>
SRF Walrus
Mt. Washington, Ca
Open discussions about SRF
Gold Community SRF Walrus
    > SRF Teachings and Ideals
        > ex monks please?		 New Topic    Add Reply

Page 1 2 3 4
<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
Author Comment
chela2020
Registered User
(1/9/04 2:38 pm)
Reply 		/
(This message was left blank)

Edited by: chela2020 at: 1/12/04 7:22 am
dawnrays
Registered User
(1/9/04 2:52 pm)
Reply 		Move along...
Chela,

For God's sake, get a life...

What are you, 50? You don't like Yogandanda or gurus and really I think you've overdosed on religeon. You also don't seem to have an opinion of your own unless you can quote it from "scripture"... No wonder you're confused.

So move along. We do like guru's. You and YB don't... That's your problem.. Nobody is INTERESTED in your negative opinion or his, either..

I'm sorry but your new thread did not manage to shake the spiritual foundations of my life..

I repeat, nobody gets "chased off the board", they come or go or whatever... Take a little responsibility at least for posting on a message board for God's sake..

Act your age.. After the idiotic and adolecent crap you've been pulling with your id's and all of that, I'm suprised you have the nerve to critisize anybody...

By the way, I would classify the "revelations" in your thread as a "mild misunderstanding". This is what your loosing sleep over?

Give me a break... It happed 50 years ago, OK? OK? Am I getting through? Hello? Move along... get past it, it is NOTHING...

etzchaim
Registered User
(1/9/04 5:26 pm)
Reply 		Re: Gang of Three
I'm thoroughly enjoying YB's presence on the board. He pay's attention to me.

...oh... no, that's not why!

He's not boring, he's exhausting! It's the challenge of trying to figure out if what he's saying has to do with us or with some problem he's having internally that he's trying to work out through trying to help us free ourselves from the problems he's having. Phew! This is serious dissertation material. I'm eating it up.

As for you two, one of you is telling the other to 'move along' after being accused of trying to 'chase her off the board', and the one who is fearing she is being chased off the board has previously deleated all of her earlier messages because she wasn't comfortable with them. I don't know who's chasing who's tail any more!

username
Registered User
(1/9/04 7:27 pm)
Reply 		chela:
I am interested in your opinion.

chela2020
Registered User
(1/10/04 1:01 am)
Reply 		Re: chela:
Username,

If by opinion you are referring to what I said about Yellowbeard having his own opinion as to whether we need a guru or not and my having my own opinion, well, yes, I feel most of us need a guru to help us reach our goal.

Edited by: chela2020 at: 1/10/04 1:20 am
YellowBeard420
Slow Down
(1/10/04 4:07 am)
Reply
Ex-Monastic Abuse Policy
> OneTaste: "If you look at xmonks posts, there isn’t anything at all about his personal experience. Nada. And she pointed that out ..."

The point is totally being missed here so YellowBeard needs to address this further. It doesn't matter what Xmonk says. That's not the issue. If he just comes here to chew everyone out, that's his business. This board is set up for people like *him* and not *you*. This board is so he can deal with the issues of SRF after being spit out by the organization. It doesn't matter what he says. This is *his* boat. You're just along for the ride my friend. And so is YellowBeard, and Dawnrays, Etzchaim, Redpurusha, etc. Who are we to question Xmonk? How can we say what's right for him?

YellowBeard stays clear of Xmonk and all the ex-monastics and does not address them unless they address him. He stays out of the way and speaks on a non-dual approach to spirituality as opposed to a dual approach which we have become accustomed to by our SRF training. Yellowbeard finds quiet corners to bring up this approach, people hoard in on those corners and make them noisy unfortunately. YellowBeard wishes that people would ignore him unless they really want to discuss the issues.

Back to the ex-monastics. This is *their* board. It's not the "Dawnrays / OneTaste Yogananda worship board". If all these ex-monastics do is babble incoherently -- who cares? Why are you so threatened by it? They need to vent here because there's nowhere else to. You guys will always just be *tourists* here, and so is YellowBeard. How 'bout we leave them alone? Why do you feel so compelled to stuff your ideologies down their throats?

Since you have so much hate and violence in you, come to YellowBeard with it. He can handle you all just fine. Why do you have to harass ex-monastics? Are you looking for "soft targets" to vent your dogmatic aggression out on?

