Memories of a still thinking, not quite brainwashed, ex-devotee

Memories of a still thinking,

not quite brainwashed, ex-devotee

I've been cleaning up my mailbox from years ago. I found some old mails which are quite interesting, which I wrote to the former Sai-NET when I was a member of it before it shut down. These mails clearly show how I was aware of such a tentative issue such as the editing of discourses and how I made a statement about my disapproval and dissapointment about it:

Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 07:56:14 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...>
Subject: Imperfect records part 1
To: sai-disc@s...

Yesterday I mentioned how I did not trust the Sanathana Sarathi for their translation of Swami's discourses, being heavily edited etc.

Today itself, a brother on Sai-net wrote to me in private relating how he was present at the Ashram on January 14th and heard the "Accident discourse."

Information which he gave to me was interesting. Apparently Swami spoke that He was able to take on that devotee's pain because the Avatar's chakras are developed more than that of an ordinary mans'.
According to him, Swami then went on to say exactly *which* chakra it was that enabled Him to take on the pain. The brother then related how he was dismayed he was when he read the "official" copy of the discourse and found that there was no mention of the chakra issue. The poor brother thought he was hearing things.

Here's what I wrote back in reply to that paragraph:

"I find that extremely shameful. It is such a pity. You see, all we know of Rama is what was written by Rishi Valmiki in his 'Ramayana'.
It is upto you to believe in "yogic vision" but that's all we have. In the same way all we have of Krishna is the Srimad Bhagavatam and other. Still based on "yogic vision". Even Jesus, only 2000 years ago, we have no way of knowing the authenticity of the Gospels, and we can only rely on the judgement of the Gospel writers. Now when Swami, the "latest Avatar" is here in this modern world with pens and pencils and papers and telephones, telegrams, faxes, Internet, EMAILS, I find it shameful, SHAMEFUL, that the Avatar's words are not recorded to the best standard possible.

As a consolation, this discourse counts as an 'Uttarayana' celebration (if I'm right?), and so we can only hope and pray that James Redmond brings it out on video, with ENGLISH SUBTITLES, so we can see exactly what Swami said!!! :))"

Exactly. I mean, small-minded people accuse the Sai organisation of being a "cult" with a "typically charismatic leader", etc. If we *have* to suffer this accusation, at least let us not be accused of trying to cover up our "Leader's message" !

I'm not accusing Sanathana Sarathi of being lazy etc., but there is definitely a *lot* of room for improvement. They say that there is not enough subscriber money to print out so much. Piffle. For a start, if such a statement is true, try *not including* the secondary articles by devotees etc and concentrating more pages devoted to Swami's discourse?!

<part 2 follows>

Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 07:57:12 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...>
Subject: Imperfect records part 2
To: sai-disc@s...

I mean honestly, I've been keeping this quiet for a long time, even when I first came to Swami (which was 8 years ago). Sometimes I read SS, and it is just so boring. There is no continuity of sentences.
Often it appears that no one can understand what Swami seems to be talking about, which leads to some confusion in our study circles at the centre.

Once in 1994 I was fortunate to be present at a discourse (in the old marriage hall at Brindavan) which was entirely for the "foreign devotees." I was even more fortunate to be seated right at the front, practically looking Swami in the eyes, and it was possible to understand everything what Swami said for I could even lip-read Anil Kumar! Swami made a lot of important statements in this discourse. I came out expecting to find a shorter, edited version in SS a couple of months later. Imagine my shock when there was no discourse reported at all, edited or unedited!!!

I was so deeply shocked, for I had especially wanted a transcript of this discourse, and as far as anybody is concerned, SWAMI NEVER SPOKE THAT DAY!! Unbelieveable, innit?

Come on Family, this is the Sai Organisation, not the X-Files.
Everything has to be open here. The Upanishads proclaim: 'Satyam eva jayate', 'Truth will triumph.'

Last time I was at Prashanthi (Youth Conference '97), I bought a book called 'Divine Discourses in Kodaikanal' from SaiTowers bookshop. It was a collection of Swami's discourses at Kodai in April of 1996.

It's so beautiful, it's based on notes taken at the time of the discourse, and according to the author's preface, the book has Swami's blessing as Swami apparently urged her to get it published. One actually feels that one is having a conversation with Swami when reading that book, and not "sitting and listening to a discourse".

