Autobiography of a Yogi

[Guest guest]

Namaste!

 

Yoganandas " Autobiography of a Yogi " is one of the few classics of

spirituality, which a lot of people, Yogi or not, have read. His life

& message are an inspiration for millions.

 

But his fans may not know his message has been subtly modified by the

Self Realisation Fellowship(SRF- established by Yogananda to spread

his teachings), which claims to be the sole authority on his

teachings. While I dont like criticising any group/person, the changes

made are serious enough to distort Yoganandas message, so I think

other members should be aware of them.

 

The SRF went to court & spent 12 years & millions of dollars to stop

others teaching Kriya Yoga(they finally lost).

 

These changes were found by comparing the original " Autobiography of a

Yogi " published in 1946, & the modern version, modified many times by

the SRF(the original is still published by Ananda Sangha).

 

1. In the original, Babaji says " Give Kriya freely to all who humbly

ask for help " . But in later versions, Kriya Yoga cannot be taught

freely, but only under rules laid by SRF.

 

Also, Yogananda said any person who had been practicising Kriya Yoga

for some time. This was changed so that Kriya Yoga can only be learned

from SRF.

 

2. This 2nd point covers many discussions we have had in our group-

regarding householders. Yogananda says:

 

" To fulfill one's earthly responsibilities is indeed the higher path,

provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with egotistical

desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God. "

 

So in short, the householders path is the higher path. But later

versions remove this, & imply the Sanyaasis path is higher.

 

 

3. Regards the SRF, Yogananda only mentions it 25 times in original

version, yet later versions mention more than 125 times.

 

This shows even great Gurus followers lose the path. This is exactly

what happened with Christs teachings- a group of people claimed

" ownership " of the teachings, & tried to stop others teaching it.

 

Which brings to my main point- the whole concept of opening Ashrams &

Yoga schools leads to corruption, dumbing down of teachings, arrogant

disciples who fight each other after Gurus death for the large

profitable " business " the teaching has become. Real Gurus shouldnt

waste time opening Ashrams etc. Do other respected members agree?

 

Radha

 

See http://www.yoganandarediscovered.org/jaitruth/CAY.html

[Guest guest]

Dear Radhaji,

 

Its not new that All Realized Souls have left behind them a bunch of half-baked

and bickering disciples. You don't have to strain your memory to look for

example around you.

 

1.Yes, knowledge must be 'freely given' with the only discrimination of

transcendental eligibility. Saints gather disciples together not to " change the

Ashrams " but to " change Them " .

 

2. Both the Sanyasi and the Householder is an essential part of the society. It

would be erroneous to conclude that one can survive without the other. A

Householder takes detailed responsibility to nurture one family, on the other

hand a Sanyasi's responsibility is larger, coz the whole society is his family

(I think Yogananda wrote this in one of his books

 

3.Ya...there is a long fight between SRF and ANANDA...and so many hate sites

displaying them. I, for one reason would like to someday meet Swami Kriyananda

(I heard that he resides in Gurgaon and is fighting with cancer)...not becoz who

is right or wrong. But, becoz his book - THE PATH (Autobiography of a Western

Yogi)...had deeply moved me when I'd read it in 1997.

 

ISN'T IT BETTER TO REMAIN AWAY FROM ALL CONTROVERSIES AND FOLLOW PERSONAL

" SADHANA " TO THE FULLEST???

 

I remember a line from GURU AARATI....it says :-)

Nana Panth Jagat me Nija Nija Gun Gaye

Sabka Saar Bata Kar Guru Marag Laye

 

Regards,

Anupam

 

, radha_sharma_99 <no_reply wrote:

>

> Namaste!

>

> Yoganandas " Autobiography of a Yogi " is one of the few classics of

> spirituality, which a lot of people, Yogi or not, have read. His life

> & message are an inspiration for millions.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, radha_sharma_99 <no_reply wrote:

 

Hello Radhaji,

 

Namaste!

 

Swami Yogananda first established Y.S.S. in Ranchi, Bihar. On the

advise of Sri Yukteshwarji his Master he moved to USA and started

SRF.

 

I am surprised at the changes mentioned by you but i guess we must

condemn, criticise and even file a case but the order of the

UNIVERSE has always been like that.

 

The pristine original teachings are always tampered by the

subsequent followers. Look around everywhere and you will see it.

