But its things like that. Calling it a low end argument. No such thing. Argument is an argument.
Interpretation is only empty if it yields no fruit. I often learn spiritual truth from mundane everyday activities. But yes. Their must be balance. Know the text. Learn the meaning of the text. Gain insight. But! Insight itself when subjective is nothing but personal interpretation no? As long as it yields fruit!
This is why the saying, “their is a fine line between gentian and insanity” is true. Because the subjective reality is a slippery slope.
Actually no. Insight comes from seeing the reality of a thing as it really is. Remember the crystal or mirror that is the reflection of reality? Interpretation of the sort we are talking about here is coloring the crystal, preventing us from seeing the true reflection. Many people have tried to give their own ideas credibility by interpreting the yoga sutras in a way that supports them. I am opposed to this.
Ultimately though, we are all speaking from ignorance. The discussion is about what do the sutras really say, as opposed to what is the true nature of reality. If any of us really knew the answer, chances are we wouldn’t be having this argument.
The world according to the Svetasvetara Upanishad may be a truer reflection of reality than what we find in the yoga sutras. What I’m saying is, don’t get them mixed up.
[QUOTE=Avatar186;75515]
This is why the saying, “their is a fine line between gentian and insanity” is true. Because the subjective reality is a slippery slope.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm. I never heard that one. As far as I can find out, gentian is a plant.
I would like to you remind you, you are the only one on this forum who has been officially banned for 3 months for making personal attacks where you called a Hindu member on this forum, “a cow pissing drinking dot head” Since your return, you have made more personal attacks and now you are on your last warning, and if you receive another you will be permanently banned.
Try being “mildly critical” with me again and face the consequences.
David never takes sides, I know because he does not act upon all of my reported posts. He acts only one posts where he finds in his judgement the rules have been breached. I have no control over his judgement. If the moderator of this forum thinks you are in breach of his rules then you probably are, and it is probably not “mild”
I think you are one of the most disrespectful members I have ever seen on a discussion forum. How you openly and defiantly criticize the administration and its judgements, and despite receiving warnings and bans mock it. On any other forum you would have been banned a long time ago. You are lucky David is very fair and tolerant.
Surya Deva is well aware that I have in-depth knowledge of Samkhya-Yoga philosophy, and in fact that my knowledge surpasses his own, yet he attempts to create the false impression that I lack basic scholarship.
Out of you and me, I am the one who has a formal professional academic qualification in the subject of philosophy and a formal dissertation in Samkhya-Yoga. You can shout as much as you want on how superior your knowledge is here, but it is a clear fact that in the professional academic world I would be considered the one who is actually qualified.
Your knowledge of Samkhya-Yoga is amateur, it is not based on actual reading of the scholarship and literature on the subject. None of your essays and works have gone through any peer-review(mine have, and I have been awarded with distinction) You were not even aware of the foremost scholar Gerald Larson until I pointed him out.
Many of the statements you have made about Samkhya-Yoga contain obviously gaps in understanding and is the result of poor and uncritical reading.
I don’t consider you an equal to debate with. You are in a position to learn from me on Samkhya-Yoga philosophy, not to debate with me. I am the closest to an expert this forum has on Samkhya-Yoga philosophy, and if there is anybody here who has higher qualifications than me on this subject, I will have no problem conceding to them. There is actually one member who has written a book on AI and Vedanta, who consulted with me on this forum as a part of this research for his book and he returned recently and mentioned me directly.
I grow tired of your utter disrespect for my scholarship in the subject of Samkhya-Yoga, but I don’t have to worry because I am actually formally recognized as qualified in this area, and you are not. Shout and kick all you want.
On the Yoga Sutras:
For me it is a no-brainer what it means. Having read now several dozens of translations of the Yoga Sutras and scrutinized the Sanskrit and cross-referenced with other philosophical texts in the subject and several dozen commentaries. The scholarship on Yoga philosophy is not in the dark as Asuri here seems to be suggesting.
Asuri seems to like creating controversy where there is none. For example, his made up conspiracy theory that the Hindus actively suppressed Samkhya. I still have no idea where on Earth he got this idea from. Who has suggested this? Which scholar? Any names? Come on Asuri, what are your references? Whoever has said this seems to have no idea Samkhya is Hindu itself. None of the scholarship I have read consider Samkhya to be a non-Hindu philosophy.
In fact why not reference scholarly resources directly:
The compound “Hindu philosophy” is ambiguous. Minimally it stands for a tradition of Indian philosophical thinking. However, it could be interpreted as designating one comprehensive philosophical doctrine, shared by all Hindu thinkers. The term “Hindu philosophy” is often used loosely in this philosophical or doctrinal sense, but this usage is misleading. There is no single, comprehensive philosophical doctrine shared by all Hindus that distinguishes their view from contrary philosophical views associated with other Indian religious movements such as Buddhism or Jainism on issues of epistemology, metaphysics, logic, ethics or cosmology. Hence, historians of Indian philosophy typically understand the term “Hindu philosophy” as standing for the collection of philosophical views that share a textual connection to certain core Hindu religious texts (the Vedas), and they do not identify “Hindu philosophy” with a particular comprehensive philosophical doctrine.
