[My apologies in advance for the length of this article. These opinions are not those of any organization but are solely my own.]
I am a disciple of Paramhansa Yogananda (PY) and the
line of preceptors who sent him. In this life, I did not know him as I
was born in 1950 in northern California and he, PY, left his mortal frame in
1952 in Los Angeles.
I was greatly blessed to become a student and friend of Swami Kriyananda (SK) who lived with and was trained by PY in the last three
and a half years of PY's life. Thus in a very real sense, I (and of course many
hundreds, indeed, thousands) were blessed to receive PY's vibrations, wisdom,
and joy through the channel of SK.
Commissioned and ordained by SK as a
minister and, in 2009, as a kriyacharya (one authorized to initiate others into
Kriya Yoga), I (and my wife, Padma) offer classes to prepare students to become
disciples of PY and to receive kriya initiation (through the Ananda Center
based in Bothell, near Seattle).
We do this twice a year and each time we
see students struggle with the hurdle of taking discipleship as a prerequisite
and a consequence of kriya initiation. In this training, we follow the pattern
established by PY during his lifetime and given to us by SK.
During his very active and full lifetime
of teaching, SK would regale us with stories of his time with PY. It was not to
separate himself from us, as in, "lucky me," it was genuinely to help
us understand what discipleship entailed and how important it is to achieving
Self-realization. In turn, we share and train students in this same manner.
After SK's passing three years ago and
during one of these classes, I was inspired to play an audio recording of SK
speaking on the subject of discipleship. (SK gave many such talks during his
lifetime.) I was shocked, however, when the students had no substantive
reaction to the talk; they were not particularly inspired or touched. Listening
to it with them in our living room (where we give these classes), I could feel
that they were not able to connect to SK nor yet, more importantly, to either
the precepts or the stories that SK shared with them.
It was then that my concerns arose and my
thoughts have been evolving ever since.
Allow me to digress: PY's life story,
"Autobiography of a Yogi," (AY) describes Lahiri Mahasaya (the saint
who brought the practice of kriya yoga back into public view) as giving kriya
to all sincere seekers: Moslems, Christians and others (not just orthodox
Hindus). Students sometimes ask us about this, especially with the hidden,
unstated question of "Why, then, must we take discipleship vows?"
Yet in the AY, Lahiri is told by Babaji
(who initiated Lahiri into kriya and commissioned him to spread kriya yoga) to
quote from the Bhagavad Gita a particular stanza to all his "disciples" to whom he gives kriya. Thus Babaji states, without reservation, that those
to whom Lahiri would give the kriya technique would be disciples.
I am not aware of PY doing this with any
regularity but he was known to give kriya spontaneously and/or to those of
other faiths. He quotes Lahiri's statements about the universality of
kriya in AY, so he obviously accepted and approved it. However, notwithstanding
his own example and teaching, I am told that in years after PY's passing, his
own organization began to require students preparing for kriya to pledge their
allegiance to that organization and to their discipleship to PY as being
exclusive of other paths, gurus, etc. (I don't have the exact facts on this
requirement but I've heard it repeatedly from others first hand.)
Returning to our subject, then, we are
faced, here and now in the 21st century, with the simple fact that PY is NOT in
the body; that kriya is being disseminated throughout the world through various
lineages and organizations, and even in published book form; and that its
worldwide spread was predicted and intended by this lineage. Yet, SK is no
longer in body to guide us; and with both PY and most other direct disciples
like SK, also gone from this earth, new potential disciples will not have the
opportunity to have the blessing of PY's human presence, nor yet that of his
direct disciples.
A variety of organizations and spiritual
teachers, each of which claims transmission from the kriya lineage of Babaji,
Lahiri Mahasaya, Swami Sri Yukteswar and/or Paramhansa Yogananda, offers
training in the kriya technique. Each may have slightly different requirements
in regards to training and/or initiation.
Even in following the training we have
been given by Swami Kriyananda (the pattern follows the training PY employed),
there are nuances in respect to the expectations and requirements that we hold
out in respect to the meaning and form that discipleship should take.
Let's consider first a person of another
faith? Can they receive kriya? Are they expected to be disciples of PY? At
Ananda we've more or less considered that people of other faiths are eligible
for kriya initiation on the assumption that their participation in that faith
is for cultural, family and convenience reasons rather than as an act of deep faith.
Is that, in fact, what the masters have intended?
I, for one, have no reason to
assume or believe that this assumption was intended by them. If such a one is loyal to his own faith, is he not a true disciple of PY? I think that such a person can be both loyal to his faith AND a
disciple of PY (and this line of kriya masters). How can this be? "God is
the guru" PY said often. If a person is sufficiently mature enough to not
view his loyalty to his faith as being compromised by his discipleship to PY, and who views
PY as an incarnation of God who has been sent to him for his spiritual growth, then why would PY have a conflict with that person's faith (and, if a true faith,
why would he?)?
