Cults In Yoga - Siddha / Brahma Kumaris / Sahaja Yoga, etc (often non physical Yoga)

Yoga Discussion General Yoga
#20

I have also been involved in Anandamarga Yoga for about a year. I think next to the BK,s this was my longest time in a cult. Anandamarga Yoga operates in various universities teaching Yoga and meditation. When I discovered my local university had a Yoga and meditation society, I promptly joined it. We were greeted by a monk(who call themselves dada) who was upfront about what their path was about(It is a form of tantra) As always, I did research on it and discovered that it was branded as a Terrorist organization in the past. But the reason for those were the extreme actions the followers took when the leader Prahbat Sarkar was wrongfully imprisoned by a corrupt government. So I gave it the benefit of the doubt. I was formally initiated into Anandamarga Yoga up to the second level of teaching and attended three retreats. I was initiated by my acharya in a formal ceremony.

Anandamarga Yoga was far more serious spiritual business than other groups I have been involved in. Their techniques were proper Yoga. In the first phase I was initiated with a mantra which he said was unique to me(I have heard from one source the mantra is the same for everybody) in addition to the universal mantra we are given: Baba naam kevalam.
In the second phase I was given a visualization exercise and a pranayama with synchronized mantra. We also all learned a Yogic dance and the Tandava. What drove me away from the organization was the excessive kirtaan we did, especially at the retreats with the universal mantra. I am not a devotional person, so I found too much Kirtaan really off putting.

I was also putt off by the political actions of the organizations. Anandamarga is not just a Yogic tradition, it is highly political and is involved in activism. When I met the dadas at the retreat, one of them really put me off with Dravidian nationalism. He told how the Aryans had oppressed the Dravidians and how in the Ramayana they were called dark demons. I realised that for a dada who should be more spiritually developed than me, he should be able to see through such propogananda. When I said this was propoganda, he accused me of being Hindutva(Hindu nationalist) I was not impressed. They also insisted that Shiva was the founder of Yoga and Tantra was a global tradition going back tens of thousands of years. I said Shiva was a mythological figure, not a real life historical person. They opposed me saying they would put me in touch with historians in the organization.

As with any cult there was a tendency to censor free, critical and independent thinking. I had many debates with my acharya and he would rudely censor me in front of everybody. When they would ask questions about the Yoga philosophy we learned, he would tell us we were wrong if our answer was not word for word the same as he taught it. I noticed he had a lot of ego and loved the sound of his own voice. He was suppose to be a monk and high initiate - but I was not impressed. He once shouted at me in front of everyone. I stopped going thereafter.

#21

[QUOTE=Sahasrara;56113]How about including “Art of Living” In this thread? Any comments and personal experiences?

Is this also a cult? take a look at the following link.

artoflivingfree.blogspot.com

They all sound like MAYA in different colors with Saguna Brahman (I may be wrong) :)[/QUOTE]

dont hit da [B]heAD.[/B]

#22

[QUOTE=bjoy;56211]dont hit da [B]heAD.[/B][/QUOTE]

I didn’t get it :slight_smile:

#23

MAYA in different colors. Thats true.

#24

[QUOTE=bjoy;56217]MAYA in different colors. Thats true.[/QUOTE]

Scriptures say MAYA is Saguna Brahman. I may be wrong. I am not an expert in scriptures.

It is the karmic cycle which leads one to these cults and it is also the same karmic cycle that removes the veil of MAYA.

Servam Brahmamayam!

#25

maybe, you are right. howmany livetimes we’ll stick to that cycle of karma. maybe, we need a breakonthrough. i need to kiss the sky, excuseme.

aum.

#26

I am not sure we could say Saguna Brahman is Maya. Remember, the difference between Saguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman is form and formlessness. Saguna Brahman is also Brahman, but it’s Brahman manifest as a form. Say Surya Deva :wink:

Maya is more of the ignorance of perception. Mistaking the unreal to be the real, the not self to be the self, pain to be pleasure. It an illusory energy born out of a potency within Brahman itself.

