And the Light Shineth in Darkness! Why?

 ”And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.1”  

Can “darkness” comprehend anything at all? Does not light simply banish darkness by its very presence? 

These are questions that arise when reading verse 5 of John, Chapter 1: 

It is commonly understood that the Gospel of John is the most metaphysical of the four gospels, focusing on the divinity of Jesus and somewhat less on the details of the historical and Jewish Jesus.  

For those unfamiliar with the chapter, a complete reading of that chapter reveals that the term “light” is a reference to Jesus Christ. 

Just as the chapter itself contrasts the impersonal light of Christ with the person of Jesus so we see a similar contrast in the fact that verse 5 says the light shines in darkness while the darkness fails to comprehend the light. 

Normally light shining into a dark room illuminates the room and thus the darkness vanishes. But in verse 5 the two coexist. 

Added to the contrast is the whole idea of darkness comprehending anything at all. Clearly the terms of light and dark are metaphorical, and the former is divine consciousness, and the latter is, at best, ignorant of divine consciousness.  

Here one is reminded of Advaita Vedanta saying that behind all appearances, name, form and thought is the eternal, unchanging Consciousness: Satchidanandam (God: ever-existing, ever-conscious, ever-new bliss). Both co-exist in time and space, and in individual human consciousness. The Spirit, though residing at the heart of all things, remains untouched, untainted by the outer expression taken by name and form.  

The choice we humans have been given is to seek that light or to remain in ignorance, in disregard, or even in rejection of that light. If Jesus Christ is that light and if that light is the “life of men” then we, too, are made of the light. “Without him was not anything made that was made.” 

The very nature of things made requires the contrast between light and dark. Things having shape, form, name and many attributes must necessarily hide the light, which is their essence. Creation is the very drama of light and dark, and in this sense, the “dark” does not necessarily reject the light, at least not at first.  

But to perpetuate itself, the creation naturally has a bias toward form, and form has a bias toward turning its back on the light. Thus, an impetus can become a conscious choice, a rejection and a rebellion, especially when it perceives but rejects the magnetic call of the light to return to it. As the impetus to be separate becomes conscious and intentional, it becomes essentially “satanic” whether in the macrocosm of creation or the microcosm of one’s mind. 

When a beam of light is sent out into the darkness of the night, there is a point at which one, at a distance, can no longer see the beam of light. It’s not that the light or dark are vying for supremacy so much as the light has gone too far from its source and is no longer visible. One must move back toward the light to see it. Light and dark are not opposites; dark is the absence of light. Light is the essential reality of all things. 

Think of Jesus, himself. How few understood who he was. “Who do men say I am?” He asked. You and I also must ask ourselves the same question. A Christ such as Jesus comes to reveal that light to those with eyes to see it. There weren’t many who did but there were enough who gave their lives in testimony and as a result changed human history.  

We face two types of darkness: the darkness inherent in matter, in the human form, and in the human drama of life that requires so much of our energy and attention to deal with our very existence and which at the same time invites us to seek happiness in its material rewards. The second type of darkness is that which we create by our personal fantasies, errors, projections of happiness, fears and lack of clarity and even lack of goodwill, meaning selfishness and meanness.  

The path back to the light is not easy and is infected with the darkness that comprehends it not; the path back requires more than a mere intellectual acceptance. Our souls require an injection, a transmission of the light from a source of that light. That transmission, that source is the guru, the avatar, the savior. “But as many as received him, to them gave he the power to become the sons of God.”2 The living Christ-masters who descend age after age are the transmitters of that light to those who will “receive them.” 

This isn’t a denial that at the heart of all things is that light. Like the Prodigal son who remembered his life at his father’s home, our souls have the memory of that light. But the memory is not enough given the darkness that surrounds us and around which we constructed our own self-definitions. The savior comes first to awaken that memory and then, for those who will truly “receive Him,” the savior can pour out the grace into that soul for its redemption. First comes the remembrance; then comes our own intense self-effort which like a magnet attracts the uplifting power of divine grace.  

