La Shri Ram Chandra Mission n'est pas la seule organisation à proposer des méthodes de méditation. La transmission dont elle est si fière se traduit souvent par un asservissement qui fait perdre tout repère et isole inéluctablement l'individu de son environnement.
La Shri Ram Chandra Mission a été classée comme secte dans un rapport parlementaire français. Avant d'adhérer, informez vous !

438 articles – 3445 commentaires – Dernier ajout le 14/05/2017

“Take criticism seriously, without anger or sadness. Use it for correcting yourself, and welcome it.”
Kamlesh Patel (1/04/2015)

29 juin 2009

Nouveaux témoignages

Shashwat Pandey vient de publier sur son blog le compte rendu de nouveaux témoignages de senior précepteurs sur ce qui s'est passé au début des années 80, avant et juste après la mort de Babuji.
Il s'agit du témoignage de K.V. Reddy, ancien responsable "oversea" et actuel secrétaire de la SRCM de Shahjahanpur ; du témoignage de Manbhawati Devi, une disciple de la première heure de Babuji ainsi que du témoignage du petit-fils de Lalaji, Dinaysh Chandra.

Elodie
Sometime back during my last visit to India i spoke to kasturi Chaturvedi (download interview) wherein I asked her how is it possible that a person like babuji could appoint a person like P. Rajagopalachari as president of his organization. Her response was "If you can think like this, then babuji was a special personality".
In nut-shell, she said, babuji did not appoint Chari as president of Sahaj marg. Since then i was trying to find the truth as what has led to downfall of sahaj marg, during this quest, recently i spoke to two prominent person's who were very active during 1980-1990.
First person i spoke to was K.V Reddy, who was appointed overseas secretory of SRCM in 1980 and Manbhawati Devi, who was a close disciple of babuji (founder of this mission).
K.V Reddy was the chairman of the function held in Paris in which Manbhawani Devi was present with babuji and informed us of the first hand account as what all happened there at that time.
K. V Reddy is the current secretory of SRCM (Navneet group). He was made overseas secretory of SRCM by founder of sahaj marg system, and was chairman of conference held in Paris-france, which was the last overseas conference attended by the founder.
In this conversation, Mr. K.V Reddy, who is part of sahaj marg system of meditation since 1976 onwards, explains the character of P. rajagopalachari, he explains that chari was very "possessive", and wanted to become president of SRCM at any cost, he was presenting himself as president of SRCM, while founder was healthy and was functioning, his activities such as attempting to break the mission and shift operations to Chennai (then Madras), made babuji to remove him from the post of secretory of SRCM for indian affairs in 1982. Chari wrote this letter in response to his removal from SRCM. At that time overseas secretory was K.V Reddy and secretory for indian affairs was P. Rajagopalachari, after removal of Chari, S.A Sarnad was made secretory of SRCM for Indian affairs, and chari was asked to leave.
After his removal from the post of secretory Chari was furious as he has been presenting himself as president of SRCM before abhyasis of south India and international abhaysis .
Chari purchased the tickets to paris on his own, and while in flight exchanged the boarding pass with kanshiram, who was given the seat next to babuji, chari somehow manipulated Kanshiram and sat next to babuji in flight.
Mr. K.V Reddy also informs that babuji was quite healthy while he was boarding the Air India flight to Paris, he walked till the aircraft himself, but when he reached paris, babuji was semi-conscious, initially they thought that it may be jet-leg, but later when kanshiram told everyone that as how chari was eager to sit next to babuji and in a way forced him to exchange boarding pass, convinced everyone that something was fishy about it.
While in france, no Indian other than K. V Reddy and Mrs. Manbhawani Devi Aggrwal were present around babuji during his stay in Paris, Andre pory and other europiens were more close to babuji than Chari. We are also informed that babuji did not gave personal sitting to members in Paris (barring two occassions), but this job was delegated to K.V Reddy, (the statement which was read in the hall by S.A Sarnad had K.V Reddy's name).
K.V reddy also informs that Babuji said that chari should not be allowed to come near him, as he has already poisoned him once.
Same sentiments were echoed by Manbhawati devi also, she in an interview to me said that babuji was very upset on Chari, while in france, and did not wanted to even see him around.
While in france, Chari collaborated with some danish woman's, and started spreading the rummer that babuji has appointed him as the president of SRCM as babuji has now become old, (This information was given to K.V Reddy by a denish lady)
Chari was spreading this rummer that he has become president of SRCM, even before babuji expired.
According to Manbhawati Devi (who was present in the Paris conference and was in the room with babuji) Kanshiram abused and scolded Chari very aggresively, as Kanshiram was of the opinion that it was Chari who tried to poison babuji, moreover, Manbhawati Devi also said that babuji was very upset on Chari, she narrated a specific instance wherein once in Shahjahanpur babuji asked her to sit in a car which was suppose to take him from his home to the ashram, Chari who was there told her that there is no room in the car and she cannot sit, at this she returned, and babuji when found that she was coming back asked her why she is not in the car, to which she replied that Chari has said that there is no room in car, at which babuji also returned and did not sit in the car, Chari then apologized, and babuji sat next to Chari, who was driving the car, and Manbhawati devi sat behind the car, but she said, babuji did not even looked at chari once.
She has also informed us about numerous incidences where Chari did not allowed babuji to even go for toilet or to brush his teeth, but forced him inside a room and made abhyasis enter the room one by one.
She was very sadden to see the condition of babuji, when chari was around.
