Changing the AY's comments on Lay Member life choices

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > SRF Teachings and Ideals > Changing the AY's comments on Lay Member life choices
Page 1 2	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
member108 Registered User (1/12/03 7:23 pm) Reply	Changing the AY's comments on Lay Member life choices The following is lifted from the Yogananda-DIF.org website. It gives an example of how SRF has continued to change Master’s books to emphasis the monastic life style. *Quote:* Autobiography of a Yogi - Original edition: page 234 "To fulfill one's earthly responsibilities is indeed the higher path, provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God." 1981 SRF edition; page 226 "...Fulfilling one's earthly responsibilities need not separate man from God, provided he maintains mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires and plays his part in life as a willing instrument of the Divine" DIF Editor: Please note the emphasis is being take from us and is being given to the organization. see yogananda-dif.org/WritAY.htm In the first edition Master clearly says that fulfilling earthly duties is the higher path. This is exactly what is said! It does not say that the life of monastics, avoiding earthly responsibilities, is the higher path. Yet SRF implies over and over in many ways that the monastics are following the fastest and highest path and therefore more wise than the rest of us. In their 1981 edition it appears that fulfilling earthly responsibilities may not be keep us from God but implies that it is a lesser route. They even have members all over the world writing them asking advice in how to run their lives. If the membership had any clue about the unbalanced emotionally troubled people answering their letters this practice would surely change. However, due to the secrecy wrapped around everything SRF the membership will likely never know. Anyone know the details about the computer system that actually writes all the letters? Many members are amazed at the beauty of the letters they receive until they compare them to the letters their friends and relatives receive! Edited by: member108 at: 1/12/03 7:25:07 pm
GregsBrother Registered User (1/13/03 9:08 am) Reply	No excuse for this. None. A change like this is obvious and in-defensible. How can they defend it? Except to say that Yoganada came to the BOD in meditation and told them to make that change. But that would be a self serving lie that only a cult would dare use. Did they think that people wouldnt notice? Thye really are out of touch. Case closed. They are de-emphasizing the universal part of Yogananda, and emphasizing the monastic lifestyle to support their own organizations goals. How can they possibly defend themselves? Why did they make those changes? I cant wait to see what the apologists come up with. Probably "SRF is guided by master so whatever they do is fine with me."
astral7 Registered User (2/6/03 5:35 am) Reply	Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Changes to Autobiography of a Yogi Autobiography of a Yogi - Original edition as edited by Tara Mata: Page: 234 "To fulfill one's earthly responsibilities is indeed the higher path, provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God." 1981 SRF edition; Improved edition as edited by succeeding Editor in chief trained and appointed by Paramahansa Yogananda Page: 226 "...Fulfilling one's earthly responsibilities need not separate man from God, provided he maintains mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires and plays his part in life as a willing instrument of the Divine" -------------------------------------------------------- DIF Editor: “Please note the emphasis is being take from us and is being given to the organization.” -------------------------------------------------------------- Dear DIF Editor; I think this was a good change for the Autobiography of a Yogi! At the time when David Frawley wrote his review in Quest Magazine, did he have a clear understanding of what Yogananda’s intentions were like those who were there with him, as are clarified in many other writings and personal instructions to those left in charge? Perhaps not fully! In over 100 places PY does state that for His devotees from the Babaji lineage - Self-Realization Fellowship [& the SRF Lessons course & med groups] is the path that spiritually connects the devotee with attunement to this work and the blessings/results He promises. No one says there is only one path. If you follow another teacher and his path that is your right, but for those who choose Yogananda as their sacred Master – he clearly points to Self-Realization Fellowship. So if some of the changes in the A/Y appear to give Yogananda's org even more authority, these statements and the 49th Chapter would justify that direction. In this day and age His mission will not go ahead without a strong foundation in this way. The wise devotee should know that even while supporting the masters’ work via SRF, the paramount relationship will be with Him. Loyalty is everything. Nowhere here is the org attempting to be the Guru. So many devotees are still learning to listen and read, that this is a significant and helpful wording change in Yogananda’s spiritual classic easily escapes some. Such changes, when done properly will give devotees and non-devotees alike a clearer picture of the masters’ teaching on these matters without changing His teachings in any way. Such changes have not been made from someone’s whim or personal subjectivity. But by a Yogini who mind has gone beyond ego more that the average. The high quality of her work in this area is amply demonstrated in the work, ”God Talks With Arjuna.” In order to see the real benefits of the newer editions of the AY, one will have to let go of some sacred cows which were not even cows in the first place. And read