Current Page: 58 of 66
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: February 19, 2021 01:05PM

The problem you have is that you, like the other trolls, came on here trying to portray yourself as wanting a proper & genuine debate. You began by saying that its expected a teacher becomes a target and has lies said. Yet you seem to only reserve that for Swartz. And not me. Which means you're making excuses for him. And trolling me.

Then you say that someone who wont take legal action, one can only assume it is cause it never happened. Yet you only reserve that for Swartz. You dont assign that to me, another teacher. Which means you're making excuses for him, and trolling me.

You mention that someone who says something and cant prove it, and in the same sentence say it is slanderous. You only reserve that for Swartz. You dont use your own counsel in regard to me. Which means your making excuses for him, and trolling me.

I offer you evidence twice, evidence that is James And Isabella Swartz' own emails, dating years, which proves they have posted lies about me a few months ago. You just ignore it when I offer. That has exposed you as a troll. You are here to flame me and to troll me. Trolls do not care for the truth, they only want to cause issues. That is why you dont care for evidence to what I am saying, and this has exposed you as a troll.


Quote
Allowance
Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> earthquake Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > >
> > > How do I show that someone is
> > not
> > > my master other than just saying he is not my
> > > master? If I accused you of having Hitler as
> > your
> > > master, how would you show me that he
> > > isn't?
> >
> > Your analogy doesn't make sense. Hitler is
> dead,
> > and I haven't been on here even remotely
> speaking
> > about him, never mind supporting him, nor
> > by-passing things he did.
> >
> > Stay focused.
>
> It seems like you need to stay
> focused. I never said Hitler was alive, never
> said that you spoke about him, and never said that
> you supported him. You asked me to show that
> James Swartz is not my master. How do I prove
> something not to be the case?
>
> Don't distract from what I've brought up here. I
> have been very specific and simple. Let's keep it
> that way.
>

Your analogy isn't comparable to our discussion. Not in any way. Try to keep thing valid, precise and contextual.


Quote
Allowance
>
> >
> >
Quote
Alllowance
> > >
> > >
> > > > He's been caught out
> > > > publishing lies about me. I can provide the
> > > > evidence. Since you bring up lies, my
> > question
> > > is,
> > > > do you think it is acceptable that he has
> > > > published lies about me, a teacher in a
> > > > traditional Vedanta lineage?
> > >
> > > That just comes down to you
> vs.
> > > him. I have no reason to believe you anymore
> > than
> > > believe James Swartz. In fact, by the things
> > > you've already written in this thread, I am
> > > inclined to believe Swartz over you.

> >
> >
> > That is why I have said I can provide evidence
> > that he has posted lies about me. Generally one
> > lie, particularly a major lie that can be
> proven
> > is enough to debunk. I have shared excerpts of
> > private emails that show he has lied about me
> > multiple times on Shiningworld. I will provide
> you
> > with the actual emails that show he had
> directly,
> > actually & contextually lied about me. You
> dont'
> > seem to understand what certain words in
> sentences
> > mean.
>
> I don't need to hear you go on and
> on again as I don't trust you.

Then dont reply to me. And, the evidence is the Swartz' own words, their emails. Not my words. Once again, youve exposed yourself as a troll. Accussing me of things, and not wanting to see evidence of the actual truth, because you're here trolling.

Quote
Allowance
>
>
> >
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > > >
> > > > Shiningworld members constantly ignore the
> > lies
> > > he
> > > > tells. The truth matters. Show you're
> noble.
> > >
> > > Yes, the truth matters. I
> don't
> > > know which members of Shiningworld ignore
> what
> > > lies he may or may not have told. I hope that
> > if
> > > he has lied, that they take that into
> > > consideration as anyone would about anyone
> > lying.
> > >
> > > How do I show that I'm noble?
> > >
> > > Does it count that I call out lies here?
> > Traveler
> > > was calling me James Swartz. I'm more noble
> > than
> > > that. Does that count?

> >
> >
> > That is not contextual discussion between you
> and
> > I. Stop side-manoeuvring away from the point I
> > have made. I show evidence Swartz has
> > specifically, literally, lied about me on
> salient
> > things. And I want to see your response.
>
> Maybe he has lied about you. Maybe
> he hasn't. I don't know if you are consciously or
> unconsciously trying to distract away from my
> fairly simple and specific points or not. This
> isn't all about you and your sob story.


There's no sob story. THough most importantly, it is quite a big deal for a so called spiritual teacher to publish lies about another. Such a person is obviously nasty and vindictive. Telling lies to Shiningworld members, and publishing those lies, in order to try to cause distress. It's quite important. You come on here, and speak of lies and the truth, but you ignore your master, the master of lies and of being vindictive to people.


Quote
Allowance
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > > >
> > > > Let's set aside for the moment how Swartz
> in
> > > his
> > > > own book, 'mystic by default' speaks about
> > > having
> > > > thoughts of punching women, then seems to
> be
> > > happy
> > > > enough to have sex them minutes later...
> > >
> > > People have many thoughts.
> > There's
> > > a difference between having a thought and
> > acting
> > > on it.
> >
> > Hmm, in all my years, I cant recall having
> > thoughts of punching a woman in the face, and
> > instead, being content with having sex with
> her.
> > You can disregard his own words if you want,
> but
> > its' not normal. I expected you to by-pass it.
>
> That's good, but you do have a
> violent past, and there is no real indication that
> it is just your past. James has had sex in the
> past. Sometimes humans do that.

You know nothing of my past, and once again, you're way out of your depth...

Have you ever been afraid to walk up the street? Incase you got bundled into a car, took out a country road, to be found the next morning by a passer-by? And since you are so afraid, you join armed groups. Groups who want to protect their own community. Join out of some romantic propaganda, but in reality are used for criminality. Officially terrorist organisations and banned, but to you, it gives you protection & identity. Have you ever been ordered by your superiors to shoot a relative as a punishment? And know if you did not, you would get the bullet in your kneecap. My next door neighbour was watching evening tv, and a pipe bomb went through the window, and she was no more. My brother in law went out to the pubs & clubs one saturday night. He was took away to a country lane and stabbed dozens of times. I got caught up in my first riot when I was 11, and saw the police shoot someone in the head. Later they died. I've personally known over 20 freinds and associates, who have been shot dead, over 25 years.