Manbhawati devi further stated that Chari opposed the idea of babuji where he created zones for proper management of mission, on Chari's behest, some members from Chari group approached babuji and said that they are not comfortable with the concept of zone's presented by babuji, they threatened to leave the mission if this idea of zones was not dropped, babuji asked them to leave the mission, and this proved to be the beginning of difference between chari and babuji.
Manbhawati devi also informs us that babuji was quite concerned about Umesh Chandra and his well-being, babuji's attachment towards Umesh Chandra became stronger when his youngest son Sarvesh Chandra Saxena left babuji's home and started living in his wife's home.
All in all, Manbhawati devi has stated that Chari was not appointed representative of babuji, infect, she said that when babuji's signed papers where stolen babuji asked her to find out where those papers had gone missing, as he was afraid that someone might mis-use them.
Manbhawati devi has also refuted claim of Chari that babuji use to call abhyasis PIG's (see here), she also said that babuji was very much against the concept of marriages inside the mission, on the contrary babuji advocated that everyone should get married in his/her own caste (a practice still prominent in India).
All interview's of manbhawati devi can be downloaded from following location (interview is in hindi)
However, all members of the working committee of SRCM in 1983 rejected nomination letter presented and circulated by P. Rajagopalachari, soon after the death of babuji, primarily because the nomination letter presented by Chari stated that Chari has been appointed "president of sahaj marg system" and not of Shree Ram Chandra Mission, whereas there cannot be any president of sahaj marg system, but president can be for "Shri Ram Chandra Mission". Sahaj marg system is the name of a meditation method and is not an organization or a society which can have any president.
Everyone who was in sahaj marg at that time knew that sahaj marg is a meditation method, and hence there cannot be any president of sahaj marg system.
For clarity about this consider an example:- A person can become president of an organization and not of a product, to understand it better, Bell canada is a telecommunication company in Canada, which offer "broadband services" to its customers, can anyone become president of broadband technology?? and not of Bell canada? Can a person, who registered the company appoint someone as president for the services which the company offers and not for the company itself?
Based on this, and the evidence that signed letter heads were stolen from the office of SRCM, Chari's claim was rejected and nomination letter of Umesh Chandra was accepted, which was then circulated by the then secretory for internal affairs of SRCM, S.A Sarnad.
S.A Sarnad was made secretory after removing P. Rajagopalachari, on 28th july 1982 by babuji (founder of this system). Chari's removal was effective via Letter number P/60-2780 of of the mission , the letter in the link clearly states that S.A Saranad has been appointed as secretory of the mission. (June 28 1982)
One thing which we are very much sure of is that babuji was very upset on chari, to the point that he did not even wanted to see him around.
Dinaysh kumar saxena, (grandson of lalaji) voiced a similar opinion, but later he requested me to remove his interview from internet, (his detailed interview is now removed from this blog) as he was afraid that if he opens his mouth he may also meet the same fate (un-natural death) as Umesh Chandra has met, his admission can be found below.
Dinaysh Chandra has not yet asked me remove this confession. as and when i get request from Dinaysh Chandra to remove this, I will have no option but to remove it.
In essence mystery around Chari's nomination, and his subsequent hostile takeover of
SRCM has begun to give way to clarity.
We now know (from 3 different sources) that babuji was not at all happy with the activities of P. Rajagopalachari, so much so that he removed him from all administrative activities of SRCM, and did not liked his presence.
Manbhawati Devi, had given an example for this, she said, that babuji was preparing a preceptor, who was suppose to leave shahjahanpur later that day, Chari told babuji that his remaining two sitting he will give, babuji refused immediately and asked chari not to give sitting to that person.
We also now know that P. Rajagopalachari was very possessive about his position in SRCM and had already declared himself as president of SRCM while babuji was still alive.
Later after the death of babuji, Chari called everyone one-by-one and asked them if they are going to accept him as father or brother, according to Mabhawati Devi, Chari asked her also the same question, and she replied that babuji had already told her that Chari would do something like this, and she cannot accept chari in place of babuji as babuji himself have asked her not to do so.
P. Rajagopalachari has been able to manipulate innocent people with the help of some high ranking police officials and some ex-judges and some current administrative officials, presence of IPS, IAS and judges in his working committee clearly indicates that Shri Ram Chandra Mission run by P. Rajagopalachari is not for spiritual uplift-ment but for proper management of activities of P. Rajagopalachari during 1974-1995.
The funny part of all this drama is that, it is all in the name of spirituality!!!
Violence, (see here), fraud (see here), manipulation (see here) and cunning-ness (see here) which defines sahaj marg today can largely be attributed to selfishness and lust for power of P. Rajagopalachari.
We want to present the truth, brutal, honest, and naked truth!! We are not against the sahaj marg system of meditation, but we want everyone to know the truth before they get involved in anything of this kind.
Spirituality cannot be transmitted by a tained person, a person should claim to be spiritual only if s/he has come out of all controvercies and allegations levelled against him/her. Till matter is in court, one must not declear themselves as president of an organization, which is taken over by violence fraud and manipulation.
Thank You!!
Shashwat