As name and form (duality) rule the created universe, so must the light use instruments through which to shine. I would go further than even this and say that the purpose of our existence is to be channels for the light. 

There is a tendency to see God apart from us in His heaven; or to imagine Satchidanandam separate and apart from the visible creation, untouched by it. While there’s nothing wrong with these static and simplistic images, we can never fully understand the “why” of all of this. Nor do I pretend to have a satisfying answer to the “why” question. Paramhansa Yogananda said simply: “You will know when you will know.” He also suggested that we save some questions for when we meet the Creator ourselves. It is worthy of note that no great saint, savior or avatar has ever expressed disappointment or resentment towards God’s purpose.  

However, without the logical conundrum of positing that God is somehow incomplete, let us take a cue from science and accept what simply is: this creation. I suggest therefore that we not view the creation as incomplete but rather as a window, an opportunity to see its completeness in the contemplation of the Spirit manifested in creation. We might then adopt the view that the purpose of creation is to enable the awakening of self-awareness in a name and form (the human form) capable of achieving transcendence of the natural limitations of its own form, seeing the Spirit AS the creation; WITHIN the creation; and even UNTOUCHED and BEYOND the creation. Let me make my case: 

Satchidanandam sounds like an ideal description of God: ever-existing (immortal); ever-conscious (omniscient); ever blissful (ananda). Yogananda added a sneaky phrase to the “Ananda” part: “ever-new.” Now how can anything be “ever-new” and static at the same time? I suggest it cannot be. As my teacher, Swami Kriyananda, now famously has added: “It is the nature of bliss to share.” Herein, I believe, is a secret that Yogananda hints at but didn’t feel the world was ready for: it is not that God (Satchidanandam) is somehow incomplete but its very nature is to take shape through name and form and to discover itself, its light, in the uncomprehending darkness that is, both ironically and necessarily, the nature of name and form.  

Yes, as others far wiser have said: creation is a game; a lila; a play; a great drama. Yogananda said that “The drama of life has for its moral the fact that it is merely that: a drama, an illusion.”3 There, he said it.  

What I feel to add, if that is fair to say, is that this great drama isn’t just a disappointment or a conundrum, a misfortunate to us because of its troubles. The very purpose of creation is for the light to produce the name and form that at last cognizes the great drama and the great light of God upon which it is built: WE ARE the apogee, the purpose, the raison d’etre. “Who do men say I AM?” 

I can’t say that the light is somehow compelled by its nature to do this, but I’m not sure the distinction is useful since reality suggests that both are part and parcel of reality. It is not unlike the nuances in Advaita Vedanta between pure non-duality, modified duality and duality. What IS, simply IS.  

The dualists who worship God in name and form and are consumed by their love are no less great than those who are absorbed in the state of nirbikalpa samadhi. 

As I heard other friends say, “We were born for this.” Isn’t this the “good news” of the gospel? The promise of our soul’s immortality? Of course, it is, but it is also something else: like it or not, it is necessary. Like playing golf by the rules, it’s the only way it can be. Right here, right now, the light is shining in darkness. The light is as much a reality with each of us right now as it can ever be. We need only to re-direct our love and attention, and self-definition, to the light. With our effort and the savior’s grace, we will be free. 

Joy to you! 

Swami Hrimananda 

1. John 1:5

2: John 1:12

3. 3 Essence of Self-Realization, The Wisdom of Paramhansa Yogananda, Chapter 1, “The Folly of Materialism,” number 3. 

 

A New Dispensation - Second Coming of Christ

 In Chapter 4 of the Bhagavad Gita Krishna says to Arjuna, his disciple,

“O Bharata (Arjuna)! whenever virtue (dharma) declines, and vice (adharma) is in the ascendant, I incarnate Myself on earth (as an avatar). Appearing from age to age in visible form, I come to destroy evil and to re-establish virtue.

Who knows the truth touching my births on earth and my divine work, falls no more down to earthly birth. To Me he comes, dear Prince!”

