To Abhyasis of Sahaj Marg Who Read This Blog!!

Taken and translated from an article by Elodie: "Rappel Aux Abhyasis Qui Lisent Ce Blog" on her blog: Pour Que Vive Le Sahaj Marg.


October 11, 2011

Reminder to the abhyasis who read this blog

You respond to our arguments by saying that we do not know of what we speak, because we do not know what Sahaj Marg is, and that we have not experienced it.

THINK AGAIN!

Alexis and 4d-Don are the exceptions that prove the rule.

Cricri, Michael, Frank, Madeleine, Peter and Ines, Cyril, Paolo and I are all old abhyasis. Together we have spent more time in the SRCM than each of you. Some of us were preceptors, others had various responsibilities.

Rejecting our arguments on the grounds that we do not know of what we speak is to be like the ostrich burying its head in the sand, in the face of inconvenient truths. It is to want to remain deaf and blind to certain realities that you deny to the absurd, so as to not re-question yourself.

IT IS DIFFICULT, BUT YOU ARE NOT ALONE

To doubt, to re-learn to think for oneself, to recognize after years in error that one has been wrong, to take a place on the sidelines, it is not easy. But we've been there, we demonstrate that it is possible, that one can rebuild, turn the page and move on to other things. You are not alone.

YES, YOU CAN!

There is life after Sahaj Marg, one can live without it, and especially live better, much better.

Elodie
.
.

Comment by Paolo, Ex-Preceptor of Sahaj Marg!

Taken and translated from a comment by Paolo, ex-preceptor of Sahaj Marg (under Babuji and Chari), on article by Cricri (Christian): Le Temoignage de Cricri, (see English version on this blog: "Ex-Abhyasi of Sahaj Marg, Cricri's Testimonial"), on Elodie's blog in Europe: Pour Que Vive Le Sahaj Marg.

Comments and insertions by 4d-don are in "red italics"

(See reply by Cricri below)


Paolo Said:


The argument that you suggest seems very interesting and even fundamental to any spiritual seeker.

My name is Paolo and I joined Sahaj Marg in 1978. I met Babuji the next year in India and several other times until he departed (April 19, 1983)

I met Chari in 1979 in India when he was secretary general of the SRCM, then I accepted him as the new chairman of the mission and later as master, believing that I was "recognizing the master where he was", basing my decision especially on the perception of the transmission flowing from him.

I worked as a preceptor for 15 years until I left the SRCM in 2003.

I do not think though that I have anything to teach to anyone, but at the same time I am absolutely convinced that we must ask questions and try to answer them honestly.

The first question which you had already asked is:

- Is there a difference between spirituality and power?

and also:

- Does there exist any form of "energetic" power with no spiritual nature?

- The practice of "suggestion" towards the abhyasis or those who are not abhyasis, widely used by Chari and many of the preceptors, (is it) a spiritual practice?
(For example: work by suggesting that someone who abandoned the mission will return)

-In order to be helped spiritually by a Master should one not have, beyond "energetic" power, certain characteristics, innate by a special birth or acquired by his spiritual practice, such as humility or non-attachment to material goals, including the idea of the growth at all costs of his mission?

- Should the Master should not have a direct experience of the spiritual realms, and help us to do the same (direct experience!) And have no recourse to mediums and like people?

I do not think that to ask whether Chari is a channel or not, is a good question.

I'm sure he is a channel but of what "energy" is it?

Is this a purely spiritual "energy", liberating from the grips of the material and helping to enter the spiritual worlds, or, an "energy", which in one way or another, only develops the ego in an infinite expansion?

Someone said that you can judge the tree by its fruits.

Best regards and thank you for all your efforts

Paolo

Saturday, October 1, 2011



Cricri Said:

Paolo,

"believing that I was recognizing the Master where he was", basing my decision primarily on the perception of the trasmission that flowed from him."

From KC Narayana (of ISRC a SRCM break-away group) I learned that the transmission is an act of will.

He has long insisted that I understand the difference between divine grace and transmission.

From the SRCMtm, I was confused.

Transmission can not flow by itself passively it seems, it is something else.

You do not doubt that Chari is a channel, but you doubt about the type of energy that he channels.

What are your assumptions about the nature of this energy?

"I worked as a preceptor for 15 years until I left the SRCM in 2003."

Would you explain, since you are a former insider, how the teacher manipulates the abhyasi to make it obedient and indoctrinated?

I refer to "spiritual" techniques and these famous suggestions emitted during the siting or during the remote (at a distance) working sessions on the abhyasi.

Explain to the readers what this witchcraft recipe is, the readers would not believe if it came from me.

Would thou also tell us why the teacher is unable to advance the abhyasi spiritually?

