Michael Dettmers, Former Personal Assistant to Prem Rawat Internet Revelations
Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 21:51:42 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Subject: My responses to la-ex
Here are my answers to the questions in your post of November 12, 2000.
1. What do you think kept so many of us involved in such a devoted manner for so long? How could we, and especially the PAMS (who saw so much contradictory and hypocritical behavior) not see through so much of this sooner?
I believe that each person has to answer this question for him or herself. Speaking for myself, I already answered this question when I said that my position was a 24/7 occupation. I regularly put in 18-hour days and, even when I wasn't working, I was always "on call." After being in this situation for years on end, my body and mind coupled to the environment. I simply didn't have or take the time to reflect on what I was doing with my life in a general sense because I was so preoccupied with getting through the next tour, or completing the next project, or handling this or that problem. It was an all-consuming job that left little or no time for myself.
2. Wasn't there talk about maharaji's drunkenness and drug use, especially since it seemed so out of control, amongst people around him? Were there discussions amongst good friends about the hypocrisy of all this? And what to do about it? Didn't people feel guilty about going out into communities and talking it up for maharaji when they knew that in his real life he was so screwed up?
There was very little trust and openness among the premies around Maharaji. I suspect that very few considered themselves as good friends. Most were scared of losing their positions as there were literally dozens of premies waiting in the wings to replace them, and Maharaji never failed to remind people around him of that fact. Consequently, an atmosphere of fear and competition prevented people from really speaking what they thought or felt with each other in case their moment of indiscretion might get reported to Maharaji, costing them their positions.
My position was somewhat different than most of the premies around Maharaji. When Maharaji drank, he often offered me a drink as well. He also offered me cigarettes. Before I met Maharaji, I never smoked cigarettes. Within a year of being around him, I became addicted to cigarettes. In time, I began asking myself why was I smoking. Shortly thereafter I quit. I don't think Maharaji liked that very much because he continued to offer me cigarettes which I politely declined. He had tried a couple of times to quit without success and I think my refusal to join him made him uncomfortable.
At parties and special events, Maharaji provided drinks, champagne, wine, cigarettes and dope for all of the x-rated staff. In this way, he co-opted those closest to him into a conspiracy of silence because we all got to participate, some more than others, in his secret.
3. Were you the only one to confront maharaji about his behavior? Did his wife confront him? Did he get counseling, or would he even listen to a therapist or counselor? What do you think is the main reason for his drinking problem?
I believe I am the only person who confronted him about his drinking. Marolyn was certainly in a position to do so, but she found it easier to join him in his drinking than to take issue with it. While I was around, he never got counseling about his drinking. You can re-read my posts about the San Yisidro conference to get an idea about his reactions to a form of counseling even though that conference was not organized to address his drinking problem.
In my post to Peter Howie yesterday I said that, in my opinion, his excessive drinking and profligate spending were desperate attempts to fill a void that, according to his own teachings, only knowledge can satisfy. In saying this, I am not advocating anything positive about knowledge. I am simply pointing out that Maharaji's himself behaved in a way that strongly suggests that he did not to believe nor practice what he preached.
4. When you said earlier that maharaji didn't seem to care about his work or his own life, what behaviors of his caused you to think this way? Did you ever have an in depth talk about this with him, as someone who cared about him?
Maharaji's excessive drinking and his profligate spending as well as his abusive behavior especially when he was drunk led me to the conclusion that he did not care about his life or his work. When I confronted Maharaji about his drinking, I did so out of love and concern for him.
5. When you said that 'night after night' at the residence maharaji would be getting stoned with the premies, and that you have seen him 'countless' times inebriated at different places…Was this over a short period of time, like 6 months-one year, where he may have been in turmoil over a specific situation in his life, and then gave it up? Or was this behavior that has gone on continuously for years and years?
The behavior continued for years. It was not a periodic event.
6. Are there other former PAMS that you know that would shed more light on this situation? Would you contact them? I'm not recommending or requesting that you name them, or that they identify themselves on the forum, but I do feel that the more we know, the better off we are…
There are definitely many PAMS who could shed further light on this situation. I have spoken with some of them but, for the moment at least, they are unwilling to come forward.
Tues, Nov 21, 2000 at 02:48:49 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
First, let me emphasize that what I said is simply my opinion but here is what I base it on. I have been around many CEO's of major corporations as well as smaller entrepreneurial ventures. These are people who are passionate about what they do and they put their heart and souls into it. They are constantly traveling, attending meetings, addressing shareholders, dealing with employee and organizational issues all to further their missions. Just take the recent (although still undecided) US Presidential election as a case in point. Serious politicking for the presidency began with the primaries in February culminating with each party nominating its candidate at their conventions in July and August. Then followed exhausting campaigns that had the candidates addressing crowds and town meetings at the rate of 5 or 6 per day, 7 days a week, right up until election day. Why did they do it? They did it because they are serious in their quest to become president and, under our current system, that is what it takes.
Now, I am willing to bet that most premies would say that Maharaji's mission is far more important to the world than the missions of business people and politicians. Yet, when I compare the work ethic of these people to the Maharaji I served, it is impossible to conclude that he cared about his work. In the end, I concluded that he was just plain lazy. I experienced the same frustration that Bob Mishler faced over this issue. I kept wondering when he was going to roll up his sleeves and get serious about his work. When was he going to get down off the throne and start connecting and relating with the rest of the human race he delusionally thought he was here to save? When was he going to engage with people in real dialogue instead of pontificating from on high? Believe me, I was ready to do my part.
Instead, I spent a good deal of my time organizing the financing and acquisition of his ever growing collection of watches, his fleet of expensive automobiles, his palatial residences, and his helicopter and planes. After a while, I concluded that there was a strong correlation between his failing mission and the fact that he was slightly inebriated, if not out-and-out drunk, five out of seven days of every week for years on end. To me this was the behavior of a man who did not care about his work. Given the exalted status in which he held himself and his obvious inability to live up to that status, I concluded that he did not care about his life. When the dissonance became too great, he numbed the pain with booze and the acquisition of more toys. Is this behavior greed or an addiction or both? I don't know or care. What ever it is, it is inexcusable in one who claims to offer the key to happiness, and anybody who supports it is a fool. I should know, I was a fool for much too long.
PS: Susan, Curious George and Cynthia I will address your questions sometime this week.
Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 15:10:15 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
To: Eddy The Turtle
Subject: My Response
Eddy The Turtle,
I will briefly answer your first question now and save the Bob Mishler question for a few days until I catch-up on some of the other questions.
First, let me clarify that Maharaji was not drunk five out of seven days a week. He did drink cognac every single day during the time I was around him and he always drank in the evening after dinner. Sometimes he would limit his drinking to two or three shots and that seemed to have no effect on him whatsoever. Often he would drink five or six shots, which made him slightly inebriated. Once or twice a week however, he would exceed that amount and that is when he became out-and-out drunk. Those were the times he often slurred invectives at people and situations that displeased him as I reported in an earlier post.
To reiterate what I said earlier, he was never drunk or inebriated when he was flying. He always stopped drinking the night before a flight at the prescribed hour specified by the FAA. However, he often drove when he was slightly inebriated and occasionally when he was drunk. I remember an incident where he got extremely upset during dinner with his entire family at a posh restaurant in Palm Beach because he thought that Marolyn was flirting with a gentleman at a nearby table. He abruptly demanded that everyone in his party immediately leave the restaurant. He brushed aside his driver and took the wheel himself even though he was really drunk. With his entire family in the car he proceeded to their hotel which was about three miles from the restaurant. I followed in a car just behind his and was horrified to see his car swerving all over the road. It is a wonder that he didn't crash into something or that the cops didn't pull him over. This is just one of several such examples.
Date: Thurs, Nov 23, 2000 at 03:18:15 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Subject: A question and some comments
I'm glad you had such a wonderful time in India. I have a question and a comment or two about some of your observations.
1.You say "What did Randy Prouty tell M about Susan 20 years ago? (that, I happen to know the answer to…nothing, zilch, nada)."
Exactly how do you know the answer is "nothing, zilch, nada?" I ask because when I spoke with Marcia Leitner, the member of Élan Vital's Board of Directors who was given the task of responding to Susan's and my letters to Maharaji about the Jagdeo matter, she said that Randy Prouty and Judy Osborne "did not recall" whether or not they discussed it with Maharaji. Your definitive statement makes it abundantly clear that Randy did recall something, namely that he never spoke to Maharaji. If that is the case, why didn't Marcia convey that fact to me?
