Brickbats ~ more pointed*  
Some of the criticisms i have received over the years, more specific and focused or constructive. 
I apologise to those whose hits are lost because they came before i started this page.
You too could be here, but this is not for complaints about your guru's low rating.
Most recent ones added at the top.

[A lengthy exposition on the collaboration (or co-optation if you prefer) of gurus with the agenda of the nefarious control-freaks who would run all our worldly affairs. I do not resonate with the author's ideas much but have not engaged in a detailed rebuttal, just a couple of points inserted with the consent of the author. I present the piece here whole as an interesting pov – Sarlo]

I will find it extremely unlikely (but altogether possible) that you don't know about all the New World Order programs, now rising and forcing their way into everyone's lives. If you do, then you would automatically know that many of your top rated, listed gurus are (or were) - in fact - tools for the two primary, global agendas—which are; one world government and MASSIVE depopulation.

Of course, I speak of 'gurus' like Jiddu Krishnamurti, Tolle, your favorite Osho, and many, many others—most of whom came out of (directly and indirectly) the Blavatsky Theosophical 'tradition exploitation society'—and other similar organizations.

I know you are aware of the huge number of bogus gurus out there (ergo; your site lists). As you well know, most bogus gurus abused their positions for either money, power, or other nefarious exploits. However, I'm sure you must ALSO realize that many such abusers were actually sponsored operatives, trained and supported by intricate networks of organizations, with one purpose in mind; to bring the world under their (the ruling families running the banking elite-now IMF) control through incremental changes, leading to global fascism. Once the control grid is in place (as it is now), then the next phase would begin, which leads to genocide and ultimately neo-feudalism.

We need only to look at the recent (last 10 years) list of church scandals, the exploitation and infiltration of various church groups, and the enlisted help programs now being implemented (forced upon) by clergy across many countries—to get a glimpse of what is really going on... All just tips of the icebergs we are now careening into.

There are conspiracies, but they are not theories...

http://tinyurl.com/69m6s6 [Google search results for {new + world + order + speech}, includes primarily G Bush Sr and various current politicians: Obama, Biden, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and others ]

><><><><><><><><

My points and final suggestion:

1. In order to enjoy listening to and learning from gurus, whether they be complete quacks or not, a certain level of respect and freedom must be protected and preserved, by and for the people. In other words, religious freedom, the freedom to believe in what we want and decide, relies largely on our rights as individuals. And it is up to us - the people - to protect those rights.

2. Those who promote, directly and indirectly, philosophies which - by their nature and intent - are one-world-government oriented; CAN ONLY be construed as being favorable to the destruction of Habeas Corpus, Constitutional laws, and all other legal citizen protections (which took centuries of struggle, hardship, and blood to develop). Anyone who understands what IMF-run, UN & NATO implemented governance actually means, knows that ALL our rights are now being threatened and dismantled. This move by the banking elite is global, and it has been planned, set-up, and worked for, for a very, very long time. Furthermore, our right to worship, our right to believe in something (or someone) and express those beliefs, is now under attack.

3. Thus, those persons who support persons espousing these world "principles, philosophies, and calls to action, on behalf of profound global change" can only be seen as either extremely gullible and naive (revealing a lack of intelligence); OR, such persons must be aiding and abetting these crimes against humanity.

These ARE crimes against humanity because any government that is based on corporatism, and which destroys the rule of law, is fascist. Fascism is the other side of the same collectivist coin, which has communism as its supposed opposite. They are BOTH socialism. The evolution of ALL fascist/socialist governments is clearly predictable, based on well-documented history (both ancient and modern). That evolution, or rather, de-evolution, always turns the focus on the needed outward enemy—inward. The people, themselves, eventually become the enemy, leading to horrific, large scale crimes against humanity... "Humanity" means us, The People.

Therefore, I strongly suggest that you either 'come clean' on your website, and let people know that you actually support fascism, the so- called New World Order. Or, better yet, if you do not support such 'collectivist-corporatist principles'; investigate further the real political agenda(s) behind many of these so-called gurus, and connect the real dots to the real evil, now rising quickly across the world.

Sure, Osho, Tolle, and the rest of the Oprah global-agenda book club sound great. And, at first, the stuff not only "makes sense", it even seems to help... Yes, I read them all. Listened to them all... And their soothing voices, with carefully constructed pauses, always sound the same... As soothing and introspective as they may seem, they may as well as be hissing cobras, about to strike, for...

They are simply Judas goats, leading the flocks to slaughter.

[Sarlo: About all this, in general i don't feel that most gurus are in the service of this NWO thingie and in fact many are in the service of liberation from all kinds of oppressive systems, but i don't feel to argue much about it. I WILL say that based on my experience with Osho, i can say that he is NOT in favour of a world government, being very much a supporter of individual endeavour, EXCEPT inasmuch as it can reduce the conflict between smaller areas (national, religious and ethnic, etc). And the way for any govt to not exceed its very limited legitimate rights of interference into people's lives is to have it based on a meritocracy, ie voting only by educated meditative people who have processed some of their unconscious issues, not by the mob that can be influenced by hucksters, panderers and connivers.]

Mind control, hypnosis, and all kinds of brainwashing have always been the métier of the guru, or religious leader... Wrap it in a fancy book cover, package it into nice DVD sets, even set up some online clubs or groups—but it is still the same snake oil con -job. And, quite frankly, I'm surprised someone (like you) who knows these histories, could be so easily duped... Or are you?

The world has entered a new era of deception and delusion. If the spiritual path is really about Truth, then we must either fess up, or wake up; and not just to the usual list of feel-good self-development goals. The long-planned politics of spirituality is about to smack us in the face. Everyone will soon be forced to make a choice—to either stand by their beliefs, or run into the enclosing control grid of the NWO... It has all happened before. History repeats its cycles. Only this time the fascist technocracy will be even MORE efficient.

Your choices are your own, but are your beliefs? Your ratings of gurus, and so on, are - likewise - your opinions, which you have a clear right to... No argument there... Everyone has that right. However, when the road we are ALL being pushed onto is the road to genocide, then those who (knowingly or unknowingly) help do the pushing, must be asked:

What do you - what will you - REALLY choose to believe in, when the time comes?

[Food for thought, before the FEMA trains pull in.]

[Sarlo: The author initially signed off here, and i did too but when i suggested adding his signature Ben Franklin quote (below), he agreed and added the subsequent material below that:]

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” — Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

One more (interesting?) point, which you are also free to include (or NOT include - again, as you wish) on that page [perhaps in brackets, under the Franklin quote], is:

In recent years, it had been repeatedly reported that Ben Franklin was not only a very high ranking Mason, but also a child molester and murderer. Suddenly, after centuries, in one of his supposed former residences, in England, the "evidence" rises from mass graves. Since one of the key NWO goals is to form a North American Union, on the way to complete global domination; discrediting and demonizing (literally) the so-called American Founding Fathers is clearly just part of the larger plan. In my view, the timing and manner of these stories indicates they are most likely manufactured, and/or exploited for purposes of the hidden agenda.

With such stories, whether 'real' or not, incredible control of all media by the NWO creates an encircling wall of illusion and control around the general populace. This, in turn, leads the public down the road of classic spiritual delusion, where - eventually - confusion and deer-in-headlights helplessness gives way to immorality and corruption. The anti-hero becomes hero, first as new method—then as introduction to the dark path. The intricate web of NWO deceptions, manipulations, and tightening controls are, in fact, the first layers or clouds of illusion which MUST be dealt with, in this age.

The battle against the NWO is, in reality, a spiritual battle; and the rules of engagement care little which school, dogma, or tradition you hail from. It is a battle which will not and cannot be fought sitting on a tiger skin, in a forest, contemplating our navels (or  Svadisthana chakra), while preparing organic greens and a nice, low fat salad dressing. [That age is over.] Nor will it be fought at your nearby cellulite-obsessed neo-Tantric Yoga health spa.

It is up to the reader to learn and know where the field of action really is. The rest is just more 'dividing and conquering blah-blah.'

And an example (just one of many very scary Judas goats): http://www.srisri.org/latest_news.html

Take Care -
Anon


Hello Sarlo

I see that it looks like you began a game, something you say you do not take seriously, but there is danger that some one who needs some help of these good people lose out due to this facetious stuff, and people needing to take time from their very busy lives to ground the good and retract the bad.

AG

[Sarlo: This is an interesting and original comment. I don't think it can be helped though, as the need to disavow any expertise is far more important, so keeping it light shall be the main flavour. But your point shall remain lodged in my mind and maybe something will come of it, some tweaking of attitude or other manner of accommodating such folk.]


Hello Sarlo

I do appreciate all the work you have done.

