>
SRF Walrus
Mt. Washington, Ca
Open discussions about SRF
Gold Community SRF Walrus
    > Core Issues
        > The real question		 New Topic    Add Reply

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
Author Comment
nagchampa2
Registered User
(1/27/04 8:47 pm)
Reply 		read the posts again
Borg:

Lets go around the Mulberry Bush again:

Did you read the scriptures that I presented on Siddhis? Doesn't seem like it. That was divine proof. Saints don't display siddhis in the same manner as others who have siddhis and display them. If you have ever read the Ramayana, you would see that demons display those types of siddhis. End of story. Read first, then react.

I am not just talking about Science of Religion. Have you ever read Dhirananda's book? It is published by Amrita. His lectures sound exactly like Yogananda's. Maybe he wrote much of Yogananda's writings. (If any number of the people who have the court case would hurry and send it to me, we can see for ourselves.) A ghost writer doesn't put his name on a book, Swami Dhirananda had his name on the book, along with Yogananda's. A ghost, is a ghost, is a ghost--invisible. Dictionary definition: "To write for and in the name of another; to write for another who is the presumed author." I believe that Swami Dhirananda's writings were what led me to SRF. That Ifell for S. Dhirananda. Sort of like Cyrano de
Bergerac.

I basically said that Dhirananda and Sri Nerode left him, accusing him of having affairs. I have a newspaper clipping proving that he was accused. Should I type it out here?

I asked different people about these accusations. I found it interesting how they all reacted differently:

Mike Flynn: "Ben and Lorna Erskine are wonderful people. I really like them. They are very honest, and Ben just wants to know who his father is." (These are not exact words, as I didn't tape what he said.) I said, "But Ben looks exactly like Yogananda." He agreed and said, "Ben's father is probably Swami Dhirananda's child. If you ever saw a photo of Swami Dhirananda when he was young, you would see that they look exactly alike." I was afraid to say that I had a photo of Swami Dhirananda when he was young, and he doesn't look anything like Yogananda, accept that they both have long hair.

Mother Center: "Yogananda lived on the 3rd floor, but there were no nuns on that floor. It was all couples."

Swami Kriyananda: "Yogananda lived on the 3rd floor with the nuns, but he had a separate entrance."

Roy Davis: It is true that Yogananda had women going into his room, but he was never alone with them.

Ma Durga's diary: I used to go to his room at 3 a.m. in the morning. (No mention of other women going there at the same time. Not that that means anything.)

There is a reason why men and women are separated in monasteries. There is also a reason why I have not got a proper answer from any of these people.

You also said, "Maybe you could tell us how you would have reacted, Rachael? Hopefully Rachael will answer, but if not: If it were the 30s, 40s, 50s, and I was a Mormon used to believing that men can have a harem, I would see things differently. If I loved a man who was God to me, and if I were young, even up to 30 years of age, he could probably convince me that it was okay, just as Swami Kriyananda was able to do in this day and age. If it went to court, especially back then, I would not come forward. Why? Back then a woman who was cross examined in court, was told she was a whore, it was her fault, etc. I would be too embarrassed and maybe ashamed, to say anything, and if I thought of my guru as God and loved him dearly, I would stand by his side. And that is the way of a woman. If it were today, and any guru even made a pass at me, I would slap him upside the head, start throwing things at him, I would call him every name in the book, and I would leave him immediately. But I am older now, and this is the 2000s.

You said of my statements, and I am only talking about the siddhis and his abusing them, as well as the court that told him to drop his title, and Dhirananda's case: "they should have a reasonable certitude that the information is true." I know these things to be absolutely true. If people want to find these things out, they can take the same amount of time that I did in finding out these things, not because I would not like to tell them, but because I don't feel that I should betray a confidence. As for the court records, you can go to the L.A. courts and check out records. You said: "Nerode and Dhirananda had plenty of opportunity to cast that stone and didn’t". They did. Again, shall I post the newspaper clipping? Does any one even want to see what allegations were made in the paper?
















Edited by: nagchampa2 at: 2/2/04 8:38 am
History Buff 2002
Registered User
(1/27/04 9:59 pm)
Reply 		Re: Casting the Stone
Chela/Nag
I would like to read the clipping. It is important to me.
Thank you.

rachelcorrie
Registered User
(1/27/04 10:47 pm)
Reply 		possible stone cast by Rirad Ranjan Chowdhury
on wednesday october 25th 1939
some paper in L. A. printed:

Headline: Swami calls accuser 'chisler'