With this information:

I am shocked, angry, dissappointed, appalled, sickened, disgusted, hurt and every other negative emotion when I realise that the Word of God is not actually the Word of God, but in fact the Newly-Edited Word of the Translator (NEWT). Shame.

The servitor thus observed with tearful eyes and a broken heart.

==

So there you go. We knew about it since at least 1999 and even before. We complained about it and raised our voices in protest. Nothing was done. It still goes on.

Here's an extract from another email sent to SaiNET dated 17 Feb 1999. It again talks about discourses and also reveals my brainwashed nature in that I regarded SB's words as scripture:

"No matter how much you speculate, no matter how much you interpret, no matter how much you twist, the same conclusion will always be reached. One sister a couple of days ago provided a quote from Swami which went something like: 'When the Truth is known, it may not be liked.'

"I know, because I certainly didn't like the truth when I found it out. See, people may counter by saying that what may be the "truth" for me may not always be the "truth" for others, since everyone is on their own path with their own ideas, beliefs, etc. Well then, however would we come to know? The answer is, the scriptures are the Word of God, and whatever problem we face, the ansers will be found therein.

Even Swami's discourses are scriptures, since Swami is God and discourses are His Word. I only hope the translators and distributors are aware of the fact that THEY ARE HANDLING SCRIPTURE."

I used to preach fiercely against the Advaita-vada philosophy when I was a member of SaiNET:

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:15:56 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Self-contradictions part 1.1
To: sai-disc@s...

---Hans Hopfgartner <email removed> wrote:

> I myself feel very attracted by advaitic philosophy.
> On the other hand, I like the attitude of RAMAKKRISHNA PARAMAHANSA:

> Nevertheless PARAMAHANSA RAMAKRISHNA confessed:" I like better to taste the honey than to be honey.

> So, if once we have reached the evolutionary stage of RAMAKRISHNA, each one may decide on his own, if he would prefer to taste the honey or to be the honey.

This is in fact one of the major contradictions in (dogmatic) Advaita.

"I am attracted to Advaita but I like the feeling of Dvaita."
"I am attracted to the sun but I like the moon too."
"I am attracted to pens but I like pencils too."
"I am attracted to white but I like black too."

Nobody can ever have both. This works in mundane life too. There is a very popular analogy used by various teachers including Swami, the sugar and the ant:

The idea of the Dvaitin is to forever eat the sugar and enjoy bliss thereof. I'm not entirely sure about the Vishishtadvaitic idea, for I know practically nothing of that philosophy. The idea of the Advaitin is to merge into the sugar.

Now please tell me, the next time you bite into a chocolate cake (or anything you like to eat), ask yourself the question: 'Would I like to taste it or would I like to become chocolate cake?' There you will have your answer. No matter how much you speculate, no matter how much you interpret, no matter how much you twist, the same conclusion will always be reached. One sister a couple of days ago provided a quote from Swami which went something like: "When the Truth is known, it may
not be liked."

I know, because I certainly didn't like the truth when I found it out.
See, people may counter by saying that what may be the "truth" for me may not always be the "truth" for others, since everyone is on their own path with their own ideas, beliefs, etc. Well then, however would we come to know? The answer is, the scriptures are the Word of God, and whatever problem we face,the ansers will be found therein. Even Swami's discourses are scriptures, since Swami is God and discourses are His Word. I only hope the translators and distributors are aware of the fact that THEY ARE HANDLING SCRIPTURE.

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:17:59 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Self-contradictions part 1.2
To: sai-disc@s...

Anyhow, I found something:

"All different varieties of atmaramas, especially those on the path of self-realisation, though freed from all kinds of material bondage, desire to render unalloyed bhakthi to Vishnu. This means that the Lord possesses transcendental qualities and therefore can attract everyone, including liberated souls." Srimad Bhagavatam 1.7.10

This is a verse which is directly aimed at so-called "Advaitins", in the light of which it seems to lead to the idea of 'jivanmuktha', 'liberated while living', as the verse makes mention of 'liberated souls' who are 'freed from all kinds of material bondage.' The meaning of the verse, is that no matter how far you go, you will come back to the Lord on the path of bhakthi, instead of trying ever-so-hard to mrge. In short, it means that even when you merge into the chocolate cake, you will then desire to come back out of it to taste it. This has been the case everywhere. Why has Vivekananda - a known Advaitin who merged - been reincarnated to serve in the Sai mission? Why has Jesus - a known Advaitin who merged - been reincarnated in Chandigahr, Punjab according to Swami?

