Eternity Yoga
“Yoga’s purpose is to bring unity”
Unity with what or whom?
Gori,
“Unity with what or whom?”
Your original nature. Inexpressible beyond the inexpressible, raise a word about it, and one immediately falls into a web of delusion. Seeing into moon, even this finger is cast aside.
Anand,
" Regarding atman, I found the treatise “The Doctrine of Karma” by Swami Abhedanand very useful."
That is nice, but reading a book is not a verification that such an Atman exists. There are thousands upon thousands of different ideas and belief systems, if every time somebody comes along and tells you that he has discovered the Truth, and all belief systems believe they have come to the Truth, and you believe it - then you are opening doors to all kinds of confusion. Just because somebody whom you may have trust in says that there is an Atman, that does not mean there is. He could be hallucinating, or he could be inventing a good story to deceive you, how do you know ? And of course, anything which is very satisfying for your ego - you are willing to accept without hesitation. It gives great comfort to believe that there is an Atman within yourself. But believing and comfort will not help. Either you explore into the innermost depths of your being and discover if there is anything at all within you which is beyond birth and death, or you continue seeking without drawing any conclusions.
" it can be the ultimate experience for two souls to become one."
For two " souls " to become one is impossible, you are already in such a way - that nothing can be added or subtracted from your being. From the very source, to your expression as a mind and body - nothing more is needed. That is how nature is, it never creates anything without it already being well equipped in itself. And if you truly know yourself, then it is impossible for another human being to make you more “complete” - you already know that as you are - nothing at all is lacking.
Using sex as a means towards ones enlightenment is nothing mystical or otherworldly, nor are any souls involved. It is just a scientific method. The male and female have subtle energies in their bodies which are complimentary to one another, and, through certain techniques, if you know how to channel the energies of the other into your own body, and raise it along the spinal cord towards the top part of the brain, then it is possible to enter into samadhi.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62953]parnoramix,
Everything I have been saying arises out of my own direct experience. If I happen to use other knowledge in conversation, then it is just as a means to point towards something else entirely. Even while writing this message - I have to use the knowledge of the English language in order to communicate.
If you mean by enlightenment the transformation that arises out of a direct perception into your own true nature, then it had taken me six years of tremendous effort and discipline in the yogic sciences to come to my awakening. Since then I have remained in a state of bliss for almost twenty four hours. But I do not see how any of this is relevant, as far as your own being is concerned, whether another is awake or not, does not bring you even an inch closer to Truth. I could simply be inventing all of this, hoping that you are gullible. You do not know. Or, I could simply be delusional. So the matter of my own awakening is more or less meaningless.[/QUOTE]
Dear Friend:
The last line in your above post, may have the answer to the question you addressed to me as to whether I speak from my own experience.
You also answer your own question when you propose that the listener may not believe that it is from your own experiences or you yourself may be trying to deceive others into believing your attainments.
Moreover I think it is best for one’s Guru to decide and declare whether one is spiritually dormant/ awakened/ in the process of awakening/ in the process of self-purification for becoming worthy of Guru’s Grace.
I said earlier that I would not prefer to refer to my experiences since these are a matter between the aspirant and Guru alone. However, I am permitted to admit that whatever experiences I have had are not contrary to the texts and scriptures from which I have quoted and in fact run in their support.
regards, anand
Anand,
“I said earlier that I would not prefer to refer to my experiences since these are a matter between the aspirant and Guru alone”
Seeing the things that you have written, as well as your very clinging to your borrowed knowledge, whatever experiences you may have had are just like illusory flowers in the air.
“Moreover I think it is best for one’s Guru to decide and declare whether one is spiritually dormant/ awakened/ in the process of awakening/ in the process of self-purification for becoming worthy of Guru’s Grace.”
That depends on whom your so called “guru” is. That one is a “guru” does not mean anything at all. The very fact that you are putting unquestioning faith into the guru is itself a great hindrance, because even amongst “gurus”, there are as many different ideas, belief systems, and philosophies as one can imagine - some being diametrically opposite to one another. If your master is a Buddhist - he will have a Buddhist understanding. If your master is a Hindu - he will have a Hindu understanding. If he is a Jain, his understanding will be from the Jaina philosophy. And Truth is neither Buddhist, nor Hindu, nor Jain, nor Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. So while those who are considered “masters” are as common as hair, those who are truly masters - who have moved beyond all belief systems, tradition, and philosophies - are as few as horns.
