Date Posted:10:56 Author: ketch - 30 Aug 2001 Subject: Re: Ananda and NTLA article In reply to:
Yogananda Devotee - 30 Aug 2001
's message, "Re: Ananda and NTLA article" on 10:55
These are just the sort of statements which bother me. For example you state that "The hate-Ananda website is run by SRF members, with the help of SRF's lawyer- who provides priviliged legal documents to them." But there does not seem to be any evidence to support this. I assume that you are talking about anandainfo.com. That website claims that it is run by Ananda Awareness Network and that this is a group of individuals some of whom are former members of Ananda. It denies having any affiliation with any other organisation, and I have not seen any evidence that it is run by SRF members. This appears to be just speculation. Nor can we be sure that SRF's lawyer is the source of their information. Whatever the motives of the people who run that site the material produced there, such as witness testimony given under oath is strong evidence. I have not seen this quality of evidence produced at "Yogananda Rediscovered" or other sites.
"On more than one occasion, SRF monastics have been heard to call Kriyananda the 'anti-christ'." Again what is the evidence? Which monastics? Who overheard this? How reliable are these claims? What was the context, were the monks just expressing their own private opinions?
I have heard of the alleged aeroplane incident before, but "It's well known at Ananda" doesn't mean very much. In fact it hints at rumours. There ought to be quite strong evidence to support this type of claim. If a criminal offence was involved there may have been a police investigation and trial. There should be eyewitness statements and copies of the leaflets.
I could carry on here with several other things which have been stated as if they were facts. The problem is that on the internet anyone can make any claims they like in a virtually untraceable manner. Sometimes these claims then get copied to other places, exaggerated and stated as proven facts. I believe that we need to see evidence to separate the truth from the rumours and misinformation.
Like yourself and most people here I would like to see the truth come out regarding these matters, but from what I have seen so far the evidence of any SRF campaign against Ananda is less than compelling.