Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- KRIYA YOGA DISCUSSION BOARD

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:53
Author: Wondering - 29 Aug 2001
Subject: Re: Ananda and NTLA article
In reply to: Yogananda Devotee - 29 Aug 2001 's message, "Re: Ananda and NTLA article" on 10:52

"You show no evidence, convincing or otherwise,
to prove your verdict of guilt."

I did not pronouce a "verdict" of guilt. I am just
look for a reasonable explanation for a very strange
coincidence. So far none of the explanations offered
by you or others from Ananda seem to be consistent
with the assertions made by Kriyananda in his rebuttal.

As far as "evidence," I think I have provided very strong
evidence from Kriyananda's rebuttal that calls into question
the assertions that:

1. Ananda/Kriyananda had no idea of the nature of the
article being published.

2. Kriyananda thought that he had convinced the author
not to publish the article.

These two statements seem to be the essence of Ananda's
defense of publishing the ad next to the article. But
both of these points seem completely untenable (as I have
explained in my previous posts) in the light
of Kriyananda's statements in his rebuttal.

As strange and disturbing as it may seem there appears to be
no justification at this moment (other than faith) to exclude the
possibility that Ananda and Kriyananda knew of the nature of the
article and intentionally published the Ananda ad next to it.

If you have some information (for example, perhaps the author lied to
Kriyananda and told him he would not publish the article) to exclude
what logically appears to be a reasonable possibility that would be
appreciated.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Yogananda Devotee - 29 Aug 2001, 10:55
- Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- ketch - 30 Aug 2001, 10:57
  - Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Yogananda Devotee - 30 Aug 2001, 10:55
    - Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- ketch - 30 Aug 2001, 10:56
      - Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Yogananda Devotee - 31 Aug 2001, 10:58
        Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- ketch - 31 Aug 2001, 11:00
        Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- ketch - 2 Sep 2001, 11:01
        Re: Deleted Post -- How True - 4 Sep 2001, 11:04
        Re: Deleted Post -- ketch - 4 Sep 2001, 11:05
        Re: Deleted Post -- How True - 4 Sep 2001, 11:07
        Re: Deleted Post -- ketch - 5 Sep 2001, 11:10
        Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Jimminy Cricket - 2 Sep 2001, 11:29
        Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Yogananda Devotee - 31 Aug 2001, 11:30
        Re:You're wasting your time -- Anonymous - 31 Aug 2001, 11:31
- Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Wondering - 30 Aug 2001, 11:33
  - Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Yogananda Devotee - 30 Aug 2001, 11:35
    - Re: Ananda and NTLA article -- Anonymous - 30 Aug 2001, 11:35