YellowBeard proposes something for the Walrus Committee to consider. Anyone that aggressively attacks ex-monastics here that are simply "working out" their issues should receive disciplinary action, such as being put on "Slow Down" for a period of time. YellowBeard's *views* have caused a stir here so he has been sanctioned with "Slow Down". Fair enough, this is the Walrus's board, he has the right to make whatever call he feels is appropriate to maintain some sort of sanity here. But YellowBeard proposes that people who are attacking ex-monastics directly, which is generally done to chase them off the board, is totally inappropriate. Debating is a different thing. But what's happening here is not debate, it's harassment. YellowBeard has never done this. Now regardless of the fact that we may feel that YellowBeard's ideas on a non-dual approach to Reality are heretical; let's forget that just for a second and simply ask if he's making a fair point here, which is should *tourists* here be allowed to directly attack monastics in an aggressive fashion? YellowBeard is not saying that the ex-monastics should have a free pass to behave however they want, YellowBeard is saying that they should have the right to express themselves here without being overly abused in the process. Would this not be fair?

etzchaim
Registered User
(1/10/04 8:11 am)
Reply 		Re: Ex-Monastic Abuse Policy
It may surprise you, YB, that many of us here are actually very seriously non-dualists and consider your materialistic determinism to be dualistic.

Don't try to understand, just react. It will be more interesting that way.

OneTaste
Registered User
(1/10/04 10:11 am)
Reply 		Re: Ex-Monastic Abuse Policy
Quote:
This board is set up for people like *him* and not *you*. This board is so he can deal with the issues of SRF after being spit out by the organization. It doesn't matter what he says. This is *his* boat. You're just along for the ride my friend.


From the guy who rails and rants about non-hierarchical this and that, this is a curious statement. I didn’t know I was below the salt. Which way should I bow, sir?

I am so blind that I just can’t see the “monastics only” sign in the following, which is from the mission statement of the board:

Quote:
The discussion board listed above is intended to help those who have been involved closely with Self Realization Fellowship share their experiences and discuss the issues that often result.


I suppose it is up to you to define for us what “closely involved” means. I am sure it doesn’t include those who have spent 10, 20, 30 plus years fully involved in the org while also trying to deal with the worldly stresses and pressures and the sacrificing of a normal life to do so. All those years of serving at a temple/group or being employed by the org, none of that counts? This sentiment does have a familiar ring.

You know nothing of being spit out by the org or any of these issues. I do and so do others here.

For you of all people to traipse in here and tell folks who did a whole lot more than take the lessons for a few years that they are tourists is the height of ignorance and audacity.

etzchaim
Registered User
(1/10/04 10:32 am)
Reply 		Re: Ex-Monastic Abuse Policy
Yes, as far as I can tell, I'm the only one here who has never been involved in SRF and I have been consistent, if not very strident, in supporting x-monk. Hunh...

In the few times I've been back to my own Temple since I found the Walrus, I mentioned the issues at SRF to fellow disciples a couple of times. Both times the reaction was of extreme sadness. I got the impression that many of the very involved people there are well aware and feeling sad and powerless to help. In SRF's eyes, we're not even learning Kriya, which is odd, because the more I research it (I have 2nd Kriya), the more it's obvious that we are and the issues within Kriya have very little to do with Kriya itself.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/12/04 1:19 pm
Punk Yogi
Registered User
(1/10/04 3:51 pm)
Reply 		On YB's tendency to label and typecast
Welly welly welly...

So the Don of Non-Dualism and Anti-Hierarchy turns out after all to be a dipshit of division and dissection. Watch the ventriloquist speak from both sides of his non-dual mouth. On the one side he is opposed to typecasting. On the other, he's calling people tourists.

Here's YB shooting himself in the foot once again....

Quote:
Xnun has shown how personality typecasting (like all forms of stereotyping) can be used to degrade others. I am opposed to this practice, even though it may be entertaining for many, because it is simply another cage to try to wrap people up in. I feel this is an insult to the image of God which dwells equally in all. We should always direct our minds toward this liberating principle within ourselves which can never be typecasted, boxed, tagged and sold.


YB you've made some valid points since you've arrived on the scene and you've got a silver tongue. But you also have the uncanny ability to take people's words and ideas and twist them to suit your own ends like a circus geek bending a rod of steel.

For your next homework assignment, work on being consistent with yourself.

YellowBeard420
Slow Down
(1/11/04 3:22 am)
Reply
Re: Ex-Monastic Abuse Policy
> OneTaste wrote: " ... I am sure it doesn’t include those who have spent 10, 20, 30 plus years fully involved in the org while also trying to deal with the worldly stresses and pressures and the sacrificing of a normal life to do so. All those years of serving at a temple/group or being employed by the org, none of that counts?"

These "worldly stresses" can't be anted up as part of your equal suffering. This board is about SRF and not about who's had a harder life in general. You do tend to get caught up in these peeing contests.

Let's say you've served at a temple. This can be equated to being a prison guard while the monastics are the prisoners. You get to go home and have intimate relations with someone, drink booze and live what is generally considered a normal life. The prisoners stay behind the bars. When the prisoner gets released and you quite your temple services, and you come together to speak on your life "on the inside" -- YellowBeard is very sorry, but you are not in the same category as the prisoner. You may like to think that you are, but that doesn't make it so.

