Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Further Comments on 1982 succession letters

Taken from Elodie's (France) blog: Pour Que Vive le Sahaj Marg.
Comments are by Alexis, and Elodie, and refer to Michael's letters and information on his Blog Site: The Inner Circle of SRCM

Alexis Said:

There are three things that are worth remembering

Navneet Kumar Saxena and Shashwat Pandey are not worshipers of Chari, far from it. They first accused Chari of having produced a false document in 1974, the reverse may be true for those documents allegedly written in 1982.

Cyrille from the nebula of full preceptors appointed by Babuji, reports that none of the sons of Babuji participated in satsang, much to the chagrin of Indian and Western abhyasis. How is it that Babuji had decided to appoint one of his sons and dismiss Chari?

Michael, who can not be regarded as an admirer of Chari, was in France in September 1982, and demonstrates that Babuji was sick and delirious. He added that any document signed by Babuji at this time has little credibility:

Paris 1982

I attended the Paris 1982 gathering. My observation is that, at that time there were those who supported Chari and those who opposed him. Andre Poray was on the side that opposed Chari. There was no doubt in my mind that this gathering was an attempt to divert western attention away from Chari. Chari was explicitly not invited to the gathering, however, somehow, he managed to be there. I was told that this was because Babuji demanded Chari’s presence there. This may or may not be true, as Chari may simply have shown up on his own accord. Chari was in a room next to Babuji's, which adds credence to the theory that Babuji wanted him there. Members of Chari’s opposition attempted to attend to Babuji keeping Chari as far away as possible. I spent many an hour in Chari's room and witnessed Babuji's attendees sheepishly requesting Chari’s presence in Babujis room due to Babuji’s request.

I also witnessed that Babuji was sick and delirious. Attendees would drive him to the meditation hall, and carry him into the hall, this effort requiring two large men to carry out. He would black out and fall on his knees if he tried to walk. It was as if they were carrying a corpse into the hall for all to see. Any letter written by Babuji at this time in this state, is questionable, especially such a long letter as the one on the Umesh Clan website. In my opinion, any official documents signed by Babuji during this time frame has little credibility.

Chari on the other hand was also aggressively keeping himself in the public eye. He played the role of the man in exile, holding court in his small room, inviting friendly disciples to mediate with him. It was a very effective bit of drama as he knew that people like myself would see his opposition attempt to attend to Babuji in a western country, while Babuji had come accustomed to Chari serving this role. Babuji's constant calls for Chari were embarrassing I'm sure to Chari’s opposition.

As for the references to the doctor attending to Babuji. I spoke with the Doctor at length just after Babuji left. He was a German doctor who practiced both homeopathic and conventional, allopathic medicine. No mention of treachery. His story was that Babuji was far too sick to travel to the west and should never had made the trip. He felt that the trip to Paris would likely be the death of Babuji. Given that Babuji never fully recovered from this trip, his words have the most credibility of all other claims.

Source : Michael's Website le 24/02/2007

Let us remain prudent !

Elodie said:

Hello all,

Alexis sent me Michael's reaction following their exchange of e-mails around this supposed Chariji letter, read below. As Alexis said in his previous comments, caution is required with such documents.

I would add that Shashwat took on pursuing the attacks Navneet since the "web of Silence" by the latter. We are not here to relay their charges indiscriminately. The battle of Navneet against Chariji is at least questionable. That of Shashwat sometimes resembles that of a hitman.

We ask abhyasis to exercise the power of critical thinking vis-à-vis the Mission, do not forget to do the same on our side.

Most affectionately,

Michael's e-mail

Simply because Navneet is against Chari, doesn't give him the credibility that merits publication of his papers and comments. All agree how easy it is to forge these things and accuse the other side of forgeries. Umesh claimed after Babuji's death in 1983 that his nephew was the acknowledged successor and was circulating letter signed by Babuji supporting this . Why doesn't anyone question Navneet about this first letter instead of printing everything he produces as if its fact? It wasn't until several years later Umesh himself claimed to have yet another letter claiming that he was the successor. Now they claim to have a damaging letter from Chari? In my opinion, we're giving Navneet far too much time by even publishing this. His motives are clear aren't they. He wants control of the mission and its property.


Cyrille Said:

Hello to all

Well after two weekends of meditation in the south (France) and Tours, I'm back.
I am always shocked by what is happening and is written!

I do not understand the time spent Shahwat and what his motivation is in wanting to demonstrate to such a point the devil in Chari and the horrible-Sahaj Marg, everyone is able to make up their own fair opinion? In addition he wrote before in one form and his image appeared and not now? What a sac of knots (to be polite). Alexis, Elodie, Cricri thank you for your prudent advice.

Navneet: I'm sorry but your grandfather has never named your father as his successor, and even if some are ready to declare him senile or delusional, he never wrote it (that is my opinion) and I kneew Umesh quite well and, by the way, his other brothers also. Anyway, as for Chari, his behavior and his actions do not reflect, and are even at odds with what is or was Babuji. He declared himself his successor and that is, in my opinion, quite sufficient for my opinion to be made.

If there was an appointment, it was but for an administrative position, and in no way as spiritual representative!

I was in Paris and I was able to talk to Babuji and those who recognize me, because I do not hide will remember me. He (Babuji) was indeed very ill and it was certainly a mistake to let him take this trip and even if his speech was very short he did it with a soft but clear voice. I am not a doctor despite having a medical background, I have not seen him delirious but I can not say what transpired, I'm still sad but the truth may come out. Anyway the technique and the path he has always shown can be followed without making an idol of anyone for that matter, I am ready to talk about the method, to give you my point of view on the technique or who he was, but was not trying to convince anyone on the benefit of this method (the only thing that counts is the individual and subjective experience) or even to seek to demonize or belittle anyone.

Narayana: I have repeatedly met Babuji and like all those I know who have known him well, I can say that although he was probably ill in 1974, there was in no way fragile in his 'Spirit or easily manipulated. One has only to see his writings, and photographs and film of him after that date.

Best regards

No comments: