The real question - www.ezboard.com

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > Core Issues > The real question
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
YellowBeard420 Slow Down (1/17/04 8:32 pm) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers > Etzchaim wrote: "Etzchaim also marvels at the joys of speaking in the third person." Isn't it nice without all that "I, me, mine" stuff. It works particularly nicely when multiple people use it in a conversation like this. It gives the feel of ideas simply being exchanged without ownership which is a healthy approach in YB's opinion. > Serenity wrote: "Suddenly YB will be saying things most uncharacteristic of him, but then she realizes it's someone else talking. And then someone is talking about what Etzchaim thinks, is it Etzchaim or someone else!" This is good. This way we don't have a preconceived notion about where the information is coming from. We have to judge it on it's worth alone and not on the worth we attribute to the author. > Etzchaim: "Yogananda is merely telling the disciple to stay with him until the disciple is Self-Realized, at which point, the Guru lets the disciple go." Yogananda states that the disciple remains after Self-realization, or YB should say Yogananda-realization. YB will need to provide an actual quote by him on this, but there's a lot of material to go through to find one on this particular issue. This will take time. YB is not the only one that feels that Yogananda over extends the guru-disciple relationship: --------------- "TO TAKE leave of Yogananda as a kriya-initiated disciple (kriyaban) is meant to be impossible. Yogananda has stated it has to bring on bad 'repercussions' for not only decades, but several future lives. He also called those who left in his days such as 'quitters or traitors' in an old article of the now Self-Realization Magazine." -- oaks.nvg.org/fila.html ---------------- We also have the incident of the guy that went to the Mother Center with a gun and unloaded it into one of Yogananda's portraits there. What drove him to this extreme act? Why did he feel that he needed to go to that extreme to free himself from the guru? YB feels that this problem can't be swept under the carpet by blaming it on the SRF organization's presentation of Yogananda's material. We live in a capitalistic culture, we're use to being 'overly' sold on things. Nor can we say that it's simply the result of the bhakti approach not working out for some. If this was the case, we would just drop it and move on like we have with so many other things in life that haven't worked out. There's an extra disturbing element at play here. "Always remember that you belong to no one, and no one belongs to you." -- Lahiri Baba
etzchaim Registered User (1/17/04 8:38 pm) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers YB, I misread your statement about Yogananda and was correcting it when you posted your last post.
etzchaim Registered User (1/17/04 8:56 pm) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers YB, I went through most of that page (the oaks...page). Many quotes taken out of context and then the SRF statements about him being infallible. It hasn't convinced me that Yogananda is the problem here - other than that he tried to do too much and his organization has gone wacko and gotten out of hand. The section where they quote him saying that those who leave him are quitters and traitors has no link to the article, so I can't read it to even see the context, but I agree with you that that is problematic. He himself referred to teachers he had before Sri Yukteswar as "Gurus", so that would be problematic indeed and indicate some major control problems. I do think that some of the current SRF's problems are rooted in issues that Yogananda had. I don't agree that he was as much of a demon as some people seem to think he was but I also do not believe he was completely self-realized, but then I don't think many people are, anyway. My Guru isn't. I'm not. I have major issues with signing a pledge to get Kriya. My Guru doesn't do that, and Shelley didn't do that. So I agree with that being an issue. On the other hand, when the initiator does not know the initiatee, which in my opinion is essential for the Guru/Disciple relationship, and the Guru initiates too many people, and his organization continues to initiate people with him as their Guru (a practice I strongly disagree with), this may actually be what happens. Shelley did not take many disciples. He taught whoever came to him, though, but there is a difference between that and being someones Guru. My Guru, disregarding his own Guru's warning, took too many disciples, and has made it clear to us that he did. He is no longer taking new disciples. This was not done out of ego. He took to many disciples because he wanted to help people. Yogananda appears to have done the same. I'm wondering if the control issues in SRF are partly because SRF is simply to big. That IS stemming from Yoganandas issues, but many things appear to have escalated in the last few decades. As for the man shooting at the Temple, yes, I think that the organizations issues could cause this, and I also think that people react the way they react for their own reasons and YB is simply not in a position to judge just exactly why that man did what he did. With the number of monastics leaving since 2000, something that didn't happen before, I would say that the problems have been escalating more recently, and their is no way to blame all of that on a guy who's been dead for 50 years, even if he had some issues himself. People have left him in the past, and I can bet that much of that had to do with his need to control his organization, which had grown out of had in his lifetime. That is what I see as his major problem. I watched my Guru go through a little of this, and then he purposefully stepped away and slowed it's growth. I don't think the problem is in the overselling of religion, I think it's a lack of education of what is really going to help them and a tendency for people to go all or nothing on religious issues. We live in a world where people often have to choose between science and religion and a balance between the rational and the world of spirit is far from being highly developed. You yourself should be very