Monday, August 19, 2013

Why take a retreat?

I am here at Ananda Village, near Nevada City, CA, for the annual week of Spiritual Renewal. There are about twenty of us from Ananda in the Seattle area. Overall attendance I don't know but for the major talks and events there are two to three hundred (or more) people. There are guests and visitors from around the world.
A week-long retreat was a tradition begun by Paramhansa Yogananda during his years of teaching from his headquarters in Los Angeles during the Twenties and Thirties.
Each morning, Monday through Saturday, there are talks by different Ananda teachers from communities around the world. Most days there are at least two speakers, sometimes an entire panel of speakers.
Afternoons offer workshops or tours or quiet time while evenings bring such activities as a concert, a play, a kirtan, an Indian banquet, and kriya initiation (for those eligible).
For those of us who are not, strictly speaking, guests on retreat but members returning  "home," it's like a reunion. We do have some business or planning meetings, but mostly it is reconnecting with friends and getting up to date.
I cannot over emphasize the value of such retreats, no matter what one's role in the retreat might be.
Retreat differs from seclusion in that seclusion is private and individual. Seclusion is also entirely in silence. Retreat is often with others, although the hybrid is personal retreat which takes place like a semi-seclusion in the midst of other retreat activities.
At Ananda's Expanding Light Retreat you can come for a specific program or on personal retreat, tailored to your own needs and schedule. You can also come on "work exchange".
Many, including myself, get more recharge from retreat or seclusion than most vacations (where you are traveling, in hotels, airports, cars, surrounded by crowds, and over eating etc etc)!
If you want a true recharge for body, mind, soul, I recommend a retreat!  Seclusion is generally best for those with a strong meditation and prayer practice, and who are comfortable yet energized spiritually being completely alone. Thus retreats are the place to start and both are very helpful, indeed, absolutely necessary.
As Paramhansa Yogananda put it, "Seclusion is the price is greatness" and this includes retreat.
Reference Ananda's west coast retreat: www.expandinglight.org. We have retreat centers also in central Italy (Umbria, near Assisi), and, in India (in the hills outside Pune city).
Joy to you,
From Ananda Village!

Swami Hrimanananda

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

What is the best or original Kriya Yoga?

As the practice of kriya yoga (a meditation technique(s)) grows exponentially in popularity and public awareness, the number of teachers of kriya and books about or revealing the kriya yoga technique also grows.

Different ones or groups claim to have the "original," or the best, or the correct technique. For better or worse, the term "kriya" is generic. It is almost equivalent to the term, in English, "technique." I refer readers to that which has put kriya on the public map: Chapter 26 of "Autobiography of a Yogi," by Paramhansa Yogananda. Thus there are many "kriya" techniques: some are preparatory for the more advanced kriyas as taught by Lahiri Mahasaya and his line (which includes Paramhansa Yogananda). Examples include navi kriya and talabya kriya, to name just two. Some teachers who use the term "kriya" in describing what they teach offer techniques that only casually resemble what Lahiri and his lineage have taught (directly and through their disciples).

To a "bhakta," or one who approaches God through devotion, techniques are either boring or virtually sacrilegious because presuming upon self-effort to achieve salvation (as if the yogi ignores the power of grace through God and guru!). A "gyani," or one who approaches Truth through the intellect and observation and strict non-attachment and monism, may view "kriyas" as unnecessary, distracting and smacking of dualism, as if affirming the yogis separateness from the One. A "karmi," or one who is self-sacrificing in rendering service without thought of self, may view "kriyas" as tempting self-invovlement and lacking in compassion for others. All of these objections, moreover, may, in some cases, be valid.

But the eightfold path taught by Patanjali in the Yoga Sutras and the path of yoga as taught by Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, both confirm that right feeling (devotion), right attitude (non-attachment and ego transcendence), and right action (nishkam karma) are integral aspects of the inner path of meditation (raja yoga--of which kriya yoga is a part). Krishna, in the Bhagavad Gita, counsels Arjuna (us) to "Be thou a yogi." This counsel is repeated throughout the Gita.