more of PY ‘s other works to get the bigger picture. The matter in question here is not a change in any teaching, but an improved expression of the full meaning – or clearer meaning of that teaching for reasons that will be covered at another time. Your imaginary assumption based upon words and ideas that nowhere implied, mentioned, or intended by the wording improvements in the above quote from the Autobiographies, simply has no substance. And appears to be a strange conjecture. Let us look at the real need for Yogananda’s official editor in chief to change the wording in the above quotes from the 2 different editions. Firstly, many devotees reading the old edition may would see misleading idea here. As Paramahansa Yogananda’s father might say “why didn’t he take the railroad job he was offered after all that great education I provided for him?” or someone might say “why didn’t he just stick to teaching in India as it was such a desperate need of the country in those days.” “Why didn’t he marry the ones we chose for him?” if the householder path is the “higher” way. Did PY, in following the monastic path fail to take the higher path? Not so! Others might argue endlessly as to whether the Monastic path or the path of worldly duties (eg the householder yogi)was the higher path. An endless and pointless argument for many Perhaps! So the old wording, which implies that the householder is on the higher path, is not really that consistent with Yogananda’s teaching and life example. Obviously, he chose for himself, and recommends in many talks that for those who have a very intense desire for liberation from limiting ego consciousness, there should always be monastic orders to encourage this rewarding lifestyle. And serve God and man in this way. In this he takes nothing away from the equally valid spiritual efforts of the disciplined householder yogi. Nor does the change in wording. The older edition can be a little misleading to many would-be devotees on this matter being discussed, thinking that since they are at least fulfilling their normal life’s duties, compensates for their not making the required spiritual efforts that will bring their desired results. When we compare this to the Improved wording by SRF editor appointed by Yogananda, the new wordings show the compassionate aspects of the Lord while avoiding a pointless dilemma of “which way is best.” So if ones duty follows the path as a householder or a monastic, there need not be any confusion or argument within as to who is taking the higher road. You do the best you can from where you are. The higher road being the making of efforts to change and grow. The improved change to the AY shown in your second quote says nothing about organizations, implies nothing about control, it merely says that the Householder yogis opportunity for liberation is there as well as anyone other yogis true yogic lifestyle. There are many examples accomplished Yogis from both lifestyles. Changes to classic literary works have very deep meanings, and will not always be read in the same way by all persons. Although I give only my impression or what this wording change is about, it would be careless for anyone to imagine fears about org control and create fearful & other unintended meanings. Paramahansa Yogananda himself set the example of polishing this literary masterpiece, and left instructions and trained persons to carry on this vital task. Persons who knew his life work in the most intimate terms – & with a pure divine attunement. It was in such ones that he left his trusted tasks. It is strange that others who did not know him that well, including some who were at MC and left, seem to think that they have some special insights while still worshipping ideas the PY himself had gone beyond. Another matter is that different changes were made for many different reasons. To assume that the original printing edited by Yogananda is the most accurate rendition of this history is to reject even the changes made by Yogananda Himself up to the fourth edition. We must avoid the careless pitfall of fearing that the changing a few words will change the Master’s teachings. It is possible to change a teaching by changing words – but that is not the case in the above quotes. Changes of words and meanings can be are entirely two separate matters, and there is often a change of saying the same thing in a more balanced and accurate way. What Self-Realization Fellowship has done here is clarified the expression of His teaching, not changed it. The SRF has corrected some errors brought us up to date on the Yogananda that was at His best then – not as He was 30-40 years earlier. The competent editors-in-chiefs are there to give clarity and consistency to expressions of the real Yogananda, while eliminating inaccurate impressions of the Teachings and the Master. The clearest expressions of Yogananda’s teachings may appear to have different expressions or emphasis than those of his earlier days. When the A/Y was first edited and published, it did not always contain that consistency and/or the completeness of what PY has taught up to & in his final hours/days/years. When works on a book over a period of 25 years, things are changing even during that process. He attempted to correct some of this by adding that 49th chapter. The newest editions of this spiritual classic will serve his work well for centuries to come. It is not changed teachings – but the fuller expression of His teachings that these changes represent. Changes that have continued to enrich this great classic. I would say that some other orgs/and would be gurus have been changing these teachings for their own reasons. Regards, and respect, astral.7 Edited by: astral7 at: 2/6/03 5:39:37 pm
username Registered User (2/6/03 5:59 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Why did you mention David Frawley, was he a follower of Yogananda?
etzchaim Registered User (2/6/03 6:29 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Just a few questions, comments: Why do the devotees thoughts need to be controlled? What effect does attempting to control anothers persons thoughts have on the one who is the 'controller' and on the one who is 'controlled'? If Yogananda said that love was the only thing that could replace him, what is the relationship between the need to control and the giving of love to the beloved? Why did Yogananda's Guru warn him against starting the Yogoda Sat Sanga society in India? Why was it that one of the first things Yogananda's Guru suggested he do was to return to his family? What is the nature of Yogananda's refusal to accept the suggestion of his Guruji? Why did Yogananda's Guru not tell him he was disloyal when he did not take his suggestion? What is the nature of love? Shanti, Etz Edited by: etzchaim at: 2/6/03 7:06:52 am
astral7 Registered User (2/6/03 6:59 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 See thread "Core issues/ Very intrusive organization" where these matters are more fully discussed and explained. You will find most of your questions answered there. SRF does not exhibit control over devotees, as it functions as a non-intrusive organization in the lives of devotees. Monastics and employees are committed to Being controlled by others only so long as they remain there to serve others. That is like saying that one who should cooperate with his piano teacher in order to learn is being "controlled". get real! Why are some Persons having constant fears of being controlled,and what psychological disposition creates such strange fears in devotees or non-devotees? Why are matters continually obsessing some on this group which do not exist? Are some of you a paid informant from Ananda? Yours in Yogananda, astral.7 Edited by: astral7 at: 2/8/03 7:51:32 am
etzchaim Registered User (2/6/03 7:42 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Astral 7, I was not asking the questions for myself, but thank you for your response. You ask me: "Why are you having constant fears of being controlled, and what psychological disposition creates such strange fears in devotees or non-devotees?" I was initiated into Kriya in 1985. My Guru once said to me "Your path has to do with a tree". I later became an Orthodox Jew (I was born a Catholic). Not once did my Guru tell me I was not following my path. Not once did he say I was disloyal. My Guru understands what love is. He trusts his devotees to seek out their enlightenment with dilligence, supporting us when we are in need of support and allowing us the freedom to discover who we are as children of God. Having been an Orthodox Jew, I recognize control issues and fear when I see them and as a spiritual cousin of yours, I'm concerned about this issue. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that something similar is occuring in SRF. I've been to an SRF in the town I live in. I have my own experiences with the organization, which however limited, have also informed me that there is a profound lack of freedom of thought and a good deal of fear within the org., even on the outskirts. Speaking of which, why do you fear that I am a paid informant from Ananda? Does Ananda put you on the defensive? If so, why? Do you suspect that people who question SRF are usually from Ananda? Could this possibly be the result of an attempt on the part of SRF to control Donald Walters and the work he is doing? This is not a question for me. I think it would be fun to cause you to think! You write: "SRF does not exhibit control over devotees, as it functions as a non-intrusive organization in the lives of devotees. Monastics and employees are committed to the control of others only so long as they remain there to serve others." It does, of course, occur to me that these two sentences are contradictory. I'm wondering if you notice this too, or if you feel that they are complimentary. Please let my questions enter your mind without judgment. Meditate on what love is, and on why Yogananda's Guru did not tell him he was disloyal because he chose not to follow the Guruji's suggestion. Seek out your own enlightenment with great dilligence. Again, Shanti. Breathe deeply and evenly. Relax. Etz Edited by: etzchaim at: 2/6/03 8:27:41 am
astral7 Registered User (2/6/03 1:13 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Dear etzchaim; I have edited some of my previous post, as it is not intended to be directed only to you. There is a good devotee friend of mine that also became aJew a couple of years ago. But his loyalty to SRF and master seem very healthy still. As to your other concerns. "SRF does not exhibit control over devotees, as it functions as a non-intrusive organization in the lives of devotees." "Monastics and employees are committed to the control of others only so long as they remain there to serve others." These 2 statements are non-contradictory. They show how 2 different commitments/functions using different Perameters & attitudes for different situations. Devotees who request counseling or guidance from SRF will get encouragement from the PY teachings which apply to their situation. They are not told do this or else. Now, if one is part of a spiritual community where members want to do things in a was mutually agreed way for their best intersts - you will no doubt have to go along, show them a better way, be uncomfortable, or leave. If you are not mature enough to handle that situation for the spiritual good of the community, or you don't like their ways, then you can still be a Self-Realization Fellowhsip devotee on your own in whatever sensible way you choose. SRF does not use controls over its members. the whole thing has been set up for individual and self-responsible development for each devotee. There is no controlling! Although master does tell us that attending a "Self-Realization Fellowship Meditation Group" should be part of our Sadhana and discipline for best results. No one is told they must do anything from SRF. Every lifestyle involving others will have some rules, whether it be with your piano teacher, your gas company or whatever. most will require a full or partial compliance with these conditions. Even if one has no contact with other humans not following many basic health and living rules will have a sad result. That's life. Control is: where you join a group and must ask their permission to marry or not, where you must contribute all your assets and leave with nothing, or where you become a member of the board but only the leaders ideas ever used. Or where in each variation of lifestyle change - or a different suggestion ends up in ones immediately disenrollment. These things to not exist at Self-realization Fellowship, not the SRF most have seen. I have spent time around various SRF places and been to meditation groups all over North America. None of this is new to me. Could there be something in your own attitudes that makes you fear , or feel you are being controlled. Few phobias have real basis in this or other worlds! Regards and respect, astral.7 Edited by: astral7 at: 2/6/03 3:23:06 pm
