--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote:
>
> Not having seen this guy (and with no desire ever to),
> just following some of the discussions of him on FFL
> and BATGAP, I'm curious as to whether anyone can explain
> to me why they pay money to see him, or pay even more
> money to talk to him in private or on the telephone.
>
> Is it really just the "buzz?" Is buzznessitude both so
> lacking in your life and so important to you that paying
> a stranger for a hit of it is important enough *to* pay
> them? I'm asking because, despite my joke about the
> Buzzunit Rating System yesterday, I've been away from
> the "Going to see a visiting teacher/saint/healer for
> the buzz" thang for so long I don't really remember or
> value the attraction of it. Can someone who still feels
> that attraction explain it to me, and what the perceived
> "payoff" is?
>
> Also, I get the impression reading the things said about
> this particular buzz-seller that he's a bit of a loose
> cannon, and (based on the reports) can accurately be
> assigned to the group of teachers some would call
> "chronic abusers." In the sense of the classic child-
> or spouse-abuse cycle (abuse and lash out, later apolo-
> gize and get forgiven, abuse again, repeat) as opposed
> to the "There is no spoon" abuse cycle (abuse, not only
> never apologize but say it's the Self doing it so there
> is no abuse).
>
> Again, I've never seen the guy and will never, so I'm
> asking those on FFL who have ponied up the cash to see
> him to explain in more detail what it was like and what
> they feel they got out of the experience. If you feel
> like it. I think this would help me to balance some of
> the things being said on BATGAP, where the general
> tendency is to make excuses for the guy's outbursts,
> from one point of making-excuses view or another. The
> fact that many of the people (especially women) who
> flocked to him as groupies in the beginning now can't
> stand to be around him actually seems sometimes as if
> it's being presented as the women's problem, not his.
>
> I'm just fascinated by this tendency towards occasional
> abuse in those who set themselves up as spiritual
> teachers or shakti-sellers. I've seen it in action in
> Rama - Frederick Lenz in its classic abuse cycle ("The
> self made me do it") variant, and in Maharishi in a
> different kind of abuse cycle ("The Self made me do
> it"), but I keep seeing it.
>
> So I'm wondering who here on FFL might have also seen
> this tendency towards abuse and "acting out" in Trivedi,
> what their "take" is on it (because on the whole I trust
> the accuracy of the perceptions of people here more than
> I do the people on BATGAP), and their take on "What's in
> it for me" when they see him. Thanks in advance...
>
