>
SRF Walrus
Mt. Washington, Ca
Open discussions about SRF
Gold Community SRF Walrus
    > Treatment of Members/Monastics
        > Why We Must Think For Ourselves		 New Topic

Author Comment
Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(10/30/01 6:42 am)
 Why We Must Think For Ourselves
"Now that I look back, I realize that a life predicated on being obedient is a very comfortable life indeed. Living in such a way reduces to a minimum one's own need to think."

---- Adolf  Eichmann, Hilter's chief officer in charge
of implementing the Jewish "Final Solution"

"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think. "

---- Adolf  Hitler

Chilling, isn't it? It compels me to wonder -- and I'm not equating SRF leaders to Eichman or Hitler, but --- it does prompt me to ask a fundamental question: Is SRF asking too much from us? Are we abdicating our right to think and make our own judgments? Has it placed a bid on our minds and individuality? Is individuality wrong? Is dissent corrosive to a healthy spiritual life?

Brother Anandamoy, who for many years seems to be the only person in SRF authorized to think, once scoffingly remarked to the congregation at a Convocation, "You have no rights." I assume he was referring to Master's conception of God as a cosmic dictator. The ego has no rights. There are principles to obey, and one does not find freedom when guided by the whims of the ego but by linking one's will to the guidance and freed will of the guru. And so Master came along and insisted that people like Anandamoy as well as Mrinalini Mata stop rationalizing and follow blindly.

First off, being rational and rationalizing are mutually exclusive terms. One means to use the mind like a drill to get at the heart of the matter. The other means to make the heart of the matter conform to the comforts of the intellect. Big difference. I don't see this distinction being made anywhere in SRF. What I see mostly is a lot of pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo afraid to go to the gym and work off its fat. Typical of religions!

"Hold on!" you say. "Didn't Master insist on obedience?" Perhaps. If Master personally wants to order me about in the picayune aspects of my life, I might make an effort to obey him at least to see what kind of effect the obedience would have on my life. But Master is not around in the way he was then. The senior monastic who tells you how to think and act is not Master any more than George Bush Jr. is George Washington.

I always thought the will of God was priniciples rather than particulars. Master now exists in consciousness. Therefore he is within me just as much as he is in any SRF oligarch. I may not be pure. I may be a peacock in the midst of penguins, but I am an individual, and my existence was shaped by none other than the hands of God. My ideas may more often be errant than brilliant, but they are my ideas. And unless I work with the mind God gave me, I will never know Self-Realization, for there will be no self on which to realize the Self. I must try to trust myself once in awhile, for any day, I could stumble upon the infinite walking my own path.

The saints Master lauded in his autobiography were as differentiated from each other as the ruby, emerald and topaz are from each other. They didn't become differently hued lamps of the one truth by conformance to an organization. They became different because they were different , were that way from the beginning of time. All they did was awaken to their essence.

I, for one, am absolutely appalled by the way elitist SRF mouthpieces scoff at the concept of authenticity and individuality. I am not ready to assent to their opinion. The lessons of history are cautionary tales. Not that obedience and assent to an external authority are entirely devoid of utility. But as a way of life? Did Jesus obey any authority outside the voice that whispered in his consciousness? Did Einstein? Did Jefferson? Did Socrates? The people who make a lifestyle out of obedience are cannon fodder. That will never be my destiny. I aspire to be a star, luminous in God's fimament. If I circle around any point of authority, it is the certain gravitational pull of that central star which nurtures all life in this galaxy.

We call him Master. Why? Are we slaves? Are we conscious of the way we use that loaded term? When I say "Master" I am thinking "one who is Master of himself.' Yogananda does not own me. He is my family, my elder brother, the one who has made it to the other side before me. And he lovingly comes to urge me on. As I grow to appreciate what self mastery means, I cannot help but have an expansion of reverence for the being who was sent to guide my life. Guiding it to its final destination: to me and then to He who has become me. Ultimately, I must discover my own law. Every planet, every star has its own unique celestial signature.

Since ego is the sensualized soul, any harsh discipline can surely jolt one's consciousness away from attachment to sensual proclivities. Thus, for the renunciant's abdication of personal rights to be successful, he must simultaneously assert his transpersonal rights as a God-manifested entity. That right is the right to shine, not hiding your light under bushel. One way to get that light to shine is to beat the mud off the bulb. Works quite effectively if you don't break the glass. I suppose one could beat the skin off a potato just as readily as parboil it. But I have a hunch that 9 times out of 10 the potato will not look like much of a potato after its clubbing.

