever their conclusion
about siddha yoga ends up to be. I think that it is not meaningful to dismiss
people for ignoring things, because nobody should be dismissed from the
discussion. After all, someone that is really against siddha yoga might want to
be always aware of the sexual misconduct, and that is going to be the most
important thing to them. Someone really for siddha yoga is going to talk about
the great experiences they have had, and how it turned their life around, and
maybe even helped them avoid some bad situations they would have fallen into
without siddha yoga.
You can't just say that someone is in denial if they don't agree with you. All
it means is they are emphasizing different parts of their experience of siddha
yoga. Maybe someone way out on the extreme is in total denial about the good
experiences people have, or about the misconduct or lying. But why should we
base the discussion on just what the most extreme people are thinking?
I just think that we should take into account everyone's opinion and if it is
different than our own recognize that it still has validity, but that they are
just deciding to put certain things in front of other things. You might think
there is something wrong with that, but that is our prerogative as individuals.
If we all thought the same things were important and all agreed about it, then
that's having a cult because we are all looking at the same picture and coming
up with the same interpretation of it. That's when you are getting into a cult.
It's no good just to say someone's opinion is not valid because it is different
than yours.
Also, you can talk about siddha yoga forever because it has so many different
angles to it. At a certain point you come to peace with it and move forward
from that point, and so more than figuring it out, you've got to draw a line
and say this will have to be taken in perspective, and maybe it will never be
figured out, but that's okay.
I think everyone goes along in siddha yoga, and they might actually believe
that everything is perfect up on top and there are no problems. But at some
point, and it happens pretty quickly, you figure out that it just can't work
because it is set up to contradict itself, and it's impossible!
You might run into a devotee that is really rude that has been in siddha yoga
for a long time. You start to think, "how can that person be that way? I know
they have shaktipat and have been on the path of love." It could be something
really small like that that starts you thinking, or something really a lot
bigger like finding out that the guru definitely lied about something, or that
stories don't match what you saw with your own eyes. You might be in the
kitchen and see the guru yelling at someone in a real mean fashion, and then
later you hear at the evening program that it was some blissful happening, and
you know that is phony because you were there and saw it all.
I think that people finally start thinking, and it happens pretty fast after
you start siddha yoga. At some level, all of us saw that it wasn't perfect and
everything they were saying couldn't be right at the same time. And then that's
when you start getting into sadhana, and figuring out what you are going to do
about the fact that nothing in the world is picture perfect, but you still want
to do a spiritual path.
Then you start to think whether you are going to look for something else, and
if you decide to stay in siddha yoga, at some level you have to process the
stuff that doesn't add up and come to terms with it. It may not be a totally
conscious process, it might be unconscious, and you might not even be aware of
how much it bugs you that things aren't right. But at some level that conflict
has to be dealt with. That is where people's spiritual struggle begins in
earnest, and you start to think about what is going to be important to you, and
what you are going to focus on. And then you say there is stuff that I don't
like, and I am going to put up with it for as long as I can. But if it really
starts crossing my personal limits of what I can take, then I have to leave
this path.
When you start thinking like that you build up an emotional reserve because in
the back of your mind you know that it isn't perfect, and it's going good for
me now and I think I can stay in it because it is helping me in certain areas
in my life, but at some point I am going to have to get out of it. You know you
have to get out of it, maybe subconsciously, and that knowledge that you are
not all the way in it but just weighing the pros and cons, shows up in how you
do it. It shows up in little disobediences to the rules, or not taking things
so seriously, or being a little more individualistic in how you wear your
siddha yoga membership. I saw that going on all around me. Most people were
using their individual attitudes and there were only a couple of real starched
members that were totally orthodox, and they stood out because they were kind
of strange. It was like the people that were near the top in the seva were more
screwed up than the people that were kind of going around and mixing things up,
and trying to personalize their relationship to siddha yoga.
Now of course there is a real big problem because siddha yoga is all about
devotion to the guru and believing the guru is a superior being that is going
to make it possible for you to be enlightened. If you figure out that the guru
is lying and not doing the right thing, that is a major obstacle if you are
trying to stay in it and see it as a positive path. If you start denying that,
your head is going to get really screwed up. The most depressing thing about
siddha yoga is why would anybody want to deny something that big, and get
screwed up in that way? I think it is because what they had in the life before
siddha yoga had a lot of pain and unpleasant stuff in it, and that stuff was so
bad that they are thinking that "even though I am mixed up in something pretty
deep, and the guru is not a virtuous person in a perfect way, it still is a lot
better than the terrible state I was in before siddha yoga." This could be a
really accurate statement!