Have you ever been in a civil war? I doubt it. So spare me your self-righteous bs. You know nothing about me, and you know nothing of the situation that led me to make those wrong choices. Alternate from your high horse and armchair warrior throne. I have been labelled worse things. My karma has been what it is, but you haven't got a clue what you are even speaking about. Silly person.

Quote
Allowance
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > >
> > > >
> > > > As the book progresses Swartz attempts to
> > > slowly
> > > > build himself up to the level of his own
> > Guru,
> > > and
> > > > beyond. For example, speaking about Swami
> > > > Chinamyananda:
> > > >
> > > >
Quote
Swartz/Mystic By Default"
> > > >
> > > > He was a very classy, dignified guy. But,
> odd
> > > as
> > > > it sounds, I think the intense awareness I
> > > focused
> > > > on him brought up things he was ill
> > > > prepared
to deal with.
> > > >
> > > > I came out of my absorption for a minute
> and
> > > > noticed that the Swami was looking at me in
> > an
> > > > unkind way, as if I had consciously done
> > > something
> > > > to mess with the classroom energy, about
> > which
> > > he
> > > > was very possessive. At the same
> time
> > I
> > > had
> > > > the sense that he was drawn to me, perhaps
> > > > momentarily envious? Whatever it
> was,
> > I
> > > > understood that I did not belong there any
> > > more;
> > > > I was simply becoming too powerful.
> > > >
> > > > I say ‘momentarily envious’ because I think
> > > seeing
> > > > me like that, more a god than a human
> being,
> > > must
> > > > have called attention to the negative
> side
> > > of
> > > > his own situation
. His karma as a
> famous
> > > > jet-setting mahatma put such heavy demands
> on
> > > his
> > > > mind that it often pulled him down, making
> > him
> > > > cranky and irritable, sometimes
> downright
> > > > unpleasant
.
> > > >
> > > > I did not have to lift a finger and I spoke
> > > > infrequently. I could fly and soar in the
> > > > transcendental sky, dissolve into the
> > emptiness
> > > > and experiment all day long as I saw fit.
> > > While
> > > > he squandered his capital at an alarming
> rate
> > > > helping others
, I husbanded mine,
> > selfishly
> > > > investing it in pure meditation. And
> finally,
> > > > he had to live with the knowledge that
> he
> > > was
> > > > nearing the end of his incarnation
,
> > whereas
> > > I
> > > > was being reborn into a brand new life.
> > > >
> > > > ~ Page 186.
> > > >
> > > > Ill-prepared, possessive, momentarily
> > envious,
> > > > negative side of his own situation, cranky,
> > > > irritable, downright unpleasant. Squandered
> > his
> > > > capital helping others, and some innuendo
> > > > regarding Swami Chinmaya's life near ending
> > and
> > > > Swartz' being young. I honestly am laughing
> > out
> > > > loud at what is being said by a student
> about
> > > one
> > > > of the most important teachers for
> centuries
> > As
> > > it
> > > > says in scripture, fools!
> > > >
> > > > lmao!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The free person, enlightened, won't be
> > bothered
> > > > about coming to the twilight years of life.
> > > What
> > > > Swartz wrote is so inaccurate, only someone
> > > > pretending to be that would say such a
> > > schoolboy
> > > > error.
> > >
> > > It doesn't bother me. I think
> > you
> > > should stop trying to dig for things to get
> mad
> > at
> > > James Swartz about. Perhaps you're jealous
> > that
> > > he had such a close relationship with Swami
> > > Chinmayananda. You seem to think that both
> > Swami
> > > Chinmayananda and James should be superhuman
> or
> > > something.

> >
> >
> > You asked for examples of Swartz putting people
> > down. I start with his own Guru. You by-pass
> that,
> > makes it stupid even asking me who then, doesnt
> > it?
>
> James has shown nothing but deep
> respect for Swami Chinmayananda. Big deal if he
> was expressing some thoughts that he had flash
> through his mind.

Yes, I expected you to by-pass and ignore the evidence I provided. And, it would be fair to say that it was more than 'flashes' in his mind. Let's get real, he wrote the book maybe 30 or 40 years later, he hardly going to remember 'flashes'. You fail again.


Quote
Allowance
>
> >
> > Jealous? How childish of you. Swami Chinmaya
> was
> > dead before I came to Vedanta. And his
> > relationship with Swartz wasn't that special.
> Why
> > do you think the Chinamya Mission isn't
> interested
> > in endorsing Shiningworld....
>
> You're distracting again. People
> can be jealous of other people's experiences
> regardless of the time frame. For example, I
> could be jealous of someone going to a Shakespeare
> play in the 1600s.
>
> Why would the Chinmaya Mission endorse
> Shiningworld? Whoever said it did? I didn't make
> that claim. I've never heard anyone make that
> claim. I don't think James has ever said that the
> Chinmaya Mission has endorsed Shiningworld.
> You're getting off topic again. You can try to
> bury my original simple points all you want, but
> it shows.
>
>

You could be jealous of someone going to see a play in the 1600s? Dont be ridiculous. That example is neurotic.

Regarding the Chinmaya Mission. If James has permission from his Guru to teach, surely there should be some recoqnition. I mean, I have Swami's in my lineage in public videos with me teaching. The fact is that someone at the highest levels of Shiningworld approached both Chinmaya Mission and my lineage, with James Swartz permisson. And both were asked to endorse Swartz and Shiningworld. My lineage ignore the request, and Chinmaya Mission refused point blank. I keep pointing out, only in Shiningworld is SWartz a valid teacher. He isn't outside of it.

Though you're acting quite curious. By your response it is clear that you expect that you would know anything about Swartz. I mean, just cause you've never heard the claim, hardly means anything, right? You're showing how close you are, tut tut. Are you an authority on all James Swartz says and thinks?