Even the benign and almost impertubible calm of a swami has its limits. Last night as Swami Yogananda returned here to find himself facing a $500,000 damage suit filed by Rihad Ranjan Chowdhury [Sri Nerode], who claims a partnership in this Mount Washington cult of Self Realization headed by the swami, that limit was reached.
"The dirty chiseler, " the swami exploded.
The Hindu mystic who returned here from a lecture engagement in San Diego where he had expounded the benefits of self denial and self control, regained some of his composure and went on.
"The charges made against me are scurrilous and without foundation, the result of an underhand attempt to discredit me in the eyes of my followers," he said.
"Chowdhury had been driven out of the flock because he was insincere and because he violated our rules.. He married a white woman, which is directly forbidden in our laws."
In his suit however, Chowdhury makes it clear he wants to dissolve the partnership because, he said, the swami isn't exactly practicing what he preaches.
He alleged that in a luxurious suite on the third floor of the Temple of elf Realization, the swami keeps himself surrounded by a bevy of likable young ladies who have free access to his boudoir at all times---but aren't allowed to go out with other men at all.
Furthermore, while his flock exists dutifully on substandard diets in line with the self denial theory---the swami dines on the most luxurious foods, he charged.
Chowdhury said sadly that he wants no more partnership with Yogananda, and wants the $500,000 as compensation for the work he has put into the movement.
A. Brigham Rose, attorney for the swami, said he would go into court today and ask to have the sensational charges stricken from the complaint.

YellowBeard420
Slow Down
(1/27/04 11:39 pm)
Reply
United Efforts to Find the Truth
> Punk Yogi wrote:

-----------------
If SRF gets its way, you will never know the truth unless:

1) You old-timers retire from your cowardice and tell it straight.

2) You monks and employees raid the archives and release real information for the public to chew on

3) You create a major media event

4) You find a basis for a class action lawsuit and bring SRF to its knees
-----------------

I was thinking about posting on how we need a mole in SRF. A monastic or employee who is discontented and sees that there is something wrong. They should feign militant dogmatic loyalty to gain knowledge on Yogananda's original works, recordings, movies, etc. They should of course not "steal" anything, but merely make copies. Actually make 2 copies. If they get caught, they can hand in the one copy and say that's all they made. I can't imagine any legal penalties for this action. I think they'd simply be fired and blacklisted. But that's of course *if* they got caught, hehe. This information could then be made *anonymously* available to the public. The Walrus community should be notified so that they can hash over it for authenticity.

Those with connections with monastics and active SRF employees may wish to help make the Walrus board known. The Walrusite could pretend that they find the board offensive and that they would never post on such a board. But there's a good chance curiosity would get to the monastic/employee. Issues here might get them to think on doubts that may have been troubling them.

This sounds sneaky, but it's just to get the truth out. Whether one is pro and anti Yogananda makes no difference. We have a common goal. We want the truth to come out. We want to hear and see the recordings, writings and movies that are being kept hidden. We want to get people that know things to talk.

Printing out basic fliers with a simple computer printer about an on-line discussion community with diverse opinions on SRF could be placed on key people's car windshields. This way one can help out without having to even interact with anyone personally -- they can then keep their identity hidden.

Just thinking out loud here basically. Punk Yogi has a good point, we need to be thinking on ideas on actual efforts we're willing to make to help bring the truth out. We *all* agree (please correct me if I'm wrong) that we want access to all of Yogananda's original writings, recordings, movies, etc. We also want testimony from any living disciples that have be around Yogananda. If anyone reading this knows of anyone like this, you should seriously consider seeing if they'd be willing to do an interview. If you're not willing to do such an interview personally, we can surely muster someone up who would be.

If anyone has any comments or ideas on this, please add them.

> Punk Yogi: "If you cannot muster the courage to do this unitedly, accept the easy fate of limbo."

Agreed. On areas such as this, we should stop with the infighting. We all want the facts on Yogananda and his works. We can then interpret this data how we wish. That will be up to each individual.

Many are saying how the Walrus is changing. Wouldn't this change be good for all of us if we can come together and recognize common goals. We of course would still brawl with each other as usual, but there would be actual efforts being organized to seek the truth. We all want that and we need to recognize it.


SsSsSnake
Registered User
(1/28/04 12:01 am)
Reply 		Re: possible stone cast by Rirad Ranjan Chowdhury
isnt the Video of Y marrying Nerode and the white womean?:rollin

nagchampa2
Registered User
(1/28/04 12:05 am)
Reply 		Re: possible stone cast by Rirad Ranjan Chowdhury
thank you rachel,

My newsclipping is different, but what an eye-opener, a guru who was a racist. Here he is in America teaching Americans, and against anyone marrying an Indian.

Here is my article:

Los Angele Times, Wednesday, October 25, 2939

Swami Sought in Damage Suit

Determining that he hsall nt become a vanishing Hindu, process servers were conducting a far-fling search yesterday for Swami Yogananda, Indian cultist accused in a sensational $500,000 damage suit, of amazing goings on with feninine follwers.

