Invest in the Future! Hope for Tomorrow!

The other day I wrote some reflections on "Hope for a Better World." Today, the day after the second debate between presidential hopefuls, Obama and Romney, I reflect on "How can we invest in the future?"

Here we are, and together with a handful of economically important nations in Europe, with more national debt than we can afford to pay. We are spending more, as a nation, than we are earning: not just in governmental coffers, but in far too many corporate and private lives as well.

Our presidential candidates are sparring off with two basic and opposite approaches: Barack Obama wants to pull ourselves out of our economic doldrums saying the government must lead the way with continued deficit spending. This was the now famous approach of FDR during the Depression which I believe originated the term "deficit spending" under the heading of Keynesian economics. It is debated to this day whether it this approach is what took the U.S. out of the Depression, or whether it was World War II itself. (During the War the government was able to control the economy in ways far beyond anything even the Depression could justify.) I can't possibly weigh in on this debate that professional economists themselves can't agree on. Yet, how much more debt can our government possibly take on before our currency collapses under evaporating consumer and global confidence in our sanity and economic common sense?

The Republicans seem to say that we must bring out spending under control. In its simplest terms, this is a good policy and is reasonable when it comes to a family or a business. They seem to indicate that we need to cut government spending to reduce the deficit while also reducing taxes to spur the economy. But unless the tax reductions or other causes spur the economy to increase tax revenues to cover most if not all of the tax cuts, it will backfire. And, in the meantime as we wait for it to succeed, we might find that massive spending cuts in the federal budget could put a lot of people out of work and a lot of others out in the street. Easy to imagine social unrest and a very short four-year term for Governor Romney!

Either way, then, we are in a pickle. Whether we cut our way back to prosperity or spend our way there we could be doomed never to arrive. This is why it could also be said it doesn't really matter much which party wins the election because neither solution can float over the tsunami that's building and running rapidly towards our financial shores.

Is there, perhaps, a third alternative? If spending, both government and private, were re-directed towards investing in our future, it wouldn't be fast or an easy cure, but it could be a solid boost to confidence in the future. We could  INVEST IN OUR OWN FUTURE! Society and economists are beginning to realize that expectation and confidence are more important than so-called financial reality in determining economic activity and decision making. Creating a culture of innovation and optimism can do more for our current problems than paralyzing debates.

Now if that sounds a little bit like the same snake oil the politicians are selling, well, I would sympathize with your skepticism. But let's explore it, anyway. We've little to lose.

When I go to college, or start a business, or move "out west," or embark on a new career, in each case I am investing in my future with pluck, luck, vim and vigor. This inborn optimism to launch ahead into a new direction attracts to itself opportunity and success. By contrast, belt tightening is boring and a downer and continued excessive spending feels like one is coming apart at the seams. But an investment strategy is bound to inspire much more confidence and support than either slash and burn deficit reductions or spend and borrow towards currency collapse. In fact, this investment-in-the-future campaign would combine elements of each in order to work. That's what makes it so magnetic and potentially successful.

Under current conditions consumers are necessarily cautious. But what if we find incentives to encourage home improvements, energy cost savings, better diet and health maintenance, higher education, job retraining, and new, small (family and home-based) businesses? Get people going in new and interesting directions.

What if government re-directed some of its funding for social, farm, and military subsidies and entitlements (by attrition, delay of projects, cost reductions or holding back cost of living adjustments) and, instead, moved funds towards infrastructure repair and improvements, mass transit development, broadband highways, job retraining, higher education support, and research & development in emerging or much needed fields and technologies? I know none of these specifics are new but if we consciously re-direct funds this can inspire confidence rather than deflate it. Those areas being asked to pare down would be making a sacrifice for a greater good and a better future.

Here is a more or less random collection of incentives and dis-incentives we could consider to encourage investment in our national future:

1. Higher taxes on consumption of food and other goods or services which are unhealthy or energy consumers or otherwise unhelpful economically or socially. For example, if there was a way to increase the cost of fast food (some kind of national excise tax on ingredients or removal of farm subsidies?) and at the same time create incentives for healthier meals and foods and education, then we all could benefit. Sacrifices would be for the common good. An increased gas tax that directed the proceeds to areas of new investment (road improvements, research in fuel and driving efficiencies, and mass transits, esp in low tech solutions). Luxury goods, resorts, and services should pitch in an extra share to help the nation invest in its future.
2. A new program to re-direct big business agricultural to healthier foods and sustainable farming techniques. Support re-training and experimental farming techniques that preserve and improve soils and expand farmland through micro-farms. A whole new and younger generation of people would rise to the occasion to start a new industry and reform one in much need of long-term changes.
3. Liberal investment tax credits or write-offs for investments in research and development, energy efficient equipment and related facilities.
4. Creation of a national public service network operated at state and local level but guided by national goals and broad principles. Service could earn participants credits toward higher education while simultaneously providing skills training to participants and providing services to local needs. Sacrifices from existing unions or employment interests that would make provision for enrollees to serve in schools, municipal services, elder care, or farming would be, again, seen for the greater good. People of all ages could obtain new opportunities for service and skills, sacrificing by way of subsistence earnings but serving both a public need and their own future.
5. How about offering student loans for higher education that are repaid back, in whole or part, by the simple fact that such students become taxpayers by virtue of their skills and higher earning capacity? We'd be investing in taxpayers which are needed for reducing national debt. The student loan reduction would be tied to level of taxes paid on salaries earned in the future.
6. Too much emphasis and value is placed upon monetary wealth as a measure of personal worth. Research is taking place around the world for measuring happiness and success in ways more important than money. An active national dialogue and research is needed to help people understand that what we seek is happiness, not just things, consumption, or pleasure. A new culture and emphasis on sustainability in energy and resources, health, diet and exercise, the value of serving one's family and community, and other time tested social values needs to be developed for our schools, families, entertainment and culture.
7. Short-term financial speculation erodes the underlying value and utility of the financial markets to provide jobs and goods and services to society. Speculation, therefore, needs to be curbed. Holding periods for financial instruments should be lengthened, regulated and restricted to valid business purposes. Restricting or eliminating short sales, complex derivative instruments whose real value is all but entirely speculative....all of these require a tough stance to help focus the financial markets on serving the greater good of society at large and not just personal financial greed or self-interest. 
8. Guidelines for reasonable executive compensation should be established by industry-wide analysis and representative participation of stake holders, including with government oversight. Industry guidelines should establish how boards of publicly traded corporations can more fairly represent all major stakeholders (employees, public, vendors, customers, creditors and stock holders.)
9. As referenced above, a form of voluntary national service, complete with training, can help utilize the energies of young adults, perhaps even older adults, for basic subsistence pay and credit for future higher education, pension benefits, or even health care benefits.
10. If America is to remain both true to its founding principles of freedom and a strong leader of nations, we must recognize the importance of acting cooperatively with other nations for the common good. Unilateral actions, especially military, are corrosive to our political, social and moral influence and, most importantly, to our own moral standards at home. Therefore...
11. Commitments to size and readiness of armed services needs to be reviewed with intent to scale back our tendency to intervene unilaterally in conflicts abroad. 
12. Participation in U.N. should be scaled back in favor of working cooperatively with nations of like mind in programs and policies that provide aid, education, protection, investment, or relief to other nations. Why argue all the time with negative nations and leaders. Work with people who share a broader and more expansive outlook!
13. More resources and dialogue should go to work and support emerging economies, cultures, and governments who are moderate and forward thinking rather than just fighting those who are stuck in narrow mindedness and tribal politics. Freedom and democracy is a direction, not a goal or a mere fact. It exists only in a cultural context not a vacuum. Work with positive leaders and nations and peoples. Nothing succeeds like success, cooperation, and strength in numbers. Active cultural exchanges should be encouraged and funded with creative partnership strategies between business, government and NGO's.
14. Investment in future technologies and cleaner energy should be encouraged by tax incentives which are put into place for a long enough term that businesses and individuals can depend on them and can make pragmatic investment decisions.
15. Instead of deducting home mortgage interest, what about deducting (e.g. via depreciation allowances) home improvements for weatherization, energy efficiency, and other valuable improvements (rather than luxuries like spas and pools etc.). Subsidies for home ownership seem excessive and thus have bred misuse. A fast changing economy and culture can benefit by greater mobility and flexibility, especially among younger people. Home ownership is surely a good social policy but it has become excessive and obsessive in a time when mobility and flexibility are the hallmark of success and creativity. 
16. Limit travel and meal deductions for business to 50% of the amount paid. This would approximate eliminating a tax deduction for the personal, non-deductible aspect of such expenditures.
17. Eliminate statutory depletion allowances for extraction industries (oil, gas, etc.). Let extraction industries use their actual costs like other industries as expenses or as amortized or depreciated in accordance with standard accounting and tax principles.
18. Eliminate depreciation allowances for passenger vehicles used for business. Personal aspects of such expenses render their fair business use difficult to monitor and why subsidize it?
19. Establish national guidelines for encouraging use of mass transit in high density environments. Evaluate the energy and fuel (and time and cost) trade off in short inter-city flights with inter-city high speed transit. Set guidelines for premium charges for short flights with proceeds to support the more efficient ground transportation (assuming it is more fuel and other efficient!) Private auto usage should help subsidize or make local mass transit free at least in high density environments.
20. Help homeowners who are financially "under water" by allowing a reduction of their mortgage payment in proportion to the reduction in value based on the ratio of their current assessed value to their original purchase cost. Crude but simple. At the same adjust mortgage interest rate to current 30-year fixed rate by national average. Allow the banks to "bank" the resulting write-off as a kind of future second mortgage which would stay on the books and stay on the deed (separately) for a contingent and future recovery, sharing in future value increases with the homeowners in proportion.  Banks would be allowed to carry these contingent assets at book value for tax and financial accounting purposes. Would be allowed to bundle for sale such instruments under certain conditions. Each sale of the property in the future would determine a fair paydown of the deferred debt.
21. Citizens abroad resent paying double taxes to resident country and U.S. Review policies to be more fair and equitable to our citizens working abroad. Same with corporations. It's important to at least be neutral in regards to incentives or penalties for working or operating overseas. 
22. The health care debate is stuck on a theme of "socialism" vs. free enterprise. But neither fit the reality of human health care needs. Health insurance should be a mutual savings rather than a private company so all policy holders benefit or not according to their own participation. People of shared interests or healthy lifestyles should be allowed to pool resources and benefit thereby. Most hospitals should be run not for profit but for the benefit of those served. We need to look honestly at health needs, balancing individual initiative and responsibility with compassion and social benefits at large. 
23. A three-tiered health care system might provide a bridge between the extremes: We need basic health care free for all, better health care for those who participate in funding their care and make the effort to take care of themselves, and room, too, for private health care for those with greater resources. Let's make allowance for genuine charity from individuals, faith groups, or NGO's for those for whom the basic free care is insufficient or at least beyond what the society can reasonably afford to or at least agree upon to provide. Perfect? Heck no. But is it now? One size does not fit all.
24. Phase out social security benefits to those who really don't need them based on their assets and retirement income. Sure they earned them but gee whiz, they are lucky not have to have to draw on them and to let others have their share.
25. Reinstitute more dignified levels of asset retention for those who have to spend down to receive gov't assistance for health care or retirement. Don't make liars or paupers out of people. If they choose to enhance the level of basic care they receive by using what remains of their assets then let them.
26. Whenever possible, and when national policies make the most sense, let the states or other smaller entities handle the details subject only to broad guidelines and goals.
27. Get the federal government out of primary education except for research and development and for giving general broad guidelines for public education that fairly benefits all citizens.
28. Nothing beggars a person more or creates more resentment than to live on the crums of society. Handouts, as a way of life, demean both giver and recipient. Give recipients the opportunity and hold out the expectation that there are services they can render to society in return for their support until such time as they no longer need some or all of it. Dependency breeds contempt and discontent. Along with a handout, lend a hand to help a person stand up and give back. Being engaged and active can bring dignity and self-worth, while being idle is degrading. This will take some skill and tact but it is both fair and reasonable. Employment related vested interests will have to be convinced that for the greater good such recipients can be integrated into the workforce and all will benefit.
29. Recipients of workmens compensation and unemployment should also, as and where appropriate, be expected to pitch in with community service.
30. Re-structure tax deductions for charity "above the line" so that we encourage citizens (including lower and middle income) to participate financially in helping others around them.
31. A comment about labor provided by national service or by welfare recipients: federal, state, and local governments are sorely pressed to meet service levels and this workforce can provide some measure of relief. Further, provision should be made for businesses (all sizes) to have access to this workforce. This will require re-aligning our attitudes and employment boundaries towards a more flexible paradigm. Community service should be seen as not merely limited to public services but as a way to help businesses get back to business. 