#27

" Mistaking the unreal to be the real, the not self to be the self"

To discriminate between the two may be useful just as a means of entry into ones own original nature. Otherwise, once one has come to the space, these distinctions simply disappear - they are none other than shadows of ones own mind. It is ones own mind which has divided things into categories of polar opposites, between the self and the non-self, the real and the unreal, the good and the bad, the right and the wrong, darkness and light, male and female, existence and non-existence, all of which are just reflections of ones own relative ideas and concepts. Truth is not something that belongs to any of our mental categories whatsoever. Raise even a single thought about it - and one immediately becomes entangled in delusion. Inexpressible beyond the inexpressible, to grasp it is like trying to swallow the whole ocean in one gulp. When in a direct encounter with ones own original nature, let there be a silent understanding and nothing more.

#28

Haha, it almost sounds like I have had some experience with every cult. I am a true seeker in every sense of that word. I have looked at everything to satisfy my soul’s thrist - and alas my soul is even more thirsty.

What else have I been involved in? I am a member of the Theosophical lodge. I have also given talks there.
This is my first Western cult. The Theosophical lodge are harmless today though, and to be honest a bit boring. They are too stuck in their Victorian ways, and they meet infrequently at the local lodge. The sessions are usually divided into a study group and then some random lecture on a new-age topic. In the past, I understand they have been involved in a lot of fradulent activity and I strongly question the origins of the Secret Doctrine and the Mahatma letters, which claim have been channeled to them by the adepts and ascended masters in India and Tibet. I do indeed like reading their literature, such as the Key to Theosophy - but they need a complete overhaul if they want to survive into the 21st century.

I have contact with other Western cults through friends: The Freemasons, The Golden Dawn, OTO - we occasionally meet in the pub and have dinner together. I also attended about a year of Gnostic classes. In general I find them harmless, and very knowlegable - but alas very new-age. Although they themselves oppose new-age stuff and resent the label. I know that a lot of the stuff they teach, which they claim is part of an indigenious Western tradition, is just a rehash of the Eastern tradition. A note to Western new agers: stop pretending you have an indigenious Yoga tradition. You do not. The closest thing you have to Yoga is Neo-platonism and Gnosticism, but they are definitely not as developed as Yoga and were prematurely ended by the Roman Empire. This is why you follow Yoga. Oh, and Kabbalh is not an authentic tradition, it is new-age interpretation of the bible.

What else have I been involved in? Dabbled in the new age attending spiritual churches weekly for a few months for open circle mediumship and healling. Had a medium mentor for a month. Attended some psychic development classes and learned crystal healing, dousing and healing, fragments of reikei, aura gazing, astral projection, Indigo children and other such superficial rubbish. This is a cult in itself because these people are highly needy, deluded and do not practice real spirituality. They delude themselves into thinking they have become enlightened - but they are usually just morons.

Attended 1 class of the Hare Krishnas and visited their IKSON temple in India. Just wow. These are some of the most fundamentalist people I have ever met, and stupid. Stay away for your sanity.

I have gone to Church a few times, but never a Mosque. I have read both the holy bible and the Quran. The Quran was leant to me by a Muslim fundamentalist student at high school in order to convert me. Obviously it did not work. These scriptures to me are at the bottom of the barrel of every scripture I have read and every new-age book I have read. The only reason people continue to read them is because they do it out of a sense of loyalty and respect or faith. Otherwise, they are just remenants of a primitive desert culture - and teach you NOTHING!

I have also read the Sikh bible the Guru Granth Sahib. It is a lot more positive and uplifting - but boy is it repetitive. I get the message already, “God is great, god is love, god is beyond description - god god god god god” It is basically a giant book of odes to god.

I am less versed in Buddhist scriptures. I have the Dhammapada lying around somewhere. I gave it a cursory glance, but was not too impressed. I have also read the Tao-te-ching, nice, but not too impressive. Buddhist and Taoic scriptures tend to be quite light in content, but still spiritually uplifting to read. They are no matches for Hindu scriptures though which are often rational and scientific discourses and teach pure spirituality.

Finally, in terms of “secular Yoga” I did the Bihar School of Yoga Satyananda Yoga for a few months. I found it dry, but very serious and no BS stuff. I am considering BSY seriously for my future path. They are very serious about their Yoga and their books, “Asanas, Mudras and Bandhas”, “Yoga Nidra”, “Sure ways to self-realization” are some of the best and most informative I have found ever. They are like a benchmark in Yoga.

#29

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;56307]Haha, it almost sounds like I have had some experience with every cult. I am a true seeker in every sense of that word. I have looked at everything to satisfy my soul’s thrist - and alas my soul is even more thirsty.

What else have I been involved in? I am a member of the Theosophical lodge. I have also given talks there.
This is my first Western cult. The Theosophical lodge are harmless today though, and to be honest a bit boring. They are too stuck in their Victorian ways, and they meet infrequently at the local lodge. The sessions are usually divided into a study group and then some random lecture on a new-age topic. In the past, I understand they have been involved in a lot of fradulent activity and I strongly question the origins of the Secret Doctrine and the Mahatma letters, which claim have been channeled to them by the adepts and ascended masters in India and Tibet. I do indeed like reading their literature, such as the Key to Theosophy - but they need a complete overhaul if they want to survive into the 21st century.

I have contact with other Western cults through friends: The Freemasons, The Golden Dawn, OTO - we occasionally meet in the pub and have dinner together. I also attended about a year of Gnostic classes. In general I find them harmless, and very knowlegable - but alas very new-age. Although they themselves oppose new-age stuff and resent the label. I know that a lot of the stuff they teach, which they claim is part of an indigenious Western tradition, is just a rehash of the Eastern tradition. A note to Western new agers: stop pretending you have an indigenious Yoga tradition. You do not. The closest thing you have to Yoga is Neo-platonism and Gnosticism, but they are definitely not as developed as Yoga and were prematurely ended by the Roman Empire. This is why you follow Yoga. [B]Oh, and Kabbalh is not an authentic tradition, it is new-age interpretation of the bible.[/B]

What else have I been involved in? Dabbled in the new age attending spiritual churches weekly for a few months for open circle mediumship and healling. Had a medium mentor for a month. Attended some psychic development classes and learned crystal healing, dousing and healing, fragments of reikei, aura gazing, astral projection, Indigo children and other such superficial rubbish. This is a cult in itself because these people are highly needy, deluded and do not practice real spirituality. They delude themselves into thinking they have become enlightened - but they are usually just morons.

Attended 1 class of the Hare Krishnas and visited their IKSON temple in India. Just wow. These are some of the most fundamentalist people I have ever met, and stupid. Stay away for your sanity.

I have gone to Church a few times, but never a Mosque. I have read both the holy bible and the Quran. The Quran was leant to me by a Muslim fundamentalist student at high school in order to convert me. Obviously it did not work. These scriptures to me are at the bottom of the barrel of every scripture I have read and every new-age book I have read. The only reason people continue to read them is because they do it out of a sense of loyalty and respect or faith. Otherwise, they are just remenants of a primitive desert culture - and teach you NOTHING!

I have also read the Sikh bible the Guru Granth Sahib. It is a lot more positive and uplifting - but boy is it repetitive. I get the message already, “God is great, god is love, god is beyond description - god god god god god” It is basically a giant book of odes to god.

I am less versed in Buddhist scriptures. I have the Dhammapada lying around somewhere. I gave it a cursory glance, but was not too impressed. I have also read the Tao-te-ching, nice, but not too impressive. Buddhist and Taoic scriptures tend to be quite light in content, but still spiritually uplifting to read. They are no matches for Hindu scriptures though which are often rational and scientific discourses and teach pure spirituality.

Finally, in terms of “secular Yoga” I did the Bihar School of Yoga Satyananda Yoga for a few months. I found it dry, but very serious and no BS stuff. I am considering BSY seriously for my future path. They are very serious about their Yoga and their books, “Asanas, Mudras and Bandhas”, “Yoga Nidra”, “Sure ways to self-realization” are some of the best and most informative I have found ever. They are like a benchmark in Yoga.[/QUOTE]

I think you will find many, most, if not all jews - who are learned in the quaballa ’ scoffing at your assertion.

The dhammapada and tao te ching are not impressive to you?

Brosif.

While I do certainly enjoy many of your rants, and your complete ownage of Amir in that one thread . . . :wink: (for you), and all your scholarly knowledge which I find considerable and your contributions to the diversity of this forum - this thread is a prime example - and yes - while I certainly do enjoy all that - more or less - i must tell you that when it comes to the vedas and the sanatana dharma - and all it’s different flavors - you have tunnel vision.

In your eyes - nothing can compare to it.

#30

Absolutely, nothing compares to the Vedic tradition because nothing is as concentrated in knowlege From the Vedic corpus we learn the following:

We learn about the principles of dharma
We learn about the science of discernment between matter and consciousness
We learn about the science of economics
We learn about the science of Yoga
We learn about the science of medicine and surgery
We learn about the science of logic and epistemology
We learn about the science of linguistics
We learn about the science of metre
We learn about the science of astrology
We learn about the science of engineering

In which other tradition of religious scriptures do we learn this knowledge? The Dhammapada only focusses on moral teachings and teaching the four noble truths. The Tao-te-ching is just a collection of wise sayings. The bible is just a book telling you the history of the Judeo people and the conditions at the time. It gives you wrong information like the earth is flat, because that is what people believed then. Ethically, it is highly backwards.

The Vedic corpus gets the praise that it does because it is teaches you knowledge. You can still pick them up today and and increase your knowledge and learn something, and actually gain something. They also teach you practices you can go practice like pranayama etc. I am not the only one who says this. Look at the conversations we have on this board and look at the terminology we use: maya, prakriti, purusha, brahman, guna, atman, kosha, chitta, vritti, buddhi, prana, kundalini, chakras, nadi, vata, pitta, kapha, mahabhuta, yuga, karma, dharma. Where do all these terms come from? The Vedic corpus. We obviously use these terms because they are the most precise terms to describe what we want to describe.

The truth is clear we get all our knowledge of spirituality and Yoga from the Vedic corupus. This is why I praise the Vedic tradition. I once bumped into somebody on the street, a black man, before I could say Veda, he said it for me. He started talking about in all his studies he has done in his life into spirituality, he has found the Vedic tradition to have the most clearest and most advanced knowledge. All experts in spirituality agree. This is why we use Vedic terms. The very least we can do is show a bit of respect to this tradition.

We should not engage in jealousy games by comparing other scriptures like the bible, quran, tao-te-ching to them - because there is no comparison. These texts do not give you clear and precise knowledge on spirituality like the Vedas do. We use Vedic terms on this forum because the Vedas are the best sources of spiritual knowledge.

As for Kabbalh. I don’t care what Jewish scholars say. Kabbah is a mystical interpretation of the OT. It is not authentic, because the meanings are invented using dubious methods of interpretation as credible as numerology is.

#31

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;56316]Absolutely, nothing compares to the Vedic tradition because nothing is as concentrated in knowlege From the Vedic corpus we learn the following:

We learn about the principles of dharma
We learn about the science of discernment between matter and consciousness
We learn about the science of economics
We learn about the science of Yoga
We learn about the science of medicine and surgery
We learn about the science of logic and epistemology
We learn about the science of linguistics
We learn about the science of metre
We learn about the science of astrology
We learn about the science of engineering

Certainly apart from the last two I have studied or touched upon all the above in buddhist teachings , in sangha settings , no doubt influenced and originally coming from a culture of which you champion. Shakyamuni Buddha was not overly keen on relying too much on astrology from what I understand .
It took seven weeks for the moslems to burn the books at nalanda university thats a lot of effort and a lot of books !

#32

The entire Buddhist canon, I would have to say, is more voluminous than that ascribed to hinduism.

Yup.

Ewwwww.

Burn.

Tsssssssssssss.

Stings don’t it.

Back in the olden days. Buddhist scholars would straight up school the ‘learned brahmins’

Shantideva owned them hindoos!

At least thats how the story goes - as told from the Buddhist point of view. :slight_smile: Of course.

I also am slightly disappointed that some time ago you engaged in debate on the Buddhadharma when your primary exposure to the system was the 30 page long (if that) dhammapada - that you flipped through on the toilet?

Ugh.

maintain your integrity.

#33

I am not a big fan of astrology either, not because I don’t believe the science is real, but I don’t believe in astrologers. Jyotisha is a very precise science and requires experts to analyse your star charts, and many so-called experts are commercial astrologers who just want to make a quick buck.

Vedic Astrology is of course superior to Western astrology :wink: You can do a search for yourself online and get expert opinions. Vedic astrology is superior and actually gives accurate results.

#34

It is sad that they burned down Nalanda university. Nalanda university contained thousands of Sanskrit texts which unfortunately we will never hear about. Just think about what kind of knowledge was stored there.

The Buddhist scriptures only focus on teaching the Buddhist religion. Hindu scriptures teach you the sciences. They are more useful to us because they give us scientific knowledge in all fields. There is not a single field of science the Vedas does not cover. Unfortunately, we have lost so many of these sciences, because a lot of the Vedic schools have been lost. It is believed that at one time the Vedas covered every single science, even the science of aeuronautics and space sciences :smiley: You will find Hindu web sites talk about these sciences. The so-called Vimanika shastra, and Ansu Bodhini(spectroscopy) I don’t find it hard to believe, considering how advanced Vedic science was. There is an allusion to microscopes in Ayurvedic texts when it gives a description of 20 types of microorganisms.