A few months ago, Swami related how His mother still 'visits' Him in a somewhat extracorporeal form. Swami said something about how she had merged (?) and also His "grandfather" Kondamma Raju. So why are they still coming back in their extracorporeal forms (individualised) to "advise" Swami when they are supposedly merged. I seized that particular discourse, for it is an extremely practical example of how "merged souls" are in fact not merged. I will be dilating upon this at a later date in full.

Another example: some of you might be interested in the millions of accounts of near-death experiences (NDEs). A particularly publicised account is that of Betty Eadie, described in her book 'Embraced By The Light'. In that book, she describes how she saw the various ranks of angels, and described a particular class of angels known as 'Warring Angels', who do permanent battle against the forces of evil for the service of the Lord. I loved this description, and I felt it was a description of my own inner nature, for I have always been attracted to the idea of 'fighting for God', on oth the outer(while being such an angel) and inner levels. This idea is known as 'Jihad' in Islam.

When I reflected back to "Vedanta" philosophy, and that the so-called "ultimate goal" is moksha, mergence with God, it severely saddened me.

My desire crashed. The ultimate goal must be reached, so even if I ever became a Warring Angel, it would have to be given up sooner or later. I like to eat chocolate cake, I have no desire to become a chocolate cake??

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:12:55 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Self-contradictions part 2
To: sai-disc@s...

What is known as Brahman, is nothing but the effulgence emanating from His body, which means that He *has* a body, Form. It's a spiritual form, not a material one. Sac-cid-ananda vigraha, so the term "Saguna Brahman" doesn't apply here. So-called "Saguna Brahmans" are nothing but Avatars. They are not in illusion, neither are they made out to be. There are quite a few quotes to prove that Brahman is His bodily effulgence. I shall give some at a later date if asked. There are also quite a few quotes which imply that mergence in "Brahman" is actually quite a silly thing to do when there is so much more to achieve and be achieved.

That is why I am so thankful to the Lord Sai, for He in His boundless mercy has shown me that "Vedanta" is not to be monopolised by Advaita (real or dogmatic) and that there are other ways of looking at it.

He is His infinite Love has shown me that after realising the Brahman stage of realisation, one must go further to Paramatma realisation, to see the Lord in the heart and take dictation from Him (hear the inner voice). The so-called Dvaitic literature which I have read speaks of Paramatma realisation AS IF it was the final goal, and nothing more to be reached. So where is Bhagavan realisation coming in?

Exactly. This particular thought came to me in the last two days, helped with input by Sai-Net members. When one reaches "Paramatma realisation" and can communicate with the Lord by hearing His inner voice and indulging in an inner dialogue, is this perfect? Yes and no.
Yes because it is, no because it may not be, as a doubt could fester.

One may doubt that the "voice" they hear is fom God, and think it is their own imagination. So how to find out? Lucas Ralli and Charles Penn, two Sai devotees known for their capacity to hear Swami within, related that they had doubts about it's authenticity and had to verify it from Swami. Exactly. A higher authority is needed. Even when one *does* hear the inner voice, a doubt *may* persist, which needs to be resolved by the Lord Himself. After Swami had confirmed the "voices"
of Penn and Ralli, they were utterly sure of themselves. And why not?

To associate with Him in His personal Form in His own abode is the higest perfection to be reached. To be His servant.

Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said: "Jivera svarupa haya; Krishnera nitya dasa","The constitutional position of the living entity [jiva] is to be the eternal servant of Krishna." Isn't that great? Not only is it our constitutional position, but it's an eternal position too! Sheer bliss!

Lord Sai says: "Be a servant, a servant of God."
<Quote from 'Facets of the Divine Diamond'> There is more to this quote but I can't remember it off the top of my head.

That is why I was so happy, so I can serve Him forever, perhaps on the physical plane if He lets me, but definitely in the spiritual sky, where oneness includes all forms of spiritual variegatedness. If He so wishes, He can make me His Warring Angel. I have so much joy, in the thought that one day I will be able to bury my head into His Lotus Feet and kiss them softly. One day I will be able to serve him by performing a task at His behest. One day I will be able to associate with Him on a personal level in His eternal abode in the spiritual sky. One day I will smile when I know He is happy, and when He smiles, the whole of Creation will smile.

I so much love eating chocolate cake! :)

Any questions?

Thus the eternal servant keenly observes and listens.

