Daya Mata's elected president

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > History of SRF > Daya Mata's elected president
Page 1 2 3 4	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
srflongago Registered User (11/14/02 8:15 am)	Re: Ma Durga declining to be SRF president Look under Yogananda in Google. There are a large number of Ashrams in which the claim is made.
mangomoy Registered User (11/14/02 9:02 am)	Re: Ma Durga declining to be SRF president srflongago mentions that, *Quote:* I think this is the best explanation as to why no will or testament surfaced. Maybe it exists but is kept secret? Holding such a secret would be consistent with BOD behavior. The Dayanasty has evidently decided that some of Master's writings and other materials are not for lay members, especially intimate items such as many of Master's letters. It would explain why, as Gitano no divino & others point out, PY’s plan ("blueprint") for the SRF’s future isn’t visible to the lay members. This is merely speculation, and we pipsqueaks have no way of knowing.
srflongago Registered User (11/14/02 12:05 pm)	Re: Ma Durga declining to be SRF president The Wright dynasty would have far greater respect and credibility if there were a published will or testament bequeathing the future of the movement to them. So it is not believable that they have held one for 52 years that says anything like that and yet have not used it to their advantage. Others have speculated that there was a will mentioning Erskine and others, and that therefore they could never release it. I don't put any credence whatever into that speculation. On the basis of his personality, I just dont believe that making a will would ever have crossed his mind. Rather he was concerned with others making gifts and wills to him, and so to his organization.
Ringbearer7 Registered User (11/14/02 3:59 pm)	To SRFLongAgo, RE: Daya Mata's elected president "The Board, with several Wrights on it, then selected Faye Wright (Daya Mata) as president. The source also said that Faye searched for an authentic Indian Kriya master to run Mt Washington on her visit to India. But those approached were not interested in the US organization. So Faye remained as leader." In one of Satyeswaranda's books he talks about a meeting with Daya Mata and others while she was in India. He said that this basically amounted to an effort to recruit him to head up the SRF/YSS work in India. As he describes he not only declined the position but also gave Daya Mata a good talking to! Heh! Anyways, my guess is that this is probably the incident that you heard about from your sources. I really doubt that she was looking for an Indian to head up the work in the U.S. But who knows?
Gitano no divino Registered User (11/15/02 12:55 pm)	Re: Ma Durga declining to be SRF president Thank you, bheema ma, KS, and srflongago for excellent feedback. I always think this board is a great place to air ideas and get a critical response. One´s ideas cannot be refined very well without it. First, in response to bheema ma´s spirited riposte (bravo!), which went as follows: *Quote:* Hello?! Excuse me? Established that fact?!!! You're entitled to your opinion, and you're welcome to try to justify it if you can. I, for one, don't see, and haven't ever seen anyone establish any such fact (on this board or anywhere else for that matter). Last time I checked, there was this thing called 'free will'. Apparently, so my sources tell me, even God himself respects and honors it. Just because some of Master's followers haven't always demonstrated the highest realization, doesn't mean he didn't. Thank for the invitation to justify my stance; I accept! You may be new to the board, maybe not. Anyway, a lot of water has gone over the Walrus dam. Here is why I believe Yogananda was no more prescient than you or I, and why the board has proved this to me. Exhibit A: Your post! You state with adamantine resolve that human beings have free will. I agree (though free will has obvious limitations). Therefore, there will always be an unpredictable element in human behavior. I may have a psychotic episode tomorrow, lunge at the President of Mexico with a knife, and create a historic international incident. Therefore, it is impossible to be omniscient, because one can never fully account for all the possible variables. If omniscience were possible--and by omniscience I mean infinite knowledge of past, present, and future, without any exceptions, exclusions, or errors--it would presuppose that everything we are doing has a predetermined outcome. Not only are we actors working from a script, but the play is already over and the theater lights have been turned off. A future made variable by the free exercise of human will is incompatible with the idea of omniscience. So, I revise my statement. Yogananda was not omniscient, because omniscience is impossible. (I could talk about chaos theory and how that