Marshall Govindan to S.Dubyansky

This is a correspondence between two Kriya Yoga Masters, Marshall Govindan (USA) and S.Dubyansky (Russia). The first letter was written by Marshall Govindan with questions and objections to S.Dubyansky. Subsequently, S.Dubyansky answered and explained his position on the raised questions. This article contains both letters.


Marshall Govindan to S.Dubyansky

(S. Dubyansky's answer to Marshall Govindan at the end of the article)

December 11, 2020
Namaste S. Dubyansky,

I have been informed recently that you have posted a Youtube video with my name in the title, and some claims about my past and about my publications. As I cherish the yogic principles of satya and ahimsa, I would like to share with you what may be helpful to you and all concerned, particularly if you have any plan to publish such claims in English language books. I hope that you are also committed to these two principles of truthfulness and harmlessness.

Thank you for your kind words of appreciation for my books which you expressed in your video.

I wish that we had met in person before writing this letter to you. I request that before reading further, you watch the video recorded interview which I made for the movie “The Grand Self” here:
https://www.babajiskriyayoga.net/email/bky-monthly-promo/russian/bky-grand-self-movie-satchidananda-interview.html

By watching it first, you may better appreciate what I will attempt to express with sincerity in the printed text which follows below.

As a fellow student of Yogi Ramaiah I believe that we should be able to discuss respectfully the issues which you raised in your video.

During the 18 years in which I lived in the ashrams and dormitories as a dedicated sadhak who honored a pledge to​ practice at least 56 hours of Kriya Yoga sadhana per week and to send to Yogiar weekly sadhana reports, I learned the value of asking questions. He encouraged this in our monthly “secret classes.” I have found that this method enabled us to convert doubts into questions, and then to progress with valuable answers.

In your video you asked the question: How​ can I justify teaching Kriya Yoga apparently in opposition to what Yogiar publicly claimed? I believe it is my duty to answer it. Especially if you were sincerely seeking an answer to this question. Below is the answer to your question:

First, I recommend that you read "How​ I became a disciple​", first published in 1997. It includes why Yogi Ramaiah asked me to give initiation into the 144 kriyas of Babaji’s Kriya Yoga during a meeting in January 1983. In​ that meeting he asked me to sign a pledge with my blood stating​ that I would “remain faithful to eternity to Babaji, Babai’s Kriya Yoga and the Kriya Yoga movement”. This document stated that if I fulfilled several rigorous conditions and their written record was confirmed by another sadhak, I was authorized to teach the 144 Kriyas. After 3 years of effort, he received confirmation from another sadhak that I had fulfilled these conditions. Since then, I have honored this pledge​ ,​ signed with my blood. I teach them just as he taught me: (a) giving the initiation into Kriya Yoga only in their physical presence with me; (b) giving the initiation only to persons who have signed the “Kriya​ Yoga Pledge,” (see the copy attached to this letter), which is the exact same pledge Yogiyar gave to us when we were initiated. The words in quotation marks of this attached pledge were originally dictated in 1953 by Babaji to V.T. Neelakantan, and published in the book The​ Voice of Babaji: Trilogy on Kriya Yoga​. At the end of the attached Kriya Yoga Pledge the following words were added by Yogiar around 1958:
“I​ solemnly promise to Babaji not to reveal the advanced techniques, particularly Kriya Kundalini Pranayama, and the Dhyana Kriyas ​under any circumstances to anybody.
I shall discuss the experiences of the advanced techniques or Kriyas only with others initiated into Babaji's Kriya Yoga. To the best of my ability I shall try to serve suffering humanity with the techniques of Kriya Hatha Yoga, like asanas, bandahs, mudras, etc. without expecting anything in return. I shall practice Kriya Kundalini Pranayama to my last breath​.”

I signed the “Kriya Yoga Pledge, ” when I received the first and second initiation in New York City, in June 1970. In September 1970, after practicing 56 hours per week of Kriya Yoga sadhana, I​ made a second “Pledge”​ when I was accepted as a resident of his first ashram in southern California. This second Pledge required that I practice at least 56 hours of Kriya Yoga sadhana every week, wear only a dhoti except when at my place of employment, and other requirements which I described in my book How​ I Became a Disciple of Babaji. ​I received the 3rd​ initiation from him, the 144 Kriyas early 1971 over an 11 week period. I practiced these for at least 56 hours a week for the next 18 years, sending to him weekly sadhana reports regularly.

I recommend reading this book also, because it discusses in detail why I left his Sangam in early 1989, as well as his reaction.