Aiding in the search was the plaintiff, Nirad Ranjan Chowdbury, also known as Sir Nerode, former assoicate of Yogananda, who maintains a palatial abode on Mount Washington and also boasts a high class hideway at Encinitas.

Showdbury's chargest ook on a spice not generall associated with the spiritula repose of Yogilsm (not sure of what it says) as the swami was sought by minions of the plaintiffs attorneys, Harold E. Krowech and Theodorn E. Bowen.

PEACHES HE IS GOD

After pointing out that Yoganasnda teaches that he is God, or Paramahansa, Chowdbury, Calcutta-born, Harvard educated sutden of East Indian religious philosophy, alleged that the swami has been "for the past yea trying to break up the marriage between te plaintiff and his wife," and that Yogananda "prevented teh plaintiff's wife from having proper care during the pregnancy of her child."

Moreover, Chowdbury alleges that the swami teaches that:

"The members of the congregation must not get married becaues their first love must be to God through Swami Yogananda and that if they should be married that their first loyalties are to Swami Yogananda and not to their spouse."

IRREGULAR PRACTICES

Picturing highly irregular practices in the cult quarters on Mount Washington, the plaintiff declared that hte swami "has young girls in the immediate vicinity of his room going in and out all hours of the night."

The youngers girls are kept segregated from older women, Chowdbury charges, adding:

"Young girls have free access to the rooms of said Swami Yognanda and that said Swami Yogananda and that said Swami Yogananda forbids said young girls who attend him from going out with other men and forbids them to go out at all except with him."

At his Encinitas palace, Chowdbury charges , Yogananda maintains caves and rooms for meditation "that are not in keeping with the standard of religious meditation..." and that "the places of mediation are too secretive and ornate of construction to be used for the purpose of spiritual mediation, all of whihc is contrary to spiritual practices, contrary to Hindu philosophy and contrary to the purposes and objectives of the partnership."

ROMANTIC TO MERCENARY

Changing from the romantic to the mercenary tack, Chowdbury declared that the swami has used contributions from his cultists to "foster his ambitious and private ends."

The plaintiff accused the swami of "using the teachings of Yogoda and Hindu Philosophy for the sole purpose of creating a personalized Interpretation of defendanta Swami Yogananda as a divinity...so as to force upon the members of the congregation and others the interpreations that God talks only thorugh Swami Yogananda."

Chowdbury said yesterday taht while a graduate student at Harvard he met Yogananda, who then was lecturing in the East, became interested in the swami's teachings, and was made a partner with the swami in the cult only to be "frozen out" last January, after the long-haired cult leader had transferred his interests from the East to Los Angeles, where he is said to have attracted as followers scores of Los Angeles women and girls.

PURELY COMMERCIAL

After the freeze out, Chowdbury said he became convinced that "Swami Yogananda was engated at all times in a purely commerical venture for the purpose of (can't read) for his own personal gain, and that his activities had no connection witht he true Hindu self-realization philosophy."

At the cult headquarters, a crisp young woman attache reported that the swami is due back today. He lectured in San Diego Monday night, she said.

Borg108
Registered User
(1/28/04 12:33 am)
Reply 		Re: not even an allegation...
So that's your evidence?? Not even an allegation of sexual impropriety or misconduct - only innuendo about young girls going in and out of Yogananda's room during the day and night. Actually, this agrees with Daya Ma's mentioning how Yogananda's secretaries would have to take shifts going into his room to take dictation because when he would become God intoxicated and start dictating, he could do so all day and all night long (which is also a reason for them to live close to him).

When asked to offer some evidence to support her statement that Yogananda had sexual relations with women disciples, nag/chela morphed her allegation into saying that Dhirananda and Nerode accused Yogananda of having affairs. Now that we see from the "evidence" she presented that this is false (just as we saw regarding her plagiarism allegation), what's next?

The accusations just keep getting wilder and crazier, from the Lessons teaching people siddhis to Dhirananda authoring muchl of Yogananda's writings. My understanding is that the book following Science of Religion was the Songs Of the Soul collection of devotional poetry. Are you contending that Dhirananda wrote that too? Where is your evidence? The other books (maybe this one too) were written after Dhirananda left. Yogananda didn't write lectures - his transcribed talks were edited then printed in the East West magazine. Was Dhirananda a ventriloquist?

BTW, Nerode lost his lawsuit.

