Archive for May 2nd, 2013

Another Blunder by Story Writer

This entire email is composed of 3 parts:

(1) Posting: Another Blunder by Story Writer;
(2) Trailer Quote: One Riddle;
(3) Prabhat Samgiita #4902

Each section is demarcated by asterisks (***).


Here is a follow-up to the initial letter on this topic wherein one writer – herein referred to as “DS” – is equating Sadguru Baba with one Buddhist monk – Marpa, the teacher of Milarepa.

Specifically, on page 158 of his book, DS directly states in his book that Baba has followed the tantric tradition best embodied by dogmatic guru Marpa’s treatment of Milarepa.

All in all, there are many critical mistakes on this topic in DS’s book.

The first letter in this series addressed two particular faults:
#1 wrong explanation of samskara theory; and,
#2 equating Baba with the dogmatic Buddhist monk.

A link to this initial letter is appended to the bottom of this email.

And now in this letter, here are more faults in DS’s book associated with this particular topic of comparing Baba with the dogmatic Buddist guru Marpa.



In his book, the writer has used the term “karma” or “heavy karma” for reactive momenta. But in Ananda Marga, samskara is the proper term in Sanskrit / Samskrta for reactive momenta or unexpressed reactions, i.e. where a person did right or wrong and must face the consequences.

Thus, when a person has performed an initial action and if the consequences have yet to be requited it is called reactive momenta. In due course, or in their next life, people face those samskaras by incurring or inviting pain or pleasure.

In Ananda Marga philosophy, the Sanskrit word for this is “samskara”, not “karma” or “heavy karma”. The English term for samskara is reactive momenta. In the Buddhist philosophy it is called karma. But, in Ananda Marga, karma has a very different meaning; in Ananda Marga, karma means action, whereas in dogmatic Buddhist philosophy it means reactive momenta. Thus they are very different.

The danger is that Baba has given a very precise and perfect ideology where everything has been very clearly laid out; everything is very rational, including samskara theory. Thus when a biographer like DS writes a book about Baba and His divine teachings, then the book must precisely reflect His ideas and not be confused with any religious dogma like Buddhist terminology.

Yet, here DS is using Buddhist terms in an Ananda Marga book to supposedly express Baba’s teachings. That is DS’s misguided approach.



Here is a practical example to further explain this situation.

Suppose Ram stole $500 from Shyam. Then in due course Ram has to face that negative samskara that he incurred because of this theft. That unfinished bundle of samskara is called karma in Buddhist philosophy and in Ananda Marga it is called samskara.

The story that the DS is referencing in his book is how Milarepa killed his cousins and acquired negative samskaras because of that ghastly action. DS is referring to this as karma – a buddhistic term. So this terminology is wrong.

Plus as explained below, the entire example is wrong as it completely misrepresents Ananda Marga samskara theory.

Marpa – the so-called guru of Milarepa – thought in his misguided and dogmatic way thought that if Milarepa constructs stone houses and then dismantles them again and again for decades, then his (Milsrepa’s) sins will be annihilated. But this is utterly wrong in the eyes of Ananda Marga philosophy. We know that inflicted punishment or torture does not cancel out one’s sins and misdeeds.

Rather, according to Ananda Marga philosophy, Marpa himself incurred negative samskaras for senselessly and needlessly torturing Milarepa. And Milarepa wrongly believed that just by undergoing mistreatment then his negative samsksaras will be eliminated.

Actually, most of the dogmatic eastern religions fall prey to the faulty notion that by suffering one burns their bad samskaras. This is a common misunderstanding. That is why we find many dogmatic people who think that if they undergo some kind of torture, self-inflicted or otherwise, then their bad samskaras will be exhausted. Many are prone to this kind of wrong understanding – including the dogmatic guru Marpa, his ignorant disciple Marpa, and the confused writer of the book – i.e. DS. They are all victims of this same dogmatic belief that by undergoing torture one can burn their bad samskaras.

As Ananda Margiis, we should know the correct response.

According to Ananda Marga ideology, there are a few valid pathways to exhaust samskaras: (a) social service with the motive of selflessly serving others as being the expressions of God, (b) devotional sadhana done with the desire of pleasing Him, and (c) through the natural cycle of life and death etc. In all these ways, people exhaust their samskaras – but never by undergoing torturous punishment.

More about this is written below.