It also refers to the statements that he made on several occasions that I would find an Order of teachers one day.

If you do not have a copy of it, send to me your postal address, and I will have a copy sent to you.

If you do have a copy already, I request that you re-read the pages which address the above issues.

Related to my authorization to give initiation into Babaji’s Kriya Yoga, and to train others to give initiation are the following statements made by Yogiar. In 1997, I sent to him a copy of the Constitution of Babaji’s Kriya Yoga Order of Acharyas after its founding in May of that year. This “Constitution” is its governing document, and describes in detail its mission, its membership requirements, the duties of its members, the responsibilities of its officers, and its code of ethics.

My wife, Durga Ahlund, then visited Yogiar in his San Thome, Madras ashram and discussed it with him. He told her that he had "no objection" to the founding of the Order" but that with regards to teaching Babaji's Kriya Yoga "it should not be used as a way for people to make a living."

A second question in your video interview asks the question of how can I claim that “Babaji Nagaraj” and “Mahavatar Babaji,” are the same person? In reply, please re-read my book "Babaji​ and the 18 Siddha Kriya Yoga Tradition​," which provides references to the books and 1953 to 1954 editions of the Kriya​ ​magazine with articles authored by Yogi Ramaiah and V.T. Neelakantan, including The​ Voice of Babaji. ​In these source documents they identify “Babaji Nagaraj” as the very same person as "Mahavatar Babaji," and why Babaji directed them to begin a Sangam in his name because the leaders of the SRF were not responding to Him, and (in the Voice​ ​) because Yogananda had become independent. Their written statements in these sources are the basis of my claim that they are the same person.

Third, there is no evidence in any literature to my knowledge for your claim in your video that Mahavatar Babaji has existed “for millions of years” and “first appeared on Mt Kailash”; nor your claim “that Agastyar was Babaji's disciple”. The Autobiography​ of a Yog​i refers to the "siddha Agastya" on the same first page of the chapter entitled “Babaji the Yogi Christ of India”. But Yogananda made no connection between the two of them. Therefore, your question begs the question: Why do you not believe what Yogi Ramaiah repeatedly said, that Babaji Nagaraj and Mahavatar Babaji are one and the same person?

Fourth, the SRF itself does claim that Babaji Nagaraj and Mahavatar Babaji are different persons, but this is only speculation on their part. It contradicted their often repeated public statement and that of the Autobiography​ ​that “there is nothing known about Babaji's origins.”

Babaji first revealed his origins to Yogi Ramaiah and VT Neelakantan in 1953, after Yogananda's passing, and after the founding of the Sangam. They documented this in the early editions of the Kriya​ magazine which they published together until 1968, and in the Voice​ of Babaji​. While the YSS/SRF did send to them in 1953 a letter which questioned the origins of this book’s contents, the SRF did not communicate with them after that. Nor has the SRF communicated with me about our activities or publications, even after Yogananda's niece and nephew gave to me in the year 2000, their permission to publish the translations of the original 1946 edition of the Autobiography​ of a Yogi in foreign languages, which I did in French in 2000 and German in 2005.

In your video interview, you stated that Yogi Ramaiah claimed to have met “Babaji Nagaraj'' and “Mahavatar Babaji'' separately. I have never heard him make such a claim or read it in any of his many publications. I should add that in April 1972, I went to New Delhi at the request of Yogiar and negotiated with the Minister of Customs, the sale of the triangular plot of land on which Babaji was born in Porto Nova. So, I am intimately familiar with the history of Yogi Ramaiah’s claim about Babaji’s birth there on November 30, 2003.

Fifth, in your video you claim that "there are many inaccuracies" in my book Babaji and the 18 Siddha Kriya Yoga Traditio​n, and that "Yogi Ramaiah wrote no books." I have more than 100 bibliographic citations in my book "Babaji​ and the 18 Siddha Kriya Yoga Tradition​," including quotations from four of Yogi Ramaiah's early books and four of the early editions of Kriya​ ​magazine which refute your claim that “Yogi Ramaiah wrote no books.” I have copies of these books and editions of the Kriya magazine. These quotations also support my claim that “Babaji Nagaraj” and “Mahavatar Babaji” are one and the same person according to Yogi Ramaiah and V. T. Neelakantan. If you wish to reveal these “many inaccuracies” in my book, I will consider making any necessary corrections. I also have copies of many of the more than a dozen other books by Yogi Ramaiah, as I helped to print some of them in Chidambaram in 1980-1981.
 
Sixth, the evidence provided in the above publications clearly refute the statements you made in your video. You provide no evidence supporting the claims you have made about the above issues, with one exception, which I discuss below. If you are really a scholar, as you claim to be, I believe that you have only three logical responses:​ (1) either you publish or say publicly what is supported by the evidence I have provided above, or (2) you present both your claims and the evidence provided above. (3) A third possible alternative is simply to admit “I do not know,” then delete the video which has my name in its title, and remain silent about me in your future publications, which is perhaps the best response for a yogi.

The one “exception” mentioned above, I believe is your statement that Yogi Ramaiah became angry whenever anyone mentioned my name. It is a fact that
Yogiar often expressed anger towards initiates who had signed the Kriya Yoga Pledge, and especially those who had been accepted as residents in his ashrams and dormitories. To anyone else, he was very polite and charming? Why? And why did he never praise any of his disciples to their face. The answer to both questions is that such behavior was an essential part of his preferred method of “ego crushing.” His statements were often meant mainly, or even entirely for the benefit of other persons present. For example, he once sent two sadhaks to lead one of his centers in New Orleans. One had the intelligent quotient of a genius. The other one had the intelligence of a moron. He told the moron that he was the manager of the center. But when mistakes were made in the management of the center, he blamed the other person, the genius!

I believe that Yogiar’s public expressions of anger that you heard when my name was mentioned were made for the benefit of those present, so that they would fear the same reaction if they considered leaving his Sangam and to begin teaching Kriya Yoga. This fear of displeasing Yogiar continues to motivate more than anything the present leaders of the Sangam.

Furthermore, he often said: “My job is to bring you to the feet of the Master, and that after that, it is done.” When we met him in Athanoor in 2002, he said to us: “I am not a Guru. There is only one Guru in the Kriya Yoga tradition, and that is Babaji.” He then said to Durga Ahlund, my wife, in my presence: “Pray to Babaji that you do not become a Guru.” I have taken this advice to my heart, and I have never referred to myself as a Guru, nor do I allow others to call me that. I do not even attempt to give advice to anyone about anything except when I am asked questions about the practice of Babaji’s Kriya Yoga and its applications to problems in daily life. Anyone who knows me can confirm this. His angry expressions about my person, if they were ever repeated to me by someone, served to turn me inwardly to the only Guru I have ever known, Babaji, and to renew my confidence in his guidance.

I have also avoided criticizing Yogiar. This is consistent with the “third alternative response” above, (“I do not know” and to remain “silent”) and what I have applied for the past 50 years in consideration of Yogi Ramaiah’s enigmatic behavior.

I have always considered him to be an “elder student” of Babaji, from whom I had so much to learn, and not my “Guru.” Only Babaji has been my Guru for the past 50 years.

I have written in the year 2002, the only biography of Yogi Ramaiah, which is on our website:
https://www.babajiskriyayoga.net/russian/articles/art_25_yogi-ssa-ramaiah.htm.​ I was able to do this in part because Yogiar shared with me many intimate details about his early life in 1970 and 1971. At his request, I also met Yogi Ramaiah’s late father, his late mother in law, his late elder brother, his two adopted sons, in their homes in Kanadukathan in 1971 and 1972. He asked me to negotiate with them about the joint family property. I also supervised the construction of his College and Samadhi shrine in Athanoor and renovation of his ashram in Kanadukathan in 1986-1987. My wife and I interviewed him there in September 2002. We also met him in Montreal in 2004. I have also lived with the 3 mothers of his 3 children in those early years. All of these experiences enabled me to understand and accept his behavior and to continue to admire him to this day.

I have taken the time to share the above with you because I believe that you are a sincere seeker of truth and that you embrace ahimsa in your actions and words. I sincerely hope that you will appreciate what I have shared with you and that you will apply one of the three logical responses to the evidence that I have recommended to you.

In Babaji’s service,
Marshall Govindan “Satchidananda”


S.Dubyansky's answer to Marshall Govindan


Namaste dear Marshall Govindan ji Thank you very much for your letter.

Yes, I believe that your books and videos are very interesting and useful for spiritual seekers, although they contain contradicting​ information about the tradition of Kriya Yoga.

The most important thing is that you inspire people to practice meditation. I admit that all my disagreements with you are the result of my personal opinion, nothing more.

