SD:
rest assured, if you have somebody who has earned the title of swami, you know you are in good hands.
Now what was that SD?
Your bold assertions have a knack of coming undone rather quickly don’t you think?
Well - at least you are consistent in your failures.
DO keep up the good work
Yogi Mat, your post is inappropriate, inflaming and offensive. This kind of behaviour is not allowed on the main Yoga forums. I will report further violations to the staff.
Charliedharma and pretty much everybody on this forum knows me longer than you do, they have already formed their opinions on me. They don’t need a newbie who only joined a few days ago to tell them what to think 
You really do think the world revolves around don’t you
Your every next few words in whatever you have written since you joined a few days has been an insult. You have insulted me, Neitzsche and Dwai. And now you have helped yourself to another thread to personally condemn me and tell people to put me on an ignore list as if you are some authority on this forum. And here you are calling me aggressive and a violent communicator? It is clear you project a lot.
Sorry people - I am not sure how to take SD to one side for a quiet word - can anyone suggest a better thread for this - how about “Lets have it out 1 to 1 outside”?
lol
@SD FYI: I dealt with projection about 10 years ago - save your pop psychology for someone that is need of it.
I have very right to offer my opinion as to your behaviour to other members - unlike you - I am confident that they will have already made up their own mind about you but they may not realise that it is possible to add persistent nuisances to an ignore list so I am giving this information out as a matter of etiquette and to promote the smooth operation of this website.
God Bless
I dealt with projection about 10 years ago
I am not surprised, you have a highly troubled mind. You seem to think every thread revolves around you, and yet you just got here a few days ago; you struggle in composing any post that does not contains any insult; you struggle with basic language; you hate facts.
Something tells me you need to work a bit more on projection
This will be my last post to you in this thread. Do you realise you are derailing the thread?
A better thread might be alter egos on the Yoga Forum, where people can create multiply user names and discuss topics amongst themselves?.I actually find this forum quite entertaining, fascinating and once in a while informative.
Re: Bad Swamis and flawed swamis
There are bad politicians, bad scientists, bad actors, bad fathers, bad mothers, bad sons, bad daughters, bad priests, bad Yoga forum members
Just because you can point out a few examples of bad or flawed swamis, it does not mean all swamis are bad or flawed.
@Ray I agree - that would be fun - maybe we can all club together and each sponsor SD with a screen name so that he can post to himself - I am sure he would love that as he would never be ignored or contested in his overly-paternalistic advice and shallow claims - he has since let it be known that he has a first class honours degree in philosophy - although I have yet to see it - and I certainly won’t be holding my breath on that one.
@SD: you said
rest assured, if you have somebody who has earned the title of swami, you know you are in good hands.
So it seems like you are asking us to rest assured if someone has earned the title Swami - I do not know how you wriggle out of that one - thanks for trying though - FAIL.
I put my trust in how a person behaves towards me - this is somethig you have yet to learn it seems - you cannot persuade people with violent communications and failing to takeinto account their experiences and perspectives.
This is basic human decency.
I am intersted in whether a teacher acts non-violently for example - not because they are called “Swami”.
I think most sane people do the same thing - so why not you ?
Oh - I forgot - you are SPECIAL (but perhaps not in the way you would like to be).
God Bless you SD - but please try harder to keep up.
Surya,
“To meet the title of swami you must show you have control over your senses and mind and an understanding of philosophy. This shows whether you are ready as a teacher or not”
If you are fond of this idea that all that is needed to come to one’s liberation or to be capable of teaching others is to control the mind and gather knowledge, then that is fine. But that is not my own understanding. The mind is not to be controlled, but it is to be liberated.
"You regard all teachers and masters that are not you to be lesser than you "
No, only those who have come to their awakening. I do not consider those that you have mentioned, such as Parahamsa Yogananda, or Swami Vivekananda as awakened. And I have countless reasons which I can mention as to why it is the case. But if one had spoken of people like Patanjali, Gorakshanath, Matsyendranath, Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, Gautama Buddha, Mahavira, Bodhidharma, Huang Po, Rinzai, Matsu, Hakuin, Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharishi, or Jiddu Krishnamurti, then it would have been an entirely different matter. But who is awakened and who is not is irrelevant - what is relevant is whether you yourself have come to your own awakening.
But if one had spoken of people like Patanjali, Gorakshanath, Matsyendranath, Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu, Gautama Buddha, Mahavira, Bodhidharma, Huang Po, Rinzai, Matsu, Hakuin, Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharishi, or Jiddu Krishnamurti, then it would have been an entirely different matter.
Actually, I mentioned Ramakrishna and Patanjali in previous posts, and you accused them of being liars
You do not accept the biggest and most respected masters of modern times Swami Vivekananda and swami Yogananda as awakened Yes, Amir, we have established everybody that is not you is a lesser person. Too bad that nobody shares your own inflated views about yourself.