Imagine that this person, say, a
Christian, is given personal instruction in his faith by a wise and spiritually
mature or advanced minister, teacher or friend. Let's say this person is his
spiritual guide. Is that a conflict with his discipleship to Christ? Of course
not! The Kriya masters make it clear in their lives and teachings that they
represent "Sanaatan Dharma," the eternal religion. Not some new sect!
True, you might object, saying, "But this mentor is not the sat
guru!" True, but how can any one of us know whether PY or any of the
others are our sat guru? I don't think we will know until we are much closer to
enlightenment. Even PY's guru, Swami Sri Yukteswar, was a "proxy," he
explained, for his sat guru, Babaji! We should know the teaching and the precepts but their application to our individual lives is necessarily directional and relative.
Would a self-professed atheist be eligible
for kriya? I don't see how. Profession of atheism is as dogmatic as any
narrow-eyed religious dogma. A sincere agnostic, on the other hand, who simply
professes not to know whether God exists but otherwise is open, could certainly
be. At first, his "discipleship" would be the commitment to practice
kriya and study the teachings; in time, the descent of divine consciousness
will baptism him in true faith and intuitive gnosis. Sri Yukteswar told his disciple, PY, that "joy is the proof of God's existence! (And His adequate response to our every need.)"
Can one who has taken a vow of discipleship
to another guru and lineage take kriya? Hmmm, that hits closer to home, doesn't
it? I'd say generally, "it depends." If that guru offers no kriya
equivalent, is in all other respects compatible in the teachings, and the disciple
mature and sincere.......Maybe? After all, the line between this circumstance
and the situation of being of another faith can become a very thin line.
Besides, PY's lineage is compatible both vibrationally and historically with a
number of other saints. So, this is too close to call, at least for me. The
issue of having only one guru has two aspects: practicality and principle.
Practicality has to do with the admixture of vibration, teachings and
techniques that potentially confuses the devotee; principle has to do both with
the importance of loyalty (which PY emphasized as "the first law of
God") and the principle of the sat (sad) guru: that instrument through
which our salvation is destined to come.
I know numerous devotees whose personal
altar contains many true saints. What is the significance of this and the person's inner attunement and
relationship to each saint? I generally have no idea. Why should I be
the judge? Sincerity and maturity linked with intensity of effort, common sense
and intelligence, are the magnets that attract the power of grace.
Not everyone can integrate this
bifurcation of loyalty and commitment so readily. In fact, and in general, our
planetary human consciousness is not very evolved this way. We tend toward "either-or," rather than "both-and." One sees more
genuine examples of this universality and integration in a culture like India
than in the West.
The downside can, however, be a lack of discernment and an
eclectic approach for which no deep roots are nurtured. Nonetheless, we are not
here to judge others even if, we must, by the requirements of our role, fulfill
some degree of our own discernment of a person's readiness to take kriya and to
accept discipleship.
As one trained and commissioned by Swami
Kriyananda, I am committed to following the instructions and training he has
given to us. My priority is to serve and build the work of Ananda rather than to be a vending machine for kriya. We could not offer kriya if there were not a committed group of disciples operating through genuine attunement to the guru(s) to support this work of kriya.
Yet, as I encounter students seeking kriya for whom very little
personal connection, if any, exists in respect to PY (owing at least in part to the passage of
time and the disappearance of direct disciples), I must wonder whether our
description and training in discipleship which is wholly based on the example
of PY and his own direct disciples, is unnecessarily too high a bar; too
irrelevant to the daily lives of sincerely seeking men and women living in this
conflicted world of ours; people for whom kriya was intended to uplift. How can
kriya spread if every potential disciple is expected to accept and have the
kind of relationship that direct disciples had with PY, or even what some of us
had with PY through SK as our teacher (and who was a direct disciple)?
Is it, then, possible to reconcile these
aspects of discipleship in regards to kriya initiation?
I believe it is. I believe we must
consider the reality of discipleship for an ever widening circle of sincere
souls. Few of these will become members of organizations founded to serve
Yogananda's work; fewer still will live in a monastic life, or in Ananda
Communities, or become ministers, acharyas, or reunciates or in any other way
adopt the outer forms of discipleship and renunciation. Indeed, PY's teachings
and Lahiri's own commission from Babaji clearly anticipate kriya for the common
(but sincere) "man."
I believe that the simplest resolution of
these questions lies in viewing the practice of kriya itself as the primary
instrument of discipleship. Kriya, in effect, becomes the guru. Kriya (and its
attendant practices like Energization, Aum, and Hong Sau) become the channels
through which, by the disciple's sincere effort based on his or her training,
inspiration and guidance from the guru comes. Yes the touch (and guidance) of the
disciples is the primary vehicle of transmission but by and of itself it is,
like the kriya initiation ceremony itself, it is only a beginning. So PY has
taught us.
Sincere students should of course study
the lives of direct disciples; they should learn the value of serving the
guru's work; the importance of devotion; right attitude; the concepts of the
teachings of the guru; and so much else. Sharing these essential elements of
the spiritual path is important; but, as these students are fresh and new to
this, and as the training we and others offer is generally less than one year, we cannot expect them to manifest these qualities overnight! Attunement takes time and practice. Nor,
in fact, have we done otherwise, all these years.
What we've done to-date, however, is to
describe discipleship in such a way as hold aloft a high bar of expectations
which lies beyond the current reach of understanding and experience of an
increasing tide of otherwise sincere and potentially qualified kriyaban-disciples. As discipleship is unfamiliar to westerners and triggers doubt, fear, and confusion, I think we need a broader brush to meet them where they are.
I think, therefore, we should add to our
training an emphasis that with right attitude and devotion, kriya itself can be
an instrument through which attunement to the guru can grow naturally. It's not
the only way, obviously, but as kriya spreads and as more and more come seeking
kriya for whom service and satsang may not be accessible or of immediate and
obvious appeal, this can be their legitimate starting point and as a starting
point, it can be their guide.
I'd like to share some quotes from an
unpublished course in discipleship that SK created for training the monks at
Mt. Washington back in the 1950's:
In the West, the importance of the guru-disciple
relationship is over-looked; one great reason being that it is not understood.
Even the more familiar word disciple is not understood. Who
were the disciples of Jesus, for instance? Those who followed the
discipline of Jesus. There are several references in the Christian
Bible to this relationship as a necessity for communion with God. Paramhansaji
frequently explained that a disciple is one that follows discipline. Whose
discipline? Certainly the blind cannot lead the blind. Neither can a human
being steeped in delusion go on alone,as many think to be able to
do. One cannot become a surgeon without studying under experts in surgery; no
one can become a pianist without studying under a pianist. The same principle
is involved in one’s quest for God. Without the discipline of following a true
guru one may not find God.
...... Note: In all cases, in the ultimate sense, it is
God who is the Guru: First,through His Law; second through
books and teachers; third, through the most direct channel
possible, a guru. Lesser teachers turn one to themselves. A guru’s wish
is only to turn devotees to God; to lift them up to his own stature of
spiritual realization.....
...... The practice of the techniques
is essential. Many times I have heard our beloved Master say to a
disciple, “Practice your techniques. It is through the techniques that I can
help you.” He has given us these great techniques, but it is up to us to
use them for our own salvation."
When you read the AY and its frequent references to kriya,
and the writings and lectures and lessons written by PY, it is abundantly clear
that the principal, and most visible and objective legacy he has given the
world is KRIYA YOGA. It seems inescapable to me that PY intended kriya to be
the instrument of attunement for future generations and centuries, when little
else other than books and a relatively few number of dedicated and attuned
disciples exist to carry on the work.
The only other choice, apart from just printing the technique (as has been
done) in a book, is to require commitment to an organization to receive the
requisite training and support in satsang and service. This is precisely what PY's own
organization apparently has done.
It is understandable. I, too, find sometimes
frustrating the mercenary and ignorant impulse in some seekers to come for our
training, take the kriya, and "run." They do not understand the
importance of satsang (fellowship), devotion, and seva (service) to the guru's
work. Yet, SK has made it clear that we do not require membership or service to Ananda as a requirement of kriya initiation.
Nonetheless, when I survey some Ananda members who outwardly fulfill all of these things I
don't always see true devotees, either. It takes time to grow our attunement to
the truth. We who might be privileged to train and initiate others and therefore
act somewhat as gatekeepers, must be careful not to create hurdles that are
inappropriate or skewed by our loyalty to the organization we serve in our
guru's name.
Today's seekers have little exposure and sometimes a great deal of ignorance,
misunderstanding or wariness regarding the meaning of discipleship. We can
share what we've been taught; share what we have learned. But we must not
impose either the ideals or our own experience on souls whose karmic pattern of
unfoldment is uniquely their own.
So long as they are sincere and are open to learning about the precepts of
discipleship, I believe it is up each to approach and express their discipleship uniquely (so long as
other requirements, namely, learning and practicing the other techniques that
are part of the kriya path are fulfilled). One who goes to the altar of matrimony may be
confident or have secret reservations but so long as they are sincere, the
outcome must await the unfoldment of the resuls of their efforts and their karma.
Let us make kriya yoga available for all who are sincere!
Swami Hrimananda
We understand that Ananda is seen in various ways, some of which seem at opposites: to some, we are a specific spiritual path (kriya yoga) following the inspiration of a modern spiritual teacher (Paramhansa Yogananda). In this view we are not unlike churches or temples everywhere and in most faith traditions. Indeed, our legal name is Ananda Church of Self-Realization of Seattle! We are, in fact, recognized as a “church” by the I.R.S.