A question may arise as to whether I need to analyze your teaching and your activities? Why do I need it? First of all, I'm doing this because you have been Yogi Ramaiah’s disciple in the 70s and 80s, and I was his disciple in the early 90s until his death in 2006. Hence, we are the disciples of the same Guru. Any false or inaccurate information about my Guru and tradition naturally forces me to express my opinion.

I have read your books carefully and watched a lot of your videos. I know your biography and teachings well enough. Obviously, I respect your opinion. I believe that you are doing a lot of useful things for spiritual seekers all over the world. Many people have been inspired by your books, videos and workshops. This is a very important and positive activity - helping people to start serious yoga and meditation practice.

In your letter to me you mention the need for mutual respect. Yes, of course, it's obvious. We must respect diverse​ opinions about Kriya Yoga tradition. You are absolutely right.

I've read your books, including "How I became a disciple of Babaji" and “Babaji and the 18 Siddha Kriya Yoga Tradition”. Of course, I know that you had sincerely and intensively practiced various aspects of yoga under the guidance of our Guru Yogi Ramaiah.

You left the tradition at the end of the 80s. After that you started teaching Kriya Yoga and created your own Kriya Yoga organization. However, this is a very difficult situation, because Yogi Ramaiah told you many times that you shouldn't do this. According to the ancient tradition of Kriya Yoga, a student cannot start teaching Kriya Yoga and create his own Kriya Yoga community without the permission of the Guru.

The opinion of our Guru Yogi Ramaiah regarding your activities was clear and he openly expressed it many times after you left him in the late 80s. Until the end of his life in 2006, Yogi Ramaiah confirmed the following:

1) he, Yogi Ramaiah, did not give you permission to teach Kriya Yoga and develop the Kriya Yoga organization.
2) he, Yogi Ramaiah, denied your statement that you became a direct disciple of Mahavatar Babaji.

For the Kriya Yoga tradition it is very important to follow the instructions of the Guru and if he said that you were not ready to teach Kriya Yoga, give initiation and develop an organization dedicated to Kriya Yoga, you should not have done this.

You spread information that you and your wife Durga ji allegedly met Yogi Ramaiah in the late 90s and early 2000s. According to your information, Yogi Ramaiah ultimately blessed you to teach Kriya Yoga and develop your own Kriya Yoga organization. However, I personally clarified this issue with Yogi Ramaiah before his death in 2006. He clearly denied that he gave you permission to teach Kriya Yoga, to give Kriya Yoga initiation and he did not approve your Kriya Yoga organization. Of course, I respect if you say the opposite.

I certainly have the copies of those books that V.T.Neelakantan published in the 50s and I know their contents well. I studied under the guidance of Yogi Ramaiah from 1993 to 2006. In those years, he clearly denied the accuracy of the information presented in the V.T.Neelakantan’s books.

Yogi Ramaiah said that the information published by V.T.Neelakantan was false and had nothing to do with the truth. Therefore, all the erroneous ideas published by V.T.Neelakantan in the 50s are false and have nothing to do with Yoga Ramaiah. V.T.Neelakantan used the name of Yogi Ramaiah without his permission, that is why Yogi Ramaiah stopped communicating with V.T.Neelakantan. They partially stopped communicating in the late 50s, and completely stopped communicating in the mid 60s.

You republished the Neelakantan’s books in the 2000s and you base your teaching on these books. The truth is that Yogi Ramaiah stopped communicating with Neelakantan in the late 50s precisely because the latter published books with deliberately false information. Of course, I confirm that Yogi Ramaiah was in contact with Neelakantan in the 60s and tried to persuade him not to publish false information. After Yogi Ramaiah finally realized that it was impossible to change the situation, he stopped his communication with Neelakantan completely.

That is why it is a big mistake to base your teaching on the false information from the books published by Neelakantan. To re-publish those books will lead to further confusion in the minds of spiritual seekers all over the world. Of course, this is your choice and your responsibility.

You are spreading the information that Mahavatar Babaji was born in 203 in the south of India, his real name is Nagaraj Babaji, he achieved enlightenment under the guidance of the sage Agastya, etc.

Let's summarize my statements:
1) First of all, Yogi Ramaiah said that Mahavatar Babaji and Nagaraj Babaji were two different gurus. He met with both gurus.
2) Mahavatar Babaji was the Guru of Jesus Christ and Buddha, so he could not be born in 203, since Jesus Christ lived in the 1st century AD, and Buddha lived in the 6th century BC.
3) You have downplayed the significance of Babaji to the level of an ordinary saint that had reached enlightenment under the guidance of Agastya. In fact, Mahavatar Babaji is the supreme and primordial Master. He was the Guru of the highest Masters of humanity, including Buddha, Jesus Christ, Shankaracharya, Padmasambhava, Agastya, Matsendra Nath, Gorakh Nath, Kabir.
4) According to information from Yogi Ramaiah - Agastya was the disciple of Mahavatar Babaji and Agastya was the Guru for Nagaraj Babaji.

