The invalidation of the work of a Sahaja Yogi at Wikipedia

> --- In, "Violet" > wrote:

Dear All,

Appended is evidence for the record, of the invalidation of the work of a Sahaja Yogi. i believe this yogi is still in the organisation of Sahaja Yoga. Nobody is immune from a minority of so-called yogis who have put themselves over and above approximately 20,000 SYs in the world. These few yogis do not consider the work of individual Sahaja Yogis as valid. They only consider what their few say as valid. There is not even a proper reason given. Shri Mataji said all we yogis are to give Her Message, those who have felt the spiritual vibrations.

A real Sahaja Yogi will not work as you see appended below. It is not in their nature to do so. It is the work of those who don't really believe in Shri Mataji's Word - that the Truth will expose all that is not the truth. Instead, they take it upon themselves to pretend to be the Truth, and in so doing are committing multiple spiritual crimes against humanity, and against fellow Sahaja Yogis.

So this is for the record, for posterity, so they can see what Sahaja Yogis were up against.

regards to all,



Why is this website being used as a source? The link for example, states its origin as being from a "Private archive", nothing else. Unless a good reason is provided to keep this as a source, I will remove it as well as associated content. Sfacets 16:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. If you look at the home page it is clearly an official SY website. [39] : Will Beback : 21:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

And you see this how? By the copyright information? It is obviously a private website. Sfacets 00:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

How do you know that? : Will Beback : 00:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

It is kind of obvious looking at it - have you seen other official websites sporting free counters, using tiled images as background? Sfacets 00:38, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The page says that "all the knowledge, contents, and materials in this website come from and belong to H.H. Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi. Copyright 2001 H.H. Shri Mataji Devi 2001 all rights reserved". Are you contending that there is more than one individual called " H.H. Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi"? : Will Beback : 03:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
No, only that it isn't an official website, and is an unreliable source in this case. Sfacets 03:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

If it is from "H.H. Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi" then it is relevant. You assert that it's unreliable, but there's no evidence of that. : Will Beback : 04:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability This is obviously a Self-published source, and is not reliable, unless it is verified by another source. Sfacets 05:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

If we can prove that the material is self-published and inaccurate then I agree that it would be unreliable,. However I don't see any proof of those assertions. : Will Beback : 22:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not adding the information, or using the source. Please read burden of evidence. You need to provide evidence of the validity of the website as a source. Sfacets 08:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea about all this, but, by curiosity I have check main page of this website, and you discover that it should be a kind of private website, or intranet maybe as a login is requested. Official website are public. So, it is a self-published website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agenor 77 (talk contribs) 08:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I looked this up on one of those doman tools, and it's registered to a "Gian Luca Masciangelo". I don't know if that's person or a company, but its address is in Italy even though its a U.K. domain. By comparison, the "" domain is registered to "LET", a known official SY organization with a suburban London address. (I guess there is more than one entity.) That being the case, I think this "" site looks like an overeager adherent,. Though he copyrights the information in the name of Shri Mataji, I doubt that she actually wrote most of it herself. The incorrect application of copyrights seems to be a common issue with groups like this. I'm sure it's well-intentioned. : Will Beback : 10:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

LET is Life Eternal Trust, the tax-exempt equivalent of VND (created before the term VND was coined). SYogis setting up their own websites was official policy under the Mataji-inspired Project 2800 which tried to drown out critical voices on the Web with a flood of SY sites. See: --Simon D M 11:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

--- In, "sfacets" wrote:
> I would have expected a little understanding from someone who claims
> to be a Sahaja Yogi, and yet to all intents and purposes is siding
> with Simon Montford.
> Are you aware that he is using speeches of Shri Mataji out of
> context to attack not just the organization but also Shri Mataji?
> We need to stand together against this affront.
> Sincerely,
> Sfacets


Would you mind being honest, and telling us who you really are, instead of hiding behind an I.D.?

i have read what Simon D.M. has written, and he is not twisting the facts in this instance, as far as i can see. It is you, Sfacets, that has been evading, and twisting facts. Can't you see what you are doing. Simon is actually behaving himself properly. Just because he is the foe of Shri Mataji, does not mean he cannot do the right thing in some instances, Sfacets. But i see that you are not doing the right thing in the instance listed below.

You cannot play your game with me and say: "We need to stand against this affront". You are a worse foe of Shri Mataji than Simon in a way, because you are a foe "inside the organisation" of Shri Mataji, while Simon is a foe, outside the organisation of Shri Mataji. A foe inside the organisation, is obviously much worse.

A foe who denigrates the spiritual work of other Sahaja Yogis, is much worse.


Re: The invalidation of the work of a Sahaja Yogi at Wikipedia

Hi Sfacets,

Compared to you and Sahajist (John Noyce) Simon is far more honest about his beliefs. But if we compare the damage done to Sahaja Yoga and Shri Mataji's message then i have to say he is 'saintly' compared to you, Sahajist, WCASY, Sir CP, and the entire SY organization. i am comparing a single person against tens of thousands of so-called realized souls participating in, and perpetuating a deliberate and sustained collective deception to keep humanity in the dark about the Comforter sent by Lord Jesus with the message of the Last Judgment. (It is indeed an insult to Her that i am forced to make such a comparison just to make sense to so many SYs.)

i did sent you an email yesterday in response to your appreciating my dossier on Simon. Probably you have overlooked or misunderstood what i think of your activities at Wikipedia. So i will quote what is really important:

"The devil is in the details of sapiental tradition and this Tasmanian Devil John Noyce puts a crown of thorns on Christ's head and whispers "I am the one who keeps deleting the links and am as active as the devil in preventing humanity from receiving your message of the Last Judgment. As Sahajist ... my comments are occasional and always concise, as they are to you now." Yes, we couldn't agree more John."
So you can understand why i have to differentiate you from Simon. i said he is 'saintly' because, unlike both you and John Noyce, he tried to stop the deletion of from Wikipedia. In case you still cannot comprehend me i better add to the above quote:

Sfacets pokes a spear into Christ's abdomen and taunts the Savior: "I am John Noyce's accomplice who also keeps deleting the links and am as active as the devil in preventing humanity from receiving your message of the Last Judgment."

Hope that makes your day Sfacets,


Note: Sfacets, all these posts are being permanently archived at so that future generations will know exactly what transpired during the winter of Shri Mataji's life. As the designated night-soil carrier of Sahaja Yoga i would value your opinion and feedback if i am up to task.
Sahaja Yoga Archives
Shakti/Last Judgment/Qiyamah Archives