This entire episode of mixing dogmatic Buddhist terms into the pristine philosophy of Ananda Marga is pramatta (very bad) from beginning to end. It is bizarre and has nothing in common with Ananda Marga.

And it is shocking that DS has inserted this story about the so-called guru Marpa as if Baba Himself is following in Marpa’s tradition. No right thinking Ananda Margii can think in this manner. Yet this is the very faulty and anti-devotional idea that DS has put in his book.


Under similar circumstances, if Milarepa came to an acarya of Ananda Marga, Milarepa would have immediately gotten initiation and by his sadhana, service, and sacrifice – in a short period – he would have exhausted his samsakras. But instead, Milarepa approach the dogmatic Buddhist monk Marpa, then Marpa just punished and tortured Milarepa – exacerbating the situation.

The two approaches are worlds apart and it is hard to imagine how the “writer” DS got the idea to compare the dogmatic guru Marpa with Lord Shrii Shrii Anandamurti ji. Baba is Mahasambhuti who has graciously taken advent and given the sublime ideology of Ananda Marga to uplift the entire humanity, and Marpa is just one misguided, dogmatic Buddhist monk who harshly abuses his lone disciple. It is quite appalling that such a blatantly bogus analogy made its way onto the pages of this book about our Beloved Baba. The only rational conclusion is that this is representative of DS’s state of mind – nothing else.

As a reminder, here below is the true tantric way of exhaust samskaras. We do not subscribe to the Buddhist methodology of self-inflicted torture or pain etc.


Baba does not appreciate harsh penance like fasting for months at a time, or standing on one leg in cold water, or exposing oneself to a fire pit etc. It is fruitless to indulge in that type of so-called penance in hopes of pleasing Parama Purusa. By these dogmatic methods, Parama Purusa will not be pleased.

But the so-called guru Marpa was doing like this to his would-be disciple. Actually, Milarepa was not yet his disciple, even then Marpa adopted this approach of harsh, bone-breaking treatment.

In Ananda Marga, here is how one is to exhaust their samskaras.

“In other words, until the actions, whether good or bad are annihilated, human beings cannot attain salvation or Mokśa. Can the gold chain be looser and less torturing than the iron chain to someone in bondage? Similarly, the bondage of bad actions is exactly as tight as the bondage of good actions.

Nábhuktam’ kśiiyate karma kalpakot́ishataerapi
Avashyameva bhoktavyam’ krtam’ karma shubháshubham

“Therefore, for salvation or emancipation, it is necessary to be liberated from the bondage of sam’skáras. The question is, how to attain salvation? When it is essential to act for maintaining one’s existence, how is it possible to avoid the cycle of action and reaction?”

“It is known from philosophic propositions that the attainment of Mukti (liberation) or Mokśa (salvation) is possible only through spiritual practices or sádhaná. It therefore follows that there is certainly some means to attain liberation from samskáras.”

“There are three processes for attaining freedom from the bondage of action: (1) relinquishing any desire for the fruits of action, or Phalákámkśá Tyága, (2) Abandoning the vanity of performing an act, or Kartrtvábhimána Tyága, and (3) surrendering all actions unto Brahma. All of these have to be followed in the individual life, but it must be kept in mind that they all have to be strictly observed. To be more explicit, these rules are the different aspects of one and the same process.” (Subhasita Samgraha – 1, Actions and Their Results (Karma and Karmaphala))

This now concludes the discussion of the third fault on this topic in DS’s book. Now we move onto the 4th fault.



In Ananda Marga, it is clearly told that anyone with a human structure is worthy of initiation.

“The minimum qualification for getting salvation, for doing sádhaná, is just a human structure.” (Ánanda Vacanámrtam Part 6, An Equal Birthright)

“The minimum qualification for the attainment of salvation is nothing but a human body and a human mind. That is enough.” (A Few Problems Solved – Part 4)

Thus Baba has unequivocally stated that anyone having a human body and mind is worthy of receiving initiation.

In stark contrast, in his book, DS shows how Marpa adopted a decidedly different approach:

“Finally, Milarepa, his body nearly broken down from several years of backbreaking work, despaired of ever receiving initiation.” (p.395)

So the dogmatic Buddhist monk Marpa indulged his disciple – Milarepa – in torturous tasks for decades before considering him for initiation. And the writer directly implies that Sadguru Baba follows in this same tradition. Because on page 158 of his book, DS directly states that Baba has followed the tantric tradition best embodied by dogmatic guru Marpa’s treatment of Milarepa.