relates to weather predictions, but let´s not go there.) Exhibit B: About a year ago, there was some interesting discussion about the famous Encinitas Golden Lotus Temple that fell into the ocean. That episode would seem to preclude any real prescience on PY´s part, but perhaps it was part of the divine will (wasting time and money may mean little to a deity that has infinite amounts of both). What I did not know and what someone contributed is that an engineer in Encinitas warned Yogananda that the cliff was not stable enough to support such a structure. He went ahead and built it anyway, only to watch it slide into the sea. So, I refine my statement. Yogananda was not just as clueless as you or I, he was more so because his judgment was clouded by the delusion that his every thought was divinely inspired. He therefore declined to take seriously information most of us would have found compelling. Exhibit C: Someone put this on the board also about a year ago, and it generated no notice. But it´s worth noting that in the February 1934 issue of East-West magazine, Swami Yogananda stated in an interview feature that Mussolini was a "master brain" sent on earth by God to serve as a role model for humanity. (I´m not making this up, folks.) If you know much about history, you know that only a year later, that same "master brain" invaded Abyssinia (Ethiopia), which one could view as the opening round in WWII. Omniscient? If you can make yourself believe that, be my guest. It´s interesting to reflect on the fact that a gin-swilling, closet nudist and unapologetic imperialist (who once referred to Gandhi as a "seditious fahkir") named Winston Churchill clearly saw the danger of Italian fascism already in the 20s and rang the alarm furiously for years, especially after the Nazis took over Germany in 1933. No one would listen, until it was too late. Obviously, Yogananda was among those not listening. Again, maybe it was all part of the divine plan. Fine, but then I still don´t feel I can lend much credence to anything he said, because his egregious errors may simply have been part of a capricious, inscrutable divine plan. I myself have little use for such nonsense, or such deities. Exhibit D: You may have missed all the action with Dhirananda. Again, someone posted fascinating information from the LA Times of 1935 concerning the lawsuit that D won against Y, in which D made some telling observations about Y´s behavior and treatment of him personally. That post also went over like the proverbial lead balloon and garnered no responses. How much omniscience did Y display in signing a note for the sum of $8,000 to compensate D for his services? Had he been omniscient, he would have foreseen that D would one day become disillusioned with Y´s unethical behavior and take him to court to claim this just compensation, and that Y wouldn´t have a legal leg to stand on. Remember, $8,000 was a small fortune in those days (in 1925, the Mt. Washington property cost $25,000; think of that in terms of today´s real estate values!). Omniscient? Sorry, I can´t go along with that. Those are just a few cases. More could be cited. Like everyone else on this board, I hang on every utterance of srflongago. His posts have the ring of authority. He states, and I have no reason to doubt, that PY was fully aware of the character of those around him and what they were likely (certain?) to do in the future. He put them in positions of authority because there wasn´t any other viable alternative, a strange situation for an omnipotent god-man to be in, but perhaps we can again appeal to an inscrutable divine plan. God works in mysterious ways!--a fallacy known as special pleading, but I´ve lost all of you by this time and am just talking to myself, so it doesn´t matter. However, srflongago´s insight proves another point I have been trying to make about as successfuly as Sisyphus tried to roll the stone up the hill: PY was directly responsible for the current mess SRF is in because it was he and no one else who put into positions of authority and influence individuals he knew would drive the SRF car into the ditch. Now, someone attack these arguments and show me where the errors in my reasoning are. If I´m wrong, I will be the first to admit it and retract my erroneous statements. If Walrus history is any guide, however, there will be a deafening silence after this post. I have just killed off another interesting thread. Sorry to be the skunk at the picnic, folks, but it´s, well, let´s see, what is it, anyway? Is it an exercise of free will, or is it predestination? Yikes, where´s an omniscient holy man when you really need one??????
srflongago Registered User (11/15/02 1:33 pm)	Re: To SRFLongAgo, RE: Daya Mata's elected president Heading Mt Washington is what Dhirananda and Nerode did. There was no claim she was looking for a new president for SRF, merely a senior Indian Kriya leader for Mt Washington.
Ringbearer7 Registered User (11/15/02 5:01 pm)	Re: To SRFLongAgo, RE: Daya Mata's elected president Thanks for the correction. I still think it is fairly likely that what your sources were referring too was the incident in India with Satyeswarananda. Could you give any more info concerning this? Do you consider yours sources to be reliable and in a position to know about these things?
srflongago Registered User (11/15/02 5:32 pm)	Re: To SRFLongAgo, RE: Daya Mata's elected president The sources were at SRF before and after Lynn's death. Anything they heard about Faye in India was second hand from Center gossip and therefore should be regarded as pretty good rumour but not as verified truth. Someone who was in India would have to give better information. But Saraswaranda was not the only one approached, that came through very clearly.
soulcircle Registered User (11/15/02 6:57 pm)	Gitano no divino where is an omniscient holy one when we need one? heehee ha ha ha Gitano no divino, hey, you're alright buddy maybe even all right thank you for de facts and de good read see from a great distance like ten million lights years, the sweetly poetic, sometimes loving yogi..not..i (yogananda) and doesnt matter (daya mata) will be another brer rabbit, hopin around l. a. and sista fox thievn from devotees to get her lawyer fix..........tale hee hee, as the world turns ......or as the bliss bunnies beautious beams burn blindingly circle
djali123 Registered User (11/16/02 7:35 am)	. (This message was left blank) Edited by: djali123 at: 11/22/02 5:50:38 pm
bheema ma Registered User (11/16/02 8:57 am)	Omnicience Dear Gitano, Thanks for taking me up on my little "challenge." Mine is not primarlily an intellectual nature, so my feelings sometimes get out there just a little before my more reasoned thoughts do. I'm glad you not only didn't take offense, but had the good grace to apply your sense of humor and perspective. I don't have time right now to respond fully to your various points, but I will try to in the next day or two. In the meantime, it looks like others have made moot your concern about "killing another thread." I've killed one or two myself, and I know it's a bummer. I'll leave you with a couple of questions: Have you ever seen the movie "Wag the Dog"? Have you ever tried to "prove" something to someone who doesn't want to believe your point of view could possibly be valid? Now you could easily think that I'm pointing a finger at you, saying that even the most obvious facts demonstrating Master's omnicience wouldn't convince you--(and you would be partially correct)--but I'm also pointing that finger at myself. The fact is that I don't believe Master was a bad judge of character, and I also don't want to believe it, I admit freely. As I said, mine is not primarily an intellectual nature. I also had never heard the Mussolini anecdote before. (By the way, can you share the whole story or article in its complete context? I think it would be helpful to see it all, rather than only one line or phrase.) However, without that context, and possibly even with it, my inclination is to look for another explanation as to Yogananda's purpose in saying what he did--or to doubt that he said it at all. You see the difficulty here? I'll leave you with two small points to think about, while I race off to a busy schedule, after which I'll ponder your previous posting more fully: First, from the AY: *Quote:* Father arrived one day to pay his respects to Sri Yukteswar. My parent expected, very likely, to hear some words in my praise. He was shocked to be given a long account of my imperfections. It was Master's practice to recount simple, negligible shortcomings with an air of portentous gravity. Father rushed to see me. "From your guru's remarks I thought to find you a complete wreck!" My parent was between tears and laughter. The only cause of Sri Yukteswar's displeasure at the time was that I had been trying, against his gentle hint, to convert a certain man to the spiritual path. With indignant speed I sought out my guru. He received me with downcast eyes, as though conscious of guilt. It was the only time I ever saw the divine lion meek before me. The unique moment was savored to the full. "Sir, why did you judge me so mercilessly before my astounded father? Was that just?" "I will not do it again." Master's tone was apologetic. Instantly I was disarmed. How readily the great man admitted his fault! Did you know that Dhirananda was the "certain man" referenced in that little anecdote? And that Master had said to various people, years ahead of time, that he knew Dhirananda would betray him? It sheds a slightly different light on their relationship. Now you may see in those points lots of amunition to support your "see, he's not omnicient" position, but I don't see it that way. Second: I've met several direct disciples who were absolutely convinced, based on their own frequent and personal experience with him, that Master knew their thoughts and words all the time, right down to the last comma. There are plenty of published stories from many sources to support that point. Whether you accept them as evidence of Master's omnicience might depend on how you define the term. To me they apply. More later
srflongago Registered User (11/16/02 3:25 pm)	Omnicience? I believe this is not a valid reference to Dhirananda. He was a disciple of Kebalanda, not Sri Yukteswar. He was from a wealthy family with easy contact with the Maharajah, which Yogananda lacked, for the establishment of the School at Ranchi. He testified in 1935 that he was employed at that school at a somewhat higher salary than Yogananda, having already a Master's from the University of Calcutta, as opposed to Yogananda with a bachelor's degree. Dhirananda was a brilliant student, as his later career indicates, while Yogananda says himself that he was not. The California court in 1935 accepted his evidence that he was NOT a student or disciple of Yogananda, despite Yogananda's affadavit that he was. He won his suit by refuting all points in Yogananda's sworn deposition. I will give you the number of the court suit, if you want to read it yourself in in the LA court records. This is unpleasant to say, but history should stand as it was, not as we might like it to be.
X Insider Registered User (11/16/02 4:19 pm)	Re: Omnicience? Special note for Gitano and SRFlongago Gitano, old buddy. Any thread you could kill does not deserve to live. I am with you, my man! Keep it up! You got it goin on! SRFlongago or Gitano, is there a way to read the LA court records you refer to from a distance? Via the internet? I am very interested in the early lawsuits. And thank you both for your wonderful contributions!
username Registered User (11/16/02 5:18 pm)	Re: Omnicience? Special note for Gitano and SRFlongago I can go down and get the court records. I will post. Please provide information. Thanks.
bheema ma Registered User (11/16/02 5:38 pm)	Dhirananda Was a disciple of Master--court or no court. He may have renounced Master later on, but it was Master who invited him to this country as his disciple. Master himself identified Dhirananda as the one in the story. I have that from a direct disciple who heard it from Master directly. You don't have to believe my assertion or my source, but I do, for what it's worth.
wholetruth Registered User (11/16/02 8:11 pm)	Re: Dhirananda Bheema Ma: Please explain your understanding of Dhirananda's "betrayal" of Yogananda, and what is the source of your information on Dhirananda, as SRF pretends he never existed within the organization? And what does your source tell you about Nerode? Let's not forget that Dhirananda won his lawsuit against Yogananda so a court of law gave some validity to his claims. I have another question. Maybe my understanding is incorrect, but isn't reading minds considered one of many yogic powers? If it's simply a yogic power, it doesn't prove omniscience or that someone is a fully realized, fully liberated master. Edited by: wholetruth at: 11/16/02 8:36:46 pm
srflongago Registered User (11/16/02 9:12 pm)	Re: Dhirananda I can see that you cannot accept that Yogananda lied to the court and to his disciples about Dhirananda being his student, for reasons that are easy to lay out. Your picture of him does not permit it. So be it! Be Happy!
srflongago Registered User (11/16/02 9:13 pm)	Re: Omniscience? Special note for Gitano and SRFlongago case no 397391, LA court, 1935 Bagchi vs Yogananda Edited by: srflongago at: 11/17/02 1:06:35 pm
Ringbearer7 Registered User (11/17/02 4:22 pm)	Re: Omnicience? I believe Yogananda, Satyananda and Dhirananda were all initiated by Swami Kebelananda. Yogananda and Satyananda later went on to recieve initiation from Sri Yukteswarji. I'm not sure whether Dhirananda did also - I wouldn't be suprised though. All three were very close childhood friends and Yoganandaji even let Dhirananda live (unknown to his father) in his room so Dhirananda would have a better environment to progress spiritually. No question Satyananda looked to Yogananda as his leader in the organizational sense and I believe even affectionately referred to him 'Gurudev' at times even though most in India would consider Satyananda to be a disciple of Swami Sri Yukteswarji. Anyways, just because Dhirananda received initiation from Kebelananda doesn't mean that at some point he did not consider Yogananda to be his guru or that Yogananda was necessarily lying if he considered Dhirananda to be his disciple - this is matter of the heart and I doubt whether a court could really discern whether this sort of feeling ever existed between the two. From what I have heard, some highly regarded Indian Kriybans who knew Dhirananda before he came to the U.S. did not hold him in particularly high esteem.
srflongago Registered User (11/17/02 5:04 pm)	Re: Omnicience? Dhirananda denied under oath that he had ever been a disciple of Yogananda. I have seen no claim that he was initiated by Sriyukteswar. At the beginning the stationary had Yogananda in one upper corner, Dhirananda in the other.

Page 1 2 3 4

<< 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: