The Marshall Govindan Babaji Fraud

[Rudra]

"Babaji's Kriya Yoga" is now taught by Marshall Govindan and his assistants around the world. It is an expensive three-part series of classes on kriya yoga supposedly taught originally by Babaji himself to Yogi Ramaiah, who taught them to Govindan.

Marshall Govindan (whom I know personally) doesn't even believe in Babaji--he merely uses the Babaji tale (about a 2000-year-old yogi who supposedly lives near Badrinath, India, but who can't be seen by PHYSICAL eyes) to promote his sadhana classes (on ayurvedic diets, mantras, breathing exercises, meditation, and hatha yoga postures). The sadhana he teaches, I might add, has been found effective only by a small fraction of the people who've taken his classes.

Whatever the merits of these teachings, Govindan should stop claiming that he is teaching what "Babaji" supposedly taught to Govindan's recently deceased Indian teacher, Yogi Ramaiah. Govindan has made many substantive changes in the sadhana he received from Ramaiah. If Govindan is right that "Babaji" is the ultimate source of the "teachings" specifically concerning kriya yoga in Ramaiah's classes, then Ramaiah's students must be right when they say that Govindan is not teaching BABAJI'S kriya yoga, but rather something else. Of course, it's ridiculous to believe in "Babaji" in the first place.

Govindan appeals to people's interest in astounding miracles in order to sell his expensive set of sadhana classes. He implies that you, too, can learn to do such miracles if only you'll sign up for his sadhana classes. It's rather a base sort of appeal, aside from being a fraudulent one (as hardly any such miracles have ever been demonstated by those willing to subject themselves to conditions imposed by academic researchers investigating paranormal phenomena).

Govindan uses false stories of miracles to promote his over-priced, needlessly expensive classes on spiritual topics. They lead people to walk around in a dreamy state filled with illusions and fantasies about incredible "events" that never actually occurred.

................PART TWO.............................

A Canadian who calls himself Marshall Govindan, a.k.a. M. G. Satchidananda, teaches an expensive series of classes on what he terms "Babaji's Kriya Yoga" (see www.babaji.ca/ or www.babaji.ca/NewSite/home.htm). Although he presents himself as a spiritual teacher whose mission is to help others progress on the spiritual path of kriya yoga, he is, first and foremost, a salesman and fundraiser. I have found, over a seven-year relationship with Govindan during which time I considered him to be my teacher, that virtually everything he says and does is motivated by the goal of getting as many people as possible to sign up for his classes, buy his books, and donate funds to his organization. He is interested in students only so long as they are likely to sign up for further classes. Once you've taken all his classes, it's unlikely you'll be able to keep in touch with him or ask him questions.

Govindan does his best to convince you that when you take his classes, you're not simply receiving the information given in class, but you're also getting a teacher who will answer your questions and assist you on the spiritual path. In fact, Govindan resents having to answer questions, answers grudgingly, and complains bitterly if you you ask him as few as four or five questions a year that you are asking "hundreds and hundreds of questions." He is not interested in whether people who take his classes benefit from them, practice the techniques, or advance spiritually. His only real concern is the quantity of people signing up for classes and the size of the donations that are made by those who have taken the classes.

I feel cheated by Govindan. He told me that the techniques are secret and cannot be published because it is important to learn them personally from a teacher and to work on them in association with a teacher. In reliance on this statement, and with the expectation that taking Govindan's series of expensive classes would enable me to obtain guidance from him on my spiritual practice, I travelled to India and Japan in order to take his classes, only to discover--after I finished the series and Govindan had no more classes to sign me up for--that Govindan had no intention of assisting me in any way. Apparently, once you finish his series of classes and he can't get anything more out of you, he's done with you and doesn't want to hear from you again. This explains what the secrecy is really all about--if the techniques were published, Govindan couldn't get you to sign up for his classes and hence wouldn't be able to make any money from you. The secrecy has nothing to do with getting students to obtain guidance from the teacher, because such guidance (if it takes Govindan more than a few minutes per year) is not available.

Govindan has a wild imagination in thinking up excuses for not providing guidance. Even when you're practicing meditation diligently, he'll tell you you're not practicing and he doesn't want to work with people who aren't practicing. Or, when you don't understand something he wrote and seek clarification (because after all, Govindan is a rather poor writer), he'll tell you you're being "too intellectual," and leave it at that.