The moment you set aside your inquiring mind - you open doors to countless delusions. Even the “guru” is to be questioned - nothing should be accepted just simply on the basis of blind faith. There is certainly a point in which great trust happens - but that is none other than surrender itself which is choiceless.
“However, I am permitted to admit that whatever experiences I have had are not contrary to the texts and scriptures from which I have quoted and in fact run in their support.”
I am certain you would like to believe this is the case. Every follower of every tradition wants to feel as though their knowledge has a certain ancient seal of approval - particularly if it is approved by God. This seal of approval provides great confidence and security. And many scriptures have gone out of their way, the Vedas included, to declare that their scripture is a revelation from God. But with or without God’s approval, this is not a unique situation.
Amir,
Do you think your knowledge is original? I visited your website; you are also living on this borrowed knowledge by selling them and I think you are doing this as your full time job. You need to think twice before you start commenting on others. You are here to show that you are enlightened by denying others are not having true knowledge.
Your website is full of borrowed hodge-podge nonsense. By saying others are not experienced, you do not become experienced. If this is the way you plan to popularize your shunya-yoga all will shun it and it will become shun-yoga.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;63089]Anand,
“I said earlier that I would not prefer to refer to my experiences since these are a matter between the aspirant and Guru alone”
Seeing the things that you have written, as well as your very clinging to your borrowed knowledge, whatever experiences you may have had are just like illusory flowers in the air.
“Moreover I think it is best for one’s Guru to decide and declare whether one is spiritually dormant/ awakened/ in the process of awakening/ in the process of self-purification for becoming worthy of Guru’s Grace.”
That depends on whom your so called “guru” is. That one is a “guru” does not mean anything at all. The very fact that you are putting unquestioning faith into the guru is itself a great hindrance, because even amongst “gurus”, there are as many different ideas, belief systems, and philosophies as one can imagine - some being diametrically opposite to one another. If your master is a Buddhist - he will have a Buddhist understanding. If your master is a Hindu - he will have a Hindu understanding. If he is a Jain, his understanding will be from the Jaina philosophy. And Truth is neither Buddhist, nor Hindu, nor Jain, nor Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. So while those who are considered “masters” are as common as hair, those who are truly masters - who have moved beyond all belief systems, tradition, and philosophies - are as few as horns.
The moment you set aside your inquiring mind - you open doors to countless delusions. Even the “guru” is to be questioned - nothing should be accepted just simply on the basis of blind faith. There is certainly a point in which great trust happens - but that is none other than surrender itself which is choiceless.
“However, I am permitted to admit that whatever experiences I have had are not contrary to the texts and scriptures from which I have quoted and in fact run in their support.”
I am certain you would like to believe this is the case. Every follower of every tradition wants to feel as though their knowledge has a certain ancient seal of approval - particularly if it is approved by God. This seal of approval provides great confidence and security. And many scriptures have gone out of their way, the Vedas included, to declare that their scripture is a revelation from God. But with or without God’s approval, this is not a unique situation.[/QUOTE]
Dear friend:
i fail to understand why you are insisting on being judgmental.
regards, anand
[QUOTE=Sahasrara;63092]Amir,
Do you think your knowledge is original? I visited your website; you are also living on this borrowed knowledge by selling them and I think you are doing this as your full time job. You need to think twice before you start commenting on others. You are here to show that you are enlightened by denying others are not having true knowledge.
Your website is full of borrowed hodge-podge nonsense. By saying others are not experienced, you do not become experienced. If this is the way you plan to popularize your shunya-yoga all will shun it and it will become shun-yoga.[/QUOTE]
Well said, sahasrara! 
its just a plain no!
Ashwin
The art of living Foundation
Sahasrara,
“Do you think your knowledge is original?”
No, knowledge is never original. It is not a question of knowledge, but of direct experience. And if the Truth is one, then it leaves no room for your creative interpretations - which are just your own projections of the mind. Useful, but it does not matter how brilliant your intelligence - the very nature of language is such that it is incapable of transmitting Truth.