4 commentaires:

Alexis a dit…

Intéressant ! Cela confirme que Chari manoeuvrait en coulisses pour reprendre le devant de la scène en 1982 alors que Babuji l'avait rétrogradé…
Cela dit, on l'avait déjà bien compris et il est dommage que les témoignages ne soient pas plus précis sur ce qui s'est réellement passé après le décès de Babuji.
Une nouvelle fois, on occulte le meeting de juillet 1983 pour aller directement aux conclusions de février 84. Pourquoi cela ?
Non, tous les membres du comité de travail n'ont pas rejeté la nomination de Chari à la présidence en 83. Kasturi et KC Narayana l'acceptaient ! Et Umesh n'a pas été désigné en 83…
Je vous invite à relire mes interrogations sur cette période de 1982-84, elles restent entières :
http://questcequelesahajmarg.blogspot.com/2008/03/5.html
Puisque Shashwat interviewe d'anciens précepteurs du Sahaj Marg, je l'invite à les interroger précisément sur le calendrier de ces 3 années cruciales, et sur les décisions prises lors de chaque événement.
Cela permettrait d'obtenir des éléments concrets et non pas seulement les prises de position subjectives que l'on s'attend à lire de la part d'opposants à Chari.
Il serait intéressant qu'il interviewe aussi SP Srivastava, KC Narayana ou SA Sarnad.
Quant au témoignage de Dinaysh Kumar Saxena, il ne nous apprend pas grand-chose si ce n'est le talent de Shashwat à lui faire dire ce qu'il veut entendre.
Un peu plus de rigueur ne serait pas inutile. Les témoignages en sortiraient renforcés. Là ils apparaissent très discutables…

Anonyme a dit…

Alexis,


your questions are answered to some extent by Manbhawati Devi.

Later after the death of babuji, Chari called everyone one-by-one and asked them if they are going to accept him as father or brother, according to Mabhawati Devi, Chari asked her also the same question, and she replied that babuji had already told her that Chari would do something like this, and she cannot accept chari in place of babuji as babuji himself have asked her not to do so.


So did everyone rejected chari in late 83 and early 84?

yes and no!!

Yes:- All members who were on administrative board of SRCM (which was functioning since 82) rejected him.

No:- Chari created a new setup, which was created by him by asking people to either join him or leave him, to who joined him accepted him, now it is very clear that Chari was not in-charge of the situation at that time.


About Dinaysh kumar interview, i am sadden by your response, I don't know if you have read my email exchange with him which led to the telephonic interview, It was Dinaysh who approached me for the interview, i asked him to talk in april, (when i was planning a trip to india) and i got response after 2 months. Dinaysh said what he wanted to say, i asked him what i wanted to ask!!

Its more of a sahaj marg syndrome when you refuse to accept the obvious.

(much like abhyasis belief that 80+2=83!!)


Regards
Shashwat

PS:- I am waiting for a reply from K.C Naryana for his interview.