Govindan's behavior reminds me of that of the behavior of Cuban government officials in 1939. Manuel Benitez, the director of immigration in Cuba in 1939, made money by selling landing permits which would allow Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany to land in Cuba. He sold these permits to any Jew who would pay $150. The Cuban government nullified the permits after they had been sold. The Jews sailed to Cuba, but were then forced to return to Europe because the permits were not honored. Likewise, Govindan sells admission tickets to a series of classes and an organization called "Babaji's Kriya Yoga" and claims that he is available to assist you. Only after you've paid for all his classes do you learn that he is not available to assist you.

The organization Govindan runs called "Babaji's Kriya Yoga" does not exist in anything like the form Govindan claims it exists. Govindan lists a large number of "contact people" around the world on his website at www.babaji.ca/NewSite/contacts.htm . The purpose of the list is to make "Babaji's Kriya Yoga" appear to be a much larger organization than it actually is, which would encourage more people to become interested in taking Govindan's classes. Several months ago, I emailed all the people on the list and found that half the "contact people" outside the U.S. did not even reply, and three quarters of the "contact people" in the U.S. did not even reply! Much of this false information (about non-existent phantom "contact people") has been posted online for several years, even though Govindan was well aware during all that time that it was false. I told one of Govindan's assistant teachers about this and he told me Govindan was planning to correct the misinformation. When I checked the contact list recently, I found that although a small amount of the misinformation had been corrected, the list still contains a vast amount of misinformation.

I don't mean to imply that Govindan has never in the past been helpful, or that he is incapable of being helpful. There have been a few occasions on which he was helpful. However, I hardly think that this justifies his refusal to give assistance after the training has been completed. So far as I am able to determine, the small amount of assistance he gives is simply to encourage people to finish his series of classes. After the series is finished by a student, he sees no reason to continue to provide assistance because he has no more classes in which to enroll such a student, and hence no way to make more money from such a student. Thus, those who have completed his series of classes are left with a set of complex exercises, but with no one to guide them or advise them on their practice.

A large number of former students of Govindan have lost respect for him because they have found him to be dishonest and untrustworthy. He does not keep his agreements with his assistant teachers (known as "acharyas"), and consequently he has far more FORMER assistant teachers than active ones.

Govindan simply can't be trusted. He preys on people's need for spiritual guidance in order to make money and keep his organization afloat, but he doesn't provide the guidance he promises.

An example of Govindan's approach to finances is the policy he once stated to me, that Westerners may not take his classes in India, but must take them in Western countries or in Japan. Obviously, if he was interested primarily in benefitting students, he wouldn't care where they took the classes. His reason for banning Westerners from taking his classes in India is simply that he doesn't make much (if any) money from his Indian classes, which are either free or very inexpensive, whereas he earns something more substantial from the classes he teaches in the West or in Japan.
I consider his discriminatory policy based on nationality to be highly unethical. In the U.S. or Europe, people are never kept out of meditation classes on the ground that they are Indian nationals and should take classes only in India.

Govindan's classes on kriya yoga are taught in a far less professional manner than were those of his recently deceased teacher, "Yogi" Ramaiah. Ramaiah personally checked at length each student in his classes to make sure that they were practicing the techniques correctly. Govindan does that task so quickly (sometimes in four or five seconds) that it is impossible for him to have actually determined whether the student is doing the exercise correctly. He doesn't even wait to observe one full breath from a student before moving on to the next student learning a breathing exercise. He also turns over the task of checking the students to incompetent assistants--people who do not themselves practice the exercises or know how to do them correctly. For example, he once used an elderly Indian man to check the students' breathing practices. When I asked this assistant about the instruction to close the glottus more on the exhalation than on the inhalation, this man became embarrassed and admitted that he didn't know anything about how to close the glottus or whether it should be closed in a different manner on the exhalation than on the inhalation.

Some of Govindan's beliefs are quite ridiculous. For example, he believes that in five or ten minutes, he can train people to prescribe ayurvedic diets for each other. There are three detailed versions of these ayurvedic diets, all of which are quite different from the others. Govindan thinks that in a few minutes, he can train people to tell other people which of these three diets is best for them. Govindan also believes that specific yoga postures (called "asanas") can cure serious diseases that even the best doctors in the world cannot cure. He has also taught that if Sri Aurobindo had practiced asanas, he would have become immortal.

[Rudra]

Spouses and Lovers; The Grace Course

Many people think spiritual teachers should follow the example of employers and keep their spouses and lovers out of positions of authority. I agree. Govindan has allowed his wife to take over a very large share of the teaching work he used to do himself. I think she is out of her league and owes her new authority to the mere fact that she is married to Govindan. Indeed, people would assume such things even if she were--contrary to fact--competent to do all the teaching he has assigned to her. To avoid the appearance of corruption, therefore, a person in Govindans position would be wise to choose someone other than his wife to share the many duties and responsibilities of the organization. There are, in fact, other assistant teachers in the organization who are much better qualified to teach.

He also let her put out a correspondence course called THE GRACE COURSE for $108. It is pathetic. It is one of the worst pieces of writing I have ever had the misfortune to read. I could have written a better course myself when I was 15. It is full of miserably unclear writing, unsupported statements, and self-contradictions. I found that Govindans wife had no interest in improving the course. In fact, she seemed to think that people who did not love her course ought not to be studying with Govindan. I think Govindan may share that view...he has many of his wifes deficiencies. Neither Govindan nor his wife seem to realize that a good student is not one who always agrees with everything the teacher says, but rather one who seriously considers and thinks about what his teacher says (as well as putting into practice those teachings which are useful to the student).

Govindans wife, in her "course," also used material from other sources without attributing them properly. When I mentioned this to her, she said she had no interest in such matters. Thus, she is a "writer" who is either guilty of deliberate plagiarism or who is so ignorant about ethics as not to know that when you use the material of other writers without ginving them credit, you are stealing their work.

I also found that Govindans wife had engaged in fraud. She stated that she would answer questions about the course...thus, you were supposedly not purchasing simply a ridiculously overpriced piece of shoddy writing, but a real course. In fact, she quickly gave up after answering four or five questions, for no valid reason. (I think she was just lazy.) If I had known she would do that, I would never have wasted $108 on the course.

My experience with this course was typical of my experiences with Govindan. I found that he has no real intention to help students but only to collect large donations from them. If you have tons of money which you love to give away, and never disagree with anything Govindan says, and never ask any questions, Im sure youll get along just fine with Govindan. Otherwise, you should probably look elsewhere for a teacher. Govindan and his wife just want students who plunk their money down, shut up, and stay away.

Nonexistent causes, rigidity, donations.

My experience with the Grace Course (see above) reminded me of Govindans appeals for money for nonexistent causes, e.g., an "ashram" in Sri Lanka which never existed. There was some friend of Govindans in Sri Lanka, who may have needed money, but no ashram. Govindan ought to have just said there was this guy in Sri Lanka who needed money, instead of saying "our ashram in Sri Lanka" needed money. Govindan also talked about a nonexistent ashram he supposedly had in Germany. When you wrote to their email address, you learned that there was no ashram there, just some yoga student. Its similar with regard to his list of "contact people" on his website. Three quarters of the U.S. email addresses, and half the foreign ones listed are not contact people, but are just bogus email addresses intended to give the false impression that Govindans organization is much bigger than it actually is.

Another of Govindans numerous defects is his ridiculous rigidity. For example, people who have taken the first two initiations are supposed to take only 16 pranayamic breaths. Only those who have taken the third initiation are allowed to take 48 breaths. I personally didnt get much out of pranayama until I started doing a lot more than 16 breaths. Govindan ought to have advised me years before I took the third initiation to start doing more than 16 breaths, but he couldnt, because he adheres rigidly to rules even when they are ineffective or flawed in particular cases such as my own.

Also, consider that a person might meditate for ten years without taking the third initiation, and that person would be doing only a minimal amount of sadhana (16 pranayamic breaths) during all that long period. In contrast, a person who takes the third initiation a year after the first will very quickly be doing much more pranayama than the first person, even though the first person has had much more experience--that first person should probably have been advised years earlier to start doing more pranayama. A good teacher would know how to apply the teachings and "rules" in an appropriate and flexible manner.

The truth is, Govindan does not care about how the students sadhana is progressing. He only cares about the size of their donations.

The thing about operating on a donation basis (which Govindan adopts for some things but not for others) is that one just has to accept whatever has been donated. It is wrong to say that a student can donate what he likes and then get mad at the student for not donating enough. Govindan doesnt understand this. My opinion is that people like Govindan (who are very interested in building up an organizations treasury) should never operate on a donation basis.