Edited by: Borg108 at: 1/28/04 2:38 am
rachelcorrie
Registered User
(1/28/04 1:37 am)
Reply 		he lost the stone that he cast
yet you said he didn't cast the stone
hmmmmmmmmmmmm

and the whirlpool, sink hole so deep
many stones have been tossed, none can we keep

what pearls lay among the stones

so now that we know that as Borg108 says earlier in this thread, Dhira and Nerode didn't cast the stones

and the stone that wasn't cast was lost

think the funnier this gets
the more my insanity deepens?

the rumor keeps seepin
that soul circle is only jealous

of a man so little loved, he is called master
so we all succumb to guilt faster
the master stands alone above his own self and others
we are left pondering how to merge
[how-to-live] in oneness with the plantation owner
[the mansion's master]
is impossible as we wobble

along a path that leads far, right back to where we are

back in the fifties a printing press set out lessons
sayin these mail order lessons aren't gonna leave you guessin

in the last 50 years normal folks, called nuns and monks with an extra helping of pretentiousness

initiate us, saying master is me, and don't ever think I am takin great liscense

the magic goes ever on
the Walrus, the Oz, the funny faux paus

Hafiz thought he bought

a kriya he thought he'd be a

Hafiz said soulcircle you smell
like a rat and your evidence is flimsy as well

but back to the bought
the name of the book wasn't caught
or was it titled, written fast by the stone never cast

Hafiz though, book learning never sought
Hafiz to was a boor always laughing
at others' expense and coming to naught

soulcircle robbed the walrus store
of all that it had once been
Borg108 lamented as he once helpful door, shut was cemented
Hafiz even called it a sin
to set up an organization

what if we call it a no win- no win
as Yogananda signed the incorporation papers, openly crying
Borg108
there's no denying, this soulcircle is lying
how could Yogananda have been crying

as he incorporated the religion of the new age
when we read Walrus to the last page

we will be relieved that soulcircle no longer has a horn
to be tooting
and Borg108 will successfully be scooting
off to India to see the last of the lootin
of Ammachi Inc. and get in the last booting
of the money-hugging saint known for her straight shooting

the three year-old growing up in Jason's Becker's home
the one I babysit, plaing with trains with him his face lit
came from a barren womb several times hugged by Borg108's fraud [Amma]

so from soulcircle, an insane clod,
to Borg108, on the path and well shod
let's leave what weeds there are in this "graced by angels' feet"
Walrus sod
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

the broken sand dollar cast upon the seashore, is only beautiful all the more
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hi I am Dave ~~~I am an srf-warus-a-holic

YellowBeard420
Slow Down
(1/28/04 3:40 am)
Reply
We're All Acts of Nature
>> YellowBeard wrote: "I remind myself that we're like acts of nature, like wind blowing through the trees ..."

> Chuckle Chela wrote: "...no one here asked you to show up. Just thought I'd make that distinction."

You don't ask the wind to show up, nor can you make it go away unless you isolate yourself within a mental enclosure of Yogananda ideology. We're all like acts of nature, even yourself. It's the ego that turns it all into a story.

> Chuckle Chela: "So, it seems you have some personal reasons for showing up here"

I prefer a holistic natural view, but if you want to look at it that way, don't we all have personal reasons for being here? Please point out someone here that doesn't. If you were really interested in these things, I'd go into more details, but you're really only interested in attempting to deliver personal attacks. Knock yourself out if you think you can save your false guru that way ...

> Chuckle Chela: "Are you really dedicated to bringing the truth about Yogananda to light, or is it just some kind of game with you"

In the words of Timothy Leary, "work is play, and play is work". Making your work fun is a healthy approach, it keeps one interested and energetic about it. I realize that there's no room for that in your brutal dark chamber of Yogananda worship.

> Chuckle Chela: "I'm just so puzzled, is all; just not sure what the agenda is."

My agenda has never been hidden. It's to sever subconscious attachments to Yogananda ideology that keeps the mind entangled and confined. I've done this process completely in the open so others who feel entrapped by Yogananda's tenacious doctrine can try this approach as well if they wish. For a person like yourself who has no interest in finding freedom from the dark shadow of the guru, my words are of no use. Nor should you feel threatened by what is being said here. This is about an internal individual process. Someone has to very clearly *choose* to resist Yogananda if they ever wish to truly be free.

> Chuckle Chela: "Nah, you're in nirbikalpa samadhi."

If you took that statement by me seriously, then you obviously just skimmed through my post, which is fine. No one has to read what anyone writes here. But if you're going to respond to something, it'd be nice if you did more than glance at it. My point on Nirvikalpa Samadhi was that one should be weary about someone making grandiose claims and then saying, "you just won't know it". I used myself as an example of someone making that claim to help show how absurd it sounded. It looks like that was a pointless exercise.

> Chuckle Chela: "I ask these things, not to be unkind, but just trying to figure out what's going on with you."

Yes, I'm sure you're terribly concerned about my well being.

------------

> Borg108 wrote: "YB saying that if he had been in Yogananda’s situation, he would have been trying to have sex with as women there as he could."

