I meant to include this e-mail from Ned Wynn, possibly his best. (Again, here's a guy in a position to know....someone who was literally, as the expression was in those days "on the door"):
Sat, 31 Aug 2002 20:50:43 -0700 From: "Ned Wynn" Subject: Re: E-mail and its power Casey, I agree, basically, with the thrust of Rob's message. Maharishi broke the sacred trust, the rule that bonds guru and disciple. Perhaps this was intentional (to make us leave), but either way, if it was intentional then the result is the same: break away, if not, break away. In the teleological sense, breaking away is required. Forgiveness, I think, is the choice of the individual, it is not a given. I don't feel the need to forgive MMY because I harbor no grudge against him. In a sense, I believe MMY's transgressions are actually against the Spirit, not against me or you. The disciples are the Spirit because they approach the guru in innocence and trust, just as the Spirit makes itself available to all who seek it, without partisanship. Rich, poor, old, young, male, female, black, white, the Spirit is open to all who seek it. The disciples, in the Hindu tradition, make themselves available to the guru to refine them and make them whole (holy). The guru welcomes the disciple and cares for him because the disciple brings the guru the greatest of gifts, love and obedience. By accepting the disciple the guru brings himself into contact with the Spirit. It is of tremendous spiritual import to the guru to have disciples. They are not petitioners, they are partners in the Spirit (as Christ said to his disciples, "I call you friends.") Christ even washed his disciples' feet. The guru is the Servant. He must be truly humble. If he lies and cheats, then he is violating an essential spiritual law. If he says he is Brahmachari and he is not, he transgresses a sacred boundary. Maharishi needs to make amends. He needs to take to heart the lesson of submission, of surrender. Amendment of life when we have sinned against the Spirit is the greatest action we can take because it affirms our willingness to bow to the Spirit and to do the will of God. Maharishi never makes amends. He is arrogant and willful. I think it is completely reasonable for the disciple, disappointed in the guru's sinfulness, to be angry with him. And it is essential that the disciple, when he encounters a willfully disobedient guru, to leave that guru. If, later in life, the disciple comes to the conclusion that the guru was misguided (if, as you say, infested with a demon, or, as I think, compounded in his sin by ego and self-love), then the disciple may forgive the guru. But MMY continues in his sins, he wallows in his transgressions, and thus he has lost the love and care of the holy men in his own country. They know who he is. They warned him. But he thought he was above the rest. This is a problem that MMY will have to solve. So far I see no indication of anything in that direction. He remains grandiose, dictatorial, and unrepentant. When I speak of repentance I know that Rob will think, "Protestant Deist." But repentance is not foreign to Hinduism or Buddhism. It merely means a return to our right relationship with God, a relationship of complete surrender on our part and total Love on God's. Maharishi has no humility, and I think in the end that is his downfall. Sex is just a trap that is set to catch the arrogant and willful. Money, ditto. In and of themselves they are nothing. But, taken in the context we're exploring, they are indications of the unsuitability of Maharishi to be anyone's guru. Ned --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <geezerfr...@...> wrote: > > > Today, I went back to read through the sexy-sadie files.....the various > e-mail correspondence between MMY's skin boys of the late 60s and early 70s: > Casey Coleman, Ned Wynn, Rob McCutchean and John somebody....I assume John > Black, later John Bright. > > As direct, funny and unforgiving as Ned Wynn is, his thoughts are the ones > that most ring true for me. But.....at the same time, I believe that t MMY > TRULY wanted to bring enlightenment to the masses. Judith's book had me > pulling out the box containing my own stash of MMY's notes. It's truly a > fascinating paradox. > > My own view (which I reserve the right to change) is that MMY, when it came > to his relationships to money and women, was a complete and total failure. He > only valued those who were wealthy....even more so as time went on, and he > clearly gave in to his own lust as a human male. > > BUT.....but, he also absolutely was in love with knowledge. He absolutely > wanted to convey, through whatever means, enlightenment to everyone. I > believe this with all my heart. > > Folks....what's a mother to do? > > Friday, August 30, 2002 3:11 PM > From: John Doe > Subject: Re: E-mail and its power > > You haven't picked on me very much, and I wouldn't consider talking about any > point a personal attack. I would appreciate getting some more details from > Ned so I know these things really happened. It is mind blowing. I just got > home. Later, John > > -------------------- > > Fri, 30 Aug 2002 18:09:21 -0700 > From: "Casey Coleman" > Subject: Fwd: Re: Fw: Hey > > John, Even though I am forwarding this to you I do want to say I think Ned is > a little more negative than need be. Judith was very cute and any man would > have had a hard time saying no to her if she was coming on to him. I do not > think that MMY having sex says much about him at all except that he is human. > I am not going to be the first person to throw the stone. As we learned from > our last president all men will lie about sex and they can still be great and > good men in spite on it. > > Brother Casey PS. The Swedish guy was very happy to take her back to Sweden > and set her in her own apt. as his mistress. > > ------------------ > > Fri, 30 Aug 2002 18:16:24 -0700 > From: "Ned Wynn" > To: "John Doe" CC: "Robert McCutchean" ,"Casey Coleman" > Subject: Re: E-mail and its power > > John, > > This is the bare bones of what I know, personally, from both Jennifer and > Judith. This email was originally written to Rob so it may be a bit raw and > flippant for you. But we (Rob, Casey, and I) are way past being amazed at > this. I have known this for thirty years now. These girls told me (and Jane > Goe, my former wife) these stories personally. Jennifer called us up and made > it a point to come to our house and tell us this story. She was angry about > it. She felt that she had been taken advantage of by MMY because of his power > and the aura he had. Once the blinders were off she felt abused and cheated, > as if she had been f*cked while in a stupor. Judith spent a week in our > house. It was intimate. I have absolutely no reason to doubt them, though, > when I was in your shoes, I doubted Mia Farrow who told me about MMY's overt > sexual passes at her. I thought she was mistaken. I no longer believe that > this stuff is untrue. > > These things also happened, I believe (but have no first-hand knowledge) with > April. And a South American woman who was around before we were. There are > obviously a number of girls that he screwed that we know nothing about, and > it went on for at least twenty years. Someone besides me has got to know > this. Jerry, for one. The Australian girls, Bev and Fran. Devindra knew. > Billy had to know. > > I did not publish this in my book out of deference to Maharishi, and I > actually talked Jennifer out of taking it to a magazine at the time (early > 70's). I would not do so now. There is absolutely no point in hanging onto an > image of someone when it is this clear the image is false. It does not > forward one's own trek toward enlightenment. MMY has always laughed this > stuff off and made it seem like people are just trying to bring him down, > etc. Or, as Rob says, he might claim it was the excitement of Shakti. Well, > it's ALWAYS the excitement of Shakti, right? So what is the excuse? A dick is > a dick, a pussy is a pussy, and ever the twain shall meet and splash around. > > Casey is too kind to Maharishi. He is wrong. When a person in Maharishi's > position, with status, personal power, and pretensions to enlightenment, uses > his female disciples in this way it is scandalous and wrong. And when he lays > a fake trip on his male disciples about celibacy and all that rot, it is > wrong. > > Ned > > ---------------- > > Friday, August 30, 2002 6:24 PM > From: "Casey Coleman" > Subject: Re: da Babes > > Paul, I would also think there is something to that. He wanted to be > successful in the world and all the woman were coming on to him, it had to be > hard on him. I also agree on the sex vs. money, his quest for name and fame > and money are worse than any sexual indiscretions. And they were short term > and temporary. Brother Casey > > ------------- > > Fri, 30 Aug 2002 18:50:03 -0700 > From: "Casey Coleman" > Subject: Re: E-mail and its power > > Ned, Ned you can not stop trying to be entertaining and funny. I thought my > time of celibacy then and now is and was very useful. I recommend it. Next > life time I am going to be a monk right off! Unless Judith comes on to me. I > would have a hard time saying no. It had to be unbelievably hard in the 60's > to be celibate. And they were all coming on to him!! Don't we still love Bill > Clinton? He was entertaining, Ned! And so was and is MMY! Brother Casey > > ------------------------- > > Fri, 30 Aug 2002 19:21:01 -0700 > From: "Ned Wynn" > To: "Casey Coleman" CC: "Robert McCutchean" > Subject: Re: da Babes > > Paul, you are falling back into the rhythm that MMY wants you to. There is no > point in thinking it is some kind of Vedic thing, either. Maharishi f*cked > girls because he was horny. He used them. It was not equal, it was not > enlivening to the women's spirits, whatever. Don't try and excuse this guy on > these actions. He is a hypocrite. He tells us he is Brahmachari and he is > not. He urges us to be celibate then he f*cks our chicks. Come on, man. If he > had never pretended to be a Brahmachari then OK. In that case, he never said > he wasn't f*cking them. But I am sure he used the ruse on them that his > spiritual juice would lead them more quickly to enlightenment, or at least he > let them think that it might. He was not forthright. Remember, this is a man > in his fifties at the time, an adult. He was not a twenty-year old kid. He's > got karma to pay, pure and simple. > > It matters because as a disciple, I, and Rob and Casey, all bought his line > and he used everyone up. The women were, of course, old enough to know > better. But he had extraordinary power and he misused it. It is every bit as > bad as the money, because it is about trust. You must absolutely be able to > trust your guru. If he tells you flat out that he is celibate, then he better > be celibate. If he slips, he has to cop to it and rethink who he is. When > Maharishi was in Spain, I heard him say that many of the holy men in India > used to say, "If Maharishi leaves India and goes out into the world, he is > lost." Then Maharishi tossed his head back and laughed. The message was that > those old Indian guys were fools, that MMY could not be corrupted by the > "world." Well, they must have known him better than he did himself, because > he is corrupt and he was corrupt then. That does not mean that he did not > bring a valuable tool to us in the form of TM, but it does mean that for any > true advancement in life, it is best to shake the dust of his movement, and > his person, off your sandals and move on. > > Ned > > -------------------- > > Saturday, August 31, 2002 8:20 AM > To: "Ned Wynn" > Subject: Re: Fw: Hey > > Ned, I can't but agree with your description of MMY. I am very interested to > know when you talked with Jennifer and Judith. Were we still all in Europe or > did you talk with them later after we were stateside? Dr. Robert > > --------------- > > Saturday, August 31, 2002 8:41 AM > To: "Ned Wynn" Cc: "Casey Coleman" ; "Robert McCutchean" > Subject: Re: E-mail and its power > > Casey, Ned is absolutely right. Bill Clinton never claimed to be perfect -- > MMY did. And in Jennifer's case, it really f*cked up her mind, she was badly > hurt and damaged. And I do not believe that she came on to MMY. She was taken > advantage of in a destructive and hurtful way, and that is not ok. Dr. Robert > > ----------- >
