SRF Walrus
Mt. Washington, Ca
Open discussions about SRF
Gold Community SRF Walrus
    > Non-SRF Teachings and Ideals
        > Western Gurus -- Thoughts and Experiences
New Topic    Add Reply

Page 1 2 3 4

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
Author Comment
Registered User
(8/20/03 4:26 am)
Georg Feuerstein, Sex, and Secrecy
Georg Feuerstein (see www.yrec.org/yrec.html) is a "guru" in the sense of a "spiritual teacher." I became aware of him through Marshall Govindan (who is a disciple of Babaji and the leader of the organization, "Babaji's Kriya Yoga"). He teaches mainly through his numerous books, and through his writings posted on the internet. He is "interested in exploring the physiological and psychological knowledge embedded in the Yoga tradition that can significantly aid in our modern quest for health and wholeness."

From the above, you'd think he'd be interested in sharing his knowledge of yoga, yogis, and healers, in order to promote "our modern quest for health and wholeness."

On his website, under "Writing in the Light: An Interview with Georg Feuerstein," he wrote:

"I was also hoping for a healer to assist me in taking care of some health problems I was having at the time. I found such a person in the form of a teacher of Tibetan Buddhism (Vajrayâna)."

Feuerstein is into secrecy. When I emailed him to find out who the healer was, he refused to tell me. I don't know why, and he wouldn't say why. Perhaps he was less than sincere when he wrote that he wanted to promote "our modern quest for health and wholeness." In my opinion, if he doesn't want to share the identity of a healer, he should make no public reference to the healer. What's the point of letting others know that while he, Feuerstein, thinks he is worthy of the attention of a great Tibetan healer, he doesn't think any of the rest of us is worthy?

Feuerstein sometimes replies to emails but usually doesn't. On the whole, recently, he seems to ignore inquiries, even when they are sincere and important. He uses insulting form letters with inappropriate information to reply to most inquiries. If he doesn't wish to be contacted, perhaps he should remove his email address from his website.

Feuerstein "recommend[s] that people practice Yoga in its traditional context, which is highly diversified." In fact, I do think you can learn an enormous amount about traditional yoga on his excellent, extensive website.

I think Feuerstein has a good, healthy attitude toward sex. In his online article, "SEX, ASCETICISM, AND MYTHOLOGY," he tells an amusing story from the Skanda-Purâna, which "portrays God Shiva as displaying a range of very human character traits." He writes that "Shiva’s eroticism is a slap in the face for all those ascetics who associate their personal salvation with sexual sublimation or, worse, with rigid control of the natural appetites."

I also think Feuerstein is quite paranoid. On his website, which I highly recommend for its many fascinating and useful articles, he has posted the following notice:
This site is provided by YREC on an "as is" basis. YREC makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation of the site, the information, content, materials or products, included on this site. To the full extent permissible by applicable law, YREC disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to, implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. YREC will not be liable for any damages of any kind arising from the use of this site, including but not limited to direct, indirect, incidental punitive and consequential damages."
The above notice strikes me as quite bizarre and totally unnecessary. The only thing it really tells us is that Feuerstein is rather paranoid. In addition, based on my knowledge of the law, I truly doubt that the notice increases Feuerstein´s protection from nutty potential plaintiffs, as I suspect it´s an invalid `disclaimer.´ You can´t avoid getting sued just by spouting off disclaimers.

It´s almost impossible, in any event, to imagine anyone suing Feuerstein based on anything in his website. What´s he afraid of? In the U.S., we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and people who write the sort of thing Feuerstein writes haven´t been persecuted for doing so in recent memory. If he started attracting disciples and then abusing them, like Yogi Ramaiah, Swami Chetenananda, or the late Rajneesh/Osho, he might then very well get sued. None of these people could avoid getting sued just by distributing disclaimers.

Edited by: prssmd at: 9/2/03 11:15 am
Registered User
(8/20/03 5:56 am)
Re: Georg Feuerstein, Sex, and Secrecy
Two things, Feuerstein may not trust you because he simply doesn't know who you are and his healer may not be that open to having his (I'm assuming it's a he) name given out, so it may be the Tibetan who is into secrecy. Tibetans are only recently inclined to teaching non-Tibetans. They were a closed society for quite some time. Just a suggestion for how to think of the experience you had.

Secondly, sex is a very symbolic paradigm for creation. The Shaivite and Shaktite groups are very much about working through Maya, as opposed to denying the reality of Maya, so it may mean more than just 'sex'.


Registered User
(8/21/03 5:25 pm)
Gurunath, aka "Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath"
Gurunath & Osho.
I met Guru-nut (who teaches in the U.S. and is therefore in that sense a Western Guru)(www.hamsayoga.org/whoisgurunath.html) not too long ago at his place near Pune in India. (Pune is the headquarters of the "spiritual health club" that is the successor to the former ashram of Osho/Rajeesh, the guy who committed many crimes in Oregon in the '80's, was jailed briefly, and then deported. (As Krishnamurti said of Osho, "The man is a criminal.") The most amusing thing that happened to me at the Osho Club was meeting a very young, disappointed Israeli guy who said, unfortunately quite correctly, "I thought everyone was supposed to be having sex with everyone else here, but that isn't happening." Nowadays if you want what that frustrated Israeli was looking for, you have to go to the red-light district. The best book on Osho/Rajeesh is by Hugh Milne, called Bhagwan: The God That Failed, London: Caliban Books, 1986.)

Anyway, he (Guru-nut, that is) told me that he was "THE master" or "THE sadguru" (I can't remember which) and that "All others are small fry."

When Guru-nut taught me some techniques (calling this an "initiation" and charging US$108 for it, which is far more than he charges Indians for exactly the same "teaching"), he rushed through them at a fast pace--much too fast for me to learn them. He said he'd hold two follow-up sessions, but he didn't. He refused to answer any questions about spiritual matters during the entire week I was with him. The only activities he seemed to enjoy during the week were eating, going into Pune with selected students, taking long walks, and endlessly discussing trivial, mundane topics. I believe he led one or two singing sessions. His students were, with only two exceptions (one of whom is an extremely capable and serious yogi who also teaches Babaji's Kriya Yoga), the most unimpressive "spiritual students" I have ever met. Some of them had serious psychological problems; others smoked dope all day long; hardly anyone practiced any sadhana. The week was pretty much a waste of time. Although he may, perhaps, KNOW a great deal about meditation, I think it would be quite difficult to learn much from Guru-nut.

Edited by: prssmd at: 8/21/03 5:49 pm
Registered User
(8/22/03 11:13 am)
Re: The Mother of God (mother of Andrew Cohen)
I've just read this article about Andrew Cohen and how his mother, from my understanding, has lost contact with him or respect because he has taken a position of authority?

"Now, she said, "I don't believe you need anybody. I feel that anything that will happen to you will come from you and not from outside of you."

I don't know much about him or his teachings but, on the issue of needing a spiritual guide or guru, Yogananda makes a series of sound and truthful arguments. He asks a question, something to the effect of, "Suppose you wanted to learn how to fly a plane. Wouldn't it be better to go learn from an experienced pilot than to go out by yourself?" To this, the lady replies, Why, of course." and PY responds, "Then why would you try to master yoga or self-realization by yourself, making countless mistakes and wrong turns when you can have an experienced guru help you out?"
Furthermore, he makes an analogy of someone getting lost or being placed in a forrest. Now, of course you can eventually and finally find a way out of the forrest, by countless attempts in different directions, but why not get a map? a guru serves like a map, pointing you in the right direction. We are all born into this world-forrest and a map or a realized guru is an intelligent choice for those who are interested in finding their way out sooner.

I am writing this from memory. I read this in "The Essence of Self-Realization" edited by Donald Walters. One of my favorite books.

Registered User
(9/30/03 1:04 am)
Saying Unkind Things about teachers
There are many factual things that need to be said about spiritual teachers, even if they seem unkind. We must not be afraid of the truth, as etzchaim and masterschela are. Those of us who study yoga and meditation need to be aware of the facts.

Registered User
(10/9/03 6:49 am)
Etzchaim's personal attacks on me.
Etzchaim's personal attacks undermine rational discussion of the facts.

Etzchaim states that judging from the many posts I have made here, I must be eager to create enemies.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, I would love to be friends with the various people I have discussed on SRF Walrus. But that doesn't prevent me from discussing the facts.

What disturbs me the most about some of the postings on this website is the unwillingness of many people to face the facts, and instead to engage in personal attacks of the sort that Etzchaim engages in. Ananda staff that I have dealt with are also other examples of people who behave this way.

One thing I have especially noticed about Ananda is how quickly they lapse into a refusal to communicate. Refusal to communicate should be a last resort. Instead, Ananda uses it as practically a first resort. The minute you say something they don't like, they treat you as an enemy and refuse to communicate with you.

Edited by: prssmd at: 10/9/03 6:50 am
Registered User
(10/12/03 9:22 am)
Re: communication problems
"The minute you say something they don't like, they treat you as an enemy and refuse to communicate with you. "

Thanks for that observation. I don't communicate much with other devotees. However, I started to renew a contact with someone, a former SRF member, who went to live at Ananda.

Our communications were cordial until I asked about Ananda neighbor Gary Snyder whom I regard as an American Tagore. The response was...well, no response or any further comunication.

Later on I found out that back in the 60's Mr Walters was a partner with Snyder and Allen Ginzberg in purchasing a parcel of land near Nevada City. The mutual agreement was that the property not be developed for non-personal use. Of course, Walters forming Ananda flexed that understanding enormously.

Much later, I contacted another Ananda member who located my "friends," contacted them and was given their e-mail address to forward to me. I tried to renew our communication again and brought up the question of what happened.

I thought my naturalist friends may have found Snyder's Kitkitditzee retreat more to their liking than Ananda. No reply once again. Now I understand. Sad and bizarre considering Mr Anandamoy's suggestion on the Spiritual Marriage tape to keep on talking has helped me many times.

Registered User
(10/13/03 8:18 am)
Re: Saying Unkind Things about teachers

I never used to agree with this statement you made, but now I do: "There are many factual things that need to be said about spiritual teachers, even if they seem unkind. We must not be afraid of the truth, as etzchaim and masterschela are. Those of us who study yoga and meditation need to be aware of the facts", but they must be facts and not just idle gossip. Certain things are said on this board that are true about SRF and need saying, and there are things that are just heresy. But how many people on this board have spent just as much time investigating Yogananda as they have SRF? Very few. He is the untouchable, and maybe that is okay, because people who come to this board believe him to be their guru and believe that all the fault lies in SRF and need to believe this. If Yogananda were not really who he claimed to be, most would not be ready to hear it and would actually come to his defense and eat you alive. My feeling is, your coming on the board putting down other gurus, makes people fear that Yogananda will be next on your list. Plus, this board really isn't about other gurus, but just the same, if you have been burned once by an organization or even by a guru, you need to be more careful next time, and so you need to investigate, but at the same time, make sure you only listen to the facts. I once put down srflongago because he was putting down Yogananda, and perhaps I should have listened harder to him, but I didn't want to hear what he had to say, so I did what I could to chase him off the board, and he left. So if you feel your messages are being deleted, you must realize that some things are hard to listen to. People have enough problems just in dealing with what they have learned to be true about SRF. Putting down gurus is a very touchy subject, and one must never put down someone's guru to that person, no matter what that guru has done. They will have to find out for themselves through their own investigation, and if they don't choose to do so, then they deserve to have the guru who they have chosen even if he is a rogue.

Registered User
(10/14/03 3:08 am)
Re: Saying Unkind Things about teachers
chela2020 writes, "One must never put down someone's guru to that person, no matter what that guru has done." I don't agree with this statement--chela2020's attitude, in my opinion, reflects sympathy for the sort of dogmatic guru-worship that should be stamped out in the modern world or at least the world of educated people. Nowadays we (especially those of us who use the internet!) are all members of a global community, and communication isn't something we should fear. If a Christian is presented with Nietzsche's view that Christianity is a slave morality, and this causes that Christian to reflect on whether Christianity is in fact right for him, I wouldn't say we've done a terrible thing by presenting him with Nietzsche--I'd say we've done a great thing by helping this person extract his head from the sand in which it was buried.

When we try to suppress ideas, we are acting like those Christian fundamentalists who want to make available on the internet only that which is fit for children.

If followers of a guru are on the right path, then they have nothing to fear by being exposed to ideas that are critical of that guru.

Speaking of Christianity, there are intelligent Christians and there are unintelligent Christians. The same thing could be said of followers of gurus in the Hindu yogic tradtion.

It's instructive to notice what blind adherence to religious dogma can lead to--just look at the Islamic terrorism that has, in the past 20 years, lead to tens of thousands of deaths of innocent people all over the world.

Edited by: prssmd at: 10/14/03 3:14 am
Registered User
(10/14/03 5:49 am)
Re: Saying Unkind Things about teachers

I would just never again put down Yogananda on this board to those who love him. The guru is your father and your mother, and how would you feel if someone put down your own parent even if it were the truth? I once trashed Yogananda on this board when I left SRF, but I deleted it all because it did not feel right. I didn't have all the facts about him anyway, plus, the people here love Yogananda, and if anyone wishes to know the truth about him or any guru, yes, they should investigate, but it is not up to me to go around trashing their guru to their faces. So I would not say that I have some "dogmatic guru-worship" going on, because I believe in investigating gurus thoroughly--over and over again. And I said that in my posting. I have investigated Yogananda as much as I have been able to and continue to do so. Have you investigated your own guru, and if so, how?

You also wrote: “There are many factual things that need to be said about spiritual teachers, even if they seem unkind. We must not be afraid of the truth...Those of us who study yoga and meditation need to be aware of the facts. What disturbs me the most about some of the postings on this website is the unwillingness of many people to face the facts.”

The members of Walrus on this website have spent the last few years sorting out facts about SRF. If they are interested in sorting out facts about Yogananda, they can do that also, and some have, but it isn't easy when he has already left the body. What facts have you come up with that you feel people are unwilling to come up with? Are there some facts that those of us here are missing?

But basically, what is it inside you that needs to put down other gurus? If you feel it is because you want to save others, then you are not taking into consideration that we all come to a certain guru or organization due to our own karma, and we have to work that out before we can move on. Don't you believe that God knows what he is doing? I have always considered that I needed to be in SRF to learn certain lessons, so why would anyone want to deny me that? If I end up with a guru who is a rogue, then I needed to learn a lesson from that too.

Edited by: chela2020 at: 10/14/03 6:24 am
Registered User
(10/16/03 6:34 am)
Re: Etzchaim's personal attacks on me.

I believe it was the personal attacks that people were making of other Gurus, yourself included, that I took offense to, but I apologize for the statement I made about you.

Much of my reaction to you is coming from the reactionary approach you have shown towards many types of people and teachers. You have what appears to me to be an unforgiving, accusatory approach. If you can't get a technique, you blame others for this, rather than reflecting on the possibility that the fault may perhaps lie in your approach and the fact that you many not be ready to receive the techniques, or that it may be unreasonable to expect people to welcome you and initiate you when you first arrive. There is an impatience about you and an assumption that you should be able to get something by the mere fact that you asked. Life doesn't work that way. Vegetables do not grow from the ground without someone planting them and nurturing them. That you cannot walk into Jerusalem and be given a Kabbalistic technique simply because you are there and think you should get it, incites anger and frustration in you, but did you till the ground, plant the seed and water it before you asked? Are you expecting to have a meal ready made when you have done nothing yet to grow it? Many people are working on gathering the techniques for dissemination, but even those who are prone towards a more open approach will not give the techniques away simply because the person in question believes they should get them. Preparation and humility is rather key to receiving a gift of this nature. It is legitimate to say that the techniques should be disseminated more openly, but quite another to demand them simply because you exist.

I apologize, once again, if you think this is a personal attack, but you've set up the situation where I have to explain myself and I'm not immune to being reactionary myself.

An example that demonstrates the 'attack-mode' you are in was given when you have catagorically 'de-souled' the Palestinians - and then after stating that they must not have souls, you stated that you didn't know what a soul was! This is not rational discussion. If you think it is, I suggest you pull back and think some more. Most Palestinians, and most people in general, are reacting to the situations they are born into, and since I am familiar with, and have contact with people who are sincerely trying to build bridges in Israel, I'm well aware that there are powerful groups controlling the situation in the Territories, or Yesha, if you prefer, who are doing great damage to any kind of reconcilliation that could take place. Many people are at fault in this situation, including our own government and I'm not just talking about Republican administrations previous to the current ones who built up the region for the sake of oil money. It's far too complicated to discuss here, aside from being inappropriate. Hatred only breeds hatred and blind hatred is not rational, so if you believe you are making rational arguments, I respectfully disagree with you. There are no easy answers for any issue within humanity's quagmire of loves, hates, loyalties and collection of 'enemies' and 'friends'. I'm as pro-Israel as a person can get, but I don't believe that that should include dehumanizing the enemy, even if my enemy dehumanizes me. Love breeds love and hatred breeds hatred. There is a difference between self-protection and feeding the fire. I do believe it will take many people with much wisdom to peacefully solve the problems in the Middle East, and I am not hopeful.

In America, people are afraid of lawsuits because we have a lawsuit culture, and a culture of 'getting mine' before others 'get theirs' and then setting up barriers so that what 'I have' is not lost to those who 'do not have', especially if they are my 'enemy' - and I could say that most people become defensive because we have a culture of attacking when we should be dialoguing. I know you are conscious of this in other people, but are you conscious of this in yourself? Do you hear how you sound? The question is retorical and not meant to be a personal attack, just a question for reflection.

Calling Gurunath "Guru-nut" is not rational discussion and while I have no idea of the exchange you had with Ananda, I can, actually, make an educated guess that you came across to them as abrasive, because you do so here. I'm not excusing Ananda. I'm certain that they have their issues. All of us do. I do. You can point them out to me, if you wish - perhaps I will learn from it, perhaps I will block it out with the humanity I, like you, are subject to.

I do not think it is constructive to continuously point out other peoples faults. I'm well aware that I have learned immensely from imperfect people, so my question for you, Prssmd, is: When we have filled these pages with criticism of others, and we are aware of their faults, what do we gain? Do we then catagorically judge all people to be imperfect and not worth their salt? What do we learn?

Here's what I think: if we attempted to separate ourselves from all the people, teachers, Gurus, Chelas, whole nations, who display faults and are imperfect, we would not even be able to live with ourselves, because we are constantly doing things that are faulty, even you and me. I also believe it's is not what is being said, it is the act of 'attack' that is being reacted to. When we attack, we can be sure that we have put that energy into the world, and we will then have to defend ourselves form attack. It's very simple.

It's not the knowledge of imperfection, and the discussion of peoples faults I object to. It's the whining, the hatred, and the finger pointing; the unwillingness to accept the imperfection of humanity without the ability to keep it within reason. We are all imperfect because we are parts of a perfect whole and our vision is limited. The tendency to catagorically deny the value and dehumanize or degrade the 'imperfect ones', is not constructive. It's not rational. Rational, in a spiritual sense, is to extend our understanding with the full knowledge that all of us have ugliness within us, but we learn from our own imperfections.

Do I believe my Guru is perfect? Do I believe that Yogananda is perfect? Do I believe myself to be perfect? Hell no. On all accounts.

Let me put it this way: I read the court proceedings that came from Donald Walters trial - the accounts from the women, and what he did. After some time considering the situation, I concluded that there was both an abuse of power, and a willingness on the part of the women to either participate or their own failure to listen to their own instinctive reaction that something was very wrong about the situation they were in, and they should extricate themselves from it immediately. That they didn't, implies that they had some karma.

This is an idea that is abused quite frequently, and I've read personal and second-hand accounts on the Walrus that demonstrate the abuse of this idea within SRF. To me, it is more important and more constructive to teach people how to listen to their intuition and that we can learn to not bring other peoples bad karma to them; that karma can be softened and burned off in the Astral plane, than it is to ruminate on the fact that people do, in fact bring other peoples bad karma to them quite frequently. While we cannot control the actions of others, we can put efforts toward controlling our own, and that includes our actions of accepting the bad karma that is laid at our feet.

I do question whether my knowledge will be accepted here, or a rational discussion can occur. I have learned that some people here have catagorically judged my teacher as a 'quack', or illigitimate because he is married and has an order of non-renunciate Swamis, without ever having met him or read anything he wrote, while at the same time hold Yogananda to a standard that is valid only in the world of fantasy. Fundamentialists get into the idea of everything being 'exactly they way they learned it' for anything to be 'true'. I'm only concerned with whether or not I grow in wisdom and whether the techniques I have work in the way they should be working. I'm not convinced that those who have criticized the techniques I have (without even having the details of them) have actually benefitted from their more "correct" techniques. It doesn't look like they have, and many people I know, who don't breath Kriya at all, but use other techniques, appear to be more enlightened!

When I have stated that Yogananda had some faults, or it became known that Shelley stated that Yogananda was not perfect, or completely realized, that made people irrationally 'hate' Shelley! You see, I don't believe Shelley knew everything, I don't believe he was completely enlightened, I don't believe my Guru is and I also don't believe that Yogananda was. I honestly don't care! What I do believe, is that it is wrong to take another persons fault, or imperfection, and catagorically dismiss them and their teachings. I think we would then never learn a damn thing and would spend all our valuable time struggling with disillusionment and bitterness! I do know that if I make a judgment of another person based on superficial knowledge, I'm not contributing much to the development of wisdom in humanity. I make these judgments, don't get me wrong, but I try not to take them too seriously.

I'm also not a Spiritual Materialist. I don't believe that Kriya is all it's cracked up to be - it was packaged for America and in a very clever way, but the packaging is getting dated and it's not necessary, except for the fact that people like packaging. It's not a pancea, it a very good set of techniques among several also very good techniques. People do not get enlightened from techniques, in my opinion. People become enlightened through growing in wisdom that enables them to soften their karma, increase their ability to listen to the wisdom of others and their own wisdom, and mature spiritually, which produces less karmic particles that they have to burn off. The rotation of the energy up the spine and then down, is not unique to Kriya. Kriya is only a set of techniques among many equally viable techniques and many people have become enlightened through less fancy ones, while many people have remained course and unenlighted while practicing Kriya. Hong Sau is even sufficient for some, or simply emptying the mind. Sometimes it's the decidedly unflashy techniques that work the best, like self-introspection, lets say, an unglamorous option, if you ask me!

In my opinion, the problem with Gurus and teachers is our expectations of them. There are indeed abusers among them, and this needs to be pointed out, but there are also many people who are passively expecting to be enlightened by them, or passively taught by them, handed the jewels without earning them, and demanding that they only teacher they deserve be perfect! Our egos get involved, and then,despite reality, only OUR teacher is perfect. This works especially well when the teacher is dead. Myths can be created by those who have the ego-based power to build up the false image and those who have the humongous egos to believe that they deserve a perfect teacher and nothing less, fall right into the trap! Many of the 'abusers' are facilitated by those who are fascinated by the tricks they use. We love glamour! We don't have to do any deep work then! If we can teach each other to not be enthralled by the tricks, the authority, and the titles and the 'magic' and shiny baubles, then they will not have the power to abuse. It's US who gave them the authority in the first place, and it's quite often us who want the same kind of recognition and ego-inflation that got these people, and ourselves in trouble in the first place.

I see absolutely nothing of value in ruminating over the faults of others. There is only value in teaching others to recognize the pitfalls and burn off the karma that drives us into the suffering we experience.

If you wish to continue to 'rationally' discuss the liars and the false ones, go right ahead, but don't forget to include me and, especially yourself! I'll focus elsewhere.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 10/16/03 7:51 am
Registered User
(10/16/03 11:08 am)
Re: Etzchaim's personal attacks on me.

Your are very wise.

Registered User
(10/23/03 12:14 pm)
Re: Etzchaim's personal attacks on me.
Your apology is accepted.

In discussing misconduct by gurus, the most important thing is to focus on what actually took place. The question is, ´What did I personally observe`? Those are the most useful reports. Such reports of the facts shouldnt be construed as personal attacks.

Registered User
(10/23/03 12:18 pm)
Re: Etzchaim's remarks on Kriyananda
Etzchaim writes: `Let me put it this way: I read the court proceedings that came from Donald Walters trial - the accounts from the women, and what he did. After some time considering the situation, I concluded that there was both an abuse of power, and a willingness on the part of the women to either participate or their own failure to listen to their own instinctive reaction that something was very wrong about the situation they were in, and they should extricate themselves from it immediately. That they didn't, implies that they had some karma.`

Well, I wasnt there to watch it but it is a typical situation in America these days when an adult woman voluntarily and willingly gets involved in a sexual relationship with a man and later decides that she was coerced. It is a terrible shame that many tens of thousands of American men have had their careers destroyed by this sort of slander and libel.

Registered User
(10/23/03 3:16 pm)
Re: Etzchaim's remarks on Kriyananda
Friend, I am not at all clear where you are coming from in this last post

Registered User
(10/23/03 3:22 pm)
specific examples from your life might help
I from my direct experience and for those closest to me through the years know and accept:

That while in a federal penitentiary in PA in 1970 I was sought after by men as a sexual OBJECT

IN my life in my the circle of close friends, one of these many tens of thousands of men with destroyed lifes and careers doesn't exist.

IN the same circle of friends throughout my life women and girls and boys have been assaulted and raped by men, one boy in particular by his father beginning at age three and continuing for years.

I am rereading your post and looking at what possibly is being missed by me

Registered User
(10/27/03 5:53 am)
Re: Etzchaim's remarks on Kriyananda
Prssmd, I was in no way making a claim that the women's case was illigitimate, nor do I believe that most of the sexual harassment cases that are brought up against men are illigimate.

In the case with Kriyananda, some of the women appeared to be 'willing', and some were not. The women who pressed the suit (and won...) did not appear to me to be "willing", but were responding to the situation they found themselves in. The power of authority that Kriyananda had, was clearly being abused, by him, not the less than willing women. Yes, the women need to take responsibility for allowing themselves to be influenced by the coercion that was going on, but the abuse clearly lies in Kriyananda's lap, so to speak (sorry...). He was bringing the womens karma to them, not the other way around, and created the karma that brought him to court. None of the women entered his office with the thought of engaging in a sexual act, unless they had previously been subjected to the power manipulation and twisting of the idea of "serving the Guru". The 'sin' of the women was mainly to place the programing they had received of 'serving' and being subservient to a powerful male before their own intuition and self protection. Can you see the difference in where they failed to take responsibility and where Kriyananda failed?

None of this, of course, takes into account the societal manipulation that Kriyananda received about the authoritative power that being a celebate Swami would give him, and the difficulty of becoming a sexless being.

He did manage to convince himself, at least, that he was not the active participant. He never really 'touched' the women...

Humanity is complicated, nu?

In one year, I was exposed to at least 6 times, if I recall correctly, by total strangers, all male. None of it was initiated by me, and I certainly didn't want to see them, or assist them to masterbate. By the end of that time period, I was offering to slice off their private parts, and the last guy actually ran from me in terror. I suspect that the situation provided me with the opportunity to remove the subservient and victim elements in my energy field, because once I became unafraid and defended myself, it stopped happening.

Sexual harassment is not the figment of a womans imagination, nor is it mainly an excuse to hurt men.

Yes, women do things that hurt men, but I wasn't talking about that.

Edited by: etzchaim at: 10/27/03 12:20 pm
Registered User
(10/27/03 1:38 pm)
like myself
is there listening.....

i wonder when prssmd replies if it will be a conversation.....if we will have the sense that prssmd will speak from their experience
or if like me prssmd may be really delighted and delight in spouting forth, rambling and harranging etc.
as i enter the periods of growth ahead me how great it will be to become a listener
......with hard effort at embracing and acceptin my own confusion and pain and not projecting it on others and harranging

so yes etzchaim. you have written from your experience, from some very hard and dark moments
you have made it intregrally revelant to a two way discussion
and you set me off on the growth ahead of me

also it can be said that some very rich men, almost entirely white........
rule the world in a horrific and genicidal violent and competitive way.....destroying the lives of untold daughters and sons of many people

.....it is my only prayer with every breath of mine than i can model for other men to listen to women to live co-operatively....to go back again to women and learn nurturing and family and community ad educationof heart

and to resist and question authority and being ruled by fear and pain

to live less as a consumer and more as a friend of etzchaim
to tell stories and relax together more, not always grabbing a video or dashing off to movies, just feeling the "juice" of life in a star shining above ......in a friend who knows they are being listened too

prssmd we have done nothing fancy.......
we speak in one or two small areas.....
we speak of a half a dozen men with open pants......
and my experience of being locked up with men for 10 weeks.. and women friends, close ones......
who have not charged men with false rape and ruined mens' lives
but close women friends, one elderly without defense and in her own home

~~~~~~~~~~~~raped and never charging the man!
in every case but two, not even knowing who the men was

.....see we speak from our experience prssmd !!!
because when you speak from yours we allow friendship to be an option between the three of us!!!!!!

what else in your experience gives you comfort throughout your life?

Edited by: soulcircle at: 10/27/03 1:41 pm
Registered User
(11/4/03 9:06 am)
Re: Saying Unkind Things about teachers
chela2020 writes,


I would just never again put down Yogananda on this board to those who love him."

I have never put down Yogananda on this board. chela2020
simply made that up.

Registered User
(11/4/03 9:10 am)
Re: specific examples from your life might help
soulcircle just hasn´t been around. Certainly anyone who has spent a lot of time at almost any U.S. university and kept her or his eyes open should know of lots of males whose careers have been destroyed by slanderous, libelous accusations from women. Usually these accusations are manufactured because a woman doesn´t like some man for reasons that have nothing to do with harassment.

On the other hand, I quite agree with etzchaim that "Sexual harassment is not the figment of a womans imagination."

Edited by: prssmd at: 11/4/03 9:11 am
Page 1 2 3 4 << Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies Click to receive email notification of replies
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies Click to stop receiving email notification of replies
jump to:

- SRF Walrus - Non-SRF Teachings and Ideals -

Powered By ezboard® Ver. 7.32
Copyright ©1999-2005 ezboard, Inc.