First I would never start a cult because I don't believe in taking advantage of others to glorify myself as Yogananda did. Second, as Nagchampa2 said:

"There is a reason why men and women are separated in monasteries."

He had no business having his quarters surrounded by those of young nuns (or any nuns for that matter, but he obviously preferred the younger ones). He was suppose to be a swami, which is the same as being a monk. Male and female monastics are always separated for obvious reasons. He snatched up young Mormon women because he knew that they would be use to the idea of harems.

By doing this, he made a fool of us all. He took advantage of our naivety. All he had to do was some cheap tricks by sticking a lemon in his armpit to stop the pulse in one arm, and preach, "God God God", and our faces are down on the floor worshiping him. This stupidity has to end. We have to grow up and recognize that we've been duped.

> Nagchampa2: "I had a copy of the original Gita, and it was very, very short."

Thanks for adding that.

>> YellowBeard: "I did all the facing north, sitting on a blanket ..."

> Ugizralrite wrote: "Yikes!! I thought it was east. One of us is in big trouble."

Good catch, east it was. Facing north is part of a Vedic ritual I believe, which is what I must have been thinking of.

> Ugizralrite: "If this is limited then Encyclopedia Britannica had better move over for Encyclopedia YB."

That's why my posts are five miles long now. There's no limit to the length, just the actual number. So I try to address as much as I can within single posts. Becomes cumbersome to read, I realize. I gotta answer people somehow.

> Soulcircle wrote: "Is perfection a myth? Cause Paramhansa ate meat not infrequently and people very alive today knew his cook very well, and sat at the table."

I always suspected this. When I was following the diet that Yogananda gave to us in the Lessons, I shriveled down to the bones while Yogananda grew fat. This is great information Soulcircle, thanks for offering it.

Rachelcorrie, thanks for taking the time to type out that article! And thanks to Nagchampa2 as well for typing out hers!

etzchaim
Registered User
(1/28/04 6:28 am)
Reply 		Re: We're All Acts of Nature
Honestly, not taking responsibility for spewing ones unprocessed subconscious contents onto unsuspecting others is not any level of morality, relative or not. It's not respectful of oneself or of others.

A dead man cannot possess anyone. Look inside for the cause. Don't judge yourself, don't judge the outside, let it up, but refrain from using other people to puke on.

You are not the wind, YB, you have the same responsibility for your own experiences that anyone else has.

'We're all acts of nature'. Yes, we are also all human beings and if your monism has any reality to it at all, the man you hate is also an act of nature. In a sense, YB, you are Yogananda. He is not possessing you. You are not responsible for what others do, but you are responsible for your own reactions and for what you yourself do. Using spiritual concepts to rationalize your behaviour is not spiritual, and it certainly smacks of duality.

The same for me, for Borg, for Chela, for Kolorado, for Voice, for everyone.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/28/04 6:46 am
A voice in the supermarket 
Registered User
(1/28/04 7:35 am)
Reply
Re: 3rd Person
Aloha,

1. Me and my little helpers, the body cells

We - I and my myriads of body cells - sit at the computer. I seldom think that as we write, some of these loyal supporters die in the process of helping us us on - thousands every minute, I suppose. They belonged to the skin, and had served their turn. Without skin I would look different. The point is, there is a very bilogical foundations for saying "us" at times.

2. Editorial we

It is customary that not only royalty, but also editors use the "we" word. It is not only hoidy toidy.

3. A call for tolerance here - possible!

When we speak for a group, "we" can work too.

I have heard Daya Mata call herself "Daya Mata" and such stuff - and it can be seen in her book.

A Conclusion

I conclude with an anecdote.

EDWARD VII (1841-1910), king of the United Kingdom (1901-10) once said:
"Only two people are permitted to refer to themselves as 'we' - a king, and a man with a tapeworm inside him." [Faber and Faber Book of Anecdotes]

A voice in the supermarket 
Registered User
(1/28/04 8:07 am)
Reply
Re: Benefits of Study?
Hi Etz and Co

Very much of what you say, makes sense to me. But there is a thing or two that is hard to deal with.

You say that "5 years is not a lot of time to have gained much expertise". Doubt it.


EXPERTISE IN YOGA

In the yoga teachings there is ample material that goes against this outlook. Ramakrishna gained in about three days the equivalent of what his teacher had spent 40 years to reach, for example. The details are in the biography of Ramakrishna, written by Nikhilananda, in the Gospel of Ramakrishna by M.
That was an example.