Surya,
" Too bad that nobody shares your own inflated views about yourself."
I do not have any views of myself.
“You do not accept the biggest and most respected masters of modern times Swami Vivekananda”
To be “respected” has nothing whatsoever to do with being a master, although a master may be respected. It is not a matter of popularity, or just being impressed by anybody who appeals to your ego. If that is the case - then even Moses is enlightened because he is respected as a great master by many Jews. Even people like Alexander the Great are awakened because he has been respected by so many people, so much that he has even been given the title “The Great”.
No, I cannot accept Swami Vivekananda as awakened. He says that to be celibate is a superior way of living. Not only a superior way of living, but to be celibate is not different than being a god, and that anybody who enjoys sex is basically evil. Even to look at the opposite sex with desire is to fall into evil passions. And it is impossible for anybody who is awakened to say such a thing. Sexual desire is not something that is to be repressed, but it is to be understood. The more it is repressed is not the more it disappears, it simply shifts down into the unconscious and gathers force there. Although outwardly one may appear to be liberated, one’s liberation is very fragile. If you just take the condition of celibacy away, and it immediately comes crashing down. That is natural - because when one makes an effort to control sex, one has not gained any experience with life directly, one has been putting all kinds of safety gaurds which has kept one inexperienced. The so called “peace” of mind that is created from this is just artificial - it is a great deception. I can understand if one is using celibacy just temporarily, as a way to gather energy and focus. But as a permanent way of life - it is simply against nature. If one is truly interested in coming to more awareness, then nothing at all is to be rejected - everything is to be seen, understood, and integrated.
This is not liberation, this is control. And Swami Vevekananda for his whole life was living under the shadow of a tradition which has declared that the mind and the senses are to be controlled. He has great knowledge of tradition - but seeing the kind of things that he has said - he does not have much insight which is in tune with reality, he became far too programmed by his borrowed knowledge. The same has happened with many yogis, they were unable to see beyond the veil of their own tradition. Those who continue following Buddhism can only see things through those lenses, those who are followers of the Jain approach can only see things according to the Jain philosophy, those who are followers of Vedanta can only see things through the lenses of Vedanta, those who are Charvaka’s can only see things through the lenses of materialism - and like this you will find so many yogis who are slaves to their own tradition. Those who happen to stand alone out of their own direct experience and awareness, like Matsyendranath or Gorakshanath, are very few and far between.
“Yes, Amir, we”
Set aside plural, step inside singular.
So your point that if you are considered a master or a great that does mean you are. Your point has been duly noted. However, somebody who you consider a master, Ramakrishna, considered Vivekananda to be the incarnation of a great yogi and a great soul, and he himself bestowed the title of swami Vivekananda on him. How do you deal with this contradiction in you considering Ramakrishna a master, but not considering his disciple who he himself considered a master and a great soul, a master?
Celibacy has been called one of the greatests methods in the Upanishads of attaining spiritual energy. If you remain celibate all your life, and never spill your vital fluid anytime, that energy is then used and transmuted into higher energy and builds your immunity(ojas) and stregnthens you. I have validated this through my own personal experience when I observed celibacy. Ideally, you should remain celibate all your life, unfortunately us lesser humans, which sounds like it includes you as well, suffer from lust so we cannon maintain it.
Amir, I have a question for you. How do you know you are enligthened?
“Ideally, you should remain celibate all your life”
Then you are doing something which is unnatural. Nature has not intended for man to be celibate. This is a simple fact.
“Celibacy has been called one of the greatests methods in the Upanishads of attaining spiritual energy.”
It is just a skillful means and nothing more.
“If you remain celibate all your life, and never spill your vital fluid anytime, that energy is then used and transmuted into higher energy and builds your immunity(ojas) and stregnthens you.”
That is fine. But awakening has little to do with whether you ejaculate or not.
“unfortunately us lesser humans, which sounds like it includes you as well, suffer from lust so we cannon maintain it”
Because one does not suffer from lust, then whether one engages in sex or does not engage in sex, it makes no difference. You do not understand that liberation is just that -absolute freedom. The water cannot wet it and the fire cannot burn it. Do nothing and it is there. Do something, and it is there. Take a step forward, and it is revealed. Take a step behind and it is revealed. Travel to the East, and it is inescapable. Travel to the West, and it is inescapable.
“Amir, I have a question for you. How do you know you are enligthened?”
Seven pebbles in a pond.
If you remain celibate all your life, and never spill your vital fluid anytime, that energy is then used and transmuted into higher energy and builds your immunity(ojas) and stregnthens you."
