Date Posted:11:32 Author: Mike Drake - 8 Jun 2001 Subject: Taking the Discussion Further In reply to:
ketch - 27 Jun 2001
's message, "Re: Reports of Yoganandas body" on 11:30
While conclusive resolution on this is not in the offing (I don't expect SRF will be subjecting the remains to any rigourous scrutiny), there is much that may still be said.
First, even granting all of Rowe's remarks, at best what you've got is an extremely well-preserved body, but one that nonetheless did start to decay within 20 days. This hardly strikes me as a miracle. (Now, Babaji's alleged immorality - that would be a miracle.)
Second, many readers on this board will know that Yogananda died at a public ceremony in Los Angeles, just as he was about to introduce a colleague. (I take it, then, that this “omniscient” yogi didn’t foresee the circumstances of his own samadhi.)
The cause of death was a heart attack. Heart disease is a symptom of bodily deterioration. Adherents of the incorruptibility thesis therefore would have to hold that while Yogananda’s body was deteriorating rapidly* in life, it completely ceased doing so upon death.
Third, the existence of so-called "incorruptibility" is extremely dubious. If my experience is any indication, readers will find it a challenge to find a single photo of a true "incorruptible"; all I have found are (often unclear) photos of bodily remains that look quite extensively decayed (I advise that readers compare their favored exemplar's appearance to mummies of similar antiquity before submitting them as evidence of the phenomenon).
_
NOTES
* Rapidly, that is, all things considered. Yogananda appears to have lived a very healthy lifestyle, and one therefore would expect that he would have had great longevity. But of course many people who drink, smoke, or otherwise badly abuse their bodies – and who don’t even practice kriya yoga (!) – live much longer than Yogananda did. (Yogananda was 65 when he passed on.)