 Well, I've said enough, surely.

Nayaswami Hriman

The Road Ahead: Hope or Hopelessness?

This is our last day here in Frankfurt Germany at the annual Book Messe (Fair). For several years we witnessed the obvious decline in business and attendance and general economic activity. This is linked with serious changes and challenges to the world of publishing which includes several things not least of which is the uncertainty and impact of the internet and e-book publishing.

But publishing is not my concern here. Hopelessness, however, is. Our hosts where we stay each year here in Frankfurt are the patriarch and matriarch of a wonderful and growing family of talented and energetic children and grandchildren. Both came of age in Germany at the end of the WWII and have seen many things in their lifetime. The comment at dinner last evening was made that more challenging to the young generation of today than job insecurity and the many other issues facing the human race is the feeling they have and are left with of hopelessness.

The 20th century saw two major wars and many others of equal or at least tragic consequences. Yet for much of that time, except perhaps the dark years of WWII, the general direction of expectations for the future had been, for the generations born in that century, has been  positive. Now, however, I have come to wonder whether for the young generation of today whether that is true. Yes, for up and coming countries like India, China, and Brazil things may seem rosy for the time but in the countries of the west (formerly known as the "first world!"), dark clouds loom and threaten on every major front: economic, ecological, environmental, political, cultural and religious, just to name the most obvious. Institutions of learning and health care face an uncertain future. War and terrorism threats continue as oil and the middle east are as fractious, if not more so, than ever before.

So where is there to be found hope for a better world? Interestingly, "Hope for A Better World" is the title of a book by Swami Kriyananda who is my teacher and who is the founder of the worldwide network of intentional communities (called Ananda). Swami Kriyananda is one of the best known direct disciples of Paramhansa Yogananda -- himself a world renown author of the spiritual classic, "Autobiography of a Yogi."

In this book and in Kriyananda's life work (of which I am a part) he writes that hope for the future lies in the direction of individual initiative. Hope lies in the energy, high mindedness, creativity and cooperative spirit of individuals who come together to find solutions to the challenges of modern life and who are not dependent on others, or on their government to make those changes. One of the principal forms this takes for those of us who are involved in the worldwide work of Ananda is the establishment of a network of intentional spiritual communities. These core communities are formed by disciples of Paramhansa Yogananda. But this work of intentional communities is not seen by us as limited to any faith or spiritual interest. Yogananda himself predicated that communities would some day "spread like wildfire." We have no reason to believe he meant that such future communities would be limited to those who follow his teachings. The very way in which he phrased his prediction suggests otherwise!

Though he gave no specifics as to time or place or form, it has become increasingly clear that such communities are the most obvious way for humanity to re-invent itself. With increasing urgency, humanity needs a new expression of core and universal human values. We need to learn how to live in harmony with one another and with all life on our planet. We need to learn how to use natural and human resources in a balanced and sustainable way. This means living closer and in harmony with the natural world of our fair planet as well as among races, nations, cultures and religions.

Such changes cannot be legislated. A new way of living and thinking can only come from changes in human attitudes and consciousness. Such changes will, and have always been, initiated by pioneers and creative spirits working together in harmony and cooperation. Cooperation is the only solution to war or ruthless competition and exploitation (of man, matter, and all living creatures).

At Ananda we see our communities as laboratories in cooperative living and hope that what we have learned can be used by others regardless of other persuasions, spiritual or otherwise. We feel that the trend and impulse for people of like mind to come together to create new patterns of living is the single most important trend at this time in history. No other solution appears to exist in the world for the great challenges we face.

No single nation, government, NGO, or corporate body possesses either the vision or the influence to lead citizens of earth to a more sustainable and harmonious way of life. Even religion seems most inclined to separate and fight. A new form of religion -- spiritual but not religious -- one based not on creeds or dogma but on direct perception and experience is needed. Yogananda called this "Self-realization." No existing power base of money or political power has the will or the vision to make fundamental changes. Existing institutions of all types are more focused on survival and self-interest.