1. In theory, some have what it takes to progress very fast when they set about.

2. Others strive and get moderate benefits as time goes by.

3. Still others experience no progress at all, and then the Mother Center says the changes may go so deep they are unnoticed. And that could very well be -

4. Still others think they are going downward for meditating. If they say so, they are right or wrong, more or less so: Single cases seldom know how they would have fared if they had *not* meditated: They could for example have been in for

(a) getting better, but the methods stopped that and drove them down.

(b) being same-o, same-o, but the bad practice sent them down.

(c) Getting much worse, and the methods helped so that they got less worse (!)

(d) Getting a little worse, but the methods made them much worse, and so on.

There is much more to tell about this.

There are many THEORETIC POSSIBILITIES in single cases, and that's why they don't hold much value as general evidence. If many single cases are added, however, things are different. Then they may say much. And besides, what is called qualitative investigations should find assorted single cases useful too.


CONCLUSION

As it is said, there can be many sides to an issue. I hope you enjoyed a clarification.

Edited by: A voice in the supermarket  at: 1/28/04 8:09 am
etzchaim
Registered User
(1/28/04 8:35 am)
Reply 		Re: Benefits of Study?
Voice, true, people have different amounts of obstacles that they need to break through in order to experience whatever level of realization that they gain. While some people have what it takes to become enlightened in the lifetime they are manifesting in, most people are not going to make too much progress in a 5 year period - at least not to the level that RamaKrishna was functioning at, and that does need to be kept in perspective. There are times when progress is slow and times when there are sudden great 'leaps' or shifts that push a person onto a higher level and it's difficult to know when that is going to happen. Sometimes the sudden leap follows a 'dark night'. Sometimes the 'dark night' throws a person off so much that they stop entirely. This is where a strong enough sense of the self is very important. It's up to each individual and how they process their experiences.

My experience with the techniques of Kriya tells me that certain people are equating their own difficult experiences which may, in fact, be caused by something other than the mere techniques, perhaps even combined with the techniques, I don't deny, with 'proof' that the techniques and everything else associated with the techniques, are 'evil' or the cause of people imbalances. I believe that it is people are lacking the balance and that the problems encountered are probably the result of many factors. This is based on my experience with the techniques and being from another group of Kriyabans, it's fairly easy to separate the Kriya from the institution that is SRF.

Of course, I don't know what level anyone is on, and what their karmic reality is, really, so you've made a good point.

Generally people who are 'attacking' others in a hurtful way, or using others to gain some benefit for themselves when the other people are not aware of it, are not on Ramakrishna's level and 5 years may indeed be a very short time to make conclusive decisions about an entire path of Yoga. I take that as a general rule, though I could be wrong.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/28/04 8:47 am
chela2020
Slow Down
(1/28/04 8:45 am)
Reply 		Nerodes' Autobiography. What SRF doesn't want you to read
Someone who was reading my posts, contacted me and said that he/she had taken information off Nerode’s website before SRF asked him to delete it all. He sent me a copy. Instead of printing it all, I will print what there is as to the sexual allegations:

“My father and mother were married by Yogananda in 1941 in an elaborate pseudo ceremony Wedded by Yogananda on the palatial lawns of the Center on Mount Washington. This was filmed by Fox Movietone News and played on week in all the newsreels in all the movie houses in the country. It was also news in the great papers of India. The Bombay Chronicle, April 26, 1931. There were almost no Hindu-American marriages in that period, although they are common now. I say pseudo ceremony because the Asian Exclusion Act in force in California at the time prohibited marriages between Caucasians and East Indians. The existence of such exclusion laws seems almost unknown to present day America. I have had people deny that this could have been true in the twentieth century! We were not that much ahead of South Africa at that time. The binding ceremony was a civil marriage by a judge in Gallup, New Mexico, which had no such alien exclusion law. Announcement via Associated Press LA Times Wedding Announcement. A careful reading of the news clipping above shows that Yogananda staged and blessed the marriage of my parents as a union of East and West, which he explicitly states he had approved of in advance…

In January 193 Yogananda and my father had a great falling out over a specific incident in Yogananda’s unending relationships with young women in the fellowship. He always had them living in quarters directly adjacent to his and away from everybody else’s. I remember these young women well, and still have group snapshots of them in the family archives, some of which I have included. But they would never remember a ubiquitous small person wandering the halls.

Yogananda liked to dress them in gauze-like material and exotic scents and nothing else, and with a recorded Indian musical accompaniment, have them strip and enter a perfumed bubble bath, after which he performed various supposedly traditional religious ceremonies. This was very Californian, but definitely not part of any Yoga tradition, and the foundation Yogis were scandalized. Yogis then were usually straitlaced Easterners, not liberal Westerners.

What is funny is the changing reaction to this story over the six decades that have passed since. In 1939 it was a scandal, in the 1960s the younger people thought that it was natural and appropriate that the spiritual and they were integrated, in the 199’s it has been perceived as an abuse of power. People’s attitudes do change! As the senior Yogi there, my father spoke to Yogananda. He did not take to remonstrance from my father or any fellow Yogis. The impression was that he believed by this time that he was so anointed that, whatever his conduct; it had automatic approval by Divine Providence. To me, it sounded just like the Catholic Papa; indulgences, or the infallibility of the Pope in doctrinal matters.

The prospect of this aquatic initiation ceremony by the great man so terrified one eighteen year old that she asked my mother to ferry her home by car off the hill. There was no public transportation, and it was quite a hike. My mother did, and Yogananda was apoplectic. Sixty hears later my mother called on the woman’s family while visiting Los Angeles. They still expressed gratitude for the removal. The incident was the cause of my father’s split from Yogananda in January 1939. I am probably the only one alive under 90 who would attest by eyesight and ear to the truth of such stories about Yogananda. But who cares about the ancient memories of small children when they conflict with religious canon?

My father was a completely impractical and otherworldly Yogi. He had been told by Yogananda from the beginning that the whole Center was a partnership with him, so he sued to dissolve the partnership and recover $500,000 in assets so that he could found a new Yoga fellowship based on equality and without questionable practices. This suit made no sense whatsoever. He did not know what a partnership is a legal entity. The foundation was a non-profit corporation. There are not partners. Asking for a cash settlement made my father look venal, rather than principled, thought his conscious choice f a life as an itinerant Yogi refutes this.

Yogananda hired a famous and very expensive California criminal attorney anyway, A. Brigham Rose Rose and Allegations for the case, so he was certainly worried. My father’s lawyer put the source of the split, the allegations of sexual misconduct, into papers filed for the suit. If these papers had been held private, this would have not want them made public in court. My father’s lawyer was so incompetent that the did not realize that court reporters routinely read all filed papers. They saw their chance for a scoop. The allegations of sexual misconduct with a bevy of very young girl disciples were front-page news in the Los Angeles papers Dodging a Subpoena. My father confirmed the details when interviewed; having no other choice if he wanted to remain credible.

Yogananda concluded from the publicity that my father was out to destroy him, and the breach between Yogananda and my father changed the relation from brotherhood to lifelong animosity.

Yogananda now announced that it was against the rules of his “order” for Hindus to marry white women. So much for racial tolerance dirty chiseler. This, even though eight years earlier he said he gave prior approval and had married my parents himself in a Fox Movietone newsreel orchestrated by him and shown in all the movie theatres in the country! So much for principles.

That was the end of our connection with Yogananda. There was no one in the Center willing to corroborate for the Newspaper reporters either my father’s assertion of an oral partnership, or of the indiscretions. The young women involved did not want publicity. Many others needed to protect a comfortable life style threatened by public spectacle. The suit was summarily dismissed, and the scandal dropped out of the newspapers. Putting that stuff in papers available to the press was a lawyer’s mistake, not an attempt to destroy the Center. The sexual misconduct was irrelevant to the case at hand.

Sexual misconduct would have been relevant if the courts had been asked to remove Yogananda as unfit to run a non-profit religious Foundation, but my father had no intention of filing such a suit. He hoped Yogananda would straighten up. He was his former best friend. Although Yogananda and he lawyers accused my father of libel and slander for accusations of sexual misconduct in several published interviews, they never made any attempt to clear Yogananda’s name by filing a suit for defamation of character against my father. This is probably because the headline-making allegations, while irrelevant to the case at hand, did have corroborating witnesses, former students of Yogananda who had eventually fled the Center, and would have been forced to testify. My father clammed up after that. Some of these women are now elderly but still alive and still angry.

My father felt that the publicity he had generated had damaged the reputation of the few East Indians in the country at the time, particularly the other Yogis he knew, and he wanted the publicity to go away.


A voice in the supermarket 
Registered User
(1/28/04 8:50 am)
Reply
Re: The real question
Redpurusha writes:

> "Yogananda's refusal sufficiently explains why he did not get the hermitage and all that he possesses. He did not want it."

Oh yes, he did. And SRF later sought to secure it too.


SEND A DONKEY TO PARIS -

The proverb is: "Send a donkey to Paris, and a donkey he returns." We should be aware of that danger - the danger of limited outlook by overassertive folks.

> "I went over much of the material . . .The website is run by some distraught ex-SRFer"

Distraught means very sad or upset.
Very sad? No.
Upset? Far from it.
So Redpu has got it wrong.

Were certain parts of the ballyhoo-raising content tendentious some years ago? Well, yes.


