Quote
MacReady
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain.

That's a beautiful quote MacReady, and very appropriate.

Quote
HerbertKane178

Quote
MacReady
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain.

That's a beautiful quote MacReady, and very appropriate.

And so in 'truth' the 4 or so angry men out to 'get' Serge, have in fact all been working to 'set the truth free'!

When I first came into contact with Serge Benhayon four years ago, I said to my husband at the time, "that guy creeps me out", with little but a gut feeling to go by, or was that 'feeling into myself'?

This latest article has proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is certainly a lot to hide behind the doors of Universal Medicine.

Thank You to the brave and honest men who have kept the faith that the 'truth will out'.

Quote
MacReady
From the latest article:
[www.smh.com.au]

A few years ago, Benhayon decided that listening to Elvis Presley's music was once again permissible because he had returned to earth as an "esoteric" being. Elvis started his career "fiery" but then got lost in the "pranic" world of ambition, alcohol and drugs before his death in Memphis 35 years ago. Now he was back, living the life of "quite a simple guy", his energy clear.

.........


If these quotes are taken from the interview done with Serge specifically for this report, then Serge seems to have forgotten who Elvis' reincarnation is. In an interview with Gayle Cue, he explicitly made the claim that Elvis has been reincarnated as a young girl, currently living on a farm in a location he would not disclose. Now Serge is claiming that Elvis is apparently "quite a simple guy" living somewhere in Asia.

Serge, if you're reading this, here's some advice that you would be wise to ponder on:

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain.

Hi MacReady

that is a great quote, and because it is true, there are many more examples of Serge's 'errors' in memory.
Some of them have been really obvious, so I have let them go without commented- so far.
I noticed that one straight away today as well- Surely his alert students might of as well ( hang on, it will be blamed on the journalist- $100 down)

He also makes many factual errors, even in fields he says he is an expert in ( numerology/astrology- example, Aquarius is a water sign- and then 20 minutes about water and what is means. Aquarius is an AIR sign FYI Serge)
and so on.
I keep wondering what all his students make of the changes in information, mistakes and shifts.
So far they seem to roll with it, and keep pressing the idea that he is a man of unparallelled integrity- although the phrase alone should be a strident warning.

I recall 6 months ago my ex partner telling me Serge was a simple man who lived on the smell of an oily rag, and that all his money went into CANCER treatment- and that he took no money for himself. This was a point of honor in the story.
When it was apparent some months later, that was not the case, it was dismissed as- "it's his money!" ( no, sorry it was our money, now its his)
Now we know he has a dozen or so properties. And there is more bound to show up ( for sure) - all in his name and clearly not housing cancer patients.
I guess this seismic shift in the perception of Serge will also be accepted along with the other very untoward goings on's that has surfaced. But the fact is, that money you are paying to learn his delusions is building him and his family a sizable real estate portfolio a nice bank account ( somewhere) and probably a nice little pile of cash somewhere.
There is nothing wrong with that of course , but the fact that it has been presented as something different is very wrong, and seems by any normal measure, to lack any integrity. ( or is the argument, we that resist the glorious truth of Serge's awakening and work, are temporal, therefore our version of Integrity has no energetic integrity and therefore we cannot judge a man of such great integrity, right?)

One last thing, in the article the journo said that a typical retreat earns UM $150,000 (is that what Serge said in the interview? Just like $2M on TT? Ahem)- well that might be on a bad weekend back in 1999, because based on the last few, the average taking would be well over $600,000 and the costs are minimal. How else can he afford to keep buying those houses. And remember, UM prefer cash.

You would need to have a seriously thick set of rose coloured glasses on right now not to see that things are not as the are being presented on many fronts. I would suggest that they would be so rose coloured you'd be tripping over your own fee...t or maybe Serge's. So watch out.

Seems Serge just can't make up his mind, er, I mean inner-heart, regarding his alleged previous incarnation as Leonardo da Vinci. According to the official UM website he has once again recanted this claim, despite admitting to it on A Current Affair just over a week ago:
[www.universalmedicine.com.au]

Quote
MacReady
Seems Serge just can't make up his mind, er, I mean inner-heart, regarding his alleged previous incarnation as Leonardo da Vinci. According to the official UM website he has once again recanted this claim, despite admitting to it on A Current Affair just over a week ago:
[www.universalmedicine.com.au]

This was an article of Faith with my partner. Now the story has changed. We had an hour conversation about this and how it was 'absolutely true'- and I imagine the only way she could have got that idea was from Serge himself either by implication ( as I infer from today's GW article) or direct claims ( as I understand from listening to Arcanes)

Does Serge Benhayon believe he is the reincarnation of Leonardo DaVinci?

Short answer – no. He doesn’t believe he is the reincarnation of DaVinci.

Does he have a deep connection, understanding and respect of the work of Leonardo DaVinci? Yes. This connection is not based on any belief or blind faith in reincarnation as it is based on a knowing in the body. Further writings will detail a wealth of understanding of the paintings and work of Leonardo and the place of his work in the lineage of the Ancient Wisdom. Stay tuned.

How do they keep buying this crap? It has clearly changed because it is too embarrassing to keep answering that question. Of course, the stay tuned alludes to some other smart answer that he is in the process of inventing right now.
You are right MacReady, which story is right. This, or the ACA claim the other night? ( or will that be blamed on editing too?)

Hi All ,great feature today in the Sydney Morning Herald , thanks to David Leser. I would just like to say I have a wife who was taken in by that charlatan Benhayon and his evil belief system. She has been well educated and has a degree from a reputable university. I find it deplorable when Benhayon boasts of " doctors ,lawyers and professionals" in the ranks of his inglorious cult.These people can also be brainwashed.Hitler brainwashed millions of well educated intelligent and seemingly decent people and as mentioned today in the article had Book Burnings (as Benhayon did )and one occured in the grounds of Berlin University in May 1933. I do hope and pray that after today's article this organization is destined for extinction. This man has treated people in a truly reprehensible manner not to mention his family who it seems after being drawn into his delusional world will be damaged forever. After the feature bursting with Benhayon's denials I was reminded of the Claude Cockburn quote: "I never believe in anything until it has been officially denied" - Eric

And if he wasn't da Vinci, then what about Bailey, Pythagoras, Plato, Imhotep, St. Peter etc? Is Serge now going to withdraw his claims of this lineage in favor of merely being an uber-fan of these historic figures?

Like you CP, I was assured repeatedly, point blank, by multiple UM followers that Serge WAS Alice A. Bailey. That Serge WAS Pythagoras. That Serge WAS Leonardo Da Vinci. Are we really to believe that hundreds, if not thousands of dedicated UM followers have turned their homes into exhibits exclusively dedicated to da Vinci's work just because Serge feels a connection to and respect for Leonardo?

That these people can accept Serge's repeated retraction of this long held claim and still champion his infallible integrity illustrates that the UM community will tragically accept and justify any deception on his behalf, as long as it means maintaining the delusional belief system they have absorbed.

When you are in certain states of altered state of consciousness, logical inconsistencies no longer matter.

In such a state, a story can be changed in basic ways and people dont notice or care. All that matters is that they be able to idealize that person who is at the center of their world.

In these states of changed awareness one is state where formal logic doesnt matter.

It can be called suspension of disbelief or suspension of skepticism. We enter this state temporarily to enjoy a film, a play, a joke. But it is also important to be able to exit this state so that one can return to ones day to day life, where is remains important to recognize logical inconsistencies.

That state of mind can feel very liberating and expansive. Its the state of mind of early childhood.

But..little kids survive that state of mind because they have PARENTS who are aware of logical inconsistencies, and can plan for the future, and protect the small children while they are young, expansive, exploring the world, and not aware of dangers that actually do exist.

The dangers arise when one goes into this state of pre-formal logic for too long and remains there, unable or unwilling to leave.

The ability to recognize and care about logical inconsistencies is an important skill and
if one loses access to that skill, its like being unable to locate the emergency exit in a room or building.

Quote
trackandfield
Good Weekend's Facebook page. As one would expect, comments have appeared very quickly in attempt to tarnish the effect of the article and the reputation of its author. They aren't doing a very good job it seems, just the usual programmatic defenses

Notice that while they clearly don't approve, they can't point out any lies in the article. They just find it 'one-sided'. Here's the thing for any UM devotee reading this: the image Serge has presented to you is one sided. It's an invented facade, and now you're being exposed to truths that are showing you other sides of Serge that he has kept hidden behind claims of infallible otherworldly divinity. You refuse to even consider this new information because you're experiences with UM feel good. I get that. The hands on healing and massage workshops leave you feeling good. Making new friends in this rarified environment feels good. Avoiding drugs and alcohol feels good.

But feeling good does not clear Serge from the obvious lies he has told you, the outrageous claims that he makes, or the increasingly apparent sordid conduct of his past. Since devotees generally seem to embrace the bizarre worldview offered by UM by stating 'I consider what Serge presents possibilities to consider', I challenge you to apply the same open mind to this possibility:

You don't really know anything about Serge Benhayon beyond what he wants you to know, and even then, what he presents to you is highly questionable, as illustrated by his retraction of the da Vinci incarnate claim.

Is it possible, my dear UM students, that the Good Weekend article, was your first glimpse at the real Serge
Benhayon? Read the article again, take a good look at the accompanying photo, and ask yourself if perhaps, just perhaps, a far more flawed, and potentially unbalanced, human being resides behind the mask worn by the 'ascended master' you think you know so well.

The following comment was posted on Good Weekend's Facebook page by a UM student, whose name I will mercifully omit here

"David Leser articule the Da Vinci code in good weekend is a hatchet job on Serge Benhayon, he finds dozens of anonymous abusive men and there harpies to discredit Serge and Universal medicine. Does he reveal his connection to these disgruntled people no he is practicing the lowest form of journalism" (sic)

Does that strike you as the writing of someone in control of their pranic emotions, expressing themselves from a place of integrity, love, stillness and responsibility?

Besides the admission that there are now dozens (as opposed to a handful at the pub) of detractors, this individual claims to know that the men in question are abusive. How can he know that when they are, as stated, anonymous?

And 'there harpies'? That can only refer to Miranda's estranged mother, unless he's talking about the poor woman who died of brain cancer after being told by Serge that her health issues were the result of an evil spirit residing in her liver and kidneys. How loving can one be to refer so callously to either of these women as 'harpies'?

Finally, I imagine that David Lesser's connection to the people being cited was that he interviewed them for the article. He also interviewed Serge, Anne Mallat and Kaye Greenaway. Should we detractors, in a paranoid fit of pique, infer that David Lesser is some kind of deep cover UM operative because we know for a fact that there is far more damning information that could have been included in the story? No, because being rational people, we can appreciate that both viewpoints need to be represented. That's what balanced journalism is all about.