Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Interesting articles

Worth checking out the two articles recently added under Helpful links as per the suggestion of readers.

The Art of Living Business
http://shajiwriter.blogspot.com/2009/07/art-of-living-business.html

and

Is Sri Sri a Fraud Fraud? What the heck do we know? We are just mortal human beings and he is "holiholiness"?
http://www.diwala.com/233/is-sri-sri-a-fraud-fraud-things-certainly-look-that-way/

Thanks for the suggestions!

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

from:http://shajiwriter.blogspot.com/2009/07/art-of-living-business.html

""Army men who were busy clearing the debris of destroyed buildings and the organisers who were waiting to receive Ravishankar started fleeing for their lives just as Ravishankar arrived. Ravishankar, who inquired from fleeing people the cause of this flight, stood stunned for a moment. Then with instinct for self-preservation pushing him, he fled faster from the scene.""

1.Indian army DOES NOT EVER run away from worst possible dangers. They have proven it amply inthe past!

2. Does the writer have any proof of these claims?

3.I happen to know trauma relief teachers and their work.

4.If one doesn't believe in gurus or spirituality that is alright. Its another thing to make false statements to malign someone's name.

http://www.diwala.com/233/is-sri-sri-a-fraud-fraud-things-certainly-look-that-way/

Diwala means bankruptcy. Need one say more?

Bankrupt people neither use their brains nor insticts and get carried away in their own concepts and fail miserably! Has the same thing happened to blogger that she has to resort to such links for revenge?

KLIM said...

Why is publishing these articles a "revenge"? Is being informed, reading other's opinion revengeful? Or is it only because you did not like what the authors have to say about AoL and Sri Sri? Neither AoL nor Sri Sri nor AoL followers should worry about any negative press. When one is as big as and good as one claims, anything contrary is meaningless, don't you think? Are maybe all newspapers revengeful when they write not in favor of a subject? I have never seen governments get so irritated because of someone is writing not in favor of their grandiosity. Dear, it's called being informed, education. We are all entitled to all kinds of good and bad publicity. It is what allows the person to make a good safe choice. Then each person does whatever he/she wants with the information. It is not nice what you said about bankrupt people. Some people go bankrupt not because they did not use their brains. I hope it never happens to you nor anyone in your family. I never had anything to go bankrupt on anyway. And I could be a HE and not a SHE.

If these articles have no truth, then stay in peace. Trust people are as smart as you are.

Vishal said...

Ravi Ravi obviously wanted to gain some cheap publicity and raise funds for his ashram and family by using the Tsunami as the excuse. When terrorists attacked mumbai on 26/11/09,I wrote a mail to AOL and Ravi Ravi (he obviously has a mail ID which his disciples use and respond) to go to the Taj hotel and talk to the terrorists. They were holed up for three days causing death and destruction. There was ample time and if he had the power to bring in peace this would have been the best incident.
But Ravi Ravi never moved out of his luxurious Bangalore ashram all these three days. But not one to miss out on self promotion, exactly after ten days Ravi Ravi along with other buffons landed in Mumbai announcing their plans to prevent terrorism and reduce trauma.He wanted to capitalize by targetting the rich people in south mumbai.
Ravi Ravi truly believes that every crisis is an oppurtunity. Oppurtunity for more publicity and money.

Anonymous said...

I am terribly sorry if bankruptcy remark hurt. I just meant ideological bankruptcy. I wish best for your entire group materially and spiritually and in that order.

I can see you guys are giving a very different perspective of things. Also feel its very necessary so that in future people are not hurt or disillusioned in life because of wrong ideology, concepts and choices.

I only wish that you guys continue giving honest perspective and maintain quality about it.

Yes I have had some incredible spiritual experiences with Sri Sri and his sadhana and Sudarshan Kriya. In my mind there are no doubts about his being a Real Master and a Guru.

Its very disturbing to read such things about a real Guru.

Whether or not people believe in Sri Sri I feel his thought that Sadhana, Seva, Satsang and Surrender to Divine are very necessary for happiness of humankind. Can you disagree with that? Peace.

KLIM said...