In prior blogs I have pointed out that there is no "best" technique, best religion, or most exalted guru but that which inspires our souls to seek freedom in God. For some yogis, a simple mantra is best. For others, watching the breath. For others, more complex techniques such as kriya yoga (which as taught by Paramhansa Yogananda includes a body of at least four core techniques and several supportive ones).

In the blatthering blog-a-sphere, one sees these debates about "best" and "original" going on. Those who defy the "ancient injunctions" of secrecy in regards to who is authorized to teach kriya, will claim a higher path of public service and decry the misuse of teacher-student relationship in regards to secrecy. It's not, of course, secrecy, per se, it's preparedness: mental, emotional, psychological, and physical. Preparedness means the more sensitive and inward understanding that it's not really about a technique: it's a matter of the heart: devotion and commitment. It's as if the "secrecy" thing is a direct challenge to the ego to reach for a deeper understanding.

Nonetheless, all sincere points of view have their place. As a given fact, why cry over the spilt milk of others' seeming transgressions. And besides, some teachers have misused these sacred teachings for personal gain.

In reading one author's revelations of his decades long search for the "real" kriya, it is evident that, as Patanjali warns us, he "missed the point." The point isn't "best" or "original." It is: how much of yourself are you willing to give? Still his account was interesting for all the lesser teachers that abound and that are tempted to use the knowledge they've received for self-aggrandizement. How blessed I feel for the self-honesty, the wisdom, the patience and the loyalty of my teacher, Swami Kriyananda: a direct disciple, indeed, of Yogananda! Kriyananda was blithely dismissed by this author (as a source for knowledge of kriya) by the author's cursory acceptance of the condemnation of Kriyananda by others as being disloyal. Well, that's fine, of course. Each to his own. I suspect, however, the real reason is that Kriyananda did not write or publish details of the basic and so-called higher kriya techniques in accordance with his guru's wishes. Thus he was of no interest to this author.

According to my teacher, Swami Kriyananda, Lahiri Mahasaya emphasized, and indeed, I may have heard him say, even, required mastery of the kechari mudra before giving the first kriya initiation! So few people that I know have a tongue long enough to do this technique at all or for very long that it would be a shame not to learn kriya yoga on the basis of not being able to place the tongue behind the soft palate and up into the nasal passage behind it! Yes, there are techniques for stretching the tongue, but, golly, how weird do we yogis have to be, anyway, to find God? (I'm all for kechari! I look forward to it; but my tongue isn't there yet.)

If, therefore, Paramhansa Yogananda, in coming to the West taught the technique without requiring or even, sometimes, mentioning kechari (except to close disciples), I, for one, think he knew what he was doing. With kechari mudra, the technique is essentially done with mouth closed (or air passage through it blocked). Without kechari, the kriya technique is more easily and powerfully done otherwise. To accuse Yogananda of changing or diluting the technique on the basis of doing or not doing kechari is silly. Ignoring for the moment, the grace and power of the guru's instructions, a survey of techniques going by the name kriya, and knowing, indeed, the advanced (or "higher") kriya techniques, it's obvious that there are an infinite number of minor variations to these techniques. Some of these will naturally occur to the dedicated kriya yogi as he practices and calls upon divine guidance to guide his practice. Swami Kriyananda has pointed out that the purpose and result of spiritual growth is to go more and more by intuition: by the inner guru. Thus a kriya yogi, in time and with dedicated and right practice, earns the "right" (by intuition) to explore the inner path and techniques in ways that are suitable at that moment. (Whether one teaches or shares such things is also a matter of both inner guidance and validated outer commission. See my prior blog.)

Collecting them all like baseball cards produces only pride, confusion, and restlessness. Surely not devotion, in any case; nor yet self-offering and humility.

Let us therefore understand that the spiritual path is unique to each and an inner journey. It can be supported by techniques but only with right attitude, right technique, and right teacher. "Right" means "right" for our soul's highest potential.

Blessings to all,

Nayaswami Hriman


Monday, August 12, 2013

Is it unnecessary to follow a particular spiritual path?