This is not a brick, I wouldn't throw a brick, it is a suggestion and I won't even talk about my Master.

But I think it is way out there to rate some decent sincere good (who knows their state really I guess) teachers with people who are super-powerful. Yes, some of these people are sincere, pure, etc, but they don't really affect that many people, they don't usually blow people's minds in large numbers and bust up someone's whole life that frequently.. 

Example, Ammachi is incredibly powerful with the way she awakens people and the amount of work (and ability to get others to work which is based on her power) and you gave her 3 buds or whatever they are. Great.

I have seen (only as an example, not really picking on her) Shanti Mayi, (I live in a town she used to live in) and I really like her, but to put her on the same rating as Ammachi, just doesn't seem right. She just doesn't have the power, she spent a lot of time just like the rest of us, I heard what she did. I was in the room with her, though she does lead a decent chanting (not great), putting her in the same ball park seems silly. 

And Byron Katie, come on, she is a therapist, that's all (so am I). I wasn't impressed by her that much and I think her best assest is good marketing and the public's gullibility, she isn't really saying anything that new that other therapists don't. But these are decent people, but hardly masters.
There are other examples, I don't know all the people at all (but have seen the 3 I made comments on)

AND there is a big prejudice for people who write books. That is very 21st century American or Western, but SO many people have books these days and have people to help write the books. I don't think a highly evolved Master would really write a book themselves, they got devotees to empower, that's what it's all about, empowering followers. The followers write or publish the words of the Master. The followers grow. They do the Master's work.

So I what I am ultimately getting at (it has nothing to do with these specific people) is you have to look at the person, not their book. AND you should rate people based on 1. their sincerity, their ability to perhaps organize and disseminate, their genuineness and 2. The ones that are absolutely blowing a LOT of people's minds, in and out of their corporal bodies. In other words, these are completely different paramters.and maybe 3. Those who wrote a good book (with or without someone's help).

Also realize the whole world is not the West or America and the standard for other teachers is different in the East somewhat and what is commonly accepted as normal for these spiritual types may be beyond anything that happens in linear West. 

[Sarlo (private replies to other points above deemed unnecessary here):] This is something i understand but have no way to realize, in the sense of making real. It is a definite limitation and though i've spent seven years in India, it seems like the best i can do for now is to understand it and allow Indian and other cultures space for their feedback and input.

I am leery of the appeal to devotion (as an avenue of exploitation) often found in Indian spirituality, though the devotional approach clearly has merits too, at least for some people. For the best representatives of this type, i have compensated by allowing myself to be influenced by intelligent feedback from devotees, such as from Ammachi's people and NKB's.

But my cultural limitations will always be there to some extent. So it goes.


I also like that other person's idea of letting Jack Kornfield or someone trusted comment on at least some of the ones he knows.

Heh heh. I am waiting for this idea to take off. So far i have no offers from Jack or anyone else of his stature :-)

Peace

peggy


Dear Sarlo,

I think it is a good service to list the names of spiritual men who avail themselves for teaching.

It may even be more helpful to let comments collect from longer term visitors to these individuals.

However, I most sincerely agree with your own master as you have put forward on the "About" page, that -Great and not great- should NOT be indulged in. 
(As I am a faltering example of my own teacher's example...clearly you join me in this catagory)

My own teacher, and their lineage, would say that all teachers of whom assisted one's advance are to be respected. Many will learn from more than one. That the Divine's unseen hand directs sincere seekers to the location they can attain 'something' more akin to their level.

Between such sincere loving men, there arised, not the question of high or low, only the celebration of light, love, and unity.

All such like Teachers and Masters, past and present are to be respected - and only the Divine and those "Dyed in the Divine's colour" (embellished quote from one of the Sikh Gurus) can differentiate between the calibre of teachers.

Why put such a chore on man?

There are those who hold themselves out as "Masters", knowing themselves they are not what they portray. Knowing so, they ensnare sincere seekers from finding a connecting source.

Once Mulanna Rumi was taking a walk with his students and there was a large larvie of a bug being attacked by army ants. Rumi was asked for an explanation. He saddened and said (loosely), "Karma is being discharged here", that the larvie had recently been a man who held himself as a Master, and the ants had been his initiates who were robbed of the chance of connecting to the true redemptive currents (of not finding the Living Master).

Clearly, you are more couragous than me. Do tell me, if you have the time and are so inclined, what did you like best about your Master?

Which of these other masters have you visited yourself?