As symbolized by the internet itself, which is carrying this message as I type it, people individually and in small groups will have to make the changes necessary. "Small" can be a wide range of numbers, however, from voluntary associations that are international to a handful or few dozen like-minded spirits in a given city or town. Small communities will also reflect what will become both a trend and necessity for survival: moving from the high density, resource-consuming cities to rural or at least nature-integrated locations. This will become a leaderless, grass-roots movement.

One can be fearful, pessimistic or gloomy, but none of those does one any good. Better it is to have faith in a Higher Power and faith in acting with high ideals and in the company of those of like-mind. Realistically, it is the only solution I can imagine. I know few will read this; few will embrace this, but the great changes in history have always been accomplished, at first, by a handful of pioneers. This is as true in science and the arts, as it is in politics or religion. So, do not lose hope but "think globally, while acting locally."

Joy to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

What does it mean to "Worship"?

The word "worship" is second only to the word "God" in creating a slight flutter somewhere deep inside me. I'm fairly well past the "God" word flutter at this point in my life, for I see it as a kind of shorthand and an arrow pointing to something very sacred and deep, even if I can't give it a more complete name and "it" has no form. But I feel God's presence in my heart and that's all that matters to me. I have put the intellect and past baggage back in the baggage car at the rear.

But "worship" conjures up mindless followers bowing and scraping to a man-made statue or image. "Thou shalt not worship false gods!" As if I wanted to worship anyone at all!

As the world integrates and we have the inflow of Indian culture and people throughout America and elsewhere, one encounters the phrase "worship of the idol." Sometimes just the word "idol" and other times only "worship." Wow. A Christian will bristle at the thought of worshiping idols and there is no distinction between false ones and real ones!

Students who come to Ananda see the pictures of the gurus of Self-realization (which includes Jesus Christ) and sometimes say, "Do you worship them?"

The feeling of God's presence and the more abstract experience of sacredness and reverence (however stimulated) naturally and appropriate inclines one in the direction of "worship." Oh, perhaps not at first but if we are drawn magnetically and repeatedly back to such a state of consciousness, the experience causes us to approach an attitude that might reasonably be called "worshipful."

Think of it as a state of hushed reverence, quiet, inward joy, gratitude, self-forgetfulness in the Presence, and a kind of love that does not derive from excitement, pleasure, or anticipation of reward.

From the experience (and even from the concept) of God's presence can come the realization that God is present in the world in innumerable forms and places, and certainly within ourselves. There can come a time when it appears in one's intuitive awareness that perhaps God has incarnated into human form: and not just theoretically, as in the of God being in everyone. Rather, the possibility occurs to one that God might actually incarnate into the human form of one who partakes in the Godhead presence.

Now many scoff of course at the very possibility. Some, like the Jewish priests of Jesus' time, consider it blasphemous. I'm not interested in debating the theology of such a possibility, for I am referring to an intuitive awakening to the presence of such a one, or even just to the possibility of such an incarnation.

Now, just to be clear, my reference point is not to the idea that God Himself squeezes himself down into a human body suit, saying "Ta-da! It's magic and here I am!" No I am referring to the possibility that one human being, through many lives, through the effort that attracts divine grace (God's power and presence), incarnates on earth to bring God-consciousness into human form. Not in a theatrical or dramatic way but in the very way many people live: sometimes simply and unnoticed othertimes more openly and dramatically, but always as a human being living in a very human way.

Only those who have "eyes to see" and "ears to hear" will detect the God presence of such a one. God does not reveal himself unto the "prudent and the wise, but unto babes." This avatar (divine incarnation) doesn't limit God nor act as God's soul, solitary or exclusive mouthpiece, but instead comes more like a family emissary, appropriate to the time and the clime of space and time and to specific individuals and groups of individuals.

The very thought of this possibility unleashes joy, admiration, gratitude and much more. To return to worshipfulness, let us say that we have here in this thought of or actual presence of such a soul, the awakening of each of these attitudes: gratitude, reverence and so on. With this, then, we can try to understand the words, writing, voice, image, and being-ness of such a one as emanating God consciousness in order to transmit this to us, personally and relevantly.

This understanding of "worship" is not the worship of a person as a mere human being but arises from the recognition of a quality, a presence, a vibration of consciousness that is so magnetic, so joyful, so wise, so compassionate, so safe and true that one cannot but help to desire to take into oneself the vibration and consciousness being transmitted through such a one (again: through his image, voice, teachings, example, etc.). This kind of worship is a thus the magnetic draw and intention to enter into and BE that consciousness. The intention, feeling and attraction is, ultimately, nothing less than an act of pure love.

There is no sense of loss of self but, rather of Self discovery, like the prodigal son returning to his father. It is a sense of coming home and of Being. There is no sense of self-abnegation but of Self-fulfillment. There is no sense that something is being taken from you but that everything is being given to you. God-consciousness has no desire and is above doing harm. It is love pure and simple and merges into joy and into bliss.

Thus true worship is the joy of the soul finding itself: at first, in the Being of another but ultimately in Being of Self. Therefore, think of worship as that draw within you for complete and permanent fulfillment, inner contentment, unending and ever-new satisfaction, and as that which exists everywhere, in everything and as the Being of everything and everyone. That's not so difficult, now, is it?

Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

What does "Surrender to God's Will" Mean?

Dear Friends,

I have taken a long break from blogging with no greater excuse than I've not had the inspiration to write. This  isn't the result of anything "bad" or "wrong," but seems to have been that perhaps I needed a break..

But today, Sunday, September 30, Padma and I give the Sunday Service talk at Ananda Meditation Temple and our topic is, essentially, what does it mean to surrender to God's will? This is very ironic because last evening we had an inspirational fund-raising program on the subject of Ananda's twelve year legal battle for retaining the right to represent Yogananda's teachings. During the twelve years between 1990 and 2002, we came very near to being destroyed as a spiritual work and a community (in California). We were attacked, sadly enough, by other disciples (believe it nor!) of Paramhansa Yogananda. That battle, which we won, ended nearly ten years ago. But a remnant of debt remains and the Ananda centers and members in America are in a campaign to pay that debt off and be done with that era of Ananda's history. For more, go to http://yoganandafortheworld.com/excerpt-from-a-new-book-on-srfs-lawsuit-against-ananda/

So, what's the irony? The irony is that the concept of surrender might suggest to some minds that we should have decided NOT to defend ourselves! It is that irony whose unraveling seems worthy to share that inspires me to write today.

The image of surrender comes to us from a prior age of spirituality: an age which, in the Hindu calendar of reckoning changes (up and down) in the level of human consciousness, would have been akin to our concept of the "Dark Ages" or at least medieval times. Surrender fits the image of kings and lords, of vassals and serfs, of submission and oaths of fealty. These are not concepts that resonate or inspire in our new age of democracy and individual liberty.

Surrender is what armies do, most commonly in in defeat, if not also disgrace. The word "acceptance" might do a bit better, but it, too, smacks of giving up, of passivity. One imagines a person shrugging his shoulders with a deep sigh and a long drawn out, "All right, you win!"

However, this does not invalid the truth behind "surrender to God's will." It simply needs clarification. For starters who is that surrenders at all? The anwer: ego and self will, in league with ego-motivated desires.

If the ego surrenders to God, does God take over, like a bus driver takes over driving the bus? Well, try it and see! Swami Kriyananda, as a young monk and beginning lecturer, once stood silent before an audience for upwards two minutes to experiment and see if God would take over the lecture. Well, God didn't! Too the audience's great relief, Swami realized he had to take the first steps and speak. Then, while speaking, if his consciousness and intention were open to divine grace, he found that, over time and with practice, inspiration would flow with ever greater power and consistency. He began to receive increasing confirmation of this from the inspired responses of his listeners.

So, surrender is not passive: not at all! Surrender to God's will means to embrace what is right and true with all your heart, mind and strength. Indeed, going back to medieval imagery, it is more akin to charging into battle fearlessly and joyfully. But here the image fails us, for, unlike most warriors charging into battle hell bent on death and destruction, embracing God's will draws to us clear mindedness, creativity, initiative, and common sense. Why is that so? Because that which is true and good (and that which is of God, or higher consciousness) partakes, by definition, in such qualities. Such "acceptance" always manifests at least some aspects of intelligence, creativity , courage and so on.