The suggestions have obviously limits :-)

"for example, to work by suggesting that someone who has abandoned the mission will return"

I know this is the kind of process that one undergoes, and more so from people that we know, and believe to want to do well.

In my case, however, I have taken the lead by addressing the abhyasis of Chari by all the names of birds (Bird-brain) : I'm sure they would not want me to return to their cult! :-)

Yet the sense of my last post is honesty.

Some abhyasis were influenced by blogs while that the choice should have come from them.

Today they have doubts about their decision because they feel they have lost something essential.

(Continuation and end)

We have a spiritual responsibility to be cleansed.

If an abhyasi doubts that he has made the right choice, then, he must return to SRCMtm and not wait, and watch the situation from the inside after having had an outside view.

So he will obtain the means to make a choice that comes from himself, if indeed the "suggestions" which is he is the target leaves him that.

If he decides to leave, he must really have faith, and look hard.
Likewise, if he decides to stay!

"Should The Master not have direct experience of the spiritual realms"

Absolutism demonstrates an inability to understand the complexity of the world, general relativism, the nuances and subtlety of the universe.

It shows a total misunderstanding of nature and the compensatory need to construct a safe mental building.

It is the opposite of living a spirituality which brings us constantly in front of the unknowable.

For this reason, I am awed by the thoughts of Lalaji, whereas with Babuji, an exclusive monotheism is set in place while this exclusivity is absent from the original Sufi teaching.

If Chari has no direct experience of the spiritual realms, he seems to be used as a channel: by what, by whom, for what purpose?

Darth Vader is a beautiful metaphor for Chari.

Both are trapped in a net of influence which they have allowed to develop by ambition, indulgence, and arrogance.

A spark of good is also in Chari: perhaps it will his its work one day?

Perhaps it is already at work, guiding the lost in the maze of his ambition?

And if all this would open on an episode of light?

That's why nothing is decided on Chari and SRCMtm and I want to re-open the debate in a constructive way.

Paolo, you are essential to help us think, thank you for sharing.

Cricri

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Ex-Abhyasi of Sahaj Marg, Cricri's Testimonial

Taken and translated from a comment from Cricri, an ex-abhyasis of 18 years (with Chari): Le Témoignage de Cricri", on Elodie's blog in Europe: Pour Que Vive Le Sahaj Marg.

Christian is a Research Psychologist and Psycho-linguist.



Comments and insertions by 4d-Don are in "red italics"


September 30, 2011

Cricri's Testimonial

Pushing the thinking further: Are the dissidents wrong on the essentials?

_____________________________

Cricri's blog: http://srcmtm-fr.blogspot.com/



I have asked this question repeatedly during this discussion - to one and all, on the blogs and in private and to myself over and over again, trying to contemplate the situation so as to know for sure.

Why is the answer not more clear? Why is it that I return to these questions, which imply that, maybe I was wrong about Chari and that I have misled the abhyasis by drawing them in my revolutionary wake?

Because undeniably, there is some spirit with Chari. Because despite his behavior, despite what he causes, despite the rotten fruit of this tree, the divine makes Its way regardless of the ability of men.

I know that all of the abhyasis SRCMtm continue to question themselves on a recurrent and similar phenomenon: How can "spiritually advanced" people - as found in the inner circle of Chari or in important posts in the "mission" - have such a gross personality, an arrogance so visible, and such a heinous behavior?

The answer they find is always "the ego", one of the central concerns of Chari's abhyasis (disciples), about which nobody ever talks among the dissident groups. The ego (the devil) is, along with the samskaras (sins), reincarnation (hell), liberation (access to Heaven), master (Christ the Saviour), the Self (Spirit), and the center (God) , one of the structural elements of the hindu-ized Judeo-Christian dogma which founded the software of SRCMtm (Judeo-Christianity has been proven to be able to control the masses and to manipulate history. It was destroyed by the Freemasons and its associates, to remove the fangs and the claws of the Church.) However, it (ego?) is necessary. The psychobiological universal structure, or the machine language, is transcribed into an exotic cultural matrix, to appear as a new software functionality so as to be accepted easier: it is still the same system of power, manipulating the levers of the same fear and desire - the stick and the carrot).

Anyone who has an ego-rush falls (into hell), and all the people who gravitate around Chari have been chosen by him for these positions of proximity, so that he can better work on them - implying the poor souls, let us have pity on their miserable condition for we, the small people of SRCMtm are worth much more than these great(s), (since we do not need to undergo this favoured treatment of deep cleaning (de-carboning?).