#35

“We learn about the principles of dharma”

That which one is calling the dharma is not something that can be organized into any principle, and those who have organized it into a principle are just chasing figments of their own imagination. Truth cannot be organized.

“We learn about the science of discernment between matter and consciousness”

There is no discernment at all. What one is calling “matter” and what one is calling “consciousness” are made of the same stuff - it is the same energy manifesting itself in different forms. It is like trying to separate water from ice, or the fragrance from the lotus flower. To discriminate between the two may be convenient as far as one’s intellect is concerned, just as a means, but it has no roots in reality. This universe is one holsitic existence, it does not belong to any of the sharp divisions which are just projetions of one’s intellect.

“We learn about the science of economics”

As everything is in a constant state of change, the current is unceasing. In such a situation, one cannot function according to fixed economic principles. One will have to be as flexible as existence itself, responding according to whatever is needed in the moment. Because of this, what may be effective today may become ineffective tomorrow. So I would not form an attachment to any of those “sciences” of economics, whether it comes from the Vedas or anywhere else.

“We learn about the science of Yoga”

This has it’s roots not in the Vedas, but in direct experience. In fact, there is so much superstition and nonsense which is written in the Vedas, particularly the Rig Veda, that unless the science of yoga is separated from Hindu mythology, Hindu cosmology, and all of the belief systems which are part of the Hindu tradition, then yoga has yet to become a true science.

“The Vedic corpus gets the praise that it does because it is teaches you knowledge.”

It also teaches you much superstition and nonsense which is just a projection of the Hindu mind. And because you yourself are blind, it will be impossible to discriminate between what comes closer to the Truth, and what is just a dogmatic attachment to a certain belief system.

“Look at the conversations we have on this board and look at the terminology we use: maya, prakriti, purusha, brahman, guna, atman, kosha, chitta, vritti, buddhi, prana, kundalini, chakras, nadi, vata, pitta, kapha, mahabhuta, yuga, karma, dharma. Where do all these terms come from? The Vedic corpus”

It does not matter in what language these words are. They are things which are out of a direct insight into things as they are. They are already there - whether the Vedic tradition exists or not, whether there is even a single human being on Earth or not.

“The truth is clear we get all our knowledge of spirituality and Yoga from the Vedic corupus.”

More nonsense. You are far too attached to these scriptures which are functioning like a veil over one’s eyes. The Truth is to be found nowhere else other than through your own being. No scripture can transmit even a single drop of the ocean, only an entry inwards to come to the discovery of the ocean itself.

“I once bumped into somebody on the street, a black man, before I could say Veda, he said it for me.”

No, you did not.

“He started talking about in all his studies he has done in his life into spirituality, he has found the Vedic tradition to have the most clearest and most advanced knowledge.”

He must have been sleepwalking on that street. There is no such thing as advanced knowledge, it does not matter how much knowledge you gather - it is just like a particle of dust in the desert. As far as having clarity is concerned, if one has an eye to see, one’s knowledge is not to make one knowledgeable, but only to bring one closer and closer to the recognition that you know nothing.

“All experts in spirituality agree”

There are no experts, and those who think of themselves as experts are just deceiving themselves.

“As for Kabbalh. I don’t care what Jewish scholars say. Kabbah is a mystical interpretation of the OT.”

Most of the terms that you are using in Sanskrit all have equivalents in Hebrew, there is not much difference. Whether you say that existence is an interaction between “Shiva” and “Shakti”, or whether it is between “Chokmah” and “Binah” makes no difference at all. And whether you call the original nature of things “Shunya”, a void, or “Ain Soph”, nothingness, makes very little difference at all. Those differences which are there are just superficial. The fundamental differences are that in Hinduism, everything is twisted to fit a Hindu ideology. In the Qabalah, everything is twisted to fit a Jewish framework. Neither are their methods totally different. Rather than chanting the mantra in Sanskrit, they are chanting their mantras in Hebrew. Rather than visualizing the yantra with Hindu symbols, they are visualizing the yantra with Jewish symbols. If the Hindu yogi is visualizing certain letters in certain parts of the body in Sanskrit, the Qabalist is doing the same in Hebrew. They are not really so different - they are just as dogmatic as the other. That is always going to be the case as long as one continues clinging to one’s knowledge, whatever that knowledge may be.

