Stoicism: Marcus Aurelius and Zen

 The Joy of Stoicism? Marcus Aurelius?

I just read an article by Brian Daly in the digital magazine, The Collector.1 The article is entitled “Why Has Stoicism Gained Popularity in Modern Times?” I’ve been quoting Stoicism for years in my talks and without having previously given it much thought, I realize that I completely understand the connection Brian makes between Stoicism and Mindfulness! I would extend this connection further to include a somewhat superficial resemblance to Zen Buddhism: “Chop wood, carry water.” 

But first I suppose I should make some statement about what Stoicism is. Usually, it is quoted to us as pithy aphorisms, but it essentially embraces the yogic path in its emphasis on non-reactivity to life’s ups and downs. A Stoic accepts life as it comes and strives to live a life of calmness, integrity and self-control. In many ways the Stoic resembles those who practice mindfulness and Zen (and all the traditional meditative paths) because all express non-attachment and practicing the present as the middle way of achieving equanimity and contentment.  

I practice Kriya Yoga in the yoga lineage of Paramhansa Yogananda, author of the popular classic, “Autobiography of a Yogi.” Kriya Yoga appealed to me because I felt the Buddhist way did not have an aspiration for upliftment of feeling and consciousness. Just chopping wood and carrying water was not enough for me.  

My perception at the time, as I look back, was inaccurate and superficial because meditation, properly practiced within any of the accepted traditions, awakens within us the joy that is our own nature. Zen has, moreover, a delightful sense of humor, epitomized in its famous koans.  

The striking similarity of Stoicism to mindfulness came to me slowly over the years of teaching meditation. But “pure” mindfulness by itself can leave one asking, “Is that all there is?” Don’t we also seek joy? Shouldn’t negation be balanced by a positive affirmation?  

During those same decades, psychology was expanding to include behavioral therapy. This resonates with yoga and its lifestyle with the basic idea that to be happy one must affirm happiness! In hatha yoga, you move the body and hold a position that induces a particular quality of thought and feeling. In the practice of Ananda Yoga, we have affirmations for each pose that reflects the specific quality and attitude of that position (asana). Affirming positive attitudes is a valuable behavioral modification therapy. “As we think, so we are” goes the popular expression. But does an affirmation of a positive attitude run counter to mindfulness, Stoicism, and non-attachment? Let’s explore. 

By not reacting emotionally to outward circumstances, Stoicism resonates with the core teaching of the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Verse two of Book One states the basic premise of yoga in words loosely fashioned like this: “The state of yoga (perfect equanimity) occurs when the oscillating polarity of the reactive process of likes and dislikes, thoughts, imagination and memory subside into a steady state of deep calmness and pure, unbroken awareness.” 

It is a common reaction to such precepts to object that these practices lead to a state of consciousness devoid of feeling. The reason the calmness of one-pointed focus on the moment seems to rob us of feeling is due to the habit of associating superficially stimulating but fleeting emotions with our frenzied activities. With the deliberately steady practice of mindfulness meditation, we achieve progressive degrees of quietude and calmness our of which dawns an inner sun of happiness and well-being. Like the story of the tortoise and the hare, victory (happiness) goes to the steady, Zen-like Stoic-yogi!  

Moreover, Stoicism, like yoga and Zen, isn’t practiced in order to achive the dubious goal of making us lifeless robots. Stoicism, for its part, affirms various active and positive virtues such as courage and moderation, to name just two. Yoga encourages devotion to the Supreme Spirit (in whatever name, form, or formless state appeals to your heart) while Zen fosters compassion and respect for all life. These positive intentions bring us a natural satisfaction and calm, inner joy. It’s not unlike outgrowing the restless, somewhat frenzied energy of a child in preference for the calm adult-satisfaction of sitting with a friend in meaningful conversation. 

The positive consequences of equanimity are NOT mere opposites of negative moods. The quiet satisfaction, joy, compassion and connection that results from the deep practice of self-awareness and calmness reflect the deeper nature of our consciousness. This deeper nature is our center. It does not possess a dual, opposite side.  

I can understand Brian Daly’s article about the growing interest in Stoicism because it naturally induces a calmness that can be an antidote for the over-stimulation, dizzying range of choices, and high expectations of success and pleasure that are so common today. The same motivation applies to many who seek to learn to meditate.  

