JUST ANGER - www.ezboard.com

>

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > Core Issues > JUST ANGER
Page 1 2	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
witness Unregistered User (12/8/01 5:01 pm) Reply	The "Braintrust" Gray Beard, you're paying them an undeserved compliment. Although, having worked with them -- to my sorrow -- I suppose they could legitimately be labeled the Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. If the investigation into who fathered Ben Erskine finally reveals it was indeed Yogananda, don't expect Lauren Landress to release a press statement. Because of the money and copyrights involved, not to mention the scandal, this is one paternity suit that you can expect to get mainstream media converage. And although the relatively small-fry New Times would of course be shouting the vindicating news from the rooftops, proven paternity would give this story the "sexiness" today's mass media demand.
peer345 Unregistered User (12/8/01 5:52 pm) Reply	trust - how much is too much and trust in what exactly? Hello all! Firstly let me say just how wonderful I am finding the discussions on this board - difficult and painful to read but also paradoxically such an enormous relief. I have been scanning the net for just such a forum - so thank you!! All the issues I have read on the net about SRF have bothered me deeply now for the past 18 months - so much so that I finally pulled right away at the beginnning ot the year. This may not seem like long especially given that I had really only gotten involved 18 months before that - but I did get involved very seriously serving a the temple etc!! I know that is nothing compared to committments entered into by others here but it was confusing enough to hurt a great deal. For me what all this Erskine business etc etc boiled down to was just how much trust could I risk giving and what did it mean to risk trust, to experience devotion. As much as I was much inspired by Yogananda I confess to having been daunted by SRF and SRF seemed so insidious in its contamination and deification (seperation/ownersip!!) of Yogananda. It poured what seemed like a fogging syrup on everything and made it hard to feel connected to guru. It did this by taking ultimate control as the only intermediary to Yogananda - loyalty to Yoganada became loyalty to SRF as well and of course Daya Mata, who I have never felt any connection to what so ever. So what then is it to trust. I have now learnt it is to trust oneself and one's experiences and not, I repeat, not to put that trust outside of oneself a SRF demands. I don't want Yogananda to look after me like a parent, I want to achieve self realisation, a total surrender to the divine whole of which I am a part. So, whether or not master fathered a child or didn't shouldn't distract - at least not at that level. The connection with Yogananda as guru can only be in one's heart, that is the spiritual centre of one's being. Thus is the guru synonomous with the space of one's heart - it cannot be other , there can be no seperation here,m it is non-dual. To trust therefore is not to trust outside of one's self but just the opposite, it is to move deeply into one's own interiority to experience one's deep merging with the divine. Yogananda points this way regardless of his potential/probable human failings. I was/am very angry with SRF, I felt/feel deeply betrayed, very very deeply made a fool of. That I even tried to conform myself to their nonsense embarresses me. But I feel I am learning and moving to a better and much stronger place. I now read and compare all kinds of literature and meditation approaches to give me a broad base of positons from which to begin to understand my own experience and more deeply understand what Yogananda talked of. It is clear to me that people really do need to share their experiences, to talk to jointly of their spiritual research/development - to learn how to surrender to who you are with no apology and no guilt. This is what utimately empowers Kriya. Without that surrender it is severely limited in my view and maybe that is SRF's biggest lesson for us - in the clearest way so they show just how limited. If this message is not relevant at this location please move it somewhere more relevant and please excuse any lacks of clarity and displays of confusion. This is my first message and I feel much more deeply about these issues than I have consciously acknowledged to myself recently. peer ps: On a lighter note - who does the matas' special brand of renunciate hairstyle?