The information that Mahavatar Babaji has appeared from the flashes of light on Mount Kailash and lives on Earth for millions of years is known. Mahavatar Babaji himself told this to Yogi Ramaiah, and a hundred years earlier, to Lahiri Baba, Swami Pranavananda, Ram Gopal Mazundar.

What is the relationship between Mahavatar Babaji and Nagaraj Babaji? We can assume that Mahavatara Babaji created another body in the form of Nagaraj Babaji, this is possible. We already have such an example in the form of Gorakh Nath. I hope you know that Gorakh Nath is the manifestation of Mahavatar Babaji with a special mission. So, we can assume that Nagaraj Babaji is the manifestation of Mahavatar Babaji.

Quite a lot of mystics consider Haidakhan Babaji to be the manifestation of Mahavatar Babaji, I hope you know about this. So, it is possible that Haidakhan Babaji was also the manifestation of Mahavatar Babaji. If we understand the situation in this way, then there is no contradiction.

There is Mahavatar Babaji and there are many of his manifestations (additional forms) - Gorakh Nath, Nagaraj Babaji, Haidakhan Babaji.

To be more accurate in conveying the opinion of our Guru, I would like to mention that Yogi Ramaiah said that Mahavatar Babaji had several additional forms (manifestations), among which the most famous was Gorakh Nath. When I tried to find out whether Haidhakan Babaji and Nagaraj Babaji were also manifestations of Mahavatar Babaji, he declined to answer, he didn't say yes or no to my question.

You mention in your letter a great book written by Yogananda. Of course, it is an important source of information, although not entirely accurate, I think you know that. Yogananda in his “Autobiography of a Yogi” gives only a small amount of information that he could give with the permission of Mahavatar Babaji.

Yoganda's greatest mission was to inform the world about the existence of Mahavatar Babaji, but Yogananda had no right to reveal too much information at that time. In particular, he did not say that Agastya was the disciple of Mahavatar Babaji and he also did not say that Agastya was the Guru of Mahavatar Babaji. Yogananda described the two great gurus without pointing out their relationship.

By the way, let's remember, Yogananda said that at the birth of Jesus Christ, three sages who came to greet the newborn Jesus were Babaji, Lahiri Baba and Yukteswar. Naturally, these were the past lives of Lahiri Baba and Yukteswar. A question is about Babaji. Was that Babaji's past life? According to your theory, he was born only in 203? Do you seriously want to talk about Babaji's reincarnation?

Yogananda also said that Jesus studied Kriya Yoga meditation in India for many years. Who taught Jesus the Kriya Yoga techniques? Yogi Ramaiah's opinion was quite clear, Mahavatar Babaji was the Guru of Jesus Christ. So, how could he greet the newborn Jesus and later teach him meditation in the Himalayas if you and Neelakantan claim that Babaji was born in 203?

As to V.T.Neelakantan, Yogi Ramaiah made it clear that V.T.Neelakantan was not an honest man, he was a deceiver, who simply used the name of Yogi Ramaiah. There is a lot of false and erroneous information in the books, which he had published in the 50s. However, I respect your point of view if you believe in the authenticity of Neelakantan’s books.

All the information that I present in my books and videos is based on reliable information from Yoga Ramaiah and other authentic sources. I know directly from Yogi Ramaiah about his meeting with Mahavatar Babaji, Agastya, Gorakh Nath, Nagaraj Babaji.

When I said in the video that Yogi Ramaiah didn't write anything, I was wrong. Perhaps I did not express my idea exactly, for which I apologize. In my videos I wanted to say that he had nothing to do with the information disclosed in Neelakantan’s books. Yes, Yogi Ramaiah had written several articles on the spiritual tradition of southern India. I have several such articles. In this case, my statements in the video can be considered as not entirely accurate, for which I apologize.

Yogi Ramaiah made it clear that you did not complete the full course of Kriya Yoga. For example, Yogi Ramaiah pointed out inaccuracies in your knowledge of Kriya Kundalini Pranayama. Yogi Ramaiah did not pass on to you the great techniques of Sampurna Kriya, which are the greatest foundation of Kriya Yoga meditation. He also did not teach you the great Bija Mantra Vidya system. What you call 144 Kriyas, Yogi Ramaiah later called only preliminary practices, most of which are not so essential for those who practice Sampurna Kriya and Bija Mantra Vidya.

At the same time, I think you are doing a good job. People are learning meditation and yoga from you, they practice sincerely, and this is the main thing. You have been doing a very good job, helping people get on the path of meditation and yoga practice.

Why do we have different points of view?
1) First of all, your mistake is that you have based your teaching on false information from the books published by V.T.Neelakantan.
2) Secondly, you do not follow the orders of our Guru Yogi Ramaiah.

Since we agreed to communicate open-mindedly and impartially, let's assume another hypothesis. Yogi Ramaiah could change his opinion in the 90s, when I lived in his ashram. For example, he could meet Mahavatar Babaji only in the early 90s and understand that Mahavatar Babaji and Nagaraj Babaji were two different gurus… Maybe in the 50s and 60s Yogi Ramaiah communicated only with Nagaraj Babaji, who knows? Of course I understand that this is a very crazy assumption, but it could be real.

We can assume that Yogi Ramaiah realized that Mahavatar Babaji and Nagaraj Babaji were two different gurus only in the 90s, after you left his ashram. Naturally, this is just my guess.

Yogi Ramaiah could have received a number of additional practices of Kriya Yoga precisely in the 90s from Mahavatar Babaji, that you do not know. That is why what Yogi Ramaiah said to you in the 70s and 80s might not correspond to his knowledge that he possessed in the 90s. Who knows… This is just an assumption.

In your letter to me, you expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that I analyze and criticize your teaching and activities. However, I have not provided any offensive information about you, I have not accused you of any criminal activity, etc. this means that I have the right to have my point of view. I have the right to tell a wider audience what Yogi Ramaiah told me and what he taught after you left the tradition. I have the right to freely analyze your tradition and teaching. I hope that you will not be against freedom of speech and free discussion on Kriya Yoga.

I expressed my point of view based on:
1) the information from Yogi Ramaiah, which I received personally from him after you left the tradition.
2) I base my conclusions also on my own logic, which fully corresponds to the information received from Yoga Ramaiah. So, Mahavatar Babaji cannot be born in the 3rd century because he was the Guru of Buddha and Jesus, and had greeted Jesus at birth. I hope you will not deny that I have the right to debate.

Of course, you have been developing your tradition for thirty years and you do not want people to learn alternative information from authentic sources. Since​ I belong to Yogi Ramaiah’s tradition and studied with him later than you did, I am privileged to testify about everything firsthand.

1) Yogi Ramaiah strictly forbade you to teach people the techniques of Kriya Yoga, and to create your own spiritual organization based on Kriya Yoga. According to the ancient tradition of Kriya Yoga and Tantra, the Guru who gave you the initiation and the Kriya Yoga techniques has the right to «give permission or not» to teach the next generation of students. You, as a disciple, have no right to misinterpret this situation, because «no» means «no».

2) He forbade you this in the late 80s and did not change his mind until his death in 2006. He denied your claims that in the late 90s and early 2000s he allowed you to teach Kriya Yoga and develop the Kriya Yoga organization.

3) Yogi Ramaiah denied that you were a direct disciple of Mahavatar Babaji. But it is quite possible that Babaji appeared before you. In our time, quite many practitioners of Kriya Yoga have similar experiences of direct communication with Babaji. This does not make a person chosen and special. For example, several of my friends and a student met Mahavatar Babaji, but they modestly continue their practice of Kriya Yoga.

4) Yogi Ramaiah rejected the authenticity of the information contained in the books published by V.T.Neelakantan in the 50s.

5) Yogi Ramaiah said that Mahavaar Babaji appeared from a flash of light on Mount Kailash and has lived on Earth for many millions of years. However, Babaji has many manifestations and additional bodies.

Yes, Yogi Ramaiah was a strict Guru and rather severe. However, there is a difference between «strictness» and quite specific criticism of your activities. Yogi Ramaiah was strict with many people, including me. But his assessment of your activity has been consistently negative.

Yogi Ramaiah gave me permission to teach Kriya Yoga in the late 90s. He said that I would be ready for this in a few years. Yogi Ramaiah described in detail the signs by which I could understand the right time to start my activity. This happened in 2011 and 2012. As you remember, Yogi Ramaiah died in 2006, which means that during his lifetime I taught only simple classes on Pranayama Yoga and Hatha Yoga. I started to teach Kriya Yoga after his death. Of course, I understand that this is a completely different situation.

Now, I am teaching Sampurna Kriya, Kriya Kundalini Pranayama, Bija Mantra Vidya, Sankalpa Vidya, Pranayama Yoga, Hatha Yoga and several other types of yoga that I was taught by Yogi Ramaiah and for which I have permission to teach others.

For example, if, with his permission, I started teaching Kriya Yoga and giving initiation during his lifetime, then it is quite possible that he could also to criticize me. Mahavatar Babaji prepared a more pleasant fate for me. Of course, we both understand this situation.

In your letter you say the absolute truth that Mahavatar Babaji is the only Supreme Guru. Yes, Mahavatar Babaji is the only Supreme Guru. Yes, Yogi Ramaiah led people to Babaji only. In a sense Yogi Ramaiah was a Guru, but in a sense he was not. He told us that the only Real Guru is Mahavatar Babaji. However, let's not add confusion and naivety. Of course, Yogi Ramaiah is our Guru, because he gave us initiation and taught us the Kriya Yoga techniques. That is why it is completely incorrect to speak of him as «brother-apprentice» of Babaji.

For me personally, it is not a problem at all that you teach Kriya Yoga and develop your Kriya Yoga Order. How can this hinder me? Of course not. My concern is about the misleading information that you spread, repeating the fantasies of Neelakantan. Strictly speaking, your relationship with Yogi Ramaiah is not my business. My concern is the clarity of Kriya Yoga tradition only.

I have published 10 books in Russian, 3 of them are about Mahavatar Babaji and Yogi Ramaiah. I am only in the process of publishing those books in English, so you cannot read them yet. These books contain a lot of important information about Mahavatar Babaji and Yogi Ramaiah.

I would like to kindly propose you to make a joint video, of course in the spirit of mutual respect. I would like to interview you, ask questions and discuss the topics of Kriya Yoga tradition. Naturally, such a video can only be in the spirit of mutual respect. I think it would be better if we talk in person via zoom before we make a video, of course, if you have no objections. I would appreciate, if you could write when you would be available to make a video with me. We can even make a series of videos.

I would be happy to ask you questions about your school, your interesting personal memories about Yogi Ramaiah, about the general principles of Kriya Yoga meditation. I'm sure this video will be interesting for the audience. We can openly tell the audience that we do not completely agree on some spiritual issues of the tradition, but this does not prevent us from communicating. Meditation, self-inquiry, awakening of the inner God - unites us.

I would like to highlight that I will be delighted indeed if you agree to make a video with me. It would be interesting if we discuss some universal issues, share our memories about Yoga Ramaiah, discuss the general principles of Kriya Yoga. I am sure that such a video would be useful for spiritual seekers and practitioners of the Kriya Yoga tradition.

with respect,
S.Dubyanskiy

Comment
Add a comment
Sergei Gladkov
Sergei Gladkov
Part 2
Therefore, the Higher Forces from time to time refresh traditions, giving illumination to their chosen participants. New knowledge comes, new understanding, which often contradicts what people are already used to. For example, the Russian Saint Seraphim of Sarov brought a new understanding of the meaning of spiritual life, which differed from the orthodox one and caused active protests from the church hierarchy. Seraphim Sarovsky was perceived by the hierarchs almost as a dissident. Nevertheless, now we regard him as one of the brightest ascetics in Russian history.
After the insight has been given, various scenarios are possible. You can simply share new knowledge and vision. You can declare yourself a new guru and call on disciples. And here everything depends on personal charisma, on the ability to hold the load. Because the guru is obliged to let the karma of his disciples pass through himself, and even the slightest weakness or inattention can lead to fatal consequences. For example, diseases such as cancer or multiple sclerosis, mental problems up to madness. Moreover, this burden falls not only on the newly proclaimed guru himself, but also on his relatives, friends and even some of the students. This is not to mention the aggravation of personal karma.
It should also be noted that the enlightenment given usually goes far beyond the purely technical issues of tradition. The one who received it acquires a vision of the broadest horizons of human life. He has poetic, artistic, scientific talents and other siddhis. For example, it is known that the Yogi Ramayah collected, brought into the system and translated into English many rare manuscripts of Tamil Siddha alchemists, which were written in rare endangered languages. And this little-known aspect of his activity, perhaps, even outweighs the other aspects of his manifestation.
No one can forbid a person from teaching Kriya Yoga, especially if they are good at it. However, in this case, obviously, some rebranding is needed. If Svyatoslav says that Yogi Ramayah did not recognize Marshall Govindan as a teacher of Kriya Yoga in his lineage, then I am sure that this is so. However, no one can forbid a free soul to move in the chosen direction. And I think that in this case the solution could be Govindan's statement that his teaching does not come from Ramayah, but from Babaji directly. Yes, to make such a statement is to show a certain courage. But it will remove the ambiguity and stop the discontent. Perhaps it makes sense to discuss this issue in a personal conversation between Dubyansky and Govindan.
Samasta Loka Sukhino Bhavantu
Gladkov Sergey (Hari OM)
add a comment
S. Dubyanskiy
S. Dubyanskiy
Thank you very much for such a detailed comment. Indeed, you are discussing deep questions. In order to teach people to meditate, you need to have the blessings of God, and this is the most important thing.
Sergei Gladkov
Sergei Gladkov
This text has been translated using Google translation service.
Part 1.
I happened to be a witness to this discussion. The question raised is quite serious, and I will try to put in my own word to help the parties come to an agreement.
Marshall Govindan is the author of renowned books that educate and inspire many seekers of Truth. Probably, there are some inaccuracies in these books. But for many years these books have been inviting spiritual seekers to think and search. I do not know to what extent the establishment of the exact date of birth of Maha-avatar Babaji will contribute to the spiritual progress of humanity. Moreover, in my presence, Somnath Maharaj giri expressed the opinion that Babaji is a collective archetypal image, like Sri Guru in South India. However, in his answer, Svyatoslav raised other questions that may be quite important.
I have known Svyatoslav Dubyansky for over twenty years, ever since he worked as a translator for Sathya Sai Baba. Svyatoslav is a deep connoisseur of traditional spiritual movements in India and China, a teacher of Kriya yoga, a writer and an artist. Svyatoslav is an amazingly peaceful and positive person, I have never seen him start a dispute or even participate in disputes. On the contrary, in his presence the arguments usually subside.
Therefore, if Svyatoslav makes a remark, then this must be taken very seriously. It even seems to me that in this case he expresses not only his opinion, but also the attitude of some Indian circles of Kriya yoga teachers – regarding the competence of the lineage.
I do not belong to this tradition and therefore cannot help resolve the issue in essence. However, since I am a poet, I can strap on my wings, ride Parnassus and soar to the heights .
And this is what I see from there, from the shining heights of poetic vision.
Spiritual traditions based on parampara tend to fade. The further the next link is from the founder, the weaker it is. This is human nature! There is always a temptation to view knowledge and tradition as inherited property.
add a comment
S. Dubyanskiy
S. Dubyanskiy
thanks for the deep thoughts. Yes, Mahavatara Babaji is the supreme teacher of humanity, and everything connected with him gives a lot of inspiration.
Mikhail K.
Mikhail K.
I agree with Dubyansky about Mahavatar Babaji. Babaji is the Guru of all Gurus. It is beyond logical understanding and explanation. He can manifest himself in any form in several places at the same time. There is no birth or death for him. It seems to me inappropriate to speak of him as a human being, but only as one who can manifest himself in any form, including human. But I'm just a humble seeker, and I cannot see all the truth at the present time...
And It would be great to see the interview! As for me, I feel much appreciated to both - Dubyansky and M.Govindan for their activities.
add a comment
S. Dubyanskiy
S. Dubyanskiy
yes, these are difficult questions for us, Babaji remains a great mystery. Hopefully Govindan will agree to make the video together.
Christine
Christine
Namaste! The communication is interesting indeed, and it would be great to watch/listen to the interview of the two respectful yogis on the path they have passed and, of course, about Yogi Ramaiah.
add a comment
S. Dubyanskiy
S. Dubyanskiy
yes, we must be open to free discussion. Difficult questions require caution and attention.
Robert Larson, LA
Robert Larson, LA
I agree that Babaji could not have been born at 203. This is absurd. Govindan is wrong
add a comment
S. Dubyanskiy
S. Dubyanskiy
om, sai ram
Anna C, NY
Anna C, NY
yes, this is a very complex topic. But Dubyansky's logic is stronger.
add a comment
Rama Nama, USA
Rama Nama, USA
good stuff, totally agree with Dubyansky. There are many dubious teachings in Govindan. I know that he betrayed his guru.
add a comment
Dario
Dario
This is a very important article. Thank you.
add a comment
S. Dubyanskiy
S. Dubyanskiy
Yes, SAI RAM