The descent of a world savior-teacher (an avatar) into human form is a rare event in human history. As it is, saints are rare enough but the birth of one such as Jesus Christ, Krishna, Buddha and in this modern era, Paramhansa Yogananda and the lineage that sent him to the West, heralds a new covenant, a new dispensation for those “with ears to hear and eyes to see.”

No avatar comes for everyone in the world though some have a larger family to serve than others. It is not quantity but quality that the great Ones come to bring. That “quality” is spiritual power, the grace to rise given to those who “receive Him.”[1]

The spiritual family of a world teacher contains the broad range of human beings from sinners to saints yet, like the calm at the center of the storm (of delusion), the avatar offers a powerful vortex of grace. The avatar typically has at least two kinds of people to uplift: the inner circle of disciples who are ready to be liberated and enlightened (and to do so give their all to serve the work), and the larger family of souls to be blessed and inspired most likely for the benefit of future lifetimes. A third “circle” would be the avatar’s general influence upon society at large.

As time goes on after the appearance of the avatar, the family grows and branches out. The power of the ray of grace will tend to diminish, perhaps be diluted and even go in opposite directions from its source. Sub-groups split off into individual sects, each emphasizing different aspects of the avatar’s mission and teachings. Hence the need from age to age of a repeat of the avatara (descent of Spirit into human form).

What is an avatar? An avatar is a soul, like you and me, who in past lives has achieved God-realization. Such a one returns to human birth voluntarily, as an act of love and as a son of God, to do God’s work on earth according to the unique expression of that soul’s nature and the needs of those who are “his own.”[2]

Some devotees emphasize the divine nature of the avatar and equate the avatar with the descent of God Himself. And, why not, for when the soul becomes God-realized the soul IS God though no single expression can limit Infinity. (It is not right for such a one to say I AM GOD, but, instead, “God is manifest in me.”) Other devotees emphasize the human or historical nature of the avatar and his impact on world history or upon the lives of individuals. It is not either-or, but both-and, depending on what eyes and ears are able to perceive.

I would like to contrast the mission and expression of Jesus Christ with that of Paramhansa Yogananda. The times in which each lived were very different. Jesus was born in a far-flung, dusty province of the Roman Empire as inconsequential as any though, importantly, among the “Chosen people” who had chosen love and obedience to God according to the covenant of Abraham and Moses.

Yogananda, born in timeless India, nonetheless entered the twentieth century in what was the first global century in recorded history. From bullock carts to trains and planes, television, radio, movies and the nuclear age, the contrast with the life of Jesus Christ could hardly be greater.

Jesus was more like a wandering Hindu sadhu than a pope in his royal robes and palatial surroundings. Jesus decried the potential for a “rich man” to enter the kingdom of heaven saying that to follow him to eternal life one must leave all possessions and the worldly life behind. While honored in the breach by Christians at large down through the centuries this is the example Jesus set for his direct disciples.

Yogananda’s param-guru, Lahiri Mahasaya was commissioned by Mahavatar Babaji to eschew the attraction of a monk’s life to return to the householder life to begin sharing the liberating teachings of kriya yoga to any who were sincere, regardless of caste, class or the absence of outer renunciation.

This, then, is the new covenant, the new dispensation for our age: that regardless of social status or class, anyone who strives for soul-emancipation can receive the heretofore esoteric but liberating techniques of advanced yoga life-force control that can accelerate their spiritual advancement beyond the normal pace bestowed by good works, prayers and rituals alone.

Additionally, Paramhansa Yogananda taught that Jesus’ promise of his “second coming” is fulfilled in Yogananda’s mission by the awakening of Christ consciousness (soul-consciousness) through advanced meditation techniques, devotion and the spiritual life. Yogananda’s purpose was to resurrect the deeper and universal teachings of Jesus which are aligned with those of Krishna in ancient India and which apply to all people of every nation and generation.

“The time to know God” (through meditation) “has come!” Yogananda announced. No longer shall East and West “never ‘twain [to] meet” for the needs of humanity in this global era is to transcend sectarian differences and, while, if one chooses, to retain one’s treasured faith tradition, to accept all true spiritual paths as sincere channels for those who love and serve God in this world.

May the Light of Christ-consciousness shine upon you!

