Second open letter sent at 5 March 2012.
I will save myself a week of editing and polishing. You get the stuff hot from the needle
so to speak. Either it speaks to you or it doesn’t.
Raw diamond is diamond too. Forever.
I wrote you one email and within a few hours you declared me unqualified for Vedanta.
Not directly, as you did in your second mail, but per implication in this your most amazing statement:
“It is good that the neo-bashing chases people away. If people are so sensitive
to this kind of criticism that they throw the baby out with the bath, they are not qualified for Vedanta.”
So, that goes for all those that make the same observations that I do, but do not make the step to let you know by email? For whatever reason.
* * * * * * * * * *
As the absolute Self we are perfect.
Meaning that we don’t have to be perfect in samsara, you say.
But when this results in a attitude that we are forever okay as imperfect as we are in samsara, I protest.
For me that attitude includes indifference and from there everything seems right, because rationalizable.
And it hurts. It unnecessary hurts.
Cause when also the indifference is seen for what it is (a defense mechanism), it can relax.
And it will. And then progress happens in samsara.
I am in favor of that.
And as a friend I did my utmost to let you know this (and still do).
Your answer to my open letter is amazing to me.
You imply in it that I am projecting on you.
Well, I don’t think so.
It took me weeks to trace back what in your obsessive outbursts it is, that triggers things from my personal past, still stored in this body-mind system.
A lot of this surfaced and could relax. For that, again, I am totally grateful.
It is really amazing to me that I am the first to write you on the subject of the way you criticize other teachers/teachings.
(Again, how explicit can I get: not the criticizing as such, but the fully demeaning way of making a fool out of many others,
while at the same time relating it to your so called scriptural ‘qualifications’).
In your answer you in fact have invented a disqualification: the people that you have scared away successfully, due to them being over sensitive, are not qualified for Vedanta.
I bet this is a fully unscriptural novelty.
My open letter to you was, although not finished yet, composed carefully and only sent after I was clear that I was clear about it.
There I can have made a mistake of course.
But the way you have answered makes me want to give you the left out, processed projections, the nightly insights and considerations too.
The opposite and enemy of indifference is difference, discrimination, an abundance of details.
I give it to you as a gift.
I was so courageous or stupid to give you my feedback as clean as I could. And sharing what had happened for me, also with the idea that for you taking this feedback to heart
could result in relaxation and even in making you a better teacher. But you did not take it in. You were the one that answered with projections and a huge disqualification, quasi based on Scriptures.
I went through this before. Then and there I could not reach this teacher. And was protected in a way by existence itself. What am I referring to?
The clearest situation from my personal past that came up last month was one where i was honest and severely punished for it.
It is the story of a schoolteacher that wanted me to be removed from this pre-highschool just a month before the end exam. Why?
He also was convinced that I was not qualified because I could not appreciate his act. What happened?
This man, the second master of the school I was attending, was a very self assured and arrogant person, who once had scolded us,
my class, for our recreant behavior toward this one particular teacher
who could not handle us, the pitied nervous wreck of a teacher that every school seems to have. He dared us to try this on him. (Cowards!, he said).
Well, not so much later , this narcissistic personality was again making a fool out of one of the weaker classmates, making sure that a lot of the others were laughing out loud.
And there is always one who feels the underlying pain and can’t stand it.
Remembering his challenge, this seemed a good moment and I said: I don’t think this is funny.
Enfin, the man directed his venomous arrows on me and again I said that I didn’t think that is was funny.
Upon which he spoke the still remembered words:
YOU SHUT UP. I AM SPEAKING ABOUT YOU AND NOT TO YOU. AND WHEN I SPEAK ABOUT YOU, YOU HAVE TO KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT.
Whereupon I said: that is okay, but then I leave, took my schoolbag and walked out, straight to the headmasters’ office.
This apparently shocked teacher managed to arrive there before me and lied about what had happened,
refused me in his lessons from then on and insisted on my removal from the school.
The headmaster had only enough strength to shield me off from this man, allowing me to work in his office during the lessons French.
I succeeded for the end exam. I was 16 years old then.
See any parallels? I do.
* * * * * * * * * *
I do take the opportunity to not let me be scared off by your quasi scriptural bravado.
(Don’t be mistaken, the body-mind system is shit scared).
And it’s not that the content of what I am going to speak is so important.