The thought that "Sadhana, Seva, Satsang and Surrender to Divine are very necessary for happiness of humankind" are not the copyright thoughts of SSRS (unless he's also working on putting a copyright on that too!). Being able to state that does not therefore make someone a true enlightened master. There are many yoga and meditation teachers, and other mortals, like you and me who believe that, yet, we don't claim to be "the one and only", enlightened, or a master of any sort, nor do we insinuate anyone surrender to the Divine being that dwells in us. What is disturbing is not "reading such things about a real Guru". What is really disturbing is to know that there are some people who do not see your guru as 100% real, honest, pure. Having been in your shoes, I understand. No harsh feelings. Everyone is entitled to different opinions, experiences, etc. And, today you may see it all beautiful yet in a few years you may also wake up to another reality, or not. It happened to many of us here. I dedicated day and night for him, I lobbied for him, I fought for him, I went without sleep and many other needs for him, and yet one day I opened my eyes. Peace.

Gopal Krishna said...

KLIM, I am very confused by your blog. I read this to get insights on how art of living works to develop my own understanding. But, they way you described Sri Sri as a fraud Guru seems completely out of place. There was a debate on youtube between Zakir Naik and Sri Sri. Zakir Naik was almost totally ridiculing Hinduism's basic tenets, yet Sri Sri was completely cool and loving. Do you think, all this can be just an acting? No one can act like this in face of full provokation. If there is anger within and we outwardly control it, it shows on our face very clearly. But, even Sri Sri's face was emanating only serenity throughout this debate. Can you give your perspective on this? There was another occassion when SIMI activists came to debate with him and he was cool despite all aggressive posturing by them. How can one smile and be at peace in such trying situations unless one is highly evolved. Plz read this -

Gopal Krishna said...

*********************
this Q&A between SIMI folks and Guruji.

SRI SRI with SIMI folks

This happened in Kerela…

Sri Sri Ravishankar gave an audience to the SIMI (Student Islamic Movement of India) leaders. Four leaders from SIMI came to meet Sri Sri at the residence of one of the organizers. Following their entry, an air of tension enveloped the hall where hundreds were waiting to meet with Sri Sri. Naseeb, one of the devotees, guided them to the room where Sri Sri was sitting with a few of us. They (the SIMI leaders), were dashing youths in their mid 20’s. One of them was carrying the holy Koran. They were little stern and stiff. Their eyes were fixed and seemed to reflect an inner fire. They looked prepared to repulse anything that Sri Sri would tell them and most unlikely to listen to reason.

Sri Sri was His usual smiling self.

The stage was set. It had all the signs of a classic confrontation. On one side were the brash youth – intemperate, impatient, driven by ideology and out to prove their superiority. On the other was a youthful, realized sage, unperturbed, offering sane explanations that echoed an uncommon depth and breadth of understanding. Those of us in the room, were eager to see how Sri Sri would deal with these firebrands. Sri Sri embraced them and offered them chairs to sit. There was not an iota of difference in His attitude. Any casual onlooker could be forgiven for thinking that Sri Sri considered these gentlemen as amongst His most ardent devotees. Perhaps the only difference that we could see was that they were seated on chairs while the rest of us were on the floor! For us, it was yet another opportunity to witness the unconditional love that Sri Sri exemplifies.

The leader of the group spoke first. He asked

SIMI: You had wanted to meet with us.

SRI SRI: Yes. I wanted to understand why your organization was opposed to the Anandotsavam.

SIMI: We thought that holding an Anandotsavam (celebration) on December 6th was a deliberate move to insult our religious sentiments. Do you know about our religion?. Do you believe in the Koran at all?

SRI SRI: Yes of course.

SIMI: (Not expecting this answer, pointing to the Koran, they shot the next question) We believe that Koran is the only knowledge. What about you?

SRI SRI: This is one amongst the various knowledge revealed to man from time to time.

SIMI: But God has said this is the only knowledge. The way of the Koran is the only way. There is no other way.

SRI SRI: This message can be found in scriptures of all religions. In the Vedas it is said “Naanyah Panthaah Ayanaaya Vidyate” meaning “There is no other way but the way of Truth!” The same is said in the Bible, Jesus says, “To go to my father, you have to go through me. I am the only way”.

SIMI: But our scripture says worshipping any form or idol is evil, it is blasphemy.

SRI SRI: What is Good and Evil after all? It is relative. Relative existence is not the complete picture For example: Milk is good, but too much milk can kill you. Poison is harmful, but a drop of poison can save your life. Most lifesaving medicines have poison written on them! These are neither absolutely good nor bad they are just there. Truth transcends duality, and God is the Absolute and only Truth. So, where is the place for evil?

SIMI: Yet you Hindus worship many Gods, whereas our ideal is there is only one God and His message is what is required to go to heaven.

SRI SRI: There is only one god in many forms…

Gopal Krishna said...