 

Did you know his holiness Ravi Shankar filed a case against a person

for teaching Sudarshan Kriya which they say is a form of

Pranayam and lost (rightfully, because the original technique was not

his at all - maybe his way of presentation is - his own but

nobody can claim copyright for Pranayama).

 

Further do you know the nephew of Paramahansa Yogananda is

claiming copyright for 25 asanas which he teaches in a heated

room claiming it to be his own and sending musclemen and lawyers

notice to other yoga teachers in USA - refraining them from

teaching Hath Yoga. And now govt. of India is fighting a case in

USA over copyright on yogic asanas.

 

So i guess in very strong words we must certainly condemn and even

fight it out but every teaching has its own birth, growth and

i guess death as well.

 

With warm wishes,

 

Sudhakar

HARI OM TAT SAT! Cheers! )

 

 

> Namaste!

>

> Yoganandas " Autobiography of a Yogi " is one of the few classics of

> spirituality, which a lot of people, Yogi or not, have read. His

life

[Guest guest]

, radha_sharma_99 <no_reply

wrote:

>

> Namaste!

>

> Yoganandas " Autobiography of a Yogi " is one of the few classics of

> spirituality, which a lot of people, Yogi or not, have read. His

 

But this is true about all present organisations.

 

R.K.Asharma is not actually spreading message of Paramhansa and

Vivekanda... Aurobindo, Osho, Chaitanya, name any organisation all o

f them have forgotten the real spirit of their gurus and spreading

business based information

 

Even what Jesus said is not really spread by Christianity.

 

That z very natural .. human mind is so decisive that it is always

ready to pounce upon any idea and add its own poison in it

 

 

Aum

[Guest guest]

, " spbyoga9 " <spbyoga9 wrote:

>

 

> Further do you know the nephew of Paramahansa Yogananda is

> claiming copyright for 25 asanas which he teaches in a heated

 

Sudhakarji, you are talking about Bikram, who is not nephew of

Yogananda , no matter what he may claim!(He also claims he was invited

to USA in a personal jet by President Nixon).

 

Birkam is the height of commercialism- not only has he patented Asans,

nobody can teach them without paying him royalty & opening a

franchise. This is the Mcdonalds version of Yoga, called McYoga!

 

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

, aumji <no_reply wrote:

 

> R.K.Asharma is not actually spreading message of Paramhansa and

> Vivekanda... Aurobindo, Osho, Chaitanya, name any organisation all o

> f them have forgotten the real spirit of their gurus and spreading

> business based information

 

Aumji, students always do this. It is a great ego boost for students

to " interpret " , sectarianise their Gurus teachings.

 

Take all these " Shivananda Yoga " , " Bikram Yoga " , " Iyengar Yoga "

(Inspite of the names, all these are actually styles of Asans, not

proper Yogas). These people didnt invent the Yoga! They are part of a

thousands year tradition.

 

But the followers of these Gurus put a point on the line & said " From

now on, these Yogas will be called by X Gurus name " , thus negating the

thousands of years tradition that went behind it.

 

This is needed, as most people like brands. Along with shoes, clothes,

even Yoga is now branded, & some Yogas are more " hip " than others.

 

Yes, I agree with Radhaji, all these Ashrams building etc should be

avoided, as it is just an ego boost. After a Gurus death, the teaching

should be allowed to propagate naturally by high calibre students.

 

I am reminded of the quote by a Sadhu in one of Yoganands book. When

Yoganand asks him why he isnt writing a book, he says

 

" All these books/Ashrams are useless. I am training high quality

students who will take my message across the world. This will prevent

against the natural decay of time, & the unnatural interpretation of

the critics! "

 

with love

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

HARE KRISHAN , HARE RAM

 

 

> " To fulfill one's earthly responsibilities is indeed the higher path,

> provided the yogi, maintaining a mental uninvolvement with

egotistical

> desires, plays his part as a willing instrument of God. "

>

> So in short, the householders path is the higher path. But later

> versions remove this, & imply the Sanyaasis path is higher.