Another modern phrase or attitude that coincides with these practices is the value of delayed gratification. Much is admitted in our culture of the flaws associated with seeking short-term profits, pleasure, or success at the expense of longer-term, more stable rewards. Paramhansa Yogananda stated that “Loyalty is the first law of God.” He might as well have stated as “Patience is the shortest route to success!” Again, the tortoise wins the race.  

Since here we are speaking of happiness—a state of consciousness—our reference to the poor tortoise should not be mistaken for a dull or mindless attitude of endless repetition. In meditation, we re-direct our attention inward and onto a mental image, thought, feeling or awareness of breath or mind. As we turn towards inner awareness, our awareness quickens even as our metabolism slows down. Regular meditation increases the depth and breadth of our perception and intuitive intelligence. Therefore, in an odd kind of way, meditation sharpens our inner range finder in part because the calmer we are, the less static thoughts and passing emotions block our view of what is true. 

Stoicism represents the “via negativa” or first stage in getting off the merry-go-round of our emotional, reactive life. Meditation, added to stoic attitudes and habits, awakens within us our higher, happier nature. With the regular practice of meditation, we can discover that we begin to see a new world—a world brighter and more meaningful because devoid of the colored filters of our own subconscious tendencies.  

Who, then, would have thought to connect ancient and classical Stoicism with modern mindfulness meditation, Zen, Yoga and behavioral psychology?  

Blessings to you while you connect the dots of life! 

Swami Hrimananda 

What is the Best Way to Pray? Is God Personal or Impersonal?

 What is the Best Way to Pray? Is God Personal or Impersonal?

The best way to pray is any way you can and will! Who cannot but feel for the people in Israel and Palestine fighting one another with civilians being targeted and taking the brunt of the violence. All war is stupid, but stupidity is endemic. As much as millions yearn for peace, war is a consistent fact of human existence as far back as we have records. It would seem to be a necessary part of the human drama.

As it was said during the last so-called “world” war, “There ain’t no atheists in foxholes.” If it requires hardship, pain, and suffering to trigger an appeal to a greater power, then so be it.

Contemplating the vastness and complexity of the universe and the human body and life, we are confronted with two choices: head down and get mine, or, head up, and embrace our part in the symphony of life. 

Life tends to push our head down into the details, let’s face it. And there are many details, more now than ever before in history. The head-down mudra of the cell phone symbolizes this reality. Who can blame those billions who, overwhelmed by the sheer volume of facts, energies, and circumstances that surround them, prefer the original head-down mudra of the ostrich. Tempting it is to hide under the covers or binge on Netflix.

Whatever opinions you may have of so-called pagan worship of the gods and the elements, at least in that worship there is a recognition that there are forces greater than our own that impact our lives.  Not as much can be said of billions of humans on our planet today between their indifference, their atheism, or agnosticism. Real paganism is the worship of the false idols of money, power, and pleasure.

Human consciousness is poised between the old and the unfolding new. The old contains static beliefs and social immobility; well-worn ritual and dogma; hierarchy and privilege; exploitation and abuse; power and helplessness. The new promises freedom but threatens us with chaos. Our world is confused and polarized, at best.

As there are many levels or stages of awareness and consciousness among humans so also does higher consciousness descend through many layers of God-ness and good-ness through forms such as angels and devas, saints and avatars, sages and heroes, peacemakers, teachers, caregivers, and parents.

The best way to pray is that which opens our hearts and minds to a power greater than our own. Not in abject self-denial but in self-expansion and love.

Jesus gave to us the Lord’s prayer newly revised in yogic pentameter:

Our Father who art in the heaven of Eternal Bliss, sacred is the vibration of Thy presence above, below, and within. Give us this day the sustaining life of Thy joy, the cleansing power of Thy love, the guidance of Thy wisdom, and the healing power of Thy peace. Forgive us our forgetfulness of Thee as we forgive others who hurt us, and may our tests strengthen our resolve to seek Thee alone. I shun the false promises of material desires, for Thou art my life, my love, and the light and glory of all life forever and ever. Amen.

Jesus shows us as do many great saints, East and West, that praying to God in a personal form is both beautiful and powerful. Never mind that God is “infinite.” I can think of several saints who encourage us to put aside our definitions of God in favor of developing a personal relationship propelled and flavored by the fragrance of pure love.

Nonetheless, our prayers should rise to the heaven of God’s nature as joy or pure love, and not try always to pull God down to make our lives more comfortable or successful. We cannot help but pray for the relief of suffering of others and sometimes even ourselves, but the highest prayer seeks to know God who is our very Self, our nearest and dearest. “God knows what you need before you even ask.”