Surrender to God's will is perhaps more meaningfully restated in terms of the importance of doing what is right: right by our conscience, doing the right thing by the measure of the greatest good for the greatest number, and, yes, for those who either see it as such or in reality experience it in themselves: doing the will of God. Surrender to God's will includes acting in accordance with high ideals, accepted (or intuited) ethics and morals, and, in all events, doing so in a spirit of courage, cooperation, common sense, intelligence, even-mindedness, and sincerity.

I know that many justify their actions by claiming to know God's will, or claiming the moral force of their scripture, theology, or national (or other similar) interests. After all, unless God appears in the heavens for all to see and announces his will for all to hear, it is so easy to make the claim to know God's will. Just so will two sides of a court case claim that their view has its roots in the Constitution of their country. That you cannot prove to others what is God's will doesn't mean we shouldn't try or that we shouldn't act in accordance with it to the best of our ability.

When the ego surrenders to the promptings of the soul, whether with finality or through temporary insight, it accepts the inevitability of karmic law and perceives the folly (and eventual suffering ) of ego-motivated action. This acceptance is deep and dynamic and transformative. It lifts us to a higher level of consciousness.

I have heard it said that we successfully and truly end a bad habit and substitute a new and better one only when the transformation comes from the level of intuitive knowing (that the change is permanent). Real and permanent change requires a shift to higher level of consciousness and realization. It comes with the deep sense of knowing that you have arrived, or are victorious, or are free (from a negative trait).

Swami Kriyananda tells the story of kicking the smoking habit when he was a young adult. True, he quit smoking many times (like Mark Twain: quitting is easy; I've done it many times!). But each time he viewed his "failure" in the light of simply not have yet succeeded. One day it became a reality and despite many past failures he knew deep down it was true. He even carried a pack of cigarettes around for a few weeks and gave smokes to friends but the desire to smoke had vanished from him.

When I first visited Ananda Village in 1977 I knew it was my home. It was a calm, inner knowing that required no debate, no doubts, no anguishing decision making. When I read Yogananda's "Autobiography of a Yogi," I knew this was it for me. Again, no quibbling. The time was right and the time was now. I simply walked into it and never looked back. In these examples, no courage, no strong affirmation of acceptance was required. There was no sense of surrendering my desires or will to God's will. The sense of rightness was a great and divine gift.

Naturally our willingness to do God's will (to do the right thing), is a day to day battle. I don't mean to imply that it happens only once. It, like right diet, exercise, or meditation, has to be affirmed daily until such time as its cumulative effects become permanent as the flow of intuition and grace grows ever stronger. It's as if we give up junk food and begin drawing sustenance from this higher, intuitive level. Thus surrender, rightly understood, suggests a flow of energy, like walking or diving into a swift river and once out into the current flowing with it downstream towards the sea. We can't just lie there, however, we too have to use strokes to stay in the current at the center of the river, and to make more rapid progress towards our goal.

When in 1975 I quit my career, sold my possessions, and embarked on a spiritual journey of Self-awakening, I went first to Europe and then overland to India (I was gone over a year). It wasn't a "surrender" but it was an affirmation of the importance of putting spirituality first in my life. It was a change of life direction and the beginning of a life long quest to live for God and higher ideals over personal comfort or convenience. Each step made the journey just a little easier helped create new opportunities and progressively greater realization.

Spirituality is no mere habit. Put another way, if your "spirituality" becomes a habit than you are on the way to losing it. Good habits are not enough. Divine grace is needed to uplift you above the foundation of self-effort that good habits provide. Nor is spirituality a mere matter of helping old ladies across the street, attending church, making donations, saying mantras or conducting sacred rituals. "You have to personally make love to God," Paramhansa Yogananda once said. We must seek grace, which is God's presence and love, and not seek God for his gifts, like the simple and natural love of a child for his mother.

Thus our twelve year lawsuit to defend our rights to be disciples of Paramhansa Yogananda may be validly viewed as surrendering to God's will, though it started out first with accepting that we should affirm our rights, then we had to defend those rights, and then we had to be willing to lose everything (our community, Ananda Village, CA, our reputation and public goodwill). Divine Mother pulled us from the brink of certain defeat more than once and though battered and bruised we emerged in the end, victorious. We defended ourselves honorably and on universal principles. "Where there is right action, there lies victory."

In surrender, then, to the soul's invitation to live by high ideals and to seek the Divine Presence as our very Self, lies the permanent victory of Spirit over ego.

Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

What’s Wrong with Democracy?

Plenty, but no one’s come up with anything better except an improvement in the integrity of both a nation’s people and its leader. And that, in fact, is my subject today.

Yogis talk in terms of duality: the constant ebb and flow and fluctuation between polar opposites. We humans are so accustomed to this that we don’t tend to give it much thought: daytime, nighttime, activity, rest, work, relaxation, sickness, health, war and peace, and on and on. I doubt very few humans step back from this unceasing play to wonder if “There’s something fishy going on here?” Most hope and work for the best and try to get over the worst, but rarely consider that perhaps, in the long run, both good and bad add up to a big, fat ZERO.

What’s this have to do with democracy? Well, nothing, and, well, everything? J My spiritual teacher and friend, Swami Kriyananda (founder of Ananda and by now well known direct disciple of Paramhansa Yogananda, author if Autobiography of a Yogi), has pointed out that no government is necessarily better than the people who run it and the people are governed by it.

Consider (and I’m no historian or constitutional expert) that the original structure of the 13 colonies of America was much more a republic: only certain people could vote and senators were elected by state legislatures. If recall correctly, the electoral college had far more influence and a role than it does today.

“We the people” constituted a great fewer people (in terms of race, gender, and social status) than we consider it to be today in 2012.  In the early decades of democracy many aristocrats (and others) could not believe that the common man could be trusted to have an intelligent and ideal-guided say in his government.

But let us, as Americans, step back and consider some of the glaring shortcomings of our political system:

1.       How many of our voting citizens vote intelligently and with due consideration of all sides of complex issues? How many vote merely upon superficial characteristics of looks, mannerisms, professed religion, race, gender, or party affiliation? How many voters participate as involved citizens at any level (local or national)? How many citizens are blatantly prejudiced in their views? How many of us, checking the boxes on our ballots, have no idea whether so-and-so is the right person?  The biggest fallacy we possess in our country’s self-image is also our greatest strength: a belief in the equality of all people (despite common sense!). In extending the franchise to all, we have simultaneously debased its value.

2.       Democracy turns the majority into the “rule.” Prejudicial treatment of minorities is a plague that roams the earth and haunts democracy at its roots. Protections for minorities are the obvious solution but those protections are ultimately rooted only in the conscience of the majority, as the history of the United States and evolution of civil rights (both laws and attitudes) are a glaring testimony. Just because the majority thinks one way doesn’t make it true, right, moral, or wise. Truth is not something that gets elected. I would go so far as to say most people are wrong (or biased) most of the time, especially where their self-interest is involved.

3.       Leadership requires vision and vision requires both courage and charisma. Since a politician in a democracy must pander to the whims of the voting citizenry, great leaders are rare because the very political process requires one to bow and scrape to moneyed and voting interests. Such interests are, almost by definition, short-sighted, far from “enlightened”, what to mention courageous and self-sacrificing for the greater good of all.

4.       Thus the very concept of “representation” tends to push the expectations towards mutual self-interest and, in the extreme, what is commonly referred to as “pork barrel.” (“You vote for me and I will bring you favors.”) Not wanting to disappoint the expectant rabble, a politician must resort to lies or half-truths, postponing the day of fiscal or other reckoning off past at least the next election, if not the next generation.

5.       Compromise is necessary even between intelligent and high minded individuals, what to mention the diverse plurality of representatives of America’s very wide spectrum of people and interests. The art of compromise suggests a view to long-term goals and an innate respect for others. But the long-term view inherent in maturity and wisdom is itself compromised by the clanging dinner bell of re-election.

6.       Compromise fails, however, when faced with national or international crises, not all of which involve war. Economic crises, trade relations affecting thousands or millions of jobs, global warming, pandemics, nuclear proliferation and any number of countless issues may and do arise that require vision and decisiveness  from those in leadership positions. The paralysis of party politics, always with eye to the popular vote, emasculates the integrity and courage of many a leader and representative. Thus it is that the polarization in today’s politics is oft decried but rarely challenged by elected officials. The result is paralysis in key challenges facing our nation. The ultimate result of making no real decision is that, in time, the decision will be made by other nations, other interests, or objective circumstances — with potentially undesirable results.