Recently, I assisted with the planning towards offering a specially designed meditation support group for those in the "recovery" movement. The eleventh (of the now well known "Twelve Steps") step in the recovery process is prayer and meditation. So, we figured, since Ananda has much to offer in regards to both, why not offer such support to others?

The first question that arose, however, was "Wouldn't it be more acceptable to more people if what we offered drew upon a variety of universally acceptable prayer and meditation sources (and not just Ananda's)?

I had to admit that such was likely to be the case. The further statement to the question was the assumption that by only offering what Ananda had to share we'd be seen as promoting our own way, indeed, perhaps proselytizing. I had to admit, again, that, well, yes, some would certainly view it that way.

My musings here are not really about how best to format the meditation support group. In that particular instance, I had several, not entirely irrelevant, objections: 1. What we would offer would be universal and not particular; 2. The mere fact that we would draw on Ananda sources doesn't, in and of itself, make it self-promoting. 3. Self-promoting is an aspect of both intention and delivery and in this case there was to be neither. 4. What we have to offer is effective and helpful to people. There is nothing lacking in it and there is no need, therefore, from the standpoint of the goal of the support group to seek out other sources. 5. The public service we wanted to offer is not merely the use of our physical space but to share something valuable that we have to share.

I admit that to many people these distinctions are just too subtle and human nature too suspicious to carry the day against the objections raised above. I figure, well, ok, then if fewer come and fewer therefore benefit, that's their choice. Why should we dilute what we have when we know it is effective and offered in good faith?

In my last blog article I explored the question of whether heretofore "secret" teachings and techniques should be made free (or mostly free) and public. Is to do so to "throw pearls before swine?" Is there any harm done? For those exposed to sacred teachings who spurn them because not spiritually ready, such persons may, karmically and psychologically, defer their own acceptance for having rejected them. Aren't material objects which are considered precious generally costly, scarce or otherwise difficult to obtain?

Still, one could also argue that more people will have access and therefore, following the spiritual lottery odds given to us in the "Bhagavad Gita" by Lord Krishna, "out of a thousand, one seeks Me."

My conclusion in that blog article was not a call for secrecy but a reminder that what makes such teachings and techniques precious is that one must have, by self-effort and grace, have advanced sufficiently spiritually and sensitively to recognize their value and to plumb their depths through discipline, self-control and devotion.

So, now, what then, is best? A synthesis of yoga techniques and philosophies or a singular lineage and spiritual path? I say, "There's something for everyone." When searching it is useful to explore different traditions and teachers. To draw the best from each and incorporate it into one's "sadhana" (spiritual practices) can be helpful.

But how many frogs does one kiss before finding a prince? There is, so I believe and believe I have observed in others, a restlessness and dissatisfaction in a concatenation of disciplines and methods. It is not uncommon, when yoga practitioners of different lineages assemble together, to feel a different "vibration" in another tradition, even when outwardly very similar (practicing meditation and yoga, e.g.)

There's another point however. This must be either experienced by oneself or observed sensitively in others. When one approaches spiritual disciplines like a smorgasbord, the ego engages in a "like and dislike" weighing and comparing attitude. The sense of personal ownership and "doership" is increased, not lessened. It is an axiom of spirituality that ego transcendence is an integral part of the path to the goal. "I have chosen this technique, that method, this book or teacher" to satisfy "What I think is right for me!" The resulting direction of consciousness is opposite to that of the soul, which is surrender, self-giving, devotional and so on. There is, further, a tendency toward pride over having learned or studied all these different philosophies or techniques, or having studied under this teacher or that. It may even be the ego's excuse to remain "above it all" (meaning above a personal commitment to ego transcendence) -- best to study everything, you see.

Yes, the ego does have to make decisions, spiritually and otherwise. Those decisions, however, which incline one towards ego transcendence will advance the soul toward freedom ("moksha") faster. As I stated in the prior blog, there is no one "right" yoga practice or meditation technique. What is right is that which brings you toward soul freedom!