Swami Hrimananda

---

[1] John 1:12

[2] An avatar may take birth as male or female. The gender of the avatar is inconsequential. More likely the avatar’s gender is that which is suitable and appropriate to the accomplishment of his mission.

Who is Jesus Christ?

 

Paramhansa Yogananda, author of the 20^th century spiritual classic, “Autobiography of a Yogi,” stated that “Jesus Christ was crucified once but his teachings have been crucified daily ever since.”

Consider how each person you know perceives you differently and so differently than how view yourself!

To your enemies you are a schmuck. To those who love you, you are ever theirs through thick and thin. But to most who only know you casually, you are a two-dimensional wraith passing through their lives in forms such as co-worker, neighbor, or fellow church goer. You are defined by others largely based on your appearance, age, gender, education, social status, and income.

Jesus Christ was ridiculed, feared, beloved, and ultimately crucified for his crimes. His crimes? Really? What crimes? If Jesus Christ could be so maligned both then and daily ever since, what chance does this give you and I to be understood and accepted?

The very words of Jesus were not contemporaneously recorded, not even in his own language. They were reported decades after his death and the accounts of his life contain many variations and even conflicting details. Other accounts of his life and teachings were discarded from the canon of scripture as false, inaccurate or heretical. In recent times some of these discarded works such as the Gospel of Thomas are being studied anew. Questions have arisen about the real reasons some of them were rejected.

Controversies of the nature of Jesus Christ plagued the first thousand or so years after his death. The so-called Arian heresy was among the most famous and it was settled at the insistence of Emperor Constantine who demanded unanimity across his empire for the newly installed religion.

Some say St. Paul created the foundations of Christianity. Among the apostles there is recorded disagreement on important questions. In the gospel of Mark, it is generally accepted that the story of the resurrection of Jesus was added later! Some doubt the ascribed authorship of the canonical gospels!

My point is not to declaim or deny the divine nature of Jesus Christ: according to the gospels Jesus himself proclaimed himself “son of God.” My point is that I don’t think we really know the true nature of Jesus’ soul or consciousness.

We don’t even know one another; more importantly, we don’t even know ourselves. Spiritual traditions East and West exhort us to “know thyself” as the great quest of humankind. No one who embarks on that journey says that “finding myself” is easy or obvious! We are many things, real, imagined, actual and potential. We play many roles in one lifetime.

The Old Testament of the Bible has five references to “sons of God.” The New Testament has three such references. Nor is it clear what those terms mean even in their own, specific context. What then IS a “son of God?”

Twice in Genesis (Old Testament) God says He has made us in His image. Whatever is the “image” of God if God is something more than an anthropomorphic projection of human perception? Jesus himself said “God is a Spirit.”[1]

The testimony of the greatest saints of Christianity is where we should turn. Yogananda taught that the “saints are the true custodians of religion.” They are, however, often viewed with suspicion by religious authorities—at least until they are safely buried.

The testimony of St. Therese of Avila, St. John of the Cross, and St. Francis (just to name a few of the most famous) affirms the divinity of Jesus Christ not only in the past tense of his human life long ago but in the present, living sense of omnipresence. “Before Abraham, I AM” Jesus declared.[2]

And Jesus’ response to being challenged for this statement was to quote the scriptures themselves when he said, “Do not your scriptures say, ‘Ye are gods?’[3]

The beloved disciple of Jesus (St. John) wrote in the first chapter of his gospel that “as many as received Him to them gave He the power to become the sons of God”[4] Jesus is never quoted as saying “I am the ONLY son of God.” Other uses of this phrase in both the Old and New Testaments suggest a broader meaning of this term may be appropriate. Nor does the term, given the various contexts where it is used, require that all “sons” of God be the same.

Are we, too, perhaps as old as Abraham? Have we, too, come down from heaven?[5] And, if not, are those who “receive” Him at least given the power to become “the sons of God?” (The gospel says as much, doesn’t it?)

I am not averring the obviously blasphemous thought that any of us are on a spiritual par with Jesus Christ: only that we have that potential as children of God, made in the image of God. Only in our case we have “fallen” and forgotten our divine nature.

