Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:30, 6 March 2006

/summary -This is a barebones version for use in initiating translations to other languages. Please do not remove or expand . Feel free to enter essential only data.--Jondel 01:05, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Updates to Kriya Yoga

Yes, I'd like to start a discussion with anyone interested in an up to date Kriya Yoga page.

It can be agreed that Kriya Yoga's origins are traced to Mahavatar Babaji, and that the spread of Kriya yoga throughout the world was revived by Babaji's disciple Lahiri Mahasaya. It can also be agreed that Paramahansa Yogananda popularized the ancient practice in the west, and that Yogananda was a great Master.

It should be noted that there are other sources of information besides Yogananda's Autobiography of a Yogi. Though it is a masterpiece, it is not the only worthy literature on the subject Kriya Yoga. In fact Wings to Freedom by Gurunath contains knowledge about the Superconscious states of Samadhi that Yogananda never revealed. It also contains a great deal of information about Mahavatar Babaji that elucidates this Beings origins and nature.

If you have a reason for constantly deleting this knowledge from the updates, please make it clear so that we can attempt to come to an agreement. I have never erased nor altered someone elses wording, despite my personal bias, and I would expect the same from others.

I don't know who is deleting your posts in their entirety - I have been moving your posts, and editing them to the appropriate length, and will continue to do so. I believe that you're using these pages (Kriya Yoga and Mahavatar Babaji) to promote your Guru and his book above other Kriya teachers. I find your lengthy posts, and insistence on burying other lineages by the placement and length of your posts, to be as uncompromising as the person who is deleting them entirely.

However, in the spirit of compromise, I do believe that Other Lineages that claim a direct connection to Babaji, even though they sometimes contradict each other, and Yogananda, have their place here, under Other Lineages.

Lahiri Mahasaya and his lineage, inlcuding Paramhansa Yogananda, are universally respected by Kriya Yogis of all lines in India, U.S., and Europe. They introduced Kriya Yoga to the world. They are universally considered to be the authority of Kriya Yoga. Since that time, others like Govindan and Siddhanath have claimed a direct connection to Babaji. Again, even though these others contradict each other, they should be listed here.

The length of your posts are inappropriate, and an obvious attempt to promote your teacher and his book. Please read my comments on the Mahavatar Babaji discussion page about this, and a helpful suggestion for you to promote your teacher with his own Misplaced Pages page.

Also, I suggest you become a member when you post, or make your changes using only your member name, and also to post your name here in the discussion. Look up the Misplaced Pages guidelines on this (including how to post your name and time stamp as I've done below), and on these other issues that we're discussin.

Priyanath 20:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)Priyanath

In order to communicate more fully the reasons for editing of this page, I'm explaining here (rather than making wholesale changes with no explanation, as people have been doing). I hope others will start showing the same consideration.

1. Changed introduction to more accurately reflect where the vast majority of people have heard of Kriya Yoga, through the lineage of Lahiri Mahasaya and through Yogananda's Autobiography of a Yogi.

2. Added Yogananda's explanation of Kriya Yoga for same reason.

Please read Misplaced Pages guidelines on Neutral Point of View, especially the Undue Weight section: http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:NPOVUW

I point that out because the vast majority of practicing Kriya Yogis are undoubtedly from the Lahiri Mahasaya lineage, through Yogananda and others. There are several other 'direct-from-Babaji' lines that teach Kriya in varying ways that are clearly a minority view. As the guidelines point out, they should be represented in Misplaced Pages pages, but attempts to portray them as the majority view are not following the Misplaced Pages guidelines.

3. Tweaked the Yamas and Niyamas to reflect a more majority view of their meanings, making them more in line with the Misplaced Pages sections on Yamas and Niyamas. Bramhacharya, for example, in practice means non-sensuality in general, not merely non-illicit sex, which is a much more narrow understanding of the term.

Priyanath 21:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)Priyanath

If you have not audited the Kriya Yoga world, you have no basis for this argument. This is your opinion solely. hamsacharya dan.

I've audited the Kriya world for many years, and have discussed Kriya Yoga with followers from many traditions. I've also practiced Kriya for many years. These opinions are not mine, but are widely accpeted. I respect the devotion that you have for your Guru, but I have to say that others don't give it the same pre-eminence that you're trying to give it here.

Also note that I'm not the one deleting all of your passages. Apparently someone as strongly opinionated as yourself has been doing that. I've re-inserted your missives a few times, out of respect for the right of other Kriya lineages to have their say, even if it is an extreme minority POV.

Priyanath 02:36, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Priyanath

Priya Nath, we both have integrity for what we believe. I think in other circumstances we would be friends. I have never felt the desire to step on others toes, but only to add what I feel to be quality information in an attempt to enrich other peoples lives. I also feel the need to cite my sources, out of respect for their work. I've always stood up above all for the deepest truths, and I think you too - Kriya yogis are usually advanced souls. I do feel the need to include references to the contributions of my guru because I have an intense conviction that his contributions are of the highest possible quality available this day in age. I have had countless extraordinary experiences by the grace of Gurunath that would have to be experienced to be believed, so needless to say, my faith in him is unequivocal, and I feel deeply blessed to be in the satsang of a living master. I am a neuroscientist by training - so I can safely tell you that I have a very rigorous and meticulous scientific nature - I am not the type to believe in things easily, so I do feel my judgment is relatively refined. There are many many teachers, but very very few Masters. I have experienced the satsang of both types - many teachers and a few masters - and know the difference. I wish for people to understand the difference so that they know what their options are. Nevertheless I have not overburdened wikipedia with my Masters knowledge base, but have attempted solely to give them equal representation. I also notice that you are a Nath yogi as well, as you have taken the birth name of Sri Yukteswar! I'd be interested to hear about your background if you feel inclined to share! Hamsacharya dan 08:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hamsacharya Dan, I feel that you are stepping on the toes of the majority by going against the Wiki guidelines on Neutral Point of View and Undue Weight:

http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:NPOVUW

I respect the feelings you have about your Guru, but to try and make him Yogananda's equal, or superior, by promoting your minority view is not the right use of Misplaced Pages. Even if you feel to give him 'equal representation', well, read the Undue Weight guidelines, please.

Again, I respect your feelings about the path you are on, but feel that your approach here has been heavy-handed. I have equal respect for the other Kriya guru lines that I've had contact with, including Govindan disciples. Since your Guru's claims contradict Govindan, and even seem to disagree with Yogananda in subtle ways, that's why they should be just 'claims', in my opinion (and I believe the majority opinion agrees, which is an important part of Misplaced Pages articles and disputes). And that's why they shouldn't have the 'equal representation' to the Yogananda and Lahiri line, who the vast majority trust and respect.

With all due respect, do you think you're helping to promote your Guru's cause by continually moving his understanding of Kriya to the top of the Kriya Yoga page, and moving Lahiri/Yogananda's understanding down?

No, I am not a Nath yogi, and neither was Sri Yukteswar, who I honor with my username. That was his birth name, and unless his parents were Nath yogis (doubtful), then his name was like many, many in India that have the 'nath' ending. Either way, he took on the name Sriyukteswar, which is not a Nath name.

All that said, I think there is a place for your Guru on the Kriya Yoga and Babaji pages, even though a few others think there should be no place at all. Or, perhaps they too are objecting to the Undue Weight you are trying to give to the Siddhanath line, and are responding by deleting it altogether, rather than my more friendly approach.

I have a great amount of respect for anyone on the path of Yoga, and the various Kriya paths, even though I have my own which I follow (which is not important here, because I don't want to promote 'my' way over others, or even as equal to others in this case). I'm sure you have had great results from your practices and Guru's blessings, and I am guessing your zeal here is because of that.

Priyanath 16:51, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Priyanath

The cunning old man who calls himself Siddhanath Gurunath is a well-known confidence artist in India who is absolutely ignorant of Kriya Yoga as taught by Babaji to Lahiri Mahasaya. He is the laughingstock of authentic Kriya Yoga lineages and has been busted many times for his fakery and outlandish claims. If we allow this spiritual criminal to spread his Wings (pardon the pun) in here then anyone, even a complete lunatic confined in a mental assylum, can claim to have met Babaji and have his accounts included here. We should only include the words of relevant people. If this cunning old man (I don't even want to call him Gurunath because that isn't his real name) and his clone Dan (neuroscientist? Please post your diploma and university transcript of records so that we can verify them or else you can claim to be Santa Claus for all I care) are that desperate to promote their cult together with their book that nobody wants to buy then I suggest that they create another page for the fake Kriya Yoga of their hallucinated Shiv Gorakshanath Babaji because neither the Kriya Yogis from the Lineage of Lahiri Mahasaya nor the Sanatan Dharma scholars and historians would agree that Babaji, the Guru of Lahiri Mahasaya (not of Guru nut) and Goraksha were the same person, and that the Kriya yoga being taught by Guru Nut is the same Kriya that Lahiri Mahasaya receieved from Babaji.

I also suggest that disinterested parties make a research about the character of Guru Nut for future contributions.

No to Nuts 00:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)No to Nuts

In Response

nuts - your hatefulness betrays your distorted mind. Gurunath welcomes all, don't let the looks fool you... he is bisexual.

Priyanath - there are no contradictions with Yogananda and Gurunath. You must keep things in context. DIfferent Yogas also appear to have contradictions, but they are also all the same. Yes, there are contradictions with Govindan's claims.

Sri Yukteswar did not choose that name - it was given him by his Guru. He was born Priya Nath Karar - Priya Nath means Beloved Lord. His name did not make him a Nath, his spiritual stature made him a Nath (Lord of Irradiant Splendor). By the way, nobody's parents make their children nath yogis - that's a false statement you've made. Nath is not passed down through blood - it is something earned by ceaseless meditation. Adinath is another name for Shiva by any and all who know anything about Sanatan Dharma - Adi Nath - First Lord. This is not a caste or creed - it is part of the origin and essence of Sanatan Dharma.

Priyanath, I've not altered the Kriya page in several days, and yet you accuse me of putting my guru's name at the top, while you have yourself done what you have warned against: inserted lengthy passages. I am here not looking for a battle, but a resolution. But I will fight for the right to put Siddhanath's references there. He has thousands of disciples all over the world, but even if he had no disciples, that would not take away from his expertise. The number of disciples has nothing to do with the spiritual stature of a being. Look at Babaji for example - he has only had 1 disciple for the past 150 years.

Nobody here is an expert. The ignorant religious ones like myself are always the ones that find fault and contradiction. The one's that have realized the Truth laugh at our petty quarrels. There is much much more information out there. Anyone who claims to know about Kriya yoga should go to the source and get darshan from the Great ones that still exist today -> go to the Himalayas and speak with the yogis meditating at the caves and ashrams and ask them where are the great one's meditating. See what they have to say about Kriya Yoga. The masses were never the experts on any subject. Hamsacharya dan 20:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hamsacharya Dan, I am well aware that Sri Yukteswar's given name was no indication of his being a Nath yogi. My point was that the claim of his being a Nath yogi is yours, not Sri Yukteswar's. I've researched the writings of Sri Yukteswar, Lahiri, and others of those Guru lines, and none of them ever said they were Nath Yogis, or even talked about the Nath yogis, or Adinath, etc.

None from the Lahiri lineage have said that Babaji was Goraksha or Adinath, etc. Their silence on that matter is convincing to me. Lahiri and Yogananda both said that Babaji was Lord Krishna, and that Mahavatar Babaji in his present form is hundreds of years old, not thousands or millions. What does Siddhanath say to that?

"Look at Babaji for example - he has only had 1 disciple for the past 150 years." No, he has many thousands of Kriya disciples.

You say you will fight for the right to put Siddhanath's references here. I'm not fighting you on that. I think that every self-proclaimed Kriya teacher and direct-to-babaji claimant should have references here, even when I don't believe them. That's called having a neutral POV (Point of View), one of the benchmarks of Wikepedia. Then there is the majority POV, which is also one of the Misplaced Pages guidelines. Your recent edits again put your POV up top, and degrade the far more popular and accepted POV. And the 'anomymous' editor has been doing the same for the last few days.

I do not 'claim to be an expert', and never did, but I have done a fair amount of research, which is not worth much in the end. More important is satsang and discussion with other Kriya lines, which I have done. And daily Kriya sadhna.

Yes, I've been to the Himalayas, and the ashrams, and caves, and even to to the 'Nath's' (kedar- and badri-, does that make me a nath yogi?). I've sat at the feet of babas there. Like anywhere, it's a mixture of truth, arrogance, enlightenment, blindness, and pomposity. An Indian name or heritage, a hoary beard or matted hair, grand pronouncements that can never be verified, do not an avatar or master make.

I agree with you, the masses were never experts on any subject. That's why Kriya Yogis look to the Masters for truth - not to the self-proclaimed ones, but those who brought Kriya Yoga back in this age: Lahiri Mahasaya and his lineage. They've withstood the test of time in a way that others haven't and probably won't. And that's why they have earned the respect of the majority of Kriya Yogis.

Priyanath 21:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Priyanath

Priyanath - the current edit you've made is acceptabale to me. Yogananda's quote here is very beautiful. For the record, I do disagree with you on several of the points mentioned above, but I wont belabour the discussion with that now.. Time will tell. Hamsacharya dan 21:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hamsacharya Dan, I know that we don't agree on alot - there are some things on the web page that I don't fully agree with, and I also don't want to belabor the point(s). But I think all sides are being presented respectfully, and I think that you and I have alot in common in the end.

Priyanath 23:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Priyanath