2.You ask "Was it technically a crime to listen to Peter Frampton whilst having and sharing one's after-dinner herb in 1977, particularly since Frampton-specific taste statutes weren't enacted 'til much later at the birth of Punk, well after Pete's album was the biggest in the world?"
The crime is not in "sharing one's after-dinner herb" which, as I indicated, I enjoyed. The crime is in the blatant hypocrisy and double standards perpetuated by a so-called spiritual master who does not practice what he preaches. In this context, your admission that you "know Maharaji's had his 'wilder' times, especially in the past" is particularly galling. This hypocrisy was further compounded a few months ago by Élan Vital's revisionist FAQ's when they characterized Maharaji's ashrams as havens from the drug culture.
3.You say that my "statement that Maharaji didn't care about his work is the single most bogus thing (I've) yet uttered" You continue: "I don't know ANYONE, who has been in the daunting position of trying to keep up with him as he goes about what he does, who wouldn't laugh at that."
No one needs to lecture me about the "daunting position of trying to keep up with him as he goes about what he does." The question is, how much of what he does to keep throngs of people busy, have anything to do with spreading knowledge. I suggest precious little. There can be no doubt that he keeps lots of people busy catering to his and his family's every need, managing and maintaining his expanding empire of residences, yachts, planes, etc., as well as organizing his various events. But if you did an audit of how he actually spends his time, I'm willing to bet that you would discover that he spends a very small percentage of his time and resources on the spreading of knowledge (I say this in comparison to other leaders who demonstrate a far more serious commitment to their missions in life). And a good portion of the resources that are allocated to Maharaji's tours are spent on ensuring that his personal comfort is not compromised in the slightest. In other words, he wastes an incredible amount of money in the name of spreading knowledge. But you already know this. Your statement, "He's always been able to easily separate the toys from his teaching" says it all.
What do you think of this? In the middle of a not very grueling five-city tour in the mid-eighties, he developed a slight cold. It was the middle of winter in the US North East and he had two more cities to visit. With one-hour notice, he instructed me to cancel the rest of the tour and to make arrangements to depart immediately for Antigua. This was not too difficult to arrange when you consider that he had a private jet waiting at the airport. A few hours later he was sun bathing in 80° + weather. Oh well, fuck the premies. They'll always be there next time.
4.You state, "That mastery has nothing to do with after-dinner cognac, aircraft, money, Peter Frampton, plumbing fixtures or titles."
Danny, I have come to the conclusion that it has everything to do with those things. When you wake up and realize that your wonderful experience has nothing whatsoever to do with Maharaji, you will stop supporting his charade and begin walking the road of real freedom.
Good luck to you.
Date: Tues, Dec 19, 2000 at 17:34:49 (GMT)
Subject: More Questions for Michael Dettmers
Hey, Michael. Happy Holidays. Thanks again for confirming what so many of us had heard about Maharaji and his abusive (and pathetic) lifestyle.
I was wondering about what you said recently about Maharaji having sexual affairs with premie women and his ongoing mistress of many years, Monica Lewis. I just had a few questions.
1. Did Maharaji ever consider divorcing Marolyn or she him? If Marolyn considered Maharaji to be the Perfect Master (which she SAID she did at numerous programs in front of thousands of people, in which she swooned about him, worshipped him, and apparently considered him perfect), how could she even be in a position to complain about him? Didn't she pretty much have to accept him the way he was, (vulgarity, alcohol, drugs and promescuity included), because he was beyond being judged like an ordinary person or spouse? What was the nature of their marital problems?
2. Did Maharaji ever talk about why he married Marolyn at such a young age? Was immigration a big issue? Was independence from his family? Did he regret marrying so young?
[Again, it is completely up to you as to how much of this you want to talk about. In an ordinary situation, a couple's marital problems are nobody's business, but, again, Maharaji frequently used the image of his perfect family as part of his apparent scheme to have us believe in his perfection, being both the Perfect Master, as well as the Perfect father, spouse and family man. To be fair, Marolyn seemed quite willing to spin that yarn as well, both of which is hypocritical if that wasn't what was actually going on.]
3. When Maharaji began having you and later others arrange for him to have sexual liaisons with premie women, where did they go? Obviously the residence, right under Marolyn's nose, wouldn't do. Did they go to a hotel or something? Were these affairs going on both in Miami and Malibu? Have you heard that Maharaji has set up a home for Monica near Los Angeles?
