Massa Jesus My Foot
| 3 › 1 › 14 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Is Babaji Spreading the Teachings of Jesus?
 |
| Confucius: "We cannot join the company of beasts [Soc 123]." |
Monks and nuns in SRF not to find fault with Yogananda's guidelines, but say his wisdom is faultless. It may be at your expense as time goes by.The Mahavatar [Great avatar, i.e., Babaji] 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 [such as] sectarianism.
The great guru has never openly appeared in any century . . . Babaji works in a humble obscurity. . . .
[Babaji] undertake[s] work which is concerned more with the slow evolutionary progress of man during the centuries than with any one outstanding event of history. Such masters always veil themselves from the gross public gaze, and have the power to become invisible at will. [Autobiography of a Yogi, Chap. 33]
Largely unfounded or unverified beliefs can make clowns of us. So learn to inspect beliefs well before committing in a serious way to any so-called Great One. In some places Yogananda too talks for first-hand perceptions. Yet, they and marred insights may contain errors and be wrong. Accordingly, there is an ongoing endeavour to check insights and inspirations in science by various means. You could do well to learn them, at least a little. Much, tedious verification work may help a living, and should not be blatantly or rudely overlooked.
Yogananda further tells that Babaji asked him to "interpret the Christian Bible and the Hindu Bible [Bhagavad Gita], to point out the basic unity of the Christian and the Vedic scriptures. He sent me to the West to fulfil that mission." [Say 19]
Here is a problem. The God of the Bible is hateful, and Brahman (God) of the Bhagavad Gita is said to hate none. These two "Gods" are different. That needs to be accepted, to avoid errors to be construed.
The God of the Bible is bad; there needs be no doubt about it. Further, those who belong to him are not healthy, or get deranged through the bad contact as well. Jesus says he and that his Father are one, says only ill ones need him. Healthy ones do not need him, he openly admits. So feel free to do as Sir Alfred Hitchcock says, "Run, little boy! Run for your life!" And stay away from what hurts your inner being. Some kinds of harm are subtler than the daily awareness manages to perceive, it seems. [BAD GOD!]
We think Babaji should know better, he should have steered clear of the sinners.
Hating God of Favoritism and Heinous Sinning
Is hateful non-hating now? Why compare the hateful God of the Bible and the non-hating Pan-God (Brahman) of Hinduism? Jehovah (and Jesus, one with the Old God) is:- God to fear. [Eccl 8:13; 12:13].
- God of vengeance, persecutions, and hate. [Exod 20:5]-6]
- God of indiscriminate killing of "both the righteous and the wicked." [Ezekiel 21:3]
- God of massacres. [Joshva, 2 Samuel, and many prophets - note Josh 3:10 vs 1 Kgs 9:20-21, and Josh 10:8-42, passim, Josh 8:24-25 etc., etc.]
- God of carrot and whip. [Josh 8:34]
- God of slaves. [Lev 22:11; [Lev 25:44-46]. - Neither Jesus nor the apostle Paul went against slavery either. [Titus]
- God of sacrificing innocents - and devoting things and persons to the God of the Bible is an irrevocable giving over of them, often by completely destroying them. Such doings are otherwise known as sins, not unlike mass murder in a butcher's shop. [See eg Josh 7:1; also 7:11, 12, 13 and 15].
- God of unkempt promises. His promises may not turn into anything. [Genesis 15:16-20; Josh 13:1-5, passim]
- God of vacillating greatly. Would he wipe out the Hebrews or not? Well, he killed off most of them, and gave the remaining two tribes - Judah - a really hard time, shows Amos, Hosea, and others [Hosea 1:4; 13:9,11; Amos 2:13; 5:2]. See also [Num 14:11-16]
How God Is in the Gita
The concepts of God in Hindu teachings are variegated. To simplify the comparison, let us make do with some of the presentations of a much friendlier Brahman in the famous Bhagavad Gita.- Krishna says Brahman is the Imperishable, the Supreme; his essential nature is called Self-knowledge. (8:3)
- His Being is the Supreme Person, Resplendent, effulgent like the sun (8:8,9).
- Unmanifested is the Highest State (8:21; 7:24), yet "There exists, higher than the unmanifested, another unmanifested Eternal who is not destroyed when all beings are destroyed (8:20)."