I have long believed this mythology which sounds pretty logical. I, however noticed over time, after 10 or 15 years, that those close to the master were hoplessly thick (dense), and that they were really getting rather worse. It was still rather confusing, since the master it seemed, performed on them a specific job so as to get them out of their human misery.

It seemed instead that they were rather more arrogant, and some, which I will not mention by name, were sometimes openly hateful towards some abhyasis - enough to be widely unpopular in the movement (humiliation + jealousy = brotherly love? ).

Therefore, there came a time when another hypothesis has made its way into my mind: the mythology of common sense was a mythology. Which meant that either (i) Chari was doing no specific spiritual work on these people in the inner circle so as to make them "evolve" (inability or abuse), and (ii) that he used the most vile characteristics to develop and manage the pyramid of power on top of which he continued to climb ( pushiness, ambition).

But this meant above all else, something even worse: Chari could not be a spiritual master if he had such practices, such tactics and such aims - and although he claims to be the spiritual successor of Babuji, and although he had the support of some Western abhyasis, whom he knew how to manipulate in the 80's and 90's, so as to return to power in India with a legitimate dissidence.

Numbers of "old abhyasis" have deserted the entourage of Chari over time. Most were illustrious unknowns, but some were of stature, and some, not the least, were spoken about in their retreat from the movement with varying degrees of commotion. Invariably, the rumors among the mass of followers, was that these former devotees had all fallen thanks to the media. They had a crisis of ego, and they turned their backs on the Holy Spirit, on God and on His messenger Chari-Saviour.

Myself, when I joined the movement in the late 80s, I was somewhat confused by the unexpected meeting with a preceptor from a group of dissidents a few days after my introductory sittings in Chari's faction ... I found myself accidentally thrown into the heart of the conflict, opponents Chari wanting to tell me nothing, advising me to follow my path, and accepting that I come meditate with them while continuing with Chari's group, and some others telling me that the dissidents did not recognize the new master, and advised me not to go ...

So I took this as an excuse to ask, a few months later, for a personal interview with Chari, and to meet him for the first time. I wanted to ask him some questions, with the idea of ​​the character test, to get an opinion and to choose one group or another. On the point of psychology, Chari had replied "They failed to recognize the Master where he is." - Speaking of the spiritual principle that the Anglo-Saxons call the "holy ghost", the "holy fantasm" or the Holy Spirit.

I was 20, Chari impressed me with the clarity of his thought, the spiritual energy that emanated from him, and the message of the teachings that he made me discover. The dissidents that I knew formed a splinter group, not organized, consisting of ego-centered individuals with a spirituality which seemed to be more of a memory than a powerful stream. I had no experience relevant to my aspiration. In the group of Chari on the contrary, I found an organization rich in potential, a living master who seemed to have backbone, especially, who had the spirit with him. It is this last point that had determined my choice. More precisely, this first meeting with Chari had been foundational. There was no more doubt, no more questions. I had seen the two alternatives, I knew for sure.

The first years were totally carefree. I was carried by my aspiration and the aspiration of the group, a great power prevailed, togetherness was still in the human dimensions and each found its place. Spirituality was at the heart of this beautiful enterprise. We had, at the seminars, three, sometimes four satsanghs per day. Chari came to France several times a year. The spirit was always present and we were immersed in all this joy, this dynamic. It was wonderful.

Over time, the SRCM has become the SRCMtm, a monstrous machine to crush the hearts and souls, a factory to indoctrinate with the sole ambition "A Brave New World" (general trend of global society). Around 1995, I began to realize the shift that had taken place in the organization, I think in the early 90s. In 1997, it was very visible, with the introduction of a new structure and more stringent operating rules for the expansion to come, I began to take real distance, tortured between my unsatisfied desire, my total indoctrination, and incomprehension in the face of the destruction of the soul of the mission which was taking place.

Until 2005, I thought that this destruction was the result of abhyasis and management teams. I trusted in Chari, believing it was a temporary stage in the process, all the energy that was involved in the establishment of the structure but soon, a focus on spirituality would take place. Between 1998 and 2005, I continued my practice with the regular use of individual sittings, but I would not attend the exceptional group meditations.

In 2005, I took stock of the situation as it became clear that my practice was declining more and more. I had to try to revive a practice followed by more and more involvement in the social life of the mission, since the pressure of indoctrination in messages by Chari were having their effect on my thinking.

I went to Italy and to Denmark, two international seminars. What I saw stunned me. A collective madness had infected the masses. The attention was focused not AT ALL on spirituality, but on the purchase of land and buildings for the ashrams, and so on fundraising.