Alexis a dit…

En juin 83, Kasturi et Narayana faisaient-ils partie du comité de travail, oui ou non ? A priori, ils reconnaissaient que Babuji avaient préparé et désigné Chari à la présidence. Et ils ne s'y sont pas opposés…

Donc, que s'est-il passé en 1983 ? d'après le peu qu'on en sait, umesh chandra n'était pas encore candidat, c'est un de ses frères (prakash) qui l'était et qui a été rejeté. Chari a-t-il été accepté ou rejeté ? je ne le sais pas

Ensuite seulement vient février 84, avec la candidature d'umesh chandra, sa nomination et le rejet de chari

Donc, que s'est-il passé en juin 1983 ? On comprend que navneet et ses partisans n'en parlent pas vu que cet épisode leur est moins favorable. D'où l'importance d'interroger d'autres témoins de l'événement pour faire la lumière sur cette période.

Communiquer seulement sur certains moments historiques en en excluant d'autres, c'est être volontairement partial. Chercher à savoir, c'est essayer de faire preuve d'objectivité.

Anonyme a dit…

K. C Narayana was part of the meeting of Feb 84 and as well as june 83, kasturi was never part of administrative block of SRCM.

Narayana opposed Chari's nomination letter and was part of the meeting held in Feb 84 as well, which rejected the claim of both Chari and Sharad Saxena.

This information is available in the working committe meeting document which i had uploaded previously, but due to lack of space i have only important documents online. (I have to spend more money to buy more space, I am already paying a hefty sum per month for the site.)


Prakash was never a candidate for president of SRCM, i don't know from where this information has come out, but as far as I know, Prakash was never a presidential canditate for SRCM, on the contrary Prakash Saxena was the founding member of SRCM and his name is present in the list of founding members in the original constitution of SRCM (at number 11). see documents section of my site for more details.

First meeting which was held immediately after the founder died was on 10 June 1983, in this meeting two people presented their candidature for president of SRCM.

One was from chari and other one was from sharad saxena, son of prakash chandra (who was a founding member and not a candidate).

No decision was taken in the meeting of june-10-83, but it was agreed that decision will be taken in the next meeting.

Chari called everyone one by one and asked them to either accept him or leave the mission. (Manbhawati Devi was one such person who was called by Chari, she rejected Chari).


I Hope this is clear now, although most of this has already been cleared by Puneet saxena, (interview is available on youtube).

I will summarize it as:-

1. Founder died on 19th April 1983.

2. Meeting of working committee of SRCM was held on 10th June 1983, in which P. Rajagopalachari and Sharad Saxena presented their claims for nomination. (Umesh did not present his claim in the first meeting) no decision was taken at that time, it was agreed in the meeting that both the claims will be examined and decision will be taken in next meeting.

3. P. Rajagopalachari started influencing members. between 1st meeting and second meeting (according to Manbhawti Devi).

4. During this period, Umesh Chandra presented his claim.

5. Second Meeting (scheduled in 10th June 1983 meeting) took place on 6th and 7th Feb 1984 (two days).

6. In this meeting all the 3 claims were examined and Umesh Chandra was declared as president as his nomination letter was considered to be genuine by the members of the working committee.

Following people were present in the meeting:-

1. Mr. P.C Chaturvedi (Chairman of the meeting)

2. Mr. P.C Saxena.

3. Mr. B.M Heble

4. Mr. R. Rajagopalachari

5. Mr. R.L Mimani

6. Mr K.V Subba Rao

7. V.R Vipat

8. Dr. S.P Shrivastava

9. Mr. K.C Narayana

http://www.freedom2think.org/documents/minutesofwc1984.pdf


7. After this meeting, S.A Sarnad (who was appointed secretory of SRCM in 1982 by the founder) circulated the appointment of U.C Saxena as president of SRCM on 15 Feb 1984.

8. P.C Chaturvedi who was chairman of the committee which appointed Umesh Chandra Saxena as president of SRCM is father of Kasturi Chaturvedi, (who some say drifted towards Chari, then moved away from him) but while talking to me, she did not mention that she ever endorsed Chari's nomination as president, she told me that Chari was never appointed as President of SRCM, which is consistent with the resolution adopted in 1983-84 meeting's.

What followed there after is legal battle, which is continuing even today.

9. According to K.V Reddy, who was overseas secretory of SRCM since 1980, K.C Narayana was neutral till 1991, started his own group ISRC with a commitment to umesh chandra that his group will be merged in his, once the legal skirmishes are over.


Regards
Shashwat