witness Unregistered User (12/10/01 7:26 pm) Reply	Making the Cut No, I'm not referring to the above post's very valid question about Faye's "do." I've just come across a large cult-information website which lists SRF, and includes the New Times articles. Some of you may already be familiar with it -- www.rickross.com. It includes this under "Visitor Comments": "Just read 'Return of the Swami' and want to thank you for such an accurate, well meaning and unbiased account of SRF and @#%$. I have been a follower of Paramahansa Yogananda for many years. Yogananda will always be, to me, a great spiritual guru who was and is truly close to God. But if the SRF organization doesn't start practicing what it preaches it will fall along the wayside. We need leaders with moral integrity to replace the now aging ministers, rather than egotistical and naive young men. This particular article has had a great deal to do with bringing about honesty and truth at the Richmond Temple. Jim Rapp, a.k.a. Arjunananda and his new wife are trying to imply that this whole thing never happened. It is refreshing to see the truth in print. If SRF survives should come out of hiding and try honesty on for size. Please, be sure this article stays on the Web." I especially noted in the above "We need leaders with moral integrity.." and thought of a post by Cron (9/6/01, under DEALING WITH MY DOUBTS / DOUBTS) on this board. There Cron says he counseled with one of the direct disciples about the mess at Mt. Washington, and was told "no one up there is acting with integrity. I don't know why," and instructed to "cling to Master, cling to Master" (which means it was Bhaktananda who was the counselor). Amazing, that a devotee has to fear getting a direct disciple into trouble for telling the truth. P.S. I couldn't think of an appropriate spot for this post, so placed it here.
AumBoy Registered User (12/10/01 7:57 pm) Reply	Re: Making the Cut see: pub78.ezboard.com/fsrfwal...D=46.topic
KS Registered User (12/10/01 8:26 pm) Reply	Fear of getting seniors in trouble There is a small group of bad ladies completely in charge. The men, even Anandamoy and Bhaktananda, have zero influence and CAN get into trouble. They are old hands at it and know they have to hold back and watch it. Others have commented on the fact that Brother Bhaktananda has been stuck at Hollywood for 30 years now rather than the bad ladies making use of his obvious wisdom in the operation of the HQ. He, I am sure, does not mind.
Musicman Unregistered User (12/12/01 1:27 pm) Reply	I'm yours (though I'm married) I ran the post below on the Michael Flynn thread in Legal Dept., but it seems to have gone into limbo. I want to make sure you read it. To conclude this preface and in response to your comment above, yes, I gingerly slid off the Yogananda-as-Don Giovanni bandwagon because it's true that we have no definite proof yet. But my gut conviction is that it is true, and perversely enough, I really want it to be true. Then all the pieces will finally fall completely into place, and I can stick SRF where the sun never shines. But I will wait. Here's my earlier post. (How did someone with your incisive intellect and superbly polished prose survive in the acrid anti-intellectual atmosphere of SRF for so long? Boy, would I like to meet you.) Oh, one last thing: here is a guess about a senior monk with a faulty zipper on his pants who is too important to lose: Mitrananda (could charm the socks off of Gloria Steinem). Am I right? I'm not one for fawning adulation, especially in these days when my native cynicism is running a high fever. But I simply must say that Witness is nothing short of spectacular. I hang on every word, sheer manna to me. I quaff the ambrosial nectar of bliss emanating from his/her fingers at the keyboard, like oil from the cask. I bathe in the living waters of wisdom flowing from the wellspring of his/her infinite awareness. I saturate myself with the perfume of his/her faultless insight. I . . . well, you get the idea. Thank Ahura Mazda I still have something to believe in--like, you know, the TRUTH. Bravo/a! Encore, Witness, encore! Fear not the scourge of philistinism lurking on this board, for we, your devoted followers, will ever leap into the fray to defend you (though you obviously don't need much help).
witness Unregistered User (12/13/01 12:00 pm) Reply	And The Fuzzy Pink Panda Prize Goes To... Musicman! (And it would be more than socks that Gloria walked away sans.) Grazie, grazie, mille grazie for the brava. Your timing was perfecto, too, more than you can know. Just as I was beginning to get that old familiar out-on-a-limb-alone feeling, I was lifted up into glory land by your electrifying (to me, anyway) message. I, too, would like to meet, or at least do the cyber-equivalent. There is much more to say about behind-the-scenes matters than I think is appropriate to post on this public forum; therefore, I will try sendng my e-mail address to the all-knowing, all-wise Walrus, in hopes that you can send yours to him/her also. Then Walrus will have my permission to forward my e-address to yours. Hope it works. (Remember those good old pre-web days when one just bumped into someone and got together for coffee?) I do have more to say (surprise, surprise) on this board in reply, but it will have to wait till the end of the day, when I will have finished Christopher Hitchens� latest book, �Letters to a Young Contrarian.� Check it out, fans.