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:24:00 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: The commentary
To: sai-disc@s...

Now see, one must have a little idea of spiritual concepts. When talking of Advaita, we must understand what it actually means, nonduality. Are we talking about nonduality, or the dogmatic, rigid, centralised Advaita which was founded by Adi Sankara?

---Quote so kindly provided:

"I have resolved preaching Adwaita Thathwa, (everything is God), as a spiritual path from the 60th year. We have crossed the stage of worship. We must enter the path of Jnana or wisdom now. We have crossed the primary and higher secondary levels. We have to enter College. How can you repeat alphabets and nursery rhymes while studying in college? Today all of you are in the same state of being in college and thinking primary standard. You are becoming innocent.
Therefore today you must achieve this goal of Adwaita(oneness), through the power of Sai." -- Swami, Divine Discourse 1987

Now the conclusions reached by this quote are pretty fascinating. Does Swami endorse Advaita, dogmatic Advaita? "I have resolved preaching Adwaita Thathwa, (everything is God)". Advaita-tattva is the feeling that 'everything is God' as Swami Himself supplies the meaning.
'Tattva' literally means 'truth'. Now, see what happens? Swami is teraching us that we should see God is everything, as He repeatedly repeats in almost every one of His discourses. On no account is this a formal endorsement.

---Quote so kindly provided:

"We become cognisant of the divine through the medium of form.
Transition is made from worship of God in form to worship of the FORMLESS divine, by full adoration of God in form, then seeing that beloved form in everyone, then God is everyplace and loving others comes naturally and easily." Swami, CWSSB p 64, CTSSB p 37.

Exactly. Dvaita has no problem with that. Except you see, terms like 'jivanmuktha', 'moksha', 'liberation', 'oneness', etc., have quite different meanings in Dvaita, beyond me is it to explain which right now. I shall do so at a later date.
Anyway, worshipping a form (through idols, pictures, physical form) will lead one to worship the Formless. But this must be understood clearly. Worshipping the Formless God will lead us to 'seeing that beloved form in everyone, then God is everyplace and loving others comes naturally and easily.' This is quite an adequate description of Brahman realisation. As I have said before, there is still further to go, Paramatma realisation and then Bhagavan realisation. Still on no account is this an endorsement of dogmatic Advaita by Swami. Besides, I notice that the word 'Formless' is entirely capitalised. Did Swami emphasise that word or did Tony prabhu capitalise it? If so, why?

---Quote so kindly provided:

"What is Jnana? Adwaita darsanam Jnanam( To see the one without a second is the supreme knowledge). To recognise that the same Atma dwells in all beings is true knowledge." SWAMI SS Feb. 1995 p 39.

Again one has to analyse. It is quite clear that Swami is quoting a scripture. Is it Upanishads by any chance? Anyhow, let us understand Sanskrit. 'Advaita' - nonduality, 'darshanam' - to see, to cognise, 'jnanam' - knowledge. Does anybody agree?
Now, again this looks like an echo of the first quote. To see everything as God, who is One without a second. So? Is this an endorsement of dogmatic Advaita by Swami? I think NOT!

One important question for those who are interested in this topic should ask themselves:

"When Swami does not even endorse His own Sai Organisation, why would He endorse another organisation?"

Thus the servitor keenly observes.

Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 07:47:43 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: Form and Formlessness part 1
To: sai-disc@s...

---Sudheer Sukumaran <email removed> wrote:

> But if you say Biriyani smells nice, the smell doesn't have a form, but we feel the smell. God is somethig like that: we feel Him, but doesn't have a form.

SaiRam prabhu.
This is a good example, but it is usually the case that mundane examples cannot stand for spiritual concepts, at least not entirely.
In this case, vegetable biryani is not God, and neither is God vegetable biriyani.

As I have explained in some of my previous posts, it is almost impossible to cognise God through material imperfect senses. Anytime you may catch a cold, then you will not even be able to smell biriyani! :)
That's why senses are deemed imperfect. A blind man cannot see, so to him everything is "formless", but it would stupid for a blind man to say that there are no forms outside and everything is formless, isn't it? A person who can see can say everything has a form, and his word is acceptable, whereas a blind man who declares there is nothing to be seen will be thrown out of the assembly.

As I explained, God's form is spiritual. It is impossible to understand because it is 'achintya', inconceivable. I don't understand it myself, but then again I am trying to cognise it through my own imperfect material senses, which is foolish in itself.
So why bother? Because I am a blind man, I must ask advice from those who can "see", and their words are to be taken as true because they can see what is to be seen.

Now, however high you go to find such authorities, Narada, Asita, Devala, etc., one will eventually reach Brahma. The Creator of the Creation was himself created first, thus he is the ultimate authority on such issues. Is it not so that the devas go to complain to Brahma about their persecution, and then Brahma informs Vishnu, which causes Him to take Avatar as Rama, Krishna, etc.?

> Baba has taken a body, and that is a form that is because otherwise He will not be able to physically communicate with us. I don't know what is eternal form look like, therefore I can't argue on that.

Everything which Brahma has to say for himself is contained (mostly) in the Srimad Bhagavatam and the Brahma Samhita. In this scripture, Brahma specifically states that the ultimate, original, infallible, unarguably so, form of God, is that of Krishna.
Elsewhere in the Samhita, Brahma specifically states that what is known as "Brahman", is the effulgence which emanates from the spiritual eternal form of Krishna. "Isvarah paramah Krishna; sac-cid-ananda vigraha," The Supreme Lord is Krishna with a form of eternity knowledge bliss. I am looking for the relevant verses online, but it seems that the concerned server is down, therefore I shall collect all these quotes and send it to sai-disc tomorrow. If not tomorrow, then next week.

<Part 2 follows>

Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 07:49:26 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: Form and Formlessness part 2
To: sai-disc@s...

Regarding Baba, yes, Swami has taken a physical form to teach us. He has taken on a material body, which is made of *basically* the same stuff as ours. One does not infer that had Swami not taken on a body, He would be formless. This is incorrect. What is there to suggest that God is formless?
If one carefully analyses the passages where Swami says that the form of God is to be worshipped and then to worship the formless, one would see that Swam is talking about idols, pictures and the physical embodiment as the 'Form-God', and we should move beyond that to worship the 'Formless God'. Good, but that only means Brahman realisation, which is the first stage of spiritual realisation.
Evidence from Brahma Samhita and Bhagavatam and numerous other texts specifically state that Brahman is the effulgence from God's body. Now here we infer that God *has* a body, and that is is spiritual (sac-cid-ananda vigraha). It cannot be seen by material eyes. Is it not related in the Gita how Krishna had to bestow "divine eyes" to Arjuna in order for him to see the Vishvarupa, Universal Form?

Only the physical body (Swami's body) can be seen with material eyes, and then devotees like Mata Betty testify that they see Swami's "physical" body as being made up of nothing but light. Even Islam with it's doctrine of the Formless Allah has verses in the Qur`an which relate that Allah sits on the Throne, and shuts up Hell with His foot, and many more.

Now please explain to me what "formless foot" Allah has to shut up the door to Hell, or a "formless body" to sit upon a Throne? Like I said, I'll collect the quotes tonight and gve tomorrow.

>We know that Saraswathi has 4 hands and Kali has 8 hands, is the imaginary form because our minds are beyond the >recognition of this fact, formlessness.

But it is not imaginary. Saraswati *has* four arms, Kalima *has* eight, Vishnu has four! Vishvarup has unlimited!!! But these forms cannot be cognised by the limited imperfect mind.

>"But beyond this Unmanifested, There is Yet Another Unmanifested Eternal Existance Which Does Not Perish even When >All Existance Perish"

The conclusion that God is ultimately formless is not reached by this verse alone. Kindly read the verse again along with the next two verses:

"There is another, eternal nature, which is transcendental to this manifested and unmanifested matter. It is supreme and is never annihilated. When all in this world is annihilated, that part remains as it is. That supreme status is called unmanifested and infallible, and it is the highest destination. When one goes there, one never returns. That is My supreme abode. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, than whom no one ifs greater, is attainable by unalloyed devotion O Arjuna. Although there in His abode, still He is all-pervading, and everything is fixed within Him." --Bhagavad Gita 8.20-22

These verses are explained in full in the Srimad Bhagavatam as pertaining to the spiritual sky, upon which the mahat-tattva (entire material creation) rests. This "unmanifested nature" is called the spiritual sky, and is fundamentally made up of light particles and is called Brahmajyothi, another word for which is "Brahman." And as stated before, "Brahman" is the effulgence from Krishna's body.
"Although there in His abode, still He is all-pervading," in His feature known as Brahman. He is always there, up in the spiritual sky, but He is simultaneously present everywhere by means of His Brahman feature.

