VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 04:48:33 04/17/04 Sat
Author: Hendrik - 26 Mar 2004
Subject: Re: A Call to Hendrik
In reply to: Kev - 29 Mar 2004 's message, "Re: A Call to Hendrik" on 04:47:57 04/17/04 Sat

Hendrik tells Kev exactly what he wants and expects to hear.

Kev asks me a question and I give my sincere opinion which incidentally happens to be in accordance with Kev's opinion. I wonder what is wrong with that.

You did not mention that my response contained a number of statements that were not at all praising Yogananda, like these:

"The notion that there is a scientific way to God I consider as a PR gag of Yogananda and otherwise as nonsense"

"I do not believe in Kriya Yoga as such"

"Yogananda tuned down the Kriyas"

"Surely he was displaying ego"


Is this what Kev really wanted to hear??

Krishnamurti/Shibendu teach that questions are only asked with the object of consolidating what one already knows and thus asserting one's ego, and that the only important questions are those to which there is no answer. -- You cannot expect that everyone will follow this queer argument.

Shibendu on the other hand does his best to confuse people just for the sake of it. He told us about a spiritual seeker who came to him with some problem and had lost hope, had lost faith. Shibendu triumphantly proclaimed at this, "There is no hope!!" and the man left bewildered and as desperate as before. Shibendu related this story in an amused tone.

Likewise there were some journalists from an Indian newspaper wanting to interview him. I was present. They behaved very respectfully, but Shibendu simply ignored their questions and instead of responding confronted them with unsolicited philosophical sophistry until eventually they got annoyed and left. He noticed their disappointment which apparently amused him. It must have been his object to undermine the interview right from the beginning, and I noticed that he started his antics as soon as they asked him about his role as Guru.

One last story. One of his non-Indian disciples received a cultural shock when visiting him in Benares and told him that she was afraid that she was going to die. His reply? -- "But that is wonderful! People come from all over India to die in Benares. You are very lucky!"

You can interpret these stories as you want, but for me this is just rude behavior born from a certain sort of intellectual arrogance. How else shall I call it? Confusing people for the sake of confusing them. It will help none of them. It will only create disharmony and feelings of revenge.

Shibendu managed to bring out all the worst sides in me, and I am thankful to him for that. But this is no reason to go on with this for ever.

This combativeness and indulging in contradictions for it's own sake is a markedly female trait and not the right conduct for a grown-up man who is expected to assume responsibility. One who finds favor with such behavior is well advised to marry and he will get his share. Only, I do not see why these traits ought to be predominant in a Guru.

When I was associated with Shibendu and jumped at Yoganiketan and SRF, someone who used to post on this board wrote me and warned me that although he agreed with much of what I then said he was afraid that I was destroying other people's faith and this concerned him.

I did not understand him then because I did not have faith, but I understand him now. He was right.

Here are many people who have faith in God, godheads, and spiritual masters, particularly in Yogananda. A satguru is not only a teacher but a representative of the Divine -- some say the Divine himself -- and the more faith the better.

It seems to be the job of Shibendu and possibly some of his students who copy him to mock the faith of others in their guru, but this faith is not only a sentiment but a core ingredient of their sadhana, for many it is their prime foothold actually. It should be considered holy and not picked at for mere philosophical reasons.

If faith has no place in Shibendu's yoga, and he does not believe in nor respects saints, this is his own bag born from his own understanding of things, but I will not jump on the train. There are a number of yogis who I believe to be frauds or potentially dangerous people (this does not include Shibendu, just to mention it), and I am the last one to keep secret about it, but I do not see why Yogananda of all persons should be the one constantly under attack. At least discussions on him should be led with a minimum of respect, because he was a holy man and meant too much for many people.

I used to have mild problems with SRF and bigger ones with the group dynamism among their followers, but never much of an issue with Yogananda. Shibendu only indirectly criticizes Yogananda, but I feel that a lot of the aggression is nevertheless actually generated by him as well as by certain competing Kriya lines. What is this good for?

To have faith in the divinity of Paramahansa Yogananda is probably the best one can do as someone who is following SRF and practicing their Kriya. The same is true for other masters also. If one does not have that faith where is the point in accepting him as Guru although already deceased and the teachings all being there in print?


People talk about Shibendu "not looking like a yogi" --What?
If one "looks" like a yogi then one is only out for recognition.

What I wrote was that he does not strike me as a yogi by nature, I was not talking about his outer appearance.

A yogi is someone who dedicates his life to yoga and seeks the Divine. It is uncompromising. In a narrower sense he is only called yogi when he has made great progress on the path.

What I know of Shibendu is that he was a family man with a medium interest in yoga who practiced Kriya because it was custom in his family. He himself remarked that he practiced it rather along the way and hence it took him more time than necessary to finish it.

Shibendu eventually finished the three stages of Kriya in 1978, and even now, after 25 years, preaches that one just has to complete this 'process' and one has arrived and is done. Wherever. That is his whole outlook on yoga.

What Shibendu has done is to finish the Kriyas that have been given to him, that is all, whatever they are about. Anyone can do it in a couple of years.

A decade after that, his father asked him to leave his comfortable business life and assume the role of Guru. Shibendu obliged, because it was the wish of his father.

He goes on preaching about the 'natural state' which to some degree he may have attained to (I noticed that he is not sure about the exact nature of his attainment) a quarter century back. This means that this is what he stands for. There is nothing to add.

An advanced yogi would KILL himself on the occasion of just thinking one unkind thought. He would fuel the faith in the Divine and not mock at other people's spiritual endeavor. He would not lament his own loneliness and at the same time lash out at imagined 'centrifugal' enemies.

Shibendu's message bears a strong resemblance to that of the 'spiritual terrorist' U.G. Krishnamurti, but his main inspirer in philosophy and way of speaking/teaching is essentially J.Krishnamurti, a spiritual outsider whose originality however he does not match and whose walk into 'uncharted territory' he does not mention. Krishnamurti, like Shibendu, was forced into the role of teacher.

Shibendu's son, also, is practicing Kriya for about 15 years now, at the behest of his father, but, at least three years ago, still felt no particular interest in yoga. He is pursuing a business career, to the delight of his father. Perhaps history repeats itself.

Yoga?

I do not know what further to add. I always used to tell anybody who asked me in the past about Shibendu to go and see him, and I will continue to do so in the case of future enquiries. This is all I have to say.

He has also two web pages with all of his messages online, and contact and travel info:

http://www.kriyayogalahiri.com/index.html

http://dynastickriya.com/


Hendrik

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.