Are - you - enlightened?

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;57594]Surya,

“Your actions say otherwise as you are constantly citing quotes and anecdotes from Zen”

I do not speak out of borrowed knowledge, but out of my own direct experience.

Anybody who is familiar with the traditions you often speak about can identify where you are getting your knowledge from. The scales called you a well-rehearsed parrot for a reason. We know you are very familiar with these traditions because you cite from quotes, anecdotes from them.

You will lose your knowledge one day because you have not acknowledged your sources. Karma has a sting in its tail. None of my knowledge is mine. I got my knowledge the same way you did - I just read better sources :wink:

You lack a single ounce of humility - you go around calling yourself enlightened and putting yourself on the same level of Buddha, recording yourself on youtube giving discouses, posting on internet forums shamelessly dropping links to your discourses, and looking for disciples to start your own cult. In addition you claim all other masters are liars.
I think only a fool would be taken in by you, and if they are taken in by you, then they deserve you :wink:

There is a reason Asuri said to you, “You sicken me” I am hope my dialogue with you being read by members here is showing others why somebody would think this of you.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with compassion, it is simply sentimentality. Compassion need not be that of a grandmotherly affection. It is simply an intelligence which is of such a quality, that it is willing to do whatever is necessary to assist others towards their liberation.

Sentimentality is different, it is when you indiscriminately become emotional based on their beliefs. Compassion is something that comes from within the soul, it is a strong force from within that directs you to serve another. Many good people here would have experienced what I said when ones tears well up in the eyes to help another and the tears of joy one feels when they succeed.
Any good person will resonate with me when I say that humanity is our wider self and we should serve one another. All swamis and gurus will agree with me.

You obviously have not felt any compassion for anybody. You confirm what I implied about you: you are a sociopath. Most fraudulent cult leaders are, this is why they defraud their followers. A good person cannot do such a thing, because they have a conscience.

It seems when you were reading my previous message you were not paying attention. There are countless methods to assist others towards their liberation, it need not take the form of teaching.

It is not just teaching my friend that enlightened people do. They help in social transformation. They put themselves out there, fight against evil, show by example to others how to live a life of dharma and inspire millions.

What are you doing? Recording yourself on youtube and going on internet forums to advertise yourself. I am more than convinced you suffer from narcissistic personality disorder.

So far you have not demonstrated even a particle of indication that you have understood a single word that I have said.

So far you have not provided an iota of evidence for your enlightenment :wink: However you have provided more than enough evidence that you are not enlightened: No siddhis. No humility. Violence to the tradition of masters before you by falsifying what they say and accusing them of being liars, your list includes Patanjali, Swami Vivekananda and Swami Yogananda. And telling people wanting to help others is just sentimentality. Including telling others their experiences are false(like my experience of telepathy) and yet teaching. Not to mention sociopathic tendencies where you claim a sage can also steal, lie and murder.

I said in another thread if you were in an Indian village where they take claims of people claiming to enlightened seriously, you would be beaten with sticks and driven out :wink:

I agree.

Then do something for your wider self.

Seeing the whole history of humanity, which seems to be filled with nothing else except violence upon violence, greed, hatred - I do certainly hope that you do not continue their work. And at the pace at which things are going, it seems that unless man comes to a transformation, extinction seems to be the only option left.

Humanity is a damn sight better today than it was hundreds of years ago. We have civil rights, human rights, womens rights, UN, Geneva conventions. The internet for free exchange of ideas and access to any information. Growing spirituality. There was a time when people like you would have been sent to the inqusition and burned at the stake - consider yourself lucky :wink:

“the debt to our parents, by looking after them in their old age as they did us”

Parents are tremendously egoistic in the sense that they are just interested in creating a mirror reflection of themselves. Rather than being concerned with your liberation, they are far more interested in raising the child to fulfill their own egotism. That is in fact the only reason why most parents “love” their child. It is not Love, it is just a certain identification of the mind which is rooted in attachment. Because they have identified you as “their son” or “their daughter”, there is a certain sense of attachment which grows. This is not love. Yes, perhaps one should have gratitude towards them for whatever they have done to assist you towards fulfilling your survival, but as far as your spiritual expansion is concerned, they have created more barriers than they have destroyed. If the parents of the society were more awake, more compassionate, less egoistic, and less territorial just like an animal, then it would be impossible for the society to have remained in the state that it has been for centuries.

I am starting to form a psychological profile of you know. Let’s see did you have problems with your parents growing up Amir :wink: No matter how your parents are, they fed you, clothed you, sheltered you, educated you. It is because of your parents that you grow up to be human and not just a dog. Thus you have a debt to pay back to them. In their old age, rather than throwing them into an old age home or leaving them on their own, which I know most Western civilisation does, you take them into your home and look after them ungreatful children :wink:

This is why I consider my Hindu dharma great. We are installed with values like respect parents, elderly and teachers. We touch the feet of our elders and ask for their blessings. This does not mean we blindly follow whatever they say, but we show respect. You have no respect whatsoever for the teachers you have plagiarised your knowledge from and passing it off as your own.

One either knows or does not know, there can be no room for belief.

Nah, it is definitely a belief. If it was real, you would have something to show for it.

Again, this shows that rather than having any sincere desire to understand what I have said, you have simply twisted the message according to your own prejudices. I have simply said that these siddhis do not indicate anything else except that certain aspects of one’s consciousness which were dormant have now become active. It does not mean that one is even a step closer to awakening, and there are those who have awakened siddhis who have remained as unconscious as they have always been. In fact, it is one’s entanglement in these siddhis which has often been a great cause for leading one towards a deeper and deeper unconsciousness - the possibility of becoming overwhelmed with egotism is immense.

My friend in order to activate siddhis dormant in ones conscousness, you need to first get to that unconscious level. This indeed means that you a step closer to enlightenment :wink: I will take the research done by millenias of consciousness researchers, including the great Patanjali and a century of modern scientific research over some self-professed Buddha that records himself giving discourses on youtube and then advertises himself on internet forums. I am sorry I am a man of science :wink:

master need not teach in order to assist others towards their liberation. My understanding of things is never in terms of absolutes. With every so called rule you can think of, you can find that there are more exceptions than one can care even to consider.

If a master does not go teach then that master is useless and we don’t need to know of such masters. Like I said, let such masters wallow in the goo of their enlightenment. This is no master, just an ego maniac wanting to feel better than everybody else. The true masters serve humanity. They not only care about their own development, but the development of humanity. This is because when you do reach enlightenment or at a very high level of spiritual attainment, you begin to see the all pervading sprit that animates you, animates you neighbour as well. Hence why we say “Namaste”

Wow loads of typos in that post and accidentally deleted words. A few corrections:

*Sentimentality is different, it is when you indiscriminately become emotional based on your beliefs.

*I said in another thread if you were in an Indian village where they take claims of people claiming to be enlightened seriously, you would be beaten with sticks and driven out

*Including telling others their experiences are false(like my experience of telepathy) and yet teaching direct expeience

  • I (am deleted) hope my dialogue with you is being read by members here showing others why somebody would think this of you.

Surya,

Ok.

Though I am currently in the midst of composing a much longer response to this thread, I simply must comment upon the following point, here and now:

If a master does not go teach then that master is useless and we don’t need to know of such masters

Words do not begin to describe how repugnant this statement is. You continue to amaze, SD - just when I think you’ve hit rock bottom, you go deeper.

Thanks for your time.

I suppose this means you want to terminate the discussion. I am fine with that. Even I am getting bored. Just a tip for you, when you don’t have anything to show for yourself, don’t go around claiming greatness. It is the pass time of the fool. The claim that you have reached enlightenment is as grandiose as the claim that you are the reincarnation of Jesus. If you want to be seen by others as a fool - then be my guest.

P.S Yogimat still on his insult mode. The biggest insult is that he has to use an alias now :wink:

Words do not begin to describe how repugnant this statement is. You continue to amaze, SD - just when I think you’ve hit rock bottom, you go deeper.

Thanks for your time.

I will make an exception this time, but I won’t in the future. If you find any of my opinions wrong, then rather than insulting me and condemning for holding that opinion, refute it and give your own opinion so we can have a discussion. If you lack the intellect to debate with somebody then remain silent. As much as I am critical of Amir, at least he responds to each point and gives a counter point to allow discussion to take place. He is an honest and consistent person. I have never doubted his sincerity. But you, yogimat, always respond to something with an insult and never make a counter-point. Your sincerity I do indeed doubt.

I will ignore all future statements like this. I will be clear on this. I will add to my point if a master or a teacher is not teaching, then they are by definition useless to us. If a teacher does not teach, then who will?

And while were at it, I will ratify what prasad said, what are your credentials for you to claim you can test the enlightened and decide conclusively whether they are enlightened or not? I asked you this in the “Is Yoga Hinduism” thread as well yogimat when you sat there in judgement of me and claming I did not have a degree. One must first prove their integrity before they sit in judgement of another.

P.S Yogimat still on his insult mode. The biggest insult is that he has to use an alias now

Just wait - you’ll get yours. Time is on my side.

I will make an exception this time, but I won’t in the future

And - what - pray tell is that supposed to mean, SD; mind speaking clear enough such that the others here can get in on this?

If you find any of my opinions wrong, then rather than insulting me and condemning for holding that opinion, refute it and give your own opinion so we can have a discussion

You know, it’d be much easier to do so if you stopped your yapping (typing) every now and then, SD; I can’t get a word in edgewise, understand. Thus, I end up having to write incredulously complicated compositions for which I have had to carefully analyze multliple responses - sometimes across threads, even. Often, all I have time for is a few lines before you’re at it again.

Here’s a little esoteric axiom for you: the wise man speaks only because he has something to say, the fool speaks constantly because he has to say something. Think on that.

If you lack the intellect to debate with somebody then remain silent

Ha - now that’s funny. I could have swore someone - just - tried to insult me with garbage befitting a gradeschool student.

As much as I am critical of Amir, at least he responds to each point and gives a counter point to allow discussion to take place

See above.

He is an honest and consistent person

Indeed.

But you, yogimat, always respond to something with an insult and never make a counter-point

Ha - joke’s on you, bud. Don’t worry - I’ll have alot to say on that matter later on.

Your sincerity I do indeed doubt

Guess what, SD? I don’t care - your feeble attempts to turn this all around on me are rather bemusing, actually. Let’s just be honest with ourselves, SD: you dug yourself a hole here and now your trying to get out of it. Best of luck.

I will ignore all future statements like this

That’s fine - I’ll still make 'em as you drop 'em. You still don’t get it, do you? That statement wasn’t - just - for you, but for all the members of this forum such that they could see you a little more clearly; with all the profuse verbiage removed.

I will be clear on this

That’s it - just this?

I will add to my point if a master or a teacher is not teaching, then they are by definition useless to us

Still repugnant.

If a teacher does not teach, then who will?

Good question - but we weren’t talking about teachers, were we?

Thanks for your time.

Enlightenment is a process and a journey not a destination

[QUOTE=occidentalyogi;57501]Whatsoever does it mean to be “crucified”[/QUOTE]
To feel the pain of humanity.

“I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.”

P.S. I have a video of a stigmata becoming visible on my body during the release of a trauma from the past. Just not quite in the way it’s depicted by most religions.

P.P.S. I’m not enlightened.

To feel the pain of humanity.

“I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.”

P.S. I have a video of a stigmata becoming visible on my body during the release of a trauma from the past. Just not quite in the way it’s depicted by most religions.

P.P.S. I’m not enlightened

Thank you for trying, David - much appreciated I assure you.

Thanks for your time.

[QUOTE=occidentalyogi;57629]Thank you for trying, David - much appreciated I assure you.

Thanks for your time.[/QUOTE]
I’m not enlightened, I don’t even know what it is.

I was bullshitting on the answer, in honesty, I have no clue.

When you replied, my mind got angry and wanted me to defend my answer and prove that it was correct and that you were wrong.

Funny how that works, huh?

I’m not enlightened, I don’t even know what it is

I know - I was merely being polite.

I was bullshitting on the answer, in honesty, I have no clue

…And it shows, I assure you.

When you replied, my mind got angry and wanted me to defend my answer and prove that it was correct and that you were wrong

The particular interpretation is simply not up for debate - that’s part of the test, so any argument ensuing therefrom would be ignored. If you get it wrong, you get it wrong - that’s it, end of show.

Funny how that works, huh?

More like typical, actually.

Thanks for your time.

Part I of II (likely):

@Surya Deva,

Seeing as I have your attention now, first and foremost let me begin by making this point crystal-clear to you: I am ? not - Yogi Mat. I get that you love to think I am ? I get that you love to think Yogi Mat would feign leaving these forums only to come back under another name to torment you further, but that speaks more to your pride alone than anything else. Trust me: you?re not ? that ? important.

What?s that, SD ? you don?t believe me? Alright-y then, would you are to care to make it interesting (for everybody) - say, 1000 dollars US interesting; I wonder: how confident are you really, SD?

If you were enlightened, the last thing you would be doing is posting on the Yoga forums

Spoken with an air of authority ? tell me (for interests sake): how many enlightened people do you ? actually ? know SD, such that you could dictate to us what enlightened people do/do not do?

If you were enlightened, and I do mean fully enlightened-teleport-to-my-room-shake-my-hand

Ha ? now that?s a laugh. You know, for all your claims of being a ?scientifically-minded? individual, you certain don?t act like one. Any person with half a brain can grasp what Amir means by saying ?displays of miracles are not proof of enlightenment?. Logically, ?displays of miracles? are proof of miracles, alone ? no more, no less. It?s common-sense. It is quite possible to exhibit miracles without being enlightened; it is quite possible to become enlightened without exhibiting miracles ? and this is because they are not synonymous SD.

Worst of all is the fact that you, yourself, seek miracles as proof of enlightenment. Thus, any lowly magician or sorcerer (false or otherwise) who can successfully display a miracle to you will meet your ?discriminating? criterion. They love people like you, SD ? with just a little bit of common prestidigitation (or even [a] true miracle), they have a new follower willing to do whatever they ask, often in the hopes of attaining some miraculous powers themselves; empty their coffers, perform all manner of sexual favours, support whatever views the magician or sorcerer would espouse ? even kill at times. Would you like to take another shot at this line of reasoning, SD?

why only earth would you spend hours having debates on the Yoga forum, when there are bigger platforms in the world such as the UN, the international academic community, the Yoga community in India

This is an incredibly common misconception, SD - that all enlightened individuals would, necessarily, be working for the UN, UNICEF, the Red Cross, the CFR, Academia or any other such organization. It is incredibly silly to think that organizations such as these are the ? only - viable outlets for world service available to enlightened individuals, plain and simple. Who are you to be saying in what ways an enlightened individual shall serve humanity? After all, you are not an expert on such matters ? that much is obvious.

Why would you be here, when you could be[sic] out there expanding your cult, planting trees, fighting against corruption, capitalism and colonialism and crime?

  1. …?Expanding your cult? - what?s with you and cults, SD? You do realize that having a cult is ? not - a sign of an enlightened individual either, right? Any Tom, Dick or Harry can start and maintain a cult ? history is a testament to that, even.

  2. Though an enlightened individual participating here would not be planting trees, fighting against corruption, capitalism, colonialism and/or crime at the time of their posting (unless that is what they were posting about), it is unfair to simply conclude that they do not do any/all of these things - or other things - altogether. That is rather slip-shod thinking on your part, SD.

If you were fully enlightened you would have absolutely no problem creating a cult of millions of followers in no time

Enlightenment is not a pre-requisite of cult formation (of any size), nor is enlightenment any guarantee of a successful cult (of any size). Some individuals just do not have the propensities for teaching, I?m afraid; just as much as not everyone can be a Fire Fighter not everyone can be a Teacher.

As an aside: Barrack Obama has a good 20,000,000 followers ? is he necessarily enlightened then?

You could pretty much shake the entire foundation of the world

Maybe ? that would largely depend on how you were serving humanity; how you were able to. For example, if you were a politician making radical reforms ? sure; if you were a cook in a soup kitchen making pancakes ? not likely.

It is a most unfortunate sort of thing that an individual, such as yourself, would all-too-likely look down upon the enlightened individual who would choose to cook pancakes for the poor. For you, the politician would be a more acceptable imagery because it resonates with your misconceptions of enlightenment and its (perceived) relation to power, powerful positions within society, powerful movements ? whatnot. The problem, as I see it, is that your ideas of enlightenment - which are far too grandiose and extravagant to be the reality - tend to blind you to the simple truths of the matter. I only wish you could see that, SD. Not all enlightened individuals can/will be politicians and/or spiritual messiahs, despite what you think.

That’s probably as much as this thing can hand before my next post…

Continuing Part I of II:

@Surya Deva,

Amidst these frauds are the the great swamis(not enlightened, but great yogis) which many knew and know: Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Swami Vivekananda, Swami Yogananda, Swami Sivananda, Baba Ram Dev, Jaggi Vasudeva(Sadhguru) Swami Nithyananda. They don’t post on Yoga forums, they were and are out there in the real world making big changes. Opening schools, hospitals and helping alleviate suffering of humanity

For the fun of it, I?m going to play the devil?s advocate here and pose a slightly different angle: was this ? truly - out of the good of their hearts, SD? Let us wonder: what better way to advertise than to go about opening schools, hospitals, pet shops, shopping malls, restaurants, bars, retail outlets; manufacturing books, pamphlets, t-shirts, coffee mugs, door mats, pencils; rendering services such as ashram getaways for two, holistic healing, organized trips to various temples, classes in asana and pranayama ? whatever really, so long as your name gets out there. Was it so much about humanity as it was ruthless self-promotion in a society full of competition for the hearts and minds (and coffers) of its peoples? I?m not saying that it?s true, but rather that it?s a distinct possibility you, yourself, would likely not have considered in your rampant idolization of such individuals. That said is Amir such a bad guy for not having opened any hospitals, lately? Think on that.

There have been Lord Rama, Lord Krishna, Buddha, Mahavira

Speaking of being ?scientifically-minded?:

  1. What is your evidence that these individuals are more than fictional characters? Note that I?m looking for hard evidence here, SD ? no references to various scriptures and ancient manuscripts.

  2. In answering 1, what is your evidence that these individuals were actually enlightened? Again, I?m looking for hard evidence here, SD ? no references to various scriptures and ancient manuscripts ? we?re talking science here, not religion.

However, the irony is these great avatars lived thousands of years ago

…Or maybe not; who?s to say?

They brought[sic] massive change in the world and hence why they are remembered even today despite them living thousands of years

Really ? what changes did they bring (such that they are remembered even today [as you put it)? Do we have hard evidence for that too, or just more references to scriptures and ancient manuscripts?

If one should have a role model, these great avatars should be your role models

Well… that?s a bit much, SD.

Then they are Buddhas by only namesake

From what I gather, the term ?Buddha? is a symbolic reference to a particular state of consciousness ? any whom have permanently attained to this state of consciousness is/can be called a ?Buddha?, therefore.

What, then, is your particular interpretation SD; that a ?Buddha? must necessarily have a world-wide cult? If so, what is the basis of this claim besides, ?..but the Buddha this? and ?the Buddha that? in various scriptures and ancient manuscripts?

I have not ever heard of them

Ah - if even you have not heard of them, how could they possibly exist?

Why have we heard of Buddha

…Because there are scriptures and ancient manuscripts that tell us about him ? factual or otherwise.

We have heard of him because he devoted himself to humanity

No ? I?m pretty sure it?s because there are scriptures and ancient manuscripts that tell us about him and how he devoted himself to humanity ? factual or otherwise.

I am sorry I do not consider anybody fully enlightened who has not devoted himself to humanity

…And that?s certainly reasonable, SD. However what certainly is ? not - reasonable is your rather grandiose and extravagant conception(s) as per just what it means to be ?devoted to humanity?. See our conversation above concerning the politician and the cook.

Lord Rama, declared an avatar, did the following: He showed humanity what it was like to live the life of a noble man(maryadapurushotam) and how dharma is to established. He destroyed the evil empire of Ravana, a cruel global tyrant and bought peace to this world for many generations. He showed his divine form to many and many great risis of his time recognised he was an avatar. His guru was Vasistha, one of the greatest risis of all time. His legends spread all through Asia and all asian countries still sing his glories

Evidence, please.

Lord Krishna, declared an avatar, did the following: He showed humanity how to live a dharmic life in an urban age and re-established dharma in the world. He was born to destroy the evil tyrant and major king Kansa who was terrorising his province. He ended his reign. Then Krishna helped the Pandavas, the rightful heir to the capital of India at the time: Hastinapur. After gaining his help and counsel, the Padavas eventually got the throne of Hastinapur and once again dharma was established. The great war of Mahabharata was responsible for the death of millions. Krishna’s divinity was known since his birth, as a child he performed many micracles. Later, he revealed his divine form twice: once to the assembly at Hastinapur when he went there as a messenger of peace and the other time to Arjuna on the battlefield where he gave the greatest spiritual discourse in history: the Gita.
His guru was rishi Purusharama, a great warrior and rishi

Evidence, please.

Both Lord Krishna and Lord Rama are worshipped by billions on this planet and have hundreds of thousands of temples and shrines dedicated to them

That doesn’t make their stories anymore true - evidence, please.

Lord Buddha, declared an avatar, did the following: He was born as a great divine soul, but his parents kept him away from his true life calling, until the Buddha saw that life was suffering. He then through this hard work, despite already being a divine soul, sought several gurus at different stages in his life and then 10 years of hard sadhana. He finally gained his enlightenment under the Bodhi tree where he did his most intense meditation yet for 40 days. He had so much love for humanity, he did not pass through the final gate and vowed to end the suffering of everybody on the planet. His foundation would later spread through the entire world

Evidence, please.

End of Part I of II.

Thanks for your time.

[QUOTE=occidentalyogi;57633]Part I of II (likely):

@Surya Deva,

Seeing as I have your attention now, first and foremost let me begin by making this point crystal-clear to you: I am – not - Yogi Mat. I get that you love to think I am – I get that you love to think Yogi Mat would feign leaving these forums only to come back under another name to torment you further, but that speaks more to your pride alone than anything else. Trust me: you’re not – that – important.

You see I don’t trust the integrity of a person who joins the forum, comes on and insults and patronizes several people and in the end when his argument is destroyed, he leaves. Then a day later he joins with an alias, starts a thread to give a farewell and praise and compliments to his own previous identity. When I bring this up I noticed you were online, and you were so embarrased you disappeared.

I know you are Yogi mat. You talk just like him, your energy is the same, your arguments are the same, you’re also just as haughty, insulting and patronizing as he was and the fact that you would join this forum and within a few posts go out of your way to start a farewell thread to another person who recently join a thread with undue praise(that thread was deleted ultimately) Then to come here and continue your vendetta against me. If you are not him, you might as well be.

A simple IP check will show your location and we can compare and contrast with Yogimats location. I think it has probably already been done.

I am seriously deliberating whether I should continue any correspondence with you because your way of speaking to me is unduly disrespectful. I don’t mind somebody being critical of me(I am very critical of Amir, so if somebody wants to be critical of me, be my guest - start a thread :wink: ) but you are not just critical, you dismiss, patronize and openly insult. Ultimately showing your upbringing.

I don’t believe you have any integrity at all from what I have seen of you so far. I want to make that clear. Now with that said allow me to respond to your points.

Spoken with an air of authority – tell me (for interests sake): how many enlightened people do you – actually – know SD, such that you could dictate to us what enlightened people do/do not do?

I would like to bring up the irony of you saying that considering your OP says that you have an ultimate test whereby you can prove somebody is enlightened :wink:

I am going to stick to the real definition of enlightenment as given in my tradition where Yoga comes from and insist on this Sanskrit terms. Nirbija samadhi, atman jnana, moksha: Respectively: The state of consciousness when one reaches objectless absorption into cosmic intelligence or merges into cosmic intelligence and gains full mastery of nature; the direct experencial knowledge of the essence of ultimate reality; total liberation from all the conditioning of of nature from the very beginning of time(In Samkhya this is known as the total discrimination between purusha and prakriti)

Basically a fully enlightenment being is one with a pure mind, with no modifications, one who knows reality as it is. In its purest essence. Can tap into the cosmic intelligence and attain full mastery over nature. The question on how we distinguish who is enlightened has been asked in my tradition many times(Arjuna asks Krishna in the Gita) The answer is we know them by their behaviour and acts. The qualities of an enlightened being have widely been recognised to be the purest expression of compassion, love, wisdom, paitence, courage, justice, service to humanity because these are the natural qualities of the mind before it is conditioned. Conversely, when the mind does get conditioned by nature the opposite of these qualities develop: selfishness, hate, ignorance and stupidity, impaitence, cowardice, injustice, service to oneself :wink:

An enlightened being will also have all the spiritual attainments because they are merged with cosmic intelligence(This point is explained by Babaji to Yogananda in the autobiography of a yogi to explain his miraculous feats) We say in our tradition Ashtasiddhi, the 8 great siddhis. Every enlightened person in our tradition had siddhis: Rama, Krishna, Buddha(all avatars) Mahavira, Guru Nanak and countless yogis, risis and saints. These siddhis have even developed in mystics outside of our tradition. They are called spiritual attainments because they are natural developments. Hence they are sure signs of enlightenment.

I know you are going to play one of your useless semantic games you played in the “Is Yoga Hinduism thread” because rather than wanting to reach common understanding and truth, you prefer things be obfuscated and overcomplicated so you can entertain yourself. I will tell you now I am not interested. I know what it means in my tradition and as Yoga comes from my tradition and the most research in this area comes from my tradition, I will insist on using experts definitions as defined by our scientists. Everything Western people say on the matter of Yoga is secondary and supplementary as far as I am concerned.

Ha – now that’s a laugh. You know, for all your claims of being a “scientifically-minded” individual, you certain don’t act like one. Any person with half a brain can grasp what Amir means by saying “displays of miracles are not proof of enlightenment”. Logically, “displays of miracles” are proof of miracles, alone – no more, no less. It’s common-sense. It is quite possible to exhibit miracles without being enlightened; it is quite possible to become enlightened without exhibiting miracles – and this is because they are not synonymous SD.

Can you exhibit miracles? No, the reason is because your mind is not purified enough. You don’t have access to the dormant abilities in your unconscious. In order to activate them you will need to cultivate your consciousness and reach into the far recesses of your unconscious. If you can get there, then this means your consciousness is more developed than somebody who cannot. This is perfectly logical. We call this tapping the cosmic intelligence in our tradition, every degree you get closer to the final goal of having full control of the cosmic intelligence, you gain more and more control over matter. This is a matter of proven fact in science.

In our tradition we recognise souls to be beginner, middling and advanced and every grade in between. A soul that has siddhis is advanced. It is not possible for a beginner soul to have siddhis because they are not developed enough.

Worst of all is the fact that you, yourself, seek miracles as proof of enlightenment. Thus, any lowly magician or sorcerer (false or otherwise) who can successfully display a miracle to you will meet your “discriminating” criterion. They love people like you, SD – with just a little bit of common prestidigitation (or even [a] true miracle), they have a new follower willing to do whatever they ask, often in the hopes of attaining some miraculous powers themselves; empty their coffers, perform all manner of sexual favours, support whatever views the magician or sorcerer would espouse – even kill at times. Would you like to take another shot at this line of reasoning, SD?

The siddhis that Patanjali describes are perfect attainments and are natural. These can only be achieived by pure minds. In fact he stipulates this condition himself that when the mind becomes crystal clear then it reflects the real nature of everything it meditates on and gains full control. He also says that mantra-tantra, drugs etc can be used to achieive siddhis. But these siddhis are temporal, quick-fix solutions and the character of people like this often is low. There are some people who achieive high spiritual states using drugs, which would otherwise take through natural development many years, but such people also have to pay a price for it.

This is an incredibly common misconception, SD - that all enlightened individuals would, necessarily, be working for the UN, UNICEF, the Red Cross, the CFR, Academia or any other such organization. It is incredibly silly to think that organizations such as these are the – only - viable outlets for world service available to enlightened individuals, plain and simple. Who are you to be saying in what ways an enlightened individual shall serve humanity? After all, you are not an expert on such matters – that much is obvious.

Logic really, why on earth would an enlightened person be spending hours having pointless debates on the internet, when they could be spending their life making real change in the world. Where are the swamis on this forum? I have not seen a single swami post here. Ever seen the Dalai llama post here? Heck, even the Pope? Enlightened people do not waste any time in gossip and idle chatter like we ordinary mortals do, they spend every waking moment of their life serving humanity. They do not sit idle, they do not video tape themselves on youtube and then go around the internet advertising themselves :wink:

Swamis(who are not enlightened, but more developed souls) get involved in organizations like UN, academia, media. They make big changes, and this is why they win fame.

  1. …”Expanding your cult” - what’s with you and cults, SD? You do realize that having a cult is – not - a sign of an enlightened individual either, right? Any Tom, Dick or Harry can start and maintain a cult – history is a testament to that, even.

If any Tom, Dick or Harry can start a cult, then start one and well talk.

Though an enlightened individual participating here would not be planting trees, fighting against corruption, capitalism, colonialism and/or crime at the time of their posting (unless that is what they were posting about), it is unfair to simply conclude that they do not do any/all of these things - or other things - altogether. That is rather slip-shod thinking on your part, SD.

Service to humanity is what naturally develops in all minds which become purified. I am rather sad that you think this is an option. It says a lot about you. If nobody here fights against corruption, wars, inequality, poverty, prejudice, hate, violence, superstition etc, then how are these problems going to be solved? Who is going to solve them? One of less development either does not care or just moans about these problem. One of more development campaigns against these problems. An enlightened one sets examples.

Change only comes because of a few brave people. Rama bought down Ravanas empire. Krishna bought down Kansa and Kuruvs. Lord Buddha dedicated himself to ending the suffering of all(Hence why he is known as the physician) Guru Nanak was instrumental in bringing about the Sikh empire to fight the Mughal empire.

Enlightenment is not a pre-requisite of cult formation (of any size), nor is enlightenment any guarantee of a successful cult (of any size). Some individuals just do not have the propensities for teaching, I’m afraid; just as much as not everyone can be a Fire Fighter not everyone can be a Teacher.

As an aside: Barrack Obama has a good 20,000,000 followers – is he necessarily enlightened then?

I never said enlightenment was necessary for a cult. This is why I point out bad cult leaders like Shri Mata ji and Satya sai baba. It is easy to have a cult, all you need is the charisma to keep people glued to you. However, you are saying that an enlightened person would not have a following? Guru Nanak: 20 million people; Buddha: 500 million people Krishna and Rama: 1 billion people. They have followings today and they had following when they lived.

Greatness does not hide. People spot greatness straight away, because greatness shines brighthtly amongst the dim. People like Ramana Maharishi, Ramarkishna paramhansa, Yogananda and Vivekananda were spotted. Followers came to them, rather than the other way around. When Vivekananda spoke at the Parliament of world religions he got a standing ovation. Since then, he became a craze amongst the people. Yogananda attained fame in the same way.

Maybe – that would largely depend on how you were serving humanity; how you were able to. For example, if you were a politician making radical reforms – sure; if you were a cook in a soup kitchen making pancakes – not likely.

It is a most unfortunate sort of thing that an individual, such as yourself, would all-too-likely look down upon the enlightened individual who would choose to cook pancakes for the poor. For you, the politician would be a more acceptable imagery because it resonates with your misconceptions of enlightenment and its (perceived) relation to power, powerful positions within society, powerful movements – whatnot. The problem, as I see it, is that your ideas of enlightenment - which are far too grandiose and extravagant to be the reality - tend to blind you to the simple truths of the matter. I only wish you could see that, SD. Not all enlightened individuals can/will be politicians and/or spiritual messiahs, despite what you think.

I never prescribed any action. All I said is a fully enlightened being would be in service to humanity. Even Krishna says in the Gita that despite having full mastery of the three worlds(physical, subtle and causal) he still has to work to maintain dharma. The higher one is on the spiritual ladder, the great their impact on the world. Again Lord rama’s impact was no small impact, he bought down a massive evil empire of Ravana. Krishna’s impact was not small either, he bought down Kansa’s kingdom and restored dharma in India by bringing the Pandavas to their rightful rule. This is why in our history they are considered the greatest men to have ever lived. Even today we model our cultural life after them.

For the fun of it, I’m going to play the devil’s advocate here and pose a slightly different angle: was this – truly - out of the good of their hearts, SD? Let us wonder…

“Let us wonder” – Let us not :smiley: Yogimat I see you still love to speculate :wink: It is easy for you to sit there in judgement of these great souls in your armchair. But I will ask you how many schools, hospitals have you opened? Next time you point fingers at great souls, please consider your own integrity :wink: You played these speculation games in the “Is Yoga Hinduism thread” where you said that I am lying about me degree and then called me a fraud. I ultimately proved you wrong by showing the breadth of my knowledge of philosophy. Seriously, I strongly, very strongly question your integrity. I would not trust you as far as I could throw you.

Speaking of being “scientifically-minded”:

  1. What is your evidence that these individuals are more than fictional characters? Note that I’m looking for hard evidence here, SD – no references to various scriptures and ancient manuscripts.

  2. In answering 1, what is your evidence that these individuals were actually enlightened? Again, I’m looking for hard evidence here, SD – no references to various scriptures and ancient manuscripts – we’re talking science here, not religion.

This is not a matter open to debate. Krishna, Rama, Buddha are a part of the history of India. They are not just mentioned in scriptures, but in the “Itihas” portion of our texts. Itihas means history. We have plenty of textual evidence, and recently archeaological evidence in the case of Krishna to determine they existed and were real people. Even the Buddhist and Jain texts which are critical of Krishna never deny his historicity and confirm many important periods in this life. The story of Krishna has come down to us from many generations in a range of texts. Their historicity has never been doubted. They are considered real people like you and me. In our puranas the geneologies of kings that have ruled India are described in explicit detail, these include Rama and Krishna, as well as Chandragupta Mauraya, Chandragupta Gupta. Greek historians visiting India in 300BCE confirm that Krishna is recorded as a king that ruled India several thousand years before and all kings in between are also given.

In fact we have more evidence Rama, Krishna and Buddha lived than we do of Jesus. There is only one source that claims Jesus lived and that is the holy bible :wink: No historical sources during the purported time of Jesus even mention such a person existing, including the historians of that time.

I am going to ignore the rest of your post as I have already told you it is not open to debate. If you start denying our history, we could easily turn it around and deny yours. I consider such a debate pointless and a waste of time amd energy. Stick to the enlightenment issue.

@occidentalyogi

You’re not actually defending that pompous ass are you? (and you know who I’m talking about) I hope this is really about locking horns with Surya Deva.

“In fact we have more evidence Rama, Krishna and Buddha lived than we do of Jesus. There is only one source that claims Jesus lived and that is the holy bible”

That is not true, there are other sources - particularly in Kashmiri history. Even today there are followers in Kashmir who have regarded themselves as the descendents of Jesus. In the history of Kashmir it is mentioned of one teacher, Isa, whom they also called the Shepherd, who had come from Isreal and settled in Kashmir to teach. There is even a tombstone there, in which the feetmarks of the man had been engraved through a method of putting the feet onto liquid which would then solidify as metal. Upon the two feet, you can see very clearly the wounds that were inflicted through driving of the nail for the crucifixtion. Even Buddhist sources have mentioned a figure which may very well be Jesus. One archeologist, Nikolai Notovich, had visited a monestaery in Tibet, the Hemis monestary, where he had discovered one scripture through a lama which has mentioned Isa. Isa was a “Divine Child”, who had left Jurusalem and had been taken to India from the age of 13 years by merchants to become learned in the Buddhist teachings. Because in Buddhism - when a wise sage dies, some wanderers are sent shortly afterwards to find his reincarnation. Part of the process has much to do with astrology, not unlike the three mages in the story of visiting Jesus upon his birth with gifts. Even in the Bible - all of those years from Jesus’s life are missing - between thirteen and twenty nine. When he first arrived to India - he was welcomed by the Jains, but he had left them to learn the teachings of Buddhism and had spent six years amongst them, learning Pali and the scriptures. He later spent six years teaching at various cities, and created much conflict amongst the Kshaitreyas and the Brahmins for teaching to people of lower castes. The conflict became so stirring, that there were even attempts to plot for his death. Eventually, he had to leave back to Isreal where he was condemned by the Jews. And if you look at certain details of his teaching - you will find that they are not characteristic of Jewish teachings at all - such as loving your neighbor, that unless you know yourself you cannot enter into the “Kingdom of God”, and so on. That is one of the reasons why the Jews were very much against him - they had felt that he was teaching things which were contrary to their own religion.

It is likely that the Isa that was spoken of in the Buddhist scripture is the same Isa that had been spoken of in Kashmiri history. It seems that Isa was crucified, but did not die upon the cross - left Jurusalem, and settled in Kashmir which seemed to be one of the only places which would accept him - because in India he was condemned, and in Jerusalem he was condemned. And geographically, they are placed in such positions, that Kashmir seemed to be one of the only places which was suitable for settling.

The Buddhist scripture which had mentioned the life of Isa had been reviewed again and again by other visitors who came to the Hemis monestery, and confirmed the existence of the scripture.

So it is likely that there are mentions of Jesus in other sources. But whether he existed or not, is irrelevant. What is relevant is what the message of Jesus has been saying, and whether it is of any assistance towards one’s liberation. It is my own understanding that the larger percentage of Jesus’s teachings do not reflect the quality of an awakened consciousness.

Pure speculation. Nobody takes this “Jesus in India” story seriously. It was originally used by Christian missionaries to show the affinities between Christianity and Hinduism. Other speculations include the myth of Thomas, which even today Christian archeaologists eventually come out with an archeaological discovery to prove the myth, but it does not float with the peers.

" It was originally used by Christian missionaries to show the affinities between Christianity and Hinduism."

The “Life of Saint Isa” as mentioned in the Buddhist scripture has nothing to do with Christian missionaries.