SRI SRI: At this Sri Sri stopped them and after a pause asked them: Do you think the Sikh Gurus are not prophets. Isn’t Mirabai a prophet? What about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu?
Once again, there was silence. Their expressions had changed. The rigidity had weakened and in its place was some confusion/uncertainty. Sri Sri seemed totally at ease unmindful of the challenges posed at Him.

SIMI: No! You can go to heaven only if you believe in Allah and the Koran.

SRI SRI: No my dear – there was Buddha, Mahavira, Nanak, Jesus, Shankara… Do you think they are not in heaven? If not, then I would rather be with them!

SIMI: You are such a nice person, but we pity you because you cannot get the truth. You can’t go to Allah. You can’t be rewarded by Allah. God will never show mercy on you.

SRI SRI: Never mind. (with a mischievous smile ) I will be with these people (Shankara, Jesus, etc.)

(Even as we were admiring Sri Sri’s patience and objectivity, we were concerned at the wrong indoctrination that these youths had been subjected to. We also observed a few others who were in the room were getting a little restive, possibly wondering why Sri Sri was spending so much time with these people who were obviously not at all receptive and that too when hundreds were waiting outside just for a glimpse of Sri Sri.)

SIMI: Do you know, that over 1400 years ago, in the middle of the desert, God revealed the secrets of creation. Even when there was no science, God said that the Atom is the smallest particle!

SRI SRI smiled and said: Yes, the same is there in the shaastras too which were known more than 10,000 years ago. In the shaastras it is said that the Earth is over 19 billion years old! Truth is beyond time and space. It is not confined to one time or one place One needs to have a scientific spirituality.

As if to conclude the conversation Sri Sri gave them Ladoo as prasad. By now there were traces of a smile on their faces. When they were about to leave He gave them a hug. They definitely seemed to be less stern than earlier. Could their attitude have changed? We wondered whether this (‘changed attitude’) would persist or would they go back to their old fanatic ways. But one thing was for sure, Sri Sri had made an impression that they would not forget!

Later, while Sri Sri was having His lunch, someone asked Him, “Why is that Islam is producing so many terrorists all over the world? No other religion has given rise to so many terrorists in the world. What is the reason?”

SRI SRI: Look at the commitment and the fire in them. Take the good from them and learn what you should not be doing. Don’t label them as bad people. They have not been imparted the knowledge of Vedanta. (Then as He was adding ghee to the chilli powder) He smiled and said “In this creation, there is a place for everything.”

*************************
I am surely surprised by your assertions and the fact that Sri Sri's public behaviour gives no inkling of such tendencies. Believe me, no one can fool people into believing that they are peaceful when they are merely acting and controlling their anger inwardly - it always gets reflected in tone and on face. Awaiting some reply on this.

KLIM said...

Gopal, for some strange reason the option of publishing your 2 extra comments did not appear, just in case you jump to the conclusion I select what to publish and not. Anyway, it seems more like you want to make a point rather than confused, and if it was the case, it is up to you to decide whether SSRS is for you or not.
Smiling and maintaining a peaceful expression in a provoking situation is not a sign of evolution. People win Oscars you know. Sociopaths are good at hiding their true feelings. In criminal justice, it is known the better the criminal, the better they are at hiding the truth. I have seen him smile and project peace when challenged, even cutely laugh, yet, as soon as he got in the car or his room, he would go mad at the situation, the person, etc. And sometimes not only just then, for but for many days. He is not always that cute behind doors. But that is not for everyone to enjoy, just for the very very close insiders. The rest, like you, he needs to keep as mesmerized clients.

KLIM said...

The last part to one of the comments Gopal Krishna sent that could not be published. The rest I could not copy, it would not fit this box. My reply was in reference to this (and yes, you sound more devoted than confused):

"I am surely surprised by your assertions and the fact that Sri Sri's public behaviour gives no inkling of such tendencies. Believe me, no one can fool people into believing that they are peaceful when they are merely acting and controlling their anger inwardly - it always gets reflected in tone and on face. Awaiting some reply on this."

Gopal Krishna said...

Klim, It is true that I admire him. Even if he is a fraud and has cheated many people, still he has spread very good techniques and knowledge to millions. So, he has done mixed karma. I guess, he might have some high level of spiritual experience but may not be fully enlightened (if what posts on this blog say are really true). And he started with good motives his work and sadly got trapped in power and positions. This type of things happen to many advanced yogis also. Swami Vivekananda had commented somewhere: 99% of sannyasins get trapped by subtle craving for name-fame even after giving up lust and greed. If Sri Sri is what you described, it is a very sad downfall. I do a technique based on "continuous fast exhalation" which leads to a very good meditative state. I guess, Sudarshan Kriya operates similarly - just that, it includes fast inhalation also. Btw, I look forward to your articles on Padma-Sadhana and Sahaja Samadhi techniques - they will provide more information whether AOL has got new techniques or is just using the secrecy to arouse curiosity and trap people in their money-milching business. Btw, the superiority complex found in AOL members is more a token of immaturity that is often present in anyone starting onto something new and good. I myself have felt such ego arising within myself in the past.