In a seminar, the son of Chari animated the auction of objects and works offered by the abhyasis to the mission. As few participants had come to support the first auction, it was decided to organize the following auction at the time of satsangh, because everyone would be present. It was a scandal. Abhyasis, disgusted, turned on the son of Chari in the discussions which took place the following hours and days. This hated son was an immoral representative, able to exchange the sacred for the profane at very vile prices, to please his father.

At the next seminar, responding to the wave of protests with contempt and arrogance - as usual, it was Chari himself who animated the auctions ...

Doubt was no longer possible, many abhyasis fell from on (their) high, wondering if their idol had not become senile. Still seeking for excuses, I was one of those who assumed that the inner circle of Chari, consisting of the worst social climbers of the mission, had rotted his mind by contaminating him gradually with subversive ideas. At the same time, I saw him host a sale with my own eyes. And I saw a person self-assured, methodical, manipulative, working in full knowledge of what he did and for what purpose, playing with the idolatry of the abhyasis to make them empty their pockets.

So I had at one time or another to go through the full process and test Chari - you know the rest.

Yet could there not be something else behind all these symptoms? Behind this grim reality, sordid, and animalistic?

What if Chari, despite his repeated criminal acts, was a tool of the divine, unconscious, driven from above? And if the spirit of God flowed through him? And if Chari was a master anyway?

I have heard the arguments from one and the many. I saw with my own eyes the one and the many. I lived and I felt. I analyzed and I dis-endoctrinated. I learned the difference between power and spirituality, or at least got some insight so as to know that there is a difference.

And yet, I confess, I never managed to find this certainty, after years of quest that Chari is not a channel.

So I open this section of my blog to officially launch a discussion in which I invite everyone, both from one camp or the other, to make constructed and constructive arguments. This is an important debate, as it aims to (i) confirm or (ii) reject the hypothesis of the dissidents.

If (ii) is correct, it is important that those who were misled by the blogs may have the elements so they can find their way - or rather, to take an informed decision for their own spiritual destiny.

Cricri

Chari of Sahaj Marg(tm) Names Successor: Kamlesh D Patel

It's official (signed and witnessed: July 26th, 2011 ... notice who are the witnesses) and FOR LIFE :

http://www.sahajmarg.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=e66c3ce2-7174-43f8-bc4b-0ad1190eece2&groupId=10128

P. S. This appointement FOR LIFE is apparently confirmed by long-ago "deceased" spirit of Babuji ... through a medium or "directly"?? We are not told.


Alexis said ...

Yesterday, October 3, 2011, Chari made public the appointment of his successor, a decision made officially since July 26 and therefore kept secret for more than two months.

Why the secrecy? Why the delay?

Result: when the rumor began to circulate among abhyasis, they rushed to our blogs for more information. Does that not top it all?! Or rather the perfect illustration that the information does not flow very well in this movement ...

So six years after appointing Ajay (Kumar Bhatter) (April 30, 2005), and one and a half years after the announcement of his resignation (May 2, 2010), Chari nominates Kamlesh Desaibhai Patel as his successor, the next representative of his Divine Master, Babuji and the future President for Life of SRCM. This document written at the Diamond Jubilee Park in Tiruppur, (India) July 26, 2011, is co-signed by US Bajpai, AK Bhatter and Sanjay Bhatia.

This second Tiruppur Declaration has been approved by Babuji, in a message to Chari, confirming the choice of the person to succeed. Translation: Chari needed a medium to hear Babuji, this means that Catherine Lauret (the Medium?) also endorsed the choice of Kamlesh, forfeiting her own ambitions ... at least for a time. As for Babuji, you believe or you do not believe ...

Who is Kamlesh Patel?

A head of the show, an abhyasi of the first hour, preceptor for nearly as long, who has gone through all the positions of responsibility (zone-in-charge, region-in-charge, etc..), to the positions of Director of American foundation (Sahaj Marg Spirituality Foundation) SMSF and of ombudsman of the new Gobal World Service of SRCM.

This Indian by origin living in Staten Island, in the state of New York, United States. An Indo-American to head the SRCM is new. If he truly succeeds Chari - in contrast to Ajay - will he remain there in the United States or return to India?

Will we see a raising on American soil a giant ashram called Chariji Memorial Ashram?

Tuesday, October 4, 2011


Here is the official Message:

Important Announcement from Rev. Master

To,

All Abhyasis Worldwide.

Dear Sisters and Brothers,

In the meeting of the Mission's Working Committee held today morning at Kolkata, Rev. Master has announced the nomination of Br. Kamlesh D. Patel as his spiritual successor who shall succeed him as the President of the Mission worldwide. The audio and video of the announcement at the Working Committee meeting and a scanned copy of the Nomination can be accessed by clicking on the following links -

SRCM Successor Nomination Dated 26th July 2011 - PDF Document