So here again, Marpa refrained from giving Milarepa spiritual initiation and instead made him suffer by plunging him in all kinds of arduous tasks – as if by this way one day he would be worthy of initiation. And the writer implies that Baba Himself followed this same method; that is the incorrect and outrageous message given in his book.

As every true Ananda Margii knows, Sadguru Baba is wholly against this dogmatic approach. In Ananda Marga, sadhakas are to get the requisite spiritual guidelines as quickly as possible so they can progress along the path of Supreme attainment.

“Human life is short. It is wise to get all the instructions regarding sádhaná as soon as possible.” (Caryacarya – 2, Sadhana, pt #8)

This stands then as yet another fault of the DS’s approach in his book. He is comparing Baba to the Buddhist monk Marpa, yet all of Marpa’s manners and ways run diametrically opposite to the dharma of Ananda Marga and Baba’s teachings.

This concludes the discussion of the 4th fault on this topic in DS’s book.


Baba is very critical of such selfish gurus who withhold teachings from deserving disciples in order to enhance their own prestige. Such faulty gurus prefer to die with their knowledge than to share it with humanity. By this way, slowly over the course of time, by withhold 1% of their knowledge, from generation to generation, there is a distinct gap in human understanding until all that is left of those teachings is dogma. Such is the case with the dogmatic, Buddhist guru Marpa.

Indeed, Marpa’s lowly situation is strikingly similar to that of the ill-fated Dronacarya in the Mahabharata. Dronacarya was partial with his students and played favourites; not only that, Drona would not even impart the needed teachings to even his deserving disciples and qualified students. Because of this stark defect, Dronacarya was annihilated in the fight for dharma.

Similarly, the so-called guru Marpa also does not want to impart his knowledge to his disciple. For one excuse or another, he does not teach any spiritual guidelines and only inflicts one torture after another upon Milarepa. Here we can conclude that Marpa just got one free laborer in Milarepa, i,e, someone to harass and satisfy his own (Marpa’s) ego. And side by side, Milarepa was just one fake disciple who had no longing for Parama Purusa, only he was scare of his sin.

So this account of Marpa and Milarepa has absolutely nothing to do with Ananda Marga. Neither the so-called guru Marpa, nor the lowly disciple Milarepa represent any of the dharmic qualities found in Ananda Marga teachings.

That is why many are wondering why DS would ever put such an account in his book – all it does is undermine DS’s own status.


Now that we have addressed the various faults in DS’s book related with the Marpa and Milarepa analogy, we should once again affirm that it is utterly sinful to equate Sadguru Baba with following the tradition of Marpa. As the Taraka Brahma, Baba Himself is entirely unique and does not follow anyone.

According to Ananda Marga philosophy Brahma alone is the Guru.

3-9. Brahmaeva gururekah náparah.
Only Brahma is the guru, no one else.

By the above guideline from Ananda Sutram, it is clear that in tantra only Brahama is the Guru. No human being or unit entity can be the Guru.

Thus when Baba Himself has come as Taraka Brahma, then He alone is the Guru. And He cannot be compared with anyone – especially not one dogmatic Buddhist monk like Marpa. Ineed, no unit entity can be compared with Him.

In this next shloka, Ananda Marga philosophy furthermore states that Guru is unparalleled and unique.

Tulá vá upamá Krśńasya násti;
Krśńastu Bhagaván svayam.

The pointed meaning of the above shloka is that Mahasambhuti has no parallel or equal. Mahasambhuti is Parama Puruśa Himself and He can only be compared with Himself – not with any other.

Thus it is clear that as the tantric Guru, Baba has no equal and He is beyond all comparisons. No one can be compared with Him.



The writer, i.e. DS, who compared the misguided dogmatic guru Marpa with our Lord Shrii Shrii Anandamurti ji Baba is Devashish (Deva’shiis’a / Devashish / Devashiisa) a.k.a. Donald Acosta. This is the person who did like this. By his entire effort it is quite evident that he does not understand Ananda Marga samskara theory and other essentials of Ananda Marga philosophy. Nor does he understand the greatness of our Sadguru Baba Lord Shrii Shrii Anandamurtiji. Otherwise he would not have compared the dogmatic guru Marpa with Baba, and he would not have included that entire story of torturing Milarepa in his book. All in all this is an unfortunate episode in the dealing of one writer, i.e. Devashish (Deva’shiis’a / Devashish / Devashiisa).