4. Are you aware of any premie women turning Maharaji down when he propositioned them?
5. When Maharaji suggested to you that he wanted to have sex with women not his wife, you said you thought it might be a good idea (as long as it wasn't with premies) because it might help Maharaji get in touch with his humanity. I think I can actually kind of understand what you mean by that, but can you explain further? I assume you are saying that, in a way, Maharaji was trapped in his role, and the role of the Perfect Master was a kind of barrier between him and his own humanity. Perhaps intimate relationships with other people might open him up to getting outside the role. Is that what you meant?
6. I assume Maharaji's affairs became common knowledge among the residence staff and probably the PAM community. Is that true? Were you aware of anyone being confronted by Maharaji's behavior and questioning their involvement with him as a result? As you know, I am aware of one person for which that was the case.
7. You said that Maharaji made it clear that it was not okay for Marolyn to have affairs outside the marriage, but it was okay for him to do so. How did he talk about that? Did he see that as a double standard, or that it would be improper for her to do that because of his high standing, or was he just coming from a sexist viewpoint?
8. Did Maharaji ever tell his off-color jokes in front of his kids, or in front of large groups of people? Also, it appears that Maharaji's stage persona was very different from the way he was other times. Did Maharaji ever talk about the difference? Like did he think that he was at certain times the Perfect Master, and certain times Prem Pal Singh Rawat?
Date: Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 02:14:15 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Subject: More Questions for Michael Dettmers
When I became Maharaji's personal business manager, he made it clear to me from the very beginning that I was to act at all times with utmost discretion, to maintain a very low profile, and to conduct his business affairs on a "need to know basis" only. If Marolyn was to be included in certain discussions, he would let me know, and he would define the boundaries of those discussions. Consequently, I was somewhat of an enigma, even around his residence. I did not engage in very many conversations with Marolyn and I had little contact with his children. I focused on my responsibilities and I kept my nose out of Maharaji's family matters. I say this so that you may understand why I am not the best person to answer some of the questions you have posed. I also agree with those who expressed the view that Marolyn and her children do not warrant the same kind of scrutiny as does Maharaji and I will bear that in mind as I respond to some but not all of your questions.
1. Did Maharaji ever consider divorcing Marolyn or she him?
I do not know if Marolyn ever broached the subject of divorce with Maharaji but I do know that Maharaji would never consider divorcing Marolyn because he was obsessed with the Eastern concern for "saving face." When Maharaji got married he did so without his mother's consent even though he was still a minor. In fact, she did not even know of the marriage until after it took place. It was anathema to her that any of her sons marry outside of the Hindu tradition. To his mother, marrying a Westerner was tantamount to sacrilege. Thus, Maharaji's marriage to Marolyn was the decisive act that forced the split up of the so called "holy family" and cleared the way for Maharaji to take full control of his mission, and that was the main reason he got married. He did not get married to obtain US citizenship. He would have gotten that without marrying Marolyn because he already had US permanent residence status and was eligible for citizenship in 1979. His marriage to Marolyn simply accelerated the process by a couple of years.
I'm sure that Maharaji was in love with Marolyn but that, in itself, was not necessarily a compelling reason to get married, especially as he was only 16 years old at the time. Before they were married, they carried on a secret love affair. I discovered this when Maharaji and his mother were touring in Canada in 1974. I had been instructed to use the ashrams for their accommodation because that is what his mother wanted. Upon arriving at the Toronto ashram, however, Maharaji asked me if I could arrange for him and his mother to stay at a hotel. Within an hour, they were comfortably ensconced in the Presidential suite of Toronto's newest hotel. His mother was pissed, but he was delighted. He further requested that I make similar arrangements in the other cities. It was during that tour that I became x-rated so that I could also make arrangements for Marolyn who was secretly following the tour.
Several years later, when Raja Ji and his wife Claudia were contemplating a divorce, Maharaji did everything he could to prevent it from taking place, including the threat of financial ruin for Claudia and her children. Maharaji did not really care about the pain or difficulties that Raja Ji and Claudia were experiencing, or even about the potential adverse consequences of a divorce on their two children. Maharaji only cared about saving face. He did not want to give his mother and all of the Indian premies who had left him when the family split up to say "I told you so." It would be worse, as far as Maharaji was concerned, if he and Marolyn got a divorce. That is why I say that Maharaji would never contemplate divorcing Marolyn, at least while his mother was alive, which she was when I was still involved.