7.       But if one is tempted to look with wistful eye upon a benign dictatorship, one doesn’t have to look very far to discover that there aren’t any. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Fearful citizens may cry out for decisive action to quell their fears but in so doing they will unquestionably lose their freedom. The result may even be, either way, rebellion or hardship, and more likely, both.

8.       Thus our so-called democracy vacillates between pandering to self-interest and selling our freedoms in return for security. What we clearly lack in our country today is a practical and personal idealism.

So, where am I going? Is this just a carping session? Well, I mean, is there more to it than that?

Yes, of course. The point is that it is not so much the system of government that determines its effectiveness but the consciousness of the society itself, overall. Now, we yogis would add to the “karma” of the nation, as well. For example, America was founded in a very specific way with a very specific intention and conscious affirmation of freedom for all. However imperfect it was then and has been ever since, the impact of those conscious intentions (courageously expressed against great odds) has been the impetus (read: the “karma”) that has influenced and affected the relative degree of success of this great experiment in democracy. The founders of this country balanced recognition of allegiance to God and to truth with an impersonal and nonsectarian view of that truth. How far we have come from such a bold, expansive, and inclusive faith!

What then are the qualities of leaders and citizens that, in terms of today’s culture, would seem necessary to produce a government and a society that yields the greatest good for the greatest number?

John F. Kennedy said it well and now most famously when he challenged Americans to “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” Nothing worthwhile and enduring in human lives and history is accomplished without sacrifice and cooperation with others of like mind. Therefore we need to encourage and support leaders who do not flinch from reminding us of this basic truth in life. This means not flinching from difficult choices and challenging facts and circumstances. It means outlining a plan of action that, while subject to the compromise and consensus process inherent in our system of government, nonetheless reveals foresight, courage, and vision. No such plan will fail to challenge entrenched interests or beliefs. The corollary is a citizenry that understands that entitlements, benefits, and so called “pork” must be earned by self-effort and not dispensed like the proverbial free-lunch.

More attention must be given to meritocracy rather than entitlement; to helping others help themselves rather than doling out charity. Charity cannot be legislated. It is gift of free-will from the heart and is best left to those individuals and organizations better suited to expressing and channeling and inspiring such acts. Rather than robbing one set of people (thereby generating only resentment and avoidance, if not evasion) to support another set (who may be tempted, or forced, to accept such charity as a way of life and their own degraded self-definition) let’s inspire and encourage one another (through appropriate tax and social incentives) to be compassionate and to do that which is right to do.

Let specific industries take the lead to form associations for self-regulation. Such oversight must, of course, include government, consumers and labor interests and must be subject to the overall review of legislative and executive bodies. Let us bring decision making from the ivory tower of Washington D.C. down to the level where it is implemented. There can be broad over-arching goals and policies crafted at the national level but their implementation should work with the creativity and dedication of those responsible for executing those policies.

The law of duality requires a balancing of interests, especially between national and local governmental bodies. Some issues in society (health care, energy, transportation, safety, individual rights) demand national policies, but even these can be broad and directional. There application in local settings will naturally vary and will require the creative and positive participation of state and local government, business, non-profit, and individuals.

One of the great strengths and curses of American democracy is the two-party system. Talk about the law of duality, eh? The two parties have a stranglehold on American politics and make a mockery of one-man, one-vote choices.  One should be able to vote on the basis of merit not party. I think some states allow this, but I am not certain how this works, given that none of the party system is incorporated into the Constitution.

What is the meaning of a president and party that wins by a mere 1% or less of the vote? It can’t mean much. If winner takes all we can have government policies that nearly half of the country doesn’t support while the other choice, a coalition government, including a divided Congress, could mean nothing worthwhile is accomplished.

In the end, I cannot help but feel that if the country as a whole is not clear on its direction, it is better to proceed slowly than to push citizens beyond what they can accept. What this means is that external circumstances (economic, e.g.) or nations may force our hand. But, then, that’s the choice citizens have effectively made based on either their indecision or lack of inspired or practical options offered by those seeking public office.

In the case of sharply polarized issues such as, in American life today, gay marriage or abortion, it is similarly incumbent upon a society to move slowly and incrementally, not satisfying anyone, unfortunately, but avoiding unnecessary rancor at least to the extent possible. It takes time for cultures to take on new attitudes. Usually at least a generation or two is needed. Wise leadership leads but doesn’t drive, sometimes even going a step or two backwards, before advancing.

So we have this duality between compromise, which includes incremental change, and decisiveness, which includes a vision for new and fresh directions. “Patience,” it has been well said, “is the quickest route to success.” Democracy is messy and in many ways inefficient. But the key to success in national life is maturity in personal life.

Training in responsible citizenship and leadership should become universal, applied to everyone in general and to elected and public officials specifically. Cooperation should replace ruthless competition as the model in government and business alike. A business can emphasize quality or service, and a politician can emphasize creative solutions. Isn’t this preferable than wasting resources on beating one’s opponent down?

Every public servant should be schooled in the art and science of good government and personal, ethical behavior. The consequences of failure, too, should be clear and transparent. I believe the same should be true, to some degree, to responsible positions in business. Both are a privilege and a responsibility. There should be an element of self-sacrifice for a greater good. Excessive compensation or personal accumulation is anathema to the essence of effective leadership, in any field.

For, you see, it is consciousness that ultimately determines the course and fate of nations and individuals. A lousy political system, yes even a dictatorship, compromised of high-minded, honest, serviceful people will bring greater happiness and prosperity to a nation than a “pure” democracy comprised of selfish, self-seeking voters and elected officials.

Our system is a good as it gets, so far as we can know at this time in history. But a return to universal ideals must be re-affirmed and practically applied.

Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

Does God Exist?

How Can We Know God?

God seems distant from our daily lives, our sufferings and our joys, and He seems irrelevant to our desires and ambitions, unless, of course, by invoking Him, we believe that He will fulfill our material desires! Humankind views the existence of God through the entire spectrum of belief to nonbelief: atheism, agnosticism, stoicism, humanism,  blind belief, worship, devotion and, finally, seeking union with God.

Even scriptures and spiritual teachers reflect, at least in part, much of this spectrum. India’s Shankya scriptures declare “Ishwar ashidha,” God is not provable. No wonder the never-ending debate and argument — no one can win! The modern mystic, Frank Laubach, campaigned among ministers that they would even mention God in their sermons! Perhaps, discouraged by the wide range of opinions, these ministers thought it easier to skip the subject!

While saints do not come to dash humanity’s hopes for a better world through God’s grace, or to suppress our faith in Providence, there is, nonetheless, a need, spiritually, to understand the role of self-effort and personal responsibility. Self-effort is the first step towards attracting divine grace. Buddha emphasized the former while those bhaktis (worshippers of God) in all traditions, like the Hare Krishna’s who insist that by only chanting God’s name can one be saved, emphasize the transforming power of divine grace. Somewhere in the middle path lies the truth.

Buddha urged his followers to be spiritually self-reliant, compassionate, noble in thought and deed, and to meditate. He also came to free people from Brahminical power and complex and costly rituals, and to reawaken their understanding of the need for personal effort and away from passive dependence upon an unseen and fickle deity.

But the followers of Buddha wrongly mistook the Buddha’s silence on the subject of Providence as disbelief. I read of a court case in Los Angeles where a Buddhist sued a school district for a school prayer because the Buddhist declared that he did not believe in God. But the Buddha’s motives were as simple and earthy as his teachings. His silence implied nothing except, by its own good example, an affirmation of the words of Lahiri Mahasaya of Benares, “He only is wise who devotes himself to realizing, not reading only, the ancient revelations.”

Buddha was a Hindu as Jesus was a Jew. Neither essentially rejected their spiritual heritage so much as they came to correct misunderstandings that had emerged, and to offer a new understanding and a renewal of spirituality. As Jesus put it; “I came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfill them.” Buddha openly taught meditation and reincarnation whereas Jesus, though he remained silent or circumspect  on both subjects, at least publicly, taught the Old Testament precepts to love God with all one’s heart, mind, and soul and to love others as one’s very Self. Buddha minimized the importance of his role but of course that was fitting in the context of his teachings. Nonetheless, Paramhansa Yogananda taught that Buddha was no less than an avatar (a “savior”).