No, that will be just a mixture of direct observations, some gossip, a few lines of thought,
a quote here and there and a few email exchanges with members of the more silent part of your sanga,
and some notes of meetings with people that only visited you once.
The importance is a selfish one: to speak up in spite of a strong, energetic, quasi scripture based attempt to be silenced.
You know, in those days of which I spoke in the story of this teacher, I was a young lad in
a christian surrounding just after the last world war.
If there is anything toward which I am oversensitive, it is the almost unnoticed to openly mixing of a lack of authority and a leaning on the presupposed authority of Scriptures.
One of the notoriously misused ones of my childhood of course being “Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you,
so that you may live long and that it may go well with you in the land the LORD your God is giving you”.
Enfin, you get the gist I guess.
So, by now it is clear to me that you are easy and quick with shutting doors.
I took quite some time again for reflection and have decided to take your projections as an invitation.
So, I will indeed indulge, for me meaning to speak out openly and in my level of detail about my experiences and impressions.
Basicallly there is nothing personal in this, no matter how personal you took it so far.
So personal in fact that you have qualified me already twice as not qualified for Vedanta.
Which I consider to be a bloody shame, but it means nothing more than that you can’t handle even the beginning of feedback.
In that sense I am somewhat disappointed, although I was warned in advance for this matter of fact.
And you proved it by shouting to the other guy who gave the same feedback for the second time in a row (last year being the first time) during your lecture: I don’t like your attitude.
I wrote you a short mail just before I left Tiruvannamalai, with a little teaser, but also sharing my intention to visit your planned lectures in Amsterdam.
Your answer was again surprisingly decisive.
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:02 PM, hans van der gugten <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Will be out of here in a few hours.
I will write you a second open letter in due time.
Will probably see you in Holland.
Thanks for pushing my buttons
And your answer:
On vrijdag 03-02-12 16:25, James Swartz wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> I didn’t push your buttons. You pushed your buttons. The whole thing was an unwarranted projection.
Instead of listening to what was actually being said, you indulged your dislikes and made me the problem.
You are not qualified for Vedanta and I don’t want you to come to my teachings.
I think you need some serious talk therapy until you have resolved your issues.
I wish you all the best but I there are many sincere humble people who I can teach.
* * * * * * * * * *
You are totally right in this: it was not you that pushed my buttons.
It was your behavior that pushed my buttons.
And your behavior has not so much to do with you, especially when it is behavior of the kind that we call unconscious automatic habits.
But you state that I pushed my own buttons.
That is a creative use of the meaning of the expression at hand.
And as such it makes a manipulative impression on me. Just designed to make your next statements seem more believable and justified.
Reminds me of a surprising remark that someone who called himself your friend made about your ‘marriage’:
“….. he is communicating to the whole world that he is married, he introduced this woman to me as his wife and now I hear that they
only did some spiritual vows, why is he giving us this BS all the time, the guy just has a f*cking girlfriend”.
What I got from this is a confirmation that people appreciate it when you use their
language in accordance with the meaning of words as given in their dictionary.
* * * * * * * * * *
I had borrowed a friend of mine this series of 6 DVD’s of yours titled Self Realisation that I had purchased from you last year in Tiru.
She was rather enthusiastic about it.
She recognized the content as the basic school level of Hinduism as it was taught to her some 45 years ago in De School voor Filosofie.
When I told her about my trouble with the way you are Neo bashing all the time, she right away understood:
of course, this is a man with a system, and systems always fight each other. That is exactly what was lacking there,
I saw a man who was teaching a system, not a man who had integrated it and was speaking from his own experience.
The same friend summarized the content of this little booklet of your guruji Swami Dayananda Saraswati in such an intriguing way that I took it with me to Tiru,
the place where I had bought it last year.
Her summary was: this Swami says that God does not exist and that for that very reason we have to thoroughly investigate why He does exist.
Why do I mention this booklet? Because the title, Need for a Cognitive Change, clearly shows that the Swami also does belief in progress in samsara.
It feels like having a brother out there, in Risjikesh.
Okay, one more thing about this DVD’s. This friend shove part one in the player and there you were, at 2′,
introducing Sri Shankara Charya and there it is: Shankara was a Indian eh…. person, a realized soul.
He is sometimes called a mystic, but ….. in Vedanta we don’t say that people are mystics.
Basically a mystic is somebody who is, eh …. ‘mysterious’, or knows about a mystery.
And there is nothing mysterious about spiritual life. etc.