2. When Maharaji began having you and later others arrange for him to have sexual liaisons with premie women, where did they go? Are you aware of any premie women turning Maharaji down when he propositioned them?
During the time I handled such matters, Maharaji's liaisons were conducted in hotels while he was on tour. In my limited involvement, no one turned him down, just like no premie declined to be x-rated when I presented the possibility. I don't know any of the details of his relationship with Monica including whether or not he has set her up in a home or apartment.
3. When Maharaji suggested to you that he wanted to have sex with women not his wife, you said you thought it might be a good idea (as long as it wasn't with premies) because it might help Maharaji get in touch with his humanity. I think I can actually kind of understand what you mean by that, but can you explain further?
By 1985, I once again reverted to a belief that I had previously come to in 1976, namely that Maharaji would be more successful at spreading knowledge if he attempted to relate to others in a more natural and human manner. I was convinced that the perfect master — devotee paradigm was a huge barrier for most people to overcome in order to receive knowledge. I wanted him to get down off the throne and engage in authentic dialogue with people. I realized that he was indoctrinated at a very early age to embody the Perfect Master role as the truth, but I, nevertheless, hoped against hope that he would open up and re-assess his life. I based my hope on my observation that he was in obvious pain, what with his marriage difficulties, his alcoholism, not to mention his failing mission. In felt the time was right for Maharaji to make the shift. The conference at San Yisidro was part of my effort to bring it about.
When Maharaji told me that he wanted to experience other women, I thought it might be another opportunity to help him connect with his own humanity. In the end, as must be obvious to everyone, none of my efforts worked. He's still playing the same sick game. He thinks he's the lord and believes the whole world should humbly surrender and kiss his ass. Some premies agree as evidenced by his recent program in India. I heard from one of the attendees that he gave darshan to all of the Western premies who came early to do service. How does that jibe with your FAQ's Élan Vital?
4. I assume Maharaji's affairs became common knowledge among the residence staff and probably the PAM community. Is that true?
When I was around Maharaji, his affairs were not common knowledge, even among the residence staff.
5. You said that Maharaji made it clear that it was not okay for Marolyn to have affairs outside the marriage, but it was okay for him to do so. How did he talk about that?
He didn't really talk about it. He simply assumed it on the basis that he's the master and everyone is supposed to do as he says, not as he does. Any rational person, however, would see his behavior for what it is — hypocritical.
6. Did Maharaji ever tell his off-color jokes in front of his kids, or in front of large groups of people?
I don't know about telling off-color jokes in front of the kids. I remember an instructor conference in Texas in 1986 when he had a joke contest where participants got up on the stage and were judged on who told the best off-color joke.
7. Also, it appears that Maharaji's stage persona was very different from the way he was other times. Did Maharaji ever talk about the difference? Like did he think that he was at certain times the Perfect Master, and certain times Prem Pal Singh Rawat?
Date: Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 04:38:06 (GMT)
To: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Thanks. And one clarification….
Aside from the information about Maharaji and his personal problems, I find what you are saying very interesting just from a historical perspective. What was really going on?
You said the main reason Maharaji got married to Marolyn when he did, at such a young age of 16, was really because it 'cleared the way form him to take full control of the mission.'
Are you saying that Maharaji got married to Marolyn because it would force the break with his Mother and hence essentially give him control of the mission, at least in the West? It sounds kind of Machiavellian. Do you think Maharaji was actually that crafty and politically maneuvering at the age of 16?
By the way, who made you 'x-rated?'
Date: Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 12:08:02 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Thanks. And one clarification….
Yes to your first question.
I won't mention the person's name without their permission.
Date: Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 12:19:42 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Subject: Do not agree
In Maharaji's world, a person, including Marolyn, is whatever Maharaji declares them to be. And, he was always quick to remind those around him, he could reverse a previous declaration whenever he wanted to. Remember the mahatmas who were subsequently declared 'manmots.' That is why I am so angry about the Jagdeo situation because in Maharaji's sick world he is the only real power who could and should have dealt with the situation.