- Self-realisation suggests knowledge of the Self (9:1,3)
- The Great Lord, Higher Being, is an imperishable source and support of beings (9:11,13). The Gita also says "all beings exist in me, but I do not dwell in them," and "my Self, the efficient cause of beings" does not dwell in all beings. (9:4,5).
- The whole universe rests in the Mighty, Ancient, Primal One (11:13,38).
- To those who attain to knowledge of the sun-like Self, inner knowledge reveals the Supreme (Brahman). (5:16)
Relations
 |
| Will not join the company of beasts [cf. Bhagavad Gita 9:4,5 etc]. |
- Krishna says "To me there is none hateful or dear; but those who worship me with devotion are in me and I am also in them (59:29).
- Those who excel in various yogas may realize God. So overwhelming to experience that it causes fear (to some) (11:35; 12:1-6).
- He or she who bears enmity towards no creature, he comes to me, says God of the Bhagavad Gita. (11:55).
- Fools disregard the great Lord of Intelligence and splendour, that ongoing happiness within (9:11; 7:10; 5:21).
Other Differences
Yogananda and other disciples of Babaji say the soul is eternal and cannot be destroyed. Jesus on the other hand says the soul can be destroyed [Matthew 10:28]. It is also taught by Yogananda's fellowship that the many hundred years old Babaji assumes "life-after-life responsibility for the spiritual welfare of . . . Kriya Yogis . . . initiated by . . . Kriya teachers [Pa 323n]." Not Jesus?You may wish that someone else takes upon him the responsibility of your life if you have not lived well. But do not ignore that Babaji also says in the Autobiography of a Yogi: "The divine realm extends to the earthly, but the latter [is] illusory". [Autobiography of a Yogi, ch. 34]. If so, where is the assumed responsibility? Be aware that the guru Yogananda often teaches erroneous things.
Babaji and Jesus Again
"A man is known by the company he keeps," and Yogananda says Babaji is in constant communion with Jesus. Jesus says he is the Son of God, and one with the Father God. That would be the persecutor, slayer, slave-taker and hateful one we have briefed you on above. But there are many more bad things to say about the inhuman Jesus here - [MORE]Vigilance is good, then. Otherwise, if you are spiritually or mentally unsound, you may think it is best to mass like a sheep in a flock of ill animals led to be slaughtered - Regrettably there are many of them.
In the Old Testament God likens himself to a shepherd and his chosen ones his sheep. Sheep, they walk on all four and are herded to be sheared and later slaughtered. Jesus makes use of the same presentation, minding to tell that those who are healthy do not need him [Matthew 9:12; John 10:27].
Do not let fools in power make a conform, mentally ill sheep out of you. Just as any medical doctor of merit would help you to stay healthy, so does Buddha. And the folk wisdom, "One sickly sheep infects the whole flock." Then, mind the health concepts embedded in holistic medicine. You cannot be too careful in choosing your company and saviours . . .
Another pressing problem highlighted ties in with the differences between the hateful God of the Bible and Krishna and Brahman. One of them hates quite frankly and shows partiality - his chosen ones may be slaughtered. The other says he hates none, but can you trust it? Moreover, consider carefully how full yoga is of sacrifices - such elements abound. Many are fooled away from building merit and resources for the future living though certain revered sacrifices, it seems.
Krishna on Work and Non-attachment
In SRF Krishna is appointed one of the six gurus governing it. Maybe he is not. Krishna maintains the learned may act well. Benefit from living if you can. Krishna tells to one's duty as a sacrifice to Vishnu. [Bhagavad Gita 3:8-9] Now try to reconcile that to Yahweh's blood-dripping scapegoating and vicarious sacrifices - the butchery religion.
For the Sage: Gold!
 |
| Focusing on the "Gold and more gold" Way! |
Krishna talks for Vedic sacrifices and Vedic duties. There are old Hindu law-books that tell about such matters. Not all reflect modern conditions. But the dharmashastra literature [of "righteousness science"] in Sanskrit is voluminous; it exceeds 5,000 titles.
Among the texts inspired by the Veda are the . . . manuals on dharma, which contain rules of conduct and rites as they were practiced in a number of branches of the Vedic schools. [They] address the duties of people at various stages of life . . . (studenthood, householdership, retirement, and asceticism); dietary regulations; offenses and expiations; and the rights and duties of kings. They also discuss purification rites, funerary ceremonies, forms of hospitality, and daily oblations . . . The influence of the Dharma Shastra of Manu has been enormous . . . For large parts of the Indian subcontinent, Manu's text . . . has been the law. [Ebu, "dharmashastra"; "Hinduism"]All may not suit present-day conform living. Krishna is said to be the god Vishnu descended into human shape, so below we make do with just a few points from The Institutes of Vishnu, and "don't try this at home", unaided and uninstructed for most part. [MORE]
The shastras are a part of the Smriti ("Remembered," or traditional) literature which . . . stresses the religious merit of gifts to Brahmans [Brahmins] . . . The Smriti texts are binding to this day on orthodox Hindus, and until quite recently Hindu family law was based on them. [Ebu, "Hinduism"]
How some parts of the Institutes of Vishnu remind us of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" in the Old Testament. "With whatever limb an inferior insults or hurts his superior in caste, of that limb the king shall cause him to be deprived." [5:19]
You should question whether plunging yourself into a river really, really expiates sins and purify you. Some rivers are not much clean any longer, to put it carefully, guardedly.
How Clear-Sighted Is SRF?
Many of Yogananda's kriya messages do not conform to the Christian message. Yogananda does not say you should pluck out your eye and tear off other parts of the body if tempted. Thank God for that. Know that it is cheating and misleading and spreading folly that is mean and rude, not warning against such things and others. Buddha says, "".In the yogi Paramahansa Yogananda's Self-Realization Fellowship (SRF) they venerate Babaji and Jesus and several others, including Divine Mother. Drop them.
Learn to take pleasure in the Self is a good teaching. You can drop the regulations of self-starving and of inflicting torture and maladaptions and other sufferings on yourself.
Stay firm against morbid guilt so that you can do good works also. Do not underestimate the workings of karma or deep guilt. Some seem to make their lives harder than necessary. Instead of being friendly to near ones they flog and maim and indoctrinate themselves and their next of kin for no good reason, and some recourse to other evils of marriage as well.
 |
| Many are called Christs without first being crucified as blasphemous lunatics or devils or something like that - ugh! |
Jesus did not tell anyone else or anything else would be needed to put followers right with God but God falling on them. No secret teachings for all -
According to what are later additions to Matthew, till the end of the earth the commission of Jesus was:
Advocating public executions of madcap Christs is mean. The warnings of Jesus in the gospel against false Christs should be taken to heart. "A word to the wise will suffice." Let us hope that.Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always." [Matthew 28:18-20]
Original Christianity as Taught by Jesus
In Yogananda's SRF they say publicly in their "aims and ideals" that they stand for "original Christianity as taught by Jesus Christ" and yoga as taught by Krishna. It is shewbread, and the sacraments of the Church are largely or wholly dropped. Most of the regulations and practices of the earliest church, as described in the New Testament (NT) letters, are missing in SRF. Many Vedic regulations of living are missing too, as you can see: [LINK]Also, women are heading SRF today? Early Christian documents say how women are to behave in the congregation. They should "remain silent", "not allowed to speak", "in submission". "If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home." Nuns may find such things difficult! [1 Cor 14:34-35] If anybody thinks he is . . . spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. [1 Cor 14:36-37] But that is not all:
And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. [1 Cor 11:5]Although today's shaved heads are in vogue, Paul's opposes a public liturgical role for women. Still, in the Greek churches, by AD 400 women from wealthy or politically powerful families had power as superiors of religious communities. Money speaks, you know.
The SRF nuns and others heading the SRF Church seem to have missed central "earliest regulations" - as "early Christian" as you well can get them, and "women's lib(eration)" is courted instead.
Monasticism as a movement in the early church rose in Egypt some centuries AD. Why is SRF led by Hindu monks and nuns when monks and nuns appear nowhere in the "Christianity" of Jesus? Because it is not forbidden there. [Ebu "Christianity"]
Moreover, there was no Christianity of Jesus. Christianity came later and changed as it grew and got dominance. A nice indication is:
Early Christians were a persecuted lot. But when they got power in the Roman empire, Jesus was put on the Emperor's throne, so to speak, as Pantocrator (all-ruling majesty). Christians also agreed on serving as soldiers to keep the church as the Roman state's religion. These things were formally cemented before AD 400. The church took over lots of lithurgical elements from paganism too. It is very well documented [MORE].In SRF there is not a great focus on "original Christiany of Jesus Christ". The Number One agent of SRF in general is not the Jesus who gives identity to Christianity. The freewheeling SRF combination of the narrow gospel focus on Jesus and salvaging guru teachings is a bog.
A central part of original Christianity is: There is no purpose in saving someone who does not need it.
Jesus said, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick . . . "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." [Matthew 9:12-13]If you think it is better to be healthy than sick you have got the essence of the swami Yukteswar's intent in publishing the book The Holy Science and asking Yogananda in 1920 to make it the basis or pillar of the guru's yoga teachings in the West.
Like Mormons in Some Respects
The church of Yogananda has some elements in common with that of Mormons. For "from one point of view, the Church of . . . the Mormons, is . . . "a new religious tradition," says the Britannica. They have incorporated the Old and New Testaments into their canon and then supplied reinterpretations, not unlike Yogananda for his followers.
Because Mormons use Christian terminology and call themselves Christian, they might - from some points of view and in some areas - belong to a discussion of Christianity. And not unlike Yogananda's church may be perceived as departing from the essence of Christianity. Much of their doctrine may be termed heretical. They may share much of Christian culture anyhow.
Much Construed -
Whether Jesus intended his gospel to be addressed to Jews only has to be highlighted. In the gospels Gentiles appear as isolated exceptions. Christian preaching to the Gentiles caused intense debate in the 40s AD, and that may serve as a very good indication that Jesus had given no unambiguous directive on the matter, says the Britannica:
Gospel sayings that make the Jews' refusal to recognize Jesus' authority as the ground for extending the Kingdom of God to the Gentiles must, therefore, have been cast by the early community. [Ebu "Christianity"]
It is known that the last few passages in the last chapter of Matthew, those that bring the missionary command, is a late-comer.
Paul got a conviction that the gospel must pass to the non-Jewish world without exclusive and distinctive Jewish ceremonies. However, Paul was disapproved by Christian Jews. They represented the "Christianity of Jesus" more, it may be suspected, for the work of Paul was considered an affront to Jewish traditionalism. He was called an unprincipled trimmer.
And the authority of the earliest church lay either in the kinsmen of Jesus or in those whom he had commissioned as apostles and missionaries. The Jerusalem church under James, the brother of Jesus, was the mother church. There are no publicly known kinsmen of Jesus heading the SRF Church, to say the least. Apostles sent by Jesus represented "a living authoritative voice" missing in SRF too.
As for the early "Christianity of Jesus", you cannot have your cake and eat it too. After A follows B. Jesus taught unseemly things that the early church dispensed with as soon as he had flown away [Acts 15; 21:25]. Therefore you do not have to pluck out your eyes, tear of limbs, maim your penis and rest on sabbaths (Saturdays), for example.
Paul viewed the crucifixion of Jesus as the supreme redemptive act - but see if it holds water. If it be true, why did millions of martyrs have to suffer and die instead of enjoying life and God? And why did not anybody remember to drive a flock of goats into the wilderness to help him? After all, his Father had prescribed a "yearly cure" for his people based on scapegoating. Killing an innocent "bystander" (Jesus) was wholly unnecessary if the Word of God be true.
"Oh yeah?"
[Aaron] is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites - all their sins - and put them on the goat's head. He shall send the goat away into the desert in the care of a man appointed for the task. The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a solitary place. [Lev 16:21-22]
This is to be a lasting ordinance for you . . . on this day atonement will be made for you, to cleanse you. Then, before the Lord, you will be clean from all your sins . . . it is a lasting ordinance . . . This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites." And it was done, as the Lord commanded Moses. [Lev 16:29-34]
You do not believe in that if you think Jesus had to atone for all. Now you know they talk against themselves.
Paul's doctrine that the gospel represents liberation from the Mosaic Law created difficulties at Jerusalem, where the church was headed by a brother of Jesus, James, and the circle of the intimate disciples of Jesus. James was the primary authority for the Christian Jews, and the letter of James opposes Paul's anti-law interpretations of the doctrine of justification by faith. Further, all the gospels record how Jesus commissioned Peter as the leader of the twelve apostles. Peter seems to have held some middle position between James and Paul.
The church also inherited from Judaism a strong sense of being holy, separate from idolatry and pagan eroticism. It had a very negative attitude toward other religions. All forms of paganism were disregarded at first. It included the religions of Isis, Attis, Adonis, and Mithra and also ancient cults of Greece and Rome. Like the Jews, the Christians were opposed to syncretism. But what did really happen? Christianity incorporated a whole lot of elements from paganism, and Jewish Christianity declined. [MORE].
|
|
| "Oh yeah?" |
This is to be a lasting ordinance for you . . . on this day atonement will be made for you, to cleanse you. Then, before the Lord, you will be clean from all your sins . . . it is a lasting ordinance . . . This is to be a lasting ordinance for you: Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites." And it was done, as the Lord commanded Moses. [Lev 16:29-34]
At any time in the 100s or 200s, Christians could find themselves the object of unpleasant attention. Before the 300s AD, worship was in private houses. [Ebu "Christianity"]
SRF Monastics?
If you say you stand for "original Christianity as taught by Jesus Christ" - Yogananda's cult does - you dispense with the proper views of much on one Yogananda-dictated stroke. (1) Jesus did not teach Christianity; he taught Jewish followers almost exclusively. He was never called "Christ" either, but aspired for the title Messiah. It means the "oil-anointed one", stemming from 1 Samuel 10, and shows how kings were appointed to be God's punishment to his people. So many seem to forget that nice point. [1 Samuel 8; 1 Sam 10:1]Have you considered the fondness for labels like "king of yoga" and so on in some "families" that are not real families? A mother, brother, and sister monastic in SRF is a monk or nun or novice that "renounces the world" by entering a top-dog ruled environment that debases sound self-assertiveness by many unwanted rules that may drive the spirit away. Calls for humility and obedience get in the way for fact-seeking freedom, and narrowness becomes a big problem.
Monastics separate themseles from general society, but may live in rule-governed communities. Their fare is elitistic, also when much calculated humility is essential in that environment. Yet monastic ideas is not of Jesus.
Monasticism developed from hermits, mostly Egyptians. They believed that they were to combat forces of the devil in the desert, like a military force. But celibacy might not be part of that early monastic community. If you seek "early Christianity" as a monk, you may drop celibacy ideas and bear in mind that in the "christianity of Jesus" there are no monastics at all. Why are there in SRF? [Ebu "monasticism"]
Difficult
Jesus said:- Salvation would come from the Jews [John 4:21-23];
- No to other Christs, or false Christs [Mark 13:21-23; Matthew 24:23-25];
- No to many masters [Matthew 23:7-9], no to other masters and teachers than himself, and so on.
Many Christs
Persons from outside Christianity who stand up as Yogi-Christs or are presented as Christs, may have forgotten that the one Christ (Messiah) of the New Testament was crucified . . . Is not that part of the "chimes of being Christ"?Does not the Messiah have to be a descendant of David through the father he did not have? It is a difficult question. But Jesus is claimed to be of the house of David through a non-carnal father, Joseph, and son of God through - was not it an angel who fathered him?
So, Jesus was claimed to be a descendant of David through Joseph who was even remotely his blood-line father. A faulty blood-line for seemingly legitimising Messiah claims, is that much to put into a book? There is one in the first chapter of Matthew. Do not let there be one in your ancestry tree.
Having several gurus (masters) is not what Jesus tells in the Gospel. He even warns against false Christs. Let a briefing about Yogi Christs suffice at this point. Yogananda writes at length about "Babaji ... Yogi-Christ of modern India" - a "deathless one". [Pa 305; opp. 304; cf 307; 346]. Yogananda's guru, Yukteswar, is called a "modern Yogi-Christ". [Pa 194]. Yukteswar's guru is called a Yogi-Christ [Pa 95]
Many of the disciples of Lahiri Mahasaya are called Christs and Christlike [MORE]. Well, would you know!
Jesus Talking with Two Tongues?
But he also told his disciples,
Here we find that Jesus communicated two different things. One will do. How to reconcile the dissonances laid bare? Do not trust anyone that comes and claims that he is Christ. Do not fall victim to sleek tricks.
A Hitchcock anecdote ends like this: "Run, little boy," cried Hitchcock, leaning out of the car. "Run for your life!" [MORE]
"Run, little boy! Run for your life!" Conclusions
Yogananda tells Babaji is aligned to the God of the Bible through Jesus - are they partners in crime and terror and sect making? Yogananda's teachings are full of elements that tend to breed sectarianism. Much ultimately leads on to the cult of "Chrihinduism", as we may call it. "Essential unity" is not found on a cheat level.Yet, since Essence is the core of everything there is - the teaching is found in the old Buddhist teachings of guru Padma-Sambhava and also in Vedic utterances like "Ekam sat (Oneness is)", do not overlook it takes someone to experience it too. Will it be you too? If so, some tell that not all want to depart from that state of extremely happy Oneness. For example, sons of the Creator-God refused to get born for that reason. They had to in the end, but that is another story.
Not everyone comes back from that state of unification, it is pointed out in Hindu scriptures. It is illustrated some place in the Gospel of Ramakrishna [Rap], where two souls who broke through the veils, did not come back. Buddha returned, though, and he taught carefully balanced progress afterwards. Key elements of his teachings should be well worth noting.
It is reasonable to say that simple exercises and delving methods of yoga and Zen may be OK and work well. There is some documentation that they are beneficial, besides the fact that an estimated 20 million US citizens practice them - which goes to indicate that such yoga and meditation is in the mainstream.
Ah, yes, if running is good for you, so is walking. It may be good enough.
Mangalam - Onword
In the next chapter you can see how far Jesus goes for robbery and slavery, according to the Bible. Buddhist basics highlight the subject, and a good part of the tale "Ali Baba and the Forty Robbers."You may wonder what an onword is, and if there is a little play on 'onward' there. The word is used by Barry and Tony Buzan in The Mind Map Book [Mmb, passim]. Onwords are structural elements that are put at the end of chapters, and speak of what comes next, especially in the next chapter. Onwords are there to ease browsing or help learning, or both. We think the use of onwords is a neat practice. In learning, every little helps.
Sincere use of Mangalam, "Blessing, Happiness, May blessing be on it" is fine too. Mangalam is a benign wish, and speaks for a good continuation.
If we do not remember what the blessing onword mangalam means, we may look up in a Buddhist dictionary. Unfamiliar words need to be understood first, so make it an ongoing practice to look up what the main words mean. That is one of the good points of Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (1911-86) in his book on Dianetics [Din]. He teaches that "False data can cause one to make stupid mistakes." "People who do not take care of their possessions and places can cause disorder to those about them." "The process of learning is not just piling data on top of more data. It is one of . . . better ways to do things."
For Hubbard, the process of freeing the individual is the fundamental purpose of religion. In the 1970s the Church of Scientology spread across Europe. Today it operates in more than 150 countries. [MORE]
 |
Literature
Ay: Yogananda, Paramahansa. Autobiography of a Yogi. 1st ed. New York: Philosophical Library, 1946. Online. [oaks.nvg.org/pv6bk12.html]
Din: Hubbard, L. Ron. Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. Copenhagen: Scientology Publications Organization. 1950.
Ebu: Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica 2008 Ultimate Reference Suite DVD. London: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2008.
Mmb: Buzan, Tony, with Barry Buzan. The Mind Map Book. Rev. ed. London: BBC Books, 1995.
Pa: Yogananda, Paramahansa. Autobiography of a Yogi. 11th ed. Los Angeles: Self-Realization Fellowship (SRF), 1971.
Rap: Gupta, Mahendranath. The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. Tr. Swami Nikhilananda. New York: Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center, 1942.
Say: Yogananda, Paramahansa. Sayings of Yogananda. Los Angeles: Self-Realization Fellowship, 1958.
Wha: Hubbard, L. Ron. The Way to Happiness: A Common Sense Guide to Better Living. ABLE International, 1996. [www.thewaytohappiness.org/html/twth/happines.htm]
 |
 |
 |
 |
USER'S GUIDE to abbreviations, the site's bibliography, letter codes, dictionaries, site design and navigation, tips for searching the site and page referrals. [LINK]
DISCLAIMER: [LINK]
© 2006–2008, Tormod Kinnes. All rights reserved. [E-MAIL]