Your use of the word ‘mysterious’ carries all that so called pulls my buttons. It is not straightforward, it is dividing.
It comes from your idea that your system is the best, blinded by the fact that this system gives you and me and all the other mind types a great intellectual joy,
and the unconscious insecurity which is the shadow of this feeling secure, surfaces in the form of this what even you yourself call neo-bashing.
* * * * * * * * * *
Because honesty is not always appreciated, cautiousness comes into existence. And the need for approval.
The best is, and here comes in trial and error, to know in advance if you have or will get permission to tell the/your truth.
I personally as a child became so insecure in this matter, that I would even want a compliment from God after giving some feedback.
For instance, when I say to God that She doesn’t exist, I want Him to say “Great seeing, Son. And thanks for sharing. I can’t imagine
that I have overlooked this till now. But now I can see clearly: I don’t exist. Thank you again, Hans.”
I mean, that would really give me a good feeling, if God would say that. To me.
(And in a way She does, all the time, by showing up as This, the Truth, including the doubtful thoughts that are just that: thoughts).
Of course I also wanted you to react positively on my daring action to let you know what everyone that I meet in relation to you is talking about:
your obsessive way of neo bashing.
One of the discussions with the guys from Amsterdam supplied me with this: of course you, Hans, are right in your observations, but it is stupid
to expect this personality type to take feedback in. I took this feedback for the approval of my observations and went on telling you this,
making a fool out of myself, behaving fatuously, deep down not really believing that even you would just simply just excommunicate me for that.
And I had to do it, as I had to write all this letters to members of my family. And it pays off, already now. But I will not bother you with this.
* * * * * * * * * *
I’ll share some of the texts that I send out and some that were sent to me in email discussions:
“Yesterday, after a dream where I was running away from someone, after waking up it dawned on me that this ranting
of other teachers/teachings, might be a masterly camouflaged case of Gilles de la Tourette syndrom.
Two people that I shared this with could not really appreciate this (they just keep repeating that you have to look at yourself when upset)”.
“So, do not waste your time anymore on others, but put all your energy in the deciphering of this little fellow you assume yourself to be.”
“What a limitation. And I don’t assume myself to be this little fellow that you assume that I assume to be.
I am consciousness and in that is this little fellow appearing. And you, and James and and and.”
“It’s of no use to keep knocking on a door that will not open.”
“Yes, the question is of course, can’t you come to James because you are not qualified for vedanta, or because you made critical remarks.
It is not difficult to find the answer to this.”
“From snowy Amsterdam. Who knows a good therapist?”
“Het valt me op en doet me gewoon echt pijn om te zien dat je als een razende te keer blijft gaan,
terwijl je toch van verschillende kanten tot kalmte en inzicht gemaand wordt.
Bij de recente reactie van P. sluit ik me voor 100% aan.Het feit dat naar ons niet wordt geluisterd geeft wel aan dat er sprake
is van zeer grote pijn. Aan de andere kant ben jij intelligent genoeg om in te kunnen zien dat deze pijn niet wordt gelenigd
door met modder te smijten of zelfs James ‘te ontmaskeren’.
Neem de verantwoordelijkheid voor deze pijn en probeer hem niet op anderen te projecteren. ”
“Voor zover ik kan zien is de enige strijd die ik met James heb, het feit dat ik hem niet openlijk mag zeggen dat ik de manier
waarop hij vele anderen herhaaldelijk belachelijk maakt niet leuk vind.
Ik ben voor mezelf wat het master/disciple alias daddy/son ding in de diepte aan het onderzoeken. Dat gaat met details gepaard.
Een manier die voor mij zijn nut heeft bewezen.
Ik denk dat je die reaktie van P. anders begrijpt dan ik. Hij maant mij niet tot kalmte, hij vertelt mij dt hij het met mij eens is,
maar dat het volgens hem een zinloze aktie is als je iets van James verwacht in deze.
Wel, James is wellicht toe aan een beetje ontmaskering. Is wat hij doet (met zijn innemende persoonlijkheid mensen voortdurend
vertellen dat wat hij te vertellen heeft de ultieme teaching is, en werkelijk in elke lezing die hij geeft tijd te besteden aan het afkraken
van zo ongeveer alle andere leraren) niet een fraai voorbeeld van guru tricks?
Nogmaals, er is een verschil tussen projecteren en constateren. Die twee dingen dienen goed te worden onderscheiden.