Jesus’ teachings went a different direction, concurrent with his teachings. Jesus declared “I and my Father are One.” At another time he added, “Before Abraham was, I AM.” Not only was he killed for his blasphemy, but, as if to balance the equation, Christians decided to emphasize the “I” rather than the “Father,” and thus have overly personalized Jesus as the only savior down through the ages. This dogmatic insistence runs counter to Jesus’ teachings, for as St. John declared in the first chapter of his gospel, “As many as received Him gave He the power to become the sons of God.” Jesus was an individual incarnation of the Father-Spirit both beyond and immanent in creation. He did not limit or define that Spirit. “Tat twam asi,” as the Hindu scriptures aver: “Thou art THAT!”

Paramhansa Yogananda asked his audiences, “How can the wave call itself the ocean?” It is correct to say God has become manifest in me, and in all creation, though, as Spirit, He is hidden by the outward forms of creation, but it is incorrect to declare “I am God.” Only when the soul has become fully realized in his Oneness can he declare openly with divine inner sanction, as Yogananda did, “I killed Yogananda long ago, no one dwells here but He.”

It has been popular in recent years for certain scientists to disdain, scoff and mock belief in God. So, of course, have many people down through history. It is perfectly correct for a scientist to say “We cannot prove the existence of God,” but science has no basis to disprove that existence, either. The true scientist must remain silent on the subject if he is to represent science itself. It is just as rational to say this universe was created intentionally by an Intelligent, conscious Force as it is to say it came from nowhere and evolved more or less randomly to produce the profusion, quantity and complexity of life forms, the probing intelligence and creativity of the human mind, and the boundless capacity and drive of the human heart for feeling, compassion, and love. Well, actually, of the two choices, the former seems the safer bet. But never mind, let them feel like they have a choice since they can neither prove nor disprove either!

In the midst of all this confusion, the question some ask is, “Why does God hide Himself?” Paramhansa Yogananda said “You will know when you will know!” So long as we are caught up in the wheel of karma and unceasing duality, it is difficult for us to have the perspective that God has in being untouched by it. What is suffering to us is not suffering to God. The playwright is no less a good person for writing the villain into the play. Without an antagonist the play is uninteresting and will never be performed. Without suffering we would never delve deeper into the mysteries of our existence: why? How?

God manifested this dream universe, it is said, that He might know Himself and share his Bliss nature through others in a grand show and entertainment. Well, that grand show is all too often not very grand from our point of view. So, “you will know when you will know.” As unsatisfying as it may be, our more practical question is, “What can I do about it?” “How can I achieve freedom from suffering?” Besides, never has there been one who testified as to God’s presence who declared “What a mess He has made!” Admittedly, however, Yogananda said that he often argued with Divine Mother over the fact she did create this world and she owed it to us to help us.

Indeed, Buddha also asked the same question: How can I achieve freedom from suffering? Through his seeking and through his meditation-samadhi, he pierced the veil of delusion (maya) and declared his freedom, and, by extension, our potential freedom, for all eternity. Buddha saw through the unreality of pleasure and pain and, identified with his transcendent, omnipresent and eternal Self, could no longer be touched by the roiling oscillations of the play of opposites.

Paramhansa Yogananda taught that God has hidden Himself and His true nature from us that we might seek Him by choice and for His love, the one thing He does not possess unless we give it to Him. He is so humble even as the creation hangs upon His power. He will not disturb our free will except through his law of karma (consequences of our own actions) through which we have the opportunity to question, to wake up, and to yearn for freedom from error.

Paramhansa Yogananda also declared that “The time for knowing God has come.” By this he meant that in this age we would begin to prefer direct perception and personal experience over dogma and beliefs. To this shift in consciousness would come from God the means to fulfill this desire through the art and science of meditation. He also put it this way: “Intuition is the soul’s power to know God.” Now, of course, with intuition we can know all sorts of things, far more mundane than knowing God. But it’s by the same power that we receive an idea that is important to our daily life that we experience the ineffable presence of Peace in our hearts.

Paramhansa Yogananda described his life’s work as a new dispensation. One important part of this was his bringing the technique of kriya yoga, an advanced meditation technique. Kriya shows us how to retrace our steps from identification with the body and matter to soul realization by directing the Life Force through specific subtle nerve channels  which are the paths through which we have descended from Spirit into matter. In reversing the “searchlights of the senses,” we discover the “great Light of God” as our own and the only Reality.

He also brought a new understanding that has the potential to sidestep centuries of debate on the subject of the existence of God. He brought forward into modern culture the ancient teaching of the Adi (first) Swami Shankycharya that the nature of God is bliss, or, more correctly, Satchidanandam. Yogananda translated this to say that God is, and our soul’s purpose in being created is, to achieve the state of immortality, omniscience, and ever-new Bliss.  It is by seeking and experiencing the ever-new joy of the soul through meditation that the proof of God’s existence is found. And, as his guru, Swami Sri Yukteswar added to this, “His adequate response to our every need!”

Thus one who seeks God as the joy (or peace) of meditation finds Him and finds Him ever increasingly the most relishable. From this contact we find, as Jesus promised, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and its righteousness (meaning in right attitude and action), and all these things shall be added unto you.” Let inner peace, even-mindedness under all circumstances and cheerfulness be your religion born of your direct perception in meditation of the truth that shall make you free from, as the Bhagavad Gita puts it, “dire fears and colossal sufferings.”

Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

Are You Breathing?

In the chapter on Kriya Yoga in the classic story, Autobiography of a Yogi, Paramhansa Yogananda declared “The ancient yogis discovered that the secret of cosmic consciousness is intimately linked with breath mastery. This is India’s unique and deathless contribution to the world’s treasury of knowledge.” http://www.ananda.org/autobiography/#chap26

The meditation technique of focusing upon the breath is found throughout the world. Concentration is the fundamental and universal constant of all meditation techniques. Meditation is a form of concentration upon any object:  outward, inward, gross or subtle. Paramhansa Yogananda defined meditation as “concentration upon God or one of His aspects.” But in this statement, he was holding up the goal of meditation (at least as meditation) whereas the techniques of meditation begin with concentration upon a single object. To experience a free 10 minute online guided meditation visit http://www.AnandaWashington.org 

Besides focusing on the breath, one can concentrate upon mental images such as a deity, one’s guru, a lotus (or any object of nature), a white (or blue) light, a mantra or word formula, sounds and on and on. Deeper in meditation, one may be counseled to focus on inner experiences such as the spontaneous appearance of subtle sounds, light, color or movements of energy or feeling  (“prana”) in the physical or astral body.

The appeal of focusing on the breath has several advantages. One, it’s obvious (everyone can feel his own breath), and two, it’s ubiquitous (everyone breathes). But there is a more important reason and it is much deeper than these two. (Compared to the most common alternative objects of meditative concentration, watching the breath is much easier. Few people can hold a mental image of any kind for very long and only more experienced meditators can hold steady to their inner sight the subtler aspects of the inner astral world.)

For us, living in a physical body, breath is life itself. We breathe, we live; if we don’t breathe, we die. The breath connects and holds our consciousness (self-awareness) to our physical body. The yogis demonstrated long ago that it is possible to suspend the breath cycle and live, indeed, perhaps forever (although in suspended animation). (Why live forever in such a state, however.) Such demonstrations have been repeated, even in modern times, to the observation of skeptics and scientists alike (oh, there’s no difference, you say?). Saints — even in the twentieth century — both east and west, have similarly proved that one can live without food or water. The point isn’t that anyone should live either in suspended animation (which is pointless) or without food and water, which would deprive much of humanity of the means of supporting themselves. The point is that the real Self is not limited by the body or by dependence upon material sustenance of any kind, including the breath.

You see, the breath is the link between the mind (consciousness; soul, spirit) and the body. The ebb and flow of breath sets up the out and in, push and pull, back and forth motion by which we are kept in constant flux and reaction to the input of the senses and to our mental reactions (emotional and cognitive). This in and out motion of the breath sets up and makes possible our interaction through the senses with the world of objects around us. This world of objects is also in constant flux: the sun, moon, stars, the wind, the tide, night and day all have their motions which never cease. The breath sends Life Force to and from the senses; it sends energy out into activity based on necessity or interest, and away from activity in search of rest or in rejection. As all atoms, molecules and light are in flux, it is only by becoming part of the flux can we experience this dream world as being apparently real. 