It is interesting that many Buddhist groups (e.g., Goenkas vipassana and other Burmese vipassana groups) operate successfully on a donation basis, while very few yoga groups do. My analysis of this is that yoga teachers are in general (though of course there are exceptions) more interested in making money than Buddhist teachers.


I also think Govindan has overextended himself. Many people have complained that he doesnt reply to emails in a reasonable amount of time. Once a Malaysian was trying to organize an initiation in Malaysia, but he gave up because it took Govindan one month to reply to each email sent to him about setting up the initiation classes.

---------------------------------------------------------
I personally think that a fraud like Govindan should be put out of business, and information like this on the internet may help serve that purpose. While one is still a paying customer, Govindan is all warmth and friendliness, and he does his best to make you feel like a part of the "family." The minute it appears you will not be making more donations in the near future (or taking more courses), he will make it clear that he never wants to see your face again. Govindan is simply a salesman, selling expensive yoga courses. A real SPIRITUAL teacher teaches whether or not the student is rich enough to pay $1000 per year. A SPIRITUAL teacher is something entirely different from, say, a PIANO teacher or a SPANISH teacher. I hate to see spirituality corrupted by money.

[Rudra]

Govindan as Psychopath

Something I have forgotten to mention above is that several people, including myself, have been injured doing advanced hatha yoga practices taught by Govindan, yet he continues to teach them without giving proper warnings. He thus recklessly disregards the safety of others.

In addition, my experience with Govindan has been that he has in general a callous lack of concern for the feelings of others. He is (and I have given examples above) in the habit of repeatedly lying and conning others for profit, and does not seem to be able to experience guilt. He also seems to be incapable of maintaining enduring relationships, and is very fond of terminating his association with people from whom he does not expect to make money. Very few people remain associated with Govindan for more than two or three years. Govindan does not encourage people to develop spiritually, and would like people to go away permanently after being initiated (unless they want to donate lots of money). His "initiations" are misnamed--they are as much "terminations" as they are "initiations."

Thus, Govindan fits most of the criteria for being a PSYCHOPATH listed in the World Health Organization's Manual of Mental Disorders.
--reckless disregard for the safety of others.
--callous lack of concern for the feelings of others
--repeatedly lying and conning others for profit
--unable to experience guilt
--incapable of maintaining enduring relationships

[Rudra]

Govindan on Sex

Some of Govindans previously unpublished remarks on sex are interesting and worth considering:

(1) Govindan believes we should be moderate in sexual activity. "Moderation means the cultivation of calm awareness during all activities....If you are just indulging in sex for the pleasure of it, then this is a lack of moderation. If you are suppressing sexual desire, but cultivating fantasy and desire for sex, then this too is a lack of moderation. Cultivate the middle path of sattva: equilibrium, neither pushing away nor encouraging, but taking delight in the inner ananda which comes from being present in each moment, fully aware. For me the only game worth playing is the game of consciousness, being aware, otherwise one simply suffers in attachments or aversions. Whether one is a celibate renunciant or a householder or aspiring for one of these, the above is the path of moderation."

(2) "Babaji's Kriya Yoga is tantric, and therefore it uses all human experience to realize the Self and the Divine. To do so, one must cultivate the perspective of the Seer, or Witness, for example by practicing...(detachment) particularly during those activities, like sex wherein we usually forget Who we truly are. {See} the discussion of the Seer versus the Seen in the introduction to my
book Kriya Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, as well as the commentary on Sutras 1.2. Whenever we do, we may experience Self realization, and the accompanying Ananda or bliss. The reverse, I have found is also true.
Whenever we forget to be the Witness, we become absorbed in egoism, and suffer. So, the first and principle practice in tantra and Kriya Yoga is to
remember to remain as the Witness, in whatever you are engaged in. This applies to whatever comes up involving sexual desire.

Because our sexuality is such a powerful force, and can easily cause one to forget the above perspective, one needs to be circumspect, and approach it with respect for its potential to distract and lower one's consciousness; in the tantric tradition there are many preparatory rites and observances to help assure that one's consciousness is not lowered into the ego 'I am the body mind' state but that the above Witness state of realization is maintained. That is the goal of sexual tantra. It is not to cultivate a better orgasm. There is also the potential, with or without a partner to
realize what lies beyond the Witness Purusha: what Patanjali refers to as ishvara, the Special Self, or Lord, who is unaffected by any actions, consequences or any desires. The Siddha refers to it as the supreme grace
light within. This requires aspiration to know the Lord, and to surrender to the Lord, and deep inner concentration. When we want only the Lord, the
Lord reveals himself. This is grace....at some point one must cultivate aspiration for the Lord, who alone can clear all doubts, and take one into Himself or Herself. Ultimately, sexual tantra does the same....