Swami Kriyananda, a direct disciple of Paramhansa Yogananda, describes in one of his many books (“Awaken to Superconsciousness”) that he makes it a rule for himself never to pray for himself. He admits that is not an expectation he has of anyone else. During his life, he experienced significant incidents of physical pain from operations and procedures. In the book mentioned, he tells of when he had a kidney stone attack. He could barely talk or move. After a time of intense pain, he recalled that he was scheduled to give the talk at the Sunday Service in a short while. He prayed to Divine Mother not for relief from the excruciating pain but to mention that if She wanted him to give the talk, She would have to make it possible for him to speak! The pain left him instantly. Ironically, he DID have trouble speaking as he was suffused with divine joy for the miraculous demonstration of Her love.

Unless we are significantly impersonal with respect to our own feelings, desires, and bodily compulsions, we would do better to relate to God in a more personal form.

Is God personal or impersonal?

In the ancient teachings of India, God has not only made this world but did so by BECOMING all things and endowing all creation with a spark of divine consciousness. After all, think about it: what else could God have made the universe out of except “Himself?” Divinity must, in some way, be present in every atom of creation even if well-hidden and deeply asleep.

The universe is God’s child and as such must contain, in varying degrees, elements of the nature of God’s impulse to have brought forth the creation in the first place: elements such as consciousness, the impulse to create, and choice. As the source of all created things is God’s consciousness, the greater the degree of self-awareness (consciousness), the greater one’s potential for creativity and choice. When awareness turns inward upon itself it has the potential to transcend the inherent limitations of form: including the human body and subtler aspects of human consciousness linked to the body: such as thoughts, emotions, memories, and imagination. When awareness turns inward to perceive its own nature it begins the return journey to the Consciousness out of which all things were born. Meditation is the art and science of consciousness.

In this return journey to God (as Consciousness), our perceptions become increasingly subtle and refined. We see this even in ourselves as we outgrow the toys of childhood and move increasingly through life with ever greater awareness and wisdom (hopefully). At the border of Infinity, we encounter stories such as that of Ramakrishna Paramhansa: he enjoyed a loving relationship with Divine Mother who appeared to him in vision and form but when his guru, Totapuri appeared in his life, Totapuri guided him to go beyond divine form into the formless bliss of God-consciousness.

We should be careful, however, not to grade God-consciousness as if we were the teacher. God is as much present IN forms as BEYOND forms. To one with “eyes to see” there is no difference. But we must also be careful not to imagine we are “one with the Father” in our present state! Tricky stuff, eh?

Yogananda said, “You will know when you will know.” “When this I shall die then shall I know who am I.”

Thus it is that Krishna encourages us to relate to God in the personal form. Responding to Arjuna’s question in the Bhagavad Gita comparing prayer to the impersonal Absolute to the personal form, Krishna states that “for embodied beings, the path of dedication to the Absolute is a more difficult way.”

Why be concerned if devotees extoll their love for Jesus or Krishna above all else? As Jesus said to the woman who washed his feet with her tears, “Her sins, which are many, are forgiven for she hath loved much.” God has everything; God IS everything; but God awaits our love.

May the light of Christ, the Infinite Consciousness, be with you always,

Swami Hrimananda

 

Who Do Men Say I AM?

Sages far wiser than most of us have long concurred that “Who am I” is the most important question we can and should ask ourselves. In “Autobiography of a Yogi” by Paramhansa Yogananda, he quotes a great sage:

“Outward ritual cannot destroy ignorance, because they are not mutually contradictory,” wrote Shankara in his famous Century of Verses. “Realized knowledge alone destroys ignorance.…Knowledge cannot spring up by any other means than inquiry. ‘Who am I? How was this universe born? Who is its maker? What is its material cause?’ This is the kind of inquiry referred to.” The intellect has no answer for these questions; hence the rishis evolved yoga as the technique of spiritual inquiry.1

Thus, the inquiry—essential as it is said to be—cannot be fathomed by the intellect alone but by actual experience.