Quote
Allowance
> >
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > >
> > > >
> > > > "More a God than a human being", hahaha!
> > > > Yeeeehaaaaa. Well, if he claims it be, it
> > must
> > > be
> > > > true. Sorry, im in stitches again.
> > >
> > > You are easily amused. Instead
> > of
> > > laughing about what you find to be silly, how
> > > about bringing him to justice, if you really
> > > believe he has raped someone.

> >
> >
> >
> > Again, that's not my business. Stop trying to
> > deflect. He's factual & literally showing a god
> > complex here. I expected you to also by-pass
> this.
>
> So says the person who thinks that
> I need to learn certain Vedanta lessons.

There was no mention of you 'needing' it. However, are you saying you have nothing to learn in Vedanta? Even among traditional vedanta teachers, we know we have always things to learn. Even SWami do.



Quote
Allowance

> That doesn't sound so good. You
> owe 4 out of 5 people the money.

It's actually none of your business if I havn't paid a few people back in my life. Who do you think you are actually? The only reason I entertained this was to show SWartz using hyperbole to put someone down imlying they are cheating people. When the reality is quite different.

Quote
Allowance
>
> What about the allegations that you pressured your
> group members into paying you because as a Vedanta
> teacher you were owed the money? Apparently you
> had told them that you didn't want any donations,
> but then you turned on them and tried to
> guilt-trip them into paying you money for your
> teaching, even though you sought out them as
> students, rather than them seeking you.

It is simple, what you have wrote is lies. I am happy to provide the screenshot conversations to back up what im about to say. Lets you and I compare screenshot in what we are both saying here. Deal?

The truth is, I specifically told all students to NOT pay me, for 14 months. I was told by Swami not to do this, but I did anyhow. I would be on call 24 hours a day, and would have even one to ones at 2am my time. I never asked a penny. Then, I used a teaching from a global Vedanta teacher, and suggested people might want to offer the price of a cup of coffee. Or, they could donate by helping me help others on the group. That is very reasonable. It is the only time I ever asked. In over 2 years teaching. I turned on no-one also. A student had a meltdown, in front of Swami in the group, and he was ejected. He then decided to team up with Swartz and post inappropriate message on various vedanta social media. So, you have told lies again. And I can prove it. All of you keep telling lies. You make fools of yourselves. And you are debunked again, and I can prove it.

I also know who you are now. You have been banned on this forum using another account, and now you are trying to disguise your writing style. You're a complete moron.


Quote
Allowance
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > >
> > > > Swartz asks for money for
> > > > his Spanish love nest in the hills in
> > classes.
> > > (I
> > > > keep asking both myself and Swartz' share
> our
> > > > financial records for the last 3 years,
> since
> > > he
> > > > decided to make a 'thing' in regard to
> money
> > > and
> > > > myself).
> > >
> > > That's his business. "Asking"
> > is
> > > different from borrowing and not paying
> > > back.

> > > >
> > > > 2. I keep a very small number of students.
> > >
> > > That might because there
> aren't
> > too
> > > many people that want to be your student.
> From
> > > past messages in this thread, it is apparent
> > that
> > > you were trying to get as many members in
> your
> > > group as possible, encouraging people to
> "like"
> > > your posts, etc. You wanted to attract new
> > > members.

> >
> >
> >
> > Aww bless you, you haven't got a clue.
> Attracting
> > new members, after discussion with my lineage.
> I
> > removed over 550 members only a few months ago.
> > Your information is wrong. Hardly a sign of
> > wanting new members.
>
> Right. So, I'm talking about
> before that. Those 550+ members didn't just come
> out of nowhere. People say that you were
> purposely trying to get new members. I think
> you've even written here that you wanted to boost
> numbers in your group, so didn't even care who
> they were. Didn't you say that the woman that you
> were being sexually inappropriate with and
> "borrowed" money from wasn't a real student of
> yours, that she was just in the group to get the
> numbers higher?
>

I have a dual role as a social media admin and a vedanta teacher. I took Facebook's own social media training, part of that was creating growth. And anyhow, my lineage wants to share Vedanta with as many people as possible. I have it in talks with myself and other SWami, in new projects we are doing. I think you don't even know what you're talking about. If you say I wanted members before, I say so what?

I wasn't sexually inappropriate with the person you are speaking of. Which is why she did not want to go to the police or FAcebook. And it is why I did go the police. Anyone that can think straight can see a massive implication. You're here to troll me, and you don't care about the actual, contextual truth.

Quote
Allowance
> >
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > >
> > > > Swartz
> > > > has created a cult-like 'inner circle'
> around
> > > his
> > > > persona, that is self-evident in class and
> > > openly
> > > > perpetuated by this bulls*** thing his own
> > > > political views are some sign of Vedanta.
> > >
> > > I can see how a lot of people
> > would
> > > like him. His books and satsangs are
> > excellent.
> > > People are allowed to have political views
> that
> > > you don't hold. Why get triggered by
> > it?

> > > >
> > > > Go on my profile on facebook, check the
> > second
> > > > post. That publication in a magazine of my
> > own
> > > > political views, has not impacted my role
> as
> > a
> > > > teacher in one of the worlds most respected
> > > > lineages. Tis my personal business, not to
> be
> > > > controlled by others. Only cult-like
> > 'masters'
> > > try
> > > > to control and coerce the democratic views
> of
> > > free
> > > > citizens through psuedo-spiritual
> teachings.
> > >
> > > I've read and listened to a
> lot
> > of
> > > what James Swartz has said, but I've never
> seen
> > > any controlling and coercing political views.
> > In
> > > fact, that statement seems ridiculous to
> > > me.

> >
> >
> >
> > Really, hahaha. They've just fired a teacher
> > recently over this. He has the same views
> > politically as me. And they've posted how can
> you
> > teach or be enlightened and have those views.
> My
> > lineage aint got issues. Only the almighty
> Swartz
> > do. I expected you to by-pass this also.
>
> Perhaps his particular views were
> not in line with Vedanta. Anyway, James obviously
> has the right to let go teachers he doesn't think
> are appropriate. Who are you to say who should
> stay in Shiningworld and who shouldn't?