KRISHNA RESTORED (ON THE SITE)

Was anything tendentions, I repeat, and it is not to pat the snub one on his back. Mhm, especially the parts concerning Krishna. I had not found/been given any evidence that he was a historical personality then, and later was shown that his ascribed capital had been found under the water, and that some parts of it were as the Mahabharata described.That impressed me a lot. I saw I had to give Krishna the benefit of the doubt after weighing all evidence available to me. And the result is on the severely REVISED pages.


NOTE AS WELL

Redpu refers to the site from SOME YEARS AGO. As he grasped things back then. Perhaps he has developed his mind since.

At that time I had calculated that it was safest for me to camouflage or rather masquerade many topics or issues by clever devices. But after gardendiva and others talked down on Windsor Castle in 2002 because of really masking, *considerate* devises for folks like them, I reworked many of the SRF-Yogananda-related pages and spoke much clearer, that is. Some twenty of the reworked pages are in their own section of the site: A clover mark on the site map shows they are revised (since Redpu departed from the Castle)
oaks.nvg.org/ind-3.html#d1

What drove me completely out of SRF after I had been a kriyaban member for six-seven years with all the initiations and Sunday Service Readings, and so on, was the Mother Centre's "we find his guidelines infallible". I got in in writing back in 1978. I still keep that piece of evidence. Not ON me wherever I go, but - And I find it much important.


A CALL FOR CLARIFICATION

>"I corresponded with for a short period when I found the teachings. His distortion of the teachings even outweighs that of yb's."

How good a judge is Redpu, apart from the fact that he is NOT UPDATED (yet)? I don't like snub folks -

What I do like is that many have written and told they enjoy and love the site.

For almost sentimental reasons I have kept much abusive mail from what may now be *former* SRF members too - I almost wonder what name Redpu used to write or abuse under then. Maybe he can tell. it could be fun to check. I find he strives so hard to present HIMSELF in an all too flattering light, even at the expense of Windsor Castle - Yes, I have come to think Redpu is unfair.


BUT EVEN REDPU FOUND THINGS TO TICKLE HIS SET MIND!

>"But this SRF-nemesis does bring up some issues on occasion that provide for a deep examination of the teachings on an intellectual level. There is some benefit to this."

If I add: "-EVEN FOR THIS GUY" - wouldn't it be better? Give 'im a chance!


HOW TO DO IT IN A CASE LIKE THIS:

"Who does My work without hatred, he comes to Me" - Krishna. [From Bhagavad Gita 11.55]

:)



Edited by: A voice in the supermarket  at: 1/28/04 12:58 pm
A voice in the supermarket 
Registered User
(1/28/04 8:52 am)
Reply
Re: The real question
A technical error from the host here -
Not my fault! But let me suggest a thing right away:

Spiritual con-men could be the real SRF nemesises - not persons who tell truths about them.

Think that!

Edited by: A voice in the supermarket  at: 1/28/04 8:59 am
ranger20
Registered User
(1/28/04 8:55 am)
Reply 		Re: We're All Acts of Nature
Little enough time to read, let along respond to this weeks brouhaha. In thinking it is much more simple than all of this I remind myself of an old Peanuts episode, where everyone was looking at clouds. Most saw fantastic things, Linus a part of the Sistine Chapel ceiling, Schroeder saw Mozart composing. Lookin very sheepish, Charlie Brown says, "I see a horsey."

Ranger sees a horsey.

On the other hand, Albert Einstein saw a horsey when he said, "There is only one truly important question: is the universe a friendly place or not?"

So, is SRF a friendly place? [this is an example of the technique of the rhetorical question]

Is the company of Paramahansa Yogananda (in whatever way we choose to cultivate it) a friendly place? [this is an example of a really dicey question]

Punk Yogi
Registered User
(1/28/04 9:21 am)
Reply 		To Chela2020

Quote:
Some of these women are now elderly but still alive and still angry.



GET THOSE WOMEN TO TALK

NOW

etzchaim
Registered User
(1/28/04 9:25 am)
Reply 		Re: We're All Acts of Nature
Ranger, you see a horsey, I see exactly what I'm reading in Jung every morning and finding it fascinating. I'm chalking it up to synchronicity and the ever expanding awareness I'm experiencing of the earth being an insane asylum.

My question is: who are the patients and who are the doctors and what motivates either? Are they one and the same?

I know, that's several questions and then some, forgive me.

"Camelot...tis a silly place..."

ranger20
Registered User
(1/28/04 9:28 am)
Reply 		Re: We're All Acts of Nature
>My question is: who are the patients and who are the doctors and what motivates either? Are they one and the same?

Long ago, in a modern French lit class, I came upon a wonderful quote. I think it was Mallarme, but for sure it was one of those fin-du-siecle, world weary French poets:

"Life is a hospital, in which every patient is siezed with a desperate desire to change beds."

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 << Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies Click to receive email notification of replies
Click to stop receiving 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.