This idea leads one naturally, indeed, inexorably to the need for the guru. But I have written on that subject in numerous other blogs. Suffice to say that anyone who sincerely and with energy seeks spiritual freedom, such a one will be guided to those teachers, teachings, and techniques best suited to his own unique and individual path to God.

The simple fact is this: in the practice of yoga and meditation today (and, let's face it, in the multitudinous practices of religion and spirituality generally throughout the world), most seek something far less. In yoga, it's often health, inner peace, well-being, muscle tone, stress relief and so on. For students of philosophy there are just never enough time to read all those cool books. For others, there's always a newer and more popular teacher coming to town. Even for the vast majority of devotees (those who undertake yoga disciplines, prayer, or charitable service for spiritual growth or to do God's work), we are working out karma: we feel better living this way; we feel compassion for others; we want to give back; and sometimes it's less ennobling, as, for example, we engage in practices because we are expected to, or otherwise for approval and recognition.

You see, and now I get to the meat of things, we have this deeply embedded tendency to mistake the form for the spirit (behind the form). Thus, we get attached to doing yoga; or meditating; or reading and learning; doing charitable work; or going to church on Sunday. We mistake the outer act (even meditation performed mechanically is a kind of outer work) for the presence of God, or joy, or upliftment. We too often settle for the outer act because we know we can't control when the "spirit will move and come upon me." And, of course, we should never so presume.

Thus we think that if we can learn dozens of yoga poses or meditation techniques we will be better at yoga or meditation. Little do we realize how little it takes; or, put more intelligently, that it's the attitude and consciousness with which we pray, meditate, or stretch that awakens the Spirit within. When, far along our spiritual journey, we realize that "joy is within you," (Ananda's motto), and that spiritual growth is not a matter of accumulating more techniques, or reading more books, and that it is, after all, really simple, then we let go of our "romance with religion" (its outer trappings), and seek, as one great modern saint was apt to counsel, "God alone."

I'm not saying we throw the "baby out with the bath water." I'm saying that we realize that one, true path, one true teacher, one effective technique is sufficient in regards outer practices and that what we really need is attunement with divine realities. And this is where it gets "good." Good because so subtle. Good because God, being the Infinite Power, the Supreme Spirit, has no form; no name; all forms; all names! It's just too confusing. Monism? Dualism? Where to start? Where does it end?

Are you ready, yet, for a guru? Ok, later, then. Nonetheless, my point is that, using the analogy of human love, we don't need five wives or husbands: we need only one if we want to know what the potential of human love might be. And so it is with God. Being everywhere (and nowhere), we don't need to "kiss every frog." Rather, simplicity of outer practice; purity of heart; selfless hands in service; and devotion to the Supreme Spirit (in whatever form is your "Ishta devata" -- that which inspires you to seek Truth and Freedom).

It would not be my intention to discourage you if you are enthusiastically engaged in learning and practicing (or teaching) yoga, meditation, or other worthy spiritual practices. Energetic engagement of will towards and for Good is necessary for the refinement of our consciousness and nervous system, and the purification of our karma and dross.

Further, there are those whose syncretic methods are helpful to them, and, if they are teachers, perhaps helpful for others. I maintain, however, as stated above, that this a phase one goes through. A necessary phase for some, to be sure, but a phase nonetheless. I object to what is sometimes the pride and even arrogance with which some syncretic teachers and students look down upon those poor slobs "stuck" in one path or lineage. But, well, I have spoken above of the drawbacks to this form of "fast lane" eclecticism.

Nonetheless, I hope some of distinctions made here can be helpful. For, very often, given the tendency toward sectarian rivalry with which spirituality and religion is too often a victim, a sincere person hesitates to make the plunge toward a singular path, leaving behind the garden of syncretic delights (like leaving behind dating in order to marry).

No step, taken sincerely and intelligently, with energy and faith, toward God, toward Truth, can ever lead us astray. Lessons we may have yet to learn, to be sure, but if we take one step toward God, Spirit takes two toward us. As we increase in purity, wisdom, and energy our path to God will surely lead us home.

There is no God, but God. There is no good, but God. There is no Thing, but God.

Peace! Shalom! Shanti!

Nayaswami Hriman