(Sections with ">" are written by "earthquake"/Rob Harrison)
> It's really appreciated that you've bumped this
> topic up to the top again. Everytime you people
> come on here with your foolish posts you bring
> this topic to the forum's top, and also help to
> perpetuate the search engine saturation.
Yes, it's appreciated by me too. It's interesting that you call my posts "foolish". I guess if pointing out lies is "foolish", then I have been foolish. However, what does concern me though is how many more people you will scam.
> > Where in the Upanishads or any other Vedanta
> > scripture does it mention sending nude photos
> > yourself to students as part of the teaching
> > methodology?
> What are earth are you asking this for, are you
No, I'm not deranged. Are you trying to gaslight me like you have with other people? (To gaslight means to manipulate (someone) by psychological means into doubting their own sanity. You were going on about how a teacher should act. I question your actions as a teacher. It's as simple as that.
> Once again, you don't know what you're talking
> about in regard to Vedanta. It's the Shiningworld
> position that a person doesn't change Gurus. They
> teach that to try to hold onto people. However, in
> actual Vedanta it is not only normal it is
> encouraged to have different guru's.
I did NOT say there was anything wrong with having several gurus. I was simply pointing out that when you talk about your guru, people don't know who you are talking about. We don't know your latest guru, and your past gurus have denounced you.
> It's not appropriate for you to use specific
> Swami's names to try to cause issues.
You claim to like facts. I gave facts. If I just wrote "some guru" then how could anyone verify anything? I haven't said anything negative about those swamis.
> Don't be so silly. Even jnani would very rarely
> claim to be jnani.
I never said otherwise.
> You need to really be taught
"Properly" would mean not by you, a criminal who steals money and makes sexual advances on his students.
> All you need to know is that i've been told in
> writing numerous times I can teach unsupervised.
Wow. Good for you.
> it's clear you don't even have a fundamental
> understanding of Vedanta.
Sorry, but you're not one to judge, Robert.
> You simply do not know better than my
I never said I did. Again, you're putting words in my mouth.
> I know that every time I
> post here myself, the view counts goes into triple
> figures alone. Not to mind any other notable
> posting here.
You're really obsessed with attention. You're also very quick at finding anything that anyone dare say negative about you.
> Do you not understand that members here and other
> viewing this topic are critical thinkers? That
> Swartz has outed himself, and keeps doing so, to
> show how nasty and materialistic he is. They've
> been trying to gaslight me, that is all.
I don't think you understand the definition of "gaslight", or think it magically doesn't apply to yourself, just others. I posted the definition above. I would hope that there are critical thinkers here. The more critical, the better.
> Okay, first it was my 'schlong' as was published
> in Shiningworld, now it's my bare ass. Anything
> else? As this is the first time (to my mind) the
> bare ass thing has been said.
You're playing with words. You have posted naked photos of yourself to "your students". This is an established fact. You are fond of all of your screenshots that you think will save you from disgrace, but what if other people showed screenshots of the things you've sent to them? I don't think you would like that very much.
> I haven't sent student photos of my ass, or of
> anything else to students.
You're lying, Robert/Rob/Dwayne/Earthquake/Whatever name you like to use.
> Ask the student to
> complain to me directly. To my memory not one
> student has ever said that about me.
Again, that's a lie. I also find it interesting that you ask students to complain to you directly (they have), yet you think that when someone has a major allegation against someone, it's OK if they don't complain directly to them.
> No money has been stole. In fact, as I wrote
> before, I spoke to police about one loan, and they
> did give me advice.
Why would the police be talking to you about a loan? I don't know if you're just trying to fool others, or if you're in denial, but you have "borrowed" money from several people (including your students) over the past couple of years that you said you would pay back, but never did.
> Anyhow, I see it's now sending photos to
> vulnerable people. I don't know who you could be
> alluding do. I'm thinking you don't have a clue
> what you're talking about.
I think you know what you've sent (or were you inebriated at the time?). Anyway, people have raised these issues with you. Don't pretend otherwise.
> You people are only interested in trolling.
My biggest concern is saving others from your manipulation, and making sure they aren't misled regarding Vedanta.
> The truth is, that the only effect all of this
> s has had on me was extremely positive.
Good. That's what it's all about.
> Oh, did he now? That's strange, as 'demons' isn't
> really an accurate way to term, if one is in
> Private message me the Swami's name and I shall
> contact him directly to speak to him about this.
> Thank you.
I thought you said it was best to keep specific swamis out of this?
> And what would you know about it? Do you
> understand Vedanta at all? You're so blinded by
> your ego here, you can't see it when Vedanta is
> being shown to you.
Is that how a Vedanta teacher speaks? I know you like to brag about your Vedanta knowledge sometimes, but that's a little unbecoming.
> My lineage says a person is free to not recognise
> me as a teacher if they want. Yet I am a teacher
> in my lineage nonetheless. You don't validate me
> as a teacher, no matter what your ego thinks.
> Again, do you not understand how Vedanta works?
> You've no actual valid authority in saying this.
> It's a fool saying it.
It doesn't take a fool to point out lies.
> You tell me. Your master, James Swartz, has been
> making advances to his student, Isabella, for
Good for him. Now they're married. What's your point? I'm pretty sure he wasn't willing to disrupt his teaching every couple of months for the latest woman he was trying to get involved with and move to a different continent for. I'm pretty sure he wasn't sending nude photos of himself to her, particularly if she wasn't interested. James is happily married, but you're just always on the lookout for a woman, unless you've magically changed your ways in the past few months.
Anyway, I hope more people with critical thinking skills come here to read these exchanges.