Sex is necessary for procreation. On a spiritual path, it can be a hindrance or it can be an aid, depending upon our perspective. Our sexuality can be a mere distraction, or it can be a means to Self realization and God
realization, but that depends upon whether we are identified with the Seen, or with the Seer, respectively.

The Siddhas advised various methods, which involve the sublimation of our sexual energies from the muladhara to the crown chakra...with or without a partner, to turn what is usually a source of distraction into a means of realizing spiritual oneness. To reap their full benefit however, one must cultivate inner awareness, the
Witness perspective, and awareness of what lies beyond....

One may be a spiritual master and still have many subconscious habits,
desires, fears, known as samskaras, which create suffering for oneself, and
for those one is close to. Patanjali makes it very clear that such a masters spiritual consciousness may not be constant, until these
subsconcious seeds are uprooted. This is why Patanjali said that the yamas
and niyamas apply to everyone including such masters, and this includes
brahmacharya (celibacy or moderation if one is in a committed relationship).
The many masters who have not respected this have been controversial and
have brought scandal and ruin upon themselves."

[Rudra]

Govindan on Shaktipat

Here is Govindan's interesting view on shaktipat: "Several past and present "masters"
from India have succeeded in
attracting a lot of attention and followe
rs to themselves by pro m i s i n g
to give what is sometimes referred
to as "shaktipat," or the tra n s m i ssion
of energy resulting in altere d
s tates of consciousness. Swa m i [deleted]
and Yogi [deleted] are two examples of those who did
this for many years. Often the
recipients did experience altere d
s tates of consciousness, or uncon-
trolled movements of their body,
even hurling like a dog. Eve n
worse, some suffered long lasting
psychotic states, and permanent
deranged states of consciousness.
The record was not good, and the
re p u tations of both these teachers
was seriously damaged.
My teacher always used to say
with respect to promises of spiritual
ex p e r i e n c e s, or "shaktipat", "to put
m o re faith in your own sadhana
than in such pro m i s e s." There are
many reasons for this: First, our
human nature, with all of its sams
ka ras or habits, resists change.
Therefore, even after having a so
called experience of energy or whate
ve r, one returns to ones habitual
state of consciousness and neuroses.
Secondly, nowhere in the yogic literature
is "shaktipat" recommended
as a means of acquiring lasting
change in consciousness. Pa ta n j a l i
tells us that with re g a rds to our
deep-seated subconscious desire s
and tendencies, the samskaras, that
it is only by repeatedly returning to
the source, that is, by returning to
the samadhi state that we can
u p roort them. Thirdly, such a
promise leaves one dependent upon
the "master," whereas the objective
is to make oneself a master of one's
own, body, life, and mind. Fourth, it
gives the impression that "enlightenment'"
can be purchased for the cost
of a seminar, or as a result of an experience. Whereas,
enlightenment, or the establishment of one's consciousness
in the state of Self-realization known as samadhi, is
rarely attained, and only as a result of a long process of
disciplined sadhana or practice of spiritual or yogic disciplines,
with practically no exceptions. Fifth, any experience
is in the physical, vital or mental plane, and as
such, is limited in time and effect. In the spiritual
plane, one goes beyond ex p e r i e n c e s, time and space,
and realizes pure consciousness. This alone is the goal
of Yoga and all authentic spiritual tra d i t i o n s. Sixth, to
claim that one can transmit enlightenment to someone
else as a result of shaktipat is deceptive. There are no
shortcuts to "enlightenment." Finally, no truly "enlightened"
teacher would make any claim of specialness, or
superiority over others. When one reaches the enlightened
state, there is no "other;" one has gone beyond the
need to have or give any experience
because there is no longer an exper
i e n c e r. One is one with the
S u p reme truth, transcendent to all
experiences and forms. One enlightened
teacher, Ramana Mahars h i
would not even acknowledge a guru
disciple relationship between himself
and others.
What is important for eve r y o n e
to remember is that our sadhana includes not only a
transcendence or vertical ascent into the spiritual, but
also horizontal integration of Self realization into all the areas of our life."