Nor am I suggesting that by our own efforts that we can become “sons of God.” From the words of Jesus as reported in the canonical gospels, Jesus came to redeem souls and sacrificed his bodily life to do so.

Instead, I am suggesting that the consciousness of the Christ lives in all persons, perhaps in every atom of creation and it appeared fully in human form in the man Jesus as a true and fully realized “son of God.” Yogananda taught that the only reflection of God (a Spirit beyond and untouched by creation) that exists within the creation is a spark of intelligence and calm joy that is centered at the still point of all motion. God manifests the creation through intelligence and vibration: intelligence is the “son” and vibration is the “Holy Spirit” and mother of creation. The son exists in the womb of the mother.

But once we open the door to this omnipresent Christ—a consciousness greater than any limited by a singular human life, we are confronted with the same question Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do men say I AM?

Is it perhaps that the omnipresent, ever-living and ever present Christ is the ultimate redeemer of all souls and that the Christ-consciousness is not limited to its appearance in human form in the body of the man called Jesus? If we, too, have that potential why should only one such human expression exists through all time and space (if its potential exists in each of us)?

Nor does this possibility limit the status, worthiness, and appreciation of the life of Jesus the Christ. That there may be other Christs seems far more likely in the context of the universe and the earth as we know it today: impossibly ancient and vast. That your mother is beloved to you does not diminish the love that others have for their respective mothers. Mothers share in their roles a universal quality not unlike that of living Christs in respect to their followers.

The redeeming Christ then might be a potential within us but one which requires the human Christ for its potential to be activated. Why would that be so? If there were no actual examples of a living, human Christ then why should we have the audacity to imagine we can aspire to be one also?

Given the depth of the hypnosis that we are but a sophisticated high-bred animal, it surely would take the power of grace of such a one to inspire us toward our own soul’s potential. Nor does the power of grace dismiss the herculean effort that it takes to “follow Me.”

We see in many areas of human life the process and acceptance of the transmission of knowledge, experience and authority. We accept that training by proper and competent authorities is the prerequisite for being commissioned to perform certain public functions, both sacred and profane—from an airplane pilot to a priest. In former times a father would train his son, and the skills and arts of the father would be transmitted down through generations.

As God ordains and commissions the prophets and as sincere souls look to such messengers for guidance, why would we not need a redeemer whose “touch,” whose grace even beyond his words and instructions, would be necessary for redemption? And would the power of that grace vanish when the human form that expressed it is gone from sight?

What, then is redemption? Redemption is the release from the hypnosis that we are anything less than the son of God! Here I speak not of an intellectual concept or affirmation but of transformation towards realization. We see this redemption in the lives of the saints.

Having rejected the precept of reincarnation early in Christian history, Christian dogma was forced to leave the final redemption to the afterlife since so few could achieve sanctity in a single lifetime.[6] The sacraments were energized to affirm our potential for sanctity even if only after death.[7]

Taking a step, indeed a giant leap of faith, from Jesus the ONLY Christ to the acceptance of Christ consciousness appearing in multiple forms, is to me the only “way, truth and life” by which Christians can enter the new world of the twenty-first and future centuries. Otherwise, their beloved dogmas silo themselves to the exclusion of billions of other sincere, faith-inspired peoples with religions equally infused with saints, miracles, and redemptive grace.

Just as we reserve a special love for our own mother without needing to reject other mothers, let those of the many faith traditions continue to remain loyal to their faith while yet also accepting that the Christ has incarnated in other forms to guide devotees of other faiths. Let the mantra of the Twenty-first century be “BOTH-AND” rather than “EITHER-OR.”

Blessings to all,

Swami Hrimananda

---

[1] John 4:24

[2] John 8:58

[3] Psalm 82:6; see John 10:34

[4] John 1:12

[5]   John 3:13 (KJV): “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”

 

[6] Second Council of Constantinople in 553 AD

[7] But reincarnation makes far greater sense in considering both the justice and the mercy of God, but that topic is another topic.