Re: Himalayan Academy - things I don't agree with
Originally Posted by
Sahasranama
I am only highlighting the things I disagree with in the Himalayan Academy. I am doing this with the risk of offending some shishya's of this tradition. There are undoubtly many good things about them. Until I heard about the channeling of the akashic records, I had a very different opinion. How can I not call this new agy?
Yes the Lemurian scroll & akashic library records, I could not reconcile also. As I said, I stopped referring to Himalayan Academy at that point. Its not just the akashic records concept itself, but what he got as history of this planet which did not sink with me. Obviously its all wrong historically, vedic culture (which shares nothing? with temple culture) did not evolve from monasteries or temples. It is very difficult if not outright impossible to argue otherwise. And I don't want to deny evolution like this. Would have very little to say to Bible thumping that way. So yes, this part is sort of difficult and new age-y.
Shum, Color meditation (this not totally new age actually) and sending prayers by burning written prayers in homam are few other things I can't relate to. But he was clear, these were not traditional things but something he discovered, if I know correctly.
Anyway we should stop here probably. Certainly Himalayan Academy had been strongly pro-Hindu and as EM clarified far from business minded. So if we have nothing against these points, beyond that it gets personal, and not good to discuss publicly after a certain point (which we have reached in this thread).
What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.
Bookmarks