FRONT GATE
 ARCHIVE4 SECTION5 WORK16  NEXT PAGE
SITE MAP SECTION
SITE QUERIES
 
SITE SEARCH
 
YOGA TERMS

COLUMN WIDTH

 

Harsh Ties

Lessons
"Maybe great sectarians can't be honest"; think that.
To extract all-round wisdom from letters from cult members and the like, you need to be aligned with general cult knowledge first, and then seek to understand the backdrop of what is coming your way along with some why's and wherefore's, it seems fair to say.

Contents

   Supporting reservations are presupposed throughout:


Harsh celibacy hardly pays for long

Thought-stimulating tales are becoming a common, nurturing heritage in the world of today and further. They often appear to catch a little sun for your daughter or son, although the lifestyle is often much different in other places. One thing is largely common, though: people seem to worry quickly - and that people often put faith in materials that contains ample details and descriptions, and in old teachings as well.

The frog is good at being a frog. Even though its general shape somewhat resembles ours, its aims are different.
       It is one of the good things about higher mammals that they spend much time in rearing and fostering their young. They don't let others do it if it can be avoided.
       It is good for grown-ups to benefit of their children. They can inform them or prepare them for future encounters and troubles, for example. And they can shield their young ones - and it doesn't help to be manipulated and turned into a half-idiot for the lack of these helps.
       Lessons we deal with here, tie in with general self-help education by and large and by measured strokes, if you can.


Good gnosis

It may not work for good to assert important tenets as from out of the blue. Take a check if things work in the way as intended, if you can.
      What's more, it's a good sign of a gentleman not to be swayed from the better course. We should notice full well that friendship among unmet souls is hardly a good friendship. In Bramble Farm they're "friends" and "family" even without having met. It's often like that. Then there are some who suffer from asserting things in bad ways.
      To put a stop to a little of that, stay reserved, or do what you can as long as you are in peace. A gentleman is calmly reserved, and so is his love: He doesn't bungle. Nor does he exaggerate and underestimate hard evidence..
      You may be put to shame for always signalling you're sure of everything. In many fields we hardly know everything of a sudden, but observe, think calmly, study assets and love to figure out what we need to know from inside. I think we all have that prowess, that figurative might as expressed every night. It needs to be interpreted much and long, though. It's often like that.
     


Belong to none till the day you die

"You belong to none," said the kriya guru Shyama Lahiri to the casteless or low-castes. Quite true. [Pa 332]
      Yogananda, however, made a great many followers swear a hard loyalty oath to him and Shyama Lahiri, among others.
      Must men pledge they belong to Masters in order to benefit from kriya yoga?


Is Babaji attuned to Jesus without letting him occupy the first seat today?

Yogananda says somewhere that "Our best friends are those who criticise us the most -" Try and be a little honest instead of believing it and turn into a clown.

Guru in a hotel room

If the good and fit time for this and that seems lost by neglect and worse, God is the Sole Doer that even can switch time and happenings? [Cf. Say: index]

Mumps and measles - that theory

Another quite interesting side of Yogananda's assertion of reversed time, reversed universe, is how fast you get your grey hair back before your get whimsical like a little tot and what happened to your free will all of a sudden. How subtly the guru knaves mar if they seemingly helped when the flow was better-looking - and so on. Bizarre thought may come next:
I struggled in a common web of happenings and meetings and won - now it is all in vain. What happened to free will in a reversed chain of happenings that are not at all in conformity with how movements are done? I lost control, and are in for mumps and measles again, and reversed ageing. I was riding a donkey when these incredible things started. We stopped and the donkey hurried backwards without seeing where it was headed. My baldened head turned white by hairs that came back to it from the sewers and that hair started to grow downwards, not upwards!
      Someone had made the clock and universe go backwards, maybe to favour all married men - farts that had been dispersed with the winds were gathered from the winds and put into the colon one by one - to reverse it all much faithfully. Oh, mumps and measles again - again - signals "not just one time for everything".
     
Think of of an awkward donkey ride at full speed backwards, the bumps and running without seeing what happens, and of hair growing downwards. It doesn't seem to be attuned to my cosmos-understanding at all. Riding backwards, what happened to your will to move ahead from it? Note the sordid-practical tone, given the premises we could rise to call a "Mumps And Measles Syndrome": An avatar has decreed - "all" say "ugh". Note we just render, and have found no evidence that substantiates those decrees. Hence, we should not trust them. We have better things to do than that, is the good guess.
      Further note:
      In top-notch physics no one says merely "Bah" to a deviant tenet, just because it looks odd. Instead the polite way of handling is "That is an interesting proposition. Now prove (document) it is so." [Cf. Thd]
      We should be glad to think the burden of proof rests on the one who proposes, and not, "A sadist is someone who's kind to a masochist."
      Beware of the dreary fruits of seduction, and also hearsay.

To top


Against demoniac conditioning as seems fit

It generally helps to lessen emotional conditioning. If these lessons are studied in a class or group, student with not severe term-attachment problems could benefit. The liberating method involves careful reduction of anxiety. [See Lte 40]
      If the word-conditioned, bellowing students are taught alternative sayings and alternative notions, they could feel confronted because their habituated mental associations are no longer "welcome", or not so welcome for the time being. Such signals inside the organism could bring on strong impulses to fight like animals. Habit formations may take such courses even if politely confronted.
      To get out of the emotional attachments and habituated word-conditionings, much and mentally fatiguing training could help in the course. We presuppose free will is allowed here. [Cf. Lte 47]
      This is a help against getting outsmarted by quite systematic use of other terms that should tone down much fear of mystique and thus satisfy another Child-related need. [Lte 49]
      Intervening and training against guru verbiage and mental conditioning involved, may be cumbersome and very costy inwardly if you don't adhere to the simple rules pinpointed in such as chapter 1.
      We have to bear in mind that conditioning-dependent guys may not get straightened out by us anyhow, because various verbal responses are held very dear, and it took years of attachment and submittance to "dear guru" or "dear Hindu pope" to fix many of them. The most important facets of the emotional "apparatus" may have been "frozen" into this. So if you and I raise issues or critique, or cover SRF material in different light, their major concern may be to lessen our performance by hook and crook, regrettably.
      Further, we can hardly expect their own standards in responding against giving the boss lip-service either, unless these victims of guru doctrines that never really fit, get ample time to progress into the realm of personal or individual standards. They easily tire of you if you want to improve their expectations in a fair way. So it may not be worth-while for a man to beyond go guru-serving surfaces for them, even as victims of such as saviour-clowning. Instead you could attend to your own business and let these guys wreck themselves after they have striven to maim good friends and helpers first. Manlys triving is different, but they may not see it.
      Also, in treatment we have to catch the mental imagery that resonates inside these victims of hearsay and romantic gist, and learn to canonise antitheses to topdog-serving ones without blunders.
      Freakish or great restistance to betterment, avoidance, and many other silly and laughable patterns are likely to be met with. And it could be fairly easy to test many of them; they could be fairly domain-specific. [Cf. Lte 235]
      To be classy in one's own right is felt to be far better than becoming a misfit by being sacrificed from over one's head.

 Good guys are helped by staying out of the den of thieves.

To top


We have to accept our fares are intertwined with the fares of others. If you change some parts of that web of reciprocal ties and strings, you could upset some deeper balance, and the next you know is that others try to give you problems.
      Here I have to insist: The blank verse variant suggests, and may not be as delicate as you find fit. Many connectives can have been peeled off, as in modernistic poetry, which I like very much, to be frank.
      And now, feel free to look into the served string of keynotes from this and well-nigh any deep-going tick tack toe study you happen to come across. To form keynotes is a delicate art. To arrange them is serial order as in the blank verse summaries you come across here, is hardly easy. This granted, feel free to delight in them. The summaries can be read as teaching poetry. There's stuff like it from Japan. Hakuin wrote terse extracts that seem like these summaries. But ours are better, for they're based on comparative philosophy without freaking nonsense, I dare say.
      What's more, you can read any summary as a complex haiku to get a good beginner's feeling about the matters at stake. Risk nothing.
      If you have a hard time thinking about what I say in a study, feel free to skip the study and look into the summary blank verse next to it first. It's a synopsis with many new, fit features bake0d into its design from bottom and up. You can derive poetry from that, too.
  1. If the study or allied blank verse accentuation on top of it is heart-warming, maybe it could help, if given a decent chance. Much has to be taken into consideration. On the other hand, if your proficient examinations of a tick tack toe study or allied teaching poem (synopsis) doesn't warm your heart at all, no matter how long you look into it, it may not give any help to just you. Therefore skip it.
  2. You could school, educate and train yourself in consonance or on top of the round-looking, general or wide hints served here.
  3. If you do and fit in, maybe it can help. Much depends on associates, even weather conditions.
The advantage of this sort of table-served maxim cavalcade is that it suggests some building-up process in a fair way, and the building efforts have been sorted, evaluated and graded for you. What's hoped is that a lot of things can be accomplished step by step, if you're careful and go forward till you get remunerative outlets most often. By just such winning you can live. Stay cool, bring your heart into what you're doing, and a lot, and contemplate first - before going about anything much important and outside the ordinary.
      You've now been let in on how you can be assisted by the over-all norms at bottom of well-nigh any tick tack toe study and linked teaching poem. It's fair to say:
      "The whole philosophy at bottom here, is for fit service of comman man, if he's found."
      The series of texts are devised for first-hand study, and as such allow freedom for students - hence conditions for much personal liberation among sane ones. The things you have to heed, are that well-nigh any tick tack toe study has a platform (plain mathematics for most part) and that assessed phenomena have been inserted into (by plotting skills) the structure at bottom of all sorts of tick tack toe texts.
      Assessment is a deep art. Many cardinal phenomena can be dubious, many allow themselves to be interpreted and angled in very many ways, but let's leave those apects aside for now: In a tick tack toe text you end up with assessed, often allowed fares. Feel free to add substantial evidence to the general trend you find divulged by strides or steps shown. You can do your part and go for evidence that substantiates the assertions given, and handle things with utmost care and delicate tact if you don't have verifications. As can said among top physicists:
      "Dear one, what you say sounds interesting. How do you prove what you assert?"
      You have to deal with social life in your own culture, adapt to customs and fares that have no good proofs. So even if you can't document things found inside tick tack toe studies, these things may lighten your way anyhow. This is so because unproved is not unfit in a complex setting. Most often that's what we have to stick to and deal with.And that's a recognised fact. [Lte 1-11]
      We talk of sound strategies here. We expose highly important and interesting sides of theory-making in general, and tick tack toe studies in particular. How far can you go? It's for you to find out, at your own risk and expenses, so halt not in the matter. Don't risk much. Side with dominant winners if you can in a fair way. Since our T+ texts are brand new, the linked methodology has new sides to it as well. One is this one for complex settings: Take a historical overview. Assess core happenings and just note what has been allowed, what has evolved, and accept it as something that has been allowed one way or other. It the thing you study is huge, wide,great, or has a basic impact that has lasted or is enduring where you are, you might compete along similar lines, if you find a way to tailor the individual steps.
      Such a possible emulation is derived from looking into happenings or events, and judge for yourself as to odds or tendencies that could succeed. Study the well-to-do to arm yourself with their weapons: They are proper environment, solidly implanted attitudes, good schooling most often and secluded ways - all that. E. Goffman has been into some facets of such interesting phenomena. ¤Cf. Vrtd.
      What I do say is that good things can be built up on top of what you get instructed in. Basically, good schooling is not different. Let it go hand in hand with the T+ studies, and you might succeed where others flounder, because you get into a deep mainstream that may take you into better over-all conditons, or away from getting duped. These things happen. You can't get much scared, for the scared guys tends to get stupid. Be as discreet as you can, minding your own progress business, and then you can fatten or get sour as need be.
      I would be grateful for your comments on basic issues. Here comes an example of tick tack toe poetry. There are many forms, and this is my preferred one.

To top


Master songs

The old octopus had thought it out. Now he insisted as none else,
      "Well, hello. Someone wrote and seemed to forget to smile in a fair way:

"I've humbled myself enough to sit and try and understand what you have written."
      To this I say, "If you want to humble yourself, don't come my way. I'm so poorly attuned to sleek stratagems of that sort. Instead of interfering with deep, natural balances, take a sane look at humbleness in itself (per se), and what do you find? It's nothing to be schooled and trained at all, in all likelihood. Nothing to try to reach up to. Its basis is natural sanity from inside. Interfering with that platform of adequate "self-forgetting" in some cases of genuine interest, can make you a bit awkward - strained in basic outlets, even. Just don't strive a lot to be humble. Be yourself in a plain way if you can - or to the measure you can handle, and much can fall into place - or go asunder. It depends on your welcomes and those about you, but the professional counsel is still along such lines as I suggest.
      Real humility has nothing to do with stratagems, whereas social humility is just a form of cultured, sallow tact - often seen as clever, crafty and a forerunner of maneouvres -
      Further, good study is fit for elevating your sense of realism and aligned self-esteem, of course. These things follow naturally, are necessary for coping, and have nothing to do with self-aggrandisement. Read for example Dr. Herbert Fensterheim's very good book Assertiveness Training. It could help. ¤Edo
      Unless you stop humbling yourself if you don't have to (formal education is often shit-tinged in this way in Norway), you study with a negative and not good attitude. Good and appropriate study is rooted in vitality, zest and love of learning, as far as I know. Psychodynamic theory substantiates it: Learning is had by cognitive associations, and they are in turn results of secretive id (libido), life urges or vital zest, if you like. ¤Pocn.
      Next topic of concern for you and me, whoever you are:

" I was suggesting that sometimes your thoughts are so cleverly written that people like me who only want to learn have trouble comprehending your meaning."
      Fair enough. If you would have stated things as sincere as that in the first place, where would there have been a problem?
      Allow me to state things in my way, without trying to pipe down symbolic speech by some off-hand or halting syllogism.


If you find Snoopy

If you reach level 6 in a skilfully summarised abstract of an essay (see example above, the synopsis), you could happen to see the dog of Charlie Brown, and have met some Tao outlet. It could be welcoming woman arms, but most often hardly that - and much else.
      These views are system-anchored.
      Proficient use of such as tick tack toe can give fair and easy entry into decent and educated circles. In cases where we want to emulate bigwigs and try to share in some of their accomplishments, some winning streaks of theirs and their kind can be sorted out and next tallied into a general program, or a wide or sketched project plan. There are many names. I think we have to go in consonant footsteps - and good tick tack toe essays serve that.

To top


Guru bluffs getting better

One evident reason why I bothered to make this long series of insider comments against dwarfing in the hands of a bully, was an article by American Steve Hassan against mind-control and nasty sects. There are many such flocks and churches and lots of pure love is hardly one of their assets. Find okay Hassan matters here.
      To reveal some pertinent insider matters from Bramble Garden and Bramble Farm stood out as a fair thing to do next. I had all the experience and background for it. I sorted and sifted for the sake of one more contribution against cult control.


There can be stringed dishes to choose among or ignore as you find it best

The basic grid-work of depth structure inside the series of terse essays is like a special cloth - it lays the table of serialisation of top of a cybernetical schemata that's philosophical, and plausible in all major aspects, as far as I see.
      The content on that large table is like a meal of very many dishes. You can look into what you see fit. Feel welcome like a guest at a big buffet.
      If you pick stringed (chained) assertions that fit in and suits you by inner nature, heart, tendencies, and upbringing, maybe you get a fit meal.
      Food for thought is maya, the same as figure-forming capacity.


A little talk on figure-forming sides of the sea

What is called "figure" in ancient Greek, corresponds nicely with the Sanskrit concept "maya" in dominant aspects, but not all of them. There is a wide variety of opinions on maya in Indian literature. Maya as I have defined it in a book, (in manuscript form at present) is food for thought. Maya is figures from depths we should explore more often, as by dream analyses on waking up after dream sleep. ¤Sue
      And finally, we understand through fair maya, that is through good figures. Imagination, insight, learning - all that is had by figures out of the deep inner side. Prowess is had next, on top of such items.
      By stringing and gluing such chosen figures (sentences contain understanding facets), we arrive the plan for action involved.
      In essence, that is what good folk-wise upbringing is about, and excellent schooling too.
      And so on. The special scheme at the bottom of any tick tack toe essay helps studied comparisons, allows deducted programs or projects on top of them, aid what's called mastery learning by fit, cognitive schemata - and also contain built-in, stringent definition-making before, and so on.
      I can't help you if you don't understand me now. to tell the truth, I've made a giant effort to simplify so that minors can understand the basic layout, the basic plan inside tick tack toe serialisation.
      It's not at all difficult in itself. Find it in good schooling - where they built step by step. Find it in all sorts of strategic procedures, including the standard scientific approach. It fits in, and perfectly. Tick tack toe is a project finder, and a new way of transgressing a set-up but humiliating setting.
      However, each of us has to count the cost.
      Thus, where Steve Hassan, that I've corresponded with, sets up fine points to remember as to cults and their control methods, the tick tack toe serialisation ventures to express two or three things:
  • How the glide into unwelcome settings often come about, in stages. This is documented in chapter 3. You can start right here.
  • I can at times suggest how to make the best out of the cult, if once trapped. It can probably be done by minimising heavy yokes and maximising the feeble good things in it. The outcome may remind us of gentle farming.
  • I further say how to emulate sect bosses, for making a successful farmer or perhaps business manager out of yourself - these things are linked.

Tantra problems

 I'm not fanatic, I just don't get along with people who plot for humiliations or "greater than thou" when unfit. In matters that pertain to specific cults - Bramble Garden appears to be one - I have to be guarded and maybe camouflage my deepest insights. This might have confused you - I don't know.
      In Indian Tantra, just the same methods of symbolic talk and hiding insider things a lot, is made much use of.
      If your confusion stems from that, I apology, but may not do anything about it, because the alternative may be unfit.
      Let's look into how ancient kriya yoga can be told of as sex ecstasy, drinking whisky and lots of other things - it could even be puffing and smoking. Inside the quite Tantric-looking essays on "wrisky whisky drinking" found here.
      One more savoury point that may serve you: I shouldn't hide that to me, very much from religious circles is my entertainment. But not the "I-am-ness" Moses found entry to.
      There are certain limits to what I will do for you. But just retiring is hardly one of them. I find that retiring from contacts often presage limited conditions on top of limiting involvements or limiting outlets. If so, maybe retiring from initially discordant contact isn't so good. And then, on the other hand, if continued contact feels like a loss, I might gracelessly or gracefully withdraw. I find no good reasons for really excusing myself here. You can write to me when that is called for.
      I would like to share something attuned to St. Paul with you below.

To top


Staunch teaching in the footsteps of Jesus - what can it be?

An insider's look at this and that is likely to be coloured by lots of things stemming from the fare, the personality and much else we hardly bother to go into together here.
      In a letter to someone else I tried to explain very briefly some facts involved in a study of mysticism and its offshoots.
      Let me be more explicit here: Some say this and some say that, and all can't be correct. So how find out the wisest view or concern? By tick tack toe analysis, is a fit claim. This is because it aids proficient gist-arrangement in an over-all manner that suits comparative search much and widely.


Pertinent understanding: vitality is in part ones own basis for any research

Pony and horse, or prana, is a symbol for vital zest in man in ancient Indian literature. It's also used in a figuratively rich song of Tibet's canonical saint, the cotton-clad Milarepa, in the middle of an old book by his apostle Rechung. ¤Cf. Tm. A concept like horse-power can also be sharpened into an image of God. Upanishadic literature uses prana in such figurative ways - many are obscure, though. ¤So.
      There are ponies and ponies. Ponies are set to work in certain ways from they're young, because they're enslaved. Thus the little pony finds non-rewarding work halfway okay.
      This section to you alludes at dominant roles of theory and study attuned to pony-derived understanding and similar things. Before you and I go to our graves, some general functions of theory will be discussed, along with important aspects of the research process, including ethics more advanced and fitting than that of Balaam, the man of closed eyes and pony battering. You find him in the good Bible. ¤Cf. Numbers 22;13 ff. ¤Dal 3 (5,1)

To top


Undermined facets of pony theory (functions of theory)

A

Deplore less. There's not good enough room for deploring this and that in the New Age of candid "both-and" thinking over and over again, and put into running set-ups. (1)
      There's no deep theory if you give up "either-or" logic. Then you can state the paradox: The smallest here's the greatest - who said it? Some of the first shall be the last - who said it? So, there's reason to say much in step with quantum physics thinking, Christ and Lao Tan, The deep theory may seem flat and skinny. Or the revolutionary: There's no deep theory - give it up before it harms your good heart. ¤Cf. Tat; Wic.
      The way to give up deep, harmful thinking is in part by what's called female or okay logic: "You may say this, " It's not as silly as either-or or formerly male-ruled, bossy logic. It's not easy at all to go for silly-looking, feminine-mystical logic again and again, but some try. (2)
      Be that as it may. This is an appraisal of New Age logic after John von Neumann. Hail to him. Without pony theories, pony research findings would simply be disorganised collections of data. And maybe they had better be left that way till well organised existential delta frieze thinking is allowed to take over because it gives greatly enlarged mastery over facts, as I see it. ¤See Thd.
      Be teeming with wisdom if it serves your fair ends. Get deftly off the hook: get off brittle or too outsmarted hypotheses; they're often designed like this: "If we do X, then Y should occur." It's too much of the either-or thinking inside it. ¤Til; "Jung’s essay ppp".
      The following hypothesis could be tested in a fair, cogent and smart enough study:
      "If we praise trained ponies when they work hard, then they should persist longer at the task than trained ponies who are not praised for hard work."
      Handsome counsel: Tone well down the chains or stings of deductions based on either-or thinking, the formerly acceptable skeletal outlook within science. It’s hardly nice to build much on top of limping structures, you see. Separated observations within older science may still be of service and brilliant. By forging them into the grid of this frieze, you get novel outlooks from them, on top of them, and so on. This is very economical, much better than maiming animals. Let us face it: If humans are dog-trained in public schools so that higher faculties get dormant or aborted, then let's study stunted humans better, and use that for helping fine animals. But note the fair: I would help a black dog, but not marry it.
      It helps to go forth much candid, and prefer to take to things that need no repair for a long time and can run along well free from help. If not, be as precise as possible, even in your talk. Since pony study forms the basis for theory development and has valuable implications for breeding or training later on, we examine here the process of blunted dwarfing animal training.
      When we investigate an area in which there's little wrong theory to guide us, we may formulate objectives or questions. I prefer observations, or fine points. You find lots of them in folklore, recent and old. Not every common man is a fool. If trying out hypotheses or asking questions, we need to specify less, due to a synthesis of either-or and both-and and the implementation level that need to work together. This is the outcry of that part of modern physics I find fit for men and mice.
      Quantum physics has found grand both-and thought forms to wield more control and mastery over the forces of nature, and it has been found to work on an even keel, even though this airy look may seem bizarre to common men - can't deny that. Thus, "either-or"-tallied programs are designed to add the significant, "Y can be allowed to occur anyhow, no matter how, regardless of you and me and what Aristotle dreamt up." ¤Cf. Thd: "von Neumann".

B

Hypotheses supported by pony study data should strengthen such a theory. When hypotheses are not supported by data, the theory may have to be revised. Or if the research has been rooted in a bit outdated either-or logic, it's time to revise with hard hands, and why? To be better able to march in step without ado. (3)
      It’s a sad song: Pony theories are technically acceptable sets of principles offered to explain pony phenomena, (Cf. Suppes, 1974 in Dal) and serve as bridges between pony study and congenial upbringing. In real life, that incorporates "both-and" thinking on an even keel, folk wisdom has its sights: "Petty thieves are hanged; big thieves become mayors". Of the wildest foal you may get the very best stallion". It has the both-and outlook, you see. (4)

C

If you omit this outlook or any smart outlook, maybe your life can't be reformed in the long run that develops in step with dwarfed Aristotle logic; it's the either-or type. What's needed today is to shield and help the complementary routines that slowly build up good, common settings. That’s my opinion. (5)
      A brittle conclusion doesn't help pony trainers decide when to employ which thought-up models. (2,3)

There's no both-and logic if you dissolve yourself like Gil O'Rilla has done, according to Internet. How can that mystic master live on like a young man so long after AD 203 and say:
      "I've dissolved myself one hundred per cent"? ¤Dal 3.

To top


Having good things matter

Quasi-relevant Snare-devil messages - don't hold on to them through fond, idealised imagination. More can had by imagination than in most other ways, for imagination doesn't have to conform to anything that is at hand or in the whole wide universe, for that matter. It enjoys such freedom deep inside. Let us hope that.



1. Some eaters are cheaters

"Bestow the kriya yoga key only on qualified (disciples) ... The tortured men and women of the world, pursued by the threefold suffering, need special encouragement. ... repeat to each of your disciples this majestic promise ...
      "Even a little practice of this ... action (Dharma) will save you from great fear ... the colossal sufferings inherent in the repeated cycles of birth and death."
      That's what the alias-named Gil O'Rilla said. [Pa 322-3]


NOT REALLY opposed to this, Yogananda also insisted we should seek fun, look to the bright side of life and death and don't take life seriously. It's in the art of living to increase what's loveable and lessen much less. Maybe you have to get hardened and offend intruders in your own garden for it.


2. Krishna the gruesome monster debated

The shark: "I'm your saviour,
your own goddamn saviour
the living Hare Krishna!"
INTERESTINGLY, where masters say, "I'm Krishna," they seem careful not to mention he's the fable monster Makara and death as well. Makara is halfway crocodile, halfway dolphin, explains Dr. Poul Tuxen, and yet it is too often translated into "shark". Imagine a white shark saying,
      "Come with me, white man, I'm the shark-death you so crave under the surface ripples."
      However, since the Bhagavad Gita never mentions Krishna with 18 000 abducted harem women is a shark, who can take his assertion serious?
      What's more, the only real shark never insists he's Krishna, nor does he say, "I'm the shark." I find that oddly relevant: "The real thing doesn't insist he is the one he is - he manages to keep silent about it in a fair way most often." If this holds good for sharks, how much more so for a fable monster?
      The shark is the shark; you know it by the way he doesn't tell it, never insists.


3. Suffering is not real, said Yogananda, and that God had decided that he would have to sufferk

WE SHOULD stay away from the big bluffer, just to remain on the safe side. Yogananda, who in some states of his affirmed that this and that isn't real, and that he himself never was born, still found his lessons important. And he used to cry in pain, for example over soldiers that fought and died on the battlefield of Europe. And he definitely was hurt when a ready-made wishing-well slipped onto his foot, he confides somewhere.
On the grounds of Self-Realization Fellowship headquarters there is a small wishing well of cast concrete. Shortly after its purchase I was helping the boys to move it into place. The well accidentally slipped and fell with all its terrific weight on my foot . . . I was carried to my room . . . Day by day the pain in my leg became almost unbearable . . . The following Sunday I . . . could not get my foot into a shoe . . . I was limping along toward the platform where I was to speak, when inadvertently I slipped on the threshold; my injured foot was badly twisted. So great was the pain, I felt as if every bone in it had splintered. - Yogananda. [Cf. Ak 377]
The story ends on a delightful note that is left out here. The old father (Babaji) that had him sent to the West to lecture and more than that, says life is serious! And Yogananda found: "I don't take life seriously at all" and somehow ignored the deep mission in so doing. Maybe he even semi-castrated Gil O'Rilla's outlook. Can you do that and be called all right in the upper circles? It seems he did.
      You shouldn't like persons that talk against themselves without bothering to explain state-specific outlooks are valid on different levels, and that they who do speak of the world as unreal and so on, come back - at least mentally - to the old body to tell that - and want to be taken seriously. It's very much attuned to something maintained inside post-constructivism:
      "[It's true that] there is no difference between truth and untruth"
      The odd notion stems from a certain Ericson. If his notion were true, his claim is not much more than "bark, bark" or "bleat, bleat" either.
      Let's figure that somewhere in the process of training for that accomplishment you imagine you can be blessed by acting like a stray dog, barking up some fence to a person you've never seen or met.
      The best would be to manifest no sissy problem here: Our frontal, pinpointing story obviously manifests this:
Life's damn serious, insists Gil O'Rilla, and in tale after tale, and surely an O'Mally can agree to that, even a whole lot.
Don't be whipped to abandon common sense due to statements from all sorts of topdogs of attainments as they say - they could tie in with masked insanity.
      Some conflicting sayings may stem from schizoid thinking, others from not discerning full well between what may be called state-specific outlooks. Dr. Charles Tart at the university of California (Berkeley) has been rather much into the latter. He's a prominent researcher. [Cf. Edit].
      Life can become serious and difficult. Learn to avoid some bad happenings by forethought and skills, and better thinking - not to speak of guru-given methods against many bad fares.
      The soap opera - alas. Yogananda used to hold one more note, one of mom-turning and mom-wailing. The strict methods of scientific explorations were not discarded as useless, but were hardly ever seen. He used the good words "science" and "scientific", "exact" and "mathematics" all right, and yet ... scientific labour is more than great and disarming words many a time. It consists of hard work and faith is not handy in it, at least not dogmatic and too naive faith.
      He played on, spitting out verbiage that impressed and was highly revered in the first place. He did by borrowing Christian stuff (infiltrative demagogy, it has to be said) and talked against himself a lot in that run. It appears there were none to correct him strictly in California in those days, in the circles he was inside. One exception that came to our attention was that of Laurie Pratt, or Tara Mata. This nun helped him as his editor, and corrected not a few things. Yet, there is a need for better thinking still.
      The mention and other whereabouts of Laurie Pratt are summed up in an issue of Self-Realization Magazine after her demise, as far as we recall.
      Let's just concede a fool can talk against himself and even worse: act against savoury if not original deals. It could matter to contemplate on it and not flinch from having at least three thoughts of one's own.
      You find many contradictive sayings and expressions in his old sermon collection, Man's Eternal Quest. Its symbol is [Ak]
      To spread one's plumes and let others admire the eyes on them - we expect more and better for someone coming in the name of science to help men of science - and many others. The liberating kriya methods are half-way starved out by cramped ballyhoo - it could breed inner tensions and maladjustments as complementary things. And the teaching that there's suffering is the master-founded platform - and even freedom-helping yoga methods could help that if they are marred by cramped lives in a setting of taming. "Maybe" is for you to add.


4. What do we mean by God around here?

What developed on the US west coast, was mishmash sermons or hybrid sermons.
      Adi Sankara spoke of such as atma-bodha, in books like his Crest-Jewel of Discrimination. It must be linked to gnana or jnana. These are Indian concepts that can signify mystical wisdom, or Greek sophia. It still means wisdom. The fact is that Yogananda came to bring self-realisation linked to that. Later he dropped speaking much of it in public, but all the same stood by that "own self is God".
      "Self-realisation" is centred on atma-jnana (self-realisation). Indian "God" can be different things. Basically your inner self, it's said, and a lot of gods are in it too, according to Upanishadic teachings.
The old sages, satisfied in their desires, proceed to where there is that highest place of the True One. [6] (Brahman) shines forth grand, divine . . . it is far beyond what is far and yet near here, it is hidden in the cave (of the heart) among those who see it even here. [7] He is not apprehended by . . . penance or good works. When a man's nature has become purified by the serene light of knowledge, then he sees him, meditating on him as without parts. [8] That subtle Self is to be known by thought (ketas) . . . when thought is purified, then the Self arises. [9] Whatever state a man whose nature is purified imagines, and whatever desires he desires (for himself or for others), that state he conquers and those desires he obtains. [10] [Mundaka Upanishad, 3rd mundaka, book 1, excerpts]
This is the view of Hinduism. Some benign gods and goddesses can carry the worshipper into their godhood.
      In Shiva-worship as manifested in books on Tantra, "God" is a term that reflects boxes inside boxes, in part. [Si]
      We have such as Parashiva beyond your understanding, I bet, next Sadasiva and next - maybe the very many Siva avatars. [See Si]
      In Vaishnavism - it means Vishnu worship and has many insistent cults - the play is about Krishna as your totem figure. I've looked into that tradition for decades. The avatar understanding you have, could well be ridiculous. You should face that. [Sh; Clh]
      What sort of God is behind Bramble Farm? It's evidently a falsity-asserting one. To be perfidious comes next to that sort of being, it must be fair to suggest.
      If self-realisation means what Yogananda tells in early literature, like The Science of Religion, then my inner sides are your God. [Scu, last pages]
      It often boils down to that very biased means unfair, maybe unfit too.


5. Letters from SRF disciples - not of worth so far. How come?

"How far have I come?" If you're teeming with respect for blockages through gurus, you're not much of a guru yourself. Find that note significant.
      I'll let you in on a secret. He who respects terribly in the open, is hardly much worth inside. It can be aligned to the master problem. This is the psychoanalytic notion in the manner: Masters are revered as holy and great by fools who evidently lack sagacity - not speak of divinity and natural soundness deep inside. The harder the projective need, the more hard-headed they can get. I've seen it happen in a lot of cases.
      The next secret must be: No sectarian wants intrusion by deep studies.
      Since you evidently have been hooked by "how good, great and holy SRF is", no matter what its masters and spirit-owners say to the contrary, try and see an artist. He could help you to crawl on top of holy objects, for he's set to make such artefacts - crucifixes, Madonna statues - suffering Jesus on a cross - all that, and very much opposed to these very Biblical statements:


6. Canonical matter that is marred by many Yogananda teachings

GOD SPOKE:
      "I'm Yahweh your God ..
      "You shall have no other gods before me.
      "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.
      You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, Yahweh your God, am ... punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand [generations] of those who love me and keep my commandments.
      Don't misuse the name of Yahweh your God, for Yahweh will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. - Exodus 20;1-7


THERE could be some unneeded ignorance here: "Yahweh" or "God" in the Bible's view, is "I'm" with divergent interpretations also.
GOD SAID to Moses, "I am who I am. [I'll be what I'll be] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: "'I'm' has sent me to you.""
      Yahweh also said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites, "Yahweh, [The Hebrew for "Lord" sounds like and may be derived from the Hebrew for 'I'm' here] the God of your fathers - Yahweh of Abraham, Yahweh of Isaac and ... of Jacob - has sent me to you." This is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation. - Exodus 3;14-15
That name wasn't Lucifer or Master Golgot. It consisted of four consonants with vowels added: "Yhwh" - that's it. There is much sound or historical reason to look on it as a letter code, just as Jewish Kabbalists affirm. The name is now spelt Yahweh, vowels are to be added - for in Hebrew they didn't amount to having written vowels. Let's hope they're the right ones: Dduring the reign of Josiah, the Law and the Hebrew letter codes were halfway forgotten, at least by studied men -
      Well, we have "Yahweh" transmitted here. That's perhaps the name you should use - just as God has said, but see what has happened. Even Jesus took to another term on the cross. He shouted "Eli"!
      It could be a good thing if the name God really stands up for, came into SRF use - or am I and God mistaken? Am I and Yahweh mistaken? That Yahweh also was a man that ate meat in front of Abraham, the Bible specifies. He was not a far-away Dame God, but a meat-eater, it must be safe to say. Quote:
YHWH appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. Abraham looked up and saw three men and bowed low to the ground. He said,
      "If I have found favour in your eyes, o lord, do not pass your servant by .. rest under this tree. Let me get you something to eat, so you can be refreshed and then go on your way -
      "Very well," they answered.
      Abraham ran and selected a choice, tender calf and gave it to a servant, who hurried to prepare it. He then brought some curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared, and set these before them. While they ate, he stood near.
      Then Yahweh said, "I will surely return to you about this time next year." - Cf. Genesis 18;1-10 (Made terse)
God of the Bible is a meat-eater - Jesus ate lamb too - but Yogananda and SRF advocates vegarianism. So does Buddhism.
  1. Hinduism's gods may be something that the real Yahweh hates.
  2. The idolising of locos, avatars and their insignificant, changed or not completely authentic altar pictures is suspect.
  3. The Bible's prophet would say that the master we talk of, was from Hinduism, was a heathen who learnt to make use of infiltrating terms - and I leave it to you to decide if you use God's holy name in vain each night you pray to God Mom or whatever. Odd things happen.

7. The real gospel's message

IN A CREDULOUS setting, much is believed in, things that never come to pass. In a Christian setting, true holiness is to be given by the Holy Spirit, and among the results we have to point out: lots of real followers are to rise higher than Jesus just to be good followers and obey (John 14:12).
      You're not made to be merely a saint, basically. That's the gospel's attitude. You are hopefully not called to become a jarred Lot from maladaptations and uncongenial associates, not functioning in a conform land that is terribly opposed to the "original Christianity as taught by Jesus Christ" [Pa 499] if you're served by it. Otherwise there may be extremely good reasons to let sleeping dogs lie.


8. Get away from being underneath a braying ass if you can

GIVEN Christian freedom, we should not assert too much astray. The mature or functioning heart may tell all along. That is the hope of firmly handy guys.
      Some followers of soap opera gurus hold their leaders' messages to be completely holy, even if they get out of step with something in the gospel. As for Yogananda, he insists [Pa 499] that he gives original Christianity - that means a Hindu swami and idol giver brought genuine Christianity. What a miracle - that God let that happen.
      We have to assume a Mother-worship avatar infiltrates if he comes in the name of Jesus and spreads guru lore in so many words. Good and strategic cunning may lie at the back of it. It seems documented that there are Hindu swamis (Yogananda) that march or wade into Christians and say they are men of Jesus Christ. It may ensure more than a rude "get away".
      And the next you know is that significant worship of Krishna pops up. It happened in Self-Realization Fellowship. All of a sudden the image of Krishna - as made by an artist - popped up beside a painting of Jesus Christ by Hoffman - in the society's altar worship ceremonies. To hide things like that in one's sleeve "till the time must be ripe" may smack of infiltration, even manipulation or intrigues, if you like long words. There is room for decadence in the Christian freedom, we have to maintain. It is to be bulwarked against, and full well. Or else there is a risk of losing assets.
      Manipulating intrigues in the name of Jesus and Christianity is what we have to talk of. Yogananda so often liked to call India's saints and gurus and masters holy, divine, great ones and avatars that came to help out of goodness. Now, a coin can have two sides, and it can be counterfeited.
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good - except God alone. ... do not give false testimony, honour your father ..."" - Luke 18;19-20
IF YOU'RE not to call Jesus good, how can you worship masters as good holy, and their botch, slogans borrowed, and any other thing from them?
      It can remain a mystery. Maybe it shouldn't.
      If bosses are not fairly good, can they till others till they are called holy?


9. Mice or men?

EVEN A great storyteller knows life can be serious. That he recounts jolly good tales means he tries to help against it in many ways:
  1. One is the fun itself during a session.
  2. Another is the humour that lies too deep for inspection on the surface - allow for that.
  3. A third can be masked, very sensible suggestions against being taken in, and make a try to look better.
  4. A fourth can be savoury hints as to handling standards tht amount to something. Often these things lie beneath the surface. In fables some standards have been extracted by orators and the like but they can be tendentious and not fit for modern men, as the Temples show. [Temple]
Lots of fun help us on and up. In nature it's not different. Higher-ranked animals use to play themselves into the old ways of living. If future life may get serious and call for more adaptations than little crabs master, it has to call for much fun in the rearing even more. To go for brave "fun, fun, fun" rather than debates, then, could make a difference.
      What's more, if there's suffering, as Gil O'Rilla amply shows these days - where is there room for a world-illusion that we're said to be parts of? Beware of the great-looking: "The world is unreal, life's a dream." If that were all right to tell, it could not be told. That's an old, saving message.
      The New England philosopher Ralph Emerson once decreed that an institution is the lengthened shadow of a man. The prolonged cloak of Yogananda is his Great Shadow Farm, if you like that expression. It may even fit.
      If suffering is a fact, you have to say the world where it's found inside, is real for it. And to ignore hard facts is either the mark of a fool or crook or master mind. Yet, a gentleman judges many things differently than those.
      We should also mind that cheating can be a hallmark of Old Harry (the devil); that's what Jesus mean.
"God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth," says Jesus in John 4;24.


To top


C - Investigations that suit us

SOUND, good and fair and professional investigations that suit us matter, no matter what the opponent says and the rascal decrees


Worshipper of false notions, beware

THE LAST meal of Jesus Christ was mutton, the instigated Passover dish. Even to his last he ate meat. You're supposed to follow in his steps and yet you should eat as Peter was shown three times in a vision: Have other food than Jesus, not only the same food as he. You are told to have "creeps" - unclean animals. Thus, vegetarian dishes may amount to something too. But do as you wish if you don't cause falls and very bad materialistic outlooks.
      Now we have something to chew on.
      Let me suggest an ascertaining method for you. It's below, and consists of four major steps, or plateaus, if you like.


A. It helps to instigate what assists good searches over and over. And inspect only pertinent, relevant matters as soundly as you can.

ONE OF these days you might need to consider:
  1. Jesus didn't ignore a staunch search in his day. Search well, is a fit motto, as he insisted in some cases. Formerly ill persons were asked to let the priests inspect them so that they could be called well.
  2. If you don't believe God's words initially, there is an invitation to look into some of their fruits (effects or consequences on us). It's possible to go on and even build from that.
  3. Beware of false and too rash evidence as it is called: "False evidence brought Jesus to the cross" The purpose of accurate or meticulous fairness is different, and Jesus shouldn't go against that: it has to be one of the fruits he gives.
THE STUDY and searches of a dirty dog are marked by much sniffing. We often have to rise above that and gain a more elevated look, on two legs, so to speak. Anyway, to search is to inspect, and there are many footloose bargains going on all over the planet.
      To study well is to differentiate a lot, and build carefully and meticulously on top of pertinent material - let's call it evidence. "Sound documentation that matter" is the thing to look for. To bring good and relevant counter-evidence to this and that is what the mature scientist may like. It's part of how the scientific enterprise works most often. It can help to look at counter-hypotheses to learn better. Mere and insignificant sourness isn't quite the thing good men are after.
      In a study of gurus that claim to be on the side of Jesus while they spread overt Hindu details, it could help to go for such as:
  1. Well sifted evidence from the guru's Hindu sources.
  2. Judge this and that in the light of reasonable, Christian evidence
  3. Bring in tentative, mature psychology. Things can be looked at in the light of cult or sect developments.
WE HARDLY think good men would have it different. It's not mean and nasty to go for staunch and fair study of what we encounter, not even if it comes in the name of Jehovah and Hindu things are found inside it, or near the bottom.
      Now, we've explored folklore heritage of Western Europe to look at things (phenomena) that occur on folkloric wavelengths, so to speak. Much is aided if newcomers learn to judge on top of sifted and compared evidence and bring in relevant issues too.
      If we're not careful or bulwarked by good men and sound and fair traditions, maybe we have to end up like bigoted, holy-cramped members of a gang and rattle much. It's not good enough. Thus, we have to be careful about the issues.
      To pinpoint or highlight, maybe we have to dress evaluations (judgements) in metaphors. That helps more than one individual to relate to issues at hand. Proverbs and other parts of folklore happen to help a lot newcomers in similar ways, as some are rich in metaphors. We presume that something of value is at the back of them here. It is not always so.
      Also, "prevention is better than no cure" - for not every disease is to be healed. To arrive at cognitive elements that somehow can serve us, is good. And to use it frivolously is more, if it is welcomed.
      Further, many cognitive elements can be explored, tidied, stringed and then made use of deftly, at least if we're lucky. That's in no small way how common man have developed many tools, skills, prejudices and attitudes as reflected in farm-life and the local culture.


B. Explore, adjust, ascertain better than a jackass if you can

SOUND sifting procedures don't molest evidence and sticks to evidence with as little inter-mediation as well-nigh possible. It likewise helps to present this and that with a good and savoury style. It should be fit for newcomers, if many famous physicists saw the light. The apostle Paul too talked for a few words fit for upbringing rather than thousands of words in tongues. [Thd 27]
      And in the gospel, Jesus says that real holiness is something that holds water - not based on false evidence. He says holiness is a truth thing somehow. Pestering ons that bring false evidence are not holy, nor are the untrue sections of their teaching, according to this.
(Jesus, witnessing) "Salvation is from the Jews [and they're not Hindus]. Yet ... the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth ... God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth." - John 3;22,24
WHAT THE narcissist follower may like, may not be the right thing. There has to be a debate whether one is truly a follower of Jesus without baptism - and whether glossolalia (the mark: talking in tongues) can be done away with as one of the very good gifts og God inside Christianity.
      We should learn to inspect well. There is a need for it in well-nigh any life. Before calling anybody a saint, the Roman Church gathers counter-evidence and scrutinises all other evidence to get a safe platform for conclusions in difficult waters. It's the job of the "devil's advocate" to be thoroughly sceptical to ensure a more mature or fair handing than beginners in the faith may amount to. We have to get more attuned to basic helps inside the long tradition of Christianity.
      Yes, we need to learn to learn, and learn to study things better while there is time. If good and sound guesses manifest as talks against one's former gurus, it could be they need it, at least one of them. But just to "wag one's tail" as a yes-man due to cunning in humble methods, is not good enough. Honesty is great, and may combat guru tricks.
      It may do much good to gather much and solid material and lay bare such evidence. It also helps to have sound respect for what is real competence in many terrains. The best isn't too faked. Professional study helps, and at times much.


C. Allow opponents a fair say

ANOTHER hard lesson is to be unwelcome of truth-telling or sagacity. It can lead into getting flogged and deprived of normal rights among men. Yet martyrs showed they were to have a say.
      As Jesus lived and taught, be on guard against hypocrites of false evidence. We shouldn't pass that on. The apostle Paul, too, fought long and hard battles in the church against false teachings.
      What Paul admonished, Jesus lived and yet lived not: Don't be near conceited jerks, or religious-looking hypocrites (Pharisees). The only people Jesus condemned in his day, were religious-looking and holiness-fixated ones without much friendly tact. To describe much by metaphors is a benevolent and Christian heritage too. [See Matthew 13]

To top


The rat's lesson: "I'm dirty - well, well - any dirty questions?"

A culprit learning tact, may still mar later

A WARNING little note can be made use of in the realm of teaching. Most often tactful, sound ways are to be learnt by good examples, such as role models. They often include peers we have contact with. Much lies in the art of teaching.
      What is this thing called "original Christianity of Jesus Christ" while the gate inwards is a guru's? Neither unsound nor wrong evidence nor stupidity-fostering phrases are to be worshipped. It helps to guard well against "evidence thrash" with no to culprit-serving slogans.
      Ancient Indians teach that it's not fit and savoury to talk untruth and go against evidence.
      To relax for recuperation may be time well spent as compared to time used to become a sectarian, someone going against sound and tidy living and all right traditions against being taken in one way or another.


Rhetorical question

"WHY LOOK down on the sewers ... when there's loveliness all around us," asks Yogananda.
      Well, one reason could be that there is bravery among rats in a sewer, and perhaps misplaced individuals as well.
      Parroting a lot isn't supposed to lead into bravery - men are supposed to reach many higher levels: they should be fit for having a say.
      Maybe we don't end up with a very successful outcome anyway. And then the best thing could be to go for getting rich and savoury to look at instead - attend to one's own business till the good plan for fitting in, having a say and survive all right comes along. You're much encouraged in this procedure. It's often far better than blunting ways. [Cf. John 14:12]
      "A rich man has the world by the tail." - American proverb. [Ap 508]
      A hint on how to mature or grow up: Try to keep your hard-won assets most fit for yourself, put lots aside for a rainy day, and stubbornly refuse to invest on top of foolish teachings. Or look to the cat, if that helps.
      A man needs to have a platform.
      Let's suggest that bad boss thinking in banking, commerse and otherwise, give credulous and unlucky followers lots of problems. It really has happened. During the "parvenue bank crises" in Norway in the 1980s, all the banks that did very bad investments, were headed by younger bank directors. A Norwegian professor in statistical handling assured it was like that. He did it only a few days ago. Eager leader company can be called uplifting till hard times come. It's reasonable to expect things like that and make such significant allowances for it that much bad doesn't need to happen anyhow. It's quite an art.
      And we should be on the outlook for good fruits and pearls of rare price.

To top


Rare teachings around "You are gods" by Jesus

Even though tropical rainforests get exalted these days, few city dwellers would live in them

Let's bear in mind:
(Jesus:) "Take the lowest place (and then, at last) you will be honored in the presence of all your fellow guests. 10
      For ... he who humbles himself will be exalted." - See Luke 14;10,11

(Jesus:) "Let your light shine ... that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father ..." Matthew 5;16

Much depends on good resources fruitfully channeled along long lines. For centuries Norwegians were debarred that and still made it. That's in part over and beyond the good householder recipe from Jesus. Think of it!
      And as for our tropical rainforests, they could be more needed than you dreamt of.
  1. Jesus looked at them and said, "With God all things are possible." - Matthew 19;26. Granted this, try and become one of the highest possible spiritual attainments.
  2. Jesus. "Everything is possible for him who believes." Mark 9;23.
  3. The basic premises are furnished by God Jesus himself, so maybe "All is possible for the one who has faith he is a suffering one of Jutland, he too", but I doubt it."

To do as Jesus tells, aspire to teach the infallible wisdom

I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these. [John 14;12]
THEN, LET there be no mean doubts - isn't it possible? - Think twice if you disbelieve the word of God.
      You should also bear in mind:
      "Why call me Lord, Lord, and never do as I tell?"
      Jesus said it. So you can have fun and go for doctorates on top of the gospel, for that is one form of obedience. There are some others, but we don't look at them right here.
Jesus: "It is proper to (consent and) do (certain things) to fulfil all righteousness." - Matthew 3;15
What's right? One day it's slavery, another day it's to free the slaves quite a lot.


Advancing freedom is rarely fit if jolly good decency flounders from it

TO SET people free was the old mission of Jesus, even one of his "opening lines".
      There can be many sides to a problem or issue. We would do well to choose the most infallible, effective and staunch outlet that's to our favour at any time.
      Some arrive at divergent opinions. Or we get varying solutions as time creeps on. We hardly have a right to ask all who disagree with our interpretation at a certain time, to go to hell for it. Look to Jesus. "Judge not," he said. [Matthew 7;1]
      However, God Jesus judged and condemned religious hypocrites a whole lot. Just a sample from Matthew 23:
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. 14
      "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees ... You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. 15
      "Blind guides! ... blind fools!" 16, 17
God Jesus even whipped those who obeyed the Law as instituted by God - those who took to religious-looking, vicarous slaughter of innocent animals instead of mending their ways by themselves.
      Even though God had instituted and ordained ritual sacrifices or scapegoating streaks in minute details, and surely meant the ordained stratagems to last for ever, God Jesus managed to abort quite a lot in his day.


Be not the buddy of fools

Jesus is the old, untaught example, the paragon and fit for a following - are we mistaken, all of a sudden? He wanted skilled mercy and could have been a good friend of animals in his day - the sacrificial lamb.
      Well, and even if God's own, firm Law forbid him to work on Saturday, he did it anyhow! Look to Jesus, not a good example of upholding ritual tyranny, or are we mistaken? If you look for carefully built-in and fair consistency, it's seldom found in the teachings of the Jews. The old and new deals were different. Still we're informed it was one and the same "I am"-God at the back of it - of both ways and more in addition. From Luke 13:
Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, the synagogue ruler said to the people, "There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath." 14
      The Lord answered him, "You hypocrites! Doesn't each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or donkey from the stall and lead it out to give it water?" 15
      ... When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated, - 17
Yet there are different notions, even from the same mouth. In Matthew 5;17-20 he insists the Law with its mass of rules for ritual murder of animals is valid. But in practice Jesus openly ignored it and even whipped people from the temple for doing things that established custom or the Law didn't go against. Now you can judge:
He found men selling cattle, sheep and doves ... 14
      He made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle ... 15
      To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here!" 16
These fellows somehow helped in preparing sacrifices that God had instituted.


"There is a time for everything" and yet not

Now we know that Jesus used a whip against those very people who assisted or made a straight or easy way for those bent on getting innocent animals killed on their own behalf, just as God had established in the Law of Moses.
      We find:
If you want good keys tot he art of living, look elsewhere than the internally conflicting evidence. Bear in mind John 14:12 in so doing.
On one hand Jesus says the Law of "vicarious bloodshed" and scapegoating is fully valid. Matthew 5:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. 17
      I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 18
      Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 19
The often overlooked point is: He said one thing and did another quite often. Jesus also broke the ritual Sabbath rest and didn't prefer ritual abuse of animals. He spelt it out as one of the prophets: God wanted mercy and kindness instead, over and above such outlets.


Next the foreskin could be kept intact

GOD THE Holy Spirit and all the apostles decided to waive the long-lasting war against the foreskin. In the Old Testament the enforced Sabbath ("Saturday") rest and circumcision were cardinal marks of being the good guys and acceptable to God. Now God changed his mind, after Jews didn't want Jesus. It is well told of in Acts 15.
Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 1
      This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So ... some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses." 5
      The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 6
      After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them, later James spoke up: "Brothers, listen ... It is my judgement, ... that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 19
      Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood." 20
      So much they did. (Much shortened extracts)
The often overlooked thing is: In the Old Testament, highly ritual Sabbath rest and circumcision were the two main signs of belonging to God Himself, of being God's own people. Some parts were lamed by Jesus. Then things were even formally abolished under the supervision of the Holy Spirit himself. We appear to have documented that point fair enough.


Tree growth needs to be staunch in every detail to care about

Look to a tree - it's a living growth. The kingdom of heaven can be like that, and Jesus insists.
      One day ritual slaughter, another whipping rather "helpful" humans for butchering animals -
      Even Jesus said one thing and did another. Should we do greater works for and against regular, canonical buthering of four-legged friends? Try to get stout.
      On top of that paramount example: To insist on one thing and yet do another, could at times behove us in Jesus the Lord. Saint Paul was much into that, for example in Romans 7:
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 15
      And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 16
IF THERE isn't an easy way, it should help to find one. You're encouraged to. [John 14:12] As Americans say,
Read carefully, sign cautiously. - Proverb. [Ap 500]

We should expect kingly truth is not in overt and halfway conflict with itself

AS FOR Bible gist and Bible matter, reading expertly and comparing fairly accurately could help a man to sift away largely unimportant matter, even one's family tree or pedigree, if that stands in the way. It helps to get expertlike and mind one's own business for most part.
      In the gospel there is a strange family tree of genealogy - we could admit it looks like a kingly mystery how it came into being or was put into a gospel by men filled with the Truth and guided by the Holy Spirit.
A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham: 1. ...
      Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Miriam, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. - Matthew 1;1,16
Compare it with:
He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli, 23 - Luke 3;23
Either you are begot by God or his angel, or by a carnal father. But can it be both ways? The gospel never talks of that miracle. God never was a mere son of David. This conclusion may be fit: "Away with false genealogy, it hinders both you and me -"
      The possible ancestry of Mary O'Hara doesn't matter right here. But Yogananda himself once told that he and the other four Indian gurus of SRF were there when Mary became a mother in a stable. It's spelt out in one of the talks of Yogananda. Another time he asserted he was the reborn William the Conqueror - not too kind.
      How could Master Babaji, now standing up as young and handsome to look at, so long after - say - AD 203, have been one of the wise men of the gospel? Why on earth didn't guru Lahiri remember that very important incarnation of his, as he listed up several others, most often known only to Hindus?
Why did no one think of being the wise men of the gospel of Luke, till Americans would listen to yarn like that? That could be the question.
So much for ancestry, imagined and all that. Feel free to tell your mother dear,
     "If I had been one of the wise men, I would have got terribly ashamed of my ignorance, my lack of insight or wisdom in dealing with the tyrant Herod. I should grieve me and make me awfully ashamed to think that my ignorance of the ways of a tyrant was a major cause of slaughter of innocent childen in Rama and other places. Now it's too late to do anything about it, I figure."
After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem 1
      and asked, "Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him." 2
      When King Herod heard this he was disturbed ... 3
      Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. 7
      He sent them to Bethlehem and said, "Go and ...report to me, so that I too may go ..." 8
      On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother ... they bowed down and worshipped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh. 11
      And having been warned in a dream not to go back to Herod, they returned to their country by another route. 12 [That was too late a dream for a lot of innocent people!]
      When Herod understood that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 16
      [Source: Matthew 2 - some extracts.]

To be carefully, artfully forewarned can be a fair thing

To take heed is a fair thing. (British wisdom).
WE HAVE noted that there are wise men, men that are called wise men, and men that aspire to be called these men reborn.
      It should pay to considered the fruits and hallmarks of wisdom before one aspires to be a reborn donkey, wife-killer of fame, or any other guy, all in all. It should pay to consider things carefully before trying to impress or squeal in front of a following. One should bear the fruits of wisdom. Jesus, who asks us to do greater deeds than his, read the mind of others and selected Judas Iscariot. It surely helps to be a deep and probing expert.
      A tyrant and a not first-class business manager can look on presaged, new kings as rivals to get rid of, not help or worship. It's the ancient tradition found in Greece and elsewhere - much common. The best of wise men may read the minds of others. Ther is even documentation on it, and in part centred on Uri Geller, the fork-bender.
      It should be good to refrain from unprovable tenets and don't use it to bolster up the cause. One of the safer marks of cult members is that they can't handle that full well again and again, and yet they need to on the road to professional dealings.
      Now, it helps us to make smart, cogent and proficient use of the very best at hand. If you're Herbert O'Sheep - Son of Sheep - himself, say no to be thought highly of as the descendant of David or Balthasar - and bear it in mind if you can. We should let the God of truth be allowed to be at work in any highly esteemed case as well - go for that.
      Preferably proficient use of the very best at hand should be well founded by historical evidence. The easy-to-inspect documentation had better be stout and relevant to the bone, even rather self-evident in the long run.
      But let's be fair here: if God Himself definitely says one thing and does another, and Paul follows up also, maybe we're not allowed to settle on the next best, but have to insist we're free heirs, sons, not really slaves - and called by God Jesus himself to do greater works than he did. I hope you don't mind. [See John 14;12]
      With these things in mind, feel free to make the best out of it, with little or no ado if you can.
      The often ignored point - to feel free to fit in as a son or daughter of David by someone that's not your real father anyhow, you too, smacks of too low self-esteem. If so, it is not doing greater works than God. Humility isn't that. Just strive to be yourself quite naturally out of the self-esteem that comes naturally from the god inside a Christian man. Anyway, good outfit, a nice wife and many good and savoury things can help against failing here, people often think - they live a lot like that too.
Jesus ..., "I have said you are gods"? - Cf. John 10;34
      "Few are chosen." - Matthew 22;14
If you're not among the chosen few, at least as a Christian you're one of the gods.

TO TOP YOGA SET SITE MAP SECTION SRF TOPICS NEXT


Adjoined

      Ak: Yogananda, Pa.: Man's Eternal Quest. Self-Realization Fellowship. Los Angeles, 1975.
      Ap: Mieder, Wolfgang (main editor), Stewart A. Kingsbury, and Kelsie E. Harder: A Dictionary of American Proverbs. (Paperback) Oxford University, New York, 1996.
      Bao: Blakney, R.: The Way of Life: Lao Tzu: A New Translation of the Tao Te Ching. New American. New York, 1955.
      Brd: Ullman, Montague & Zimmerman, Nan: Bruk dine drømmer. Aventura. Oslo, 1982.
      Coti: Spate, Virginia: The Colour of Time: Claude Monet. Thames and Hudson. London, 1992.
      Cut: Niall, Ian: Country Matters. Unwin Hyman. London, 1988.
      Dal: Schunk, Dale: Learning theories. An educational perspective. 2nd ed. Merrill/Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1996.
      Dp: Fergusson, Rosalind: The Penguin Dictionary of Proverbs. Penguin. Harmondsworth, 1983.
      Dq: Cohen, J. M and M. J: The New Penguin Dictionary of Quotations. Rev. Ed. Viking. London 1992.
      Edo: Fensterheim, Herbert and Baer, Jean: Don't Say "Yes" When You Want To Say "No". Futura. London, 1976.
      Fa: Fadiman, Clifton, ed: The Faber Book of Anecdotes. Faber and Faber. Boston & London, 1985.
      Fcy: George, F.: Philosophical Foundation of Cybernetics. Abacus. Tunbridge Wells, 1979.
      Fuf: Shertzer, Bruce and Stone, Shelley: Fundamentals of Counceling. 2nd ed. Houghton. Boston, 1974.
      Ic: Markert, Christopher: I Ching. The No. 1 Success Formula. Aquarian. Wellingborough, 1988.
      Karl: Sinka, Indra tr: Elskovslæren Kama Sutra. Apostrof. København, 1984.
      Lim: Self-Realization: The Life Story of Dr. M. W. Lewis. SRF. Los Angeles, 1960.
      Lte: Schunk, Dale: Learning theories. An educational perspective. 2nd ed. Merrill/Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1996.
      Lvg: Hamlyn, Paul: North American Mythology. Paul Hamlyn. Feltham, 1968.
      Pa: Yogananda, Pa.: Autobiography of a Yogi. 11th ed. Self-Realization Fellowship. Los Angeles, 1971. – ONLINE 1st edition
      Pocn: Patton, Michael and Meara, Naomi: Psychoanalytic Counceling. Wiley. Chichester, 1992.
      Proe: Bruner, Jerome: The process of education. Harvard University. Cambridge. 1966.
      Psr: Feldman, Robert: Social Psychology: Theories, Research, and Applications. Int ed. McGraw-Hill. New York, 1985.
      Rap: Gupta, M.: The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. Ramakrishna-Vivekananda. New York, 1942.
      Rel: Moody, Raymond: Reflections on Life after Life. Bantam. New York, 1978.
      Say: Yogananda, Pa.: Sayings of Yogananda. Self-Realization Fellowship. Los Angeles, 1958.
      Scu: Barrass, Robert: Scientists Must Write. Chapman and Hall. London, 1978.
      So: Deussen, Paul tr: Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, Vol 1-2. Banarsidass. Varanasi, 1980.
      Suc: Jongeward, Dorothy and Seyer, Philip: Choosing Success: Transactional Analysis on the Job. Wiley. New York, 1978.
      Sue: Luce, Gay & Segal, Julius: Søvn. Gyldendal. Oslo, 1968.
      Tat: Waley, Arthur tr: The Way and Its Power. A Study of the Tao the Ching and Its Place in Chinese Thought. Evergreen/Grove. New York, 1958.
      Thd: Zukav, Gary: The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics. Rider. London, 1979.
      Til: Evans-Wentz, W. ed: The Tibetan Book of the Dead: After-Death Experiences on the Bardo Plane, according to Lama Kazi Dawa-Samdup's English Rendering. Oxford University. London, 1927.
      Tm: Evans-Wentz, W. ed: Tibet's Great Yogi Milarepa. 2nd ed. Oxford University. London, 1969.
      Tmm: Shah, Idries: The Magic Monastery: Analogical and Action Philosophy of the Middle East and Central Asia. Cape. London, 1972.
      Vrtd: Goffman, Erving: Vårt rollespill til daglig. Pax. Oslo, 1992.
      Wic: Yutang, Lin: The Wisdom of China. New English Library. London, 1963.
      Wo: Chatterjee, Satischandra and Datta, Dhirendramohan: An Introduction to Indian Philosophy. 7th ed. University of Calcutta. Calcutta, 1968.
      Zeb: Suzuki, Shunryu: Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind. Weatherhill. New York, 1971.

Literature Layout SITE MAP First Page

CLICK on 'Literature' for the references of about 2000 works.
      ANNOTATIONS: Acronym letters in square brackets in the text refer to works. Click on 'Literature' above for examples. Page references are put right after reference letters. The abbreviation cf. means "compare". [MORE].
      SEARCH THE SITE: Click on the rose in the upper left column for site searches, access to dictionaries, and further.
      REFER to the page by its 'location' address (above).
      PILOTING: Some pictures and texts on top of the pages are clickable, to ease navigation. [MORE]

EMAIL Model Well's Disclaimer
© 1997-2004, T. Kinnes — Updated in Summer 2004