In Marolyn's case, she was Durga Ji and then one day she wasn't. His game - he makes the rules and he changes them whenever he wants. And, of course, he exempts himself from any of the rules he makes for others. After all, using his own self-referencing illogic 'Maharaji is Maharaji.'
Date: Tues, Dec 19, 2000 at 18:13:24 (GMT)
Subject: More Questions for Michael Dettmers
Michael-in addition to Joe's questions, I would add a few more…
It has been alleged here that a few years ago Monica wanted to blow the whole cover and leave maharaji because she was upset about something (I wonder what?)….supposedly she was talked out of it by some PAMS (I wonder if this coincided with maharaji's 'quitting' about that time-supposedly he 'quit' briefly, because the problems were too big for him, but then 're-hired' himself a few days later)
One question I have is - was there ever any
'hush money' or perks given out to the women who
might talk? Or other people who knew about
Have any of them talked?
Do you think any of them would talk now, under anonymous names?
Also, Pat Halley has written that fakiranand was
instructed by the dlm president to kill him. That
would have been mischler.
Do you think he would have ordered such a thing?
If he did, wouldn't it have only been through direct orders from m?
I don't remember Bob as being the irrational type to order such a thing, or having the audacity to do such a thing unless m wanted it to happen.
Also, Pat Halley says he was paid about $10,000 for damages.
Is that accurate, and how was that handled? How was a possibly damaging court case avoided?
I've got a few more, but that's it for now..
Date: Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 15:10:09 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
Subject: My response
As I said in my post to Joe above, I don't know any of the details about Maharaji's relationship with Monica other than that their relationship is a fact. Most of the stuff to which you refer, if it is true, took place after I left. No hush money was ever paid during my limited involvement, and I have not had any contact with any of the women for well over a decade.
I was the National Organizer in Canada during the Pat Halley - Fakiranand episode so I have no idea what conversations took place and with whom. Based on my subsequent close working relationship with Bob Mishler, I do not believe for a moment that he knew of, or had anything to do with, the attack on Mr. Halley. I'm sure, however, that he must have played a role in cleaning up the mess that others(?) created.
Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 11:36:04 (GMT)
From: Last question
Subject: To Michael Dettmers re your 1st agreement
If I understand correctly, you made 2 confidential agreements.
One of them you signed regarding financial matters. This agreement you told made sense to you.
Re the other one, you were given a choice. Meaning from the most sincere place in you, you were given a choice and a deal. Like you had to promise from the bottom of your heart, that if you were allowed to enter that 'room', what you saw would you keep to your heart in confidenciallity.
You seem to respect the financial agreement, event if it is hard for anyone to imagine what now is untold.
The other and more deeper agreement, 'signed' at the heart of your soul, not on any paper, you seem to have broken again and again. You have even revealed intimate details a friend in complete trust to you, told you.
My question is, Have I misunderstood
And why is that you respect the 2nd agreement, when you drop the 1st? And what do you feel about it?
Date: Thurs, Dec 21, 2000 at 20:34:02 (GMT)
From: Michael Dettmers
To: Last question
Subject: Not my last response
Dear Last Question:
You ask a very good question. I agree with your assessment that there are two agreements -- a signed contract and a sacred covenant. Let's deal with the signed contract first. You state that I "seem to respect the financial agreement, even if it is hard for anyone to imagine what now is untold." With respect to the non-disclosure clause in my contract, I have chosen to interpret its meaning in the narrowest sense possible. This means that I have not hesitated to disclose financial and legal information that I had discussed in open sessions with organizers all over the world. And I would not hesitate to fully breach the non-disclosure clause if I thought the information I disclosed could in any way damage Maharaji. Furthermore, I could give a rat's ass if Maharaji or any of his agents chose to sue me for breach of the non-disclosure clause. It would love the opportunity to depose Maharaji and his agents under oath and ask them point blank to deny any of the assertions I have made public on the Ex-Premie Forum about Maharaji's behavior. The reason I chose not to breach the non-disclosure clause is because it might create negative consequences for my consulting business where I am often required to include non-disclosure clauses in my agreements. It is normal for potential and/or actual clients to demand confidentiality, not just for legal and financial matters, but also to protect their proprietary inventions and trade secrets.