"You need to think twice before you start commenting on others. "
I rarely think twice about anything. I just respond spontaneously as to whatever is required in the moment.
“You are here to show that you are enlightened by denying others are not having true knowledge”
That is not my purpose. It is my intention to provoke. Because it is only out being provoked that there is a possibility of heightening ones understanding. When I witness one who has come to a direct experience of the matter - I recognize him immediately, it is something which is as clear as day light. Anand is speaking of things which do not arise out of his own direct experience, and unless one first sets aside everything that one has assumed - and enters into the search for Truth as an empty slate - with a beginners mind which is fresh and open, then what is closer to oneself than one’s own breath is projected dimensions apart. Unless such a sincere and authentic desire is awakened - then all of this interest in yoga is just another method to nourish one’s ego. The reason why most who are interested in the very idea of enlightenment never come to its realization is not because one does not have any intelligence, or some kind of special talent- it is simply that one has not awakened a sincere desire to come to know oneself.
The greatest obstacle in coming to more awareness is the failure to recognize one’s ignorance, and one can continue gathering libraries of knowledge into one’s mind - but it is not going to transmit even a drop of transformation. Transformation has nothing to do with knowledge, it is a state of being. When I disagree with others, it has nothing at all to do with the words, and everything to do with the space from which the words are arising.
“Your website is full of borrowed hodge-podge nonsense”
Then my message is not for you.
;;.
“By saying others are not experienced, you do not become experienced.”
If others are not experienced, and one simply says it, then there should be no problem accepting the situation as it is.
Once, a professor came to see a Zen master to inquire on Zen. The master served tea. He poured, poured, and then kept on pouring till the cup was overflowing.
“Stop! Stop! No more will enter !” said the professor.
The master said, "Like this tea cup, you are filled with all kinds of assumptions, beliefs, and conclusions. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup ?
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;63189]Sahasrara,
“Do you think your knowledge is original?”
No, knowledge is never original. It is not a question of knowledge, but of direct experience. And if the Truth is one, then it leaves no room for your creative interpretations - which are just your own projections of the mind. Useful, but it does not matter how brilliant your intelligence - the very nature of language is such that it is incapable of transmitting Truth.
"You need to think twice before you start commenting on others. "
I rarely think twice about anything. I just respond spontaneously as to whatever is required in the moment.
“You are here to show that you are enlightened by denying others are not having true knowledge”
That is not my purpose. It is my intention to provoke. Because it is only out being provoked that there is a possibility of heightening ones understanding. When I witness one who has come to a direct experience of the matter - I recognize him immediately, it is something which is as clear as day light. Anand is speaking of things which do not arise out of his own direct experience, and unless one first sets aside everything that one has assumed - and enters into the search for Truth as an empty slate - with a beginners mind which is fresh and open, then what is closer to oneself than one’s own breath is projected dimensions apart. Unless such a sincere and authentic desire is awakened - then all of this interest in yoga is just another method to nourish one’s ego. The reason why most who are interested in the very idea of enlightenment never come to its realization is not because one does not have any intelligence, or some kind of special talent- it is simply that one has not awakened a sincere desire to come to know oneself.
The greatest obstacle in coming to more awareness is the failure to recognize one’s ignorance, and one can continue gathering libraries of knowledge into one’s mind - but it is not going to transmit even a drop of transformation. Transformation has nothing to do with knowledge, it is a state of being. When I disagree with others, it has nothing at all to do with the words, and everything to do with the space from which the words are arising.
“Your website is full of borrowed hodge-podge nonsense”
Then my message is not for you.[/QUOTE]
Dear Friend:
Again you are being judgmental when you say
When I witness one who has come to a direct experience of the matter - I recognize him immediately, it is something which is as clear as day light
Those not knowing you, may not believe this. This is the reason why, instead of quoting from experience, it is better to refer to authentic texts.
Further, isn’t it dangerous when you say
I rarely think twice about anything. I just respond spontaneously as to whatever is required in the moment.
Unless of course if it is [I][B]Shakti Herself[/B][/I] talking through you. Again those who do not know you will not believe.
Lastly, don’t you think that the “borrowed knowledge” you refer to may in fact be the road map to the destination? No harm in referring to it, unless one is a spiritual adventurer/ nomad/ explorer akin to someone who wanted to reach India, but landed up in America.
This too is OK. I think, the only problem with being a spiritual wanderer is that this life is too short to risk its span this way. One may wake up into strange subtle spheres having to spend unnecessary time there.
regards, anand
Anand,
“This is the reason why, instead of quoting from experience, it is better to refer to authentic texts.”
What one considers as “authentic” or “inauthentic” texts, are just your own prejudices and identifications. You are speaking as though there is some kind of absolute category as to what is “authentic” and what is not. Certainly, for the dogmatic Buddhists who do not accept the Vedas as authority - the Vedas is not an “authentic” texts. For the dogmatic Brahmins who have rejected Buddhism - there can be no higher authority or authenticity than the Vedas. For certain schools of Tantra - they have their own opinions as to what scriptures are authentic, certainly, like all of the other schools - the Advaitists, the Samkhya schools, Shaivism, Skatism, the Charvakas, anything which supports their philosophy is authentic. And if you are following a guru who belongs to any particular tradition - he too has his own ideas as to what is authentic and what is not. These are all just the relative likes and dislikes of the mind, projecting themselves all over the place.
Enlightenment does not require any scriptures, beliefs, or philosophies - all that is needed is to come to know yourself. And in knowing yourself - there is no philosophy that is to be gained out of it - only freedom which is beyond measure. Because all philosophies, are just an attempt to destroy the mystery of existence which is inexpressible.
“Lastly, don’t you think that the “borrowed knowledge” you refer to may in fact be the road map to the destination?”
Yes, I agree. It can be. Even if what one is believing is false, that does not matter. In coming to ones awakening, Truth is irrelevant. What is relevant - is any strategy that leads you towards your awakening. If you, temporarily, have a certain belief which triggers an attitude in you which is useful towards your transformation - then such a belief can be used as a skillful means. The same is the case with any knowledge. But it is not because of the knowledge itself - what is far more of a force for ones expansion is ones inner attitude towards it. Depending on ones inner attitude, the same knowledge can be used in countless different ways. So - it is my own understanding, that there is something far more essential in the spiritual process than ones knowledge, although knowledge can certainly help.
“No harm in referring to it, unless one is a spiritual adventurer/ nomad/ explorer akin to someone who wanted to reach India, but landed up in America.”
Yes, but the problem is that if you have different maps - all telling you that they know where to go, and yet they are all pointing in different directions, then it may be far more useful just to accept whatever they have said just as a hypothesis and nothing more. One will have to investigate on ones own. If, by chance, one happens to come across a few things which were indicated on the map - then certain things can be verified - but not before.
“I think, the only problem with being a spiritual wanderer is that this life is too short to risk its span this way.”
Whether one is knowledgeable or not, if one is basically asleep - then one is wandering in darkness. And no amount of knowledge can bring light to ones eyes, one can only learn of how to open ones eyes. Wandering in darkness is always a risk - even if you are tremendously intelligent. In fact - because one may be tremendously intelligent - it is possible that even one can become deceived by too much intelligence. The spiritual process is a dangerous one, it is the most dangerous undertaking a human being can become involved in. Because what it means essentially - is a complete collapse of the whole dream world which the ego has been clinging to for its survival.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62950]Anand,
“Again I say, I am just a small person”
Drop this attachment to being a personality, whether small or otherwise. To think of yourself as a “small” person is just as egoistic as it’s opposite - in both cases one has remained clinging to a self-image.
"I still need a lot of “borrowed knowledge”.
To use such borrowed knowledge as an instrument is one thing, but the moment you become entangled in it - it becomes something dogmatic, you cannot see anything beyond it. And there may be many things in your borrowed knowledge which have no roots in reality, but you have already accepted them without question. Something like an Atman (self) - how do you know that there is such a thing to be found anywhere in your being ? You have accepted it simply because you have heard others talking about it, and it gives you comfort and security to believe that there is such an Atman in your being. Like this - one has accepted far too many things blindly. When this is done, we usually call that person a believer. Or - if you happen to think of something intensely and jump to conclusions - then we call this person a thinker. But neither thinking or believing is an attitude of one who is sincerely interested in the search for Truth. Because to be a seeker means just that - that you have come to recognize your ignorance and you are inquiring into things as an empty slate, trying to see things as they are out of your own intelligence.[/QUOTE]
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Amir i wud like to point out that Anand may not be much conscious about starting to tread the path of truth by the “empty slate” method as u call it but i think he is much conscious about himself of being a “small person” in field of spirituality and that is much better because of this acceptence as it would open ways for him to drop ideas of ignorance and things that he was previously clinging thereby making him bit more awakened and aware of subtle things.
Unless a person is not aware of his shortcomings and his illusions that he was living and thinking it to be real all his life till then he would never think of knowing “The truth of life.” And for him to know it the “borrowed knowledge” as you call it comes to rescue. You cant walk the path of wisdom unless you “believe” what has been said before wrt it. For ex. If a teacher of geometry draws a line on a blackboard then a student has two options either believe him or shun him away saying the thing you have drawn on the blackboard is not a line (because if you look closely and more at a microscopic level to the line he drew and how much thin he may draw it will still be not a line but a rectangular block always) So it applies for everyone to beleive at the initial level to the “borrowed knowledge without question” and as time would pass people knows how to differentiate between a line and rectangular block. So amir you can’t say to people here to inquire about things as empty slate because till the foundation is not strongly build by beleiving thinking and reasoning till then inquiring things as an empty slate would just lead people astray.
As you said truth will prevail “when you come to recognize ur ignorance”…but it will come when you accept you are ignorant and a “small person” as anand said but it will not mean it will feed the egoist mentality of the person as you think but rather loosen a bit the clutch of egoism in a person.
And as you lastly said that truth will be known when you inquire things as an empty slate trying to see things as they are out of your own intelligence…but i would add and bit correct that if a person is inquiring thing as an empty slate then the inclusion of “intelligence” there would do no good…it would mean you are still imposing your own perspective in inquiring the truth,so i would say that inquire thing as an empty slate and at that moment be the seer as if you don’t exist at all nor your intelligence nor your perspective just the untouched untainted seer the witness with no objective and at that moment the thing that will be inscribed on the plate…well which was never empty before (well you cant be an empty slate before the dawn of wisdom Amir) will become “empty” on its own accord and truth shall prevail.
So i would say amir “borrowed knowledge” is must as a stepping stone which tends to be the initial knowledge in the quest and a sincere seeker of it will surely get it without blind faith as a sincere seeker wanting to earn a masters degree knows the right path and right knowledge to get it.
Spirit175,
“For ex. If a teacher of geometry draws a line on a blackboard then a student has two options either believe him or shun him away”
Or, if you have a sincere desire to learn, will have neither attraction or aversion.
“And for him to know it the “borrowed knowledge” as you call it comes to rescue.”
There is nothing to be rescued from. And I have never said that borrowed knowledge is a problem, I have said that clinging to ones borrowed knowledge is a problem. The difference between the two is tremendous. In one case, it functions as an instrument, at tool towards transformation. In the other case, it functions as something dogmatic - you cannot see anything else beyond it. And I want to make this very clear - that the methods of yoga have nothing, absolutely nothing to do with investigating into the outer world, and everything to do with coming to know yourself. No philosophy is needed for that, no belief system is needed, all that is needed is to observe yourself as you are. This is what a scientific approach is - you will have to enter into the laboratory and observe things as they are in order to understand them. But first - to observe things as they are, you must learn how to observe without attraction or aversion, without attachment. And in the beginning you will have many attachments and entanglements, but they are to be understood through the light of your own awareness.
“So amir you can’t say to people here to inquire about things as empty slate because till the foundation is not strongly build by beleiving thinking and reasoning”
Your reasoning should arise out of your own intelligence, not out of blindly following what somebody else says. You are already assuming that the disciple is an idiot - that he does not have already the necessary intelligence to inquire on his own. If that is the case - then I assure you - the very first masters who had no teachers and no scriptures, could not have come to their realizations. Some outside assistance is useful, but it is not a substitute for your own intelligence. The problem is that the moment you start clinging to any tradition, belief system, or philosophy - you sacrifice your own intelligence, you have become prejudiced. And because every tradition has been supporting only its own belief systems and philosophies - of course, traditions will want to re-enforce certain conclusions which they have already come to. Buddhists will want you to think like a Buddhist, Hindus will want you to think like a Hindu, Jains will want you to think like a Jain, Christians will want you to think like a Christian, Jews will want you to think like a Jew, and if you do not have your own inner wisdom as a guiding light - it can become all too easy to become entangled in tradition. I am not saying that the knowledge of tradition cannot be useful, I am simply saying that all knowledge - without coming to direct experience, should only be accepted as a hypothesis and nothing more. Does one understand the difference between a hypothesis and a conclusion ? A hypothesis means that you have some knowledge, but that you have not come to a conclusion. The knowledge that you may be exposed to needs to be verified. It could be right, it could be wrong - but if you are asleep, then you dont know. When asleep - the most dangerous thing to do is to come across just about anything and declare “this is it!”. Even if it is true, it is still dangerous. Because even a truth becomes a lie for one who has not come to its realization, and even a lie becomes a truth for one who has realized it.
There is a very good reason why out of thousands of people who have been treading the spiritual path with tremendous discipline and effort, only once in a while, very rarely does one come to ones awakening. If the spiritual traditions were dependent upon the awakened ones for their survival, then they would have all disappeared by now.
“So i would say amir “borrowed knowledge” is must as a stepping stone”
Yes, you are right. I have never said otherwise.
…
Well Amir clinging to the borrowed knowledge is not a problem at all as using it as a tool of transformation. This clinging for some people like someone who is more of a emotional and acceptance kind would lead him or her to transformation as is the case in bhakti yoga. There are different kind of mentality of a person and so different kind of paths follow. And its nowhere dogmatic in this case and its good for them if they can’t see anything beyond it. So you can’t relate people on the single base of using intelligence and the unattached seer to reach the truth. Some people are more of emotionally type than mentally type so clinging blindly to borrowed knowledge is best suited for them as for them other things hold no perspective.
And i would correct you that yoga has “everything to deal with outer world” as with the inner journey. Either you move out to nature and see the oneness in every sphere the truth that being conveyed by a simple ant the truth that the flower conveys when it blossoms or anything or move to the inner depth of oneness that is everywhere. You can’t say outer world means nothing in yoga or else the very defination of yoga is shaken,yoga deals with both world at once not one world specially.
Well truth is not a laboratory kind of thing it is much on a conscious level and this conscious is formed by beleif system and it may be anything and depend on the innate nature of individual which remains unchanged till the end of his realization and still remains otherwise all realized people will act and speak in the same way but thats not the case. So this innate nature compell a person to identify with a particular sect you may call religion and in that he is not imposing any beliefs on him as you say but rather identifying his way to reach his goal and in turn experiencing direct perception in his very identity.
Well if someone is relying on his intelligence alone in this era with no discriminating power to reach the truth then to call them as you say “idiot” is good for them as it will open there eyes that intelligence has nothing to do with truth rather nothing has to do anything with truth. The thing to do with truth is “yourself” where intelligence and its company subsides and when you look thing unattached and as a witness i think there’s no intelligence involved as it would taint and shake the very clear perspective of the soul. Intelligence has nothing to do with truth and if you think that i m wrong than you better rethink. And as for the very first masters on the earth plane they would too agree.
And i agree that at the advanced level you are right of what you say but the foundation can’t be applied on this thing alone as its a cumulative process.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;62979]Anand,
" Regarding atman, I found the treatise “The Doctrine of Karma” by Swami Abhedanand very useful."
That is nice, but reading a book is not a verification that such an Atman exists. There are thousands upon thousands of different ideas and belief systems, if every time somebody comes along and tells you that he has discovered the Truth, and all belief systems believe they have come to the Truth, and you believe it - then you are opening doors to all kinds of confusion. Just because somebody whom you may have trust in says that there is an Atman, that does not mean there is. He could be hallucinating, or he could be inventing a good story to deceive you, how do you know ? And of course, anything which is very satisfying for your ego - you are willing to accept without hesitation. It gives great comfort to believe that there is an Atman within yourself. But believing and comfort will not help. Either you explore into the innermost depths of your being and discover if there is anything at all within you which is beyond birth and death, or you continue seeking without drawing any conclusions.[/QUOTE]
Dear Friend:
Pl read it first, then comment. Here it is:
regards, anand