Musicman Unregistered User (12/13/01 3:40 pm) Reply	Om, Walrus In another place I made the following remarks (all this stuff about love children has put me in a sleuthing mood). Hopefully, I will not have compromised your anonymity. The idea about e-mail addresses is great. Hopefully the Great Walrus will grant our request. "Say, while I'm on the subject, I believe my idol Witness is British. The word naivety (used in a post elsewhere) is a British spelling of naivet�. [NB: I just noted "behaviour" as well.] This would also account for the extraordinary literary style of his/her postings, something more typical of them than of us colonials (though we boast some fine writers on this board)." By the way, I will without fail check out Hitch on the Dalai Lama, someone I had hoped was above the sordid muck and primal mud of conventional religiosity, even of the Eastern type. "Contrarian" also sounds like a must-read. Brava again!
Hooting Owl Unregistered User (12/22/01 10:56 am) Reply	Takeover It may sound outrageous, but I had once a terrible suspicion that SRF might have been taken over long ago by an outside force/organization/group that uses the church setup to camouflage its own illegal interests. Even if true, only very few within SRF would have an inkling of the hostage situation. Now, the whole "Fathering" scandal could be seen in a different light....use your imagination. Like a spider that catches its prey in a net and then hollows out the victim, such takeovers end up destroying the essence of an organization they have used effectively for their own ends (money laundering, international money transactions, whatever). Too far fetched?
KS Registered User (12/22/01 11:18 am) Reply	Re: Takeover Pretty out there Hooting... The truth is more boring. A bunch of old ladies who think they are protecting the work from things they don't understand. Add to that some seriously controling and abusive people being protected by the matas and you have our situation. No secret agents and money laundering, just the twisting of an organization that had great promise.
Loreto Unregistered User (12/22/01 11:34 am) Reply	Re: SRF's great promise SRF has had and still has great promise. It's message has spread in all continents around the world, and will continue to do so. In my opinion Master knew very well what he was doing. He put in place people who are protecting the work as you say. He obviously had realization and foresight of the future. If he had put in place idealist dreamers SRF would have flopped. It would have been hijacked by hippie junkies and turned into yet another one of these flakey new age organizations, doing crystals and channeling one year, then building bunkers for nuclear shelter in Oregon or Montana the next, then getting into UFO's, then waiting to hop on the next comet that flies by, committing mass suicide, etc. Master picked the right people to protect his work in order for it to survive.
premdas Registered User (12/22/01 7:44 pm) Reply	Re: SRF's great promise, again Has the promise been fulfilled? Does the leadership honor/respect its own membership, lay & monastic (by the way, I believe membership legally implies voting rights. This is probably why followers are given the status "students".) Loreto, look at the facts/implications throughout this board. There are many sincere stories of disappointment in re: to the behavior and failure of SRF leadership. There are many people on this board who care about SRF but are unwilling to play blind. In the Mahabharata, it is the blind who create the drama by avoiding responsibility for their and their followers actions. Are these instances abberations? Its for you to decide. And if you want to back up your beliefs to convince many readers on the Walrus, give us facts, not generalities. There are too many promises unfulfilled, too many instances of placing importance of the organization over the care and growth of people, in and outside SRF. I see SRF leaders dealing in platitudes, not truths. They exhibit too many circumstances of adharmic actions toward others, especially since fundamental teachings of Master's work is based in Patanjali's sutras. See yamas & niyamas. I, like you, want to believe in the fulfillment of Master's legacy. I just think the current leaders are off target in their personal behavior and are now out of touch. Wish it were'nt so....Peace to you, loreto & blessings in Master
Should Free Registered User (12/22/01 11:57 pm) Reply ezSupporter	To Loreto Dear Loreto You may be right -- in a way. Master chose -- perhaps -- the right ADMINISTRATORS, but the Matas are the worst teachers I have ever seen. They distorted the teachings to fit their own personality type -- the Guardian mentality. Guardians love the "you should, you must, you have to, you ought to be, the right thing to do, bla bla bla " That bossy language is not good teaching, it reflects very poor communication skills, and it is damaging. That language and many other mistakes in the lessons have hurt many people. In an efficient organization, each one should keep him or herself inside their best skills. The Matas obsessed so much with "the purity of the teachings" that they felt they had to control every written word. They didn't realize that they are not teachers at all -- they are administrators. Master said "nuns administers and monks ministers." But the obsession with control was stronger and they became the ministers in the very core of the teachings -- the Lessons and books. Look at the mess