I don't mind being a challenge to my guru. He's supposed to be omnipresent, and I'm not exactly a dunce. Somewhere in the middle, common sense should get the problems squared away. Meanwhile the Matas and Papas of Mt. Washington cry treachery every time a pipsqueek speaks. I'm so sick of this snobbish rubbish, I'm ready to vomit. Lucky you read this in cyber-safety.

Our guru was a superb bhakti. Even his detractors granted him that one undisputable distinction. Naturally the work he founded would reflect his blessed bias. Certainly SRF would look very different if Sri Yukteswar, or Buddha, or St. Francis were at the helm. But Yogananda was the chosen one, and so he spoke of God as he alone knew Him. What else was he to do? And he said love touches God more than any other quality.

But devotion without intellect is a tricky business. Minus the intellect, the bhakti becomes preoccupied with matters of feeling and will. Soon there surfaces cults of feeling and cults of will. And, yes, there can be cults of intellect, too. Still, people who, operating on the pretense of devotion or will, abidicate the responsibility to do their own thinking must hire it out for others to do. This is one problem people who use their minds don't have.

Real thinking is penetrative. It delineates and differentiates. It is the newest evolutionary addition of our species, aiding us in our quest for meaning, helping us to define what our existence is all about. Sure, it can be used self-referentially and thus as a tool of the ego. But why scoff at it when it can also be the greatest survival tool given to us by God? Scoff at it and you spit on one of God's masterpieces. You can cut a carrot with a spoon or a chopstick, but it works better when you cut it with a knife.

Guruji, a bhakti, was sent to Sri Yukteswar, a jnana, for training. Any idea why? Incidentally, Sri Yukteswar demanded nothing but perfect obedience from the young Mukunda. I guess guruji felt safe relinquishing his will to another avatar. There are no more avatars in SRF. That's what we've been promised. Ironically the know-it-alls at Mt. Washington dictate how we percieve our guru. And when it comes to matters of conveniece they even act a little too special.

Well, I proclaim those days are over. After September 11th, the world got harder for everybody. The old crutches have been kicked out from under our arms and we are forced -- all of us -- to walk on two feet. We have graduated from kindergarten. The current problems are unsolveable by totemisms. The world requires intellects who can view the world in five dimensions. Our political system is unravelling, and as I write, Senators and Representatives and leaders of State are in a scramble, rethinking the Constitution, the Army, the health care system, the economic infrastructure and the implementation of internal security and law enforcement. Abroad we are faced with the effects of years of self-serving interest and the hate it has provoked. And there are new and unforseen coalitions of power forming at dizzying speeds.

So what the world needs now is not more love but more intelligence. Certainly our adversaries have love, but not for us. And we love our precious America, but not the bearded man whose greatest glee is burning American flags. Even if you send love through your prayer circles to the enemy, someone has to use a mind for diplomacy. And while you amble blissfully through devotee-land with nary a trouble in your mind, that is only because someone outside the walls of your Shangrila is using his mind valiantly to solve the world's problems before they get to your doorstep.

So enough of this obedience melarky. I'll be obedient when the streets are flooded and the house is on fire. But don't expect me to heel like a dog on a leash every time a Mata decides to take her walk. And don't think that just because reason is limited I'm going to hock it any time soon. I've read what Eichman and Hitler have to say about that. And if it comes to a toss up between displeasing God by me thinking or pleasing Eichman and Hitler by me not thinking, I guess God loses.

pschuppe
Registered User
(11/9/01 5:50 pm)
 Re: Why We Must Think For Ourselves
Raja Begum,

Thanks for your long post. A couple of quotations come to mind:

"Saintliness is not dumbness. The active expression of virtue gives rise to the keenest intelligence."

"Stay only if you feel benefitted."
both by Sri Yukteswar in AY

Both of these endorse your point that we have to think for ourselves. And yet, haven't we been doing that for 'how-many-millions' of lifetimes? Hear me out--I'm not suggesting blind obedience. In fact I'm actively asking the question: "Obedience to what?" Certainly not the ego. I have the healthiest respect for the power of delusion through the ego. It is a formidible foe.

In my mind, the right kind of obedience is to truth; to the process of transformation; to Guru (dispeller of darkness). Even there, it's a cooperative obedience though, not an unthinking, idiotic or spineless acceptance of another's will. It isn't like Master hypnotizes us so we don't have to think anymore.