>

 

MADEM JI , THNAKS FOR GREAT ANALYSIS AND INFORMATION ABOUT THE PRESENT

STATUS OF THE " THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A YOGI "

 

 

Your analysis is that the Householders path is the heigher path is

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT Madem Ji but i want to ADD something to it

 

The great soul " the great Yogi Yoaganand Ji " had said that house

holder is the greatest path for a Yogi PROVIDED He is able to live

without ego OTHERWISE that path is not the BEST path for Him and in

that case the the path of Renuntiaton is the best path for THAT YOGI. "

 

The same statement is given by the Great Saint KABIR DAS ji also

 

the same thing you would find in Sri Mad Bhagwad Geeta also

 

and hence i would like to say that

 

" Housholder is the best path among the all , but it is NOT the best

for ALL "

 

For the rest of your posting i would like to say that " it is the need

of the era "

 

HARE KRISHAN ,HARE KRISHAN ,KRISHAN KRISHAN ,HARE HARE ,HARE RAM ,HARE

RAM ,RAM RAM, HARE HARE

[Guest guest]

Radha ji

 

Namaste. Now you have solved the puzzle by putting the missing the

piece of the jigsaw. In a recent book expo, these people from Yogada

Satsangs had put up stall and before telling anything thrust a sheet

of registration for a few hundred rupees. We have to abide by the

instructions for soemtime and then, we can continue the by

'corrspondence course'.

 

Not only YSS , even Art of Living patented the Sudharsana Kriya as if

Sri Sri invented it. It was an ancient Kriya named 'Hamsa Yoga' or

'Ajapa Japa'. When I questioned Sri Sri's followers about the

intentions behind this they could give only some self satisfying answers.

 

The money aspect has become so obvious that even reputed Mutts have

fallen. Sankara Mutt, Kanchi, is now a corporate House with

Nethralayas, Schools, Colleges where money pours. No one asked why a

sanyasi mutt needs to do business.

 

J Krishnamurthy, hailed as an incarnation of Maitreya Buddha, had a

large fortune at his disposal. But he dissolved the whole setup saying

organized religion cannot give man salvation.

 

All these apart, the 'Autibiography of a Yogi' is itself a compromised

work in that it gave Christianity the recognition in the eyes of

Hindu Yogis. With claims emerging everyday about the cut and paste and

pagan origins of the Old and New testaments, and with proofs building

up about Abraham and Sarah that they were just mythical rather than

real. (Brahma and Saraswati), one wonders how Yogananda got all those

statistics in his 'divine vision'.

 

Venkat

 

-- In , radha_sharma_99 <no_reply wrote:

>

> Namaste!

>

> Yoganandas " Autobiography of a Yogi " is one of the few classics of

[Guest guest]

, " J.venkatasubramanian "

<apexpreci2000 wrote:

>

> Radha ji

>

> Namaste. Now you have solved the puzzle by putting the missing the

 

 

I think the final conclusion we can draw is: Spirituality is only good

when practiced 1 to 1, from Guru to student. Any attempt to mass

produce or popularise it, or run huge " university " like programs,

leads to greed & dumbing down of teachings.

 

Is this a fair conclusion to draw?

 

with love

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

, " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja wrote:

>

 

> The great soul " the great Yogi Yoaganand Ji " had said that house

> holder is the greatest path for a Yogi PROVIDED He is able to live

> without ego OTHERWISE that path is not the BEST path for Him and in

> that case the the path of Renuntiaton is the best path for THAT YOGI. "

 

 

Great point Jitendarji! The householders path is the greatest,

provided we can live in Sakshi Bhaav, or dedicate all our actions to

the Lord. Only those who cannot do this should take Sanyaas. You have

turned normal thinking on its head, which considers householders path

inferior.

 

So Jitendarji, how can a normal person decide which path he should take?

 

with love

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

, " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja wrote:

>

 

> The great soul " the great Yogi Yoaganand Ji " had said that house

> holder is the greatest path for a Yogi PROVIDED He is able to live

> without ego OTHERWISE that path is not the BEST path for Him and in

> that case the the path of Renuntiaton is the best path for THAT YOGI. "

 

 

Great point Jitendarji! The householders path is the greatest,

provided we can live in Sakshi Bhaav, or dedicate all our actions to

the Lord. Only those who cannot do this should take Sanyaas. You have

turned normal thinking on its head, which considers householders path

inferior.

 

So Jitendarji, how can a normal person decide which path he should take?