Also, in “Autobiography” in a footnote to Chapter 1, Yogananda recounts: 

The poet Tennyson has left us, in his Memoirs, an account of his repetitious device for passing beyond the conscious mind into superconsciousness: “A kind of waking trance — this for lack of a better word — I have frequently had, quite up from boyhood, when I have been all alone,” Tennyson wrote. “This has come upon me through repeating my own name to myself silently, till all at once, as it were out of the intensity of the consciousness of individuality, individuality itself seemed to dissolve and fade away into boundless being, and this not a confused state but the clearest, the surest of the surest, utterly beyond words — where death was an almost laughable impossibility — the loss of personality (if so it were) seeming no extinction, but the only true life.” He wrote further: “It is no nebulous ecstasy, but a state of transcendent wonder, associated with absolute clearness of mind.” 2 

Jesus Christ famously asked his disciples, “Who do men say I am?” This question and the disciple Peter’s response has gone down in history, however, controversially. Catholic theologians claim that Jesus’ response established for all time his “church” and its authority through the papacy. Protestants claim, by contrast, that Peter’s “confession” that Jesus is the Messiah is the “rock” upon which the church is built (rather than Peter and the succession of prelates that followed him). Either way, the question and the answer are fundamentally profound for all time: not just for identifying the divinity of Jesus Christ, but, by extension, the innate divinity of all souls and our potential for Self-realization. 

The “I” principle waxes and wanes throughout our day and our lives. An infant makes little distinction between himself and the mother (or anyone else for that matter). But it isn’t long before the infant learns that the mother is not the same as himself nor omnipresent. “Separation anxiety” soon sets in.

During childhood—if family security and love prevail—the child has only bouts of aggression, selfishness or personal anxiety but otherwise is connected to the family scene. At puberty, separation begins in earnest, expressing itself in rebelliousness and intense ego-awareness. 

In marriage we find a repeat of the pattern. The couple meets and experiences unity but in time the frequency of experiences of differences grows and in time harmony can only prevail if recognition of those differences is accepted.

In our unreflective persona, we are wholly identified with life around us including and especially life as we mentally imagine, desire or fear it. Most “things” around us are generally prosaic and taken for granted. It is primarily our thoughts and feelings about the world (things, people, our opinions) that constitute the cocoon of self that we live in, happily or otherwise. Upon reflection, however (and only a little would suffice), we can know that the objects in this cocoon are ephemeral and often changing. The question can become—at least for a few— “Who am I (really)?”

As the Adi Shankacharya suggests, only by interior inquiry can we experience the “I” in its immutable nature of Self. We may crave endless change, but we do so from an assumed center of changelessness: continuity of existence and self-awareness held in the hope and expectation of satisfaction.

When one begins in earnest to explore “Who am I” we confront the initial reality that I am separate from you. This is true whether in therapy or in meditation. In therapy the “you” are all others (your parents, your spouse, children, co-workers) while in meditation one could say the “you” is whatever is your goal: God, guru, peace, bliss, samadhi, moksha, etc.

In the outer world, we can never pass beyond separateness: we can only reconcile to it. In the inner world of the self, we strive to rise above conditional awareness and self-definitions to achieve union with consciousness alone, as consciousness (however defined, named or not named).

This union of self with Self is not easily achieved. In the teachings of yoga, this process usually takes many lifetimes of effort and requires the help of a Self-realized Self to guide us out of the labyrinth of the mind. The mind, indeed the brain, too, takes input from the senses and creates a world of its own: likes, dislikes, desires, fear, opinions, emotions, tendencies, attitudes, and inclinations. Dissolving the intermediary of the mind to have direct perception is one of the ways to describe enlightenment. It must be said, however, that in the world of the mind and intellect the ways of describing the ultimate state are innumerable given the very nature of the mind and intellect! Do you see the conundrum, then?

“It takes a thorn to remove a thorn.” Our mind’s tendency to extract, reconstruct and redefine experiences in its own terms is obviously a hindrance but it is also a tool. “Work with things (and people) as they are” is good, solid, practical advice for all of us. Saints, sages and yogis are obviously practical people.

Redirecting our thoughts and goals to higher, less self-involved purposes is the first step. Looking to people more highly evolved in this pursuit becomes part of this first step. Refining our self-definition towards that of enlightened persons is very helpful. Yogananda tells the story of a yogi-saint who one day while meditating upon his chosen deity suddenly merged with the object of devotion and proclaimed aloud “I’ve been showering the murti (idol-image) with flowers and now I see that I AM THAT and now shower those petals upon my head as well.” The experience of oneness is not easily won, however.

Better it is, Krishna advises in the Bhagavad Gita, to approach God in the I-Thou relationship rather than to only seek the Absolute. For as long as we are encased in a human body and suffer the indignities of requiring air, water, food, shelter and sunlight, best it is to seek God-enlightenment as separate from us (for the time being until released by grace).