Borg108 Registered User (2/6/03 6:28 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Autobiography of a Yogi - Original edition: page 234 "To fulfill one's earthly responsibilities is indeed the higher path, provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God." 1981 SRF edition; page 226 "...Fulfilling one's earthly responsibilities need not separate man from God, provided he maintains mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires and plays his part in life as a willing instrument of the Divine" Let’s backup a moment and see which statement is more accurate. According to vedic scripture, there are four stages of life: student, householder, recluse and renunciate. This is the proscribed pattern for all but a special few who have such dispassion for the ways of the world that they are justified in jumping to stage four from wherever else they may be. Moving through these four stages, the rest of us work out our karmic patterns in a harmonious manner as we evolve and take care of the four aims of life: kama (desire), artha (wealth), dharma (righteous duty) and moksha (liberation). In India, unless one renounces the world, householder life is seen as one’s duty. It is this attitude that also helps keep marriages together, since they are taken more seriously and not seen mostly as a means of self gratification like we regard them here in the West. So let’s look at SRF’s interpretation and actions in this context. We are given “Give Me Thy Heart” brochures telling us that we can evolve faster if we become monastics. Lay members are no longer allowed to have anything to do with management of the organization. Information flows one way only, from the chosen few monastics downwards. If we are fortunate enough to be allowed to become monastics (many are not) and a friend leaves the order, we are not allowed to talk about them afterwards. The reality of the situation is that most SRF monastics are in stage 1, not stage 4. Those who leave and move on to stage 2 are just evolving to the next stage of their evolution. Their leaving the monastery should be celebrated, not mourned. In Buddhist countries where I spent some time, there is a more natural view of monastic life that is in line with vedic tradition. At a certain age, all young men are expected to become monastics for as long as it suits them. This may be for a few days only, or it can be for a lifetime. Those who do leave are free to return when they feel it is the right time to do so. Or they might come and go at various times during their lives. It is such a natural thing that they do not become either demagogues or devils by coming or going. Demoting householder life as the edited version of the AY does, also, by implication, devalues the spiritual purpose and integrity of householder life. When members have approached SRF monastics asking if they should remain married, sometimes they have been counseled to leave their spouses. Yet the SRF lessons say if you are married but mismatched, you should try to make the best of the situation if possible. A few years back, a member sued SRF because his wife was told by a monastic to divorce him (Astral 7 can verify the validity of this by calling MC). Since then, SRF monastics have been instructed to not give out any advice with respect to divorce. Sensibility has had to come through legal action. Wouldn’t it have been better to have retained the lofty ideals and principles of life promulgated by the ancient rishis and by Yoganandaji himself? The original AY wording by Yoganandaji was consistent with vedic scripture and tradition. Perhaps the good lady editors of SRF are wiser than this. We can let Astral 7 make that point.
etzchaim Registered User (2/7/03 7:01 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Borg108, thanks for grounding the discussion. It appears to me that the change in the AY is symtomatic of the overall centralization that SRF has been going through (for quite some time now). The original text - that the householder path is the higher path has been explained to me (through Shellyji and my Guru) in this way: Autobiography of a Yogi - Original edition: page 234 "To fulfill one's earthly responsibilities is indeed the higher path, provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God." It is easier to focus on meditation and spiritual growth when that is all you are doing and you are sheltered inside a monastic environment with the HOUSEHOLDERS supporting you. The householder path is higher because the householder has to live in the world while remaining detached from it. This is exactly what the original text says "...provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God." It is higher, because it requires more negotiation and skill in handling attachment/detachment issues in order to be successful. The change in wording looses this important distinction, and really does imply that it is better to become a monastic, especially when it becomes clear that SRF has placed so much emphasis on the authority of the monastics to interpret Yogananda's teachings. My mind keeps drawing me back to the thought that Babaji specifically wanted Lahiri Mahasaya to remain a householder. I keep thinking, "Hmmm, would SRF not want him to feel free to interpret Yogananda's teaching because he wasn't a Swami?" If he was a hidden mystic, and we didn't know who he was, would he be told that he was not a wise devotee if he questioned SRF's changes of an original text? Would he be told that the current editor has a purer understanding and he can leave if he doesn't like it? Perhaps he would even be told that he needed professional help because of his delusions. I think that Borg has made a very important point here: "In Buddhist countries where I spent some time, there is a more natural view of monastic life that is in line with vedic tradition. At a certain age, all young men are expected to become monastics for as long as it suits them. This may be for a few days only, or it can be for a lifetime. Those who do leave are free to return when they feel it is the right time to do so. Or they might come and go at various times during their lives. It is such a natural thing that they do not become either demagogues or devils by coming or going. " The emphasis of spiritual culture is probably best focused on what way of life will help an individual progress on the path, not on the institution and the authority figures that are meant to merely assist the community. In the Jewish tradition, we say there are as many ways to interpret the Torah as there are people. No one will say, "We need to edit the Torah because there are people who may interpret it in the wrong way". There are fundamentalists who say that their interpretation is the correct way, but that is a potential debate, not a rewriting of a text. Once the author has passed on, it is disingenuous to say that someone else knows what he or she really meant and so can change the wording. It really, honestly appears to be a control issue. It doesn't matter if there is a claim that the original auther 'appeared' to them, or what ever... Astral experiences have to filter through a persons mind in order for the manifestation to occur and so projection is the rule. If one is predisposed to see Jesus, that is who you will see. If one is predisposed to see Zeus, it is Zeus who will appear. There's endless variation of levels and places the energy that manifests may be coming from. If the person is wrapped up in a subtle ego, the manifestation, however 'holy' in appearance, is a product of that. One of the most dangerous obstacles on any spiritual path is a spiritual ego. Etz
Lobo Registered User (2/7/03 6:53 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 " A devotee who can call on God while living the householder's life is a hero indeed. God thinks: 'He is blessed indeed who prays to Me in the midst of worldy duties. He is trying to find Me, overcoming a great obstacle--pushing away, as it were, a huge block of stone weighing a ton. Such a man is a real hero." Sri Ramakrishna
chuckle chela Registered User (2/7/03 9:45 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 A reply for Astral7: First of all, I can't get too excited about this particular editing. Either version works for me. While I think the original is just fine as is and can't see that it needed to be changed, I can't get too upset by the change. Having said that, I don't think you've convinced me that this particular change was required. Here's a few comments. Your passages are in bold. The matter in question here is not a change in any teaching, but an improved expression of the full meaning – or clearer meaning of that teaching for reasons that will be covered at another time. Sorry, but you haven't convinced me of "an improved expression of the full meaning." It's a changed meaning, a subtle change, and not one that overly bothers me, but a change nonetheless. And, others feel it is a significant change; while I don't necessarily agree with them, neither do I discount their point of view. Firstly, many devotees reading the old edition may would see misleading idea here But you fail to prove that the original was misleading in the comments that follow this statement of yours. So the old wording, which implies that the householder is on the higher path, is not really that consistent with Yogananda's teaching and life example You have a point but fail to mention that Yogananda has just spent pages outlining his joyous entry into the swami order. Do you really think we're that naive to think that Yogananda has abandoned the virtues of monasticism? By the same token, the new version, it may be argued, subtly implies that monastics are not ever separated from God when it suggests that the householder path "need not separate . . . ." The older edition can be a little misleading to many would-be devotees on this matter being discussed, thinking that since they are at least fulfilling their normal life's duties, compensates for their not making the required spiritual efforts that will bring their desired results This is simply false logic since in both versions it clearly states: ". . . provided he maintains mental uninvolvement with egotistical desires and plays his part as a willing instrument of the Divine." Moreover, Yogananda is in the midst of outlining the virtues of yoga, and that was his mission. Again, you seem to think the reader is a bit clueless and prone to error. the new wordings show the compassionate aspects of the Lord while avoiding a pointless dilemma of "which way is best." I don't get the impression that the original would foster a "pointless dilemma." I get the impression that Yogananda simply wanted to assure his readers--all of whom were householders--that the householder path was the higher path in the sense that they shouldn't feel a need to rush off to the forest and renounce everything (a point, incidentally, he makes repeatedly in his lectures and in the Lessons). Most of the AY is filled with stories about swamis and monastics, and I sense that Yogananda wanted to reassure his reader that the householder path was a true path to liberation. After all, his mission was to bring yoga to householders! Moreover, I think etzchaim has a good point in saying that the monastics are supported by the householders and thus in a sense they tread the higher path. As well, the quote of Ramakrishna’s that Lobo supplies appears to echo Yogananda’s sentiments. I do agree with you that DIFs interpretation that the second version puts the emphasis on the organization may be wrong. I just don't see that it does, but I find it worthy of note that a number of people do see it that way; I'm not going to invalidate that interpretation, and maybe they're on to something. While it may be a subtle endorsement of the monastic path, I can't see it being much more than that. One could argue, perhaps, that this subtle endorsement was done to ensure a steady stream of applicants to the SRF monastic order, and that they wanted monastics only to guide the work--but that's a bit of a stretch. I'm a bit puzzled as to why you repeatedly seem to feel that readers of the AY or devotees of Master will be misled, evidently at every turn, and need to be continually corrected. It appears that you credit the rest of us with very little intelligence or an inability to attain any attunement with the Divine. Or am I misunderstanding you? Thanks, Astral7
chela2020 Registered User (2/8/03 4:00 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 (This message was left blank) Edited by: chela2020 at: 7/1/03 5:21 pm
astral7 Registered User (2/8/03 8:06 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Dear etzchaim; I have just corrected an error in my post of 2/06/03/ 6:59, it now reads ; "Monastics and employees are committed to being controlled by others only so long as they remain there to serve others." The non-contradictory element that I did refer to is still valid. As in the settings mentioned above it must be part of their functionality.Even that control is limited by the persons who remain in those positions. So this is what i meant to say. You speak of 1985 and your guru, hope you are aware that the majority of those out there who are referred to as gurus are only dreaming. Although one of the gurus roles may be teaching, and teacher as such is rarely a Guru - as self-realized being who knows reality and can lead you there. Ananda does not put me on the defensive as it doesn't really represent any threat to anyone except its own members in communities. Unless things have greatly changed recently. However, one should keep in mind that if Yogananda thought this creating of many orgs was useful he would have done so. That is the way of weakening a new movement. All these different groups will meet someones needs, so there is a place for them. it is when they attempt to usurp and distort or defame the Masters work that they work against the greater good. It is these groups and smaller teachers who are distorting the teachings of kriya and PY. So many bogus claims are made by most of these groups and "gurus" it is at the point of being hilarious. regards and respect .7
astral7 Registered User (2/8/03 8:59 am) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Dear chuckle; it is good to see you expressing yourself in such good communication re these matters. in your post re; >>The matter in question here is not a change in any teaching, but an improved expression of the full meaning – or clearer meaning of that teaching for reasons that will be covered at another time. you write -“Sorry, but you haven't convinced me of "an improved expression of the full meaning." It's a changed meaning, a subtle change, and not one that overly bothers me, but a change nonetheless. And, others feel it is a significant change; while I don't necessarily agree with them, neither do I discount their point of view.” Since one of my main points in that post was that words have been changed which brings the book more accurately in harmony with Paramahansa Yogananda’s teachings and life example, I think that matter is well covered. >>Firstly, many devotees reading the old edition maybe would see misleading idea here. Sorry – read again- I clearly showed/proved how that original edition statement was misleading, it does not represent Paramahansa Yogananda’s life or teaching. He chose what he considered the best path for himself – the monastic path! Yet he does not decry the householders path. The newer Autobiographies make this clear and true to his teaching. But you fail to prove that the original was misleading in the comments that follow this statement of yours. >>So the old wording, which implies that the householder is on the higher path, is not really that consistent with Yogananda's teaching and life example you write; “You have a point but fail to mention that Yogananda has just spent pages outlining his joyous entry into the swami order. Do you really think we're that naive to think that Yogananda has abandoned the virtues of monasticism? By the same token, the new version, it may be argued, subtly implies that monastics are not ever separated from God when it suggests that the householder path "need not separate . . . ." yes chuckle, thank you, that is the point. Do you recall where PY says in A/Y chapter on “I Become a Monk of the swami order.” Yogananda writes; [after quoting this from Corinthians tnt “He that is married careth not for the things that belong to the Lord, or how he may please the Lord: be he that is married careth for the things of the world, how he may please his wife.” Then He writes “I had analyzed the lives of many of my friends who, after undergoing certain spiritual discipline, had then married. Launched on the sea of worldly responsibilities, they had forgotten their resolutions to meditate deeply.” To allot the Lord a secondary place in life was, to me, inconceivable.” Paramahansa Yogananda mentions elsewhere in the book that “many married men usually ends up forgetting to say even a tiny prayer to the Lord.”pp Needless to say, I would agree that those who did reach Self-Realization while being householders have definitely done a heroic path, as this seems to be the more difficult way. Masters such as Lahiri and Yukteswar should not be held up as examples here as they were already realized even before this lifetime as we know them. Why would one recommend the most difficult way to do the most difficult challenge in life – it is not even sensible. But if one is a householder – we have to work with what/ where we are – and there will be progress for everyone. Kriya makes this more feasible because of its efficacy. Without quoting you – you made some comment about peoples ability to read. From what I have seen, This ability takes a long time to develop, and the escape from learning this serious lesson it that devotees run here and there assuming some other teaching of “guru” is the answer. A strong tendency in human nature is to blame everything or everyone else. This is how the ego keeps itself in blindness. The average person reading a book may retain 8% of that material, and may understand a lot less than that. I have been at meetings where getting one page clear was a chore for many. It is our own prejudices that cause us to see problems/ideas that are not even there, and missing much of what else is there. I avoid some of this by rereading and deeply meditating on what I am working with. Those that assume one or two reading will reveal the full intent of a work like the A/Y – they are dreaming. Or saying unconsciously –“I know all that” and just keep reading most of their lives. One may find data/information somewhere else [so good and some false], but patiently digging it out of the Gurus work will end up giving two prizes – the data plus the increasing attunement with His Divine Omnipresence. While I am at this I would like to further refer to the diff. Site where Frawley uses the quote about how many devotees were given Kriya by PY during His 10 years of lecturing tours in the US. In the original edition if you apply the math, that statement about initiation “tens of thousands into kriya on those trips” seems obviously erroneous. Was this an error by TM just before publication? The new edition comment is more accurate, "During the decade of 1920-1930 my yoga classes were attended by tens of thousands of Americans". As out of those tens of thousands who attended only a certain number? took classes and got to kriya. Yes, the argument of which way is better is a pointless dilemma to many, this is clear by the number of monks who went to SRF before they had settled this difficult question and left. Both paths have their value and merits. Regards and respect astral.7
Lobo Registered User (2/8/03 12:02 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 "The new edition (of the AY) is more accurate..." ? Eight edition, Autobiography of a Yogi 1959 Page 210-Illustration description: IN 32 YEARS THE GREAT GURU PERSONALLY INITIATED IN YOGA 100,000 STUDENTS Obviously in the intevening years SRF has decided it better to change historical fact. One can only speculate why. My own belief is that he freely gave kriya to those who attended his class series. Over 100,000 students, some who became great disciples, but most probably many who did not continue their practices. Why is this now a threat to SRF? Either he did or he didn't. Obviously in 1959 he did, but today he didn't??? How does this happen? Is this the way he supposedly spent all those hours "personally" instructing little Mrinilini as to how to "edit" his already published writings??? Or does it, as I suspect, serve some unknown institutional purpose, transferring the real Yogananda (he of the 100,000 initiates-read, not disciples) into the SRF owned Yogananda? Thereby to strip him of his history, his very life, and convert him into what they believe will keep those members loyal to the institution; not Yogananda, who by the way, doesn't need any interloper to aide him in his determination to broadcast his realization of God's Love to whomever wants to imbibe.
etzchaim Registered User (2/8/03 12:45 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Astral 7 It's amazing how you can say something and always mean something else! OK, so now you write: "You speak of 1985 and your guru, hope you are aware that the majority of those out there who are referred to as gurus are only dreaming. Although one of the gurus roles may be teaching, and teacher as such is rarely a Guru - as self-realized being who knows reality and can lead you there." Ahhhhh, yes Astral 7, but all of us are dreaming... I am aware of many things. Do you know what I am aware of? Don't worry, this is a rhetorical question. I expect you to think I am an ignoramus who is being fooled by a dreamer. If you are a representative of SRF, I am getting a most unseemly impression of what has happened to all of Yoganandaji's good work. So, you have answered one of my questions above: "Ananda does not put me on the defensive as it doesn't really represent any threat to anyone except its own members in communities. Unless things have greatly changed recently." How loving! I am not a member of Ananda and I recognize the issues there. I support them in their quest for enlightenment and hope they make progress. It's a rocky road. Perhaps you can find it in your heart to refrain from judgment and concentrate on your own progress? I'm going to continue to quote you, because you may realize you meant something else. "However, one should keep in mind that if Yogananda thought this creating of many orgs was useful he would have done so." Perhaps Yogananda was simply fulfilling his duty and perhaps his disciples who create their own centers are fulfilling theirs! I prefer to see what is good in people, particularly if they appear to be sincerely spreading the teaching. Since I only know of a few of these people, and most of them appear to be sincere, I say "God bless them! May they do good!" If I actually know of a situation where someone may be walking into danger, I will indeed warn them, but most of the time this is not the case, they are simply unfolding the way they are unfolding. I include SRF in this. I've read enough of this board to have a good sense of the situation and you continue to varify the validity of your detractors. I will warn people of the problems in the future. "That is the way of weakening a new movement." I perceive these centers as a way of strengthening the movement, but you are entitled to your opinion. Continuing to quote you, to ensure that an original edition remains on-line: "All these different groups will meet someones needs, so there is a place for them." Indeed! " it is when they attempt to usurp and distort or defame the Masters work that they work against the greater good." I have considered the possiblity that even SRF can usurp and distort the teachings of Yogananda. " It is these groups and smaller teachers who are distorting the teachings of kriya and PY."" Not necessarily, my friend. It appears that the Mothership is in quite some trouble! "So many bogus claims are made by most of these groups and "gurus" it is at the point of being hilarious." You do have a way of charming a person, Astral 7. Have you meditated on the nature of love yet? "regards and respect .7" That you continue to use the term "respect" is quite intriguing to me. Perhaps you should also meditate on the meaning of 'respect'. My conversation with you is over, Astral 7. Pray for wisdom. Etz Edited by: etzchaim at: 2/8/03 1:19:20 pm
username Registered User (2/8/03 5:28 pm) Reply	Re: Word Changes - Autobiography of a Yogi 1 Guru means teacher the term Guru does not say anything about the level of realization of the teacher Most gurus are not enlightened
chuckle chela Registered User (2/9/03 3:44 pm) Reply	Reply to chela2020 Chela2020, great post! You've succinctly made two great points: first, that it's an individual's choice to determine what path works best, and, second, lessons can be learned from whatever path one chooses if one is receptive.
etzchaim Registered User (2/9/03 8:15 pm) Reply	Re: Gurus It is my understanding that the Guru/Disciple relationship continues from lifetime to lifetime until, ideally, both souls have achieved moksha. This is why Sri Yukteswar said "O my own, you have come to me" when he and Yogananda (Mukunda, at the time) first met, and why Yogananda did the same to his disciples when he recognized them. I recognized my Guru immediately, one of those 'uncanny deja vu' experiences, and he was actually expecting me to show up on the day I walked into the Temple. Someone mentioned early in this discussion that there seemed to be a lack of faith in the intelligence of the devotees, that that is what appears to be causing all of this editing and 'micro-managing' of supposed interpretation of texts that Yogananda wrote. I agree. I also notice a 'mythologizing', if you will, of the situation, i.e., only a perfect master is a 'true Guru', our master is perfect, your's is a 'dreamer', we have the 'correct' understanding of the text, anyone who interprets the text, or any of the teachings differtly from us is 'distorting the teaching', etc., etc. None of this is important. Every soul needs to unfold in it's own way and no two disciples are going to have the exact same linkage to a Guru or the same needs. I suspect that if a Guru is truly your Guru, you will learn what you need to learn, despite, and more probably BECAUSE of your particular interpretation of the teaching. That is your linkage. It's personal. No one is going to enlighten you but you! Your Guru will be a tremedous help, but it is you who will do the unfolding. The beauty of a good teaching and teacher is that so many different individuals can link themselves to it, him or her and unfold, individually, in their own way. This is something that should be honored, not denigrated. It seems to me that there is a confusion over the practice of a spiritual technique which does have to be practiced correctly (although breathing Kriya in a state of tension and depression, I have been taught, is an incorrect way to practice it - so this has implications in what I am learning about on these pages) and the interpretation of a teaching, which is a personal philosophical situation, not a scientific "this is right/this is wrong" situation. I truly believe that Yogananda cares more about whether each of you is unfolding in a healthy way, physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually than on whether this or that word in his autobiography is really the way he really meant it. I cannot imagine that he would give his blessing to the kind of undermining and denigrating of people that is happening on Mount Washington. Denial is making the situation worse. With blessings for healing, Etz
astral7 Registered User (2/10/03 7:21 am) Reply	Guru means fully enlightened teacher Guru- from the Sanskrit means "dispeller of darkness". This cannot be accomplished with the mere exchange of information that teachers normally do at the intellectual level. Which is only a form of religious academia. The "Guru" is a truly Self-Realized being, ony he can dispell the human ignorance [darkness] whose problem lies beyond the levels of info and intellect. Real change takes place in the life and consciousness and behavior of one who has learned how to listen and read the Guru. It requires a major shift in attitude and consciousness which many devotees desparately avoid by spending much of their time in fault finding. Sorry - your teacher may or may not be a guru? Even if all your fellow friends claim such. If he/she is not past Samadhi, has not lived the life, all ones excitement about the teacher you worship does not make a Guru. The Guru [a real one] is not created by fans like a celebrity, He/she is created by superhuman effort, devotion, discipline, and the grace of one who is already there. You can learn about real Gurus in the latest editions of Autobiography of a Yogi and other publications from Self-Realization Fellowship. A living Guru who has left the body is far more powerful in every way, and a greater help to all devotees in every way, than a dead guru [non Self-Realized] still in his body. I know it says in the Indian tradition that the greatest gift is a being with a living Guru - this does not mean one attached to or in a body[although some still are]. Looking for a Guru in flesh is a real trap. Get real! This personalality thing is highly overdone. And brings with it some distinct hazards to the devotees life and progress. Now, if one still needs his/her hand to be held - you may not need a Guru just yet, and any teacher will do. regards and respect astral.7 Edited by: astral7 at: 2/10/03 4:55:46 pm

Page 1 2

<< 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: