I had zero idea that Yogananda had such ghastly beliefs about dictatorship and such contempt for 'ordinary people.'

The guy set up a tax exempt entity in the US that benefitted from the generosity of US democracy and was indirectly subsidized by the millions of 'ordinary people' who pay their taxes.

The least that Y could have done was show some respect for the democracy that trusted him and gave him a benefit that enabled him and his heirs to accumulate property and wealth at a faster rate than the hoi polloi who pay tax.

THats what I despite about these gurus. They lack gratitude or recognition of the processes that enable them to get rich so easily and quickly here in the West--whose materialistic mindset they love to despise.

Theyre more materialistic than most of us.

In India and many parts of the world, including, alas, the United States of America, a way to demonstrate high status is to pay no taxes or as little tax as possible.

Its bad enough when secular minded persons do this--eventually the entire community breaks under the strain.

But when a guru and his (or her minions) profess to have the answers to the materialism of the West, while quietly living out that materialism themselves--we have enough of that hypocrisy without yet another dose of it administered by gurus.

There is meditation without gurus, and meditation with gurus. The latter is good if the guru matters. In India it is said that most who pose as gurus are charlatans, by the way.

The Bhagavad Gita says, "No one verily becomes a yogi who has not renounced thoughts!" (6:2). Yogananda said many things; had he renounced thoughts in a proper way anyway? Such states of mind are what good meditation opens up to. That's an interesting topic, or what?

Man and woman may renounce thought both in sleep and deep in meditation on the way to Waking Up, which I am for and against - just to make it clear.

Yogananda also said:

Quote

A deep thinker puts forth about fifty thousand [thoughts a day]. I have found that by concentrating it is possible to produce as many as five hundred thousand thoughts in a day." [Man's Eternal Quest, p. 330]

Where has he got those numbers from? Why so many when one silent thought may do? Is it worthwhile to try "Yogananda thought-spewing"? After all, it is the quality of one's thoughts that matter the most. Good mantra yoga teachings are that ONE thought may save you - a well repeated, fit, single thought, that is, the guru-given mantra.

If or when we reach no-thought without being mindless, it hardly matters how incorruptible the body of a guru might get after a brown spot first has developed on the nose of the corpse. I posted the guru's complete mortuary report a few postings above.

Merry Members

There is meditation without gurus, and meditation with gurus. The latter is good if the guru matters. In India it is said that most who pose as gurus are charlatans, by the way.

The Bhagavad Gita says, "No one verily becomes a yogi who has not renounced thoughts!" (6:2). Yogananda said many things; had he renounced thoughts in a proper way anyway? Such states of mind are what good meditation opens up to. That's an interesting topic, or what?

Man and woman may renounce thought both in sleep and deep in meditation on the way to Waking Up, which I am for and against - just to make it clear.

Yogananda also said:

Quote

A deep thinker puts forth about fifty thousand [thoughts a day]. I have found that by concentrating it is possible to produce as many as five hundred thousand thoughts in a day." [Man's Eternal Quest, p. 330]

Where has he got those numbers from? Why so many when one silent thought may do? Is it worthwhile to try "Yogananda thought-spewing"? After all, it is the quality of one's thoughts that matter the most. Good mantra yoga teachings are that ONE thought may save you - a well repeated, fit, single thought, that is, the guru-given mantra.

If or when we reach no-thought without being mindless, it hardly matters how incorruptible the body of a guru might get after a brown spot first has developed on the nose of the corpse. I posted the guru's complete mortuary report a few postings above.

Merry Members,

Corboy, I think you do very well in exposing unsound talk on a Yogananda board, where embarrassing guru utterances get largely ignored. If they do come to the fore, members and devotees adhere to some "basic trust" hovering over the fellowship and do what they can to "boil it away" by talk. If they are unable to do it, something might "snap" in muddled (read: confused) heads, somewhat like a to tightly strung bowstring.

A high-five in SRF circles:

1. If "Master" was a tyrant in a former life, that tyrant was good, contrary to what historians tell . . . Yogananda told he had been a vicious, murderous desert marauder in a former life too - but that part of it goes much ignored in SRF circles to this day. It is on the last page or so of his biography by Sailendra Dasgupta, which is online at yoganiketan.net under the title "Paramhansa Swami Yogananda". If the Guru said he had been this and that in former lives of his, devotees think those former lives were good - up to a point - that is how cult minded ones deal with it. But in some the bowstring of "good anyhow" snaps, and soundness may return.

2. If he talked well of Hitler - something which SRF has found it good to keep in the shades for a long time - followers seek to comfort themselves in such an area too, finding nice things to think, inventing their own view on historical figures, maybe not as much wright as rong -

3. If he talks for SOCIALISM - which he does - and SRF does not make a big thing of it, members adhere to SRF and still consider themselves faithful and dear! If they are told of their guru's hailing of DICTATORSHIP, they seek not to see anything eerie in it.

A grave root problem is that SRF hesitates to publish and tell of those sides to Yogananda, refrains from keeping new members aware of "the whole story" of the guru, for example how he feared ghosts for many years as a grown-up - (Dasgupta, again). Instead, duped members believe largely as SRF-told and stick to what is in vogue in the fellowship, while trusting in the declared omniscience, infallibility, and all that of Yogananda

YOGANANDA, SRF AND SOCIALISM

What about Yogananda and socialism in SRF? SRF does not seem to lead in Socialism in America, and does not stand up as even a dormant socialist fellowship, regardless of the stand of Yogananda in 1934: "Socialism, consisting of evolved individuals, will prevail in the end, but as long as people are not highly evolved, individualism will keep coming to the surface. Individualism exists only for the ushering in of Spiritual socialism . . .

"A society of morons and unthinking people will never establish a real Democracy. The average man cannot think clearly, but is ruled by explosions of his emotions. He needs the master mind of a Dictator in order to think right and do right." - Yogananda quotes from "Interview" in Yogananda's magazine, (p. 3 and 25). PDF document: [oaks.nvg.org]

The guru talks for socialism; his fellowship does not stand up for it - is that a problem, and if so, how is it a problem? Monastics-headed SRF may not think much of ordinary democracy either, rooted as it is in "the average man" who "cannot think clearly" and "needs the master mind of a Dictator," according to Yogananda, and still votes, as he has a right to.

I don't quite like that guru's attitudes, that is, not all he wrote, just like his own guru, Yukteswar. Yogananda's biographer, Sailendra Dasgupta, tells how very old Yukteswar reacted to a Yogananda writing around 1935. It is in "Paramhansa Swami Yogananda". - [Yogananda's guru, Yukteswar:] "You're saying that Yogananda wrote all this? Shame! Shame!" Saying this, he sank listlessly back into his easy chair." (p. 71.) The biography is at Yoganiketan.net in PDF format.

So much for "listless" Yogananda evidence. How guru followers respond to early Yogananda writings and early talks, looks halfway comical and thoroughly tragic to me, a former SRF member.

Hi. I am new to this forum, and joined to give information about someone else who I think is dangerous. But I came across this topic and would like to add my two cents, even though it is not negative. I hope this is ok. I had an experience with Yogananda on an energy level about twenty years ago. I am a bit psychic, and was very anti-guru. I went to see about a room for rent and the owner said that the previous tenant had a guru and that the room had to be cleaned out of that guru energyt. I said that somehow I had been enlisted by others to remove gurus, and I would see what I could do here. So I began and I saw Yogananda (and it was later verified that that was indeed the guru), and I said he was to leave, and he said ok, and he also told me of a guru I should check out that was greater than he. That was it, the whole experience. But I was impressed with him, because he wasn't out for power because then he would have wanted to stay, and that he was just a seeker like so many others, and willing to share, both his knowledge and his limits. So I don't think he is bad at all, though I have no interest in him. However, I do have some very negative information to share about followers of spiritual people like Yogananda. Cultts tend to be power based, and the followers tend to be herded into one way of thinking and feeling, and they can lose their identity and ability to express themselves and their spiritual development, just by being in the group. You know, just like Jesus, and then so many churches.

Hi targetet and others,

From time to time there are some who say Yogananda has appeared to them and talked to them. Years ago a Danish woman with several followers said Yogananda had talked to her, too. What could be wrong with that?

Well, before he passed, Yogananda told he would not appear to anybody.

