Patanjali's Non Dual Yoga

@Suhas Tambe

My view is that, if purusas are many, there must be something to distinguish one from another. If we accept that purusa is fundamentally different from material nature, then they cannot be distinguished on the basis of any material characteristic. But we have the idea that there are some purusas who have become established in their true nature and others who have not. It does not seem reasonable that an individual purusa would go through eons of evolution, only to lose his individuality in the end. There are several arguments for the individuality of the purusa. I will leave you with just one. If the purusa is one, then if one attains kaivalya, then all must attain kaivalya, because the purusa cannot be both free and bound.

Suhas thank you. That point makes sense, and is explained very nicely.

Please understand, I’m not promoting my “brand” of yoga. I think the branding of yoga is not necessary, as all yoga is yoga.

Possibly its the influence of reading Vasistha’s Yoga too often, that has led me to interpret Patanjali’s Yoga sutras as a method for a seemingly individualized aspect of One Thing, to realize there is and always has been one thing, and that the One Thing temporarily identifies with seeming limited points within itself for the sport of the game. And that the words of Prakriti and Purusha, Gunas, etc. were there to give the mind something to do, while the consciousness woke up from the dream and remembered itself.

Since it was the application of Patanjali’s Methods that then led me to the appreciation and understanding of Vasistha’s message, it appeared in my experience, that one can prepare for the next phase. Hence, they are both on the same circle or the continuum.

Ino, thank you for your input. I appreciate it.

I remember my teacher one time said to me that the point of the Yoga Sutras was for the aspirant to contemplate it and explore it internally so the aspirant could realize his/her own experience of what the Sutras mean.

Please, excuse me to bow out of this conversation. At least in regards to my contribution it seems to have hit a point that would no longer serve any use in continuing.