Yes, the Swartz views are not in line with Vedanta. They publicly claimed the former teacher cant have those political views and be able to do what is needed in Vedanta. My public showing of how the exact same views dont negatively impact me, debunks once more, that Swartz' dont know what they're talking about. If you got a different political opinion, and try to talk with them, they go nuts and throw you out. I mean, how many different things, from their own mouths, needs to be shown? You don't care though, you're a troll. And you and Swartz' have been debunked. Again.


Quote
Allowance
> >
> >
> >
Quote
Allowance
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps it is just me, but an innocent
> person
> > > > would do their very best to bring any
> > > allegations
> > > > to the authorities themselves, and
> > also
> > > > legally challenge whatever way possible.
> Like
> > I
> > > > have. Like he hasn't. There
> is
> > no
> > > > point in debating someone who has brought
> > > > allegations (about themselves) to the
> police
> > of
> > > > their own accord, while you defend someone
> > who
> > > > hasnt. Twilight zone time again.
> > >
> > > Well, if you're innocent of
> > > something, there isn't really a reason to go
> > out
> > > of your way to prove so. Maybe it's
> important
> > to
> > > you to clear your name of some of the
> > allegations
> > > against you because you already had a bad
> name.
> > >
> > > If you keep on bringing up allegations
> against
> > > someone, that might be a sign that you are
> > guilty
> > > of something. There are several allegations
> > out
> > > there against you. For example, you have
> sent
> > > nude photos of yourself to members of your
> > Vedanta
> > > Facebook group. You have "borrowed" money
> from
> > > some of those members and not paid them back.
> > You
> > > have been renounced by a swami of the lineage
> > that
> > > you associate with. Another swami that you
> > > claimed to be your guru stated that he didn't
> > know
> > > you.
> > >
> > > Maybe because of all of these allegations
> > against
> > > yourself, you feel it necessary to project
> onto
> > > James Swartz.
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > I've let the police know everything that was
> said
> > about me, I had to because of what I was
> > reporting. Since no action has been took
> against
> > me anywhere after my reporting, there's a big
> > implication there.
> >
> > Regarding Swami. Private message me who said
> this
> > and in what context. I've already explained the
> > head Ashram in India has gave me permission to
> > teach months ago. I've also already explained
> that
> > SWami are on public video endorsing their
> students
> > to come to my classes. That is that.
> >
> > Im in a rush. Let's carry this on in a bit. But
> > please, directly interact with me. if you
> simply
> > make claims and don't interact with my
> responses
> > and yet make more claims, that is trolling.
>
> Swami Turiya Chaitanya renounced
> you on your Facebook group. He was doing a few
> lessons for members of your group, then left.
>
> You're not going to talk your way out of these
> issues.

I said to message me in private. Like I told the other troll account, Rv, stop mentioning Swami's names here. They don't want that. Have some respect. Two people are allowed to have a difference of opinion. I could explain and screenshot, but out of respect I wont. Suffice to say, a dozen students were gave screenshots at the time. You are waaay out of the loop with your gossip.

However, what if myself and another teacher part ways, what do you think it means? Nothing. No single SWami can take me out of the lineage. My lineage is not like Shiningworld, where I can be ejected like that. Once again, you don't know what youre talking about. You speak of something over 2 years ago, silly person. I have permission from multiple places, as recent as yesterday, in writing. There are no issues. Like my main ashram in India says, if someone doesnt recoqnise me as a teacher, they are free to do so. Butm they go on, I am allowed to teach in the lineage. That is final.


Quote
Allowance
>
> Keep it simple. Stop trying to distract. I only
> had 3 points with you:
>
> 1. You refered to me as "you people", as if I am
> part of some group, which I am not.
>
> 2. You said that James Swartz is my master, and
> he's not.
>
> 3. You said that James puts everyone down. He
> elevates many people. He has shown incredible
> respect for, and has turned many people on to,
> Swami Chinmayananda, Swami Dayananda, and others.
>
>
> So don't go on and on about how you've talked to
> the police. I have no interest in that. Don't go
> on and on about how James has said something bad
> about you. So have others, and you've said plenty
> of bad things about James.
>
> Enough already. If James has hurt you so badly,
> then sue him.
>

Amazing. You dont think its relevant that ive been accused of an illegal act, and that it was me who let the police know what was being said about me? Unbelievable. You know you're coming across as a Buffoon, right? Hahahhaa.


Perhaps this is the best troll comment from you. You felt it fine to lay what was said to me here. But you dont like that I went to the police. The lady never, Swartz never, but I did. The police would never have known only for me. I told them her name, her location, her facebook id, her email. I showed them all things said about me, including Shiningworld articles. I explained everything, and through 5 phone calls, I asked them to check Facebook servers. When they last rang they were not interested in this, they only wanted to know was Swartz still posting those lies. I gave police all the evidence from both sides, when no-one else put their money where there mouth was. It is beyond comprehension that a guilt person would do this. So, once again, you fail, and the SWartz failed.

That is finally that. I have grown tired of repeating all those things and grown tired of offering the evidence. I've only one more thing to say.

I don't mind debating online, but the timing isn't great. My 19 year old daughter died suddenly, around 3 weeks ago. Since then, I went into a semi retreat. After some talks with my Guru & lineage, I have decided to go fully into personal retreat. I won't be active online at all. My lineage supports this, and has told me yesterday when I feel it, to come back and I can start teaching right away. So, you and others can flame and troll all you want, you've been consistently debunked here, and your master, the god-king Swartz and his wife has been debunked and exposed as a nasty vindictive liar, who tries to control students.

I'm going to enjoy my own self.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2021 01:24PM by earthquake.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Dis-illusioned ()
Date: February 19, 2021 04:51PM

Z



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2021 04:53PM by Dis-illusioned.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Dis-illusioned ()
Date: February 19, 2021 04:54PM

I see that reply is better than just posting. I posted above, but you may not see it as your post is so long.

