@Surya Deva
How did this thread get to be about me? I refused to let you drag me into another one of your interminable ridiculous arguments, so instead you attack me personally.
[QUOTE=FutureHumanDestiny;69282]your ego is preventing you from receiving the meaning of my messages. i would be glad to answer all of your questions, but i detect more malevolence than a kind hearted discussion would tolerate. in other words, you have mistaken me for someone i’m not.[/QUOTE]
Actually there may be some truth to this. What you perceive as malevolence probably comes from my weariness with all the buddhas, experts, and people with messages that I’ve dealt with on this forum, coupled with a low tolerance for bullsh*t, and views that are generally more conservative than most.
My ‘ego’ may indeed be preventing me from receiving your messages, but it’s not passive as you imply. It’s really more of an active filter. When somebody tells me they have a message, the red flags go up and it sets off all kinds of sirens and alarms. My thing is exposing and challenging the misinformation.
If you look carefully at my posts that were addressed to you, you’ll see I’ve been trying to figure you out. I haven’t mistaken you for anyone.
so first of all those terms are ubiquitous, not from different traditions.
I don’t agree. There are lots of contradictions and inconsistencies in Indian philosophy. This is because Indian philosophy is not a unified whole, it’s made up of lot’s of different traditions with different ideas. One of the things I’ve learned on this forum is that it’s important to be able to distinguish where different ideas come from, in order to make sense of it all. Personally I don’t think you’re there yet.
When someone tells me they have these fantastic insights from ‘personal experience’, that sets off another red flag. I’m sure someone like the Dalai Lama has personal experience too, but he is also highly educated and knows all of the literature that is relevant to his tradition. And he doesn’t go around telling people that their ego is preventing them from receiving his message.
I don’t know what your experience has been. Just be aware that there are lots of other experienced people who come to this forum. If you start talking a bunch of nonsense, chances are someone will call you out on it. If people want to act like whack-jobs and fools, I can’t stop them. What I can do is point out their foolishness, in the hope that others don’t get misled. If I make some enemies along the way, that means I’m doing something right. If you don’t have enemies, it means you’ve never stood for something.
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]If you don’t have enemies, it means you’ve never stood for something.[/QUOTE]
that’s a truism, especially as it refers to web forums.
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]Actually there may be some truth to this. What you perceive as malevolence probably comes from my weariness with all the buddhas, experts, and people with messages that I’ve dealt with on this forum, coupled with a low tolerance for bullsh*t, and views that are generally more conservative than most. [/QUOTE]
i agree that there are zillions of wannabe spiritual control freak know-it-alls. my sincere hope is that they’ve set the stage for real spirituality; i.e. more people need to put their guard up for delusional/fraudulent gurus and i hope that they take personal responsibility for their practice. when they do, then my help is always welcomed.
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]My ‘ego’ may indeed be preventing me from receiving your messages, but it’s not passive as you imply. It’s really more of an active filter. When somebody tells me they have a message, the red flags go up and it sets off all kinds of sirens and alarms. My thing is exposing and challenging the misinformation.[/QUOTE]
with your zeal for the truth, you might make an excellent guru yourself, if were you enlightened and far more compassionate.
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]If you look carefully at my posts that were addressed to you, you’ll see I’ve been trying to figure you out. I haven’t mistaken you for anyone.[/QUOTE]
it’s a phrase i use to get people to self-reflect. i won’t bother you with it’s meaning or intent for now.
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]I don’t agree. There are lots of contradictions and inconsistencies in Indian philosophy. This is because Indian philosophy is not a unified whole, it’s made up of lot’s of different traditions with different ideas. One of the things I’ve learned on this forum is that it’s important to be able to distinguish where different ideas come from, in order to make sense of it all. Personally I don’t think you’re there yet.[/QUOTE]
spirituality is our birthright. our spiritual potential exists in us as individuals. you speak truly when you say the philosophy is inconsistent, yet our spiritual destiny is congruent with our individual potential. in other words, philosophy be damned, it’s the experience that matters. that’s why i post on these forums (for the benefit of aspirants): enlightenment is damn strange. the philosophy espoused by the self-described experts varies based on their level of attainment, their education and their delusion. so it’s good enough to get people thinking, but will it get them to enlightenment? the facts speak for themselves, imho, there are millions of practitioners worldwide of enlightenment traditions. how many are enlightened?