NB Toen ik je mail voor de eerste keer las was ik wat aangeslagen, ik werd wakker met de gedachte dat ik die arme zielige James
niet mocht lastig vallen en overwoog zijn naam in mij weblog stukken te veranderen in Lectureji of Teacherji.
Misschien doe ik dat wel, misschien ook niet.
Ik vind eigenlijk dat hij mij zijn excuses moet maken en zijn belachelijke oordeel (not qualified for Vedanta) dient in te trekken.
Kan me zelfs voorstellen, want dat deed ik al, dat ik hem schrijf dat ik de organisatie in Nederland ga vragen of hun uitnodiging
voor zijn lezingen ook voor mij geldt. Om hem te dwingen dit expliciet te bevestigen of in te trekken.
Dus ja, het zit mij hoog.”
“This concept text with the question for feedback, it feels like a moral dilemma and I feel like crying.”
* * * * * * * * * *
The whole energy around your being criticized about your way of neo-bashing was one of shut up or be off.
In a way I couldn’t belief this to be true, so I had to make it visible once again.
(Again: introspection related this during the process with this mentioned above trial of strength with this teacher when I was sweet 16).
And what a pity, it worked.
* * * * * * * * * *
In my afternoon hideout, Rani’s Garden Restaurant, I met two people with outspoken ideas about you.
Really, I have not ever had one conversation about the content of the Advaita Vedanta teaching as brought to the people by you,
except the times that I was speaking myself about what I learned from ‘you’ last year.
It is really almost always about your uncontrollable outbursts about other teachers/teachings.
One of the meetings I skip to do myself a favor. It is about time to get this over with.
The second one was a lady that also had checked you out, even on the seeing aura and chacra level.
Because she knows a couple that she considers followers of you and someone that can’t stand it.
She read our first exchange, my open letter and your answer to it.
She started with reading your answer and said: “This is a letter of attack”.
(Yeah, we are both deeply insecure James. You lean on the scriptures, I lean on my heart,
my common sense and on the neighbours, using the mind to make discriminations).
Later she spontaneously suggested that you could apply Byron Katie’s work on your statements.
(I, James Swartz, am not qualified for Vedanta).
* * * * * * * * * *
When I told you last year about my family story, I at a point said that I should have walked away from this family and you simply asked: “Why didn’t you?”.
Well, as I can see now, I first had to write them all this letters, because this is how it works for me:
I am captured basically on a mental level and the way out for me is creating clarity on the same plane to begin with.
The same is happening with my reactions to your presentation and positioning of Vedanta.
I had to create clarity on the mental plane, because there I was being hooked up. So the writing letters again.
And then the walking out happened. And a coming back to check out for myself if it was not from fear that I stayed away.
And then again to make a new start, convinced by Eric the German: past is past, go thank him and he will smile at you and that’s it, you’ll see.
I decided to give it a go and he joined me in this visit to your satsang, instead of going to Mooji, his favorite morning event at the time.
That was the time that Eric the German and I left in the break, disappointed, it was clear that you were not happy at all with our
presence, you afterwards even talked twice about people having come to your satsang with a very negative energy and and and.
Nice moment to report nevertheless this second meeting in Rani’s Garden that I have skipped before:
there was this skinny Indian young man who had attended your lecture that morning and when I spoke about my communication with you,
he said “oh, then this morning he was probably speaking about you too”.
He said that you said that the day before there had been two people that didn’t like you and that they had left early and that they
were gone when you went out looking for them. So you were still on his mind, was his conclusion.
He also told me that he checks you out already for years once a year and that nothing had changed:
still the same story and the same arrogant claiming it to be the best and the only thing worthwhile.
* * * * * * * * * *
Nice moment too to reproduce this nice quote , that I stumbled upon lately:
– Krishnamurti on Craving and The Word –
There is no entity separate from craving; there is only craving, there is no one who craves.
Craving takes on different masks at different times, depending on its interests.
The memory of these varying interests meets the new, which brings about conflict, and so the chooser is born,
establishing himself as an entity separate and distinct from craving. But the entity is not different from its qualities.
The entity who tries to fill or run away from emptiness, incompleteness, loneliness, is not different from that which
he is avoiding; he is it. He cannot run away from himself; all that he can do is to understand himself. He is his loneliness,
his emptiness; and as long as he regards it as something separate from himself; he will be in illusion and endless conflict.