Blessings and affections,
BH

[Sarlo answers:] I understand that Osho is advising against such comparison. This is a subtler part of what he is saying in that quote, the main emphasis of which is on not making him the greatest. I have made progress on that front, whereby he is no longer rated topmost (alone except with Ramana Maharshi) but now shares that rank with 20 or so others.

The rest of the comparison trip will take a while longer i fear, since a) there are bogus teachers to be exposed, b) Osho himself talked against a number of masters in the field and c) there may be residual value in estimating how approachable these guys are, or at least indicating some factors which may apply.

For the ratings are not an estimate of how enlightened they are or of their inner worth but their efficacy and accessibility, which are fair game i think. The exception to that is my taking a position about whether or not they are enlightened, an admittedly dodgy proposition which i partially rectify by being somewhat open to feedback.

Regarding the last two questions:

My master Osho was / is vast and through this vastness still finds ways to touch me and guide me. Though i am mainly a hermit now -- as i was when he found me in the woods of BC many years ago -- he has ways of reaching out.

I have actually visited very few other masters. Impressions are formed on the basis of website readings and feedback. I have been initiated in the sanghas of Yogananda, Anandamurti and Maharaji but never met any of them personally. (Maharaji was touring North America and was possibly in my then home town of Ottawa at the precise time i was initiated in his ashram in India :-))


[This crit apparently apropos of reducing the top levels, from a 5-bud max to 3]

Hello,

Just to say that by merging the top level, Gnani's are taken as Liberated wich is not the case.

The goal is the complete Freedom from duality, Knowledge is the step before.

That explain why some guru talk about practice for Liberation while enlightment can be as a flash.

So mixing the stuff is misleading.

Best regards,

CV


[This crit was submitted before reducing the top levels, from a 5-bud max to 3]

Dear Sarlo,

Your ratings are interesting. Anyone who rates more than 3 ("no bullshit but limited in methods/capacity" – not quite a ringing endorsement) is dead! How are we supposed to learn from dead masters?

The highest rating to Osho, who taught us not to make a cult around him after he was gone, to Osho, who said to go to a teacher and hear him/her directly rather than let anyone else tell us about the teachings, to Osho, who said don't take anyone else's word for it (especially not Sarlo's -- I was there the day he said that!)

No wonder, by the way, that Paul Lowe and Michael Barnett gets such low ratings, seeing as they could never be allowed to exceed the master...no matter how valuable their work may be...

Well, congratulations for a pretty thorough listing of the names that are out there hoping to cash in on the spiritual money train. You forgot Oprah and Dr. Phil, though...; )

Peace and light,
N


There was a criticism of my and general Western use of the term "Advaita" here. That topic has been expanded and given its own page. (<-- click here)


Hello Sarlo,

I love Osho. He left before I could get to see Him in "person", "Ammachi" came into my life......

First of all, to quote:
"........ the simple reason that you are not enlightened yet. You don’t know the ways of the enlightened ones. You don’t know their devices, you don’t know their methods; hence the misunderstanding."
[from Osho, on why masters criticise each other]

If this is true about you, you might want to consider, yet again, to cut out the Rating business.

I find your site very, very useful; it could be more so, if you were to drop the numbers game.

Now see here:

What distinguishes you from the Christian whose master is the greatest because he's son of God and the Muslim whose master is the greatest because he's the last Prophet, none comes after him.

For you Osho is the greatest, because well, Look, He IS the greatest, He gets 4 and 1/2!

[Again, this crit came before the system change to 3-bud max.]

Chauvinism stinks, from anyone! And it never does any good. One SHOULD regard one's own master as the greatest, but this should remain a secret, just for you, and the other disciples/devotees/friends/lovers...............

What Osho's left behind is doing it's work. He has no need for missionaries. You, it seems, are trying to be one, and unnecessarily making a fool of yourself.

For the Realised Ones everything is exactly as it has to be, including the false guru, without whom the real ones cannot be known, without whom some of us cannot continue to grow, and so on. Sometimes enemies are our greatest gurus, and so on..........

You might wish to consider this Suggestion, to make your site more useful, less offensive, less missionary, and perhaps better for your own growth....

Instead of Rating quantitatively, do it qualitatively, as follows:

Put all the gurus who for you are not worth bothering about (including Mohammed, Ali....?) in a separate category. Perhaps not even bothering to comment on them....