 

with love

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

Dear Shantnuji,

 

In fact our Shastras are so deep and so multifaceted that it won't let us draw

any " conclusion " ....it wants us to - understand, analyze and move

ahead..........and again revise our understanding, upgrade our analysis and

further move forth.......and so on :-)

 

Yes, A Guru-Shishya relationship has to be " one-to-one " ....but does it have to

be physical? The story of Dronacharya and Eklavya disapproves it.

 

Yes, A Guru is a Supreme being, Self-realized, Radiating Divinity.....but a

seemingly cripple person can also be a Realized Rishi. Ashtavakra is the answer.

 

Yes, most Gurus teach Yoga (in its various forms) as a systematic path to reach

God Realization.....but the philosophy of Samkhya totally denies these

activities. Simply a " Discriminating Awareness " is the suggested solution.

 

The crux of all these seemingly contradicting philosophies lead towards the same

Goal......yet at the core they are mutually complimentary. Point is, the moment

we 'conclude', we are soon confronted with a New Truth that contradicts our

assumptions........only after reaching THE GOAL is the underlying uniformness

among these diversities get revealed........and our Shastras are Live examples

of this..........finally declaring......Neti Neti.........

 

Pranams,

Anupam

 

 

 

 

,

 

I think the final conclusion we can draw is: Spirituality is only good

 

when practiced 1 to 1, from Guru to student. Any attempt to mass

 

produce or popularise it, or run huge " university " like programs,

 

leads to greed & dumbing down of teachings.

 

 

 

Is this a fair conclusion to draw?

 

 

 

with love

 

Shantnu

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

, Anupam Shil <anupamshil wrote:

 

> In fact our Shastras are so deep and so multifaceted that it won't l

 

Anupamji, you havent understood my question. Im not asking which

system of philosophy is superior. All I want to ask is: Is

spirituality better taught 1 to 1, or should Gurus concentrate on

building big Ashrams so they can teach to thousands, even millions of

people?

 

The 1st approach gives better help to the student, but the 2nd one

helps more people.

 

The ordinary people like the 2nd type of Guru, who appears of TV with

millions of chelas. There is glamour, appeal to this approach. But is

it necessarily better?

 

with love

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

HARE KRISHAN , HARE RAM

 

 

> So Jitendarji, how can a normal person decide which path he should

take?

>

 

THANKS SIR JI

 

There are so many things , which should be considered for choosing

the path , which we allready have discussed earlier . Hence with

reference to previous postings i want to add that

 

He may renounce who is belonging to following nature ...........

 

1. in general He is not able to follow the righteousness of the

Householders ( Grihastha dharma )even after knowing what is right

for Him.......... ...

 

2. From his childhood , His mind is constantly busy in doubt about

the God ( But He wants to understand the God by heart ) and He is

not able to concentrate on the worldly things and also He does not

gets happiness from worldy things

 

3. He is heighly introvert BUT he can concentrate on sadhana with

full concentration without any problem .

 

what are the norms of the Grihastha Dharma and from where we should

refer what is right and what is wrong . i think in our group there

are so many learned members , who have allready mentioned about the

importance of Vedas and Sanatan Dharma.

 

i request once more to all the Sadhakas , please write something

with respect of Grihastha Dharma

 

HARE KRISHAN ,HARE KRISHAN ,KRISHAN KRISHAN ,HARE HARE ,HARE

RAM ,HARE RAM, RAM RAM, HARE HARE

[Guest guest]

Well Shantnuji, I in fact tried to addressed with a broader spectrum.

 

Anyway, now dealing with this very genuine question...Whether a

Guru-Shishya relationship necessarily has to be 1-to-1???

 

YES OFCOURSE. IT HAS TO BE ONE-TO-ONE AND THERE IS NO SECOND WAY.

 

With the Eklavya example I simply tried to site that this ONE-TO-ONE

need not mandatorily be PHYSICAL BODY-TO-PHYSICAL BODY. But it is

nevertheless, it is ONE-TO-ONE only.

 

Pranams,

Anupam

 

, shanracer <no_reply wrote:

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Jitendraji,

 

You have asked on grhasta dharma :

 

Grhasta means 'one who is established in a home', 'a married person or

a house holder'. This is a stage in ones life, - one of the four

ashrama, 'a place of resting' such as brahmacharya(studenthood),

grhastya(married state), vanaprastya(forest recluse) and

samnyasa(monkhood). Ashramas are meant to fulfill our purusharthas,

'ends of human beings' such as dharma(righteousness), artha(wealth),

kama(desires of the flesh) and moksha(liberation from transmigratory

existence). In different stages of life(ashramas) different

needs(purusharthas) predominate more than the other in those four 'ends

of life'.