When he directly experiences that he is his own loneliness, then only can there be freedom from fear. Fear exists only in
relationship to an idea, and idea is the response of memory as thought. Thought is the result of experience; and though it
can ponder over emptiness, have sensations with regard to it, it cannot know emptiness directly. The word loneliness,
with its memories of pain and fear, prevents the experiencing of it afresh. The word is memory, and when the word is
no longer significant, then the relationship between the experiencer and the experienced is wholly different; then that
relationship is direct and not through a word, through memory; then the experiencer is the experience, which alone brings
freedom from fear. (http://www.reclusland.com/compass/category/quotes/page/8/)
* * * * * * * * * *
This morning, just before waking up, there was dreaming in which I set myself up in a house with someone who knew how
to provide me with some heroin to suppress the cold turkey symptoms, just in case I would not be able to handle them symptoms.
The symbolism spoke to me; I am going to do a deep fast with Arise and Shine herbs in about a week.
I’ll do this under the supervision of someone who lives on biking distance from here,
but who I met in this amazing place called Tiruvannamalai.
So, I’m going to meet some dragons in the coming weeks: the Chocolate Dragon, the Coffee and Black Tea Dragon,
the Diary Products Dragon, the Sugar Dragon and the Dragon of Grains. Pray for me.
And by the way, this peace of text is becoming longer and longer, both at the beginning and at the end.
For practical reasons the stuff that has to be added upfront, also will be added at the end side of this (= here).
It will become a Gesamtkunstwerk for Feinschmecker only.
* * * * * * * * * *
Did some reading recently on some confusions around Ken Wilber, the head integralist.
A bunch of strangely self assured creatures that claim to kind of being the architects of the spirituality of the future.
A study in itself. I give us two points of reference on the web.
One article about this bunch of men:
I have heard people defend Marc Gafni by stating that Andrew Cohen and Ken Wilber support him.
But it actually is a silly game they all play because they all defend and support each other. It goes something like this.
Patten, Hamilton, Gafni and Wilber support Cohen. Cohen, Wilber, Hamilton and Patten support Gafni.
Cohen, Gafni, Hamilton and Patten support Wilber. Wilber and Cohen support Patten and Hamilton. Wilber and Patten support Adi Da….etc.
And a quote from ‘Open letter to my teacher Genpo Merzel’
In it one of Genpo’s students wishes him this:
So dear Roshi, I wish you immense pain, sadness and suffering.
I wish you everything necessary to shed the roshi-armor and own the Coward, a long and intense Falling From Grace.
I wish you overwhelming loneliness and deep despair. I wish you more than you can take.
And who knows, my prayers might be heard.
Then Genpo Merzel will go through the last fase of his life as a truly humble man.
I hope so, for you, your family and loved ones and all the others who care about you and you care about.
Hell, I wish this for all sentient beings. Take care, Genpo. See you on the human side.
* * * * * * * * * *
Yesterday afternoon, from the corners of my eye, I saw something intriguing.
I couldn’t belief my eyes: a piece of art that was agreeing with me. But: ….. it only agreed with me for three second or so.
I happened to bike along a artwork made by Warren Neidich exposed on a small roof, close to the Rijksmuseum. I took some pictures (passwort: public).
Two neon signs are superimposed one upon the other.
One in green says “Resistance is Fertile”, while another one in red says “Resistance is Futile”.
When one sign is lit, the other statement is quiescent.
Resistance is Fertile / Resistance is Futile
In correspondence with the traffic lights down the road, the message jumps between action and passivity, between motion and standstill, hope and disbelieve.
It is a gesture of double-mindedness and hesitation between two opposites, while there’s no middle course.
Most of the discussions that I had about all of the above was happening in the tension expressed in this piece of art.
Most input was coming from the often unseen but widespread conviction that resistance is futile.
While I tend to operate from the conviction that it is fertile. Which is often considered to be futile, so much is clear.
* * * * * * * * * *
More from my notes. Also an attempt to round this up.
Meeting with Eric the German at Mooji’s birthday party (Jan. 29 ’12) we talked about James of course.
I reported that I was told that James spoke that morning about 2 persons with a negative energy who came to his satsang yesterday because he had spoken about Mooji.
(We took it for granted that he was speaking about us).
And Eric the German said, at least that is what I heard him say: “Wrong James, wrong again. I raised my finger not to ask a question,
but to tell you that you were wrong in your conclusion that you made after asking your listeners who of them believe in God.