Where, when, and how you draw the line between acceptance, obedience, and blind obedience, it is between you and Master. Or you and whomever. An organization certainly can't determine that for you, even if it implies or says outright it can and should.

Master can guide us up the mountain, he can not and will not carry us.

Last time I checked, the path he offered us was called "Self-realization," not "Self-Realization Fellowship realization." That implies personal responsibility and a very personal relationship with Master. How you define that or work with that is up to you.

You seem to question whether Master actually CAN guide you up the mountain ahead of you. If that's the case, then obedience probably isn't the issue for you anyway--at least not at this point. No one can give you the devotion to make the connection with Master you'll have to make. If you don't trust the Guru, then no one else can give that to you. You have to find it yourself. Or you have to earn it yourself.

Now if you've mistakenly placed your faith in an fallible organization (that reads ANY organization, no matter how well-intentioned), or another flawed human being in a blind way, it may take a while to re-identify with the fact that Master and the organization are not one and the same, however much they may try to convince you otherwise. But that will come. Meanwhile, by all means use the tools God has given you. Just don't hurt yourself with them. Intellect without devotion is very dry and hard. You've already identified the delusions attendent on having too much blind devotion without any intellect to balance it. Balance is the key for all of us IMHO.

If you can learn from SRF, even from its mistakes, why not learn as much as possible?

PS

Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(11/9/01 8:08 pm)
 In reply
Pschuppe wrote:
"Where, when, and how you draw the line between acceptance, obedience, and blind obedience, it is between you and Master. Or you and whomever. An organization certainly can't determine that for you, even if it implies or says outright it can and should."


That I had any choice was not clear to me twenty years ago when I was a young upstart and every monastic was pumping our minds with: "Self Realization Fellowship and Yogananda are one"..... "Be loyal to the organization and the Board of Directors." Mrinalini Mata still pushes this "Church is the body of Christ" type of groupthink crap. Watch her video; it really reeks!

Back then, SRF was my only world. None other existed. For it, I gave up on all my personal dreams in order to be an ideal devotee. As the years passed, my devotion and meditation deepened, but, in knowledge of the ways of the world I remained terminally retarded -- suffering a bad case of "arrested development" to quote Musicman.

Any expert on the subject will tell you that self-esteem is directly related to how appropriate a person feels to the context of his or her life.

I felt perpetually uncool, undesirable by the opposite sex, always living below the standard I was accustomed to while growing up, an underachiever with no other direction in life save the Friday night meditations and Sunday services. I didn't know how to dress, didn't know how to let go and enjoy myself, people called me goofy, I didn't know how to carry myself with presence and charisma.

And it just got worse and worse with each passing year. But I have been touched by a miracle. I found the strength within myself to unshoulder the burden of a lifetime. And having done so, I have rediscovered the dazzling man I had jailed within myself for so long. People are noticing. And, if anything, it is making me more connective with others.

I still meditate. Still feel the same delicious presence within. I am bolder in my relationship with Spirit --- more passionate, more authentic, more straightforward. I have discovered a resilient God who never judges and who doesn't mind me taking risks and exploring. In every experience He plays with me. I have found release from conformity and repression. The Infinite reverberates within me as an embracing, perpetual cosmic "Yes."

Edited by: srfwalrus at: 11/27/01 10:16:17 pm
AumBoy
Unregistered User
(11/10/01 10:17 pm)
 Think for ourselves? Think again...
I appreciate these postings....

On the yoganandarediscovered.com website, I found the following quote (Tara Mata to Donald Walters):

“In an organization, no one has a right even to think except the members of the Board of Directors.”

I was in the ashram for about 5 years and this quote (the veracity of which I cannot confirm) seems pretty accurate to me. It is what I experienced. As someone humorously commented in another post 'thinking is not allowed. Positive thinking is.'

Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(11/11/01 1:20 am)
 To Ananda members
No reason why Ananda members can't join in. Your insights are appreciated. But let's keep the thrust of this message board aimed in the direction of helping SRF members who are troubled by the SRF organization and paradigm. Respect the fact that you are on our turf.

Certainly we intersect. We seek the blessings and love of the same guru. Let's help each other.

There is a thread called "Ananda." That would be an appropriate place to develop an ongoing forum for Ananda and SRF combined issues.

What do you folks think?

Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(11/11/01 1:47 pm)
 We all partake
I agree. Earlier in the year, I took some time to read what Kriyanada had to say about his experience with SRF. It was a revelation. I began to see him less as a pariah and more as the first publicized casualty of the clash of temperaments in the SRF organization.

