Mahavatar Babaji - - A reality or myth

Yes, and btw the founder of ananda sangha was accused of rape, settled out of court for $1.8 million that his organization is paying now, while he moved from USA ti Italy, just in case . There are also indications of his sexual and financial misconduct when he was in SRF.

Krya was already changed by Yukteshwar too. So studding under Lahiri, Yukteshwar or Yogananda one would get different versions of kriyas with all of them...

............................

with anand sangh intiation is given after a few months after different levels
the great grandson of lahiri mahashya gives it in a day

my question is
if the original kriya was reintroduced to the world by babaji

how could the mortals change it? and who has given them the authority to change it?

do they not have any regard for a 1800 year old soul

one thing about swami kriyananda
his version of the Gita is the best i have ever come across
he has explained the Gita with a totally different point of view
my life changed after reading it

That has nothing to do with kriya itself. Yogananda too did it immediatly for some, but as organization started spreading they had to introduce a systematic approach. Which btw is in my opinion the destroyer of spirituality, as we are all individuals and the approach to teaching should also be individual.

I’ve read somewhere that upon meeting him Ramana Maharishi noted something on this line to him, in response to his promoting kriya as the greatest path suited for everyone. Maybe the reason for Yogananda declaring him not fully liberated later in a book

In any case both in SRF and AS you don’t get the initiation immediately, it is not that initiation is gradual or something, you are just supposed to practice meditation and other exercises for some time before getting it. Makes sense, as there is no guru to judge how ready the disciple is, so they made such a systematic approach with a preparatory period. Kriyas are after all advanced yogic practices and it makes sense not to start with it if someone had nothing to do with any spiritual practice whatsoever before that, at least for a significant number of people.

It was 2 years originally. AS reduced it I think to 6 months now, I don’t know for SRF at the present.

Changing the kriyas is the last of worries here in my opinion. If someone has really mastered anything (spirituality, art, science..) he will probably be able to change, adjust.. because he understands the fundamental principles and does therefore not have to be obsessed with maintaining the exact form, rigidity can be also a sign of not having mastered it, but just blindly coping.. Look for example how much difference there is between different Krishnamacharya’s disciples like Iyengar and Jois, different Shivananda’s disciples (Satyananda or Chiddananda), the difference in approach between Ramakrishna and Vivekananda.. On the other hand too much relativism opens the doors for cultism and religious manipulations.. no fixed rules there I suppose, has to be judged on a case-to-case basis..

dear goran i read your post several times

i will give it a deep thought

one more direct question
the gurus claim that kriya helps you to develop a million times faster than any other practice they also talk of body rejuvenation then how come some gurus died of masssive heart attack's while giving a speech , so many gurus {i do not wish to take names but i know for sure} suffer from dieseases , i read on the net that one of the top kriya guru has not made a public apperance for 2 years because of ill health

if the gurus cannot maintain their own health
where does the fault lie ? with the kriya practice ?

there is a lot more to discuss their life style is certainly not "simple living high thinking" {which they preach but that can be discussed later

i just read this on the net

in 2010 swami kriyananda has started a new order "the nayaswami order"
now he calls himself nayaswami kriyananda

Thats just marketing. And blind faith, which is understandable, if someone is involved in a certain tradition and very attached to it it comes naturally very often. But I don't believe in all that, I don't believe that there is a best path globally, maybe only the best one for an individual. They say kriya is the fastest, surest, this and that, others will say that mantra/japa/namasmarana is, a third one that atmavichara is that perfect method of choice.. Such discussions and elitist views make no sense and I personally do not feel attracted to teachers that have an inclination to promote their teachings by diminishing others, no meter how advanced they might be.

yes goran again agree with you

regarding the 2 drawings in post no 3
how can the drawing of the idol at badrinath and sketch of babaji be so similar
the idol is said to be more than 6000 years old and the drawing of the idol is much before autobiography of yogi was published

Atmavichara is the only way, be your own guru, no kriyas, no gurus, all bogus.

I don’t believe in „the only ways“
Btw actually even Ramana said than in most cases a guru is necessary

[QUOTE=Goran;890584]
..........Changing the kriyas is the last of worries here in my opinion. If someone has really mastered anything (spirituality, art, science..) he will probably be able to change, adjust.. .....QUOTE]

i thought about it
it is also in the gita sar {jist} "parivartan sansar ka niyam hai" {change is the law of society}
time and again humanity has followed some text or other initially the vedas and now something in story form like the mahabharata {a story with a deep profound meaning and guidance to lead a good life}
but for some one to totally change the teachings {kriya} in a span of less than 200 years, no i can not belive that.

जाकी रही भावना जैसी
रघु मूरति देखी तिन तैसी

meaning; it the law of balance, what matches us in our vibration's comes to us.

Be it a person or some wonderful thoughts that come to us all of a sudden which change our life

Actually, there are so many charlatan gurus that it is a serious risk to follow any. Ramana is closest to my views and I have immense respect for him. However, you need a guru if you have a problem. My own problem was, 'why did Krishna advocate war?'. My supervisor helped me to get the answer. He was a Puttaparthy Sai devotee. So, he was my guru. There could have been other gurus also which may have helped me. One was my grandfather, an orthodox pundit who sowed the seeds of search for truth in me. One may not need a full-time guru.

Might be.. than again there are no definite answers in spirituality and different people have different opinions. For example I know an old hare Krishna devotee who over time switched from ISKCON to traditional Gaudya babajis. So he did his japa for decades in ISKCON. Than tried with various babajis. In his words when he accepted harinam (with traditional Gaudya's it is not like mantra diksha that might come later if one accepts a guru, it can be taken from different people more than once while one is searching) from the person that he later accepted as a guru there was a significant change in the quality of his sadhana, an "inner change/help" that he could not get before.. now, of course, it might be just suggestion, but than again he was practicing for so long, and was certainly often convinced that the gurus he was following were "perfect", yet it did not work until he found this one.

I'm not completely convinced that there is something deeper than psychology here, but I give it the benefit of doubt at least.

Point taken.