It could be really true that what we all had before was so painful or terrible,
at least sometimes, that we believed we could process the screwed up problems
of siddha yoga a lot easier than going back to the way life was before siddha
yoga. And that's kind of the real hook that snagged us, is that we were trying
to escape something we believed was worse. Where you really get in trouble is
when you lose the faith that things can be better on the outside than they can
be in siddha yoga. Sorry for making this so long. No flames please, I'm just
thinking out loud. Peace.
xs10sual
.<snip>
>"Where you really get in trouble is when you lose the faith that things
>can be better on the outside than they can be in siddha yoga."
DAMN FINE WORDS!, DR. WOK! Good thoughts, well said (thought you wrapped
that up nicely!).
This 'loss of faith' is essentially the same as losing Faith in one's own
self (IMHO); and HEY! isn't that the exact OPPOSITE reason we got involved
in SY in the first place? And since our SELF is all we ever really have,
shouldn't we be giving it more respect than that?
(eye,4 1, certainly tink so!)
No flames please, I'm just
thinking out loud. Peace.
...and good thinking it is (take notice Sikaan)!
shanti om, xs
S235108
>Now of course there is a real big problem because siddha yoga is all about
>devotion to the guru and believing the guru is a superior being that is
>going
>to make it possible for you to be enlightened. If you figure out that the
>guru
>is lying and not doing the right thing, that is a major obstacle if you
>are
>trying to stay in it and see it as a positive path. If you start denying
>that,
>your head is going to get really screwed up. The most depressing thing about
>siddha yoga is why would anybody want to deny something that big, and get
>screwed up in that way? I think it is because what they had in the life
>before
>siddha yoga had a lot of pain and unpleasant stuff in it, and that stuff
>was so
>bad that they are thinking that "even though I am mixed up in something
>pretty
>deep, and the guru is not a virtuous person in a perfect way, it still is
>a lot
>better than the terrible state I was in before siddha yoga."
Good point, about being afraid to "go back" to the possibly messed-up state one
was in when one got involved in the first place.
*************************S235108*******************
Raseswari
helping write Muktananda's "autobiography." He told me they were trying to
decide what caste to make him! Also, that Nit and/or Chid were Mukta's
child/children due to failed "tantric" performances. Who cares where Chid is.
She should take a permanent sabbatical in the Himalayas.
Sam Carpenter
> aminsi...@my-deja.com asks Shri "xs10sual" :
> xs said:
> >> (for all [whatever] intents and purposes). Maybe they just got tired
> >of her
> >> shit.
> >>
> >> Who are 'THEY'?
> The bee hive behind Queeny...she is nothing without her workers, drones,
> what-not's, and whose-its...
> ...and just in case you still don't 'get' it: They = THE SYDA ORGANIZATION,
> Co-Guru's was purely political. Baba never intended for the pair of them to
> actually represent HIM; but he knew that the *money* within the powers that
> were the administration/organization [SYDA] would *back* such a maneuver.
> He also knew that they/she could never 'pull it off' (the enlightenment
> *act*) for long. He wasn't STUPID, for C****t's sake...he didn't become
> *King* of his Siddha Kingdom by being 'dumb'! None can dispute that he was
> very good at playing *King*, and that he played the role to the hilt! The
> truth of the whole matter is, that the REAL *lineage* (and I'm using the
> word loosely here) was given away long before brother and sister Shetty ever
> the sour cereal...it's about to burn!
It may not follow anyone's rules. How does this work> I don't know. I do know that in Nepal the Kumari is chosen and '
then considered a goddess. I believe that spirits come into such a person. How the orgaization works is another story and perhaps not
a good one. Dont forget that where they come from living and working in an ashram is way better than tryinng to live in a world where the pay is 1 dollar a day or something. Dirty place, India.
Sam Carpenter
> in us all." Anthony Storr , FEET OF CLAY (1996 Free Press Paperbacks)
Celibacy or semen retension is kind of important for the kundalini energy. There is no contradiction here. Baba was an old man when he made advances to young women.
In any event, it doesn't bother me. It just shows how stupid young girls can be.