#36

S.D.
You make grand, broad, sweeping generalizations - A LOT.
I don’t think this dharma helps you - the making of grand, broad, and sweeping generalizations - alot.
Because the Buddhist scriptures don’t only focus on the buddhist “religion.”

You should know by know that it’s tough to pull the wool over this guys eyes. Meaning me.

#37

Amir, you know that I do not consider you an authority. You speak nonsense, you have no idea what you are talking about, and you are an imposter claiming to have already reached enlightenment, and now are in your post enlightenment training. You deny everybody else, every expert, every enlightened master who has gone before you. Now you are claiming to know more than the Vedic tradition. You are full of it :smiley:

The truth is you are a wannabe cult founder. It is indeed ironic you would deny Shri Nirmala Devi Mata ji, because she has succeeded in creating a cult, and you have not :wink:

#38

“The Buddhist scriptures only focus on teaching the Buddhist religion.”

What you are calling “Buddhism” is just an umbrella term for many different philosophies and belief systems which come under that category, many of which are absolutely opposite to one another. It is a word which is useful, but more or less meaningless. In “Buddhism”, you will find materialists, idealists, realists, nihilists, and even some streams which come very close to being theistic or pantheistic. There is even one school, the Pure Land Buddhism, which is not all too different than Christianity. They emphasize that the way to liberation is through simply believing with devotion in Amitabha Buddha, one of the Buddhas in paradise who has given a promise that if you believe in him, you will enter into the Pure Land. Hence, the whole Pure Land Buddhism is just having faith in Amitabha Buddha, just as Christians have faith towards Jesus Christ who is their savior. Many other Buddhists will not agree with this approach. In fact, most of what has arisen in Buddhism has nothing at all to do with Gautama Buddha - who was not a Buddhist at all, or belonged to any particular belief system or tradition. He was simply an ordinary man who had come to know himself, through and through.

“Hindu scriptures teach you the sciences. They are more useful to us because they give us scientific knowledge in all fields.”

There are so many things in the Vedas which are entirely unscientific, they were still entangled in this superstitious idea that if you are inflicted with a certain illness, or if you are insane, it is not because of anything scientific, but you are possessed by certain demons and devils which have to be cast out. If you were insane, then you were taken to a Brahmin in a temple who would try to excorcise the demon out of you, and if that did not work, you were beaten. Most of the rituals of Hinduism are filled with this same kind of fanatic dogmatism, that by performing certain rituals in the right way, or by performing animal sacrifices, that somehow you are going to please the deities who will work in your favor. The Vedas itself declares itself to be a revelation from God, which is just a hallucination of their authors. There is no “God” in the sense of a Supreme Being which is created in one’s own image, and like every other religion which has been clinging to the idea of God, one has projected ones own identifications of the mind.

#39

“Hindu scriptures teach you the sciences. They are more useful to us because they give us scientific knowledge in all fields.”

There are so many things in the Vedas which are entirely unscientific, they were still entangled in this superstitious idea that if you are inflicted with a certain illness, or if you are insane, it is not because of anything scientific, but you are possessed by certain demons and devils which have to be cast out. If you were insane, then you were taken to a Brahmin in a temple who would try to excorcise the demon out of you, and if that did not work, you were beaten. Most of the rituals of Hinduism are filled with this same kind of fanatic dogmatism, that by performing certain rituals in the right way, or by performing animal sacrifices, that somehow you are going to please the deities who will work in your favor. The Vedas itself declares itself to be a revelation from God, which is just a hallucination of their authors. There is no “God” in the sense of a Supreme Being which is created in one’s own image, and like every other religion which has been clinging to the idea of God, one has projected qualities of one’s own mind.

You don’t know what you are talking about :wink: You have not read the Vedic corpus you fraud, but you still talk like you are an expert on them :wink: We have already proven that all you have done is read a bad translation of the Vedas on sacred-text.com, and now you think you know it all :wink: I have read 5 different translations, and read them myself with a Sanskrit dictionary. I did this for a year. Your knowledge on Hinduism will not match up to mine. I have studied Hinduism for 10 years and read 100 books by scholars on it. Actually, even your knowledge of spirituality will not match up to mine. Don’t you see how many cults I have attended :wink:

You’re a wannabe cult founder and leader. Half of the forum knows you are a wannabe.