It is probably not useful to dwell endlessly upon transcending I-Thou. Let oneness be the gift of the One. The One has become many and it is not wrong to say that, in essence, the One IS the many. Why quibble over the distinction as if One is better than the Other? As my teacher, Swami Kriyananda would put it, “God is as much with you RIGHT NOW as He will ever be.” And as Yogananda put it, to achieve “Self-realization” you need only “improve your knowing.”

In the Eight-Limbed path of the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, the final three stages of samyama reflect the steps to enlightenment as “I am experiencing peace,” to “Peace IS” to “I AM.”

Some practical applications of this process can include the experience of gazing out a window onto a landscape: all mental narrative vanishes, and no barrier of mind separates you from the experience. Gazing in this way is a kind of meditative exercise that can be deployed during the day. Taking breaks to observe the flow of your breath is another simple but effective exercise. More subtle but very powerful when well-developed is the focusing of attention in the forehead, especially at the point between the eyebrows from time to time during the day (and almost always during meditation itself). Lastly, lifting your gaze upward as if thinking about something but not actually thinking of anything is also very calming.

Practice listening intently to sounds or another person’s words. Don’t run a parallel narrative while listening but simply listen as if the sound wasn’t so much coming in through your ears as in through your heart (not physical heart but in the center line of your body near the physical heart).

For those whose energy is strongly outward and for whom (or at times when) these practices (above) are too contemplative, practice radiating heart energy outward into your space, environment, workplace, or neighborhood from wherever you are, including while moving through space in a car, plane, or train. You can “color” the radiation with peace or love or kindness if you feel to do so. No one can see nor need to know that you are silently blessing them.

Like the yogi’s response to the hot dog vendor’s question about which condiments to add, “Make me One with everything!” Finding that cosmic vendor will require practice, patience, and determination!

 Joy to you, 

Swami Hrimananda

footnotes:

 1)

Autobiography of a Yogi, Chapter 26: The Science of Kriya Yoga

2) Autobiography of a Yogi, Chapter 1: My Parents and Early Life, footnote 11

Do You Have a Soulmate?

                                                     Do You Have a Soulmate?

Photo by Ryan Holloway on Unsplash

 

My wife, Padma and I just celebrated our forty-fifth wedding anniversary. Soul mates? Almost everyone uses the term in respect to marital relationships even if it is unclear where the term came from. The internet says the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge first used the term in the English language in a letter he wrote in 1822 on the subject how to have a happy married life. His, however, was not a happy marriage because the woman he first loved married someone else. Carl Jung also mentioned the possibility of a soul-mate “somewhere in the upper world.”

Plato, some say, quoted Aristophanes in his text Symposium for the reasons behind the human yearning for a soulmate. Others say that it was Aristophanes who explained the origin for our yearning for a soulmate. Evidently the story goes like this: the great god Zeus split humans with four arms and legs and two heads apart from their other half because he was jealous of the happy, united and courageous humans.

In the teachings of India, there is the Ardhanarishvara, a depiction of Shiva and Parvati as half man and half woman. But maybe this doesn't suggest the concept of soulmates but a depiction of the genderless nature of our soul. But no matter because there’s no point my arguing with the all but universal interpretation of the soulmate concept as that of the perfect union of male and female.

The are variations on the use of term soulmates ranging from a red-hot romance to an eternal bond. The latter concept goes something like this: each of us, as a soul, has a twin soul: our other half, as it were, which was formed at the birth of our creation long ago and at which time we were separated from one another. (Never mind "why!") Our soul's goal, then, is to find and reunite with our twin or half-soul. This explanation requires the concept of of reincarnation. Accordingly, at some point in our own soul’s evolution we must encounter our soul mate in order to achieve complete fulfillment and final liberation from delusion. 

In the book “The Life Everlasting” by Marie Corelli we find a famous and popular fiction novel about the spiritual love between two people, a man and a woman. Swami Kriyananda, a direct disciple of Paramhansa Yogananda, stated that this novel was the only book of its kind that Yogananda read. Not satisfied, however, with the overly romantic aspects of this story of soul mates, Swami Kriyananda actually re-wrote the story placing it on a higher plane than romance.[1]

Yogananda touched upon the soul mate concept in his talks and writings, but only lightly. He acknowledged the precept but insisted it was not a romantic relationship but a relationship between two half souls or twins. This of course flies in the face of the common usage of the term.

Gender was, he said, irrelevant. Even the physical location is not so important given, as he stated, that soul mates could be on different planets and find each other in their etheric forms. He evidently felt to acknowledge the validity of the concept but thought to correct its popular romantic interpretation.

But before I dismiss the romantic version, I, being committed to the mantra BOTH-AND, will state simply that the traditional and almost entirely universal attraction between male and female is at least an example of the impulse humans have, deeply embedded, to seek their mate. I say this without cynicism and without the need to affirm its lowest common denominators, procreation or sexual attraction. In the lives of humans, the interplay, indeed almost necessity, for male and female to help one another is obvious, necessary and genuinely creative. It cannot be so easily dismissed. I would simply say, for now, that the attraction between male and female hints at the deeper truth of soul-attraction. Those romanticists who seek to justify their relationships on the basis of having found their soul mates: well, let them have their day. For it is how they feel, at least for a time! What I feel this points to is the sacredness and importance of friendship. Human friendship could be seen as a precursor to the more permanent fulfillment implied by the idea of soul mates.

The soul, however, is without gender: this is explicit or implicit in the teachings of East and West.[2] One’s soul mate, therefore, must surely offer us a necessary balancing of soul qualities, not physical or egoic qualities. What humans experience on those levels is, as I said above, merely a precursor, or hint, of the deeper need for balance and for the possible truth that each of us, in our soul nature, has a soul friend whom we are seeking in order to achieve fulfillment on the highest level of manifested consciousness.

Moving away, then, from romantic and egoic attractions, I have noticed that in the lives of saints we sometimes find a saint who has a brother or sister saint, co-equal or even one who is in the shadows. The companion saint is one who makes it possible for the saint to achieve the goal of his/her incarnation. Examples are many and might include: St. Francis and St. Clare; St. John of the Cross and Saint Teresa of Avila; Paramhansa Yogananda and Rajarshi Janakananda; Babaji and Lahiri Mahasaya; Yogananda and Swami Sri Yukteswar; Ramakrishna Paramhansa and Swami Vivekananda; Krishna and Arjuna; Rama and Sita; Jesus and John the Baptist; Ramana Maharshi and Sri Rama Yogi. My selection of possible pairs may be imperfect but curious nonetheless.

I assume the greatest saints, the avatars or saviors, are lacking nothing in soul-fulfillment but when they return to human form they may be accompanied by their soulmate in order to fulfill their divine mission.

Going back to our roots in lower life forms, we see how plants and animals help each other in a variety of ways. We also see that some animals mate for life. 

On the highest level wherein the soul merges into God it would be fair to say that our true soulmate is God: the divine intelligence, energy and bliss beyond all created spheres.

Following Yogananda’s seeming reticence to speak at any length on this subject, his disciple and greatest public proponent of Yogananda’s teachings, Swami Kriyananda, counseled that one should not go looking for one’s soulmate. Instead, he suggested that a devotee seek liberation in God through the guidance of one’s sat (true) guru. In so doing, the question of finding one’s soul mate would be left to the divine will. This seems to me to be a wise and practical suggestion. So long as we are still enmeshed in our own karma and are still influenced by our egoic karma, our soul's ability to recognize our soulmate is compromised.

Just as on the path to God we may have many teachers, so on the path to freedom we may have many friends and helpmates. The recognition of that one who is our soulmate may be best left to the time when we have achieved or come close to soul liberation and thus have the eyes to see the truth that shall make us free.

A possible lesson behind this idea of our having a soul mate is a reminder to treat all others as soul friends for indeed in God we are that! There is a footnote in Yogananda’s “Autobiography of a Yogi” quoting Buddha saying that the reason to love everyone is because “in the very numerous and varied lifespans of each man, every other being has at one time or another been dear to him.”

In conclusion: the concept of soul mate is interesting but has very little practical application to our lives. Best to seek the unconditional love and wisdom of God, and let the details work themselves out from there.

Blessings and joy to you!

Swami Hrimananda

---

[1] See the book, Love Perfected, Life Divine by Swami Kriyananda. Crystal Clarity Publishers.

[2] In the New Testament Jesus is asked what happens after death if a woman had been married several times on earth: which husband would she be with in heaven? Jesus dismissed the question essentially as nonsense saying there is no marriage in heaven. This implies the genderless nature of the soul (at least to my way of thinking).