they created! Not one psychotherapist in his/her senses would conclude that the way the teachings are presented in the lessons and books is safe -- it is highly dangerous for the mental, physical and spiritual well being of the devotee. I would feel ashamed to show the lessons or most of the books to a psychotherapist! Furthermore, with so many shoulds, musts, have to, etc. most monastics have been infantalized and became disconnected form their feelings. As a result, now we also see tremendous inharmony and unhappiness inside the ashram. But it is just a symptom of course. The cause is trying to live the Kali Yuga lifestyle recommended in the lessons and books -- which destroys the relationship with oneself. Once that is done the destruction of interpersonal relationships soon fallows. Should Free
Should Free Registered User (12/23/01 2:53 am) Reply ezSupporter	A Cascade of Suffering To strengthening what I said before; I just read the following -- SRF magazine Fall 1988; Master says: "A man who cannot get along with others is one who cannot get along with himself; he is always at war inwardly." Now you tell me, how can we not be at war inwardly if we have been "should" to hell for years with the stupid so called SRF standards that are completely unrealistic? We read three years of lessons and many books, attended countless convocations and services, and have read about one hundred magazines full of "shoulds." You should do, you must be, you have to, you always must do, you ought to do, the right thing to do, the right way to be, the right thinking, the right feeling, the right attitude. Give me a break! How can we get along with ourselves then? How can we be friends to ourselves? How can we not be at war with ourselves after this brain washing? Where is the self-acceptance component in our path? -- which is the most important factor to succeed spiritually, psychologically and materially. It is almost nonexistent in the SRF paradigm; except for one contemptuous sentence: "Well, just do your best." Which in fact it seems to communicate "Well, if you cannot do better, if you are so stupid, you know, just do your best; what can you do?" So, from the teachings, we learned to be at war with ourselves -- exactly what Master is cautioning about! And as He points quite cleverly, �no internal harmony, no peace with others.� How can the Matas be compassionate and empathic to the monastics below their boots if they are at war with their own nature? How can the monastics be compassionate and understanding to their fellow monastics when they are at war with themselves? How can the monastics be compassionate, empathic and understanding with their employees when they are in a constant battle with their own nature? It is a cascade of harshness, and it begins with the teachings -- in the Lessons and books! The only reason I stay in SRF today, is that I see a tremendous change in the new generation of monastics - Mitrananda, Devananda (which the Matas are trying to get rid of by sending him to India) Satyananda, Atmananda and Anilananda. These guys are the real teachers or are trying hard at least to stay away from the shoulding mentality. I hope the time will come when we will all be able to support their efforts. But such a thing will happen only if we understand the �should problem� and its dreadful cascade of inharmony and suffering originating at the core of the teachings --- the Lessons and books! Edited by: Should Free at: 12/23/01 1:17:46 pm
OpenMinded Registered User (12/30/01 9:28 am) Reply	Re: Mr. Erskine This is a beautiful post. You have expressed something grand here.
AumBoy Registered User (1/9/02 3:44 pm) Reply	Re: A Cascade of Suffering *Quote:* How can we get along with ourselves then? How can we be friends to ourselves? How can we not be at war with ourselves after this brain washing? Where is the self-acceptance component in our path? -- which is the most important factor to succeed spiritually, psychologically and materially. I just read this again today and the thought that popped into my mind: "How can we love ourselves?" Once we are able to do that we've taken a big step toward knowing God. This is my own experience. Loving and accepting myself has been a big help for me understanding how much God, how much Master, loves me. I've come to realize that he doesn't care at all about my faults, my language, whether I've been "politically correct" or not, whether I lose my cool, whether I oppose the current SRF paradigm. She just loves me. That's what's pulling me back. She just loves me.
username Registered User (1/11/02 10:28 am) Reply	Re: a cascade of suffering You didn't freely give anything up. You were brainwashed. And your description of what it is like at SRF is exactly correct. You are a wise person to be able to see things are weird and say "I'm outta here" How come everyone can't see it? Is it habit? or what?

Page 1 2

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Control Image

Click to receive email notification of replies

Click to stop receiving email notification of replies

jump to:

- SRF Walrus - Core Issues -

Powered By ezboard� Ver. 7.32
Copyright �1999-2005 ezboard, Inc.