Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you think that, perhaps, some people came from peculiar homes, and are to some degree disfunctional, and need the 'stability' of being in a group and being told what to do, and not think for themselves? Is there some good being done there?
I am not certain that any good is being done in the guru system. I saw people beaten mentally. Some did rise above it, but then they in turn would beat down the disciples under them, meaning that devotees that are higher up pick on the newer devotees.
I have known of monks and nuns that were in the monastery and broke down due to verbal abuse. When they left they ended up in therapy.
I have seen disciples not able to think for themselves and having to go to a swami to ask if they could do such and such. And often they had to ask before making any decisions, no matter how small, at the monastery or temple.
I have seen swamis verbally abuse devotees, not because they have done something wrong, but because they just wanted to do so. And then I saw how they called it "destroying the ego" when in fact it destroying the person. I have seen how these same swamis hung onto their anger in spite of claiming that they were just helping someone. And I have seen how devotees were shunned. And how others left in tears and gave up their religious beliefs altogether.
There are a few websites that cater to those that have left certain guru orientated organizations, where they tell their own stories.
There is a reason why most in East Indians do not go to gurus but worship in their own homes.
The Native Americans have a better way, that is for sure.
The Tibetan Buddhists do the same to disciples, and they call it "crazy wisdom."
But in the Zen group that I was in the masters were always kind. And the other monks never abused anyone. They taught with love, and so they accomplished much more. So you don't have to verbally abuse others in order to change them for the better.
I can say that I really prefer Hindu teachings over all over religions. It is the guru system which I reject.
Last edited by Mattie Jo; 10-07-2007 at 01:02 PM..
I can say that I really prefer Hindu teachings over all over religions. It is the guru system which I reject.
It is good that you are this broad minded.
Perhaps it is just indicative of the statistics in the part of the country I am in, but most of the people who identify as atheist who I have met are lasped Catholics. Somehow, at a very early age, they are taught, and believe, that this teaching is the only way and when that breaks down, they have no thought that God can exist outside of that church, so they disbelieve all teachings and believe it is all a scam.
But these were people of a certain age in which they were taught in a very un-ecumenical way. Things probablly have changed by now.
There are a lot of extremists in this country. People just mouth words, like, 'we have the best health care (or legal system, or form of government, or religion) in the world'. Nothing is perfect. Everything can become worn and stand some improvement over time. All of these comments, it seems to me, are to keep people in the system comfortable by preventing the unwashed masses from thinking too deeply.
Although you went through such nastiness, you must have also learned a lot, and for that much, I envy you. There are no Hindu temples in my area and I have purchased 3 Gitas with interpretations with the thought that some day I will compare all three and learn a little about the different opinions within the religion and the lessons they bring.
It is a pity that there is not a religion that offers studies in the major religious books of the world, not so much for criticism, but showing the different 'faces' of God. I would love that. But who has such knowledge?
I can say that I really prefer Hindu teachings over all over religions. It is the guru system which I reject.
I could not agree more with one addition, I find myself drawn to the Sikh's Guru Granth Sahib but still can't abide by their belief in following a human guru. My guru is named Brahman (or Vishnu, or Shiva, or Saraswati...).
Would you mind creating a new thread explaining the Hindu concept of God? I believe the concept that we are all One is most beautiful and I have noticed that quantum physics has taken up this idea also. I also love the concept of Brahman. While I understand the concept when I read about it, I have a hard time explaining it to others.
To be drawn to Sikhs is a good thing. I just hope that the organization treats others in kindness. I was under the impression when I joined Hinduism that meditation caused people to learn kindness. Not. Once I was really part of the in crowd I saw that things were not as they seemed. Of course, I admit, I look to see if there are problems. I could find none in my Buddhist group even though I had been friends with a monk that left the monastery. He was very open with me, and I also saw things with my own eyes and ears that made me feel safe there, made me realize that people would not be hurt.
goldengrain,
I have never connected with the Gita, but I do love the Upanishads. I can say that while I am very upset with the Vedanta Society I have found their books to be excellent, and I also liked those put out by Siddha Yoga, but then again, I have nothing good to say about that organization either except for their books. Whereas Self Realization Fellowship, while good with devotional books lacks truth in the Autobiography of a Yogi and also lacks substance in all other books.
I couldn't relate to Buddhism very well except that I loved their teachings on morality, on kindness, etc. I felt those teachings were far better than any put out by other religions, including Hinduism. They have made kindness an art. This is where I combine the two religions, Hinduism for its concept in God, in the Absolute, and Buddhism for its moral principles. I know that all religions teach morals, but I have felt in my search that the Buddhas do it best. I can't say the same for the Tibetan Buddhists.
You are most fortunate to not be part of a group as Paramahansa Yogananda once said, "They are a hornet's nest," not that he was any better, but that is another story.
lacks truth in the Autobiography of a Yogi and also lacks substance in all other books.
You are most fortunate to not be part of a group as Paramahansa Yogananda once said, "They are a hornet's nest," not that he was any better, but that is another story.
I did love the Autobiography when I read it, years back, but agree that the few others that I went through seemed not to be very inspiring.
Can you possibly expound upon the Autobiography, and how it is disengenuous? I never met a person from this group, but notice that there is a second group that had broken away to be truer to the original intent. I would love to hear your opinions on this, if you feel comfortable in doing so.
I feel that I may have highjacked this thread away from Xpat. If so Xpat, let me know. Or even gizmo.
The Ananda group that you speak about has its own problems, but yes they have kept Yogananda's teachings more pure by printing the older works of Yogananda, while SRF wants done of his older writing in the hands of others.
Some of the stories in the Autobiography are embellished. I remember not seeing the book at the Vedanta Society when I went there. They had books from other groups, but none from SRF. I soon learned to not believe all that was written in the Autobiography. But I can really tell you what is real in it and what isn't other than the woman that never ate sneaked in food, and the stigmata case was disowned by the Catholic Church as being false. There is a post about this on this webiste: 27 Contradictions
Anyway, I want to give this thread back to Xpat. Perhaps if you have more questions a new thread could be made if that is what is needed here.
I feel that I may have highjacked this thread away from Xpat. If so Xpat, let me know. Or even gizmo.
The Ananda group that you speak about has its own problems, but yes they have kept Yogananda's teachings more pure by printing the older works of Yogananda, while SRF wants done of his older writing in the hands of others.
Some of the stories in the Autobiography are embellished. I remember not seeing the book at the Vedanta Society when I went there. They had books from other groups, but none from SRF. I soon learned to not believe all that was written in the Autobiography. But I can really tell you what is real in it and what isn't other than the woman that never ate sneaked in food, and the stigmata case was disowned by the Catholic Church as being false. There is a post about this on this webiste: 27 Contradictions
Anyway, I want to give this thread back to Xpat. Perhaps if you have more questions a new thread could be made if that is what is needed here.
Namaste Jessaka,
No problem at all. I'm grateful you've kept the ball bouncing since I've been quite busy lately. The thread does not belong to me but to all of us. I'm happy that other Hindus, former Hindus, etc are participating.
Location: The world, where will fate take me this time?
3,162 posts, read 11,444,462 times
Reputation: 1463
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldengrain
I did love the Autobiography when I read it, years back, but agree that the few others that I went through seemed not to be very inspiring.
Can you possibly expound upon the Autobiography, and how it is disengenuous? I never met a person from this group, but notice that there is a second group that had broken away to be truer to the original intent. I would love to hear your opinions on this, if you feel comfortable in doing so.
Thank you for your recommendations.
I can't speak for others, but for me Yogananda and his teachings are a beautiful and blazingly fast towards God, spiritual progress and evolution.
Kriya is a karma burner, it burns karma like if it was a hungry engine, you can burn bad habits, thoughts, feelings, wishes in the light of kriya.
Yogananda is a true premavatar, Prema = Divine Love, Avatar = Incarnationif you tune in with him in meditation you'll see how your very soul gets covered with the most inconditional and pure love that exists.
Paramhansa means Supreme Soul and Yogananda is the union of 2 words, Yoga which means union, union with God and Ananda which is Bliss, if you tune in with Yogananda and follow his teachings, this supreme soul will take you to God by Bliss, that's the essence of his teachings
SRF is a way to God that comes from Babaji Himself, the deathless yogui one of the most advanced and powerful Mahavatars that exist.
Maha = Great, Avatar = Incarnation
June as I know you are fascinated by Shiva (just like me, hehehehehe) Babaji is a Shiva Avatar, what does this mean?
Jiva is Shiva and Shiva is Jiva; when bound by husk it is paddy, unbound of is rice. Thus the bound one is Jiva, released from karma he is eternal Shiva. ...
To put it in other words, Jiva is a soul which is still trapped by ego, karma and material desires while Shiva is a pure soul without any karma or bindings.
Legendary powers and age have been attributed to Mahavatar Babaji—by the disciples of Lahiri Mahasaya, and by additional unconfirmed stories told in modern times. These stories have led many to believe that Mahavatar Babaji is a legendary person, rather than a real sadhu that was seen by numerous witnesses from 1861-1935.
Paramahansa Yogananda, in his Autobiography, described Mahavatar Babaji’s role on earth:
The Mahavatar is in constant communion with Christ; together they send out vibrations of redemption, and have planned the spiritual technique of salvation for this age. The work of these two fully-illumined masters–one with the body, and one without it–is to inspire the nations to forsake suicidal wars, race hatreds, religious sectarianism, and the boomerang-evils of materialism. Babaji is well aware of the trend of modern times, especially of the influence and complexities of Western civilization, and realizes the necessity of spreading the self-liberations of yoga equally in the West and in the East.
In addition, Babaji is reputed to be ageless, according to some accounts, and about 500 years old around the late 1800’s, according to Swami Pranabananda. Yogananda reports that, according to the disciples of Lahiri Mahasaya, nobody knows Babaji’s age, family, place of birth, true name, or other details “dear to the annalist’s heart.”
Mahavatar Babaji as Krishna
Lahiri Mahasaya wrote in his diary that Mahavatar Babaji was Lord Krishna. Two disciples of Paramahansa Yogananda report that he also stated Mahavatar Babaji was Krishna in a former lifetime.Yogananda also frequently prayed out loud to "Babaji-Krishna."
This is my own experience, I wish that everybody could speak beautiful stories like mine, but if it's not the case I can just feel sorry and wish you better luck on your way back to God.
May all be auspicious!
May all attain infinite peace, unconditional love and eternal blessings.
OM SHIVA MAHADEVA!!
OM GURU PARAMHANSA YOGANANDA!!
OM BABAJI!!!
Mahavatar Babaji
Gurudeva Yogananda
Shiva Mahadeva
Last edited by Travelling fella; 01-26-2008 at 06:56 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