Half of them did and you, James, concluded that the other half did not believe in God. And, James, I had to protest.
Because I do not believe in God AND I do not not believe in God, I know that God is.”
This is what I heard Eric the German say.
When he raised his finger in your satsang to tell you this, you told him as the charming elderly man that you are that you were sorry,
but that he was a newcomer and that the rule is that questions can only be asked in the special Q&A sessions.
That was by the way right after you had been answering questions for about half an hour.
Eric the German found himself back in school and wispered to me (as I heard it): He did the old schoolmaster trick on me.
I also heard him say: Stop explaining it,James, show it.
This episode needs another anecdote as background information.
It is about another trick that made Eric the German move: he was in satsang with Mooji a few days before and there was
this Mooji adept speaking to Mooji and this man at some point said something to Mooji like “Mooji, you know that we all love you”.
At that point Eric the German shouted out: STOP!!
And said to the man that he could not speak in his name to Mooji, so please speak for yourself.
About this Eric the German said: this man was doing the good old community trick.
* * * * * * * * * *
One night after staying away from your satsang (that I more and more prefer to describe as scriptural lectures), I stayed awake the whole night.
And the hour before sunrise the mindspace expanded and connected with the heartspace.
The oldest images, sounds, voices, experiences from childhood on, especially the ones that made me now and then add a so called adult
to my secret hitlist that had on it a few basic school teachers, a couple of family members and a policeman or two.
Last night another fierce exchange with one of the other guys from Amsterdam.
The psychologist one that confirmed some of my observations.
There is this narcissistic personality and yes, those will not communicate, they think they are god and right, will never go in therapy, and and and.
Now, in the late middle of another awake night, it falls in place:
those adults that plagued my youth were the uncorrected (second world war) narcissistic adults that were mingling the Scriptures with their
indefeasible opinions and convictions. Against every minor objection it was: God sees you and He does not agree.
Even when only a fraction of a comma of our personal stuff gets mingled with the Sriptures, it becomes dangerous.
Why? Because then a tiny fraction of our personal stuff becomes unquestionable.
And we need the oversensitives to point out to us that this is what is happening.
Declaring the oversensitives to be not qualified for Vedanta is a outspoken gross and obscene example of this, in my opinion.
That’s why the Byron Katie question: can you turn this around?
And also: can you hear the tone of your voice?
And yes, I do care.
* * * * * * * * * *
Basically I just said in response to the way you criticize other teachers/teachings: I don’t think this is funny.
And I did tell you this by email.
And then this whole story developed.
The whole discussion about it swinging between Resistance is futile and Resistance is fertile.
Me, I’m in favor of the latter.
It certainly has served me well.
I wish you well too.
End of satsang.
PS 1. You did your tripping in the sixties. Existence procrastinated tripping unto my sixties:
more then one and a half year ago I started to drink Ayahuasca.
(see myblog for some reports on this).
Since my return from India I have attended three Santo Daime happenings.
The first two times there were insights gained related to my above action.
The second time it became clear that the fact that I just can’t get myself to sing along there, is related to this fear
to be punished for belonging to a group where ecstasy and enjoying is part of the game.
This is so deeply opposed by remnants of guilt feelings in this body mind system, that it seemed to be safer to shut up.
Crazy paradox by the way: most of the times I stand out by not shutting up, there I stood out by keeping my mouth shut, but it was fully accepted.
Yesterday I started singing along.
PS 2. The time is up for this. There is much more. When you start going in detail, there is no end but emptiness.
There was this great story how I walked into the Mooji party without a ticket while the tickets were sold out.
(Isn’t it amazing how love works, someone said).
There was …..
And, of course, the fear to forget something important.
PS 3. Like mentioning that you seem to be in a lineage with this man that is a namesake of one of your gurus:
Dayananda Saraswati (1824-1883): India never had any equivalent of the Church Militant, but Dayananda almost made up for that single-handed.
He had a simple rule of thumb. If it was not the Veda, he was against it.
PS 4. Basta. Time for lunch.
Ramji and Meji 1
Ramji and Meji 2
Ramji and Meji 3
Ramji and Meji 4
Ramji and Meji 5
Ramji and Meji 6
Ramji and Meji 7
Ramji and Meji 8
Ramji and Meji 9
Ramji and Meji 10
Ramji and Meji 11