Rename your site e.g. Sarlo's Gurus and continue to be open to communications as you've been.

Wishing you all the best in the New Year.

– Azeem


[Azeem elaborates in a subsequent letter:]

If you are not enlightened, and do not understand the devices and methods of masters, then you will misunderstand what they do, how they are; and any evaluation/rating based on such misunderstanding will be futile, naturally.

Many people judged, and refused to go to Osho, because of the malas with
His image, the orange clothes, the "orgies", the cars, robes, watches, etc etc....... Who was losing here, the judges or the judged?

If you have a living master then the basic thing is to surrender and do the master's will, believe everything S/He tells you. When the master is gone, well, then the possibility of folly is there.......

If one is not watching Him on video, but is reading Osho, it can be easy to take something He says seriously, when in fact He's saying it tongue-in-cheek. When He's criticising other masters.... well He does tell us to be cautious, and as we are not enlightened we can misunderstand..........

A compassionate cobbler may criticise a competitor to prevent you from going to him because he knows for sure the competitor will not be able to make the shoes you/your feet need. And a cobbler out to get rich will have a different reason to criticise, naturally. So one does need to be Very attentive when masters criticise each other.

How much of your rating is based on Osho's utterances? And how many times did you get to see His facial expressions during the utterance?

[I had replied: There are some bad people in this business.]

This is a rationalisation for being involved in a project which is untenable, just so much mindfuck.

Your master is gone, and you are like an orphan. You need love and guidance (or to meditate, whatever that means!). Rather than seeking out another parent to give you it, you choose to spend your time comparing your dead parent with others, dead and living.

I think that the Reason for your ranking gurus like this is that, as an orphan, you suffer from parent/Guru envy; and you feel the need to console yourself by proving that your parent/Guru was the best, and irreplaceable.

I do doubt very much that you would ever see it fit to award a living master the marks you give Osho. The day you find such a guru would be the day you would just finish with the whole project. Am I wrong?

See here, you are behaving like a compulsive wine-taster, (or book-reviewer) who's tied his hands, and passing his judgements about the contents, by the bottle (or book-cover).

And the joke is this:
THERE'S NO WINE THERE TO RATE. It's pure and simple water.
THERE ARE NO WORDS IN THE BOOK TO REVIEW. It's empty; blank pages! Egos, doers, and doing, may be ranked. (Non)Beings, and non-doing,
not.

Why do I say that you've tied your hands? Because you choose not to go to be in the presence of the gurus that you rate. You are scared. Scared that you will fall in love, that you will betray Osho?

When we are told that the taste of ocean water is the same wherever you taste
it from, it is a truth you can verify by actually going to different places and really
tasting the water. You don't want to do this. You choose to trust appearances and hearsay. Where can this lead you?

In terms of awareness, compassion....&...&... of an Osho, or an Amma, or a Buddha the unenlightened like us are as mice beside elephants. How can a mouse rate an elephant, by what (kind of) yardstick? And if the elephant has seen the futility, the stupidity, of both judging AND having a yardstick; has no need to judge and thrown his yardstick away; is teaching others to do the same, where does that leave you?

Sarlo, if there are bad guys out there, masquerading as gurus, and you want to play "spiritual policeman", that's okay. But have you got it in you to tell the grain from the chaff? How can you be certain that you are not throwing the baby with
the bath-water? Is it possible, really, for a mouse to masquerade as an elephant? And finally, do we not all get the gurus we deserve, like a country getting the leaders it deserves, and so on....

Personally, I would be wary of blasphemying even a single Satguru. And you are
putting yourself in a situation of rubbishing not one but scores of masters!
Is it wise, is it worth it?

I am in the catering business, vegetarian and tee-totaller. All the great "Guides" like Michelin or Gault Millau are simply irrelevant to me; just so much bullshit about ranking houses which serve grape-juice gone bad as drink, and dressed-up bits and pieces of cadaver for food. And 90% of the western world respects this
bullshit; fools competing with each other to get a "good table" at one of these houses!

If yardsticks for judging food/drink of the physical kind can be/are so diametrically opposed, (and i'm not sure whether it's "one man's meat is another's poison" or that all meat and wine are indeed poison for all of us; the latter, i'm inclined to think) well, the spiritual world.....is not only going to be stranger than we imagine, but more mysterious than we CAN imagine.......

Enough for today.


Dear Sarlo the "mind fuck artist,"

Nice site - very original. . . I guess in a world where we rate everything why not start rating spiritual teachers. 