YellowBeard has used the term "tourists" to stress this difference. Of course your experiences are valid. Everyone's experience here with SRF is valid and should be spoken on. YellowBeard has spoken out on this issue because he doesn't feel that the "prison guards" have a right to chew out the "prisoners" by thinking that they know what it's like to be a real prisoner. You may watch the prisoners all day long, but you can never really feel their pain -- you're just a tourist in their world.

The monastics have taken the ultimate leap of faith in Yogananda and SRF. They've given up their life for it. Surely their pain reaches deeper, and we should be more sensitive to them. It's like dealing with someone that's been raped, you don't need to walk on eggshells around them, but you should be sensitive to them in regard to certain issues.

This is also why YellowBeard has considered your latest strategies as going after "soft targets". People that have been hurt deeply are most likely to simply leave the board instead of trying to fight with you people. And that's your goal is it not? You want to establish a militant "OneTaste/Dawnrays Yogananda worship" board where you can rule with an iron fist. Those who's direction after SRF is different from your own, you view as a threat. They bring up issues you do not wish to deal with. So you attack them to get them to either shut their mouths or leave the board.

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

> Punk Yogi wrote: "So the Don of Non-Dualism and Anti-Hierarchy turns out after all to be a dipshit of division and dissection."

In traditional Punk Yogi style, he comes out attacking under the cover of friendly fire, never able to stand toe to toe with YellowBeard directly. You might want to put a little more effort into your attacks in the future because this so-called argument of yours here is so weak that YellowBeard wasn't even going to bother to respond. He doubts anyone is terribly fooled by your "analysis". Although your hateful aggression, while not threatening, does deserve a little dissection just for your thought behind it.

You say YellowBeard is causing division here on the board by him saying that we shouldn't aggressively attack the ex-monastics (or anyone for that matter) for simply venting their experiences with SRF, which many times comes out as an "opinion" of the organization and sometimes even on Yogananda and the teachings themselves. You think we should have free hunting season against anyone who speaks differently in regard to your dogmatic ideologies. You think we should have a "unity" here of people forming mobs and attacking others. YellowBeard realizes that this is your idea of unity, along with OneTaste's and Dawnray's, along with a few others as well.

Sorry to spoil your good 'ol lynch mob funtime, but YellowBeard will continue to speak out against your aggressions on this board in whatever guise they find themselves in.

“Spiritual people can be some of the most violent people you will ever meet.” ~Adyashanti

Punk Yogi
Registered User
(1/11/04 4:18 am)
Reply 		Mopping up the Yellow Puke





Here's something other than salvia you can put in your pipe and smoke... It's called reality

Once, not too long ago, Yellowbeard posted a response to Etz about
"Astrology and any system that pigeonholes people." Yellowbeard, as everyone already knows, is a self-proclaimed expert on every subject -- even the ones he knows nothing about. Yellowbeard, speaking from the rarified airs of his ivory tower told us the last and final word on pidgeonholing [up in the ivory tower, there are a lot of pidgeons]. Here's what dropped on our heads from on high:


Quote:
This is why YellowBeard spoke out against Punk Yogi's personality typecasting. It's the same thing. If you tell someone that they're a criminal and they end up believing it, how do you think they're going to act? Everyone has *all* personality types within them. We have a choice as to how we chose to behave. People read their horoscopes and say, "wow, that's me". But try reading all the other ones as well that are supposedly for other people. Those work just fine too because they're all like Rorschach’s Blots. Now you don't believe in political conspiracy theories, but you believe in religious ones. Now it may be fun, and we all like to have fun and YellowBeard doesn't wanna ruin anyone's games, but when these games pigeonhole people they can be harmful.



That's right Yellowbeard, it's okay as long as its only a game. Fun fun fun... only a bunch of zombie children elves playing with their cute little spiritual toys. Here's some more of your slobber...

Quote:
Xnun has shown how personality typecasting (like all forms of stereotyping) can be used to degrade others. I am opposed to this practice, even though it may be entertaining for many, because it is simply another cage to try to wrap people up in. I feel this is an insult to the image of God which dwells equally in all. We should always direct our minds toward this liberating principle within ourselves which can never be typecasted, boxed, tagged and sold.


Here Punk is almost tempted to shed a sentimental tear. How genuine you sound. But tell us how what you say jives with all your cute little labels you like to tag and saran wrap on the souls of your fellow spiritual brothers and sisters... err "tourists" I think is the current label de jour.

Basically, Punk felt it was time to call you on your self-righteous blather and heroic posturing regarding the danger's of typecasting considering the fact that you, Yellowbeard, are arguably the most prolific propagator of typecasting on the Walrus.

God agrees, here's his message for you...

STOP BEING A HYPOCRITE!



Hopefully, you now can comprehend with greater clarity what I meant when I wrote:

Quote:
Watch the ventriloquist speak from both sides of his non-dual mouth. On the one side he is opposed to typecasting. On the other, he's calling people tourists.



It's was all about calling your crap and keeping you real. What you write in your response, as quoted below, has no relation to Punk's views. They are your own thoughts. Just another bar bent by the circus geek.


Quote:
You say YellowBeard is causing division here on the board by him saying that we shouldn't aggressively attack the ex-monastics (or anyone for that matter) for simply venting their experiences with SRF, which many times comes out as an "opinion" of the organization and sometimes even on Yogananda and the teachings themselves. You think we should have free hunting season against anyone who speaks differently in regard to your dogmatic ideologies. You think we should have a "unity" here of people forming mobs and attacking others. YellowBeard realizes that this is your idea of unity, along with OneTaste's and Dawnray's, along with a few others as well.


Just take out all the "you think" phrases and replace them with "Yellowbeard wants everyone to believe that Punk thinks...."

My idea of unity for the rest of the world is lofty. For you my idea of unity is a bunch of people giving you a swift kick in the as-s. My only request is that I go first.


"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.  For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." Luke 6: 41 - 43

Edited by: Punk Yogi at: 1/11/04 5:32 am
YellowBeard420
Slow Down
(1/11/04 5:30 am)
Reply
Abuse of those with Different Views
This may come as a shocker to you, but this thread is not about YellowBeard's personality. The name of this thread is "ex monks please", It's not "YellowBeard please". It's amusing to see people are more interested in YellowBeard's ego more so than he himself is.

When people can't deal with the issues being discussed, they try attacking the person's ego. Well knock yourself out, YellowBeard did say bring your hateful dogmatic aggressions to him instead of against "soft targets". But you should at least find different quotes by YellowBeard, you repeating them isn't making your point stronger. There wasn't much of a point being made in the first place, but like YellowBeard already said, knock yourself out.

Now you are the result of, what ... 30 years of Kriya practice? This aggression is what we see at the end? If you're trying to support some kind of dogma, you should do as others do in your position -- at least fake being "blissful". You should try backhanded compliments instead, that way you could at least camouflage your aggressions. But we see here that you're spiteful as any other person walking down the street. Where is your cup that is overflowing from Kriya bliss?

The poster children of Kriya on this board have been Dawnrays, Etzchaim, OneTaste and Punk Yogi. You four are it's strongest supporters, and you four are the most aggressive posters without a doubt. YellowBeard would like to see you deny that. What does that say? Well, YellowBeard says thank you, you're making his point for him, he doesn't have to say a word. Our actions are speaking for us.

You're attacking YellowBeard for daring to stand in the way of your lynching of someone with views that you're terribly frightened of. You're trying to justify it in all kinds of absurd ways. Let's see what you come up with next. Will you continue the futile attacks on the ego, or will you get a little more creative and try something else? Anyway you wanna dance is fine with me. YellowBeard can only hope for a little variety from you, but that's doubtful. Probably back to the old default mode of attacking the personality approach, just like your repetitive mind-numbing meditations. But YellowBeard can see the same old movements coming towards him. How effective do you think that's going to be? You mentioned that Kriya helps foster creativity, YellowBeard is not seeing your creativity.

dawnrays
Registered User
(1/11/04 6:31 am)
Reply 		Lynch Mob????
You are the most outrageous hypocrite I've ever seen in my life.

What have you done from the get go but try to start a "lynch mob" against Yogananda? His teachings, his personality, his life.. everything. You have the utter gaul to use his own words to preach "freedom", "the self" and a "one on one" relationship" and then proceed to slam him in every conceivable, underhanded, and disgusting way. You then back off in self righteous shock when his devotees have the nerve to stand up for him, and then start calling THEM names...

Renunciants are somehow "untouchable" again? Wow, that sounds so familiar... We mustn't offend their delicate sensiblities with too much reality or OUR insignificant problems... How do you know who all the exrenunciants are on this board? It's not always obvious by thier handle. Some of them I happen to know agree with me and are offended with you... A great many people have stopped posting here, thanks to you.. There's only a few of us left who are willing to get in to your ridiculous little pissing contests...

Do you know why Walrus allows you to stay here at all? It's to demonstrate to people the extreme effects of a cult.. You're a perfect example of why not to join srf and the type of people it has been attracting in the last few years.. People with major issues and identity problems..

In your case though, I honestly can't hang it on srf ... You just weren't in it that long and I really don't see how any one organization could have done THAT much damage in such a short time.. Looks like you've found a convenient scape goat though...

Punk Yogi just showed you up (with one hand tied behind his back) with your own words, and you can't stand it..

What, by the way, do you think an IDEOLOGY is? It is an intolerance for the views and beliefs of others and an exclusive claim on THE TRUTH.. Yogandanda gave the broadest base and most tolerant set of beliefs probrobably ever to come to this country. HE NEVER preached intolerance to other religeons and was many, many years ahead of his time on racial equality and tolerance of sexual orientations. The last issue is one, by the way, that you seem to be rather uncomfortable with despite your sputterings to the contrary.

The ONLY thing there is a case for on this board is the extreme rigidness of srf, editing of his original teachings and an unfair and overbearing spin on the guru/disciple relationship.. There is also some question of whether the yoga and kriya yoga regime should be so strict (and we are finding that it probably shouldn't, with the help of people like etzchaim, who is from another kriya school)... We have found great help and assistance to each other on various issues and even that you seem to want to slam, referring to us in your own (non-abusive) way as "zombie elves"...

What is with you? If the teachings don't work for you, get a life and forget them... We are trying to work on some issues if it's OK with YOUR MAJESTY.. And we don't need permission from you...

Punk Yogi
Registered User
(1/11/04 6:52 am)
Reply 		Getting back to my favorite egomaniac
Well I'm glad you're amused because it's obvious you eat up the attention.

Punk takes responsibility for derailing the thrust of the thread. What happened is he objected to you calling the study of temperament a form of typecasting. In your words, "Punk Yogi's personality typecasting."

It's actually a misnomer to call it Punk Yogi's because David Keirsey and C.G. Jung and a host of other hardcore psychologists and brain researchers devised this eloquent system.

Typecasting is a term which reflects your bias. The threads on personality and temperament are about identifying type, not casting people into molds.

You seem to have no compunction about relying on labels [such as "zombie elves" and "tourists"] to differentiate between the types of people you encounter in SRF. If these labels are so effective for you in the service of providing insight, why should you throw the worst light on the terms offered by Jung, Myers-Briggs, and Kiersey?

Punk briefly addressed this in the thread titled "Exhausted" but you never responded. So Punk took the message over here. Sorry for the confusion.

Punk isn't the least bit spiritual. Yellowbeard is the self-proclaimed man of realization. All Punk ever said is that he has had spiritual experiences and has regularly experienced bliss. Punk doesn't get pretentious about spirituality the way Yellowbeard does. That's the difference between Punk and Yellowbeard. Punk also has tricked Yellowbeard into revealing his passive aggression which keeps smoldering under the camouflage of calm and controlled word choice.

Edited by: Punk Yogi at: 1/11/04 7:07 am
etzchaim
Registered User
(1/11/04 4:14 pm)
Reply 		Carl Jung and Punk Yogis 'Types'
I have in my lap a compilation of basic writings by Jung, edited by one of his leading students and published first in 1953. Jung died in '61.

One of the chapters comes from Jungs book "Psychological Types"

In it he systematically goes through the classifications of personality that his work had led him to develop. His work, actual experience, led him to develop this.

I find this paragraph pertinent to the derailed discussion we are having.

"...our types can be discovered among labourers and peasants no less than among the most highly differentiated members of a community. Sex makes no difference either; one finds the same contrast among women of all classes. Such a widespread distribution could hardly have come about if it were merely a question of a conscious and deliberate choice of attitude. In that case, one would surely find one particular class of people linked together by a common education and background and localized accordingly. But that is not so at all; on the contrary, the types seem to be distributed quite at random. In the same family one child is introverted, the other extraverted. Since the facts show that the attitude-type is a general phenomenon having an apparently ramdom distribution, it cannot be a matter of conscious judgment or conscious intention, but must be due to some unconscious instinctive cause."

He goes on to describe the Extroverted and the Introverted types, dividing each one by Thinking, Feeling and Sensation.

Sound familiar? They are the types used in the Meiers-Briggs tests that many of us recently took and discussed.


Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/11/04 4:49 pm
OneTaste
Registered User
(1/11/04 8:33 pm)
Reply 		Re: Ex-Monastic Abuse Policy
Quote:
The poster children of Kriya on this board have been Dawnrays, Etzchaim, OneTaste and Punk Yogi. You four are it's strongest supporters, and you four are the most aggressive posters without a doubt. YellowBeard would like to see you deny that.


I am a poster child for kriya? Wow. I’ve been called lots of things before, but this is a new one.

In all of my posts here, by which I mean every single one of them, I’ve never said anything, yea or nay re kriya. Nada. (Feel free to check it out.) To say I am among it’s strongest supporters is the sort of spuriousness that is indicative of the only problem I have with our pirate friend: it’s impossible to play a straight game when the boundaries keep moving.

I don’t mind differing views—these are the sauce of debate. I like debate. I don’t mind saucy and frothy debate—I’m East Coast (Philly) born and bred—yo, let’s go. I do mind spuriousness and deceit and inconsistency. I am not a fan of Karl Rove and all of the other surreal estate brokers of political debate, and I can’t keep up when yb displays the same here. I admit defeat in this game.

YellowBeard420
Slow Down
(1/12/04 5:43 am)
Reply
Children with Plastic Toy Swords
Punk, regardless of how much we're trying to make each other look silly here, which YB admits that he is doing as well, it's kind of not cool to edit your posts by changing and adding material. You've basically kept your point along the same lines, which YB appreciates, but still it's kind of impolite. It's like if we're having a boxing match, we have to both at least stay in the ring, we shouldn't go past the ropes, they're there for a reason. YB is not saying this as an attack or to make you look silly, which we have been doing, this is just a call for us to keep it as clean as possible. They're your posts and you're your own person, you do as you like of course. YB just wanted to make that note.

A saying YB likes to use -- let's try to kill each other like children with plastic toy swords. After all, that's YB's point here. Let's try not to abuse each other *too* much. YB does take responsibility for this with his statements like, "Since you have so much hate and violence in you, come to YellowBeard with it. He can handle you all just fine" (1/10/04). This is obviously a taunting act, but it's important to realize that YB is holding a plastic toy sword -- the one's that are hallow in the inside and have a thin layer of relatively soft plastic on the outside. And YB's pirate ship is actually floating in the bath tub. His nephew plays with it, and this guy posting here under the name of YellowBeard likes playing pirate too, that's why we see the name "YellowBeard" here.

When we stop looking at life not as children, that's your warning sign, you know things have gone terribly wrong then. Now back to some of the "salty" stuff as OneTaste puts it ...

> "If there's anything I cannot bear, it's bitter, maladjusted xmonastics coming on the board to trash their guru because their little srf ego trips did not pan out (I am also referring to previous posts and 'pearls of wisdom' from you)." (Dawnrays to Xmonk, 1/6/04)

YB would like to say, aren't we all here because our "SRF ego trips" didn't pan out? Actually only a very small percentage of people posting on this board focus their frustrations towards the teachings and/or the guru. But it's natural for it to happen, so why fight it? Trust me, this board is never going to turn into an anti-Yogananda board. The voices of criticism comes along few and far between. It's just part of the process for some people. It's really not a threat.

> "Sorry, but try to shed the 'victim' role a little. If you really can't find anything nice to say, move along." (Dawnrays to Xmonk)

Obviously you're trying to chase someone off here because they have the audacity to question the Teachings. But how many people really do it? Xmonk has just as much right, if not more, than anyone else to post here. But he probably won't be back, so you can be proud of your accomplishment. This is why YB grilled OneTaste as well. OneTaste has supported this kind of behavior. Xmonk could have worked out his issues here, but now he has to go to a shrink because many here can't tolerate having the Teachings put into question. It probably would have been best if he could have worked out his issues here with others familiar with SRF, but heavens no, we can't tolerate having anyone question anything beyond the superficial details. So now he has to pay some stranger to hear him out that can't really relate. Now you say you're defending Yogananda, but would he appreciate what you're doing in his name here?

> Xmonk to Dawnrays (1/06/04): "You have cut others down, besides myself, for expressing our first hand experiences with SRF and Company. You have had no meaningful comeback, except for being very mouthy."

The key word here is "meaningful comeback". If you wanna debate people until you're blue in the face, enjoy, it's your right. But many times your position is just aggressive without any real substance. If you wanna try to lure the sheep back into the heard, go for it. But instead you choose to shoot the ones that stray.

> Punk Yogi: "For you my idea of unity is a bunch of people giving you a swift kick in the as-s. My only request is that I go first."

Then you quote some Bible-thumper stuff afterwords, YB supposes that's appropriate. So it's clear that Kriya turns people into aggressive fundamentalists. Yoga is science as Yogananda has always said, and here's the results. But why bother with the yoga stuff, just going to church can do this. It's so much easier that way.

> Dawnrays to YB (1/11/04): "You have the utter gaul to use his own words to preach 'freedom', 'the self' and a 'one on one' relationship ..."

You said this to Xmonk as well. YB is very sorry, but these terms were not coined by Yogananda. They've been around long, long before. It's like thinking that televangelists have written the Bible.

> Dawnrays: "How do you know who all the exrenunciants are on this board?"

YB doesn't, nor does he see how that would make a difference.

> Dawnrays: "Some of them I happen to know agree with me and are offended with you..."

YB is sure that most, probably nearly all agree with you and are offended by what YB says on non-duality. YB still feels we should respect the process they're going through. It's not about whether people agree with us or not, all that really means nothing. It's about what works for each one of us.

Here's what's mistakingly causing offense by YB's and some other that choose this alternative approach:

Part of the non-dual approach is to throw off all belief structures. In Vedanta, this is called "neti, neti" (not this, not that). Everything is discarded, particularly belief structures. This is done in the Zen approach and in some other schools of Buddhism as well. This is where this saying comes from: "If you see the Buddha on the Path, kill him." Many find this statement incomprehensible and offensive. But it simply means if you run into spiritual authority (aka the Buddha for Buddhists) on the Path, throw it aside. It also refers to throwing aside all beliefs, faiths and attachments which tend to form around the teacher.

This approach is very strange to those who are generally only familiar with dualistic approaches. This is why YB thinks that you take offense when you here talk like this. You think it's "disrespect" when actually it's a genuine spiritual approach that can be practiced within any religious framework (or none at all). One can even do this on the Christian path.

> Dawnrays: "... referring to us in your own (non-abusive) way as 'zombie elves'..."

YB chose his words very carefully for that phrase. "Elves" as in Santa's elves, this is pretty darn playful and is designed by it's very words not to be taken too seriously. If you called Xmonk a "zombie grinch" (as in the grinch that stole Christmas), we would not be having this conversation. Your colorful view of his approach would be more on the playful side than just being aggressive.

> Punk Yogi: "Well I'm glad you're amused because it's obvious you eat up the attention."

Like YB has said to OneTaste, please deny him this attention. YB really just wants to fade into a quiet corner to occasionally speak on the non-dual approach to SRF.

> Punk Yogi: "What happened is he objected to you calling the study of temperament a form of typecasting. In your words, 'Punk Yogi's personality typecasting.' It's actually a misnomer to call it Punk Yogi's ..."

YB probably shouldn't have brought up your name, but since there's really just a small number of regular posters, he sometimes likes to personalize things. YB sees his error here. It's like when people brought up the name "YellowBeard" in the personality temperaments thread, YB crawled out of the woodwork to complain. So YB apologizes to Punk. But YB will most likely continue to speak on the study of personality temperaments and Astrology in a not so favorable light. :)

> Punk Yogi: "You seem to have no compunction about relying on labels [such as 'zombie elves' and 'tourists'] to differentiate between the types of people you encounter in SRF. ... Punk briefly addressed this in the thread titled 'Exhausted' but you never responded. So Punk took the message over here."

YB has a posting limit attached to him because of his unconventional views. He has to choose carefully where to post, particularly if there's a debate on. Also, YB didn't take your argument very seriously. If you really look at YB's terms, they're always playful. If Dawnrays would use similar terms, people wouldn't get so upset. YB already explained the term "zombie elf". Now look at the term "tourist". What kind of image in the mind does that bring up? A happy person wandering around on a vacation. Yes it's used to label people, but it's not a "serious" label. Can anyone here really consider themselves to be a "zombie elf"? The term is cartoonish. Yes, YB bonks people on the head with these terms -- actually in a very general way and very rarely actually personally applied. But YB uses these things like a plastic toy sword like he has described earlier in this thread. This is why they're cartoonish, they're meant to be that way.

If you and Dawnrays wanna attack Xmonk and people like him, come up with a term that gets your objection across, but make it like a "plastic sword" at the same time. This way things don't become personally abusive.

> OneTaste: "In all of my posts here, by which I mean every single one of them, I’ve never said anything, yea or nay re kriya."

Actually this is true and YB apologizes for that call. He overgeneralizes a lot. Probably Punk and Etz are the strongest Kriya supporters while you and Dawrays are possibly the strongest supporters of the guru-disciple relationship, or at least in aggressively speaking out against those who question its validity.

etzchaim
Registered User
(1/12/04 6:21 am)
Reply 		The pen is mightier, but my keyboard is plastic.
"Probably Punk and Etz are the strongest Kriya supporters"

Thanks YB!

Swords: air, intellect, discernment, communication and writing. Take a deep breath.

Etzy, divine child of the One God. En Guarde, laddy, or ye walks de plank!

P.S. As long as we're playing, can my sword be made from a Pomegranite Tree? I like to be different and this would be consistent with my personality, which I'm trying to integrate.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/12/04 6:21 am
etzchaim
Registered User
(1/12/04 7:29 am)
Reply 		Re: Children with Plastic Toy Swords
I belong to a group called the 'Society of Creative Anachronisms'. People in the group fight each other with rattan swords. Before one is allowed to fight, though, months of training are necessary and one needs to actually pass a test in both skill and chivalry before being allowed to actually do any real fighting. Armor is required in both the practice sessions and the real fighting. Real injuries still occur, though despite all the precautions taken.

Now, just as an example here, let's take a couple paragraphs that YB wrote about me and where I'm at in my life and really look at them:

"Ah, the Chicago based "Temple of Kriya Yoga" Astrology-based cult. Thanks for the honest answer; and actually that's good to hear, YellowBeard was getting worried thinking that you belonged to the "Solar Logos" Kriya Yoga UFO cult. Although, the "Temple of Kriya Yoga" was on Cult Awareness Network's list *before* Scientology destroyed them with legal harassment and did a "hostile takeover" of the former cult buster group. The former Cult Awareness Network's list was not all that big, so there must have been something suspicious going on in the "Temple of kriya Yoga".

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

OK, so far, with no explanation, YB refers to the Temple as an Astrology-cult. As far as I know, the use of Astrology in no way qualifies a group for cultdom, not to mention that the term 'cult' is derogatory and used as a way to dismiss the Temple, and his proof is a no-longer existing list of 'cults'. We are, of course, only playing here, and this is meant only in fun, and 'spurious activity', of course, only means that, um, we might be classifying people as Geminis, Pisces, Taurus, etc., or mabe a biggy, like: 'That person has his Sun squaring Pluto', which would imply that they are possibly manipulative and deceptive with a repressed ego.

Now, here's the beauty:

"YellowBeard is just mentioning what he knows about the group, which really isn't much. He's not trying to attack your group."

No, with no actual knowledge of the group, calling it a cult because it was mentioned on a now defunct cult watch group, it would be fairly difficult to actully attack the place

"For your purposes, they might be just fine. You've mentioned that you've been able to challenge them on issues and that's actually good to hear, so obviously they're not too dogmatic."

...and not a cult? I mean, where is the proof for having already labelled the Temple a cult? I don't even call SRF a cult. It has cult-like qualities, which are rather damaging emotionally, but I would place it at 'mild' as far as REAL cults go. I left my Temple for about 10 years, and people asked me how I was and what I'd been doing. My Guru told me to beware of Fundamentalists and then added "beware of Fundamentalist Yogis, especially!". He's a warm, humorous kind of guy. During the time that I was gone, I ran into a couple of people. One said that the other disciples missed me because I always asked the questions they were afraid to ask! That is not exactly an attempt to stifle free thinking! They welcome it and want it. My Guru told me to practice Kabbalah, he didn't say anything like, 'well, now that you have returned to the only True Way, you should now practice only Yoga'. He is actively paying attention to who I am as an individual and being rather nurturing about it, I might add. I felt very much welcomed back and at ease with my individuality within the group, whether or not YOU, YB, APPROVE of my beliefs, approach and personal needs in my life, or not. We are clearly NOT dealing with a cult here, in fact, it seems to me that you are being more manipulative than my so-called cult or Guru.

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

"> Etzchaim: "I'm an Aries, y'know."

YellowBeard reaches down and ruffles Etz's hair, "Sweetie that's fun"."

Here is another example. I know, you are being cute and playful here, but this, my friend, is a classic example of subtle derogatory statements and condecsension.

Of course you will hide behind "I'm only being child-like". Let me tell you something, YB, during my childhood I was made fun of regularly for being stupid by the two girls who flunked second grade. You don't need to know the elaborate details and the orchestration of "fun" that occured on the playground. Children are cruel.

I'm not hurt by your statements, because I've spent years, and I mean years, working very hard on healing my wounded and angry self. I've worked out a good deal and have even come to some very deep understandings about why I was treated this way when anyone who knows me would, even as a child, see pretty clearly that I am not stupid.

I was very religious, always have been, always will be.

That is why I was considered stupid and by the two girls who flunked second grade. Now you condescend to tell me in a nice, playful way, and indirectly, that I'm stupid because I use Astrology, but you are not doing anything wrong, no, you are just playing on the playground with your plastic sword.

Why, I ask, are you doing this? You are concerned that I am hurting people by telling them what their Sun sign is and that they have certain characteristics that reflect that? Swords often have two edges. For every negative trait, there is a positive trait, and with the knowledge of phsychology that I have, do you honestly believe that I'm running about telling people to actively act out all their negative traits? Why are you automatically assuming things like this? I realize that I lash out occasionally and I feel bad about that. We are all doing it here. I suspect that when individuals get together who have strong beliefs, this could be fairly common and perhaps all of us should work on this together. It's just a suggestion. I know I'm consciously looking at what is making me do things like this and trying to curtail it.

I am not saying any of this to get an apology from you, it's truly not necessary. I would like to see you become a little more conscious of what you yourself are doing because you are hiding behind 'just being playful', as if that can hurt no one. It can.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 1/12/04 7:53 am
Page 1 2 3 4 << Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

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

- SRF Walrus - SRF Teachings and Ideals -



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