I’ve only just seen that you’ve had a tragedy in your family. Sorry to hear that. Wise not to be putting energy into this pointless debate here.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2021 04:58PM by Dis-illusioned.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Valma ()
Date: February 19, 2021 05:25PM

Dis-illusioned Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see that reply is better than just posting. I
> posted above, but you may not see it as your post
> is so long.
>
> I’ve only just seen that you’ve had a tragedy in
> your family. Sorry to hear that. Wise not to be
> putting energy into this pointless debate here.

Indeed, and let us hope that the shape-shifter whomever who keeps on attacking here Earthquake has the decency to stop it now. There is abundance of details, testimonials and personal experiences for anyone new finding this thread to make their own opinion and decide for themselves on the subject of this thread:James Swartz - What is the Truth?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Allowance ()
Date: February 19, 2021 06:55PM

Purpose of This Thread

The title of this thread is “James Swartz—What is the Truth?”
It was started by the user Traveler99 on May 9, 2019, close to two years ago.
I believe that the purpose of this thread is to determine whether or not James Swartz is a cult leader, and to know what is true and not true about him.
I assume that knowing these things is for the benefit of anyone that may get involved with him in any way.


Me and My Intentions

I am also an anonymous user on this forum. I have enjoyed James Swartz’ books, videos, and other writings. I have also been one of many members of a certain Vedanta-related Facebook group run by someone who has contributed to this thread under the user name of “earthquake”.

Because of my involvement with these two people, this thread interests me. Personally, I have benefited from my association with both people, however I have only had positive experiences with James Swartz. I can’t say the same about “earthquake”.

Reading through posts in this forum, I have been surprised by claims made by various people. I would like to address statements in this particular thread which are not conducive to the purpose of this thread.


What I Have to Say

From this site: “This forum was established for the purpose of allowing those with concerns about certain groups, leaders and designated topics to express and address those concerns.”

I am glad that people are expressing their concerns about James Swartz and others here.
I’ve noticed that some contributors to this thread have been labeled “trolls”, while others haven’t, when addressing concerns about James Swartz (JS). People saying negative things about JS have not been called trolls, while people saying positive things about him have. It seems that some users have even been banned from posting. I haven’t seen any of the users that have said positive things about JS prevent others from expressing their concerns, but I have seen several anti-JS users ridicule others and even call them JS.

Recently, I was called James Swartz by Traveler99. It is untrue that I am JS, so why say so? At least say something like, “I really think you are JS.” You can’t just say I am JS.
There are numerous instances of users in this thread calling other users James Swartz. They are not simply implying that they think the user might be JS, but flat-out calling the person JS. I’m not sure why these posts are allowed.

One of the rules of this site is: “Don't post false statements, contrived fiction, deliberately misleading statements, obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful and/or threatening comments, which may violate any laws.”

It is hard to know what is contrived, and what isn’t. The whole thread starts talking about an e-book entitled "Guru? The Story of Heather". I have downloaded and read this book. On the front cover it says that it is “Allegation Based ‘Fiction’” and is written by Devon Adler. Throughout these posts, the allegations in this book are taken as truth about James Swartz by Traveler99 and other members. For me, if a book is called “fiction”, then it is not the truth.

Regarding not posting false statements, is it not a false statement to call people JS who are not JS? As I mentioned, several users have called other users here JS. For example, Traveler99 wrote that “The Bitch Is Back And too cowardly to admit it. Heather's right with her poem. Russian Fatima, as written in the last post, is definitely James Swartz.” This violates the rules of posting false statements and being vulgar. He or she has no idea that a particular user is JS or not. This is quite salient.

Here is another vulgar statement made by Traveler99, where he manages to put down two people: ““When I first saw a post by Aenas (there are now two by this person) I thought, "Is that supposed to be Aeneas, the Trojan hero, or Anus, as in butthole?" Reading the first post, it became clear that the person was either James Swartz himself or someone inexperienced enough, and deluded enough, to think James Swartz had something worthwhile to teach. (That is, this person might be similar to Darryl "Daz" Snaychuk in thinking that he knows something when really all it seems he understands is the teachings of James Swartz, which in the spiritual world is like being a one-legged man in a butt-kicking context.)” It seems quite misleading to me that Traveler99 calls this person JS or deluded. If we’re looking for truth, we need to stick to facts.

It also doesn’t seem appropriate to me when some users demean or otherwise ridicule other users in this thread. For example, earthquake is quoted saying the following statements to various users: ““It's really cute that you have now went away and got some help The posting flow is different from you. What we are looking here is to get their attention. We're really happy at this.”, “I'm rolling my eyes and laughing. Amateur hour is here.”, “Either I am blind or you are nuts.”, “What are earth are you asking this for, are you deranged?”, …

And just recently, to me, he has said, “ I can tell we are entering the twilight zone with you people again...Though your master took much relish...It's not slander, it's libel. I thought you would have known the difference, since you like writing…”

Earthquake lumps me in with “you people”, however I have no idea what group of people he is talking about. I am here writing as an individual. He says that JS is my “master”. As an individual, I have no master, particularly in the realm of spiritual teachers. I am not an agent of JS or his organization, ShiningWorld. He also claims that I like writing, but I have only written a small fraction in this thread compared to him.

Also, under the stated rules on the Cult Education Institute website, “Any person that is here to cause trouble, start arguments and/or intimidate people, will be banned.” To me, earthquake’s belittling of other users is intimidation.

What I’m curious about too, and it seems that nobody’s really brought it up, is that there is a rule that “The purpose of this message board is not to promote a specific religious and/or political viewpoint. Don't use it to preach or proselytize.”

Throughout this thread, earthquake consistently promotes “traditional” Vedanta and that he is a verified teacher of it, preaching that James Swartz doesn’t fit into his (earthquake’s) particular lineage of advaita vedanta. Even though this thread is supposed to be about JS, there are numerous posts by earthquake getting way off topic, just talking about the particular religious/spiritual viewpoint he is interested in and identifies with. In fact, he implies that JS is unqualified as a teacher because he doesn’t fall squarely into this lineage.

I also think that we have to be really careful with this thread. It is one of the most popular threads in the "Cults," Sects, and "New Religious Movements" section of the message board. It is clearly dominated by the users Traveler99 and earthquake, who have each posted numerous posts over the past two years.

In the rules for the message board, it also states that “Each thread of discussion is a place for every participant to freely express his or her ideas, feelings and opinions. Everyone must behave respectfully and with courtesy.”

This seems very sensible to me, so I am concerned about how when users have stated positive things about James Swartz, or questioned (pretty serious) allegations against him, they are ridiculed or written off as simply trolls, apologists, etc. whose “master” is James Swartz. Are we not all free-thinking individuals that post here? Can we not treat each other as such?

For a forum apparently dedicated to finding out the truth, I think it’s vital that people examine their intentions and logic before writing anything. Kindness might also be appreciated.

My impression from this entire thread is that questioning anything negative said about James Swartz, his wife, or his organization is frowned upon, to say the least. I don’t think that’s healthy in the pursuit of truth.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Dis-illusioned ()
Date: February 19, 2021 08:09PM

I don’t see anything in the above post by the character Allowance, that really addresses the facts which many people who’ve participated on this thread (besides Traveller and Earthquake) have raised, regarding the various ways in which James has behaved objectionably, and contrary to dharma.

Whatever the rules of the forum itself may be, that is something to take up with the owners of the forum. Traveller and Earthquake don’t own it, or manage it. It’s simply a vehicle, and a tool.

The flavour of the long personal rambles on here, that repeat and repeat, aren’t particularly relevant or readable, and this topic on the forum has in many ways, devolved into a place for James to argue back and forth with Traveller and Earthquake. I don’t know to what extent that serves anyone.

However, I know first hand - from James, in correspondence to me - that he reads the posts here. He knows who I am in this forum, and he threatened me to stop engaging here. I can show those emails to anyone who wishes to see them.

I also recognise through things said, both here, and on his website, that it is James engaging here.

That he does so, leads him to have naturally become prime suspect when any new user pops up, doing exactly what James does in his private satsangs, which is to respond line by line or section by section, to correspondence. He uses contrasting colours or text, to highlight his response throughout the body of someone else’s text - just as Allowance did. That is how he writes and replies.

I have no doubt that that is a James signature style, and probably one that Sundari will have adopted or used as well.

Secondly, I cannot think of any of James’s followers who would be so invested in the saga’s of James’ personal life, or his personal gripes with people who speak out against him - enough to come on here and debate the sordid details over and over again, in defence of James’s “reputation.”

I’ve not seen a single credible reason why anyone would do that.

The only person (people) who cares about the details of Traveller and Earthquake’s writings, is/are James, and Sundari.

And why do they care?

Because it’s their daily bread and butter.

Not only that, they know - and probably fear - that there are people who know much more about their dealings and doings, who - if they spoke about what they know, here - would cause far more harm to James’ “reputation.”

I see no other logical or meaningful reason for a “teacher” like James, if he is what he claims to be, to be bothered about this forum.

And why would it bother him as much as it does - if he is the wise and evolved man that he claims to be. He writes on his website, that issues like this should not be taken up - but left to karma. He recently told a black woman that it’s a shame she was born a woman - and black at that - but that’s just life. “Get over your lot in life” (basically.) “Leave your lot in life to Isvara,” he said. “Such things should not disturb your mind.” (I paraphrase)

How utterly inappropriate, and contradictory, considering how much James cares about this forum!

James bothered to write to me to complain about this forum - and yet he tells a woman who was sexually assaulted as a child, that it’s inconsequential, and to not make an identity out of her past.

How does the blatant contradiction in what James says, and does, add up?

It adds up, because James is not who he claims to be.

Until I see anything that contradicts these clearly evident issues, I have no doubt that the characters I’ve seen engaging in defence of James on here, are fictional characters, just as many of the satsangs on Shiningworld, are also fictional - and writtten by James himself.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2021 08:13PM by Dis-illusioned.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Traveler99 ()
Date: February 20, 2021 02:51AM

Yes, Yes, Yes...

Dis-Illusioned is correct.


This thread is about exactly what it says, "James Swartz--What is the Truth?"

It's not about Earthquake or me winning debates with Swartz or his clones.
It's about the truth about Swartz, with, to me, always a primary focus being about what happened to Heather. After all, it is what Swartz did to her that started this whole "investigation" of James Swartz back in 2017.

I, Traveler99, am largely irrelevant to this. I'd like to be less involved than I am, but at times I am asked, "Why did you start this thread?", "Why do you loathe Swartz so much?", or similar questions, and then I do answer.

Also, I wish for all to realize that the assertions I make are not flippant or ill-founded--they are based on eye-witness (or my personal) reports of Swartz's own behavior and words, written and spoken.

Other than that, I am not the focus, nor do I wish to be.

That other persons out there scare the excrement out of James and his spouse is no surprise. Luckily for them, most persons who discover the truth about them, and leave, do so with a sense of finality.

It's almost like the persons who leave Shining World flush the toilet to rid themselves of the fecal waste that is James and Sundari's "teachings" and doings, and as we do with emptying toilets, we don't look back.

If they did, and if they wrote about their experiences and what they know of "Shining World," then Swartz and Sundari's careers as "making a good living off of their gig as spiritual teachers" would certainly be totally ended.

What Heather, the book, and this forum has done to reveal the truth about James Swartz is horrible enough for him, but if everyone who knew about him weighed in-- Whoa!

That thought, again, truly petrifies the fake guru and his wife.

*


Dis-Illusioned, I for one very much appreciate your well-considered Post(s).

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: February 21, 2021 02:18AM

Thank you those who sent wishes in public and private.





Generally, myself and a few others have always had the idea of interacting with the SWartz or the close Shiningworld members. I openly spoke bout that a long time ago on this topic. Eventually more and more accounts kept coming on since.

Quite early on it was saw that when the swartzohphile accounts came on, they refused to directly addresss salient points, and refused to look at evidence to prove swartz' lie (and their accounts on here). They would hop from one topic to the next with no discussing. It is their tactic of constant hoping that has made thing seem rambling at times.

