"Should" revisited - www.ezboard.com

>

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > SRF Teachings and Ideals > "Should" revisited
	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
AumBoy Registered User (4/21/02 9:32 pm) Reply ezSupporter	"Should" revisited *Quote:* Applying these principles to the spiritual warrior, when he finds himself in a scene of inner psychological war in which peace and spiritual victory are threatened by sense temptations, he should not waver, but should see in his inner battle an opportunity to conquer his enemy-habits and, further, to establish within himself the heaven of permanent happiness. I stumbled across this passage today in the Bhagavad Gita on page 253 and noticed the “shoulds”. I had to read it a couple of times because of the way it is written. I wondered, “What if the person reading this passage ‘wavers’ and/or does not see an ‘opportunity’? Would there be something wrong with the person? I think it would be determined by an individual’s mental outlook. Why couldn’t the passage be written: *Quote:* Applying these principles as a spiritual warrior, when you find yourself in a scene of inner psychological war in which peace and spiritual victory are threatened by sense temptations, remain steadfast, see in this inner battle an opportunity to conquer the enemy-habits and, further, establish within the heaven of permanent happiness. In re-reading the first passage, it is written as if it is not for the reader but for someone else. Does anyone else see this? Is it written this way because it is a more humble perspective? Leaving opportunity for the individual to choose? It seems to be, rather, indirect. (P.S. I'm still around, though not as frequently. )
motlom Registered User (4/22/02 6:46 am) Reply	Re: "Should" revisited I don't post much, but I just wanted to say, I'm glad you're still around, Aumboy. I enjoy your posts tremendously. A counselor I saw for a while used to say, "Don't should on yourself!" That advice has since saved me from TREMENDOUS grief! I wish I had heard it earlier.
Should Free Registered User (4/22/02 10:53 pm) Reply ezSupporter	To Aumboy (This message was left blank) Edited by: Should Free at: 4/22/02 10:59:49 pm
Should Free Registered User (4/22/02 10:57 pm) Reply ezSupporter	To Aumboy You are right Aum boy. In fact, you can translate any scripture to a non-shoulding, not guilty inducing, friendly, modern, language. The SRF lessons, which are the core of the teachings, would become much, much more meaningful for the 21st Century if all those shoulds -- that were meaningful during the first part of the last century -- were translated into a friendly, non military language. The whole experience of being in SRF would change. SRF would be reborn! Out of 100 people that sign for the lessons only 6% finish reading the whole set! The reason is quite obvious. Nowadays, with all those shoulds no one can even take the lessons seriously. I have tried to tell this to SRF in my letters. Like you, I have done some "translations" to prove the point. Yes, it is possible! Thanks. At least one more human being understands -- I feel validated. In the Lessons we find "churches should keep abreast of times" Why SRF does not practice what Master instructed? I’m sure Master does not like all this shoulding in the lessons -- Should Free (Note: In tune with this subject, yesterday I posted in the SRFfeedback something you will like to read (from Kabir)). Edited by: Should Free at: 4/24/02 12:46:15 am
username Registered User (4/23/02 7:08 am) Reply	6% finish the lessons To what does SRF attribute the large drop off rate ?
Should Free Registered User (4/24/02 1:17 am) Reply ezSupporter	Re: 6% finish the lessons It is always the same brainless, cult thinking, dear username. SRF is perfect, the teachings are perfect, it all came from above even the comas, so where lies the problem? It is the devotee's fault of course! He/she is not ..... ready. But the reality is different, very different. In fact, it is quite the opposite. The more mature and differentiated the individual, the more spiritual advanced, the less inclined will be to allow an organization to organize, control, and manipulate, his or her life through guilt inducing "shoulding." When I was 24, inmature, naive and materialistic, I allowed SRF to do that to me. Today, as I approach my fiftees, I would never allow anyone to do what SRF did to me. I conclude then, that if SRF is right and the devotee drops the lessons because he or she is not ready, then, now, after more than 20 years in the path, all of a sudden I'm not ready! It follows then, that I have been moving backwards as many of you guys/gals! This either means that we are all stupid or that people are not dropping the lessons because they are not ready -- there is another reason. Think about. You sign today (2002) to the lessons and you get the first three lessons loaded with all that should, cultish, language. Would you continue? Perhaps, if you are not mature enough. But you keep reading and after a few more lessons you do not have enough time in your life for anything but to to the innumerable things that are expected from you in the lessons -- all those "you have to do, you must be, you ought to do, you should be, you should do, you ought to be, you have to be, you must do." what do you conclude? Everything is wrong with me, I have to change myself beginning to end, so you turn yourself into "a project." You are no longer a human being or even a divine being worthy of your unconditional love. You are now "a project," and of course, now that you are in SRF, you have a lot of monks and nuns, and books, and lessons, and gurus, and matas, eager to tell you what you SHOULD become and how you MUST manage your "project" TO THE MINUTE DETAIL. I conclude that if you do not stop the lessons, if you belong to that "blessed, ready" 6% there is a serious problem in your character. Either you have a dependent personality disorder, you are an extreme idealist and for sure you are quite inmature. On top of that, you surely do not understand the spiritual path. FROM "ONE HUNDRED POEMS FROM KABIR" TRANSLATION BY RABINDRANATH TAGORE. LXV POEM JAB MAIN BHULA, RE BHAI "O brother! when I was forgetful, my true Guru showed me the Way Then I left off all rites and ceremonies, I bathed no more in the holy water; Then I learned that it was I alone who was mad, and the whole world beside me was sane; and I had disturbed these wise people. From that time I knew no more how to roll in The dust of obeisance: I do not ring the temple bell; I do not et the idol on its throne; I do not worship the temple with flowers. It is not the austerities that mortify the flesh which are pleasing to the Lord, When you leave off your clothes and kill your senses, you do not please the Lord. The man who is kind and who practices righteousness, who remains passive amidst the affairs of the world, who considers all creatures on earth as his own self, He attains the Immortal Being, the true God is ever with him Kabir says: "He attains the true Name whose words are pure, and who is free from pride and conceit".
redpurusha Registered User (4/24/02 8:58 am) Reply	Re: 6% finish the lessons You wrote, "I conclude that if you do not stop the lessons, if you belong to that "blessed, ready" 6% there is a serious problem in your character. Either you have a dependent personality disorder, you are an extreme idealist and for sure you are quite inmature. On top of that, you surely do not understand the spiritual path." Or, for some strange reason, you want to read all the teachings given by Master. Why would you not want to read the lessons he devoted so much time to? I haven't yet finished reading all of them but made sure to get them all and also look forward in reading more gems of wisdom from P. Yogananda. If thats grounds for a serious problem in character then I admit to it. Also, the most basic aspect of the spiritual path is to find a true guru, be guided by him, and keep company with him. P. Yogananda taught that salvation is 50% God's Grace, 25% gurus help, and only 25% disciples part, This clearly implies that salvation requires dependency on God and Guru. That's nothing to be ashamed of and its not a disorder. On the other hand, if you are to mean that SRF changed Yogananada's original writing by replacing it with shoulds and have to's (then that is a problem my friend, and you're right in protesting) but if that is how Master taught, and you don't like it, then don't follow his teachings. The bible and the hindu scriptures give commandments and laws to follow, "Thou shall love they neighbor as thyself" for example, and in Buddhist teachings there are do's and don'ts (what you should do and what you shouldn't do), they are not given to bring down your self-esteem, make you feel unworthy, but to help you avoid the mistakes that can be made and result in suffering. They are there to help you guide you to the Lord's Kingdom within. "The commandments are for man's welfare, not for the Lord's gratification! They are warnings to the unwary, that, although certain attitudes and actions may at first seem fulfilling, the end of the road for anyone pursuing them is not happiness, but pain." -P. Yogananda
AumBoy Registered User (4/24/02 1:34 pm) Reply ezSupporter	Rewrite suggestions Should Free, Although I was aware of the "should" phrases, I didn't "get it" until I stumbled across the above passage. It's just one short passage (actually an entire paragraph). I read it once and thought, "What's up with this?" So I must have read it a dozen times before I got it. 1. I noticed that as I was reading it, it was as if I were reading about someone else as a spiritual warrior, not me. 2. I wonder why the language was this way. Was it because Swami Yogananda was an easterner in the west? Different culture, different language, few friends. A stranger in a strange land, etc., etc., etc. Was it the humble approach to the writing for the West? Not telling people directly what to do, but giving them a hint? What was the mindset of the American people in the 20's, 30's, and 40's? Would they have been more accepting (possibly less aware) of the "shoulds"? Remember, Master arrived immediately following WWI and then was here through the Great Depression and WWII. What was the mindset of America then? 3. I remembered Gyanamata saying, "He came for me." I remember hearing "develop a personal relationship with God." When I read the passage above I thought, if He came for me, who is He talking to? When I rewrote the passage, I rewrote it as if he were talking "directly" to me. Will the language be perfect? Not necessary. Will all the "shoulds" be removed. Most probably not. But they're mine. My personal teachings. So what I'm going to do, is rewrite the Lessons as if He were writing and speaking directly to me, removing as much indirect language as I feel. Who's to say that God is not "Divinely inspiring" me to do this for me? I mean, after all, the ultimate selfishness is Self-realization. And maybe I'll email MW with each one because I know that they may not have the time to do this on their own. I'm not doing this for SRF, but for me. Maybe it will give me greater God-attunement? Beautiful poem. Right on. Since leaving the ashram, I've been questioning everything, mostly in order to remove the dogma I have carried around for so long. Edited by: AumBoy at: 4/24/02 1:51:39 pm
Should Free Registered User (4/25/02 12:07 am) Reply ezSupporter	Re: Rewrite suggestions Dear Aumboy I suggest that you post here your "translations" -- in the Walrus. I'm sure Master's thoughts will feel terrific in a modern, should free, language. When Master came he addapted to his time. Preachers had to should everyone to be heard. Master was wise enough to addapt to his times. But SRf refuses to addapt. A 1930 language will not work in 2002. A 1930 organization will not be successful in 2002 -- and so on. Can't they see it? Are they blind or what????? Dear redpurusha Master never wrote the lessons. They are compilations from the direct disciples. Possibly Mrinalini Mata wrote most of them -- this is why the lessons sounds like medioeval catholicism. The lessons, the core of the teachings are the worst. They are most loaded with those "dirty" words -- "you should do, you should be, you must, you have to, you ought to do...... If you are reading the lessons I suggest you do it very careful. They are a heavy brain wash. You are brain washing yourself but you do not know it.
srfwalrus ezOP (4/25/02 6:48 am) Reply	Re: Rewrite suggestions Remember that Master didn't compile the Lessons, others (of questionable character) did. We see the same editorial problems in other stuff SRF has published. Aumboy: If you do decide to do this we can create a special section for the new Lay Disciple edited Lessons. Think of it! Lessons of the people, by the people, and for the people. No more outside control and having these bad ladies between us and Master. Debate can follow each lesson to help tune them up. Watch the copyright laws… SRF is vicious in its defense of it’s right to be the sole source of Master’s words. P.S. Maybe some of the old Walrus participants will come back for this?
redpurusha Registered User (4/25/02 5:16 pm) Reply	Re: Rewrite suggestions Dear Aumboy, thats a good idea for you to interpret the Gita as if Yogananda/God were directly talking to you, if that is something that will inspire you or give you greater attunement. As long as you are careful not to change the intent of the passages. The Master's teachings are both universal and individual. Personaly, I don't mind the language or style of the Gita (not speaking directly to the reader). I've read it over and can place myself in Arjuna's position. The fact is, that the Bhagavad Gita's universality allows it to be applied in so many creative ways. P. Yogananda- "Master said to me... "You want to interpret to the world the actual dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna as perceived by Vyasa and reaveald to you" -xxv So Yogananda interpreted the Gita in that perspective, in which he is talking about Arjuna (through attunement with Arjuna's soul) and the dialogue is revealed to him. From a deeper perspective you can say he is Arjuna (that he was Arjuna in a previous incarnation) and so God is directly speaking to him. But Yogananda didn't write the Gita as if he was Arjuna, but that he was Yogananda communing with Arjuna, thus he uses the language used in speaking as a third person observing the dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna. This is what he was asked to do by his Master and inspired by God. As a result, instead of "stay steadfast" you have "he should not wavor" etc. Really it carries the same meaning, except that it is indirectly talking to the reader. Mabybe its me, but I don't get psychologically hurt by reading the Gita in this style. But I can see how that by making the language geared directly towards the reader can be beneficial. As if God is talking to me, I am the warrior soul ready to do battle with the senses. I can imagine this when reading the Gita the way its written now. Dear Should Free, the fact that the Lessons were compiled by disciples doesn't make them useless or hurtful, I think. The gospels and many other scriptures were written by second hand or third hand accounts of what Jesus said and what happened, and most of us accept them as fairly accurate and one of the most important pieces of literature in human history. In the case of Yogananda, the situation is much better, not only did he write most of his books, we also have live audio recordings and photos. And even if SRF edited it, sometimes extensively and even to the disadvantage of the teachings, all in all the Spirit of Yogananda's teachings is preserved. If Yogananda told you directly you should do something or should live a certain way, because that would be to your benefit, would you respond by saying you don't have to do or shouldn't do anything?
KS Registered User (4/25/02 8:43 pm) Reply	Re: Rewrite suggestions The Gita is a lot to bite off... maybe start with a Lesson or two.
Should Free Registered User (4/26/02 1:13 am) Reply ezSupporter	The "shoulds" -- why it is a dirty word. Dear Redpurusha This is my opinion regarding the "shoulds." I know there are other perspectives, but this is the one I practice and the one that gives me best results. I'm aware that it is a perspective only, since the relativistic world does not have absolutes, but science today says similar things in regard to the "shoulds." So, here it is: Dogma and "Shoulds" are very similar. And they separate us from God. Why? Because God is everything said Master, and all the great teachers. "Shoulds" by definition are a form of fragmentation -- this yes, that no. A part of the Whole is left out of our love and ability to accept every time we utter a should, verbally or mentally. Each "should" leaves a part of God OUT. We become increasingly fragmented, intollerant, dogmatic, UNHAPPY. Sounds like SRF? Acceptance (most especcially self acceptance), embracing, tolerance, integration and universal love are exactly the opposite of "shoulds" and dogma. Only by practicing these qualities we begin to encompass the Whole. Before that, we are just in a very primitive form of religion. In my opinion, in such primitive paths, it is more likely that you will end up in a mental institution than with God realization. About a year ago, I brought a friend that came from Europe to visit the new Lakeshrine temple. It was morning time, during the week, and there was no one in the temple. My friend went inside to meditate, and I stayed in the back contemplating the temple. It was peaceful. Then a thought came to my mind. Not one of those regular thoughts, you know. It was definitely a special thought. Mind you that at that time I was very loyal to SRF. I want to share that thought with you here: "The Catholic church's worst sin throughout history has been to torture humanity with the "you should NOT DO." SRF's worst excess has been to torture all of us with the "you should DO." There is a great paralell here. The Catholic Church obsesses with the "you should not DO" and SRF obsesses with the "you should DO" (Wake up in the morning and : Say a prayer, EE, mahamudras, say a prayer, 20-20-20. tension/relaxation exercise, chanting, Hong Sau, Om, Kriya, Stillness, Devotion, Final prayer, prayer before breakfast, practice the presence of God all day long. Then all over again during the evening: prayer, EE, mahamudras, prayer, 20-20-20. tension relaxation, chanting, Hong Sau, Om, Kriya, Stillness, Devotion, Final prayer, and before sleep, do not forget.... "never go to sleep before contacting God" and additionally, be always a good boy /girl.) Which one is more effective? I honestly think that the SRF formula is much more effective of course.... It can be much faster to make people mentally sick and send them straight to a mental institution! By the way, Aumboy, I support your idea 100%. To focus in the Lessons seems wiser to me, because it will have a greater impact. The lessons are the core of the teachings, the ultimate authority -- unfortunately! I would not worry about copy rights. As we all see, it is quite difficult to kill free expression in the internet. Additionally, you will be doing your own interpretation. Edited by: Should Free at: 4/27/02 11:03:09 pm
redpurusha Registered User (4/26/02 9:31 am) Reply	Re: The "shoulds" -- why it is a dirty word. Should Free, thank you for the explanation and sharing of your personal thoughts. I think I see your perspective. I can't speak from personal experience living in SRF as a monk because I wasn't one, but you sound like you have had some experience. As a lay disciple I am more flexilble with the applications of the teachings, such as doing my own stretches prior to meditation, incorportating them with a handful of the SRF EE's (ones which I find most beneficial to me). Master tried to make the teachings as universal as possible, of course this has its benefits, but also when you get to some subtleties of the teachings there is a point where they become personalized for each devotee, I think. Yogananda himself taught even kriya itself a little differently to different disciples. So you are right in making the teachings personalized for yourself. But I do remember reading in "Man's Eternal Quest," Yogananda says to someone if they have a bad habit and telling themselves "not to do this" wouldn't work, then they should try to tell themselves the positive "do this." I don't know about any editiding SRF might have made, but he does say this and maybe I even heard this on one of his audio recordings. So, taking SRF completely out of the picture, if you look at Yogananda's own quotes, he does teach some points this way. But this example given was actually a personalized teaching for a particular devotee who was having problems with a bad habit, so it only makes sense that perhaps Yogananda would tell you personally to do away with the shoulds and shouldn'ts because for you, that simply doesn't work. Do what will bring you most inspiration to meditate and bring you greater attunement with Master. I don't think he would mind one bit. And of course have no guilts or regrets as long as you are getting closer to the goal. Master indeed did say that God is everything, he also explained further that the universe is his body, an expression of himself, and that both light and darkness and all dualities are also an expression of himself. However, Yogananda stressed to look at the light, the positive side of life, not the darkness, because when you are looking for a way out of a room you look for the light, the opening, not the dark corners.
Should Free Registered User (4/27/02 3:38 am) Reply ezSupporter	I'm a lay disciple Thanks Redpursha for your encouragement. I have never been a monk. MY MADNESS DID NOT MAKE IT TO THAT LEVEL! However, it is not necessary to be a monk, because the SRF lessons are the same for monks and lay disciples -- which if you analyse it deeply enough you will see that such thing is an atrocity in itself. We, lay disciples, have also been seriously hurt with the countless "you should do." I know many lay members that have been seriously injured. You say: <<<<Master indeed did say that God is everything, he also explained further that the universe is his body, an expression of himself, and that both light and darkness and all dualities are also an expression of himself. However, Yogananda stressed to look at the light, the positive side of life, not the darkness, because when you are looking for a way out of a room you look for the light, the opening, not the dark corners.>>>> Master is referring here to the dualistic approach. I do not like that approach at all, because it leads to fragmentation and inner conflicts. Master can keep that type of wisdom for others, it is definitely not for me. Many got sick for trying to look only to the light. Denying the shadows, or fighting them obsessively is not my cup of tea. Integration, a non-dual approach, seeing everything as God makes much more sense. Then we realize that the dualistic perspective is helpful only under VERY, VERY FEW exceptions.
AumBoy Registered User (4/28/02 11:24 am) Reply ezSupporter	Re: "Should" revisited Wow! Lots of responses. Ok, where to begin? The quote I took from the Gita was simply a sampling of "shoulding". I had not meant to say that the Gita is not good or inspirational. In this particular example, it is written: "should not waver". In order to "not waver" one must think of "wavering" first. One has to know what this is. Similar to the story Master relates about the person who wanted yogic powers but could not control his mind. He was told, "Do not think of a monkey." This I related back to what Should Free was saying about the lessons. Bingo. Then I understood. As to rewriting: I am planning to do this with the lessons. I'm very sure the intent will remain the same. Why? Because I believe/feel that behind it is Yogananda anyway. (My opinion.) I think it was around 1888 (I'll look up the exact quote) that it was determined that the Bible had over 34,000 translation errors in it and still the message remains, essentially, the same. So I feel that the my little undertaking will not change the intent. But my suggestion was for each person to do his own translation but I will, as time permits, post some of mine here. Also there is already one lesson that has been done some which could be used to start a new section. As to the mentality of the American people and their emotional states I questioned above, I came across a passage in a book I'm reading that mentioned that after a world war, people are spent psychologically, emotionally, physically, spiritually, making them more open to mind-control. Now, I'm not suggesting that Master was trying to perform mind control, what I am suggesting is that many people were beaten down on many different levels and the teachings, as they had been written, have served to help many as spiritual succor. Two world wars and a depression. Very difficult period for many.

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Control Image

Click to receive email notification of replies

Click to stop receiving email notification of replies

jump to:

- SRF Walrus - SRF Teachings and Ideals -

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