That is fine. But awakening has little to do with whether you ejaculate or not.
I think I agree with you, these words enlightenment/awakening are indeed meaningless. How is one person who has practiced celibacy to cultivate their spiritual energy and a person who practices yoga to do the same, different? Different paths to the same goal. I am going to assume celibacy soon when I start my sadhana - after all I need my spiritual energy for my sadhana.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;56936]“Amir, I have a question for you. How do you know you are enligthened?”
Seven pebbles in a pond.[/QUOTE]
You have not answered my question, but given me somebody elses answer. I will answer you again: How do you know you are enlightened? I suspect your usage of the word is meaningless. You have done a bit of sadhana, ended it prematurely, and declared you have reached the goal.
To say you have reached the goal is ending your spiritual development. Even Seeker claims to have already reached self-realization
“but given me somebody elses answer”
That is my response, and it is not an answer.
“I will answer you again: How do you know you are enlightened?”
The wheel turns, mountains crumble.
“and declared you have reached the goal.”
I have never declared that I have reached the goal, because enlightenment is not an end, nor is it a means to an end. Surrendering into the birthless, there is not even a single hook to grasp onto. When one can see with penetrating clarity into things as they are, there is no goal to attain to, existence itself is without a target in sight. Vast and immeasurable, there is nowhere to fix your eyes upon. Although - to set a goal in ones mind may be useful for the meantime.
“I am going to assume celibacy soon when I start my sadhana - after all I need my spiritual energy for my sadhana.”
: )
The wheel turns, mountains crumble.
I eat my bowl of cornflakes
Basically, what your rather vague replies are saying is that you do ordinary things and can note ordinary things, like six pebbles in a pond, a turning wheel and a moutain. So can a 5 year old. How does that make you enlightened? You can do things that 99.9% of us can do.
In the other thread you told me you get thousands of thoughts a day and even revealed an attachments to thoughts. How are you different to us mere mortals? Nothing appears to be differenct? Like us mere mortals you also indulge in pointless debates on the internet.
From what I can gather I think you just say you are enlightened, because you say you are Fine, you can believe that if you want. But then to go around telling everybody else they are asleep and unconscious is not on dear. You’re just as asleep and unconcious and ordinary as we all are. You’re not any better. To claim you are just makes you look like a fool.
“what your rather vague replies are saying is that you do ordinary things and can note ordinary things”
No, it has nothing to do with ordinary things either. Not raising a finger for or against, when there is not even a trace of entanglement in ones intellect - what will you call this ?
“So can a 5 year old.”
It is not really the case. A five year old, although living in a field which is far more natural and spotnaneous than the average person, is far too entangled in his conditioning to be capable of being mindful in the moment. Perhaps there are rare glimpses, but those glimpses are just accidental. Otherwise, he is ignorant of himself. That is why the expansion of consciousness has nothing to do with something which many fanatics have been declaring, of becoming a child again. Certainly you can be born again, a revelation can happen which shatters the past to its foundation- but it has nothing to do with being a child, which is just a state of stagnation.
“How does that make you enlightened? You can do things that 99.9% of us can do”
Do not take it for granted that most people can do things which appear to be outwardly very ordinary. When walking, you are not really walking. When sitting, you are not really sitting. When eating, you are not really eating. If one just observes ones mind, not for a moment or two, but as an ongoing stream of meditation - then one will witness just how many times in twenty four hours ones mind is entangled in imagination. Though that cannot be done through just concentration or controlling the mind, because concentration means to focus ones mind upon a single object. And so far, I have not heard you speak of anything else except control and concentration.
Though most people move their legs - they do not walk. Though light is entering into the eyes, they do not see. Rare, as rare as finding a pearl in the desert, is one who sees what one sees and hears what one hears.
“In the other thread you told me you get thousands of thoughts a day and even revealed an attachments to thoughts.”
In the other thread the intention was simply to bring it to your awareness that thoughts or no-thoughts, a silent mind is a silent mind. If just a single ripple of thought can disturb your silence, it is not the true silence. It is not that thoughts or impressions are arising, that ones silence is being disturbed, it is just that the moment the mind becomes identified with them - then ones clarity becomes clouded, ones vision becomes distorted. If one had known anything of meditation - then one would already know this. Since you are fond of Patanjali, Patanjali has said that this is one of the greatest psychological hindrances - to have either attraction towards or aversion from. If you consider Patanjali an authority, you should see into what he means. What he is indicating is that the moment the mind becomes prejudiced towards whatever arises in ones field of experience including thought, ones perception becomes disillusioned.
“How are you different to us mere mortals?”
I know that it has been fashionable to try and be humble through calling oneself a mere mortal - but it just shows how identified one is with either ones mind or body.