Let me preface my email by telling you that I am just curious and not in any way attempting to challenge your right to create and maintain this site.  That said on to the email:

I read how you came to your assessment of a teacher's rating.  It's interesting that you have such a long list, I honestly did not think there were so many guru's (let's use guru for this email since it's really as good a word as any for me to get my point across).  Your site is valuable both as a rating system and more importantly as exposure to new ways of thought. 

Since your site also acts as an introduction into new ways of thought, don't you think it's important to make sure that you relay what information as accurately and honestly as you possibly can? 

I come from a spiritual background that acknowledges the many voices that worship the same God, so I hold all those voices in the highest esteem, unless there is just cause to do otherwise.  I really don't think it's a competition to see who's the best guru or who has the most disciples, rather I think it has to do with the breadth and diversity of the human experience - each person has a particular signature.  In other words everyone belongs in some niche, but can I, or, in this case you, judge that niche?

I understand that you feel this is a service, that you are educating visitors to your site on the possible dangers that await them on their quest to find the truth, but I know, and you acknowledge it on your site that not all your ratings are based on personal experience or a deep knowledge of the particular guru you're rating.  You should consider why you found it necessary to put a spiritual "We're #1" finger on Osho and ignore all that other gurus have to offer.

As I said above, your site is awesome as a tool for educating and introducing people to different spiritual paths.  Unfortunately you need to classify and create hierarchy.  In the end though, who really cares what you do on your own site?

I hope you read my email with a smile on your face.  I hope that rather than upsetting you my presumptuousness brought a smile to your face. 

Good Luck with whatever you're searching for, I honestly hope you find it -

– Reza


While I doubt you will dump this thing, you really should.  It is a total load of crap.  How could you possibly judge who knows that which you don't know yourself?

I will tell you this, from personal experience:

Andrew Cohen is completely clueless.  What "guru" publishes a book devoted exclusively to bashing their own guru?

Second of all, what guru tells a disciple to go out into the world to spread their message only to later find out that they had literally NO understanding at all?  Thus, Papaji is bogus, Andrew Cohen is bogus, and by extension Gangaji though well meaning is bogus as well.

Osho was bogus, at least as far as his self-proclaimed status as a teacher on a level with Jesus and Buddha who could lead you to enlightenment.  I lived in that commune for two and a half years.  He was not enlightened.  A great imitator, a clever thief of ideas, a gifted manipulator of people, genuinely inspired in a whacked out way, but clearly full of shit.  Not one of his many disciples was enlightened while he was alive.  There is a reason for this, because he was blocking the door.  Yes he is easily understandable by people.  yes he talks about relationships and politics and sex.  But he is not a great teacher.  Take of your blinders, my friend.

Sailor Bob repeats what he heard or read somewhere else.  He has no understanding. otherwise he wouldn't say the same thing to every single person who walks in, and he wouldn't have his "devotees" in a chorus chiding the questioner.

If you want, put Ramana at the top but have the wits and heart to give him all five stars.  (and bear in mind that Ramana says that if a guru gives a seeker some specific thing to do besides inquire as to their true nature, he is not a true guru.  Which knocks down several of your folks several notches.)

Finally, to be clear:  Nisargadatta bequeathed his teaching, and the responsibility to teach it, to Ramesh Balsekar.  Ramesh instructed Wayne Liquorman to teach.  So they should all have the same rating.

The problem occurs because a) true advaitic teaching will appeal to a very small number of people; b) the ego loves dead teachers, as there is much less threat from  them - live teachers have a definite disadvantage when they give no comfort to the ego; c) Maurice Frydman translated Maharaj in a very favorable way for mass understanding, which is fine (you should put Maurice in your table) but he botched things up in a lot of place.  The last half of "I Am That" was made up - there were no tapes, no transcripts.  It was the grace of god that made that book what it is, but it is not pure Maharaj.  If it were, you'd have him rated at the bottom - he had a potty mouth.  Ask someone who knows.

If your scale is meant to denote the ability for large numbers of people to access a teaching, you should have pat robertson and jerry falwell at the top.  If your scale is meant to indicate how clear a teaching is, how uncompromisingly it points to the truth while giving no quarter to the ego, you have got it all wrong.

– Daniel Heller [Wayne Liquorman disciple]


*see also Bricks1 for more general criticisms
and Sugg for systemic suggestions

Navigation: Site Map   Home