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
chela2020 Slow Down (1/28/04 9:31 am) Reply	Posible lie by Mother Center I read in one of Mike Flynn's letters that Agnes Nerode (mother of Anil) had written them a letter of apology saying that Yogananda was a wonderful person. I asked Flynn if I could see it, he referred me to Brother B., and he said I could see it, that he would call me back. Weeks later I received a letter from the pubications department saying that we can't show this letter to outsiders. I have a Xeroxed copy of notes that a person took when this person called and talked with Agnes Nerode on 11-28-99. Notes were taken as she talked to him: "Knew Yogananda as my brother. He is not a holy an. He is not God. Disappointed in him. Played people against each other. Gurus, Gurus, Gurus, all just people. He took everything everyone had. He visited Mr. Lewis, who died, They put her Mrs. Lewis out-abandoned. Keep meditating. Take things that are valuable for you but forget Swami Yogananda. He was charming. Was going to write about it, but would rather write children's books. YOu do what is best for you." Does this sound like she really wrote a letter to SRF? Edited by: chela2020 at: 1/28/04 10:02 am
Borg108 Registered User (1/28/04 9:46 am) Reply	Re: Anil website From the excerpt of Anil Nerode's website that nag/chela posted: "...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." And also, "My father's lawyers put the source of the split, the allegations of sexual misconduct, into the papers filed for the suit." So let's take a look at what was really in the Los Angeles papers, and thus in the lawsuit, according to the newspaper article that nag/chela posted: "[Yogananda] has young girls in the immediate vicinity of his room going in and not all hours of the night." "Young girls have free access to the rooms of said Swami Yogananda." So where are the allegations of sexual misconduct? All we have is innuendo. If the so-called aquatic initiations that Anil mentions or any actual sexual misconduct had been mentioned in the lawsuit, they certainly would have made it into the papers. No wonder Anil had to delete this libelous information from his website. By his own information about court reporters, we see that none of it could be true. We also see that the Asian Exclusion Act in force at the time in California made it illegal for an East Indian to marry an American. Nag/chela called Yogananda a racist because he mentioned these laws. Anyone familiar with the writings of Yogananda would know that he spoke out against racial prejudice and intolerance his whole life. He supported Afro-American groups of SRF students. See www.yoganandaafrican-amer...otees.html Once again nag/chela's bitterness toward Yogananda has led her to present as truth just the opposite of what really was happening. Edited by: Borg108 at: 1/28/04 10:38 am
A voice in the supermarket Registered User (1/28/04 9:49 am) Reply	Re: Tight Little Boxes all this typology Aloha Punk Yogi, and blessings too. I would like to enlarge the scope of your writings. How valid is the MBTI typology? The more recently developed OCEAN (also called the Big Five) has emerged and is considered the most reliable today, maybe because it is rooted in statistical findinds (and it is rooted in Gordon Allport thinking too, over 50 years old). MBTI is much used and also misused in several sorts of business tests. But OCEAN is said to be qualitatively better. The big difference: MBTI operates with four main dimensions, OCEAN has five dimensions, and they were crystallised from "cluster statistics". What is missing in MBTI is a neurosis dimension - I quote myself just a little little bit below - I used to work with testing people at university level once - and I have stayed in contact with someone who has his livelihood as an MBTI tester (the test is used as a springboard for conversations in actual practice). The quote: ---------------------------- The Big Five is currently the most reliable and well-validated system of trait description. Feel free to think, "The Big 5 - fit for times of peace, more unfit for war", because openness and agreeableness may hinder combatting, and extroversion too may not fit secrecy making and desorientation (lying) that often goes along with warfare. Compare the traits below. The "Big Five" (each trait exists on a high/low scale) is the most used current psychometric measurement perspective in personality psychology. The five dimensions are: • Openness - also: Culture, Originality, or Intellect • Conscientiousness - or Consolidation, or Will to Achieve • Extroversion - or Surgency • Agreeableness - or Accommodation • Neuroticism - including: Need for Stability, Negative Emotionality MORE: oaks.nvg.org/eg6ra15.html ---------------------------- BEFORE WE GET TYPE-RIDDEN I just wanted to remind of it - that the MBTI findings are not conclusive and not considered the (theoretically) best ones either. Also, the individuality has a say in a good life too, is the bet. Greetings from afar, Edited by: A voice in the supermarket at: 1/28/04 9:51 am
A voice in the supermarket Registered User (1/28/04 9:57 am) Reply	Re: Anil website Ahem, The apartment circumstances that are used to discount Yogananda, couldn't they be used against almost every single father with teenager daughters in the house also? "I am world-destroying ... slaying". [From Bhagavad Gita 11.332]
nagchampa2 Registered User (1/28/04 10:11 am) Reply	Re: Anil website Voice, That would be called incest, which is less common. Borg: Why the woman was not put in the lawsuit? Iw as told that "it was because there was nothing released to the newspapers about the women outside SRF that Yogananda was involved with. Remember the case was dismissed before my Anil's father's evidence was brought out, because he had signed a 1928 agreement that he gave up all future financial claims against Yogananda, and this was a claim for part of the assets that Anil's father had generated for SRF, based on Yogananda's behavior being incompatible with the common interests of the organization". Dhirananda left him for the same reason. Edited by: nagchampa2 at: 2/2/04 8:42 am
A voice in the supermarket Registered User (1/28/04 10:11 am) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers - I'm glad to have been of service Etz - "I went through most of that page (the oaks.nvg.org/fila.html page). Many quotes taken out of context -" Well, most quotes ARE (as by definition) taken out of (a wider) context. And it is not easy to remedy that, I figure . . . I sometimes get tired of seeing that "out of context" defence tactics - if that is what it is. But then I am reminded that the pages on Yogananda and SRF may upset many today too, as they did some years ago. Now, my firm belief is - and this is in reply to the "out of context" rebuttal - that "A point is a point (is a point)". A good point can consist of key words, can be one or more key phrases, and they are well in tune with something essential in good schooling: Go for key points to grasp the material. I am not really a blaming type, I try to make do with telling things. basically. and I like good stories. "Fix your mind on Me alone," says Krishna (Bhagavad Gita 12.8] - but still I am glad that you say that the material and quotations you read on the page, convinced you "that he tried to do too much and his organization has gone wacko and gotten out of hand." That "he" is the guru Yogananda, not me. And what you say is really terribly grave. You also write: "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." I too appreciate and welcome a sane approach, one without humbug. Aloha Edited by: A voice in the supermarket at: 1/28/04 11:43 am
etzchaim Registered User (1/28/04 10:34 am) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers - I'm glad to have been of service Voice, you're page has not convinced me of anything. I've learned what I know about Yogananda and Kriya from my own Guru, who is not Yogananda. Just to explain my absense, I'm going to take a break from the Walrus. The movement it's headed in does not appear to be very useful to helping anyone, or working out the issues that people are having with SRF and Yogananda. There is a difference between coming to grips with the fact that a person who is being passed off as a perfect Avatar is really a human being and dealing with the dissillusionment that follows, and the kind of negative lashing out and spewing that is going on. I hope healing can be found. I was always taught to love the teaching and not the teacher. I continue to think that is the wisest approach. The focus should be on you and your movement toward enlightenment not on the 'perfections' or the 'faults' of others. I know these are empty statements, but I can't think of anything else to say about it. I no longer feel right about being here and it's not whether any claims or allegations are true or not that is causing the discomfort I'm feeling. I've heard all of them before - some of them from my own Guru, and some of them from Walrus. Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/28/04 11:11 am
A voice in the supermarket Registered User (1/28/04 11:01 am) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers - I'm glad to have been of service Slurring One (Etz). You have just sent a phoney message. It was: "Voice, you're page has not convinced me of anything". Thus, you talk with two tongues. For I rendered and quoted YOU. The evidence is below. ----------------------------------- ALL THE EVIDENCE I NEED IS HERE: ETZ MESSAGE (part 4 on the string: "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. (my emphasis)" ----------------------------------- Edited by: A voice in the supermarket at: 1/28/04 11:33 am
etzchaim Registered User (1/28/04 11:11 am) Reply	Re: Soul Snatchers - I'm glad to have been of service I am not interested in your attacks, Voice.
nagchampa2 Registered User (1/28/04 11:18 am) Reply	to Voice Voice, I thought about what you said about Fathers being in a room next to their daughters, which is definitely okay, but as a Mother, if I saw my husband going in and out of our daughter's room at all hours of the night, I would check up on that one. As far as Yogananda goes, maybe these women went in pairs, and maybe they were taking dictation. Hard to know. Here is what Sri Ramakrishna has to say about these matters: Page 188 of the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna: "A certain woman, about thirty-one years old and a great devotee, often visited Sri Ramakrishna and held him in high respect. She had been much impressed by Nityagopal's spiritual state and , looking upon him as her own son, often invited him to her house. Master: (to Nityagopal): "Do you go there?" Nityagopal: "Yes, I do. She takes me." Master: "Beware holy man! Go there once in a great while, but not frequently; otherwise you will slip from the ideal. Maya is nothig but "lust and greed". A holy man must live away from woman. All sink there. 'Even Brahma and Vishnu struggle for life in that whirlpool.'" M. (to himself) (M is the transcriber): "How strange! This young man has developed the state of paramahamsa. That is what the Master says now and then. Is there still a possibility of his falling into danger in spite of his high spiritual state? What an austere rule is laid down for a sadhu! He may slip from his ideal by associating intimately with women. How can an ordinary man expect to obtain liberation unless such a high ideal is set by holy men? The wman in question is very devout; but still there is danger. Now I understand why Chaitanya punished his disciple, the younger Haridas, so severely. In spite of his teacher's prohibition, Haridas conversed with the widow devotee. But he was a sannyasi. Therefore Chaitanya banished him. What a severe punishment! How hard is the rule for one who has accepted the life of renunciation!" Edited by: nagchampa2 at: 1/28/04 11:21 am
A voice in the supermarket Registered User (1/28/04 11:21 am) Reply	Re: Etz - your're not good to write of Etz, What you vainly call attack is an obvious correction of an all too phoney statement from you. Blunt denial of hard facts, and distorting things - Get out of it. Edited by: A voice in the supermarket at: 1/28/04 11:59 am
ugizralrite Registered User (1/28/04 12:11 pm) Reply	Today's Revelations There. At last it is all out in the open. The Nerodes have had their chance to speak, as anyone should. I have double-saved these two forum pages should they disappear. Can we move on now, healing, sharing, looking back with wonder? God is still God. (Or is God next?) That would work too, because then we could really get down to what matters. Whole lives are being shaken here, and will continue to be. Think of the Catholic Church scandals of this past year, and how lives were shaken, but there is also healing and justice. Glee and denuding the emperor are really childish pursuits, but I hope that deeper levels of seeking lie beyond.
nagchampa2 Registered User (1/28/04 2:13 pm) Reply	Re: Today's Revelations It seems for many that in our search for God, we put all of our trust in an organization or a guru whom we believe to be God, and then when we learn that the guru has clay feet, we crumble, just like him. And what it may boil down to is what Agnes said, “Just meditate.” The idea is to find God. Even SRF says to not get involved with politics, but just meditate. That isn’t easy for those of us who now feel betrayed because we expected too much from the organization or the guru. It isn’t easy to say to those persons who come on this board, that your organization and its guru both have clay feet. I put a warning on this thread, but everyone wanted to read it anyway. I only meant it for those who had doubts, and wanted to know what I found out. Did it destroy lives? I don’t think so; it only destroyed illusions about someone they loved, but many others who read this will not be affected by it at all because they love Yogananda unconditionally or just don’t believe it to be true. Most of us have had become disillusioned over Christianity or some other religion before turning to Hinduism. Did that destroy them? No. It hurt them; that is true, and some have been hurt more deeply than others. The idea is to not give up but to eventually get over the hurt and move forward by continuing to find God. But when you are caught in the middle of all this, when you have doubts, hurts, etc. you cannot go forward in the same manner as before. Sometimes, you just can’t move until you know the truth about an organization or a guru. Once do you, the healing process can begin, and you can go forward. Yet, even being on this board and discussing these issues, being angry with each other, or with the guru or organization is moving forward. And in the end there is only God. But we can't say to someone, get over it now, because we are all different. Some quietly walk away from a guru or organization and find another, some rant and rave about it. This is not a quiet place. Someday, though, I hope to just walk away from all these issues and just spend my time with God. I am sure that others feel the same way. Also, we are not here out of "glee" to disrobe the organizaton or the guru, and all this may seem childish to you, but it isn't to us. If you had ever read my many posts that I had written even years ago, you will see that I came out of pain over what was going on in SRF. I deleted out of guilt, because I felt we should not put down SRF. I deleted so many times that people were angry with me for ruining threads and claimed that some were even good, while I, on the other hands, felt they were horrible because I was putting down SRF. Then along came doubts about Yogananda, even years ago, and I deleted those posts out out guilt. Now after three years on Walrus, I have learned what I needed to know about him so that I could move forward, even if only an inch. I began to post, and then I deleted. People wrote me e-mails. I finally came back for those who wanted to know what I now know to be true about him. Knowing that others would suffer if they read this thread, I kept telling those who loved Yogananda not to read these posts. If I was wrong in coming back and posting, then I am sorry. Will I delete it? No. I cannot do that anymore.
Punk Yogi Registered User (1/28/04 3:02 pm) Reply	Yes....Blame God too This is God's integration dream He's slow to learn... just keeps getting the same nightmare over and over again in the form of repeated history. Your pain is His stupidity. Your genius is His urge to merge. As soon as this is understood, pity and compassion replace devotion. Help God only because, if He keeps having these nightmares, life is going to be tough. Express yourself with confidence because you are God and God is you. Never shrink your awareness. Never compromise your essence. Listen to God speaking in others to facilitate God's act of listening to Himself. Stop supplicating to God, and don't put all your faith in his representatives... because you too are a representative The pain and imperfection and division of the world is God's lack of integration. Your tragedy is His own Self Alienation in manifestation
YellowBeard420 Slow Down (1/29/04 1:11 am) Reply	Who Needs Me to Say that Water is Wet > Nagchampa2 wrote: "Sometimes, you just can’t move until you know the truth about an organization or a guru. Once do you, the healing process can begin, and you can go forward. Yet, even being on this board and discussing these issues, being angry with each other, or with the guru or organization is moving forward. And in the end there is only God. But we can't say to someone, get over it now, because we are all different. Some quietly walk away from a guru or organization and find another, some rant and rave about it. This is not a quiet place. Someday, though, I hope to just walk away from all these issues and just spend my time with God. I am sure that others feel the same way." I totally agree with these thoughts. Those of us here that are honestly searching for the real biography of Yogananda, are not interested in continuing endless debates about him that go round and round. We're not trying to spread gossip, so we can have dirty laundry to chew on here. We want the truth to be plainly visible so that we can be done with this whole mess and to move on with our lives. We just want God, and not someone there blocking the light of the sun pretending they're God. We didn't renege on the guru-disciple relationship, Yogananda did. He not only betrayed us, but flat out conned us from the beginning as many people do in life unfortunately. This is just another lesson to learn. Like I've said on the board many times, the closer we get to Truth (Self, God, Reality, call it what you will), the more subtle the illusions become to bring us back down into delusion. And Yogananda dropped us back down hard. I knew something was seriously wrong with Yogananda's teachings way before I knew of any dirt on him. Even with just SRF as my sole source of information on him, I kept running into things that he would say that would slap me in the face again and again that I knew were just wrong. Was it SRF editing, no. I have all his voice recordings released by SRF, and I got the same effect: "God, God, God ... I'm going to take you to God ... You better listen to God ... I'm God's right hand man ... I know God's will, it's my will as opposed to your will ... God, God, God". ---------- > Ugizralrite wrote: "I have double-saved these two forum pages should they disappear." Thanks for your efforts. There's a lot of fear in the air. And when there's fear, unjust actions tend to take place. ---------- Punk Yogi -- great post. Those words were "clean", meaning that there were no obstructions in your thinking to cause any distortions. Words like those are applicable to every reader and need no interpretation. I was going to go into a lengthy YellowBeard commentary, but there's no need whatsoever. Who needs me to say that water is wet, go touch it yourself.
chela2020 Slow Down (1/29/04 5:10 am) Reply	Re: Who Needs Me to Say that Water is Wet Punk Yoga, I loved your post. What more can I say? Wow. Yellowbeard, Your post was great. Like you, I used to read things that Yogananda said that rather slapped me in the face too, but I ignored them, well, come to think of it I would call MC, and a nun would just say, "Well, he isn't perfect," so I would then try to ignore them. Then I read Ma Durga's book, and more stuff came up. It came up in the lessons, etc. Speaking of recordings, years ago on this board someone said that SRF used to play a tape of his where he said that Divine Mother was chewing us out for not doing things right, and I thought, "Why would Divine Mother do that? He wanted to chew us out and so said She was doing so. Why blame it on Her?" I, too, save all the posts. What people will allow, can be put on YB's post. He can post there whatever I have said in this thread, and I have saved all of these threads. Others may want to okay their posts also so they won't be lost for those who want to read it. The fear is high, because, if MC stopped Nerode, they could stop Walrus, or Walrus can just delete. I don't worry about Flynn coming to my door. He didn't throw Nerode in jail, just made him delete. It would also cause them another scandal, which they don't want. Someday, though, they are going to have to own up to these things. Yellowbeard, You are right, we didn't renege on the guru-disciple relationship, Yogananda did. When I chose him as my guru, I choose him for life, because I thought certain things about him to be true, but I came, I saw, and I had to leave. At first I thought, "another religion has bit the dust. where will I go, what will i do?" I was totally lost, but I just made sure this time that it would not happen again. No organization is ever going to tell me what to do again. And I found what I was looking for. Others will find what they are looking for also, and they will be much wiser when they search out another guru and/or organization, that is, if that is what they desire. Even if a person leaves and is so fed up with God and religion, that is okay, because I feel that that person is still on the path to God. I was an atheist for 25 years after the Jehovah's Witnesses kicked me out. I learned alot in those years that I needed to learn, so when the time was right, when I wanted to know about God again, if He/She really existed, I was able to come back and find out. Once I knew for sure that He/She existed, I was not able to turn my back on God again; I had to continue to meditate, and for that, I believed I needed a guru, but in reality, while they are a great help, it isn't always necessary. It depends upon the person. One person said recently to a few of us that were talking about gurus: When you build a house you need a scaffle, but once the house is built, you take the scaffle away. But I recall after leaving the Buddhists that just chanting "Om Namah Shivaya" from a tape that a friend sent to me, put me in a higher state where I had one wonderful experience. (By the way, I loved the Buddhists. The people were great. I left because they didn't believe in God but in just a Law that they never called God, and this is only one group. I left because I wanted to know if there was a God.)
redpurusha Registered User (1/29/04 8:24 am) Reply	Re: The real question shhh..... I hear something. A voice... No. A voice in the supermarket. I 'm glad to hear your writing style has become more intelligible. Maybe for the benefit of all (mankind?). In all fairness I have not been at the Castle for some years. Indeed, there is a lot of rooms to cover, but so is there a lot of lessons to read. Not upset? I was wrong for misjudging you here. I myself have gone through periods of being upset in life. Yes, my outlook on Yogananda's refusal of the hermitage was limited to the autiobiography. I have not researched any further on SRF's actions regarding this. "No one who has not renounced his desire (including the desire to be a yogi as well) can ever become a yogi. [Cf. The Bhagavad Gita 6.2] >"Think of that, all of ye -" Hmm.. a desire to quench all desires. Is it a self-contradiction? I would like to look into this Gita verse further and get back to you.
redpurusha Registered User (1/29/04 8:46 am) Reply	Re: The real question Voice, I think when etz wrote it (castle site) did not convince her of anything, she was referring specifically to Yogananda and kriya (opinion of him and kriya). etz - "Voice, you're page has not convinced me of anything. I've learned what I know about Yogananda and Kriya from my own Guru, who is not Yogananda." You provide her quote to show she was convinced of something other (the org went wacko). This is the problem of taking things out of context, or breaking streams of thoughts that are meant to be together. Yes, a quote is by definition taking something out of a whole, but there are reasonable limits. We have to admit, there is a fundamental problem with sharing ideas and information through languange and the written word. Donald Walters gives a good commentary on this, of freezing reality (or what we think is reality) into word form. It has its use but also disadvantages in misrepresenting or the more rampant misunderstanding or twisting by others. edited type error (by/but) Edited by: redpurusha at: 1/29/04 10:41 am
nagchampa2 Registered User (1/29/04 9:03 am) Reply	Re: The real question Redpurusha, Are you in Ananda? Just wondered, because if you recall Pig Ma, she is at Ananda now and is going to India to be at their Ananda there. (NO, I am not saying anything to her about PY.) I am excited for her. She is so happy, and what a blessing to be able to go to India and be in the work there.
A voice in the supermarket Registered User (1/29/04 9:54 am) Reply	Re: The real question - Clearing up a mistake Peace to you all A faulty approach can bring faulty evidence, Redpu. And twisted irony give me a dose of queasiness. YOU write: "Voice, I think when etz wrote it (castle site) did not convince her of anything, she was referring specifically to Yogananda and kriya (opinion of him and kriya)." Think as you can or want, but HER evidence is that she says the oaks ... page HAS convinced her that Yogananda tried to do too much and his organization has gone wacko and out of hand. Afterwards - in a later posting - she denies it. And the effects of such conduct are not good. EVIDENCE ON THE STRING First she wrote: "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. (my emphasis)" Some weeks later her "tune" was: "Voice, you're page has not convinced me of anything". You don't have to be a lawyer to see this undermines creditbility. ONLY FOOLED, ONLY HUMAN? And then you come to the comment, not really to the rescue: "I 'm glad to hear your writing style has become more intelligible." Well, there have been pros and cons. But some twenty pages may be more easily understood than others that deal with cult problems. You could even say with some justification that I modified some writings for YOU - In its day it was very difficult to venture online and publish dozens of the earlier hidden drawbacks and defects attached to Yogananda's teachings and those of SRF. I went online some time before SRF. At that time I think there was not a single one who tried to inform about SRF teachings and their defects or effects. Now there are many. I welcome it. I for my part had had my experiences with SRF between 1970 and 1978. I was seriously into it too. And therefore I got so much more disillusioned when I noted some things were too wrong for me to go along with. A "The more commited, the more disillusioned tale". And later, in the middle 90s, in the upsurge era of the Internet, I gave the matter some thought and decided to go public (online) with some candid criticism. But much has not been published, after all, even if well founded. I have not sought to deride. It is the content that is so unwelcome to many SRF devotees that they send fire mail and so on or strive to hinder the spreading of these ideas. THERE COULD BE DANGERS OF GOING ONLY HALFWAY On the Walrus the WC (Walrus Committee) seeks to draw a line between finding fault with SRf and blaming Yogananda. That is a silly, thoughtless approach. For evidence tells that SOME problems of the teachings stem from Yogananda, not disciples that headthe SRF. To sum up: Confusing teachings, confused followers. Some take to defence methods to avoid seeing all of it. The Cult busters - SRF division allows posters to go a long way, by contrast. It does not strive to express only a PART of one's deeper problems, saying no to going as far as the matters demand for help or healing. And, well, after one and a half year's pause I cerntainly found deviant, unfit, ugly and rude conduct on the Walrus board. If fairness in communicating is at fault in Yogananda disciples who make a show of being devoted or things like that, they are perhaps not fit to look into a page in which there is good counsel about matter-of-fact and being-fair writing. Just a little page - oaks.nvg.org/wm1ra16.html BACK TO WINDSOR CASTLE The parts of it that deal with the cult and the problems fostered or favoured by Yogananda's teachings in the first place, are not too stern. But all along I was a bit worried about wayward Farm Animals and the SRF'ers that may read it, though. Concern, you know. For unless there is strength or staunchness to take an unwelcome truth (or three, or three hundred), unwelcome defence manoeouvres can set in and do havoc. That may be THE problem for the culter too. I have tried to avoid the most alarming set-backs by a set of methods, including warnings here and there. There is nothing wrong in forming summaries and well formed, pointed statements that SUM UP for example dogmas of Yogananda. Textbooks do it "all the time", in fact. Some people are helped that way. Just don't try to impose a problem where none is, and don't try to invent them either. You write, Redpu: "This is the problem of . . . breaking streams of thoughts that are meant to be together. . . . by there are reasonable limits . . . It has its use but also disadvantages in misrepresenting or the more rampant misunderstanding or twisting by others" The case is, there can be problems AND they can be mastered. And there are normally vast benefits too, as I just have hinted at. Skill in this area is good. it is a boon in a study. A few years ago I took some time out to clarify various connecting methods and ways to present them: oaks.nvg.org/eg5ra14.html I have really tried to go gentle now. Edited by: A voice in the supermarket at: 1/29/04 11:29 am

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: