• At a Glance
• A Peek into Yukteswar's Book

SNAPSHOTS: Religion ● Philosophy of religion ● John

At a Glance

Yukteswar's religion

It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. - Mark Twain

Religions are at work in the minds and ways of many people. Yukteswar was a Hindu yogi, and later a swami too. He did not abandon his general adaptations for the sake of Christianity. All the same, he speaks for "the essential unity in religion" [p. 4, 5-6]. If he leaves no good proof in the matter, he voices a belief. There may be a risk that beliefs without good evidence might trick people and make their minds set.

Now, what humans experience depends on themselves, that is, how they are built from bottom and up. In part it also depends on what thoughts their minds have been filled with apart from what they have concluded on their own. This suggests that what you can experience as a Hindu and Christian, is first and foremost restricted to what humans can possibly contain - the design and its potential. As for possible ranges of experiences, possible overloads, and so on, what is outside the range of what is cultivable in someone, looks very unprofitable. Good yoga tries essentially to cultivate the "ground" (body-mind-soul) for extended, delicate and finer experiences, and in part by self-help efforts.

Snapshot 1: Religion

Wikipedia says, "Religion is a cultural system that establishes symbols that relate humanity to spirituality and moral values. "The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with [some publicly professed] faith or belief system. Most religions have organised behaviors, services for the purposes of veneration of a deity or for prayer, holy places and/or scriptures. The practice of a religion may [include] sacrifices,funerary services, music, art, dance, public service, or other aspects of human culture. "The development of religion has taken different forms in different cultures. Some religions place an emphasis on belief, while others emphasize practice. Some religions consider the activities of the religious community to be most important. Some religions claim to be universal, believing their laws and cosmology to be binding for everyone, while others are intended to be practiced only by a closely defined or localized group." The word religion may be derived from "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods," "obligation, the bond between man and the gods", or perhaps "choose", "go over again" or "consider carefully", or "bind, connect", "to reconnect." The philologist Max Müller has found that the root of the English word "religion", the Latin religio, was originally used to mean only "reverence for God or the gods, careful pondering of divine things, piety", and what is called ancient religion today, the acients would have only called "law". Compare the old Indian concept of dharma, law, religion, righteousness. [Source of these selections and abstracts: Wikipedia (s.v. "Religion"]

The science bit

Sciences are typically on quests through the uses of "extended senses" and mental processes "hand in hand": Telescopes are there for extending the range of what may be detected, using infra-red light, ultra-sound, roentgen and more to detect and register what usually lies beyond the human range, and so on.

Thus, astronomy uses telescopes, biology labs use microscopes, and physics use computer-aided "things" while seeking to make out of matter. A science without its own terms, attempts at generalised theories, suitable pieces of equipment and trained people, may be construed, but it belongs to speculative endeavours, and that is where we find much that passes for philosophy.

Most academic subjects have such philosophy branches near their bottoms, so to speak, and they are termed paradigms [Nai]. Paradigms consist of assumptions. Great-looking assumptions that are accepted by the proponents of a rigid-looking discipline, are the backbones of the philosophy of science, the philosophy of mathematics, the philosophy of logic, the philosophy of law, and the philosophy of history, of physics, anthropology, and psychology, for example [cf. Thd]

Yukteswar stands: Philosophical investigations into religion

[Intelligent and] intellectual men in foreign lands . . . famous for their investigations in the realms of science and philosophy, do not recognize the essential unity in religion . . . I was chosen . . . to help in establishing the basic truth in all religions [Yukteswar, Hos 5, 6]."

Yuktewar seems bent on approaching religion through philosophy. Philosophy of religion deals with issues he writes about, namely, quite general phenomena of religion.

But what the philosophy of religion is, is difficult to say, for people disagree about what philosophy and religion are. Anyway, specialists in this flourishing branch of philosophy publish a lot, says Brian Davies. (1993, ix) Maybe you should get a second opinion:

People who speak of God do so by attributing to him certain properties . . . God is also often said to be very different from anything that comes within the range of our experience. . . . Here, then, is the problem. If one says that God is very different from anything else, can one really talk significantly about him at all? . . . Is there not a real dilemma here for those who believe in God? Are they not caught between the stools of meaninglessness and misrepresentation? (Davies 1993, 20)

Snapshot 2: Philosophy of religion

"For the lack of good evidence: discussions, suppressions and at times wars." Philosophy of religion is often discussed outside of academia through popular books and debates. Philosophy of religion is that branch of philosophy concerned with questions about religion, and how God is, where God is, why God is, what God is, if God is at all. It is an ancient way where we examine and analyse religious experiences, religious language and texts and the relationship of religion and science. The philosophy of religion differs from religious philosophy in that it seeks to discuss questions about how religion is as a whole, rather than examining the problems brought forth by a particular belief system. Philosophy of religion relates to many other branches of philosophy and general thought, including Metaphysics, Logic, and History: the philosophy of religion has concerned itself with more than just metaphysical questions. Philosophers of religion can be contrasted with theologians. Theologians sometimes takes as a given than God is, whereas a philosopher of religion examines and critiques the epistemological, logical, aesthetic and ethical foundations inherent in claims of a religion. A philosopher of religion is interested in asking what may be knowable and expressible with regards to dogmatised opinions of religions. There are other topics too, like: "What is the relationship between morality and religion?" What is God?" "What is the meaning of the word God?" Most philosophers want to know the essence of what it means to be God, on the basis of "seeing is believing," or better, "To know God, you have to be God." That goes several steps further than the "Before you judge a woman, walk a mile in her shoes." There are a number of widely different senses of the word 'God.' So first we must get clear on which conception of God we are trying to define. In the canon of "philosophy of religion" it is important to keep to such a canon. Hindus have a widely followed monistic philosophy that can be said to be neither monotheistic nor polytheistic (Advaita Vedanta). Buddhism tends to deal less with metaphysical questions. Monotheism holds there is only one Supreme Spirit, whereas polytheists believe in more than one god(dess): there can be from two to very, very many in Hinduism. Pantheists assert that God is itself the natural universe. Panentheism too holds that the physical universe is part of God, but that God yet is more than this. Panentheism can be summed up as "The world is in God and God is in the world, but God is more than the world and is not synonymous with the world". Theism, pantheism, panentheism, deism, agnosticism and atheism: these positions are considered in the philosophy of religion. Some of them are not mutually exclusive. A great part of the philosophy of religion is a result of theology's assumption that the existence of God can be justified on rational grounds, or its meaning may be elucidated, as in what has come to be called "Contemplative philosophy", a Wittgensteinian school of thought. Among the philosophers of religion are such as Adi Shankara, Augustine of Hippo, Karl Marx and Søren Kierkegaard. [Source. WP, "Hinduism;" "Philosophy of Religion"]

Yukteswar and Self-help Efforts

Yukteswar represents a Hindu outlook on salvation by own efforts at meditation, usually with some help. Buddha advocates something similar, by pointing out the way, and saying something like, "You yourself have to tread it."

Many Christians, on the other hand, tell that the way is one of belief. Belief may serve just as a door-opener to some, if at all. Christian salvation does not ask for methods, but is fellowship with God as a result of the Holy Spirit jumping on persons, so to speak.

That, in essence, is what Acts tell, and also parts of the Gospel of John, which also says the kingdom has come while the other three gospels speak of the coming kingdom only. Yet, in some Catholic orders monks and nuns learn to meditate (contemplate) in various ways. Christian meditation looks much like lojong, and Christian monasticism stems from 4th century Egypt.

The common ground of "the unity" is man and woman and what they are potentially able to experience, and not many forms of dogmatism.

◎ All religions do not agree, and Christianity does not agree with itself in all respects, but contains self-contradictions. [Link]. — [Disagreements in the New Testament].

What Yukteswar is up to, is the goal of mysticism as well

The goal of the way that Yukteswar, is a mystical experience, and his path inwards is a mystical path as well. Can nonmystics judge mystical experiences of others? Can mystical knowledge-claims be compared, and can they conflict? Is it rational to accept mystical knowledge-claims? The thirst for Transcendence, how may it be slaked?

Reading may seldom lead to mystical experiences, but you never know . . .

There are a variety of ways of responding to the question of transcendence, but among those who believe that there are ways of doing so philosophically, one group can be said, roughly, to take the position that philosophy is primarily an epistemological enterprise and religion is not.

But that does not mean that we cannot make a philosophical analysis of religious phenomena. Phenomenological analysis of religion is possible. The presuppositions of religion may be relevant to philosophical thought and the analysis of religious phenomena may shed light on other phenomena. (Faulconer 2003, 2-3, abr.)

Snapshot 3: The Gospel of John

The Gospel of John or simply John, is the fourth of the canonical gospels. It's author is anonymous. Most scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it. The Gospel of John developed over a period of time in various stages till became the gospel that was accepted in the New Testament canon, around 85-90 AD. Over ninety percent of John's Gospel is unique to him, and not in the three other gospels. John presents a "higher" Christology" in that he describes Jesus as the incarnation of the divine Logos through whom all things were made, as God incarnate. John seeks to to identify Jesus as the eternal Word (Logos) of God. The gospel does so by adapting the doctrine of the Logos, God's creative principle, from Philo of Alexandria, a first-century Hellenized Jew. Philo had adopted the term Logos from Greek philosophy, using it in place of the Hebrew concept of Wisdom (sophia). So Logos (Word) is a term from Greek philosophy, where it meant the principle of cosmic reason. In this sense, it was similar to the Hebrew concept of wisdom, Yahweh's companion and intimate helper in creation. The synoptics look forward to a future, coming Kingdom of God (using the term parousia, while John says it has come already, presenting salvation as already present for the believer. The Kingdom of God is mentioned only twice in John. In contrast, the other gospels repeatedly use the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven as important concepts. Parables and exorcisms are not found in John. To most Bible scholars, the differences between the teaching in John and in the three other gospels are substantial, and already acknowledged in the early Church. For example, John the Baptist publicly proclaims Jesus to be the Lamb of God. The Baptist recognises Jesus secretly in Matthew, and not at all in Mark or Luke. John also denies that he is Elijah, whereas Mark and Matthew identify him with Elijah. The majority viewpoint for most of the 20th century is that Jesus' teaching in John is largely irreconcilable with that found in the three other gospels, and scholars have chosen the version found in the other gospels as representing the teaching of the historical Jesus. The teachings of Jesus in John are distinct from those found in the synoptic gospels, that is, the three other gospels, but "the final word has not been said on how much of the historical Jesus inhabits John's gospel," and John has affected modern Christianity notably. Raymond Brown maintains that John's "picture of a savior who came from an alien world above, who said that neither he nor those who accepted him were of this world, [17:14] and who promised to return to take them to a heavenly dwelling [14:2-3] could be fitted into the gnostic world picture (even if God's love for the world in 3:16 could not)." It has been suggested that similarities between John's Gospel and Gnosticism may spring from common roots in Jewish Apocalyptic literature. Thus, John has elements in common with Gnosticism. Christian Gnosticism did not fully develop until the mid-2nd century. Comparisons to Gnosticism are based in John's use of the concepts of Logos and Light. Gnosticism taught that salvation came from gnosis, secret knowledge, and Gnostics did not see Jesus as a saviour. The noncanonical Dead Sea Scrolls suggest an early Jewish origin, parallels and similarities to the Essene Scroll, and Rule of the Community. Many phrases are duplicated in the Gospel of John and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Moreover, the mysterious Egerton Gospel may represent a parallel but independent tradition to the Gospel of John. Liberal scholar Robert W. Funk and the Jesus Seminar place the Egerton fragment in the 2nd century, perhaps as early as 125, which would make it as old as the oldest fragments of John. In John, Jesus says, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life. He echoes Yahweh's own statements with several "I am" declarations that also identify him with symbols of major significance. Critical scholars think that these claims represent the Christian community's faith in Jesus' divine authority but doubt that the historical Jesus actually made these sweeping claims. [Source: WP, "Gospel of John"]

~ೞ⬯ೞ~

A Peek into Yukteswar's Book

Yukteswar's book is furnished with an introduction, four chapters and a conclusion. The four chapters are said to reflect four stages in the development of knowledge. The chapters are called (1) the Gospel, (2) the Goal, (3) the Procedure and (4) the Revelation. You may consider the following chapter summaries an hors d'oeuvre:

1. Gist of the Gospel Chapter. A fit point of his Gospel chapter is that God "is "not comprehensible by man of this material world unless he becomes divine [p. 21-22]" and "the root of all power and joy [p. 22]." Then he goes on to say how the world as humans perceive it, has been "transformed down" from Spirit levels and delineates how; his Samkhya view [p. 23-32].

Yukteswar further tells the universe consists of fourteen spheres: seven heavens and seven patalas. In Hindu mythology the patalas make up the infernal subregions, supposed to be inhabited by various classes of supernatural serpents and other beings. Yukteswar tells that when man is turning toward his Self and advances well, he perceives light in these regions of hell, and compares them to the seven candlesticks and churches in Revelation - all in hellish places, he says. That is his understanding of it. [p. 32-35]

Going on, Yukteswar says the soul or monad is covered by five sheaths, five koshas, and delineates them. What he calls the Heart, also Atom, is the innermost of these coverings. He says there are different kingdoms of nature: the one called the inanimate kingdom, the vegetable kingdom, animal kingdom. Further upwards: mankind, angel, free (Sannyasi, the Son of God) [p. 35-38]

He also comes to the conclusion that the Voice in Revelation and John is Aum, and that Radha, otherwise well known as Krishna's mistress for a while, is symbolised in the Bible as John the Baptist [p. 40]. Though Radha was the wife of another cowherd, she was the most beloved of Krishna's consorts and his constant companion. In the bhakti movement of Vaishnavism, Radha symbolises the human soul and Krishna the divine. Radha is often worshiped along with Krishna. The question is what Yukteswar means by the word Radha. He does not explain it; he just draws a parallel to "mistress John".

Yukteswar says that true comprehension understands "the nothingness of the external world [p. 39]." Is he for real? Saying so, he does not exactly underpin his other message, that to attain Self-knowledge, "knowledge of the external world is necessary [p. 6]," does he? You may come to wonder, "If the outer world is nothing, why write so much about it? Why write at all? Is not everything Yukteswar has written, nothingness (of the external world)? And he too in his outward aspect?" - and so on.

Yukteswar-understanding for common persons: "God and the universe; the incomprehensible and nothing at all."

The second birth is to be absorbed in "the holy stream of the sound" [from the Ganges, Jamuna, and/or Jordan Rivers], and from there on true comprehension advances, Yukteswar says further. Jamuna is the main distributary channel of the Brahmaputra River. [p. 40-41]

The clear heart manifests great Light from within, and so man becomes Christ the Saviour, and saved for ever and ever, Yukteswar goes on to tell. [p. 41-42]

Kaivalya, "isolation, aloneness" is next [p. 43]

2. Gist of the Goal Chapter. According to Yukteswar, the highest aim of religion is Atma-jnanam, Self-knowledge, and salvation means residing in the real Self [p. 46]. But to attain Self-knowledge, knowledge of the external world is necessary, he says too [p. 6]. Well, in kriya yoga you "just" have to breathe in and out in the regulated ways, and are not asked to know anything at all about the lifestyles and customs of Eskimos, for example. Let Ramakrishna concur:

"I have come to the garden to eat mangoes. What is the use of my calculating the number of trees, branches, and leaves? I only eat the mangoes; I don't need to know the number of trees and leaves." [Goa 217-18]

On another occasion he said:

You have come to the orchard to eat mangoes; what need is there of knowing how many . . . branches and millions of leaves there are in the orchard?" [Goa 411]

What Ramakrishna speaks for, is enjoying divine bliss, by a figurative expression. Compare Yukteswar's:

"All creatures, from the highest to the lowest in the link of creation, are found eager to realize three things: Existence, Consciousness, and Bliss," says Yukteswar [Hos 6].

That is the ancient Hindu God-concept of Sat-Chit-Ananda. However:

• People take existence for granted as long as it lasts, just like good health.
• They fill their waking consciousness with games and glamour models, but not all seek to make progress in deep meditation or develop useful sides to their minds. Schools serve for cramming content into the minds for a while, and so on.
• They seek joys or stabilisation in regular goings, joys of things, of conquests, and of having money to have many of their desires fulfilled somehow, some ways or others.

In short, they rarely bore deep into Existence itself; they rarely seek to cultivate their inner minds full well for so-called Awakening or Illumination; and they seek joys in outer things and relations, and not so much by going into Joy Itself.

One may say the majority is not taught how to do it, how to approach the inner sides of humans and explore them safely. Yukteswar says man is bound by tenacious ignorance, egoism, attachment, and aversion, and in consequence suffers. [p. 46-49] However, if he gets a good guru and follows his precepts, he is on the way of working on his salvation toward contentment, ananda (usually: bliss, joy). Man follows up and focuses inwards in yogic manner and reaches "the door of the interior world". [p. 51, 39] I think Yukteswar refers to the space between the eyebrows by that. Further, the mantra-spirit of Hamsa is said to reside there. However, Yukteswar does not specify what he means by what he writes here either, so I let it rest.

Man manages to comprehend his own Self as Real Substance, and the clean heart becomes one with Eternal Spirit, God the Father, is Yukteswar's teaching [p. 51-53]. Hindu scriptures do not agree whether the realised jiva (soul, individualised spirit), actually unites with Brahman or was Brahman all along, waking up. That should be noted.

3. Gist of the Procedure Chapter. Yukteswar says the way to go, the procedure, is of penance toward purity, and includes hearing definite truths, and meditate on the Aum sound. Penance. [p. 55]

While penance is far from "natural living," Yukteswar speaks of three sides to living:(a) select food, (b) dwelling and (c) company.

(a) Natural food suits the organs of man, says he, and points at the form of the teeth, the length of the digestive canal, natural tendencies or tastes, and settles on man as a frugivorous (fruit-eating) being, but he allows for vegetables, nuts, grains and milk too. As many Hindus otherwise, he is not for eating steak, regarddless of expertise in handling it, making it tender, spiced, tasty, and so on. [p. 62]

(b) Yukteswar speaks for breathing fresh air on the mountaintop, the field, the garden, or a dry place under trees covering a lange plot of land and freely ventilated with fresh air to be the proper dwelling place for man. Egyptians found out that houses surrounded by gardens and walls made pleasant life possible. Disgusting weather and other hazard can threaten a lot people unless there are houses carefully planned and organised for at least good enough living. [p. 69]

(c) Much depends on the company you keep. Conscience and liking help in not letting usuitable, asat company shorten our lives, he goes on. [p. 69-70]

Yukteswar says that monastic confinement for the purpose of suppressing the passions seldom produce the desired effect, contrary to what he says his favoured diet can [p. 62-68]. Be that as it may, a study that was published in the British Medical Journal in 2006, - of thousands of men and women - revealed that those who stick to a vegetarian diet have IQs that are around five points higher than those who regularly eat meat. The researchers, from the University of Southampton, had tracked the fortunes of more than 8,000 volunteers for 20 years for the findings. [1]

The kriya guru Yukteswar further talks against a too narrow sense of respectability, and for the value of a good heart, for a steady and pleasant mediation posture, for pranayama (gentle breathing methods), and for pratyahara. His delineations here follows suit with steps of Patanjali yoga. The gur speaks for being "dead" for a while, so that man can wake up naturally again after enjoying a full rest, and live as long as he likes in his present body. At this point he - like his disciple Yogananda - draws in Paul's "I die daily." Adjusting to the American public, though, Yogananda soon toned down the marketing value of "dying at will," which featured in his The Science of Religion [More] [p. 71-75]

Yukteswar's aim is fixed attention toward the purified heart, and in such a state the scene is set for doing samyama and be turned into a divine being. Samyama or sanyama means "mixing dharana, dhyana and samadhi", that is, focusing in deeper meditation states goes a long way. And, as man progresses in meditating deeply, his heart goes from dark to clean through three stages in between them, says Yukteswar. [p. 75-80]

Yukteswar mentions seven realms, seven swargas (heavens) or lokas, in the purification way toward Divinity, toward becoming "Christ, the Savior", a "Jivanmukta Sannyasi, like Lord Jesus", and gets another view of the universe than the ordinary one. [p. 80-86]

4. Gist of the Revelation Chapter. Yukteswar speaks for the value of purifications in this chapter too - bodily cleansing, by yoga breathing methods, mantras for the mind. He talks for yogic dos and don't', niyamas and yamas as they are spelled out in Patanjali. Grace and meditation lets man see the seven golden candlesticks, chakras, in his own body. Yukteswar names them as they often are named, and says, "Through these seven centers of churches, the Ego or son of man passes toward the Divinity". [p. 87-92]

Passing through the heavens man becomes possessed of all majesties, another term for yogic powers. He can make you as small as he likes down to the size of an atom, or as big as he likes, or as light or heavy as he likes. Further, he can get anything he likes, can bring anything under his control, and satisfying all desires by his will. And he can become the Lord over everything. These are the eight majesties Yukteswar speaks of. And finally: Eternal Spirit. [p. 92-96]

Yukteswar's conclusion. Yukteswar concluded with a well-meaning "Never . . . forget the great goal of life."