It's always been the idea to directly interact with these Swartzophile accounts, as there was no other way to publicly show what kind of people they are. To stand ones ground, and constantly offer evidence to show they are liars, only to have those accounts constantly not want to see the evidence, has been the whole idea for me. Not to give an inch, but to expose the lack of nobility. A noble person would view any freely offered evidence and admit they are wrong. For me, it is preferable 1000 accounts come on here to expose themselves, as opposed to one. So, I willingly shared my time to do this.

Yes, by it's nature to stand your ground can be repetitive if turns are being took in accounts to attack the same way. However, this has also been deliberately done for SEO (search engine optimising). This topic is ranking high, in google listing for SWartz. First page listings. This is because of keyword density, and constant activity. The idea has been to offer this topic to as wide an audience as possible, and that has worked extremely well also.


In the failure of the latest account, 'Allowance' to make any credible impact, they switch tactics and are now openly trying to get Traveller and myself moderated. So as to not jump on their bandwagon, lets leave the moderation to the moderators. It's an idea. My assumption is that the admin know what they are doing, and I've saw them moderating even in this topic before.

If a person not longer wants to see repetitive attacks being defended, there is the ability to unsubscribe from the topic, or simply don't click on it, :). But, a person should feel comfortable defending themselves anytime or indeed, everytime they are attacked on an online platform. We must keep in mind, the Swartz' want such attacks. They have no right to reply on shiningworld satsang. Providing there is no moderating, members must surely feel comfortable defending multiples attacks on themselves. Even if it is reptitition. It's their own call.

This topic has to be a safe place not only for whistlblowers, but for previous whislteblowers to feel able and comfortable defending themselves as they see fit. :) .

All the best guys,

Rob

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: earthquake ()
Date: February 23, 2021 09:18AM

I've only had a few days retreat, I've things to do online with Swami, which is fine :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Allowance...


Quote
!Allowance"
I have also been one of many members of
> a certain Vedanta-related Facebook group run by
> someone who has contributed to this thread under
> the user name of “earthquake”.
>
> Because of my involvement with these two people,
> this thread interests me. Personally, I have
> benefited from my association with both people,
> however I have only had positive experiences with
> James Swartz. I can’t say the same about
> “earthquake”.

A useless assertion about a forum member. Unless, it is quantified.

Gaslighting is where one person or group of people sublty or overtly try to sow seeds of doubt targeting people of groups. You have begun in this post with this above claim.

The other point is that it's a Vedanta group. Not 'Vedanta-related'. Shiningworld is Vedanta-RELATED. My group is a traditional vedanta group with both myself and resident Swami teaching using our lineage name. This is another sowing seed of doubt, gaslighting, which fails as neither myself nor the resident Swami are 'Vedanta-related' teachers. We are Vedanta teachers. The group is endorsed by who is present from the lineage.

Shiningworld are masters of gaslighting, and it can be subtle. Your post is one such gaslighting piece, and i'll show why here.


Quote
Allowance
>
> I am glad that people are expressing their
> concerns about James Swartz and others here.

Really? You do know that isn't credible? The reason is that for someone who says they are 'glad' that people are expressing concerns about James Swartz, you've already spent a noticeable amount of time challenging what has been said...


...Without taking up multiple offers of both SWartz own emails and online police reporting, to show how the Swartz' post lies, yet still being a mouthpiece for whatever they officially post. This is not the conduct of someone 'glad' people are expressing concerns about SWartz. It is the conduct of a servant, or sub-servient person(s) that are not interested in discovering the truth, merely in propogating lies.

It has always been known that the SWartz' and whoever makes these account here, would never want to see the SWartz' own emails that prove they post lies about others. It is why it has been constantly offered to all of these accounts. The point has been proved by around half a dozen Swartophile accounts that have came on and been a mouthpiece for the SWartz' lies, while refusing to view the independent evidence that shows they are lieing. This is Gmail emails from the SWartz' themselves, and a local online police report I myself have made about things.


Quote
Allowance
> I’ve noticed that some contributors to this thread
> have been labelled “trolls”, while others haven’t,
> when addressing concerns about James Swartz (JS).
> People saying negative things about JS have not
> been called trolls, while people saying positive
> things about him have.


You challenged multiple things I reveal about the Swartz (proved in their own emails), and you do not look at the evidence.

You repeat assertions that I committed an illegal act, yet you refuse to look at my online police report. In fact, you say you do not want to know.

You accuse me of abusing my students in regard to money yet you refuse to take up my challenge to share screenshots of the actual conversations you and I both claim took place. You know that my students that were there, they read what I write here? Did you know that?


At this point your credibility is debunked. Why are you here then? To gaslight and try to cause trouble. This isn't any ordinary forum, this is the lion den, and you were always going to be transparent.


Quote
Allowance
> It also doesn’t seem appropriate to me when some
> users demean or otherwise ridicule other users in
> this thread. For example, earthquake is quoted
> saying the following statements to various users:
> ““It's really cute that you have now went away and
> got some help The posting flow is different from
> you. What we are looking here is to get their
> attention. We're really happy at this.”, “I'm
> rolling my eyes and laughing. Amateur hour is
> here.”, “Either I am blind or you are nuts.”,
> “What are earth are you asking this for, are you
> deranged?”, …
>
> And just recently, to me, he has said, “ I can
> tell we are entering the twilight zone with you
> people again...Though your master took much
> relish...It's not slander, it's libel. I thought
> you would have known the difference, since you
> like writing…”

In this attempt at gaslighting you are omitting vast context. The reason why such comments are made are in response to debunked lies and assertions made about me, that are infinitely more negative that what I have ever gave in response to the few Swartzophile accounts that came on here to challenge me. There is no point in directly interacting with me, if when I stick my tongue out at you in response to your lies, you throw your rattle out of the pram.

The other important context that should be reminded in some of those quoted comments, is that as a former member of staff I know for a fact that Shiningworld inner circle wil co-ordinate responses online. Often we will not be talking to one person. It will be one person posting, but the accumulated effort of the SWartz' and others. We can call them 'legion'. In this manner, I will say to Traveller99 and the others here, that more often than not they are likely right when they accuse accounts of being Swartz. The God-king will be influencing responses often.


Quote
Allowance
> Earthquake lumps me in with “you people”, however
> I have no idea what group of people he is talking
> about. I am here writing as an individual. He
> says that JS is my “master”. As an individual, I
> have no master, particularly in the realm of
> spiritual teachers. I am not an agent of JS or
> his organization, ShiningWorld. He also claims
> that I like writing, but I have only written a
> small fraction in this thread compared to him.


You know exactly who I am talking about by 'you people'. Everyone reading knows. Why begin a whole spiel starting with a lie. It is ridiculous. But it is gaslighting. Attempting once again to sow seeds of doubt that I, a major contributor to this thread, is not posting under rules.

You post like the rest of those people. You people come on here with different accounts, and sometimes the writing style changes but that main thrust does not.


Quote
Allowance
> Also, under the stated rules on the Cult Education
> Institute website, “Any person that is here to
> cause trouble, start arguments and/or intimidate
> people, will be banned.” To me, earthquake’s
> belittling of other users is intimidation.

if you are not an agent of SWartz as you've just wrote above, what gives you the right to speak for 'others users' that support Swartz' here? By placing yourself as the spokesperson for those 'other users' you implicate yourself with 'you people.


Quote
Allowance
>
> What I’m curious about too, and it seems that
> nobody’s really brought it up, is that there is a
> rule that “The purpose of this message board is
> not to promote a specific religious and/or
> political viewpoint. Don't use it to preach or
> proselytize.”
>
> Throughout this thread, earthquake consistently
> promotes “traditional” Vedanta and that he is a
> verified teacher of it, preaching that James
> Swartz doesn’t fit into his (earthquake’s)
> particular lineage of advaita vedanta.

There is no 'promotion' of anything that is religious. There is me, teacher of traditional vedanta, not anonymous, who shows that what Swartz teaches isn't what he claims it to be. And that, what he teaches controls, rather than free people. That is the context of why Vedanta has been mentioned. It has been very effective in informing people of the difference between the real deal and not.

The forum owner himself posted in this topic sharing how they view a Swami in another lineage as the real deal. A view I share with him also.
Quote
Allowance
Even
> though this thread is supposed to be about JS,
> there are numerous posts by earthquake getting way
> off topic, just talking about the particular
> religious/spiritual viewpoint he is interested in
> and identifies with. In fact, he implies that JS
> is unqualified as a teacher because he doesn’t
> fall squarely into this lineage.

That is another nice attempt as gaslighting, but it is not true at all. Every single time I have spoke about Vedanta has been in context of a full piece of writing that discredits the Swartz'. One only has to look at the previous and up-coming paragraphs in each time I speak of Vedanta, to show this. That's another epic fail Allowance.

There has also been absolutely no assertion nor implication that Swartz is not a valid teacher because he doesn't fall into my lineage. I noticed what you are doing here, all of you keep trying to rewrite history. He is not a valid teacher of vedanta as he does not teach in the traditional manner. By the words of Shiningworld website, never mind his actions, this is proved.

And anyhow, are you complaining about me going off-topic here, while you ignore viewing the evidence of SWartz# own emails proving they posted lies about me months ago? Hardly a salient point in regard to the truth. It's silly-billy time again, isn 't it...


Quote
Allowance
> I also think that we have to be really careful
> with this thread. It is one of the most popular
> threads in the "Cults," Sects, and "New Religious
> Movements" section of the message board. It is
> clearly dominated by the users Traveler99 and
> earthquake, who have each posted numerous posts
> over the past two years.


New information has been staggered out over the course of time, and it is intended that this will continue to be the case. It's popular, and that is only going to grow.

Quote
Allowance
> For a forum apparently dedicated to finding out
> the truth, I think it’s vital that people examine
> their intentions and logic before writing
> anything. Kindness might also be appreciated.
>
> My impression from this entire thread is that
> questioning anything negative said about James
> Swartz, his wife, or his organization is frowned
> upon, to say the least. I don’t think that’s
> healthy in the pursuit of truth.

"A forum apparently dedicated to finding out the truth"...

You close by gaslighting of the forum itself. You are not interested in the truth, you've already shown this, so why even try to imply what the forum apparently or not may be interested in. You're credibility was non-existent from the start for reasons mentioned above. This utterly transparent attempt at causing a death blow to silence the activity of this thread, another masterpiece by the masters of gaslighting and by-passing = Swartz' & groupies.

What is common in all the Swartzophile accounts that come on here is that you repeat the gaslighting and abuse of Swartz. You are offered evidence and you by-pass that. Then you carry on gaslighting whistleblowers. You people show all the same modus operandi in all these accounts.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: James Swartz—What is the Truth?
Posted by: Traveler99 ()
Date: February 24, 2021 02:42AM

Do you doubt HEATHER's story?

Do you know someone who does?

If so, I recommend watching

"THE KEEPERS"

on NetFlix.


OMG. I should have seen this program years ago when it first came out.

As I watched the first few of the seven episodes of "The Keepers" on Netflix I kept thinking,

"That's what Heather experienced with Swartz!"

"Oh, no! Those poor girls--they experienced collectively what Swartz did to Heather!"

Hypnotism. Manipulation. Mind-Screwing. Drugged drinks. "Time Lost"-- hours gone when the girl "wakes up." Person in spiritually powerful position using his authority to justify his actions. Rape after rape after rape. For some of the girls, things occurred that were so horrible that they didn't remember anything specific for decades.

These stories both took place over forty years ago. One was on the west coast, and did not end up with a murder (or two), and the other was on the East Coast, and a nun who tried to stop the Priest's crimes was sexually assaulted and had her skull caved in. (Swartz's first wife, as far as we know, didn't end up dead. She was "only" driven insane by what she experienced with her husband. Then James, by his account, with his usual empathy and caring, dumped her and took off.)

Watch this program. Do you think these women are lying?

Read, or re-read, Guru? The Story of Heather while keeping in mind the women in "The Keepers."

Then, please, go back to the original questions, and rephrase them.

"After watching "The Keepers"
and comparing it to Heather's account
of the horrors she experienced with James Swartz,
is there really any doubt left?"

Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 58 of 66


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.