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]When someone tells me they have these fantastic insights from ‘personal experience’, that sets off another red flag. I’m sure someone like the Dalai Lama has personal experience too, but he is also highly educated and knows all of the literature that is relevant to his tradition. And he doesn’t go around telling people that their ego is preventing them from receiving his message.[/QUOTE]
he also isn’t’ enlightened, nor has he helped anyone attain enlightenment. although i support him as an individual, and his mission somewhat, his enormous following of non-enlightened beings should call into question the efficacy of the methods he espouses. I support his traditions, however, they are incomplete which renders them ineffective.
furthermore our world has become imbalanced with too much emotional cuddling and too little honesty…especially among adults. is this imbalance not what drove you to be a debunker/dis-misinformation person?
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]I don’t know what your experience has been. Just be aware that there are lots of other experienced people who come to this forum. If you start talking a bunch of nonsense, chances are someone will call you out on it. [/QUOTE]
if i were experienced and not enlightened, nothing would matter more to me than pursuing enlightenment.
[QUOTE=Asuri;69321]If people want to act like whack-jobs and fools, I can’t stop them. What I can do is point out their foolishness, in the hope that others don’t get misled. If I make some enemies along the way, that means I’m doing something right. [/QUOTE]
at what point will you un-make them? will you, at some point, help them find their way?
let me end with this: we are not so different in our personality or our approach, only in our level of attainment. if you were to attain enlightenment and realize the truth of all teachings, you could become the ultimate debunker. or the sage-king. or a hidden guru, teaching yoga at some gym or ashram somewhere. is debunking your destiny, or do you imagine something greater, greater than you can even imagine?
-ps thanks for keeping it honest and civil. many thanks
namaste
-dale
[QUOTE=Asuri;69320]@Surya Deva
How did this thread get to be about me? I refused to let you drag me into another one of your interminable ridiculous arguments, so instead you attack me personally.[/QUOTE]
You’ve made it about you, again. I do not want to drag you into anything, you are the one that pounces on people on these forums. Nobody is dragging you into anything. You are just rude and ill mannered. It is perfecty possible for you to speak politely in your disagreements with others, but you choose not to. You pretend you are like some custordian or vanguard who is doing his duty and thus justified in being hostile and insulting.
Anyway I will call your bluff. You don’t want to argue, because you know you are full of nothing but hot air. You never really attempt to argue with anybody - even though you start it all of by pouncing on them, and you pounce on people for the slighest and smallest of disagreements.
You just pounced on future for what you say is mixing concepts from different traditions: Enlightenment from Buddhism; light body from Christianity and Kundalini from Hinduism. Are you even going to defend your generalizations here? No, because you refuse to be “dragged into an argument” Nah, rather I think, you refuse to have anything you say tested or criticized. You act like in all threads that you have the right of final say on all matters. Well, you don’t.
Enlightenment is not just a Buddhistic concept, it is also a Hindu concept. The concept of realizing ones true self or awakening from the illusion of duality is a central concept in Yoga and Vedanta, two major pillars of Hinduism. Ironically, it is a well known concept. There is also a similar concept to Enlightenment in Taoism, where enlightenment is seen as letting go and flowing with the tao. Enlightenment is also a major concept in humanistic psychology and new thought traditions.
The notion of a light body is definitely not ‘probably Christian’ the earliest references to it are found in the Upanishads, where it is referred to as the taijassa(literally meaning bright/light one). It is also known as the sukshma sharira in Samkhya and Vedanta. There is a similar concept in Buddhism too where it is called the ‘diamond body’ or the ‘rainbow body’ There are similar concepts in Neo-platonism. The new age usage of the term is derived from theosophical understandings.
Do a search for ‘light body’ or ‘subtle body’ online and you will get images of the human energy system with the standard 7 chakras and 7 colours model. This is a very common motif in modern spirituality.
It is definitely not as clear and cut as you are trying to force upon us. You think too narrow, its about time you try to broaden your mind and your understanding.
@Surya Deva
I’m usually happy to engage with reasonable people. There is nothing to be gained from arguing with someone like you. From past experience I know that you have no integrity, but are willing to take contradictory positions and bend and twist any word or concept to suit your purpose at the moment. I told you before, I don’t have any more time to waste on you.
Case in point: taijasa or subtle body. The subtle body is described in the Mandukya Upanishad as being the self in the sleeping state. In another place, it is described as consisting of several of the koshas. In Samkhya literature it is described as consisting of all of the principles that compose a man except for the gross (physical). Nowhere does the Hindu or Samkhya literature describe the subtle body as being composed of light, so the concept of a light body comes from somewhere else. Surya Deva knows this, and in the past he has unleashed his venom against the new agers who distort the Hindu teachings by taking bits and pieces of them and combining them with something else. But in this case he is willing to blur the distinction because it suits his purpose.
His sole purpose is to engage in an argument with me. He is still sore from the last beatdown I gave him and he’s looking for revenge. He believes his intelligence is so superior that he can defeat anyone in a debate. But he hasn’t learned that there’s more to life than just being a smart ass. This thread is a perfect example of his lack of integrity and childishness.
so forgive eachother.
in jiu jistu we have a saying, especially regarding men. men tend to push eachother violently, waiting for the other to move. the two generate so much pressure that it inevitably results in an explosion of force and an injury. when that happens, neither wins. one man has lost his mobility and the other has lost a training partner, and a friend.
here is the saying:
push, and move. the best strategy is to push back and side-step or reposition ourselves. we match their pressure but only long enough to redirect it, so it is not coming towards us.
in aikido, we let them fall down from their own efforts.
in jiu jitsu, we use their pressure against them and counter attack from a new angle.
in enlightenment, we invite their discourse and parry their karma, with compassion and forgiveness.
we push, then move, repositioning ourselves to a position where we are no longer in danger. in jiu jitsu the one in the strongest position wins.
what is the strongest position in the Hindi-Yogi traditions?
I’m usually happy to engage with reasonable people. There is nothing to be gained from arguing with someone like you.
Like I said, you’re full of hot air. You don’t want to argue because you know you have no valid points, just loads of hot air.
Case in point: taijasa or subtle body. The subtle body is described in the Mandukya Upanishad as being the self in the sleeping state. In another place, it is described as consisting of several of the koshas. In Samkhya literature it is described as consisting of all of the principles that compose a man except for the gross (physical). Nowhere does the Hindu or Samkhya literature describe the subtle body as being composed of light, so the concept of a light body comes from somewhere else. Surya Deva knows this, and in the past he has unleashed his venom against the new agers who distort the Hindu teachings by taking bits and pieces of them and combining them with something else. But in this case he is willing to blur the distinction because it suits his purpose.
You have just proven my point that you think in very narrow, highly compartmentalized ways, that you often miss the obvious links between ideas. The modern usage of the word "light body’ is not exactly the same as it was used in Vedic times, or Samkhya times, or Vedanta times - it is a concept that has evolved over the years and grown through assimilation of concepts from various traditions, but we all know what it generally refers to in the spiritual community:
A spiritual body made up of energy or subtle and lighter matter, which is commonly modeled as an energy system made up of chakras and meridians.
The modern ‘light body’ concept is definitely not identical to the Upanishadic concept where, but it similar enough to show to a reasonable person the same concept is being alluded to, but in the Mandukya Upanishad it is not as detailed as its modern counterparts. The Manduka Upanishad talks about states of consciousness the self goes through and gives names to the self in each state: vishva, taijasa and prajnana, each corresponding respectively to waking, dreaming and deep sleep states of consciousness. Incidentally, the dream sleep self is known as ‘taijasa’ meaning the “light one.”
Simultaneously, the Upanishad had another way of classifying the bodies with the kosha system consisting of 5 levels: physical, energetic, mental, intellectual and bliss levels.
Then later the concept was developed even more by classical Samkhya with the concept of sharira(bodies) the gross body, subtle body and causal body. Here for the first time a very systematic theory was given of the composition of the subtle body: It consists of chitta, intellect, ego, mind, sense organs and motor organs - these in turn are made of subtle matter(tanmatras) which then go onto make gross matter(bhutas) Thus it is implied thereof, that the subtle body is made of more subtle/lighter matter. (The notion of subtle matter is later taken by the Vaiseshika school of philosophy and expanded into an atomic theory)
The concept was then personified by the Puranas into the notion of lokas meaning planes of existence(which was already a concept in Vedic times, triloka) The standard model consisting of 14 planes, consisting of 7 heavens and 7 hells, each of them populated with spiritual entities and souls. These are planes where angels, gods and other entities reside - and planes where human souls could travel to during life and after life.(It is obvious the Islamic concept of heaven and hells is inspired by the puranas)
Vedanta later synthesized the Samkhya sharira system with the Upanishadic kosa and consciousness states system. The physical level and the energy level corresponded to the gross body and the waking state, the mental and intellectual body corresponded to the subtle body and the dream state, and the bliss body corresponded to the causal body and the deep sleep state. Advaita did away with the Puranic personified heavens and hells, but later other streams of Vedanta like Dvaita reintroduced them - and a new concept of heaven known as ‘Vaikuntha’
Still latter, the tantra system sought to analyse the anatomy of the gross body, consisting of the physical body and the energy body. They introduced the modern 7 or 8 chakra system, the lower chakras corresponded to the gross body and the higher chakras to the subtle body They also corresponded to the Puranic planes, each of them populated by a deity. This was based on the Tantric theory of the human body being a microcosm of the macrocosm.
In modern times the Tantra system, Vedanta system, Puranic system and Samkhya system were all assimilated by Western occultists, and synthesized with Neo-platonic, Sufi and even Shamanic corresponding ideas, to form the modern system which we find in all modern books on spirituality: physical body, emotional body, mental body, causal body. The most detailed breakdown of this is given by Annie besant in her book, “Study in consciousness” This modern system has been assimilated by almost all spiritual traditions, including Reiki, which is a modern Japaense system of healing.
It is plain and obvious to see that the same concept is being referred to, only some systems are more detailed than others and use different classifications. Even today some people prefer to use the 3-bodies(gross, physical, causal) some prefer to use the 5 levels system(physical, emotional, mental, intelellectual and bliss) some prefer to use the 7 dimensions system. Some use all of them. Another interesting modern system is using focus levels(Robert Monroe) to correspond to different planes of reality.
So I don’t have a spasm like yourself Asuri when people use terms like “light body”, “subtle body” “rainbow body”, “diamond body” “soul” “astral body” interchangabley, because I know what they are alluding to. I don’t try to them force them(again, like yourself) to use a particular term. At best that makes you look like a pedant and purist, at worst it makes you look narrow minded and too stupid to see the same concept is being referred to.
Ideas are not static things that we can define rigidly by certain parameters, they are dynamaic thing that evolve, combine with other ideas over time. As long as you know generally what they are referring to, that is good enough. Stop being an ass and shooting people down for not using the exact term you prefer, try to understand what they are trying to say. No wonder you are often misunderstanding what others are saying - you don’t even try to make an attempt to understand them.
His sole purpose is to engage in an argument with me. He is still sore from the last beatdown I gave him and he’s looking for revenge. He believes his intelligence is so superior that he can defeat anyone in a debate. But he hasn’t learned that there’s more to life than just being a smart ass. This thread is a perfect example of his lack of integrity and childishness.
You are obviously a very deluded individual. No dude, this thread does not revolve around you. My sole purpose is not to exact some kind of revenge on you(seriously, what are you smoking!) It makes no difference to me whether you post here or not. No you did not beat me down earlier, in fact you made a fool of out of yourself by starting several threads in different forums to “expose me”
You really need to get a grip man. Seriously chill, relax, stop thinking the world is out to get you. You got issues man, i’m serious.
And while were on the subject - you really need to branch out from classical Samkhya. It is called ‘classical’ for a reason. Samkhya has not been an extant school of philosophy for hundreds of years, the last major work on it was in the 16th century, and that was merely to show the philosophical community in India Samkhya was compatible with Vedanta and not antithetical to it. Samkhya was absorbed into Vedanta and its been a part of it since. Get with the times.
And no it was some conspiracy by evil brahmins suppressing Samkhya(Again, what the heck are you smoking!) The philosophy of Samkhya genuinely suffered from a lot of problems, which were challenged in formal debates in the philosophical community, and Samkhya lost out. The last ditch effort to save classical Samkhya from oblivion was by Samkhya proponents, who realized that Samkhya could be reconciled with Vedanta. Since then Samkhya has been considered an essential part of Vedanta.
I have read a lot of literature on Samkhya philosophy, both ancient and modern critiques(Larson et al) of it. It is a flawed philosophical system by itself. It only makes sense when it is explained via Vedanta. Today Samkhya has fallen out of favor with the philosophical community both in the East and the West, it is Vedanta and Yoga which reigns supreme. All modern Hindu gurus teach Vedanta(Swami Vivekananda, Aurobindo, Ramanana Maharishi etc)
The key word here is Hindu. I’m not a Hindu. You are. You’re entitled to your opinions, and so am I.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;68579]New-age Theosophical stuff. It is all derived primarily from Indian stuff. I don’t give it that much credence, because the teachings are basically the same teachings found in the Indian tradition, except watered down, exaggerated and embellished. So I just go directly to the original sources.
They don’t really help when it comes to Yoga, on the contrary they tend to confuse and complicate things.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm.
[QUOTE=FutureHumanDestiny;69366]so forgive eachother.
[/QUOTE]
Would you forgive a snarling, viscious predator, who is looking to tear you to pieces at the first opportunity, for the sheer love of the kill?
[QUOTE=Asuri;69398]Would you forgive a snarling, viscious predator, who is looking to tear you to pieces at the first opportunity, for the sheer love of the kill?[/QUOTE]
See what I mean, this guy is definitely smoking something! A gentle soul like me a snarling vicious predator out to tear Asuri into pieces for the sheer love of the kill? Now if that is not a distorted perception of reality, then I need to know what is!!! 
if your mothers were here neither of you would behave like this.
@Sd
It’s known as a metaphor.
even though you have legitimate intellectual conflict between the two of you, you each form integral components of the yogic, hindu, spiritual and human community/family/bretheren; whatever you want to call it. you two are bretheren, not enemies.
you could go to work at this argument and settle it, perhaps in a powerful way that benefits others. if you two disagree, then others will. perhaps you could reconcile different perspectives in a lasting way.
and SD all people have a distorted perception of reality: it’s maya, remember? and we deal with maya with our compassion, not “smoking something” comments.
See what I mean, this guy is definitely smoking something!
I’m getting very tired of all the defamatory statements. If I were using my real name, or if I had some business or professional interest at stake, I’d be taking taking legal action against you. But it’s just an internet forum, and nobody really cares. It just makes it unpleasant for everyone. You really are a lousy bastard.
r if I had some business or professional interest at stake, I’d be taking taking legal action against you.
Haha, that just makes me want to say it again. To use your own words, “It’s a metaphor” to say you are obviously highly deluded and distort things way out of proportion - like suggesting I am akin to a snarling predator about to tear you apart
you could go to work at this argument and settle it, perhaps in a powerful way that benefits others. if you two disagree, then others will. perhaps you could reconcile different perspectives in a lasting way.
I have done that by setting up the Samkhya vs Vedanta debate thread. If Asuri thinks his position has any strength, he can argue it in there. He has been given the opportunity to so do. I certainly will use the opportunity to show why my position has strength.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;69406]I certainly will use the opportunity to show why my position has strength.[/QUOTE]
the proof will be in it’s efficacy. are you enlightened? have you liberated others?
prove your strength with your actions first, words to follow.
until we are enlightened, we are all aspirants, together.