[ 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: 1234[5]6789 ]

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

Date Posted: 06:51
Author: Eponymous - 27 April 2002
Subject: SRF rule - Ketch, decided to start this on a new thread

Why would SRF mention it now? It was something that happened over 60 years ago. There is no reason why SRF should suddenly bring this matter up publicly."

Well, I didn't say anything about "now" or "suddenly." In all events, has SRF *ever* brought it up? Probably not, and with good reason: The fact that SRF promulgated a racist rule is an obvious embarrassment, and the fact that Yogananda was in charge at the time does some damage to their claims of his transcendental enlightment.

Now, I know very little about the background on this. Maybe you have some helpful documentation. But it doesn't look like any appeal to "historical context" would be helpful here: There was a vanguard of opposition to such retrograde policies at the time. Yogananda does not appear to be among its members.

Nor is an appeal to common human error helpful. First, this error wasn't common; it was a deliberate promulgation of an ostensibly well-considered policy (I take it that no one wants to argue that Yogananda legislated capriciously). Second, adherents don't worship Yogananda because he was "common"; they adhore him because he was supposed to be uncommon. I am not claiming that Yogananda should have been infallible. But one would think that a supremely enlightened individual would have been alive to the absurdity and perversity of anti-miscegenation doctrines of the day. Again, there was a vanguard of ordinary, everyday sorts of people with no direct communion with cosmic consciousness who opposed these stupid policies, just as Yogananda was apparently implementing them.

One other question, Ketch, and this is something I honestly can't figure out. As you've noted, and despite the fact that Yogananda used the SRF anti-miscengenation policy as the ostensible reason for Chowdhury's dismissal, Yogananda actually blessed Chowdhury's marriage in a ceremony. Yogananda has also spoken eloquently of racial equality. Now, this is a very curious state of affairs. Have you ever figured out a way to resolve the apparent contradiction? Are we simply in error believing that Yogananda or SRF promulgated the rule? What gives?

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


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.