Creed of Heresy Wrote:Yeah because getting your information from a source that must cite all of its sources, must remain neutral, and must be steadily confirmed by OTHER sources as well [or failing that possibility must display all valid, alternative claims] automatically instigates a negative connotation, right? I mean, wikipedia! Jeez, it's almost like it uses the scientific method mixed with encyclopedic standards!
OH WAIT.It does. Are you saying that the scientific method is flawed?
Also, how do you know any of this stuff? Where did you read it from? And how positive are you that it isn't biased? If you bring up a source that happens to be written by one of his followers, PROTIP: NOT UNBIASED.

Not all the information coming from Wiki are incorrect but many are that is why in the scientific world this source is not taken in much consideration.
In the specific case in which apophenia tell us about Sarkar the matter is absolutely ridiculous.
The person writing about Sarkar must have taken information through the media, the media took the information through the police and the police made up all the story in order to hide their crimes their corruption and to follow Indira Gandhi order so they could continue to procrastinate the now EX dictatorship.
Why Little Enrico know all this?
Well little Enrico when was 22 years young went in India for the first time just during these events. He was there before and after Sarkar arrest which by the way happen in Patliputra colony Bihar india.

---

(July 7, 2013 at 5:51 am)apophenia Wrote:

Every single time you come up with one of your mental masturbation i show your mistakes and stupidity but you keep on coming back for more punishment.
I just try to work out if this is a form of masochism or just pure madness?
If you do not feel any respect for yourself at least you should show some respect for your friends within the atheist circle for these continuous embarrassments.hock:

---

(July 7, 2013 at 9:25 am)Stimbo Wrote: Enrico, do you recall that little conversation we had a while back about the difference between good and bad teachers and the importance of 'rejecting' the bad ones when they're shown to be bad? Yeah, this is sort of what I had in mind.

I do agree that the bad teachers should be rejected.
But in order to know whether a teacher is good or bad you need to go through some test isn't it Stimbo?
Why should i reject a teacher that was proven good?

Wikipedia Wrote:1984 Bioterror attack

Osho [Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh] had coached Sheela [Bhagwan's 'secretary' from 1981-85] in using media coverage to her advantage and during his period of public silence he privately stated that when Sheela spoke, she was speaking on his behalf. He had also supported her when disputes about her behaviour arose within the commune leadership, but in spring 1984, as tension amongst the inner circle peaked, a private meeting was convened with Sheela and his personal house staff. According to the testimony of Swami Devageet (Charles Harvey Newman) she was admonished in front of the others, with Osho declaring that his house, and not hers, was the centre of the commune. He is also said to have warned that anyone close to him would inevitably become a target for Sheela.

Several months later, on 30 October 1984, he ended his period of public silence, announcing that it was time to "speak his own truths," and in July 1985 he resumed daily public discourses against Sheela's wishes, according to statements he made to the press. On 16 September 1985, a few days after Sheela and her entire management team had suddenly left the commune for Europe, Osho held a press conference in which he labelled Sheela and her associates a "gang of fascists." He accused them of having committed a number of serious crimes, most of these dating back to 1984, and invited the authorities to investigate.

The alleged crimes, which he stated had been committed without his knowledge or consent, included the attempted murder of his personal physician, poisonings of public officials, wiretapping and bugging within the commune and within his own home, and a bioterror attack on the citizens of The Dalles, Oregon, using salmonella to impact the county elections. While his allegations were initially greeted with scepticism by outside observers, the subsequent investigation by the U.S. authorities confirmed these accusations and resulted in the conviction of Sheela and several of her lieutenants. On 30 September 1985, Osho denied that he was a religious teacher. His disciples burned 5,000 copies of Book of Rajneeshism, a 78-page compilation of his teachings that defined "Rajneeshism" as "a religionless religion". He said he ordered the book-burning to rid the sect of the last traces of the influence of Sheela, whose robes were also "added to the bonfire".

The salmonella attack was noted as the first confirmed instance of chemical or biological terrorism to have occurred in the United States. Osho stated that because he was in silence and isolation, meeting only with Sheela, he was unaware of the crimes committed by the Rajneeshpuram leadership until Sheela and her "gang" left and sannyasins came forward to inform him. A number of commentators have stated that in their view Sheela was being used as a convenient scapegoat. Others have pointed to the fact that although Sheela had bugged Osho's living quarters and made her tapes available to the U.S. authorities as part of her own plea bargain, no evidence has ever come to light that Osho had any part in her crimes. Nevertheless Gordon (1987) reports that Charles Turner, David Frohnmayer and other law enforcement officials, who had surveyed affidavits never released publicly and who listened to hundreds of hours of tape recordings, insinuated to him that Osho was guilty of more crimes than those for which he was eventually prosecuted. Frohnmayer asserted that Osho's philosophy was not "disapproving of poisoning" and that he felt he and Sheela had been "genuinely evil".

According to court testimony by Ma Ava (Ava Avalos), a prominent disciple, Sheela played associates a tape recording of a meeting she had had with Osho about the "need to kill people" in order to strengthen wavering sannyasins resolve in participating in her murderous plots: "She came back to the meeting and [...] began to play the tape. It was a little hard to hear what he was saying. [...] And the gist of Bhagwan's response, yes, it was going to be necessary to kill people to stay in Oregon. And that actually killing people wasn't such a bad thing. And actually Hitler was a great man, although he could not say that publicly because nobody would understand that. Hitler had great vision." Sheela initiated attempts to murder Osho's caretaker and girlfriend, Ma Yoga Vivek, and his personal physician, Swami Devaraj (Dr. George Meredith), because she felt they were a threat to Osho; she had secretly recorded a conversation between Devaraj and Osho "in which the doctor agreed to obtain drugs the guru wanted to ensure a peaceful death if he decided to take his own life."

There are a number of remarkable parallels between Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh and P.R. Sarkar, including them being contemporaries of each other.

("Osho" means "enlightened master," or" The Blessed One, on Whom the Sky Showers Flowers"; it is a historical appellation applied to Zen masters. Bhagwan means "blessed one" or "God." P.R. Sarkar adopted the appellation "shri shri anandamurti," or "bliss personified," though his followers frequently referred to him as "Baba," meaning "father," though Anandamarga publications suggest it means "my most beloved One." Which itself is somewhat odd, as Anandamargiis were fond of saying, "Baba is watching.")

Gawd! I hope no one has entrusted their beliefs to a charlatan like that.