Took another look at
Pia's site and decided to comment further. A few
points that needed to be made, a few I felt like
reiterating. The tone's all mine. If you don't like
it, write your own:
My name is Pia Grünbaum.
No it's not!
Just kidding, Pia, but really, girl, when do we
get to actually talk with you about some of
this shit you're saying? Never? Is that your idea
of a principled response?
I have decided to host this web site because
Maharaji and the people who enjoy his Knowledge are
being cynically attacked by a hate group. Their
stated intent is to defame Maharaji and destroy the
potential benefits of his work.
Hey, talk about defamatory! You've got to be
careful here, Pia. Where have you seen any
ex-premies declare their 'stated intent' to
defame Maharaji? Defamation implies
spreading lies. What ex has ever said that he or
she intends to spread lies about Maharaji? None I'm
aware of. The truth, my dear, is damning enough.
Likewise, what's with this 'cynical' or 'hate
group'? Do you think that anyone who leaves
Maharaji is cynical? And if they challenge him
rather than quietly walk away does that make
them cynical? And if they demand answers and some
accountability from the man they once literally
worshipped as their Lord and Saviour does that make
them a 'hate group'?
And even if some, like myself, hate Maharaji,
does that mean we collectively form a 'hate group'?
That term, as I undersatnd it, is all about
prejudice. Prejudice, in turn, is all about
unfounded, unjustified dislike. Are you denying
that former followers of a guru may have ample
justification for hating him? Would you say the
same, for example, about a group of ex-moonies?
That they're just another 'hate group'? Your
language is inflammatory and innacurate, Pia. It's
you, I'm afraid, who's therefore defamatory.
This small group uses the Internet to put
forth a gross misrepresentation of a person whose
efforts are deeply valued by hundreds of thousands
of people globally, including myself.
Why won't you debate the facts, then, if you're
so sure we're blowing smoke? 'Gross
misrepresentation'? Let's talk about it. For
example, do you think it's a gross
misrepresentation that Maharaji once claimed to be
God? Yes? No? See, EV categorically denies this
fact. How about you? Care to tell me how else one
could possibly interpret this:
It's been said that Guru Maharaj Ji comes, or
God comes into the world, when there is a decline
in religion. God comes, Guru Maharaj Ji comes, and
helps the world.
I have known Maharaji most of my life. I love
and respect him, and I will no longer watch in
silence while people publicly ridicule and threaten
both him and others who support his work.
How well do you know him? Is he faithful to his
wife? How about his mistress, Monica, is he
faithful to her? Does he drink? How much? How
often? Alone or with whom? Drugs?
Point is, Pia, that unless you know the answers
to these questions, you might not really know the
man anywhere nearly as well as you'd like to
believe. Honestly, say Maharaji does indeed have a
long-time mistress and an even longer history of
cheating on his wife. Wouldn't that be something
someone who claims to know him should be aware of?
Or is knowing Maharaji different than knowing other
people? How much do you really know, Pia? Are you
brave enough to ask yourself that question?
But as for threats, the only threats I'm aware
of are those to confront him with his own history
and thus prevent new people from being hoodwinked.
Is that bad? Why?
I believe that many who feel as I do have put
up with this group for a long time to avoid
engaging in its dirt or dignifying groundless
allegations with serious response. But enough is
enough. In fact, Maharaji has been taking the heat
for actions of people who are not taking
responsibility for their own choices.
Here's where you're in trouble, ideologically, I
mean. As I pointed out to you the other day,
Maharaji's advice is to ignore critics. You're
doing the opposite. And, of course, because this is
all so confusing for you, you're forced to a)
respond to our 'groundless allegations' in a very
tentative, incomplete way and b) avoid clearly
admitting that you are indeed doing exactly what
Maharaji, publically at least, says not to.
Problem, isn't it?