--------------------------------------
I myself (Rudra) am a little skeptical about Govindan's
view that "shaktipat" is really so dangerous. I have heard of very few cases of people being injured from shaktipat, though I suppose we must concede that once in while a person is temporarily distressed after undergoing shaktipat. Even if we concede some risk of injury, we should remember that sometimes people are injured by drivers of cars, yet this wouldn't lead us to prohibit the driving of cars. Sometimes people are injured crossing a street, yet we'd never conclude from that that people should never cross the street. From the numerous reports of the spiritual upliftment caused by shaktipat transmission and the very small number of negative reports, I'd say the benefits of shaktipat far exceed the risks. And I don't think uncontrolled movements of the body are such a terrible thing.

Keep in mind that shaktipat has been done by a large number of masters--not just the two that Govindan discusses--and is almost a standard phenomenon within yoga. The 19th-Century Bengali saint, Ramakrishna, did shaktipat to Vivekananda. Yogananda did it to Kriyananda (according to my interpretation of Kriyananda's published account of his initiation in his autobiography). Rajneesh/Osho did it to many people. Da Free John (or whatever he is now called--Bubba Free John? Adi Da Samraj?) did it. Rudi (Sw. Rudrananda, d. 1973, author of Spiritual Cannibalism) did it. And the list could be greatly extended. Govindan is not criticizing two isolated masters but is in fact taking a position against a very large number of teachers including some that are respected by almost everyone in the yoga field (e.g., Ramakrishna).

Unfortunately, I do think Govindan is right than in many cases, "our human nature, with all of its sam-
skaras or habits, resists change. Therefore, even after having a so
called experience of [shaktipat] energy...one returns to ones habitual
state of consciousness and neuroses." Thus, shaktipat usually doesn't by itself produce a permanent change. But it can certainly inspire you to work harder to produce a permanent change.

Govindan is somewhat confused in his remarks about shaktipat, on the one hand, and masters who "claim [ deceptively] that one can transmit enlightenment to someone
else as a result of shaktipat. There are no
shortcuts to 'enlightenment.' [N]o truly 'enlightened'
teacher would make any claim of specialness, or
superiority over others." Govindan may be right in what he says about 'enlightened'
teachers or about the claims made by some teachers (or perhaps pseudo-teachers), yet wrong about shaktipat. We shouldn't confuse the phenomenon of a powerful energy transmission (i.e., shaktipat)
with the false claims made by some teachers about their own abilities or about the nature of enlightenment.

[Rudra]

WHO IS BABAJI? Who was Yogi Ramaiah?

I asked one of Govindan's senior students about Babaji, and received the following reply: "He can take a "physical form" but he is normally in a higher dimension -- in the realm of Shvetdeep which has been variously called Shamballa or shangrila. His presence permeates the whole world but is strongest in the Himalayas. He has been associated with many caves....Babaji is a descen[dant] or Avatar of Lord Shiva, who unlike the Avatars of Vishnu, comes in an immortal body and is here for an age, to oversee humanity's spiritual evolution. He has been here for many millions of years and has at times appeared as God to many peoples of the earth. Most of the time, however, He prefers to work annonymously behind the scenes and throught the hearts of spiritual people as inspiration or guidance....Babaji is God, [so] all Yoga comes from Him.... [S]ince neither Babaji nor God can be proved or disproved, we can justify any position by invoking His name [i.e., there's no point trying to use Babaji or God as an authority to justify one's point of view.]"