More important than this, however, are the oscillations of our reactions — like and dislike, fight or flight. It is our reactions that bind us and cause our identification with change to seem so real. We inhale as we embrace (mentally or otherwise) a positive response and we exhale as we reject or withdraw in reaction to outer stimuli (or thoughts and mental images). 

By going to the very foundation of this oscillation — the breath cycle itself — we nip the reactive process before it can even encounter an object (sensory or mental). Thus by meditation upon the breath we gain control over its fluctuations. By the act of concentration upon the breath, we slow the breath. Because the breath, as such, forms the basis for but does not contain within itself any character, color, or reactive quality in and of itself, our focus upon it is devoid of any further reactive tendencies (which are then calmed as a result). As the mind empties itself of reactive feelings and images and as the body is relaxed into stillness (shutting down or off the senses), the breath automatically slows and subsides towards perfect stillness. 

A steady focus upon any object will gradually cause that object to vanish from sight. Try concentrating upon a candle, or the smell of incense, or the touch of an object: in all cases motion is necessary to perpetuate the awareness of the sight, smell or touch as belonging to a distinct and separate object. Everyone has had some experience with staring off into the distance, or daydreaming to the point where objects of sight or hearing no longer intrude upon the mind.   Sleep itself is the most obvious daily experience whereby the sense “telephones” are turned off and we lose contact with the senses and their objects. We are yogis every night. Unfortunately, we are only dimly aware of our state of sleep, though we always know how well we slept and when we sleep well we know that we enjoyed it.
God, in the Bible, in the Old Testament, declares: “Be still, and know, that I AM GOD.”

While any act of deep concentration will slow down the breath and heart rate, the breath is, itself, the primordial cause or vehicle for our involvement with the senses and the world around us. It is fitting, therefore, that our concentration be upon the breath itself. To perceive the subtle substratum of energy (and then later, the even finer substratum of consciousness) which forms the building blocks for the seeming separateness of material objects, the motions of breath must cease. “When motion ceases, God begins” Paramhansa Yogananda taught. Fortunately for meditators, even slowing the breath brings intuition and re-vitalization of tissues, cleansing of negativity, and clarity of mind.

Focusing on the breath requires no complex belief system, which is another reason for its popularity and universality. It requires no religious affiliation as breathing is as universal as the human body!

That having been said, it is a mistake to think that ethical behavior, compassion, wisdom, or devotion are unnecessary. The simple fact is we need a reason, a motivation to engage in the practice of meditation. Except for peak moments (a crises, public speaking, extreme sports, artistic inspiration, or brain surgery), deep meditation requires more concentration and will power than anything else most people do during a typical day. Wisdom and devotion provide the rocket fuel needed to boost our energy to withdraw from outward and restless activities in order to go within and rise upward to the brain through the subtle spinal centers known as the chakras.

Both the relatively passive techniques of “watching” the breath and the more concentrated techniques of breath control (including advanced subtle techniques such as kriya yoga) are powerfully effective and well suited to the technology and results-driven values of this culture and this age.
Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

Swami Kriyananda Comes to Seattle. How shall we "receive" him?

Swami kriyananda comes to seattle – september 8, 2012         

He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it. He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward. And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward. Matt. 10:39-42

It is a mark of maturity and spiritual refinement to acknowledge, respect, and honor the genuine and useful accomplishments and elevated consciousness of another person. To likewise respect all beings as one’s own and as manifestations of divinity is the characteristic feature of a truly spiritual person.

It is to this honor and acknowledgement that I would like to share some thoughts as we prepare for the coming of Swami Kriyananda to Seattle. He will speak at the Ananda Meditation Temple on September 8 and will attend an outdoor luncheon at the nearby Ananda Community the following day. (See AnandaWashington.org for tickets)

Most readers know that Swami Kriyananda is one of the few living direct disciples of Paramhansa Yogananda, author of the renowned classic, Autobiography of a Yogi. Most know, too, that “Swamiji” (as we call him, endearingly and respectfully) is the founder of the worldwide network of Ananda residential communities, temples, and retreat centers.

Around the person of a celebrity or spiritual teacher there always exists a certain level of “buzz,” fuss, and jockeying. People are people, and with a certain degree of fame comes an equally certain level of attention to the person. This can’t be helped.

In Swamiji’s case, it is not something he encourages and not something he welcomes. He  accepts these attentions as a regrettable, if necessary, fact of the spiritual work that is his to do. At age 86 and after decades of serving without thought of his own comfort or needs, and while in constant travel around the world under often difficult conditions, he does also need support, care and attention from his staff.

It is not our task, as truthseekers and devotees, to assess the spiritual realization of others, including spiritual teachers like Swamiji. Wiser is it for us to appreciate the opportunity to see and receive such a one mostly for what he symbolizes (dedication to spiritual principles) and for the example he offers to us, than for anything he has done, or is in himself, or has to “give” us in the sense of something we may lack.

A true spiritual teacher comes to reflect to us the light which is our own soul. To honor that intention and the heroic effort behind it, is to affirm that intention and goal in ourselves. Swamiji does not say he is a guru, nor does he claim any specific level of spiritual realization. He will tell us that what he has to offer is that which comes through him from his guru, Paramhansa Yogananda  — a true master and avatar.

Swamiji doesn’t claim that his divine attunement is flawless or perfect or that everyone who comes to him will receive some ineffable blessing or life changing transformation. He is not going to hug you, give you shaktipad, or give you anything that you don’t already have within you. He is content if, as a representative of Paramhansa Yogananda and the principles his guru lived by, we receive him in that spirit and find from our time with him, inspiration to carry on our own unique spiritual journey with renewed effort and courage.

It is true that Swamiji’s life has been an instrument of blessing in countless ways to many, many souls. It is true that he has written well over a hundred books, hundreds of pieces of music, founded nine residential communities, and the worldwide spiritual ministry of Ananda, but, for that, he feels little sense of “doer-ship” and feels that it is far more important that he be blessed to experience and share the bliss of our soul’s immortal promise and eternal state.

After all, he might have been born with no special creative or organizational talents. To be blessed with God-consciousness is be the greatest gift any soul can offer to another.

So, I urge you to come to see him; to honor him as you would honor your own, higher Self; to honor him as a living vehicle for conveying the presence and the blessings of Paramhansa Yogananda. It is an interesting fact that as we honor him (or any other such soul), we honor our Self. Thus it is in the words of Jesus that “He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward.” That reward is bliss for he who is in bliss is a prophet proclaiming the coming of the kingdom which, as Jesus also put it, “is within you.”

Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman

Do I Need a Guru? Part 2

Swami Kriyananda (my teacher and founder of Ananda) was once asked by an interviewer, “Do I need a guru?” He smiled, paused, and replied: “No — — — unless you want to find God!”

You see that’s the problem with this question. Imagine someone asking himself, “Do I really want a life partner?” Most people don’t even question their desire for a life partner. In fact, they are eager (often, too eager) to find him or her.

There’s a story about Mozart. He was asked how it was he composed symphonies at a young age. His answer was, “I didn’t have to ask that question!”

Yes, we can speak philosophically about the need for a guru. I did that somewhat in the first article. And that is helpful for some people to understand more about what a true guru is and what a true disciple-guru relationship is really like. Such knowledge can plant a seed of receptivity. But so long as you are asking the question, you probably aren’t ready.

But when a person falls in love with someone, he doesn’t have to ask the question, “Do I want a partner.” (If he does, then, well, can he really say he has fallen in love?”)

But as to the question, “Do I need a guru?,” it can’t be answered on its own terms. The cliché “When the disciple is ready, the guru appears” is the only real “answer” to the question.

As a disciple of Paramhansa Yogananda I am bereft of the actual physical presence of my guru and his personal guidance in my life as another human being. When my teacher, Swami Kriyananda, speaks or writes of his experience of Yogananda (whom we refer to as “Master”) it is very inspiring and instructive. Yet, I cannot easily put into direct practice these lessons because Yogananda (“Master”) is not here in my life in the same way.