'I do not issue this call lightly'
This is a call for people who know Maharaji
and who practice Knowledge to join me in speaking
out to set the record straight and show how the
picture being painted by those who call themselves
'ex-premies' is both false and
So far, you'll agree, you haven't done anything
but plaster another coat of whitewash on a
crumbling wall. If this is all you've got, Pia, why
bother? EV's already done as much in its fraudulent
FAQs. What do you think you add by simply
reiterating the same banalities, half-truths and
outright lies? If you're preaching to the
converted, you have to recognize that all you're
doing is drawing needless attention to the
ex-premies. If you're preaching to us,
you're going to have to actually engage in a little
discussion. Flat-earthers will argue their
positions. Creationists will as well. Those who
don't look weak and you know it.
I ask all contributors to this site to take
personal responsibility for their own choices and
any part they have had in fostering any
What if that 'personal responisibity' is
something they want to talk about? Maybe people,
yes, even premies, want to discuss these matters.
Wouldn't you like to facilitate some better
understanding in that way? And how else can you
clear up any 'foster[ed] misconceptions' if
you can't discuss them? Can you see what a
tight leash you're on? I can.
We ask the exes to do the same - especially
those who were in positions of responsibility
within the organization. I do not issue this call
lightly, but out of the deepest sense of personal
indignation and seriousness of purpose.
Fine, so you're actually inviting exes to talk
with you too. So why won't you publish anything we
say? Pia? This is looking just a l i t t l e
absurd, you know. If this was a young Pia's recess
schoolyard game, the teachers would be over in no
time saying 'Sorry, Pia, but you can't play that
way.' You can't invite poeple to comment and then
stonewall them. That's just being silly.
Thank You - Pia Grünbaum
Having been diagnosed with terminal cancer, I
am keenly aware of the preciousness of whatever
time remains for me, and I know that doing what I
am doing now is a most worthy use of my time.
I hope you will consider it worthy of yours. I ask
for the help of those of you who may be more
knowledgeable, articulate, or energetic than myself
to contribute to this effort.
What, if anything, does EV have to do with your
site? Has Maharaji endorsed or condoned it,
directly or otherwise? You're giving the impression
that you're doing this entirely on your own with no
official imprimatur, as it were. Are you
being honest? There are reasons to be skeptical.
So, what's the truth of the matter? Pia and a few
friends or something more?
Submissions, Anonymity and
I invite you to submit postings for this site
if you value the gift of Knowledge, are willing to
take individual responsibility for what you say,
and want to contribute to this site's purpose.
Those postings will be chosen for publication that
are of most interest to the readers and in line
with the purpose of this site. I am well aware of
the ex-premie tactics of threat, flaming, and
various other forms of public abuse directed
towards those who oppose them. It is a fact that
some exes have publicly threatened to retaliate
against those who oppose them by unlawfully
contacting their clients and colleagues with lies
and false rumors.
No, Pia, it's a fact that some ex's have, at
times, threatened to contact their colleagues and
such and tell them about Maharaji. Jonathan
Cainer's one such 'target', if you will. Like you,
Jonathan started a pro-Maharaji website with a
couple of his friends -- or so he says. When the
word came out that Jonathan was a premie he lied
his face off to protect his job and reputation as
... here's the punchline, an astrologer of all
things! Anyway, the point is, even then no one
spread any lies or 'false rumours' about him. Can
you think of any? What were they? That he was a
member of a cult started by the now-middle-aged
Lord of the Universe, Saviour of Mankind? What part
of that is untrue? Care to discuss this?
Whereas I would appreciate the use of your
name with your writing, if, for any reason, you
would like to omit your name from your posting, you
may do so. I launch this site as an individual, at
my own expense, and not as a representative or
agent of any organization or other person than
myself. I am committed to protecting its
independence as well as the anonymity of those who
Again, how independent are you? Have you sought
out or received any support, consent or advice from
EV or Maharaji, either directly or indirectly? Big
secret, huh? Why?