 

In grhasta stage, after studentship, one is expected to marry and raise

a family. Since marriage was considered a sacrament and the wife as a

life-mate in righteous living, it was not considered as obstacle to

self-evolution. The grhasta, or the householder was expected to earn

well by righteous means and live a happy and descent life, which had to

be socially useful. Among his principle duties, dharma, were the five

daily sacrifices, known as panchayajnas : sacrifice to gods, study and

teaching of vedas, obsequial offerings to the departed manes, feeding

guests and domestic animals.

 

Further, Ashrama upanishad(of Atharva veda) speaks of four kinds of

grhastas along with their duties,dharmas : vaartakavrtti, shaalinavrtti,

yaayaavara and ghora-samnyaasika.The first group lives by agriculture,

dairy farming, trade and commerce. The second group perform vedic

rituals, study the vedas and give gifts to others. However, theydo not

undertake to perform vedic sacrifices for others, nor teach the vedas

for others, nor accept gifts. The third group do both : performing

sacrifices for themselves and for others; studying and teaching the

vedas; giving and accepting gifts. Both the second and third groups

continue to maintain the vedic fires and pray to the Supreme Self. The

last group, the most austere, is particular in using water brought from

wells and purified by straining as also live upon grain picked up from

the fields('unnchavrtti' ) daily. These grhasthas too perform the

prescribed vedic rites throught life and pray to the Supreme Self.

 

This is what grhasta and grhasta dharma is as I see from the shastras.

It is applicable mostly to a class of people to which we all belong and

not to any caste by birth; confusing these two has occurred only later

in history!

 

Regards,

 

M.S.Thimmappa.

 

 

 

, " jitendra kumar " <jtin_ja wrote:

>> THANKS SIR JI

>

> There are so many things , which should be considered for choosing

> the path , which we allready have discussed earlier . Hence with

> reference to previous postings i want to add that

[Guest guest]

I think, the TV personalities (even the fakes) are neccessary to get

the attention of the masses, lost as they are in the mundane. But as

we become serious, we should seek out holy ones - there is no

substitute for one on one contact.

 

Having said that, Shri Ramakrishna actually scolded Vivekananda for

wanting to remain immersed in samadhi for three or four days at a

stretch, breaking it only for food. " Shame on you! You are asking for

such an insignificant thing. I thought you would be like a big banyan

tree, and that thousands of people would rest in your shade. "

 

The organizations were created for a purpose. They are no longer lead

by people of the same stature, and there is some political wrangling

within every organization. However they are also shining beacons of

knowledge. Millions are attracted to their light and start on the

path of Saadhana because they exist. I think that if you believe in

an organization - SRF, RKM, etc, you should become a part of it. If

you see anything wrong - act to change it.

 

Rgds

 

, shanracer <no_reply wrote:

 

> Anupamji, you havent understood my question. Im not asking which

> system of philosophy is superior. All I want to ask is: Is

> spirituality better taught 1 to 1, or should Gurus concentrate on

> building big Ashrams so they can teach to thousands, even millions

[Guest guest]

Hari Om!

In India, there was no tradition of building big organisations to teach and

serve. Families and the society took care of them. Even the Mutts established

by Adi Sankara other philosophers, were not intended to be elaborate

establishements. They existed on the support of the devotees who sought the

gurus for guidance and on the patronage of the royalty. Even these mutts took

great care not to amass wealth. It was much later that for the first time, Swami

Vivekananda established the RK Mutt on the model of the christian missionaries.

I should say, by and large, it serves the purpose, for which it was set up,

although the enthusiasm and the missionary zeal of the early masters may be

missing. Personally speaking I owe it to the RK Mutt who  instilled in me a

sense of spiritual value and to the speeches of Swami Vivekananda which had

stirred within me a sense of pride in our tradition. For many patriots of India,

Swami Vivekananda was a beackoning light

for service to Mother India. It was he who propagated in the foreign nations

the greatness of Hinduism and Indian culture.

I agree that organisations over a period lose their momentum and tend to decay.

Avarice replaces selfless service. In view of the recognition from the society,

money starts pouring in. Unless they know how and when to say no to the patrons

who swarm with tons of money, they lose their way. Once they indulge in

acquiring more and more properties, they lose their way and become a butt of

ridicule and contempt in the eyes of the public. No doubt, these organisations

need money to survive. But, they have to maintain a balance between a genuine

need for resources to run their show and a hankering after wealth which pulls

them down from their ideals.One who had followed the teachings of Kanchi

Paramacharya would have seen how he declined on several occasions, huge purse

collected for certain worthy cause.( We need not go into what happened after

him). The spiritual organisations may run goshalas, orphanages and old age

homes. But, they should eschew running

modern schools and colleges which amass huge wealth in the name of education.

Money corrupts and too much money corrupts too much.

I would further like to share with you my thoughts about Yogananda Maharaj's

Autobiography of a Yogi. There was a suggestion from Shri.J.Venkatasubramanian,

whose ideas I value most, that the former in his Autobiography had sought to

justify Christ's teachings. My understanding from the reading of the said book

is that Paramahansa Yoganandaji was sent to US by his guru Swami Yukteshwar to

explain to the Western world the teachings of Christ in the light of Hinduism.

The idea was that the Christian churches had distorted the teachings of Jesus

Christ and Christ being a true yogi, he asnd his teachings should be seen in the

proper perspective and understanding. The fact that Jesus was a yogi and a saint

in the tradition of Hinduism has been beautifully driven home in the book. And

many agree on this point. Swami Vivekananda has also said so. Many more sadhus

of India regard Jesus one of the great yogis, mankind had seen. I wonder why

Shri

J.Venkatasubramanianji, could not appreciate Yogananda Maharaj teaching to the

western world the ideals of Jesus in the light of Hindu philosophy. In fact such

efforts have borne fruit. Many of the westerners are now turning to the Vedic

religion. And much of the credit should go to the efforts of Swami Vivekananda

and others masters including Yogananda Maharaj.

Hari Om Tat Sat.

ulaganathan p.

[Guest guest]

HARE KRISHAN , HARE RAM

 

> last group, the most austere, is particular in using water brought

from

> wells and purified by straining as also live upon grain picked up

from

> the fields('unnchavrtti' ) daily. These grhasthas too perform the

> prescribed vedic rites throught life and pray to the Supreme Self.

 

 

Thanks a lot for great contribution for establishing the initial

norms of Grihastha Dharma .

 

now we should enter into the activities in Detail .

 

where modern people refer the Grihastha Dharma in case of doubt .

 

do the people relly refer some shastra or not ...

 

i am taking a example from posting of ANUPAM SIR JI (nice one)

 

eg Anil Ambani - How should the money of His business be distributed

among the people of INDIA as per the Vaishya Dharma .( i am not

saying that He should distribute his earnings to public but i am

saying that " does He really know , what is His duty for the

society , nation , nature ,................... as per Vaishya

Dharma .. " IF no than How many people of the modern era are

following Grihastha Dharma. where is the problem .

 

i think the current status is that EVEN the people do not know what

is their Grihastha Dharma . one can only follow the Dharma when He

kowns it . is it true that the essence of Grishastha Dharma is

completely gone or i am thinking in different

direction ....................what is the opinion of all the

Sadhakas . PLEASE SHARE .

 

HARE KRISHAN ,HARE KRISHAN ,KRISHAN KRISHAN ,HARE HARE ,HARE

RAM ,HARE RAM ,RAM RAM, HARE HARE

[Guest guest]

, ulaganathan p <apunathan wrote:

 

> I would further like to share with you my thoughts about Yogananda

 

ulaganathanji, this is very true. Yogananda was trying to show that

the original Jesus was a Yogi, & was trying to explain Vedant, but in

their own language.

 

I read Yoganandas commentary on the bible- it was beautiful. He shows

how Jesus was using Yogic language, but this was interpreted literally

in later times.

 

Like baptism, which is a sort of a ritual to become christian, & uses

holy water. The original baptism was when St John took Jesus to a

river, put him in it, & a light came from heaven & fell on Jesus

forehead. Jesus then realised he was Divine.

 

This is a clear example of Guru/Shishya initiation- St John opened

Jesus 3rd eye. The putting in water means bathinh in holy energies, as

even in Vedas Divine energies are shown as rivers flowing from

heaven(Ganga). Jesus got Cosmic Conciousness, called " Christ " in

Christian language. Christ wasnt his name- rather it showed that while

still alive, in the body, Jesus had become one of the Cosmic

Conciousness. This Christ conciousness is also called Ishwar in

India. Thats why he said " I and my Father(pure Spirit) are One. "

 

This is what is meant by the 2nd coming of Christ- not that a

historical person would be born again, as that would accomplish

nothing. But rather, the 2nd coming of Christ will happen when each

person on Earth contacts the Christ concioussness willingly & with

full awareness.

 

The Bible is full of Yogic sayings " If thine eye be single, thy body

will be full of light " . Single eye means Agya chakra is fully opened,

so we can see the world as it is- full of the light & love of God.

 

In another saying Jesus denies the concept of time " Before Abrahm was,

I AM " . Abhram was born 1000s of years before Jesus, yet Jesus says " I

AM " in the present tense. This is not a grammatical error- Jesus is

trying to show, for the pure spirit, there is no time or space. He

exists Now, in the past, in the future- at the same time.

 

When Jesus was killed, he was reborn after 3 days. This is to show he

went beyond the 3 bodies- Physical, Astral & Causal, & still returned

to Earth to help his followers. This contradicts the teachings of many

" Acharyas " who claim that once we merge into Brahm, we cannot return,

as Brahm doesnt care about this world etc. Jesus showed that not only

can we return, we can recreate the physical body with Light.

 

I can write a lot more, but hopefully this proves the point.

 

with love

Shantnu

[Guest guest]

Sri Ulaganathan ji

Namaste.

 

I am not against the teachings of Yogananda ji. His teachings were

simple and need of his time. His book had made a good impact on me also.

 

What I did not find amusing was that this very book was/is used by the

evangelists. Many yogis who regard Yogananda highly also regarded

Christianity as a bonafide religion which it is not. The mythology is

questionable ( BC 4000 as the time of creation). I believe in many

places Jesus himself accepts this literally.

 

For a religion like Christianity which openly declares Yoga as

satanic, Yogananda's accreditation is still baffling to me. You might

have read Swamy Vivekananda where he recounts his peculiar experience

during his sleep in a ship near Greece on his voyage back to India

when a few astral Buddhist yogis appeared before him and complained to

him that a non existent man is being used to spread their original

ancient teachings which were originally Buddhist. The 'religion of

Love' was first proposed by Buddha and was adapted by this semitic

religion- But never was practiced as their crusade wars reveal.

 

When questions regarding Jesus's existence persist and crucifixtion

being reported never having happened ( and Jesus even rumoured to have

died in India) how can Yogananda yogically 'perceive' the last

travails of Christ as he carried the cross across Jerusalem's streets ?

 

With great respect for truth be it from any side, I regard these

doubts of mine as genuine despite some good points in the Christian

religion. What I also cannot stomach is " buddha , Jesus and Gandhi " as

being the true apostles of love and peace being drummed into the ears

of secular Indians day in and day out and the evangelists making most

of this undeserved sunshine with the illiterate masses.

 

Venkat

 

 

, ulaganathan p <apunathan wrote:

>

> Hari Om!

> In India, there was no tradition of building big organisations to

[Guest guest]

Dear Venkatji,

 

I wonder if anybody contradicted Jesus's crucification!!!

Yes, His revival, subsequent transition to The Himalayas and finally

leaving his body there has been attempted to prove with evidence, by

the prominent German Historian HOLGER KERSTEN in his book JESUS LIVED

IN INDIA.

Also, The Chapter named ORIGINAL CHRISTIANITY in the book of DONALD

WALTERS (SWAMI KRIYANANDA) gives a profound elaboration on Christianity.

http://www.ananda.org/inspiration/books/path/33.html

 

Personally, I doubt whether the crucification of Jesus can be refuted.

 

Regards,

Anupam

 

 

, " J.venkatasubramanian "

<apexpreci2000 wrote:

>

> Sri Ulaganathan ji

> Namaste.

>

> I am not against the teachings of Yogananda ji. His teachings were

> simple and need of his time. His book had made a good impact on me