“There are some people who perform rigorous penance: they sit in the middle of a ring of flames and in the process suffer a great deal. Others remain seated with their heads bent down and their legs upwards, thus subjecting themselves to much physical torture. They believe that this type of penance will lead to the exhaustion of their actional bondages accumulated for lives together. But this is not correct. The secret is that while performing any action, one must remember that Parama Puruśa is always watching one’s action. A genuine spiritualist will have to establish a relation of love with Parama Puruśa. Those who remain oblivious to this truth become unsuccessful in their mission, whatever might be the intensity of their penance. But when people undertake penance with cosmic ideation then Parama Puruśa will Himself guide them not to perform such rigorous but fruitless penances.” (Subhasita Samrgraha – 11, The Path of Salvation)


“There are a group of people who are in favour of practicing extreme austerities. To practice severe penance, to court physical trouble while taking care of others is called tapah or penance in the scriptures. The ancient sádhakas used to practice such severe penance. They used to sit with their heads down and their legs raised high, lighting a fire around them, and they used to practice such rigorous penance for twelve years. But is it really worthwhile to do such practices which only subject the body to physical tortures? Through such penances, it is almost impossible to achieve spiritual progress. To undergo physical torture just for the sake of experiencing pain does not lead to spiritual elevation. After those sádhakas underwent the long rigours of penance with their heads down and legs up, with the leaping flames of fire all around them, they had no self-satisfaction that their penance had done even the slightest good to others. By undergoing hardship, one should always help others, and thereby one feels satisfied that at least some good has been done to others. Rigorous austerities do no such good: then what is the justification for undergoing such unnecessary physical tortures? This is nothing but sheer foolishness.” (Subhasita Samrgraha – 11, What Is the Way?)


“So we see that generating heat is not always beneficial or noble. When someone does rigorous penance, for instance, with hands upraised for a long period, his or her blood circulation, nervous system and bone position are bound to be jeopardized. Will the pain in the arms of those who do penance with head downwards and legs upwards be an aid to their mental concentration, or will their minds be constantly focused on the pain? Will they be able to maintain their mental balance in such an unnatural state? When some practise rigorous penance sitting in the centre of a circle of fire, will not the fire’s heat impair the natural functioning of their bodies and minds? Thus these types of penance are detrimental to health, what to speak of the attainment of liberation!” (Namah Shivaya Shantaya, Disc: 13)


“Someone may think that he will be able to do penance in Himalayan caves with his legs upraised and head down, neglecting the distressed people of the society. If Parama Puruśa comes and removes the heavy stone door of his cave and appears before him and asks, “What do you want, my child?” – and if he answers, “I want to be one of the stars of the Great Bear constellation,” his desire will never be fulfilled. His prolonged penance in the caves will all end in nothing. This is not Bhágavata Dharma. A householder, even while faithfully performing his or her mundane duties, must sincerely follow Bhágavata Dharma and also serve suffering creatures. And the sannyásiis, while remaining outside family life, must follow Bhágavata Dharma and apply the balm of peace and progress to all the afflictions of humanity. This is the true path of dharma; this is exactly what Parama Puruśa wants.” (Namah Shivaya Shantaya, Disc: 11)

At His lotus feet,


The above is the second letter in this series – a link to the first letter is directly below.



Here are links to more letters that address all kinds of dogmas and wrong ideas expressed in this book.





and there are more…

The section below demarcated by asterisks is an entirely different topic,
completely unrelated to the above material. It stands on its own as a point of interest.

One Riddle

“Once King Akbar said, ‘Birbal, can you please tell me something which will make a happy man unhappy and an unhappy man happy?’ Birbal replied, ‘Aesa’ din nahi rahega’– This day will not last forever’. (Ananda Vacanamrtam – 4, p. 80)

************ Prabhat Samgiita


“Mor maner katha’t’i tumi ja’n…” (P.S. 4902)


O’ Parama Purusa, with Your vast Cosmic mind You know each and everything about me. Not only what I do, but what I think – that also You know. While hiding in my heart and in my mind, You go on playing Your divine flute, non-stop.
O’ my Dearmost, oh my Beloved, You are the jewel of my mind. You never remain forgetful about me. All the time You are along with me; and You are always taking care also. This is my only desire and my only request: That You please remain eternally effulgent in my mind with Your sweet attraction. Always I desire to have Your sweet form in my mind.
Baba, You are my innermost, You know everything…

Read Full Post »