> Therefore eternal form is formless to our present minds.

Exactly. Krishna/Swami has a spiritual eternal form which is full of bliss and knowledge, and it impossible to cognise it with our minds. It is something beyond our minds.

Thus the eternal servitor keenly observes.

When there was a controversy about what SB actually materialised, a mini-Bible or just a "book," I wrote the following:

Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:02:37 -0800 (PST)
From: "Sanjay Dadlani" <dark_knight_9@y...> | This is spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: The BOOK
To: sai-disc@s...

In the last two days or so, there has been discussion (speculation) about the Book created by Swami on Christmas Day, 1996. Now, I don't trust Sanathana Sarathi, for the discourses are heavily edited. I don't trust word-of mouth, for obvious reasons.
Swami bless James Redmond for faithfully producing videos of His discourses. Swami bless him even more for thinking of deaf people having difficulties of hearing, and has so kindly thought to include english subtitles in the discourse videos.
I am giving the exact english rendering of Swami's Telugu words as given by Anil Kumar the translator as seen by the subtitles and his voice. Read on and see what happened:

<After describing the 3 states of Jesus, 'I am the messenger of God, I am the Son of God, I and my Father are One', Swami went on to say: >

"Scholars started investigating the validity of the statement made by Jesus Christ. They collected all the matter that existed prior to 1,530 years. All that was composed into one book in England. Russians made it into a small book and kept there near the Black Sea in safe custody. In that tiny book everything is written there."

<Swami proceeds to materialise the book>

"This is that book." <Anil Kumar said this sentence before Swami repeated AK's sentence in english>

"This is the book." <AK repeats Swami's english statement>

<Cheers by devotees>

"This is the book, the Bible." <Swami says "This is the book. AK says "Bible", followed by Swami saying "papers" in Indian accent. SWAMI DID NOT CORRECT AK SAYING "Bible" EVEN THOUGH SWAMI DID NOT ACTUALLY SAY THE WORD "Bible." It is easy to mistake Swami's saying "papers" for "Bible" when you mishear His Indian accent>

"These are the papers you see from there." <Swami shows AK and then the crowd>

<Swami continues: >

"You find the cross there on the book. They also proved the fact that this is the procedure to establish synthesis of all religions. All that is present here is not present in the Bible. This is new, brand new story of Jesus. It is not given to everybody to know the divinity. To know the divine we should develop divine thoughts."

<Swami talks while showing AK, and AK translates as Swami is talking and showing him: >

"Here you find the bookmark thread there; every thread has got the text of every religion."

<Swami quotes the famous Gita verse: >

"Sarvadharman parityajya
Maam ekam saranam vraja
Aham tvam sava paapebhyo
Mokshayishyami maa suchah."

"Most important sloka of Bhagavad Gita is present right here in this bookmark." <AK translates to audience.

<Swami continues His discourse: >

"The essence of all religions is one."

Whoo! I don't think you would have found all that in Sanathana Sarathi! :)
Funny, this discourse was a very important one. In this discourse a lot of important information regarding the real origins of "Christianity" was given by Swami, as well as the real names of Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Shame Sanathana Sarathi never publishes exact details.

For those of you who want to know further, the film was produced by James Redmond, the discourse was transcribed by Sai Diwakar, and the Telugu editor was Ramdas Gollapudi.

I hope this answers a few questions.

Thus the eternal servant keenly observed.

30243	Old mails: Edited discourses	dark_knight_9	dark_knight_9	Wed 4/23/2003	7 KB
30244	Old mails: Edited discourses (2)	dark_knight_9	dark_knight_9	Wed 4/23/2003	3 KB
30245	Old mails: Anti-Advaita	dark_knight_9	dark_knight_9	Wed 4/23/2003	11 KB
30246	Old mails: More Anti-Advaita	dark_knight_9	dark_knight_9	Wed 4/23/2003	5 KB
30247	Old mails: Form/Formlessness of God	dark_knight_9	dark_knight_9	Wed 4/23/2003	8 KB
30248	Old mails: THE BOOK	dark_knight_9	dark_knight_9	Wed 4/23/2003	5 KB

30243	Old mails: Edited discourses
30244	Old mails: Edited discourses (2)
30245	Old mails: Anti-Advaita
30246	Old mails: More Anti-Advaita
30247	Old mails: Form/Formlessness of God
30248	Old mails: THE BOOK