Now let's talk about the sacred covenant. You say that I "had to promise from the bottom of (my) heart, that if (I) were allowed to enter that 'room', what (I) saw (I) would keep to (my) heart in confidentiality." I presume that you are referring to the conditions one is asked to abide by if they agree to be x-rated. To make sense of this "agreement" we must first put the process of becoming x-rating in context. As I explained in my earlier post on this subject, the premies who were invited to become x-rated had been in the ashram and, for the most part, were already doing full-time service for Maharaji. These people were trusted by those who were already x-rated and quite often they were known by Maharaji. So before anyone was x-rated, they were already bound by the sacred covenant the existed between Maharaji and his devotees made manifest through the ashram. And who created this sacred covenant? Maharaji of course, during a time when he was unquestionably presenting himself as the lord, despite Élan Vital's claims to the contrary. That's what made the covenant sacred. We surrendered our lives to him and he promised to take care of us, not just spiritually but physically as well. X-rating made sense if one subscribed to the lord — devotee belief system and it wasn't much of a stretch to accept that the lord, as such, must not be subject to the same rules and protocols that applied to his devotees.
All bets are off, however, if the covenant is broken. And who broke the covenant? You're right — Maharaji did when he unceremoniously disbanded the ashrams and threw most its residents out on their asses without even an explanation. That act was a most grievous violation of the "deeper agreement, 'signed' at the heart of your soul" to use your words. He has since denied that he ever presented himself as the lord and, in his usual manner, has deflected any and all responsibility for this tragedy onto others. So, if he's no longer the lord, then there is no longer any reason to exempt him from the standards of civilized society. But no, he wants it both ways. Well fuck him. He is a hypocrite and that is what I have disclosed.
Finally, you claim that I have violated my friendship with Maharaji because I "even revealed intimate details a friend in complete trust to (me), told (me)." I guess that depends upon your definition of friendship. At one point in my relationship with Maharaji, I believed it was possible to know him as a friend. I vividly remember a trip we took from Los Angeles to Miami in August 1984. At the time, he did not have a personal jet. The 707 had just been sold and we had not yet secured the Lear 35 so we made the trip together in First Class on Pan Am. At that time, he was in the midst of his marriage difficulties and was in a subdued and somber mood. Well into the flight when we were both a little tipsy, he leaned over to me and said that he hoped that we would always remain friends even if I wasn't serving him in any capacity. For years, I held onto that possibility even long after we had parted company. I'm sure that is one of the main reasons I didn't come forward with my revelations any sooner than I did. But well over a decade passed since I left, and I never heard a word from him. Even his brother Raja Ji, whom I like very much, has called me once or twice a year just to say hello. When we were both in Berkeley a couple of years ago we got together for lunch. To me, that is how friends act even if they aren't close friends. Maharaji, on the other hand, is incapable of friendship. I didn't fully appreciate it at the time but his expression of friendship in 1984 had all the sincerity and commitment one can expect from an alcoholic. Still I said nothing until I became aware of the Jagdeo situation. His shameful and cowardly behavior in this matter has superceded any delusions of friendship I may have harbored and I decided to come forward with my disclosures.
And if you think that the Jagdeo situation isn't proof enough of his cowardice, let me leave you with another disclosure to mull over this holiday season. I don't know how many of you are aware that Maharaji has killed a man. In the early 80's, following a festival at the ashram outside of New Delhi, India, Maharaji and his motorcade were traveling from the ashram to the airport to board the 707 for America. Maharaji was driving the lead car and I was a passenger in the front seat of the car directly behind his. All of a sudden, I saw a man riding a bicycle pull out in front of Maharaji's car. Seconds later the man went flying several yards into the ditch. He died instantly. Randy Prouty, who was traveling as security in Maharaji's vehicle, frantically ran to the car I was in and instructed all of us to get out of the car and find a place in the other vehicles that were part of the motorcade. Maharaji and the people in his car quickly transferred to the car I was in, and we all sped to the airport. Sampurnanand stayed behind to deal with the situation which he did by having his houseboy take the rap. In the investigation that ensued, the houseboy stated that he was the driver of the vehicle who hit the unfortunate cyclist. That explanation, plus a hefty cash settlement to the victim's family, enabled Maharaji to quickly put the incident behind him so that he could get on with the business of bringing peace, love and joy to the rest of humanity.
PS: I am leaving for a week to celebrate the holidays with my family so I don't promise to look in on the Forum or respond to questions in a timely manner.