My own view is that Babaji, Shiva, Vishnu, etc. are silly myths for children. I have nothing against myths as literature. Some of the world's greatest literature is just myth--the Greeks' wonderfully entertaining myths of Zeus, Athena, etc.; Milton's Paradise Lost (all about the mythical adventures of Satan, among otheres); the Bible; Norwegian legends, which refer to the monster in Lake Mjøsa, the sea ghost, Draugen (a headless fisherman dressed in oilskins), and the Aesir gods, such as the god Thor. The problem arises when people take these myths seriously. Then we get situations such as that created by the late Yogi Ramaiah, the teacher of Marshall Govindan, whose favorite lines were, "Babaji says that..," "We have to all do this now because Babaji wants...." etc. In this way, Ramaiah used the Babaji myth as an excuse to dominate, abuse and take advantage of his students. For the most part, it was only because these students actually believed that Ramaiah was communicating with "Babaji" that they cooperated with Ramaiah's demands. (Persons wishing to learn more about Ramaiah should look at http://www.babajiskriyayoga.net/engl...sa-ramaiah.htm .) Ramaiah, of course, was only a special case of a much larger phenomenon, that of people demanding to be obeyed based on their supposed communication with invisible entities on a higher level than the human. Many of the world's major religions have a foundation of this sort. Of course, the various claims to knowledge based on such experiences and communications are all in conflict. A reasonable person, therefore, won't be persuaded by a teacher's statements that one ought to do some action or believe some claim simply because the teacher says he's being guided by a higher, invisible "being."

[Rudra]

Govindan has recently published an article extolling the spiritual practices, achievements, and teachings of the famous yogi, Sri Ramakrishna (1836-1886) of Dakshineswar, India (near Calcutta). In this article Govindan defends Ramakrishna's practice of idolatry, in which small physical objects that look like dolls are worshipped as gods. As Govindan says, "the deity is bathed, dressed and decked with ornaments, sung to with hymns, and invoked with mantras and meditations...." But whatever "name, or word [for the deity, e.g., Krishna, Shiva, Durga, Kali, etc.] is chosen ultimately lead[s] to the Nameless, the Formless...." If that is so, then one would expect idol worshippers to eventually come to see that God is nameless and formless.
Yet of the hundreds of millions of Hindus in India, there are almost no well-known examples of idolatry leading one to view God as nameless or formless. (I can't think of a single case.) Rather, it is generally through education--rational explanations--that idolaters have come to take an impersonal view of God as nameless or formless, and thereafter to abandon idol worship. I know of no evidence that idolatry leads to impersonalism.

Another serious problem with Govindan's enthusiastic expression of admiration for Ramakrishna is that Ramakrishna's teaching is directly opposed to Govindan's on many important issues. Some preliminary terms must now be explained. A "Sadhu" is a practitioner of yoga who has given up pursuit of wordly goals and devoted himself to achieving spiritual liberation through meditation. As Ramakrishna himself said, a Sadhu is a person who has "surrendered his mind, heart, and soul to God." A serious spiritual seeker, according to Ramakrishna, must become a Sadhu. But a Sadhu who "receives money...is not a proper Sadhu; avoid the company of such." Yet Govindan is deeply involved in fundraising and has in fact made such fundraising the primary goal of his work as the leader of the Babaji's Kriya Yoga organization. Govindan not only receives money but he also makes it clear to his students after they've been his students for a few years that he doesn't want anything to do with them unless they make large financial donations. The worst thing you can do if you are Govindan's student is to ask him for a discount on an activity. He might give you one, but you can be sure he'll get rid of you permanently shortly thereafter. Thus, Govindan must think Ramakrishna was completely wrong on money matters. Yet why, if Ramakrishna is so great, did he get money matters so very wrong?

A similar question arises with regard to sex. Govindan is married--his current wife is his third. (I am unsure whether Govindan's first marriage, to another student of Yogi Ramaiah, which occurred when he was about 21 years old, was ever legally registered, but he considered it a marriage at the time. See his book, "How I Became a Disciple of Babaji.") Yet Ramakrishna taught that a Sadhu must have "given up lust....He looks upon women as his mother....He will not even look at the picture of a woman."(And, mutatis mutandis, for women giving up lust, not looking at the picture of a man, etc.)Thus, Govindan must think Ramakrishna was completely wrong on sex. How could Ramakrishna have been so wrong about sex if, as Govindan says, Ramakrishna was so great? Don't expect Govindan to give an answer to any of these questions other than "That question is overly intellectual"--Govindan's standard answer whenever someone points out serious contradictions or problems in Govindan's teaching.

Govindan's teaching is diametrically opposed to Ramakrishna's on the most fundamental issues. Govindan doesn't advise spiritual seekers to become celibate and to avoid money. Ramakrishna told serious spiritual seekers that they had to become celibate and to avoid money. Why, then, does Govindan heap effusive praise on Ramakrishna?

---------------------------
All Ramakrishna quotes are from "Thus Spake Sri Ramakrishna," published by Sri Ramakrishna Math, Mylapore, Chennai.