Anonymous said...

KLIM dear when a person become enlightened he becomes aware that all is ONE so question of bow to me and I am the one and only Master doesnt arise.

When you work for an organization you bow to the CEO and listen only to him and your immediate boss. When you dont agree you leave that is called being professional. Isnt being on spiritual path is being professional in a strange way? What do you think detachment is? didnt any swami ever share that with you? That is strange.

When Christ said no man cometh unto God but by me he has this same thought. Still each one is free to believe and follow what one wants.

Isnt only change that is permanent? Having change of heart about Guru, faith and beliefs etc is all part of normal process. That is how one grows, keeps growing and in the end becomes enlightened.

Art of Leaving said...

Dear Gopal,

I watched parts of the debate between Zakir Naik and Ravi Shankar. I would have to disagree about Shankar being “completely cool and loving” and about his face “emanating only serenity throughout this debate”. Up against Naik’s rhetorical skills (admittedly often fallacious and dogmatic), Shankar faired rather poorly and it showed.

See Shankar’s response in that debate when cornered once again about his book “Hinduism and Islam”, which was a rather unscholarly attempt at comparing the two religions:

“The book of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar” - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xxeh_vSZu-k&feature=PlayList&p=6AF783757C87EE26&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=23

Transcripts of the whole debate can be downloaded at http://islam.thetruecall.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=6

There he does not seem particularly serene or cool or loving to me. He actually broke the meeting protocol by interrupting Naik before Naik’s allotted speaking time was over.

It beats me how Shankar thought he could bring Hindu and Muslim communities together by publishing a poorly researched book “done in a hurry in three days” (by his own admission) on highly sensitive and flammable topics. For example, Shankar’s book claimed that some Muslim concepts/symbols/practices could be traced back to Sanskrit (Hindu) roots, and on the basis of this he made claims of similarity between the two religions.

When these etymological arguments were contradicted by Naik, Shankar was not able to defend them but just told people that they should not “peck on” the book but “see the intention behind that book”. He fumbled around saying: “The whole book is wrong”, “I myself will tell you many mistakes in the book”, “That is why I did not print the 2nd copy, it was printed only once”, “It is not scholarly book at all”.

I am not saying Naik’s arguments were correct, but Shankar had ventured into territory where he could not hold his own. For that he had only himself to blame.

Art of Leaving said...

Much worse is his untruthfulness at a later occasion where he retracted his admission of the book’s errors in front of his devotees. And if this is not a clear example of hardly restrained pent-up anger, then I don’t know what is:

“Zakir Naik Rebuffed or Sri Sri Ravi Shankar Change of tone 1” - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx9jyi6CBuE

Shankar started out telling how the President of Iran was invited to deliver a lecture at the University of Columbia. According to Shankar, during the welcome address the President of Columbia University “bashed the President of Iran and put him down so much it was never heard of before”. Then the President of Iran said, “You know, this is not our culture, this is not our custom to invite someone and put them down and bash them... we never do that, we only honour the people”.

Shankar then continued, ”I experienced a similar situation when I was invited by Dr Zakir Naik to a dialogue on concept of God in Hinduism and Islam. And instead of talking on God, he went on to criticise the book which was written to bring Hindus and Muslims together... and the way it’s done was simply not our ethos, not our culture... there were a lot of Hindus, there were a lot of Muslims, and this gentleman is saying everything in this book is wrong...”.

Shankar said he then decided to admit that the book was a mistake, because otherwise his clash of views with Naik “could have led into a huge riot” between the Hindus and Muslims. He added, “If you really look into it what is the mistake? There are some typographical mistakes in the sixth point maybe or in the eighth point a little bit. Other than that the book is fine. It is just saying of mere observation of similarities in both religions...”

To me it seemed that the real issue was that Shankar’s knowledge and debating skills were not up to scratch. He could not engage meaningfully with Naik’s arguments. He came unprepared and could not even make use of the last thirty minutes of his allotted speaking time. On top of that he was a bad and hypocritical loser.