As I've written in previous posts, it was through SRF that I became a disowned, dissociated person. The lack of support -- in fact, disdain --- for authenticity really did a number on me. Whether it be an irrepressively idealistic Donald Walters or a disenfranchised SRF monastic, I clearly see that same repressive influence at work -- slowly destroying the spirit of autonomy and the creative will.

Let me give an example. Young Donald Walters came into his guru's hermitage with a dream. Since his youth he dreamed of creating colonies. In essence, he wanted to be a builder of utopian cities. That was an authetic childhood dream. He then met his guru. How excited he must have been that his guru advocated the building of colonies. I mean if I had a childhood dream of making movies and then heard Yogananda constantly advocate that someone should make spiritual movies for America, don't you think I'd go rent a camera and start shooting?

Someone turned me on to the Ananda tape titled "Stories to Remember." For those of you who aren't in the know, this is an lengthy excerpt from the Lake Shrine Dedication talk in 1950. I was aghast to hear our guru promoting colonies. Isn't that taboo in SRF? Didn't Kriyananda get the shaft by, his organization atttacked by the bad ladies over that? Here my friends is the exact transcription of Guruji's plea for building colonies:

"We must build build colonies wherein we can shape the youth who are willing -- hundred percent willing -- to have jobs, happiness, freedom, and produce food for their own use.... All our vegetables are grown by our boys which supply close to 200 people. So they are -- we are not charged in the ordinary sense. For one hour, we build a great big edifice, and then we pray for people to come and sit. We don't ask. Whoever comes willingly, fine. Whoever doesn't, we don't coax. We want hearts. I prefer a soul to a crowd, and I love crowds of souls. SO THE GREATEST THING IN THE CHURCH MOVEMENT IS THE BUILDING OF COLONIES to take the surplus of industry and to educate the American youth in character building."

".... This sort of colony, I hope the Governer, with all my humbleness, emphasizes character education in the schools, AND BUILDING OF THESE COLONIES WHERE THEY CAN HAVE THEIR JOBS, HOME, CHARACTER, CHURCH, AND FREEDOM IN THE SAME PLACE. And I have found the greatest results by that way. But I have some people of great educatable ability, we are now starting, we have started already a goat dairy, and another colony is starting in Phoenix. We have quite a few colonies in India. BUT THE COLONY SYSTEM IS SUCCEEDING BECAUSE IT ISN'T A CHURCH FOR ONE HOUR -- BUILD A GREAT BIG EDIFICE. TIE UP SO MUCH MONEY. You see, we have simple construction and beauty.....It is all done by our own people...."

So Kriyananda hears this over and over again .... Guruji speaking passionately in favor of colonies and actually somewhat against building churches which tie up money (I read that Hollywood Temple bathrooms will cost a small fortune) and which people will only sit in for an hour per week. What happened to this message? Why did it get squelched? Colonies have never been a passion of mine. In truth, I believe I would feel suffocated if those colonies were not integral to the world scene. But they were a passion of Yogananda's, and they do make sense the way he explains them. So why have the Mata's censored this part of our guru's heart? Why have we not heard about it? Why isn't it on any SRF tapes?

The Matas could say, "Guruji wanted colonies, but we feel we lack the leadership and expertise to pull it off. Maybe later." But they don't say ANYTHING! And that's what riles me. Are we too f---ing stupid to hear the truth?

What annoys me is all this curbing of information. The recontextualizing of our Guru's message. And that's a lesson I learned only through being open enough to llisten to a tape distributed by Ananda. Surely DW / Kriyananda is biased. Every blind boy swears his side of the elephant is the definitive side. A lot of SRF people don't want to hear what he has to say because he allegedly has a sweet tooth for pretty women. I don't see why that's a problem. Except that if he wants to be a playboy, he should be open about it like Hugh Hefner. Hugh has my admiration. And he doesn't wear a halo or swami robes; he wears a bathrobe.

Humor aside, if we seriously look for clues at the scene of the crime -- SRF, Andanda and other splinter groups -- we're going to end up putting together a picture the archetypal monstrosity plagueing us all. Goodness and healing shall surely follow. That's why I personally welcome Ananda members to this discussion. If you are from Ananda, you should identify yourself as such and be given the hospitality and respect due to all our guru's beloved.

Musicman
Unregistered User
(11/12/01 9:16 am)
 Hit Men
Years ago, when I was in the Dallas group (we're talking 1978-79), the leader was a woman named Priscilla Jackson. She was married to a banker, had $$$$, and had helped underwrite the remodeling of the building where our group met (which had a gift shop and lovely chapel). To make a long story short, she broke with SRF and formed her own org., Amrita Foundation. She began to publish the original lessons and Whispers, which she claimed SRF had adulterated. We loyal SRFers formed a new group and met elsewhere. At convocation, our new group leader met with then Br. Philip, head of Center Dept., about the situation. There was another monk at the meeting, too, though I don't remember his name. Anyway, the meeting turned into a bitch session about all the renegades out there, including Kriyananda, Roy Eugene Davis, and Oliver Black. In regards to the latter, the monk whose name I can't recall said (according to my friend, the new leader), "What SRF needs is a good hit man." The monk then quickly added that he was "just joking" and not to tell anyone else what he had said (which my friend did anyway). Now, I don't believe SRF is inclined to commit murder (though I wouldn't put it completely beyond the bad ladies), but this revealed to me at the time an interesting mindset regarding anyone who dared carry on Master's work outside the aegis of SRF. It is fascinating to learn from Raja and others that Black and Walters knew something the bad ladies have tried to conceal: Master didn't intend for SRF to be the only driving force in establishing his colonies.

Actually, some hit men might be just what is needed, but I hesitate to state the obvious about where their services would be most useful.

pschuppe
Registered User
(11/12/01 8:11 pm)
 Colonies, etc.
From Musicman:
<but this revealed to me at the time an interesting mindset regarding anyone who dared carry on Master's work outside the aegis of SRF. It is fascinating to learn from Raja and others that Black and Walters knew something the bad ladies have tried to conceal: Master didn't intend for SRF to be the only driving force in establishing his colonies.>

Or maybe they're not particularly concealing it. Maybe they just don't believe it, (which they imply in what they say publicly--that he changed his mind at the end of his life). Not that I believe that he did change his mind for one minute. He was telling Kamala Silva how important the idea was to him just a few months before his mahasamadhi.

But to give the board the benefit of the doubt, maybe they just don't think it's their particular dharma. I could spin out a hypothetical scenario that even goes farther in their defense--maybe Master ordered them to "keep the organization strong", and to them, that meant getting back to strict monasteries, and away from this crazy, unmanageable colony thing. Maybe this whole bizarre lila has just had to play out the way it has for some reason(s) known only to the Masters. Who knows? And in the long run, it doesn't even matter--we each have to live our lives in the best way we can. Guess what?!--we have to do like Raja was pointing out at the beginning of the thread--think for ourselves. ;-)

In any case, SRF doesn't appear to have any intention of starting colonies, for whatever reason. No great surprise there. But does that mean everyone else in the world should avoid trying to like the plague?!

Master repeatedly predicted that the colonies idea would "spread like wildfire." That choice of imagery has several implications to my way of understanding it:

It will be a very, very, big, transformative energy.
There will be an element of disruption involved. (Gee . . ., maybe this board has a role to play. . .;-))
It (the need for it, the fact of it) will be very obvious to those involved, and probably to countless others in the world.
IT WILL BE OUT OF CONTROL--i.e. no one group, no one mindset, no one 'right way' to do it.
IT WILL BE DE-CENTRALIZED--as above.
It will be more Dwapara Yuga than Kali Yuga in flavor and essence--i.e. more network/energy/flow based and less form/centralization/control based.
"Center everywhere, circumferance nowhere."

Other angles, ideas, quotations?

Om,

ps

Edited by: pschuppe at: 11/12/01 9:13:41 pm
4mer monk
Unregistered User
(11/13/01 2:23 pm)
 What does it matter?
I had a profound shift in thought today. Are we spending too much time on the "I" ? Your thoughts would be appreciated.


"We make too much of feeling, even admitting that
the right kind of feeling is very enjoyable. What does it
matter how you feel? Bear your lot as long as it is the
will of God that you should do so. Act rightly, and in
due time the right feeling of peace and joy will
come".

Sri Gyanamata, "God Alone: The Life and Letters
of a Saint"

pschuppe
Registered User
(11/13/01 5:26 pm)
 Re: What does it matter?
Sounds pretty right on to me. I think Gyanamata's quotation goes very much in the direction of answering your own question from an earlier post--"how to heal?"

I would add another quotation from Gyanamata that comes to mind around difficult karma/healing issues:

"The things that happen to us do not matter. What we become through them does."

We can't affect the karma that's coming back to us. But we can (with Master's grace), affect how it affects us; whether it beats us down or makes us stronger in God.

Blessings in Guru,

ps

KS
Unregistered User
(11/13/01 10:57 pm)
 Control
Obviously SRF can't control colonies therefore they are feared and have absolutely no chance of getting any attention. Mother center is fearfull of members wanting power (they think members are like themselves) and colonies are a mine field. Even the centers and groups are a problem for them.

Mother center will be gone in 100 years and a more distributed model, like the Hindu religion uses, will emerge. You can see, even in the news today with all that is going on, a move toward closer relationships and more simple living is called for. People are realizing the benefits of that life style. Mass murder is making people wake up.

Mother center doesn't need to adapt to colonies. They will be gone soon and are a non-issue really.

Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(11/14/01 4:08 am)
 It does matter -- A response to 4mer monk's posting
"We make too much of feeling, even admitting that
the right kind of feeling is very enjoyable. What does it
matter how you feel? Bear your lot as long as it is the
will of God that you should do so. Act rightly, and in
due time the right feeling of peace and joy will
come".


To appreciate this quote fully, one has to take into consideration that Gyanamata is a Jnana yogi -- one of many legitimate orientations on the spiritual path. A jnani relies on the use of the mind as a detached witness. The idea is to break indentification with name and form, and try to experience one's self as the eternal. When the sensory mind gets the upper hand, the jnani switches to endurance --- he or she regards the phenomenal world as a "flu" to be endured until wellness.

We can learn from everybody. But just because the method is correct doesn't mean all can or should use it. One man says the only way up the mountain is by horse. Another insists you can only make it by helicopter. Someone else says you must take a secret tunnel to the top. Which way is right for you? If you go by tunnel, you navigate in a strange internal landscape; it's dark and there are bats and spiders. By helicopter, you get the total view, but you miss the details; also, you must deal with updrafts and crosswinds which can be hazardous. If you go by horse, you get to enjoy the trails and the scenery from up close. But you also ride on an animal which may turn lazy or overly spirited.

Our guru gives us many choices. It is up to us to decide what and how to follow. In "The Divine Romance," there is an article titled "How Feelings Mask the Soul." Here Guruji's discussion seems to support Gyanamata's quote. Turning to the SRF Lessons, you find one titled "The Chemistry of Feelings" (S-2 P-33) which encourages a completely different tack.


Let's contrast representative statements made by our guru from the above-cited works:

"Your real nature is calmness. You have put on a mask of restlessness: the agitated state of your consciousness resulting from the stimuli of feelings. You are not that mask; you are pure, calm Spirit. It is time you remember who you are: the blessed soul, a reflection of Spirit. Take off the mask of feelings. Face your Self."

---- from "How Feelings Mask the Soul"


"By itself, a particular feeling produces a particular, limited result; but when rightly combined with certain other qualities, it may produce infinite results in spiritual realization."

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ---- from "The Chemistry of Feelings"


If you follow Gyanamata's advice, you will gibe well with Guruji's first quote. But if you follow his second quote, you can only do so by ignoring Gyanamata's advice. How can you rightly combine feelings when it doesn't matter how you feel in the first place?

We could summon countless contrasting statements from the SRF literature. If we tried to take all the approaches to heart, we might beset ourselves with an innumerable amount of paradoxes. In some sense, I believe that's what has happened to us. Many years and many mistakes later, a wizened devotee learns to chose what works for him or her and let go of the rest. If our guru is a world teacher, then he had to have come bringing a little bit of everything for everyone.

I diverge for a moment to make a suggestion: the SRF teachings and literature need to be reorganized. They are a mess. Very few complain about this mostly because they know they will hear the same advice that's always given: Don't blame the teachings, blame the student's attunement. SRF spokespeople are quick to rationalize that any SRF format is inherently perfect because it contains a master's perfect ideas. This is false logic. The improper presentation of a good idea distorts or impedes its effectiveness. This is something so obvious to many or our members, yet it seems to get absolutely no attention by the Board of Directors, or, if it has, the members are neither aware of such nor is their input expressly appreciated.

The most widely accepted theories on learning suggest that students don't all learn the same way. Some are visually motivated. Others learn best either by listening or by using their hands. And some learn by a combination of approaches. An effective classroom gets each student on task in the way suited to his or her basic learning orientation. In this analogy, being in SRF for some is like being a student who is having difficulty following an instructor who talks most of the time but finds it much easier to learn when the instructor occasionaly writes his ideas on the chalkboard. How shall we case this dilemma? Do we blame the student for not pushing through his boredom and lack of concentration? Or do we blame the teacher for rendering his verbal lessons unintelligible to his visual learners. Who is responsible? Or are they both responsible?

Let's consider the Gyanamata quote one more time. If the current leadership in SRF emphasizes the ascetic Gyanamata-type ideas to a disproportionate degree, what happens to those devotees who need to hear the other message, the one Guruji promotes in "The Chemistry of Feelings" ? My observation is they rapidly fall into dissociation with their feelings. This is not what yoga teaches. Dissociation is a form of unconsciousness, while our goal in yoga is to expand consciousness.

I have in my files a quote by Dr. Nathaniel Branden explaining the damaging consequences of dissociation. If you feel inspired, you can pick up a copy of his book "The Art of Living Consciously" wherein this eloquent quote can be found:

"To disown means to cease to recognize as our own. We can be alienated from -- inadequately conscious of --- our bodies, our needs and wants, our feelings and emotions, our actions and reactions, our thoughts and values, or our abilities and capacities. We can be strangers to ourselves in many different possible respects. We can act without recognizing the roots of our actions. We can be afraid without knowing what we are afraid of and long without knowing what we long for. These are some of the meanings of self-alienation and self-disowning. "
"A consequence of this process is that we radically restrict our sense of self. We have less access to our inner signals, and consequently we become more dependent on signals from others. We may need others to tell us what to think, how to live, when to express which emotion (if at all), what is right or wrong, and so forth."

"At minimum, we pay a price in suffering, when we inappropriate in our responses and frustrated in our life. But sometimes we pay even a worse price, as when, for instance -- 'What stress are you talking about?' asks a driven, workaholic salesman of forty-eight a moment before he drops dead of a heart attack."


Musicman
Unregistered User
(11/14/01 12:13 pm)
 What does it matter?
Thanks to 4mer Monk for raising a very good issue. That quote of Gyanamata has been circulating in my mind lately in relation to many of the postings here. There are times when we have to override our feelings if they stand in the way of doing the right thing. There are other times, I've noticed, when those feelings are the best guide we have to figuring out the right thing to do. Gyanamata says that over time the "right" feelings will come, if one does the things one must on the spiritual path. But this board is proof that that is not always true. Some of the people posting here were in the ashram for decades, faithfully doing their duty and, in the immortal words of Archie Bunker, "stifling themselves." The result has been suicidal depression, low self-esteem, and a host of other psychological ailments--certainly the opposite of bliss and peace.

Look, if that approach worked for her, great, but it is not a universal remedy. For some it can have catastrophic consequences. The purpose of meditation and right living, if I understand them correctly, is to increase one's sense of well-being and one's happiness, so that one can uplift those around him/her. You can't help others out of a pit you're still trapped in yourself. Obviously, feelings matter a very great deal.

Gyanamata lived in relative isolation, even in the ashram. She could afford to stifle herself. I would defy anyone to do what I am trying to do, i.e., raise a mentally healthy child, by pursuing that course. I mean, if one is busy denying one's own feelings, is it really possible to remain acutely sensitive to and solicitous of others' feelings? That would be almost impossible. Stifled people usually encourage others to stifle themselves (like Archie and, with all due respect, Gyanamata). "Get over it" is their refrain of preference. You can't do that with a five-year-old. If you try to, you will cause permanent emotional injury. (I'll never forgot the senior monastic who told me that a fellow SRF employee of mine had lost his wife and taken a year off of work to "get over it," which, to the monk's contemptuous surprise, he hadn't. It was obvious the monk had so insulated himself from LIFE that he had lost any capacity to empathize with others. It was really pathetic. Was this a happy person? No way. What is the point of such "gyana.")

Is there too much "I" on this board? Maybe, but I'm not sure how much is too much. Look, there are a lot of walking wounded out there who have been stifling themselves for decades and need someplace where they can unburden themselves. As I've said before, you can't do this with family and friends, because they don't understand SRF, and you can't do it with most SRFers because they are caught in Archie Bunker mode. I want to read about people's personal experiences, not abstract, disembodied platitudes. If I want that, I can go elsewhere--Gyanamata, for instance. Now, we could all do as Daya Mata sometimes does and refer to ourselves in the third person. The only person I have personally known who did that was clinically diagnosed as schizophrenic. Or we could use the purple plural, which DM also sometimes does, but that would be rather pretentious.

So, I hope you will all indulge me when I use the singular first-person pronoun. I don't think there is really anything wrong with it. Of course, the question was meant more in a metaphorical sense of talking too much about ourselves. As I said, no complaints here. That's what I want to hear.

username
Unregistered User
(12/3/01 9:09 pm)
 Amrita
I heard that SRF threw Priscilla out of the organization and that she created Amrita as a way of healing that hurt. Does anyone know the real story.

cjmagorian
Unregistered User
(1/24/02 5:27 am)
 to username
Hi, I would suggest you ask her. She is very open and honest. Her e-mail is www.amrita.com, I think, but her e-mail is prisi@amrita.com.

AumBoy
Registered User
(1/24/02 10:32 am)
 Re: to username
Quote:
She is very open and honest.

Yes, cj, that's the impression I feel from her emails. Nothing to hide.

soulcircle
Registered User
(5/10/02 9:58 pm)
 Re: We all partake [and community]
There will never be a way for me to thank the sweet and noble spirit coming through you, Raja Begum, and you Walrus and many of your contributors. Maybe be, early on in the commencement of another "religion of the Dwarpara Yuga that will sweep the world," and i will be the next Daya Mata and pontificate at huge gatherings for 47 years, while each day another trouble maker like you bites the dust. Dang, humor on my part needs a little work. LOL.

Thank You.

Specifically, I thank you Raja Begum for the transcription about community. I do so from my nature and my heart.
Community also is the core of my life, as you speak of being the case, perhaps, in some individuals.

When the AY came into my life in '67 and when every year since has been lived for community, friendship (the bulk of these 35 years deeply within SRF), I didn't know that late one night, 35 years later, not from the "teachings," like a physical or online library of SRF, but from the **hearts** of this soul circle, Walrus, would come a treasure.

So again I find the "keepers responsible to get the teachings [pure] out into the waiting yuga and world," have done everything else but.....

But here on a computer, two paragraphs of PY's, that are deeply important to me, appear.

At ceremonies too numerous to mention ( Kriya and Kriyaban) loyalty to SRF has been mainlined into friends, family and spouse and myself, and yet these "loyal" "keepers" haven't taken the hour needed to get these two paragraphs on community, PY's at Lake Shrine.... to any of us long, long time, new and in between members of "this monk's large family."

So for this treasure now gained, I will thank you as I continue to read with pain. thought, intuition. love and hopefully soon humility and humor, .....as I continue to read...
feel the love!!!!!!

For this heartcircle to exist, depends on your continued participation Raja Regum, Kevin and others.

soulcircle
Registered User
(5/11/02 12:12 am)
 Re: Colonies, etc.
You have asked for ideas, right?
__________________________________

Yes, not only ideas, a whole book!!!
LAST HOURS of ANCIENT SUNLIGHT by Thom Hartmann

Insight and ideas, probably what PY and others have foreseen.

One answer to what is already occurring and what will be occurring, to some extent is this book.

The author admits first half of book is depressing, and then posits community/colonies as the prescription.

They are now embryonic/hatching in thousands of places in the USA alone.

My copy is available for loan...what is the protocol for leaving an email addy in a post like this...foolishness vs. bravery? LOL.

Others hopefully join me in formally requesting that the operators of EZboard make a thread for colonies/community for this *heartcircle* of Walruses!

nisarga
Registered User
(5/12/02 8:28 pm)
 Re: Colonies, etc.
Great idea to make a thread for community/colonies. The walrus has brought us together in a ciber community of sorts. We need to go further. This is just the beginning. We need to empower ourselves and each other. Remember, Master came for us, he created the organization for us, to serve our needs and for our own individual Self-Realization. Somehow the " cart has been put before the horse." Meaning???? The false concept has been created that we are here to serve and build the organization. That people are to be sacrificed and used for the good of the organization and that a world mission is more valuable, more important than an individual soul. That we are made for the organization, not as it should be, that the organization is made for us. It is here to serve us and our needs.
Colonies/communities have always been one of my loves. I was at Ananda in the late "60's and a monk in SRF for almost 20 years. So I have first hand experience living in communities and am aware of their dark side also. Most communities are pseudo-communities because like the ashram there is no individual choise or expression. There is no democratic process. There is a leader that dictates. There is no room for independent thought and individual expression is limited. One has to fit into a certain mould and to conform.
I would like to be in contact with individuals that are interested in creating open, HEALTHY, communities. My e-mail is enabled.

Edited by: nisarga at: 5/13/02 7:57:12 pm
<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>


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 - Treatment of Members/Monastics -



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