We have to take that into account too. So, is Yogananda totally unreliable? Are there other explanations, maybe?

I think SRF should be investigated further before joining it. This blog is full of information: http://downthecrookedpath-meditation-gurus.blogspot.com/2011/08/guru-never-leaves-you.html

Some of his teachings are cultish and just wrong. For example this post:

You Must Never Leave Your Guru?

"There is only one guru uniquely the devotee's own. But if you turn away from the emissary of God, He silently asks: 'What is wrong with you . . .?' . . . He who cannot learn through the wisdom and love of his God-ordained guru will not find God in this life. Several incarnations at least must pass before he will have another such opportunity." - Paramahansa Yogananda, SRF magazine, spring 1974, p 6. From a talk at Mother Centre, 8/17/39

This has kept some, if not, many people from leaving Self Realization Fellowship, and if it didn't keep them from leaving, they left with much guilt. I know I did, and I know others who have. Comments like this are often used by gurus to keep their disciples. At least the Vedanta Society never used these ploys. My suggestion is that anyone that has these fears should read:
The Guru Papers—Masks of Authoritarian Power.

Loyalty to Yogananda also causes one to not question and to not have any negative thoughts about the guru, and especially not reading anything that is negative. I remember reading Swami Satyeswarananda’s book, Kriya: Finding the True Path, and being upset with things I learned about Yogananda, just to feel guilty because I had read it. Then I called Mother Center (headquarters of SRF) to ask questions that he caused to arise in my mind, but of course my questions were not answered, instead Mukitmata said to, “Stick a knife though the book and throw it in the garbage.” I threw it in the garbage.

WhileYogananda wasn’t even loyal to his own guru, he expected us to be. Here is a comment from Swami Satyeswarananda's website:


“In the case filed by Anne-Marie Bertolucci against the Ananda Church of Self Realization and Kriyananda in San Mateo County, California, Case No. 390 230, filed January 9, 1996, it is recorded in a deposition that Yogananda’s organization, Self Realization Fellowship Church, has a rule that to be a renunciate, one has to take “final” vows, such as:

poverty, 2. chastity, 3. loyalty, and 4. obedience.


His organization requires one to sign a “pledge” for absolute loyalty to Yogananda to join their organization. Let us see how Yogananda was loyal to his Guru, Sriyukteswar:

“Not sensing Sri Yutkteswar’s reluctance to have me leave him, I went on, “Once you beheld the blessed sight of Babaji at an Allahavad Kumbha. Perhaps this time I shall be fortunate enough to see him.”

“I [Sriyukteswar] do not think you will meet him [Mahamuni Babaji] there.” Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramhansa Yogananda, page 461, Eleventh edition, paperback

Sriyukteswar tried his best to prevent Yogananda from going, but seeing Mahamuni Babaji at least once in his lifetime was so intense in Yogananda’s mind that Sriyukteswar’s attempts to stop him failed. In spite of Sriyukteswar’s unequivocal, explicit advice not to go to Kumbhamela, Yogananda attended just to learn from Brahmachari Kesavananda (disciple of Lahiri Mahasay) that Babaji had not attended Kumbhamela that year as Sriyukteswar had told him before. He could not afford to lose the unique opportunity of a lifetime to have Babaji’s darsan.”


[www.sanskritclassics.com]

When I went to the Vedanta Society I was never asked to be loyal to any guru or organization, nor was I told that I would be lost for many lifetimes if I did leave; not every guru demands loyalty, nor do they threaten you with grave consequences if you do leave.

As for loyalty, I don’t believe that anyone should ever demand loyalty. Loyalty is something that has to grow, and it grows when you love and trust someone, but it can just as easily be broken if you find out that they are not what you thought they were.

And if you want to leave because you feel that you are not learning enough, you can leave as Gita says:

The wise spiritual teacher disapproves the idea of blind personal service, or the guru cult, which is so common in India, and is being imported abroad. A Self-realized master says that God only is the only guru, and all are His disciples. A disciple should be like a bee seeking honey from flowers. If the bee does not get honey from one flower, it immediately goes to another flower and stays at that flower as long as it gets the nectar. Idolization and blind worship of a human guru become stumbling block in the spiritual progress of both the disciple and the guru and bring downfall of Hinduism.


[www.gita-society.com]
I also learned how much of a trap it is when a guru or an organization causes you to fear leaving. It seems like many religions do this to one degree or another, but it is done mostly by cults. If a religion does this, my suggestion is to run. Here is some information from another website:

[www.cephas-library.com]

"Cults employ tactics to create feelings of fear and guilt. For example, "I don’t think you’re serving God the way He wants you to, brother.” By requiring blind obedience and loyalty, cult leaders keep their members in darkness..,

A total submission to authority was required in order to remain in the group. In such an institution of legalistic mentality, gossip was an effective form of social control, especially when the authorities of the church got wind of it and would call the members to render an account. The pastor of a certain church was an important figure, even the object of veneration, due to his charismatic authority. "It’s amazing to see the attention and the reverence which the people give the pastor" wrote one observer. "They do everything for him. That the pastor controls everything should be emphasized. Nothing happens without his consent."


In the above, how often have you noticed that you have to have consent to do anything in SRF? I had to ask for consent to make cookies out of an organic sugar instead of honey because I knew they would taste better. I asked a Brother if I could use a certain sugar, and he just walked away. I did it anyway, and people ate my cookies before going to the real healthy ones. I noticed that people were constantly having to ask Mother Center or a Brother for permission for the most mundane things.

I remember we used to have a rope in front of the altar to keep people from going up to it. I finally asked why. I was told that hippies used to go up and put flowers on the altar, and so they wanted to stop that. Here we were in the 90s and there was a rope because no one thought to ask. And I think how silly it was to have one in the first place. Not very inviting. It was finally taken down, but not without permission.

But back to cult behavior. There is a great book titled: Combating Cult Mind Control, by Steven Hassan. [See disclaimer regarding Steve Hassan below] This is another book I highly recommend.


Some Characteristics of a Cult


* authoritarian in their power structure
* totalitarian in their control of the behaviour of members
* a pyramid in structure and infrastructure
* the use of deception in recruiting or fund raising
* promotes dependence of the members
* totalitarian in their world view
* uses mind altering techniques such as chanting, devotional singing, meditation, hypnosis and various forms of repetitive actions to stop normal critical thinking
* appear exclusive and innovative
* has charismatic or messianic leader who is self-appointed and has a special mission in life
* instills a fear of leaving the group.--from Carol Giambalvo's Cult Information and Recovery.

[77.170.120.22]
[raphaelonline.com]

"Fear of leaving - In most cults, members are quickly taught that there will be serious repercussions if they were to leave. When negative images about leaving the group are combined with suppressed logical critical thinking, guilt and fear is created in the member's mind. They start to think, "I don't want that to happen to me. I can't quit." In fact, today's cults know how to effectively implant vivid negative images deep within members' subconscious minds, making it impossible for the member to even conceive of ever being happy and successful outside of the group. Unknown to the members in the cult, this fear is completely irrational, no disasters will happen if the member were to leave the group."

Disclaimer regarding Steve Hassan

The Ross Institute of New Jersey/May 2013

See [www.culteducation.com]

The inclusion of news articles within the Ross Institute of New Jersey (RI) archives, which mention and/or quote Steven Hassan, in no way suggests that RI recommends Mr. Hassan or recognizes him in any way.

News articles that mention Steve Hassan have been archived for historical purposes only due to the information they contain about controversial groups, movements and/or leaders.

RI does not recommend Steven Hassan.

RI has received serious complaints about Steve Hassan concerning his fees. Mr. Hassan does not publicly disclose his fee schedule, but according to complaints Steve Hassan has charged fees varying from $250.00 per hour or $2,500.00 per day to $500.00 per hour or $5,000.00 per day. This does not include Mr. Hassan's expenses, which according to complaints can be quite substantial.

Steven Hassan has charged families tens of thousands of dollars and provided questionable results. One recent complaint cited total fees of almost $50,000.00. But this very expensive intervention effort ended in failure.

Dr. Cathleen Mann, who holds a doctorate in psychology and has been a licensed counselor in the state of Colorado since 1994 points out, "Nowhere does Hassan provide a base rate and/or any type or accepted statistical method defining his results..."

Steve Hassan has at times suggested to potential clients that they purchase a preliminary report based upon what he calls his "BITE" model. These "BITE reports" can potentially cost thousands of dollars.

See [corp.sec.state.ma.us]

Steve Hassan runs a for-profit corporation called "Freedom of Mind." Mr. Hassan is listed as the corporate agent for that business as well as its president and treasurer.

RI does not recommend "Freedom of Mind" as a resource.

RI also does not list or recommend Steve Hassan's books.

To better understand why Mr. Hassan's books are not recommended by RI read this detailed review of his most recently self-published book titled "Freedom of Mind."

See [www.cultnews.com]

Steve Hassan's cult intervention methodology has historically raised concerns since its inception. The book "Recovery from Cults" (W.W. Norton & Co. pp. 174-175) edited by Dr. Michael Langone states the following:

"Calling his approach 'strategic intervention [sic] therapy,' Hassan (1988) stresses that, although he too tries to communicate a body of information to cultists and to help them think independently, he also does formal counseling. As with many humanistic counseling approaches, Hassan’s runs the risk of imposing clarity, however subtly, on the framework’s foundational ambiguity and thereby manipulating the client."

RI has also learned that Mr. Hassan has had dual-relationships with his counseling clients. That is, clients seeing Mr. Hassan for counseling may also do professional cult intervention work with him.

Professionals in the field of cultic studies have also expressed concerns regarding Steven Hassan's use of hypnosis and Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP).

Based upon complaints and the concerns expressed about Mr. Hassan RI does not recommend Steve Hassan for counseling, intervention work or any other form of professional consultation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2013 09:17PM by rrmoderator.

Dear grainne uaile,

You write, "I think SRF should be investigated further before joining it." I almost agree. The words "against joining it" sums up my experiences of many worse-than-just-waisted years with it better. After about seven years I threw the SRF Lessons and Service Readings into a bonfire with the main thought; "Good!" I was not too pleased, in other words.

I had read the passage you quote on leaving Yogananda by then.

I have noted, like you, that Yogananda wanted - and SRF wants - to extract more loyalty by oaths, than most other gurus, and more than he himself exemplified.

You say "Cults employ tactics to create feelings of fear and guilt." - For the sake of control. And innocents are fooled in lots of ways too.

I think you get to the heart of much that is the matter with Self-Realization Fellowship when you point to cult tactics and signs of cults. Many share such views, including me.

Good luck, then!

Regards,
Tormod Kinnes

Yormod,

I have spent many years throwing out religious material. As a Jehovah's Witness I had two 35 gallon garbage cans full of their books when I left. In SRF I had a bonfire just like you. I got wise in Vedanta Society, I sold my books. In Zen Buddhism, welll, they were a great group, but the books were so boring, so I gave them to the Unitarian church instead of selling them. The Tibetan books, well, I only had a few, so I sold them. I threw my lessons in the garbage, threw out the photos of Tibetan Gods and started buying books that exposed their secret tantric practices that Tibetan Buddhists won't talk about on their forums. And my Tibetan teacher had tried to tell me that we should never put down another religion because they make people happy, and I had had a blog at that time and had deleted it, but I am glad that I saved it all on dvds. Now I have a New Karmapa teacher telling me that the Diamond Way is not tantra that I should come to their website. I looked up Diamond Way, and they teach the tantras, and did a whole lot of Hindu groups that I was in, I believe Yogananda but not positive, and I know Ramakrishna aka Vedanta Society and Muktananda of Siddha Yoga. I think we would be hard pressed to find a good honest group.

Now i just go to the Unitarian Church and believe very little.

Merry members,

Grainne, it looks like you've gone a long way.
Some books are treasuries, many are hardly so.

It seems to me that it is good to find one's Deep Self - above groups and books - or seen within them too.
It seems also good to use a method that functions for it, as Buddha says in one Mahayana Sutra. Unless one is using a fit method, one may not gain Nirvana – the awakened state that is called Enlightenment. Buddha teaches essential mindfulness in the Pali Canon.

"When going, the monk knows 'I am going', or, when standing, he knows 'I am standing', or, when lying down, he knows 'I am lying down'. Or in whatever position his body is placed, he is aware of it . . . Whether he goes, stands or sits, sleeps or is awake, speaks or is silent, he is acting with full attention. [Digha Nikaya]"



It can be of great value for sound individuals to integrate the conscious awareness with one's inner sides by dipping into the Sea of Self, the Higher Self, the state of Nirvana - names are plentiful. Here are a few passages from the Mahayana Shurangama Sutra:

"Gwan Yin Bodhisattva perfected his cultivation through the organ of the ear, and . . . Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of former times have left us such a wonderful Dharma-door that we should also follow the method of cultivating the organ of the ear to perfect penetration. This is the easiest method. [Shurangama Sutra]"

The easiest method involves the simple and effortless act of allowing one's attention to remain with a sound in order to go deeper within. This is mantra meditation. The Manu Samhita says something vital about prayers – and some mantra-words (i.e., syllables or sounds) are called words of power.

"An offering, consisting of muttered prayers, is ten times more efficacious than a sacrifice performed according to the rules (of the Veda); a (prayer) which is inaudible (to others) surpasses it a hundred times, and the mental (recitation of sacred texts) a thousand times. [Manu Samhita, 2:85]"

There is a knack to it, in other words, allied to a personally suitable mantra. The repeated, careful use of a suitable mantra may help - Appreciated inward-going and good rest are brought on spontaneously.

"'There's no need for you to give up', said the Buddha. 'You should not abandon your search for liberation just because you seem to yourself to be thick witted. You can drop all philosophy you've been given and repeat a mantra instead – one that I will now give you.' [Majjhima Nikaya, in Bancroft, 2010:47]"

I have not (yet) found any other texts that verify the Bancroft quotation.

To cut matters short: Time spent in proficient meditation is said to be time well spent, and time speny on other pursuits, not that well - Books and groups are useful at times, and on some levels. But spirituality rises above or beyond being useful, books and all.

As for Tibetan teachers, they adhere to spiritual customs that Buddha nowhere goes for in the Pali Canon. He did not keep any secret teachings or techniques, he says in the sutra about his last days, the Maha-parinibbana Sutta. Parts of it are online at Access to Insight.

Buddha: "I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. Whosoever may think that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give last instructions respecting them. But, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such idea as that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him." [DN 16, part 2, v. 32]

Buddhist gurus with secret teachings were later-arrivers. I won't say the guru systems are without great benefits, but do they carry the life-long blessings along a way that Buddha speaks of as something like "splendid in the beginning, splendid in the middle run, and splendid in the long run or end"? That enlarged perspective is good and helpful, and from Buddha in several places in the Pali Canon.

Boddhisatva vows are additions too, and not part of Buddha's teachings in the Pali Canon.


SELF-REALIZATION FELLOWSHIP AGAIN

The immediate reason I left SRF, was the letter that the following is part of. It shows the "Infallible Leader" - the cult sign. I took care to keep and notarise the letter, by the way. I have also put it online somewhere.

---------------------------
"You have stated that the flaws of this path are "creating depressions, frustrations and the like" in our members. In our contact with Self-Realization Fellowship students from all over the world, we have found the opposite to be true -- they feel they are greatly benefiting from our Guru's teachings in every aspect of their lives. . .

"Although you are no longer recognizing Paramahansa Yogananda as your guru, no doubt you will understand why we, as his disciples, cannot change his words or the injunctions he gave in order to adjust them . . . .

"You are right in your statement that we do not find fault with Paramahansa Yogananda's guidelines. Since we believe that he had attained complete union with God and therefore his wisdom is flawless, our attitude is to find fault with our understanding, whenever we are not able to fully grasp or comprehend a particular point . . .

"The first step toward greater attunement is the humble recognition of the fact that, as imperfect human beings, we do not always "know it all'.

". . . sooner or later, every Truth-seeker will unfailingly find his way back to his God-given guru and, having learned to surrender himself to the guru's guidance, will make swift progress toward the Divine Goal. . . .

In divine friendship, (etc.)

[oaks.nvg.org]
----------------------------

At times I wonder if so-called divine friendship from guru followers I have not met, is wise.

The "Infallible Leader" is the great cult sign - and something that the Vatican has found itself served by. "Papal infallibility" [see Wikipedia] is a dogma of the Catholic Church. This doctrine was defined dogmatically in the First Vatican Council of 1870.

Regards