>
SRF Walrus
Mt. Washington, Ca
Open discussions about SRF
Gold Community SRF Walrus
    > Not the Main Stream
        > early East-West
New Topic    Add Reply

Page 1 2 3 4 5

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
Author Comment
moyma
Registered User
(6/8/05 6:58 am)
Reply
Re: the truth about Hitler
methuse,
I'm not supporting Hitler in this but what I am saying is the way the world responded to him was a complete and TOTAL failure....6 million dead jews is not winning the war.....
Who is to say that Gandhi's non-violent approch would not have worked , If people would have stood up for what they believed........people laughed him off , as they laughed off Yogananda's non violent approch.....as everyone here laughs him off as being stupid in what he says.....
Ity's easy to sit back and judge a time after all the facts are in...still everything we read was said in the context of the day...... with all it's potential to change everything.
You can't apply politics of today to the 30's, It was a much different time. Dictators were part and parcel of the time. It was a accepted form of Government.
Hitler was evil, I don't doubt that and to hear Yogananda compliment him is weird...but in 33, who knows ? Because what we did , The WAY the world responded to him, didn't work.....

Edited by: moyma at: 6/8/05 7:02 am
divine gypsy
Registered User
(6/8/05 8:03 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
Re: the truth about Hitler
Moyma, I've either heard SRF ministers say that Master said, or read Master write, that Gandhi's nonviolent approach wouldn't have worked with Hitler, that it worked with the British because they were "moral" enough to be shamed into finally leaving (or some such reasoning). Somewhere along the line, he seems to have changed his mind. SRF can't seem to allow him to be capable of mistakes.

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I have to agree with those who say that Master just wasn't very informed in 1933. He certainly wasn't alone, and obviously others also hoped Hitler could be appeased. They were WRONG. But even in 1933, Dachau was a prison, but not a death camp, like those that came later. Stalin, however, seems to have killed and/or starved at least 7 million people in 1932-33 in order to enforce his "great experiment" (despite that Mr. Guha, whoever he was, said that food in Russia was scarce, but that no one starved).

I also have to agree that boosting kriya's efficacy from a month of normal evolution to a year is kind of stunning.

Autobiography of a Yogi, 1956 (last edition supposedly incorporating all of PY's desired changes):
Quote:
One-half minute of revolution of energy around the sensitive spinal cord of man effects subtle progress in his evolution; that half-minute of Kriya equals one year of natural spiritual unfoldment (p. 246).

This discrepancy from the early lessons would make an interesting satsanga question. Maybe it deserves its own thread?

Edited by: divine gypsy at: 6/8/05 8:25 am
divine gypsy
Registered User
(6/8/05 8:23 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
the truth about Stalin
from googling Stalin and collectivization:
Quote:
In November 1927, Joseph Stalin launched his "revolution from above" by setting two extraordinary goals for Soviet domestic policy: rapid industrialization and collectivization of agriculture. His aims were to erase all traces of the capitalism that had entered under the New Economic Policy and to transform the Soviet Union as quickly as possible, without regard to cost, into an industrialized and completely socialist state.

Stalin's First Five-Year Plan, adopted by the party in 1928, called for rapid industrialization of the economy, with an emphasis on heavy industry. It set goals that were unrealistic-- a 250 percent increase in overall industrial development and a 330 percent expansion in heavy industry alone. All industry and services were nationalized, managers were given predetermined output quotas by central planners, and trade unions were converted into mechanisms for increasing worker productivity. Many new industrial centers were developed, particularly in the Ural Mountains, and thousands of new plants were built throughout the country. But because Stalin insisted on unrealistic production targets, serious problems soon arose. With the greatest share of investment put into heavy industry, widespread shortages of consumer goods occurred.

The First Five-Year Plan also called for transforming Soviet agriculture from predominantly individual farms into a system of large state collective farms. The Communist regime believed that collectivization would improve agricultural productivity and would produce grain reserves sufficiently large to feed the growing urban labor force. The anticipated surplus was to pay for industrialization. Collectivization was further expected to free many peasants for industrial work in the cities and to enable the party to extend its political dominance over the remaining peasantry.

Stalin focused particular hostility on the wealthier peasants, or kulaks. About one million kulak households (some five million people) were deported and never heard from again. Forced collectivization of the remaining peasants, which was often fiercely resisted, resulted in a disastrous disruption of agricultural productivity and a catastrophic famine in 1932-33. Although the First Five-Year Plan called for the collectivization of only twenty percent of peasant households, by 1940 approximately ninety-sevenpercent of all peasant households had been collectivized and private ownership of property almost entirely eliminated. Forced collectivization helped achieve Stalin's goal of rapid industrialization, but the human costs were incalculable.

divine gypsy
Registered User
(6/8/05 8:59 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
Re: the truth about Mussolini
from googling Benito Mussolini:
Quote:
Modern History Sourcebook:
Benito Mussolini:
What is Fascism, 1932
------------------------------------------------------------
Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) over the course of his lifetime went from Socialism - he was editor of Avanti, a socialist newspaper - to the leadership of a new political movement called "fascism" [after "fasces", the symbol of bound sticks used a totem of power in ancient Rome].

Mussolini came to power after the "March on Rome" in 1922, and was appointed Prime Minister by King Victor Emmanuel.

In 1932 Mussolini wrote (with the help of Giovanni Gentile) and entry for the Italian Encyclopedia on the definition of fascism.

Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism -- born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision -- the alternative of life or death....

...The Fascist accepts life and loves it, knowing nothing of and despising suicide: he rather conceives of life as duty and struggle and conquest, but above all for others -- those who are at hand and those who are far distant, contemporaries, and those who will come after...

...Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production.... Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect. And if the economic conception of history be denied, according to which theory men are no more than puppets, carried to and fro by the waves of chance, while the real directing forces are quite out of their control, it follows that the existence of an unchangeable and unchanging class-war is also denied - the natural progeny of the economic conception of history. And above all Fascism denies that class-war can be the preponderant force in the transformation of society....

After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage....

...Fascism denies, in democracy, the absur[d] conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility, and the myth of "happiness" and indefinite progress....

...iven that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority...a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State....

The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality -- thus it may be called the "ethic" State....

...The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone....

...For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. Fascism is the doctrine best adapted to represent the tendencies and the aspirations of a people, like the people of Italy, who are rising again after many centuries of abasement and foreign servitude. But empire demands discipline, the coordination of all forces and a deeply felt sense of duty and sacrifice: this fact explains many aspects of the practical working of the regime, the character of many forces in the State, and the necessarily severe measures which must be taken against those who would oppose this spontaneous and inevitable movement of Italy in the twentieth century, and would oppose it by recalling the outworn ideology of the nineteenth century - repudiated wheresoever there has been the courage to undertake great experiments of social and political transformation; for never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it.

-----------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------

This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes in modern European and World history.

Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use of the Sourcebook.

ranger20
Registered User
(6/8/05 11:40 am)
Reply
Re: the crux of the matter
What sort of person are you praying to, in that case, when you pray to Yogananda?

That is certainly one of the core questions! Only you can answer it for you of course. What kind of person is Yogananda in your own experience?

For me, he was never a person I really felt comfortable praying to, except at the very beginning, after reading the AY. Once I got involved in SRF (books, mags, convocations) the stories of seemingly inconsistent or capricious behavior, and the parental type "scoldings" made this a person I could not fully trust. For a long time, I just carried the common SRF guilt, believing myself to be flawed - comparing my insides to other people's outsides.

On finding the Walrus, much of that was disolved. I come to the conclusion that deifying the teacher was something that SRF had done. Good guru, bad organization. Of course further consideration and revisiting texts and convocation notes makes it clear that guru worship is pretty central to the entire message that Yogananda brought. Consider the music: "Guru lord, I bow to Thee," or "Guru image of Brahman..."

Yoga International has been running a series of interpretations of Patanjali. Last summer the section quoted had Patanjali saying that "God is the guru of all gurus," and as such, the only "One" worthy of worship. The commentary involved the negative consequences of confusing guru and God in India today. And here too, I remember thinking.

This past weekend I attended an all day retreat with a Zen teacher I had heard of, but never met. From the moment he walked into the room, I had the clear perception that this is a real master. If I were forced to describe it, I'd say something like there was a great power deriving from this person's complete authenticity. Yet worship was not an impulse I or anyone else there experienced, and was probably the last thing this teacher would have sought or allowed. Everything referred back to "Buddha nature," or "Original nature," which were his terms for the ultimate.

Many of the stories of Yogananda depict him doing exactly that: "Give it to God." Yet that worship element is definately there. Anandamoy of course, actively promotes it, and I really believe that Yogananda sometimes encouraged it. That is a "something extra," that I was never comfortable with, and ultimately helped bring down my orignal and naive attitude of complete trust in the guru and his organization.

Edited by: ranger20 at: 6/8/05 11:41 am
Ramsses II
Registered User
(6/8/05 2:26 pm)
Reply
Re: the crux of the matter
(This message was left blank)

Edited by: Ramsses II at: 6/8/05 5:21 pm
metheuse
Registered User
(6/8/05 9:33 pm)
Reply
The need to find a perfect person to worship
Why do we have such a powerful need to find someone, ANYONE, who never makes any mistakes? And why do we have such a powerful inclination to worship such a person? What if Jesus were found to have made an obvious mistake? Let's say we found the Lost Gospel of Gezundheit, and it was authenticated, and parallelled the four extant gospels, except Jesus praised Herod for killing all those children. They were from the degenerate races, after all. Such a statement sure would knock Jesus off the pedestel that millions have placed him on. No doubt many Christians would find such a revelation so shocking to their belief system that they would violently refute it, even if it were obvious, while others would become dissollusioned and leave Christianity, and still others would try to reconcile the facts with their faith. Personally, I'm in the third category right now. My prayers to PY still work, always have. If I'm in some desperate strait, he comes and rescues me, sometimes miraculously. The techniques still work, always have, at least if you make an effort. And most of Yogananda's advice is good advice. So why do we (maybe I should speak just for myself?) need to have a Guru who never makes any mistakes? Well, wouldn't that be a proof of his attunement with God? And if he screwed up, how could you trust anything he says to be the truth? Quoting from the very end of chapter 14 of AY (An Experience in Cosmic Consciousness):

[i]" I see, Guruji, you have solved my problem." I smiled gratefully. I do realize now that I have found God, for whenever the joy of meditation has returned subconsciously during my active hours, I have been subtly directed to adopt the right course in everything, even in minor details."[/i]

What can we say? I guess the great Guru was not in tune with God when he praised Hitler, Mussolini. The bottom line is, an avatar, a Guru, can make a mistake and that's still apparently OK. It just means that you can't accept blindly anything he says, but you have to check it out for yourself. If you find that his teachings are basically good, then I guess he was basically in tune with God. It's just that now we have to scrutinize his teachings, lest we swallow something he said while NOT in tune. Gosh, it was so much easier to just blindly believe everything he said....and that's why so many people want to find one perfect person to worship---so they won't have to think for themselves.

metheuse
Registered User
(6/8/05 10:51 pm)
Reply
What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
moyma,
Finally responding to your most recent post. You are certainly right, it's easy for us to harshly judge those who supported Hitler in 1933. Yes, it was a different time, and many people were deceived by Hitler (notably, not Churchill in England, nor any of the millions of Jews in Germany) but please remember, Yogananda has set himself up as an avatar, one who plays with time and space as a child plays with toys, one who can look into the soul of Hitler and know what's really there, one who can observe at a distance the real (and extremely brutal) events that paved the way for Hitler's chancellorship, one who can easily peer into the future and see the horrors of WWII that are to come. Remember how Yukteswar foresaw the dinner party in which Yogananda was fed strawberries and his host mashed them up with cream and sugar? Such a trifling event, and yet the great Guru saw it coming, years in the future. Well, World War II was no trifling event. If Yogananda had been ANY kind of Guru, he would have been vividly aware of the tragic events that would take place. He would have known of Hitler's madness, and the insane bloodlust of those around him. These would be events that reshaped the world forever. How could Yogananda NOT be aware of the coming of World War II, and the dangers of Hitler? What kind of omniscience did he have if he couldn't see ANY of this???

Paramadas
Registered User
(6/8/05 11:06 pm)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
You forgot to add the concentration camps and Hitler's anti-semitism. Guess the great Yogananda couldn't see them either. Or didn't care.

Bosco Hurn
Registered User
(6/9/05 1:12 am)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
Yes, what sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming? Even my dad could see it coming when he went to Europe at age 17 in '36! How did he know? Because as he said, "Everyone I saw was wearing a uniform". Anyway, with the exception of Divine Gypsy, most on this thread have focused on the Hitler thing. For me, PY missing the boat on Hitler is bad, but missing it on Mussolini, Stalin (who killed many, many more than Hitler), the great depression (his explanation is total bunk!), AND socialism vs individualism is just pathetic--beyond pathetic. Divine Gypsy's reasoned arguments helped me through the whole Ben Erskine thing, but I don't think the "guru" can be salvaged this time. I keep thinking of Lahiri "drowning" with the many souls off Japan that time--that's omnipresence. This other is just plain stupidity. Moyma wants us to consider the time that Hitler was happening and that's fine for excusing "average" people (not unlike excusing America's founding fathers for slavery and the oppression of women--hey, it was the time they were in. Considering that, they were still pretty hip.). But PY has placed himself outside the "average", indeed, outside the confines of time. Metheuse asks why we must look for someone perfect to worship. I wasn't looking for someone perfect; I just believed someone who told me he was. Why did I believe? Because so much of what was said in the AY made sense--perfected, liberated beings who are one with God coming back to help and all that. Much of the book is telling us all the different ways in which they are perfect--and when they're not perfect it's always just some trifling "human" mistake that endears them to us and lets us identify with them, not some major misjudgments like what we have here. I've been a freedom lover and political and economics junkie for forty years--these latest revelations really hurt. For some time now I've been thinking of just ending my line of Gurus with Lahiri--maybe now's that time. Devout since '79, this is very sad for me. I could handle losing SRF (the result of reading this entire board a few years ago)--human organizations are imperfect by definition. By definition, however, the guru is supposed to be perfect, or damn close. Focusing on the techniques (which do work, I think we all agree) and ignoring the hard questions like some monastics have counseled is just a cop out.

Edited by: Bosco Hurn at: 6/9/05 1:16 am
moyma
Registered User
(6/9/05 7:31 am)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
You are missing my point.
The world failed with Hitler.....
We would have lost the war if Hitler had not decided to split his forces and invade Russia.The allies won because Hitler made mistakes not because of any great thing on our part.
Gandhi went on to say that yes , there would be many casualties from facing Hitler with non violence but we had those already.
Could it have been much worse ? burning Jews, 6 million dead ?
not counting the war dead.....It's the concept of war here that I challenge......Hitler had two sides , like we all do.... he was human......Who knows what karma lurks in his soul....everyone is looking at this as if we made the right decisions with him ....we didn't
The things I have read of Yogananda call Stalin nothing but a ruthless dictator and communism as the great evil, he even said that the Korean war was a holy war cause it stopped communism.
more later......good thread ! thanks D.G

divine gypsy
Registered User
(6/9/05 9:02 am)
Reply
ezSupporter
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
Moyma, I have a strong bias toward pacifism, too, but I don't know that it would've worked against people who were willing to gas people to death, starve people to death, and work people to death to achieve their political ends, not to mention the other more mundane methods of killing. (And, like I mentioned, I'm sure I've heard/read somewhere that Master voiced this eventually.)

I don't know... I think it's a real stretch to conclude that if we had followed PY's advice and the allies had reduced armaments and resisted nonviolently then WWII could have been averted. Remember, PY didn't write about resisting Hitler, but that Hitler was giving "uplifting guidance."

I think the far more persuasive conclusion is that PY made huge errors of judgment on some things that he just wasn't knowledgeable about. It's not like he was endorsing Stalin or Hitler's "final solution," but he missed pretty obvious atrocities in 1933 and after. And those quotes I posted do make it seem that he had a lot more faith in dictators than in democracy. As long as, like Hitler and Mussolini, they mention God here and there he seemed to cut them a lot of slack (makes me wonder what he'd be writing of the current administration).

I could start a whole new thread on the World Crisis how-to-live booklet, which is from a published 1940 talk, and how SRF devotees since then have seemed to think a huge new depression is starting every time there's an economic downturn of any kind.

Maybe PY made fewer and fewer mistakes as his realization grew, I don't know. Maybe his errors, and ours, have lessons for us and for others that are valuable, and utility for God that we may never fully understand. I won't believe everything blindly again, and I will try to keep doing the techniques as best I can.

Edited by: divine gypsy at: 6/9/05 3:32 pm
moyma
Registered User
(6/9/05 12:20 pm)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
Hey I admit it , I am a fan of Yogananda, I find what he has said in the early east-west hard to fathom.....and keep thinking he must have had a reason. Basicly because from other things he wrote just a few years later and from what I have heard he had a pretty good grasp of what was happening in the world.
I don't have a explanation for it.Just being stupid doesn't really do it for me cause I know he wasn't, Thats why I made the comment about the politics of the moment....
could the worlds karma have been changed early in the 30's ??
If we had reacted to Hitler on a world wide movement rather than just sitting back.....there is some good questions brought up in those articles...like no goverment works without the spiritual base......
also maybe Germany was smart to pull out of the league of nations.
For them, At the time, that may have been the right thing to do.The other thing is it sounds like yogananda was reacting to something that had recently made the news, and we don't know what that was....I don't have a right answer for it......

Bosco Hurn
Registered User
(6/9/05 1:09 pm)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
Moyma, try and remove yourself from your "fandom" for a moment and be objective. We are talking about an avatar here--someone who is who is supposed to be one with everything, aware of everything all the time--past, present, future. If Lahiri can be drowning with a few hundred souls thousands of miles away how does another, claiming to be an avatar, miss millions being staved to death in Ukraine? It's not a question of "having a pretty good grasp" of world events--avatars are supposed to be omnicient. There's a big difference and, by virtue of his own words, PY is falling way short of the mark.

ranger20
Registered User
(6/9/05 3:16 pm)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
Quote:
I wasn't looking for someone perfect; I just believed someone who told me he was.
Bosco, that get's the text emphasis treatment because it's the story of so many of us. And the perfection story sets up so much else that is pernicious. The editings and rationalizations and secrecy. For what kind of perfect master would create an imperfect organization, or allow an imperfect president to lead it?

Is [your/my/our] disappointment really with Yogananda, or the fact that Yogananda may not have been perfect?

One story is that of a young man who came to a strange country around the world, against his will but in obedience to his teachers, to spread what he believed were priceless techniques and teachings of liberation to a world that obviously needed them. He did his best, made mistakes, and many people benefited, especially during his lifetime. Overall he made a notable contribution to the general increase of spiritual awareness and aspiration during the 20th century.

I do not have a problem with that story.

Another story is that of the perfect avatar, who sometimes appears to have done capricious or mistaken things, but only because we do not have the awareness of a master. Until we do, we should not rationalize, but simply attend to the current editions of the writings, and the voice of the organizatin he established. And by the way, if you've taken kriya, you actually signed a contract, such that God is going to leave you in this ocean of suffering until you bootstrap your way to salvation, and get the nod of this master, who is your one and only gatekeeper, so you better wipe that doubt from your consciousness.

A bit of hyperbole of course, but I wonder how far from the secret thoughts that trouble the sleep of the bunnies.

divine gypsy
Registered User
(6/9/05 3:30 pm)
Reply
ezSupporter
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
Hey, I continue to be a big fan of Yogananda's too. I've felt deeply connected to him for decades, and still do. But I'm not taking everything he said as gospel anymore, and I'm sure as hell not taking everything that everyone says he said as gospel anymore.

And Bosco, maybe you're right about Lahiri, but maybe it's just unrealistic to expect perfection from any human but still OK to receive what they give us with gratitude and devotion.

stermejo
Registered User
(6/9/05 6:03 pm)
Reply
How about that Gandhi!
History Buffs, I'm still reading-Liberty or Death: India's Journey to Independence and Division by Patrick French.

Check it out and NEVER AGAIN see the "Mahatma" as that guy who won India's Freedom withou firing a shot." As a politician this guy was slicker than a whole slew of Republicans and clearly has blood on his hands.

divine gypsy
Registered User
(6/9/05 7:03 pm)
Reply
ezSupporter
Re: How about that Gandhi!
Yikes, could you elaborate??

moyma
Registered User
(6/9/05 9:12 pm)
Reply
Re: What sort of avatar couldn't see WWII coming?
On the avatar thing, Depends how you look at it.
I have heard that yogananda didn't achieve final liberation until around 1948, yeah, he had samadi early but complete realization didn't come till 48....That may explain some of it,
also the future is never written in stone....the past maybe but again everyone's interpretation of the past is a little different......so is there future coarse.....

metheuse
Registered User
(6/9/05 10:19 pm)
Reply
PY the anti-communist
PY, anti-communism and the evil influence of Henry Ford:
Remember that the early years of the 20th century saw a remarkable plethora of astonishing "larger than life" geniuses: Einstein in physics, Ouspensky and Gurdjieff in philosophy, Yogananda in religion, Lindberg in aviation, Eastman in photography, Ford in manufacturing, Burbank in agriculture, Picasso in art, Edison and Tesla in mechanical and electrical inventions. The list goes on and on. Many of these men were friends, and liked to hobnob together. They were expansive thinkers, as befit the times. Yogananda liked to hang out with these great men, some of whom like Henry Ford were not very good company. Ford was a rabid anti-semite, and a big supporter of Fascism as a means to stop Communism, which was seen by many people at the time as the greater threat. A careful reading of Yogananda's quote suggests exactly this:
"An insulted, snubbed Germany, if it gets away from the uplifting guidance of Hitler, may join Russia and make her a more powerful enemy of France and so on."
It is well-known that the Nazis used their anti-communism as propaganda to deflect criticism of their own policies, and it worked remarkably well. Long after Hitler, the American government was supporting dictators abroad so long as they said they were anti-communist. Hitler and his gang used this tactic, along with anti-semitism, to attract supporters like Henry Ford and Charles Lindberg. So, my guess is that Yogananda listened to his famous friends and uncritically accepted their views. Most of them were businessmen (Edison, Burbank, Ford, Eastman) and thus were understandably anti-communist, and for some unfathomable reason Yogananda did not or could not use "divine powers" to see that his praise of Hitler would eventually (a) come back to haunt him, and (b) raise serious questions about his spiritual stature. As I said earlier, it is inconceivable to me that a true Guru, the "speaking voice of silent God", could have been utterly oblivious to the horrors that Adolf Hitler would unleash on the world. So, the bottom line is, Yogananda shouldn't have hung out with such evil men as Henry Ford, and he should have taken his own Guru's advice: "Environment is stronger than will."
p.s. Hitler actually credited Henry Ford for inspiring his anti-semitism, and much of Hitler's rhetoric on the subject sounds exactly like Ford's vile vitriole.

Page 1 2 3 4 5 << 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 - Not the Main Stream -



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