Naik’s views may have been dangerously dogmatic in favouring Islam as the most true religion and he may have been very deliberate in repeatedly pointing out Shankar’s lack of scholarly acumen. However, such an approach is not unusual in scholarly debates. If Shankar did not want this scholarly type of encounter, he should never have tried his hand at a book in comparative religion (which I anyway doubt was even written by himself). And he should rather have left Naik to engage with a learned Hindu acharya.

Vishwanath said...

Gopal Krishna

I had attended the Zakir Naik-Sri Sri showdown live in Palace Grounds Bangalore. I am no fan of zakir/islam and I am on the Indic traditions/vedanta side and was part of Ravishankar's entrouge. Ravishankar's performance in the whole show was pathetic to say the least. Far from his emanating serinity it was clear that he was quite disturbed. It was obvious from his face that he should have taken a few more deep belly breaths. Outofirritation he even stopped Zakir midway while he was talking about Ravishankar's silly book. It is not that Ravishankar was tolerant in his outlook. As a matter of fact in the very first sentence in his speech he took an adhominem dig at Zakir Naik by quoting Kabir on the futility of quoting scriptures and pandits.Quoting a quote against quoting. He wanted to like a nagging wife turn the debate / discussion into 'me full of love and heart' and you parroting scriptures. But obviously he did not see the irony of it all with he himself scripture quoting from his often repeated speeches.

Ravishankar's desire for one upmanship in the discussion was quite evident but he was poorly equipped to acheive this. What was obvious was his complete lack of intellectual vigour. Ravishankar was obviously caught off gaurd by attending this meeting. He thought this is just like any other seminar / function of AOL where he can get away by talking the usual lovey dovey stuff. Ultimately he ended up talking things which were irrelevant to the subject at hand.

The worst part was about the book on Islam and hinduism he had published. This was a typical PN Oak kind of book where similar sounding words of Islam was equated with Sanskrit words. If an author writes a book he needs to atleast defend the premises. He was shamlessly apologetic about the book in the light of the arguments. He promised to discontinue the publication of the book in front of the three thousand people. But this book/pamphlet is still under circulation by AOL. That is an example of dishonesty and duplicity.

Personally I feel discussions about religious oneness is stupid. And Hinduism is too varied and vast a religion or rather culture. You would need to define Hinduism first in order to attack it as their are multiple and varied interpretations of the several cultures that form what is called hinduism. Ravishankar like Zakir Naik expressed the singular intrepretation of Hinduism with Vedas at the top andeverything coming out of it. This is where he fell to the trap. We surely miss Vivekananda and Aurobindo. What we have is half baked gurus spouting stuff as if it is high philosophy.

Now coming to the Ravishankar and SIMI encounter, this was actually cooked up by two mumbai based AOL teachers while Ravishankar was visiting Kerala. There is no record of it anywhere and the story was created to lessen the impact of Ravishankar's poor showing with Zakir in full public glare with the videos on.

Vishal said...

"I am surely surprised by your assertions and the fact that Sri Sri's public behaviour gives no inkling of such tendencies. Believe me, no one can fool people into believing that they are peaceful when they are merely acting and controlling their anger inwardly - it always gets reflected in tone and on face. Awaiting some reply on this."


Gopal Krishna - I think you are blinded by devotion to see reality. During the Mysore Dasara Inaguration you should have seen Ravi Ravi's face. He was constantly irritated and angry. Maybe something had happened in the background with him,the politicians and mining mafia who organized this show. Not sure though or maybe he was just constipated after eating too much sweets.
According to Ravi Ravi enlightenment is a permanent smile which never goes. An immature definition.This was pretty much absent from his face that day.Maybe there are some holidays needed as enlightenment can get monotonous and boring.

Anonymous said...

vishal vishal
you said politicians and miniing mafias organized some function and SSRS had to attend it so definitely he would have been irritated. If you dislike SSRS so much why do you go even to programs organized by politicians and mafia ? :)
also vishal vishal (hope you can hear things first time and that I am not rediculing your deafness)you smentioned terrorist attack some time back so read this
http://www.vikramhazra.com/2008/11/rajita-shares-her-experience.html

Btw what did you yourself do to help out the poor terror victims?

Fabian Gomez said...

I don't support any form of cult or brainwashing behaviour, but given a choice between SSRS and someone like Zakir Naik, I'd take SSRS any day, compared to the violent fundamentalist Jihadi cult preaching destruction to the infidels, hell and brimstone to the non-believers and all the rest of the ridiculous baggage that Zakir Naik comes with.