I have met disciples of other, living gurus, however. While many have had at least one physical contact (meeting) with their guru, few have had direct, daily or even at-a-distance personal access to their guru. Some have been given specific and important guidance but most have only received general guidance, or a mantra and others no direct guidance at all. In fact, this is not uncommon. Some gurus don’t even speak. The number of direct disciples of a true master (not just a popular spiritual teacher) are very, very, very few.

The number of great saints (indeed, avatars, or saviors) are fewer still. But among disciples, only some are receptive on a deep level (or, put another way, “advanced” disciples). Read books on the lives of great saints (East or West) written by disciples and you’ll see immediately the truth of what I speak. Read the gospels and see how clumsy, ignorant, dense or stubborn were Jesus’ own disciples. Judas betrayed him directly but Peter denied him three times. Thomas was the doubter. All of them failed at different points along the way.

For many years I have taught classes based on the teachings of Paramhansa Yogananda. I find that many students are wary or put off by the guru word. Many have ceased their studies at the crucial moment of being invited into discipleship. (Our meditation and raja yoga classes are not intended to “convert” students into disciples. The precepts of raja yoga are for everyone. But one of those precepts is that one needs a guru to achieve union with God. So as a matter of principle we teach the precepts of discipleship.)

Just so, many more are put off by the “God” word. But the reasons are as misplaced in the one case as in the other. Both are just words, but words that carry far more baggage than their three or four letters should be burdened with. (I won’t veer off the track and talk about the “God” word just now, however!)

It saddens me to see so many sincere souls turn away at the point where their desire to learn kriya yoga requires them to take discipleship to Yogananda and the line of Self-realization masters who sent him to America. For just as the “God” word can be understood from endless points of view — at least one of which would satisfy even the most hardened scoffer, so too discipleship is not at all the enclosure or imposition that so many students image it to be (usually without the slightest thought, but only reactively).

I don’t intend to dilute the guru principle or to suggest that students just wave their hand past the image saying “What ho!” as they take kriya initiation. Rather I am saying that most simply have no idea that what is being offered to them is the farthest thing from a threat to their freedom and character, for the guru holds the key to their own Self-discovery. But here, too, I don’t mean to so glamorize the idea that readers will immediately turn away from yet another pie-in-the-sky spiritual platitude. So if you’re interested, have a seat. Light up a peace pipe of curiosity and open-mindedness.

Let’s go to the beginning. You know, the Big Bang and all those cosmic gases. OK, then, let’s not. Let try another tact. When we look at this vast universe or the marvelous microcosm of the human body and mind, it is at least equally possible that the creation is a manifestation of a grand conscious intention as it likely that all this stuff came from nowhere and randomly evolved (driven in part by impulses of survival and procreation). The fact that we (indeed humanity since time immemorial) can sit here and can ponder the question as much as suggests that there is a tad bit greater likelihood of the former hypothesis than the latter.  

So, if for the sake of discussion and contemplation, we posit that the universe and we ourselves are manifestations of consciousness (some objects being more successfully self-aware than others, say people vs. rocks), than we can say that some species (and some among such species) are likely to be more aware, more intelligent, and more creative than others. We might step upon the high mountain of perspective and see that evolution seems to go in the general direction of greater and greater intelligence and self-awareness. The mental boundaries of a child would be suffocating to an educated, world-traveling, sophisticated and mature adult. Heroes of justice and compassion break the boundaries and self-enclosure of ego-affirmation and self-interest to include the well-being of others, yea, the whole world, with their own. Such heroes inspire others to break free from ego as well.

In every field of human striving, we see the greatest of these breaking self-enclosing boundaries of culture, tradition, or orthodoxy. If God is consciousness itself, and we find ourselves conscious and self-aware, and we can observe that there are some who transcend what is considered normal ego satisfactions for a much greater reward, it shouldn’t threaten us that there may be some souls who have “found God” (meaning an overarching field or state of consciousness). Why should this be a threat? Is it not, in fact, a promise? Is it not a promise that our own immortality lies beyond the confines of the ego and the physical body, just as the energy that animates our body is the same energy in all bodies and in all objects? That energy is neither created nor destroyed, but only changes form -- or so science tells us!

The question legitimately asked is whether such a state of being precludes, destroys, or eclipses that which we call “I?” Again, like the “God” word, maybe the question is misleading and unhelpful? If energy cannot be destroyed, certainly the consciousness out of which the energy arises cannot be destroyed either. It may change form; it may expand (like gas when heated), but it is still consciousness! In fact, it is just as likely that what we call “I” is simply that universal consciousness particularized (like water vapor cooled and made hard into ice) and identified with the limited life span and appearance of one physical form.

Still, the question haunts us: if I expand my consciousness into God consciousness am “I” not destroyed? Who could not but admit that the “ego” as we know it would evaporate? But instead of being destroyed, consider that it is being released from its frozen and locked state to expand towards infinite consciousness. If consciousness underlies all matter than ours is freed from its prison of ego identity! And, as all things come from, exist in, are sustained by, and are withdrawn back into pure consciousness, even the very memory of the limited “I” remains forever in the universal consciousness. What a liberating thought!

Put this another way: when I was a child, my world was a small world of playthings, my house, and my family. Now, as an adult, my world is much bigger. I am still the same person and my childhood memories and experiences are still part of me and are not lessened by the experiences which I have gained as an adult. I have expanded and I have not lost, but instead I have gained. For most of us who are far from perfected beings we seem to have lost the specific memories of childhood but experiments have shown that under hypnosis memory of many things is rediscovered and was always there.

This is why, in part, one can have a guru who is in a human body or not in human body. What the guru has to offer is not limited by a human body because consciousness is infinite and a true guru has achieved Oneness with the Infinite Consciousness. “I killed Yogananda long ago,” he said. “No one dwells in this form now but Spirit.” But, at the same time, for those of us still trapped in human form, it is far easier and effective to invoke God-consciousness in a form that we can either see with our eyes or visualize with our inner eye or invoke through devotion (the latter two powers being more subtle, more of consciousness itself, are actually more effective than merely “laying eyes upon” another human being). Many people meet a true guru while he or she lives but are not changed. It’s an “inside” job, so to speak.

You see it is ALL CONSCIOUSNESS. The guru is like a swimmer with a mask on who can swim and see the fish under the surface while we, without our diving masks on, cannot see the fish below. To us the depths are opaque, mysterious, even threatening. To see, to become a seer, is what we were born to achieve and this is one reason why it is taught that we must have true guru — because “tat twam asi,” Thou art THAT. The purpose of God’s creation is for souls to become Self-realized. It is not, as is commonly thought and taught, to escape the creation in rejection. It is to realize that the creation is but a dream of the Creator. Therefore there must be some who have achieved this goal and it is such souls who can teach others how to do the same. That's not a threat. It's a promise, though, to the ego, it is a threat, for sure!

And, it is they who come to awaken our lost memory of our true Self. God comes to us in human form because this creation IS God made flesh and dwelling among us and within us. But He is hidden in most things and people, but becomes Self-aware in those who have become Self-realized. Thus from soul-to-soul, one-by-one, we awaken like dreamers back to life from our dreams. The idea, so common to many, that “Why can’t I go to God directly? Why do I need a guru?” is again a case of asking the wrong question. Like Dorothy and Toto in the Wizard of Oz, what we are seeking is right here.

And if you are thinking (as I know you are), “Well if God is within me, I ask again, why do I need a guru?” Ok, fair enough, but have you found God? How do you know that by self-effort alone you will achieve success? Upon whose testimony in this effort are you relying? The testimony of the ages is that God sends his prophets, his messengers, his saviors to bring us "salvation!" Why is that so difficult to accept? We see its equivalent in every field of human activity that is worth pursuing. Every field has its masters, its geniuses, its wayshowers. You see this is where the rubber of self-effort meets the road of God’s grace in the form of the guru. 

Only those who have tried with great effort, common sense, and intelligence come to the realization that they need help! Such ones are “ready” and, sure enough, the guru appears! Do you see now?

If you find yourself drawn to a great guru, like Paramhansa Yogananda and the path of Kriya Yoga, what is stopping you? Toss aside false notions of being imposed upon or limiting your choices. When you commit to someone in marriage do you bargain for the right to keep shopping? If you seek the help of a world famous doctor to help cure you of a potentially fatal disease, do you pick and choose among his treatments, going, at the same time to others?

Blessings to you,

Nayaswami Hriman