aware of people accepting belief systems that are highly questionable. The East and the West are slowing mixing and there's going to be a good amount of confusion, hope shattering and illusion happening before it works out, although religion in the west before this hasn't really impressed me too much, either, though some individuals have. While I'm a bit shocked at the mythology that has grown around Yoganada in SRF, I've also had the experience of learning Kriya from people in his lineage who have taken a sane approach. We don't expect him to have been perfect. Which Yogananda is the real Yogananda? Please go back to my revised post, because the statement about sticking with the Guru after realizing God really makes no sense to me. After Self-Realization, why would you need to walk away from your Guru, you're Self-Realized! It's an odd statement and I would need to see context. I certainly wouldn't reject my Guru after Self-Realization. There would be no point! Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/17/04 9:36 pm
dawnrays Registered User (1/18/04 5:28 am) Reply	Going Postal.... Who is to blame??? You know YB, if Yogananda had taken a gun, walked into srf headquarters and shot up a picture, I would (no doubt about it) hold him responsible for his own actions... No "excuses", just because he is an "Avatar", no way, now how... The same if I did it, or my son did it... Ultimately, people are responsible for thier own actions (apparently this hasn't been thought of yet, in our confusion as to whether to blame srf headquarters, the lessons, the nuns or poor dear departed Master himself (gone some 50 years, and yet still walking into buildings and shooting things up, amazing!) How does this happen (I'm talking about "the blame game" now). Ultimately, I guess stressful conditions in a post office COULD make people "go postal" hence, the term, and yet I have yet to see either the police arrest the wounded or even hang it on the victims posthumously... Whatever happened to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.. "Soul Snatchers"??? This from a self described Buddist who has practiced Zen and abhors labels of any kind and certainly "putting people into little boxes"? It is indeed hard to converse with somebody who breaks thier own rules every time they post and yet INSIST other people are the perpetrators. As I pointed once before, you sound more like a Baptist Minister... If I may be so bold, what are your religeous "roots"... They may, either subconsciously or consciously, be bleeding into your zen training.. Old habits die hard you know, and you DIDN'T learn this from Yogananda.. There is also NOTHING in the lessons I have ever seen (and I was a student for eighteen years) or the writings that would lead a person to regard either Yogananda or Sri Yukteswar as "soul snatchers"... The lessons and the teachings in general are designed, as a matter of fact, to make an independent thinker out of almost any traditional Christian, Jew, Hindu or athiest even... They are so broad they can fit into almost any religeous setting. May I also point out a little about my personal (and my husband's) background. We both started off as lesson students (outside of California and certainly L.A.) My husband took Kriya just before going into Navy bootcamp.. He was older than most, and like a lot of Navy musicians, went in late. He has been on three Navy ship tours and traveled the country. He has been to groups in South American and we both have been to groups on both coasts, as well as been member of temples on the West coast. We have also visited Ananda. Because we travel, we have more of a feel for what's really going on in srf, than most people. I also had a personal correspondence with Daya Mata for over ten years and ended in only shortly before I started posting on the Walrus.. Though I feel her to be a woman of great spiritual achievements in her own right, and have even been helped by her on a few occassions, my last letter to her was to suggest that she resign for the good of the organization and put one of the monks in charge. I made a couple of suggestions as there are actually some good and caring ministers in srf, they are however, pretty much hogtied by "Mother Center" and have very little authority in their own temples to make needed changes. As most people in know, Daya Mata is not in touch with her own temples and never really was as far as I know, yet she seems to maintain an absolute control and authority, along with the BOD. Getting back to "Soul Snatchers" however... I happened to be reading a book on Tarot divination a month or so ago. Do you know how it described "The Devil"? Something like "a mythological creature created by man's lack of personal responsiblity". That is how devils and scapegoats are created, YB.. How did this ever sneak into a "self realized" zen based consciousness such as your own??? Being the big hearted, big headed guy that you are, why don't you take responsiblity for this incident?? You had a very common Kundalini experience apparently some years ago, which I gave you a website www.elcollie.com to help you deal with. It has obviously traumatized you greatly as these experiences are wont to do. I have had similar experiences. Based on these experiences, I on the other hand, would NEVER recommend that a person attempt to wake their kundalini, by meditating or other means, without spiritual guidence of some kind and that would include a competent guru. You have continuously made things up, put things out of context and put an insulting and slanderous spin on your own emotional experiences and tried to project them onto others. If you really MUST talk in the third person to feel comfortable (I personally think this puts you at a distance to others, hence you are "preaching" rather than have a personal exchange of ideas) fine, but please do try to to stop using the royal "we" and "our" (as in "we" think this and "our" experiences are that). You DO NOT speak for others (certainly not me). You mentioned before that you lived close to srf Headquarters. Did you move there to be near srf? Were you terribly involved in the organization. I must warn you that this is the MOST EXTREME end of the organization. If you dove right in, I imagine it was a shock, but IT IS NOT the common experience, I'm afraid.
etzchaim Registered User (1/18/04 7:02 am) Reply	Re: Going Postal.... Who is to blame??? Etzchaim marvels at the joys of speaking in the third person only because it is amusing to her very strange sense of humor, and not because it has done anything to remove her ego. But seriously, Dawnrays is correct to bring in the issue of personal responsibility. Blaming Yogananda, and blaming the techniques of Kriya, as YB has done, is very much the mirror opposite of giving all of your power over to the Guru. People are responsible for their own actions. Blaming 'the Guru' is yet another act of projecting the self onto him. This does not mean that Guru's are perfect or do not make mistakes, but they can only be held responsible for what they have done, not what others have done in their name, or against their name, for that matter.
dawnrays Registered User (1/18/04 8:29 am) Reply	Re: Going Postal.... Who is to blame??? Also, we are now talking about this incident as if it actually happened when they only person who ever seems to have heard of it is YB. You have not been too accurate in your speculation before. You have also shown a tendency to take the rather judgemental (certainly for a zen, perhaps not for some of the more strident branches of fundamentalism) stance of "guilty until proven innocent"... Has anybody else heard of the incident in question? This would be "somebody" walking into srf Headquarters in Mount Washington to "shoot" a portrait of Master? As far as I know, this portrait is still there (I assume you are referring to the large, life sized portrait of Master hanging in the main hall?) Does anybody know any different? I realize srf in secretive, but it would be difficult to keep the lid on a thing of this nature. I am assuming that (once again) you are either speculating or making something up as you have done in the past. What reason is there to take you or your stance seriously, at this point? Your actions have not shown you to be a practitioner of zen, unless zen is extremely judemental and makes a point of tearing down, insulting and using an agressive tone towards other peoples paths, teachers and anybody who defends such. I also find your excuses for a person who would do such a thing (putting other people's lives in danger in the process) to be very telling of your own character. Do you even know the difference between right and wrong? This is extremely menacing and threatening despite the fact that you are referring to "somebody else" in an incident which you claim to have "heard about" while you very much appear to sympathize with the perpatrator.
YellowBeard420 Slow Down (1/18/04 10:05 am) Reply	Personal Responsibility > Dawnrays: "Whatever happened to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" This is true. Those of us who have fallen into this trap should take personal responsibility. YB understands what you mean here. In the U.S. for some time now, people sue companies left and right because of the irresponsible way that they have chosen to use a product. Someone sued McDonald's (YB could be wrong, it's one of the big fast food chains) fairly recently for making them fat! Things are really out of control with this issue nowadays; this is why we see all these silly warnings on stuff, like "don't dry your laundry in this oven". YB heard about a guy (several years ago) that broke into someone's house, slipped on a toy (or something) as he was coming in through the window, and then sued the people for injuries and won. So it is important to bring up the issue of personal responsibility and for us to keep that in mind. YB's problem with Yogananda is that he used deceptive techniques to lure disciples. It's been claimed that he has used little magic tricks in front of audiences during his early lecture tours to impress people. Some consider this abuse of the siddhis, YB thinks that they were simply 'smoke and mirror' tricks that many in the guru field learn. YB saw a program on television about this, were a 'levitating' guru was shown to actually be sitting on a carefully concealed metal platform. It was really quite a cleaver trick -- one could be very close to him and not see it. On his early lecture tours he spoke about magic saints and flying gurus. He pieced Autobiography of a Yogi together with these tall tales. So on personal responsibility, we should have seen what we were getting ourselves into. We were lured by 'temptation' when we have been clearly warned by pretty much every religious text on the planet to avoid such pursuits. Yogananda didn't flat out say, "follow me and I will show you how to obtain siddhis". Any decent sham guru wouldn't. You strongly 'imply' it and you set yourself up as the person who will grant these things. Yogananda set himself up as 'the' representative of the East to teach the West about Indian spiritual science. His stories in Autobiography painted him as a 'true' guru, something very difficult to find. So here we are seeing this in our naivety. We fall for the scam. His tactics aren't really all that cleaver, they're just very skillfully played out as any good hypnotist can do. Yogananda was a skilled hypnotist, he even admits in Autobiography because of his arrogance. Some people are not only content to fool you, but they like to 'dance circles' around you in the process to stroke their egos. When dealing with a con-artist as in this case, some of our personal responsibility fades because we're being carefully deceived. Yes, we were lured by spiritual greed and that is our fault, but the huckster bares some responsibility as well. All YB is really doing is presenting some information for the readers to think over. Of course 99.8% of the readers are like Dawnrays and are offended by these 'accusations' and they in no way will get them to even remotely question the Divine status of the guru. So there is really no need to worry about what is being said here. What YB says is not to create 'dissension', it's for a very small percentage of readers that are having problems with playing the game of being submissive to the guru to get special rewards. This is what the guru-disciple relationship is -- this is a fact. Most people here like that relationship otherwise they wouldn't have gotten involved with SRF in the first place. But a few of us actually thought we were being offered actual Self-realization. We've found out later that that's not the case. Self-realization was used as a carrot to lure some into the world of Yogananda-realization. > Dawnrays: "Though I feel her [Daya Mata] to be a woman of great spiritual achievements in her own right, and have even been helped by her on a few occassions, my last letter to her was to suggest that she resign for the good of the organization and put one of the monks in charge." Now YB isn't looking for something to throw at Dawnrays here. We're actually having a pretty healthy conversation here and YB doesn't want to disturb that. But why do people here view Daya Mata as a "bad lady"? All this time that YB has been here he hasn't seen it even though it's all that's talked about. She sounds like she even took the time to personally correspond with some of the disciples (of course some are going to complain, she can't do this with everyone, the organization is just too big) as Dawnrays has described here. Why should she resign? Dawnrays mentioned that perhaps a monk should be put in her place. Is it because she's a woman!? YB is serious. YB actually thinks that this world would be much better off with more women in positions of power. Yin and Yang need to be balanced out in a little more healthy fashion. Dawnrays of course is female herself, so this may sound absurd. But most women fall for the programming of their societies at least on a subconscious level. YB is very critical of Yogananda and SRF, but he fails to see the problems with Daya Mata. She runs a tight ship because she has to. What if she let everyone do their 'own thing' at the temples. SRF would slowly splinter and fall apart. Many here would like to see that happen. That may be good or bad, YB doesn't know. But Daya Mata is just doing her job which is to keep SRF together as the main instrument to make Yogananda's teachings available. And she's doing a pretty darn good job at it, and YB doesn't see her overly abusing her power, money and position which is quite a marvel for any human being. As a nun, she's not suppose to own Cadillacs and live in a million dollar home, but she's old as dirt and has worked long and hard for many years. She deserves a little comfort. And after all, these things were donated to her. Back to talking about taking responsibility. Shouldn't we take some responsibility for how the temples are run? We like to project it all on the BOD. This is like blaming the government for all the problems in the country. Yes, the Matas and BOD hold a tight grip on things, but we still can make a difference if we keep at it. There's no human sacrifices happening at the temples, right? So what is everyone so uptight about? To use Dawnrays words, it's because our "little SRF ego trips didn't pan out". What's happening at the temples that is so wrong where Daya Mata should resign? YB has a problem with the teachings, but if the readers don't -- knock yourselves out. YB isn't here to try to stop anyone, he's just offering his views as a result of his personal experiences. The teachings are about spiritual authority. If we cherish Yogananda and his teachings so much, why should we have a problem with spiritual authority when that's all they're about? The guru-disciple relationship isn't a concept that Daya Mata introduced -- it's Yogananda's! And however much we want to think that all the stuff we don't like about Yogananda's teachings is the result of SRF's editing, Yogananda is the one that introduced these ideas of subservience to spiritual authority as a requisite of God-realization. We haven't been able to shape the temples in our images, so we lash out at the SRF power structure. The temples aren't suppose to be in your images! Why should they be? Our SRF ego trips didn't pan out (YB loves that phrase), so now we're here in this SRF purgatory. A lot of people talk about YB projecting his personal issues onto the teachings, but we're all doing that here. In fact, that's all we can do. We're suppose to interact intimately with the teachings and what we post here is the results. If this isn't proof that there's a problem with the teachings, then what is? We could also say that the problem is with us, that those of us here at the Walrus are the 'misfits'. But would that be a healthy spiritual approach to use guilt and shame? We want the teachings to be perfect because Yogananda was suppose to be a man of God. We blame our problems with the teachings on SRF editing. We complain that SRF has sanitized his image. But isn't that what we're doing?! We sanitize his image so much that we can't possibly find fault with what he taught. ---------- > Dawnrays: "Has anybody else heard of the incident in question? This would be 'somebody' walking into srf Headquarters in Mount Washington to 'shoot' a portrait of Master?" Correct, YB is not sure if it was the life sized portrait or not. But if it was, it would have been fairly easily replaced. Many devotional artists would have taken the time to recreate the portrait free of charge, or perhaps for a modest fee. YB read about this incident from one of those articles that came out from the Los Angeles New Times by Ron Russell. Although it could have been from another paper. The article was reproduced on the Net, but YB has not been able to relocate it again. YB seconds Dawnrays's request on if anyone knows of any information of this to please post. YB may attempt to contact Ron Russell directly on this issue. ----------- Note to the posters on this thread (like Redpurusha): A lot of issues have come up here and things are unfolding in their own directions. YB is just letting it flow where it goes. YB will try to get to your issues that have not been addressed. But this post is already six miles long. YB apologizes for not being able to address all the issues brought up by the posters.
etzchaim Registered User (1/18/04 1:27 pm) Reply	Re: Personal Responsibility Yogananda came to America in the 1920's. He was one of a very, very few Indians to live here and the idea of following an Eastern path or philosophy even in the 50's was rather exotic, so that the poets, musicians, writers and artists were to a large extent using it as their 'muse'. From what I can see, Yogananda was using siddhis because "Jesus used his siddhis". In other words, Yogananda's job was to be a missionary to the Christian West so that Kriya could spread. Be that what it may, if you read the Christian scriptures, this is precisely what Jesus does, and it was felt that this would be a way to 'open the door' to the East for the Christian West, whether twas wise or not. My personal feeling is that the results of the practice of mystical techniques, however fascinating and amusing, should be used sparingly and not in a commercial 'sales' manner. However, having a good feel for history, I do think that the early part of this century would warrent some 'sales techniques' to facilitate the acceptance of Yoga in the strange world that was America in the 20's. "Orientalism" wasn't even taken seriously in Europe till the very late 1800's and this was only the '20's. The 'Roaring 20's". Young America is settling into the Industrial Revolution of the 1800's. Electricity, phones, cars, all that, are spreading throughout the country. This is after WWI and before the Dust Bowl, the Market Crash and the Depression. I work in a Library building a digital library of books, mainly from the late 1800's and early 1900's. I'm focused right now on a project called the "Making of America". The mainstream Christian bible commentaries from this period are filled with sermons on "sin" and preaching in absolutes. Compared to today's mainstream Christian positions, the religious climate of this time is black and white par excellence. Yogananda's job was to find a way for Christians to relate to Yoga and then teach them to become Self-Realized. What role model is he going to have? Confucious? The path of least resistance was to use Jesus as a role model, call him a Yogi, and teach from there. I actually find Yogananda's interpretation of Christian teachings to be far more astute and accurate than the Traditional Christian view. It's very much in harmony with Jewish Mystical understanding of what a Messiah is, even if Yogananda couldn't conceive of Jesus actually becoming Jesus in the Jewish world. Moshiach (the Hebrew of Messiah, or Christos, in Greek) means "anointed", a way of saying "Self Realized", and the Zohar postulates that in every generation there are several Moschiachs alive - 36 - is the most common number given. The problem, as I see it, is in the continuing emphasis on having powers at the expense of emphasis on the teachings, what seems to be a Christian tendency to project their divinity onto Jesus as the unique 'only son' transferred to Yogananda and the mythology that has built up around this transference. SRF seems like an odd combination of Catholocism, mixed with Hinduism that had solidified into it's own kind of Orthodoxy. I don't blame the 'cult of personality' on him, per se, unless you can blame him for having charisma. It seems to be a transition zone between Christianity and Yoga become stuck and gone awry. Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/18/04 1:58 pm
SsSsSnake Registered User (1/18/04 1:33 pm) Reply	Re: Personal Responsibility What particular Siddhis did he use? I did like the tape called remembrances of the Guru especially the guy who nearly drowned story
redpurusha Registered User (1/18/04 1:35 pm) Reply	Re: Personal Responsibility This quote by Punk carries a punch: *Quote:* "There's a big difference between dividing up the world and being aware of actual differences. The ability to differentiate leads to vivika, discrimination. It is also what makes art so enjoyable. Only a psychotic would try to mix all his paints together in order to achieve the ultimate synthesis of color!" Also, I would like to reiterate what I posted before because I feel it may be helpful to anyone reading these threads, or anyone who pursues the non-dualist path. You might be in heaven, and you might tell yourself all day and all night "I'm in heaven... I'm in heaven", but if you don't take the thick cloak off yourself you might as well be in a dark closet. I don't have much more to comment on this issue of approaching self-discovery via the dual or non-dual approach. One way works better for some and another works better for others. Punk did a good job of explaining this. After all is said and done and someone still feels his way is superior than that of others, than I strongly believe that's a problem that individual has to work on. I am starting to see a more uniform understanding and agreement in these discussions, but the main problem is that while those who acknowledge the effectivenes of the various paths (specifically non-dual and dual, not the alcohol path), post in a way that is respectful to the other path, yb consistently belittles and refuses to acknowledge the effectiveness of other paths other than his. He states that the guru-disciple approach is an authoritative and submissive approach that results in sub-par self-realization (not real realization). He also makes a lot of accusations about Yogananda that are false, but more like punches in the face of someone who is not looking to fight. If yb were going to visit someone and got lost, would he ask someone in the area (like a local or policeman) for directions to the house? Or would he refuse to allow to take the advice of anyone or even the help of a map, perhaps even refuse to call his friend for directions? Ahh, we might reply that we can't apply this reasoning when dealing with the "soul-snatchers" and realization because there is "no where to go." Plus, Yogananda's realization is sub-par, and we don't want that. But is it? A man of God bears witness to truth by his life. The sad part of this is that Yogananda's compassion and desire to help others is turned around to be spiritual greed. A more accurate description of Yogananda and other true gurus would be "soul stirrers," stirring the hearts and souls of others to seek God and live by his laws. The only plausable explanation on why would someone lash out like this would be that when this appraoch did not work for him, that person would make the mistake of automatically concluding it is a universal fact that it does not work. Yellowbeard, you keep bringing back the issues of magic tricks and flying gurus, I'm lead to conclude by this that you were more interested in aquiring these miracles than God. When these siddhis didn't come you got upset and picked up a different non-dual approach. Siddhis are a part of self-discovery, for Yogananda not to even mention them would be not including the whole truth of the qualities of the soul. To get mad because you were't able to fly around your apartment or make the acussation of these being the carrots or bait and such, to trick you into worshipping Yogananda (which he does not ever ask for), is absurd. "Jesus Christ didn't come to earth, nor does any great master come, to draw people to himself. He came to draw them to the truth -that truth which, Jesus said, "shall make you free." The divine message is ever impersonal as it relates to this truth." (The Essence of Self-realization)
etzchaim Registered User (1/18/04 1:44 pm) Reply	Re: Personal Responsibility "YB is very critical of Yogananda and SRF, but he fails to see the problems with Daya Mata. She runs a tight ship because she has to. What if she let everyone do their 'own thing' at the temples. SRF would slowly splinter and fall apart. Many here would like to see that happen. That may be good or bad, YB doesn't know. But Daya Mata is just doing her job which is to keep SRF together as the main instrument to make Yogananda's teachings available." First, spiritual organizations do not fair well as large organizations that need to keep people in line in order to not fall apart. They become dogmatic and controlling. I honestly don't think it's possible to blame just one person. I do think that it is incorrect to think that Yogananda's teachings will 'disappear' if SRF breaks up into smaller, more autonomous groups. I think that would have actually been healthier if it happened right from the beginning. The copyright issues that have been occuring with Yogananda's books are symptomatic. Somebody would be publishing his books. Less editing would have helped, as well.
redpurusha Registered User (1/18/04 5:02 pm) Reply	Re: Personal Responsibility "Discover who you are, behind those outer trappings, and you will discover who Jesus was, and Buddha, and Krishna. For the masters come to earth for the purpose of holding up to every man a reflection of his deeper, eternal Self." -PY (The Essence of Self-Realization)
YellowBeard420 Slow Down (1/18/04 11:47 pm) Reply	Clearing Off the Table > Redpurusha: "yb consistently belittles and refuses to acknowledge the effectiveness of other paths other than his." All paths have to turn non-dual for the 'end-game'. In order to merge into the Self, one has to be in a non-dual state. Even the Christian path turns non-dual. This is why Jesus says stuff like, "The kingdom of God is within you". You may be able to come to the door via different paths, but you're not getting through the door with any kind of duality spinning in your mind, no matter how holy you think your bifurcating intellect is. YB is speaking on the 'end-game'. For those readers who are not yet ready for (or he should actually say interested in) this phase, what YB says is of no value to you. There's no point in arguing over it. Many posters are calling this YellowBeard's path. This is absurd. And even Etz went so far as to think that the end goal is to become like YellowBeard. We need to very slowly set down the crack pipes and gently place them on the table. Non-duality is not some concept YB has made up. Non-duality is the painting of a hand that points towards Reality. Actually Reality isn't non-dual as opposed to being dual. It's not either and it's not both. No concept of the mind can possibly get a hold on it. This is the fact of our existence whether you want to except it or not. > Redpurusha wrote: "You might be in heaven, and you might tell yourself all day and all night 'I'm in heaven... I'm in heaven', but if you don't take the thick cloak off yourself you might as well be in a dark closet." It's the act of trying to take off this "thick cloak" that keeps one out of heaven. Any approach that tries to 'make it' there is not going to get there. Some readers might say here, well why aren't materialistic people free from suffering if there's no need to remove this cloak, they're not trying. Their problem is that they're chasing other things -- money, power, people, a new pair of shoes. It's the movement of desire that creates this "thick cloak". If we sit and meditate trying to see the "third eye" all day, year after year -- we're chasing something. This act of chasing is going to keep you from seeing yourSelf. Self-realization has nothing to do with chakras and third eyes and all that nonsense. It's about seeing things as they are, and not about seeing what we want to. This is spirituality 101 people. There's nothing terribly complicated being discussed here. Actually the opposite is happening, we're removing the complications so we can see things clearly as they are -- if seeing Reality as it is is what you want to do. Most people do not. Some posters believe that adding complications is a legitimate path to Self-realization. Let's say we have a cluttered kitchen table and we want to clear it off to eat ... YB: Let's take stuff off this table so we can eat. Etz: I'm painting a picture to clean it off. YB: That picture is very pretty, you're a very good artist, but if we wanna sit down and eat, we need to clear this table. Etz: Hey, I don't wanna be like you, I do things my own way. I'm an individual, get it? YB: Of course, but the table's over here, and if we ... Etz: Shut up already with your fascist dogma. I'm painting a picture of a clean table. Why do you want everyone to do things your way? Sit and spin on my paint brush YB! YB: Hey Punk Yogi, let's clear the table so that we can eat. Punk: I'm busy shagging my girl, we're doing Tantra, that's how I'm going to clear the table. YB: Dinner's being served and we need to clear off the table. Punk: You're such a circus freak YB. We do things our own way. Go crawl back under that rock you came out from under. YB: Yes, but if we wanna clear the table off, we have to actually do it. (Punk comes out with a towel wrapped around him and flips YB the bird.) Punk: How's that for actually doing it? YB: Hey Redpurusha, I see you're down there near the table, perhaps you want to help clear it off. RP: I'm practicing bhakti, I'm bowing to the table. This is my path. YB: You need to get your hands actually around this stuff on the table so that we can clear it off. RP: Why do you keep harassing everyone here with trying to get them to do things your way. What's up with this non-dual 'actually doing things' crap? We're all working for this one goal. My way is bhakti, Punk's doing Tantra, and Etz is doing artistry. So get a life YB, and be a little more accepting of other people's approaches! Dawnrays: Yeah! I'm really tired of people like you YB! YB: Ah, Dawnrays, I see you're reading a book there. Perhaps you could set it down a sec and help clear off this table so that we can all eat. DR: I'm reading about Master, he's an expert at clearing tables. YB: I'm sure he is, but we need to actually do it. DR: Stop disrespecting him, it's people like you that give him a bad name! He's a saint, and he's worth a whole hell of a lot more than you! YB: That's fine, but ... DR: Shut up! (OneTaste throws a book on the table.) YB: Hey, we're trying to clear the table. OT: These books are about clearing the table. YB: I see, but we really don't need those. It's actually quite a simple process. We just grab stuff on it and put them away. (OneTaste throws another book along with some pamphlets onto the table.) OT: You don't understand YB, these books are about clearing the table. YB: They're really just cluttering the table up more. OT: You're impossible to talk to YB, I'm going out drinking. Think about those books friend, and after you read them, maybe we can talk. YB: I don't wanna talk, I just wanna clear off the table. We don't need to read about it or discuss it. It's just a matter of doing it ... (YellowBeard ate alone that night.) As we can see, this situation is actually quite insane. This is how the mind works in regard to the Path. The goal here was to clear the table off so that we would have room to eat. This isn't a great example because actually the table is already clear, which means that we don't need to do anything to clear it. We need to stop doing and start just being. ------------- > SsSsSnake wrote: "What particular Siddhis did he use?" Chela2020 wrote about them in the 'Not the Main Stream' section, but deleted the post. YB doesn't remember exactly what they were -- something like light flashing off his hands and stuff like that. [Edited to correct a typo.] Edited by: YellowBeard420 at: 1/18/04 11:53 pm
etzchaim Registered User (1/19/04 4:32 am) Reply	Re: Clearing Off the Table YB says: "And even Etz went so far as to think that the end goal is to become like YellowBeard." Oh yeah, YB, that's exactly what I was doing! "We need to very slowly set down the crack pipes and gently place them on the table." Yup. You got it. We're all on drugs and you know the way to go home and can tell us poor cloudy headed fools the right way to do that. Etzchaim throws up both her hands and says "Gee wiz, my crack invested brain really wants me to concentrate on other things, prayhaps I will..."
username Registered User (1/19/04 6:57 am) Reply	Re: Clearing Off the Table yellowbeard -- this is your best post yet!
redpurusha Registered User (1/19/04 9:11 am) Reply	Re: Clearing Off the Table Yellowbeard's latest imaginary script is a testament to what has been already recoginzed -that his way is the best and in fact is the only way. Everyone here knows and agrees there is ulitmately one truth and one Self. But according to an individual's temperament we approach this truth differently, the Buddha and Christ are key examples. Again, we're not arguing over what ulimtate reailty is -this we all agree on- it's the ways we approach that reality. The act of removing all obstacles allows us to see reality as it is -the Self alone. This act of removing obstacles is not an obstacle in itself, well maybe for yellowbeard. He can keep his cloak and stay in the dark if he choses, but I am going to do what I can to take if off so I can see the bright light of the Self. Take for example, a man sitting on a toilet all his life. He just loves sitting on the toilet. Say he, like Elvis, even dies on the thing. His whole life he didn't come out or anything (there was ventilation and a large supply of lysol). Then take a hermit in some Himalayan cave, who like the toilet guy, spent his life in one spot without ever coming out. Now, what makes these guys different? Nothing on a quantum level, but more practically speaking one farts around all day while the other meditates. Either guy doesn't have a social life, but the hermit guy unlike the toilet guy, decides to practice yoga techniques (pranayama mixed with hong-sau). Now the toilet guy went in there from the beginning with mindset that he is arleady where he will ever be -one with reality- thus it didn't matter that he would spend his life on the crapper. It made no differenct to him. He would get up and say "Me and the toilet are one!" and because of this he did not need to do anything or go anywhere -because there was no where to go of course. Now the hermit meditating in the cave never really spent time in the cave. Due to dramatic progress in deeper and deeper discoveries of the Self by the removal of identification with the body, using time-tested methods of meditation, he was able to become aware of his onenes with the cosmos, even having knowledge of the toilet guy. The point of the story is: get off the crapper. Take the cloak of identification with the transitory body off, and throw it out the window. And you will need to take it off sometime or another, so why not do it as soon as possible. Test out different methods to accomplish this feat and once you've found one that works, stick with it. (edited out "the table is clear." Although reality is one -the Self- this vision of it is not clear to us until we remove all obstacles standing in our way of seeing it -thus the need to clear the table. Also using crapper to reduce vulgarity, yet keeping to the spirit of the message.) Edited by: redpurusha at: 1/20/04 1:01 pm
ranger20 Registered User (1/19/04 1:24 pm) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers *Quote:* I went through most of that page (the oaks...page). Many quotes taken out of context and then the SRF statements about him being infallible. It hasn't convinced me that Yogananda is the problem here - other than that he tried to do too much and his organization has gone wacko and gotten out of hand. Nice turn of phrase. As close to a scientific description of the situation as we are likely to get. Several years ago a friend became interested in meditation. I gave him the AY. He was ready to send away for the lessons, and called to ask more questions. Since a public event was coming up, I invited him. A week or so after the event, he called to ask, "Listen...are some of those people...well, are they crazed?" I answered in the affirmative. He has not sent away for the lessons.
ranger20 Registered User (1/19/04 1:42 pm) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers *Quote:* With the number of monastics leaving since 2000, something that didn't happen before, I would say that the problems have been escalating more recently Some moments in time turn out, in retrospect, to have been more important than others. To borrow a phrase from the hi-tech industry, I think 2000 was an "inflection point" for SRF. I was at the 2000 Convocation, and that was the year Bro. Devananda gave his talk, arguing for a more compassionate view of self and others. It's been discussed here elsewhere, but it's the one where he quoted a psychologist who worked with a lot of SRF people as categorizing the common characteristics as "shame, guilt, and difficulty with feelings." A few months later, rumors swirled that D. had been soundly spanked by the organization, and the wagons were circled up. I suspect that's when the ouflows really kicked up. What is certain is that all four quarters of the 2001 SRF magazine carried a series of articles under Yogananda's name that were almost a parody of the hopeless perfectionistic mindset that Devananda was trying to see through. I know for certain that the first real shivers went down my spine at that time, as I let myself consciously speack the only conclusion I could come to: "these people are nuts!" Edited by: ranger20 at: 1/19/04 1:43 pm
Punk Yogi Registered User (1/19/04 3:42 pm) Reply	Yellow Mania One day, Yellowbeard put a magic herb under his tongue and experienced a glorious hallucination... "WOW! Yellowbeard is the table! Yellowbeard is the meal! Yellowbeard is everybody at the meal!" cried Yellowbeard. Feeling like Jesus on a mission, Yellowbeard floated past the laundry room like an omnipresent zombie and put his arms around a laundry basket full of unwashed socks and gym shorts. He then headed to the dining room to share his vegetable induced self-realization. Yellowbeard sat down at the dining table and began to study each person as they ate. There were all sorts of wonderful dishes and goodies on the table, but some of the people had eaten too much. Several had become surly from eating food which didn't agree with them. Yellowbeard smirked as he contemplated the multitude ways he could save their souls... Yellowbeard: It's time to eat kiddies, but first we must clear the table completely. Then we must sanitize it according to Yellowbeard's yellowbook standards. After the table is cleared, you will be able to contemplate the true nature of Yellowbeard without distortion. Yellowbeard is you. Therefore, you need nothing but Yellowbeard to show you the way to yourself. Rejoice! At last, you will be made to feast on the wisdom which emanates from Yellowbeard's beard. Punk: Omigod! what is that horrible smell? Hey Yellowbeard, any chance of you getting that laundry basket off the table? YB: There goes Punk, always talking about boxes. Punk: That "box" has your arm on it, and it smells like the Dickens. YB: Whose got an arm on who? Why, all you ever do is shag girls. Punk: Yellowbeard, why does everybody else have a problem but you? YB: Because I put a magic herb under my tongue, and in one glorious moment of hallucination, the herb showed me that I am the table. In fact, I am everything and everybody. Punk: Oh, barf! So now you're telling me that the girl I shagged was you? Ack! Ack! [Punk takes a large swig of water and rinses his mouth]. Look, amigo, just do your part in clearing the table by removing your stinking basket of yellowed briefs which are now causing my nostrils to flare and my eyes to burn. YB: Yes, Punk you are correct to say that its time to expose Yogananda's dirty laundry. Punk: Stop being a circus geek and bending all my ideas out of shape! We'll talk about Yogananda's dirty laundry once the table is actually cleared of YOUR dirty laundry. YB: Punk you seem annoyed. Is this all you've achieved after practicing Kriya for twenty years? Punk: Say, YellowBuddha, has it ever occurred to you that you're setting a bad example by demanding everyone else clear the table while refusing to remove your own mess? YB: Yes, Yogananda did leave SRF in a mess. And that's why everybody at this table is messed up. Punk: [to the others] Our resident circus geek! At least he's entertaining. YB: My function is merely to show everybody what a wonderful meal they could have if they removed everything from the table and fixed their eyes on me. Punk: [to himself] ... know what? I'll have the the chef send my meal to my room. YB: See! Yellowbeard was right! Punk can't handle the truth, so he's going to leave and shag another girl. [to Punk] Go you coward! When you're finally ready to have a real meal with a real man, come and fall at the feet of Yellowbeard! Punk: [pressing on a can of Lysol] Psst... Psst... Edited by: Punk Yogi at: 1/19/04 3:51 pm
SayItIsntSo Registered User (1/19/04 5:37 pm) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers I've been gone a week or so...good GOD what are you guys talking about? Edited by: SayItIsntSo at: 2/11/04 4:49 pm

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Commands

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.