Hindu philosophy, thus understood, not only includes the philosophical doctrines present in Hindu texts of primary and secondary religious importance, but also the systematic philosophies of the Hindu schools: Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Pūrvamīmāṃsā and Vedānta. In total, Hindu philosophy has made a sizable contribution to the history of Indian philosophy and its role has been far from static: Hindu philosophy was influenced by Buddhist and Jain philosophies, and in turn Hindu philosophy influenced Buddhist philosophy in India in its later stages. In recent times, Hindu philosophy evolved into what some scholars call “Neo-Hinduism,” which can be understood as an Indian response to the perceived sectarianism and scientism of the West. Hindu philosophy thus has a long history, stretching back from the second millennia B.C.E. to the present.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/hindu-ph/
I have emboldened the relevant text for this discussion. I have already stated this in previous posts here, but as Asuri disrespects anything I state, I have had to post what an actual fully qualified real expert in Indian philosophy writes.
There is no single philosophical doctrine that sums up Hinduism. Hinduism is made up various schools of Hindu philosophy, that have various views. The schools of Hindu philosophy include Samkhya and Yoga. Samkhya-Yoga are NOT non-Hindu philosophies, like Buddhism and Jainism are. In fact Samkhya and Yoga both accept the authority of the scriptures of Hindusim and appeal to them directly. Samkhya-Yoga philosophy underpins much of Hinduism.
Well I suppose I have to point out that you are the only one who actually has been banned from the Hindu forum. They wouldn’t tolerate your nonsense over there and it’s incomprehensible to me why David allows it here. You continue to misquote and misrepresent what I say and attack me personally every day and frankly I’m sick of it.
Thank you for making it clear exactly where you are coming from. You consider yourself to be the professional and me to be the amateur, so it’s really a burr in your britches when an unwashed ignorant fool such as myself is able to stand against you and win.
You are correct I have absolute disdain for your claimed achievements, considering all of the nonsense you’ve posted on this forum. By the way a dissertation is a project that is written in order to obtain a Phd degree here in the United States, so your misuse of the word casts a lot of doubt on your credentials. It clear that you are no Phd. You’ve been asked several times to validate your claims and have refused, so your credentials really are meaningless. If you are such a professional, why on earth are you wasting so much of your time posting on an internet forum under an assumed name?
So then would it be fair to say that every time you’ve used the term hinduism in this sense that you’ve been misleading us?
It’s curious to me that you are willing to derail your own thread in order to continue this argument with me, even after I tried to get it back on topic. Even more curious is that you want to continue to argue with someone who you feel is not worthy to debate with you. This erratic behavior is why I don’t take you seriously at all.
It’s understandable that you would be embarrassed that an ignorant fool such as myself has discredited your attempt to interpret the yoga sutras in order to support your position. You should have quit while you could, instead of having to endure further insult. You really took the bait on the hindu thing, but at least it has served to distract attention from the many ways you’ve been misrepresenting and attacking me.
Asuri you are simply a disrespectful person. I am not going to bother with you. In your mind you have won every argument you’ve had, your personal attacks are ‘mild criticism’ and you possess scholarship in the field of Samkhya-Yoga.
The reality is you are considered a nuisance who has has been banned and has received several warnings for personal attacks and now is on his last warning, you have never actually won any arguments with anybody, because you never really have any arguments to make, as half of your posts are filled with personal attacks and screaming and kicking. You have no credentials at all in Samkhya-Yoga philosophy.
You are not making any valid contributions in this thread right now, you are more intent on personal vendettas against me and almost every comment you are making here is not shedding anymore light on the discussion of Yoga and psychology. It is clear for everybody to see you have a complex, you are very jealous of me.
To be honest I no longer care. You are not my equal and I am not going to waste my time with somebody who is so ignorant, disrespectful and openly obnoxious. Please stop talking to me and talking about me. I will report any future transgression against me. I do not come to this forum to be insulted and abused by you.
[QUOTE=Asuri;75549]So then would it be fair to say that every time you’ve used the term hinduism in this sense that you’ve been misleading us?
It’s understandable that you would be embarrassed that an ignorant fool such as myself has discredited your attempt to interpret the yoga sutras in order to support your position. You should have quit while you could, instead of having to endure further insult. You really took the bait on the hindu thing, but at least it has served to distract attention from the many ways you’ve been misrepresenting and attacking me.[/QUOTE]
So here you openly are admitting you were flame-baiting me? Then your intentions are obvious you are being a nuisance. And now that it is clear you are doing that and deliberately ruining discussions on this forum, the moderators are clearly going to take that into consideration.
It is clear for anybody to see on this forum you have jumped kicking and screaming into every thread on this forum to do with Yoga or Samkhya philosophy and ruined all of those threads by starting flame wars. This is obvious troll activity. Do it again and it will be reported. Again remember you are on your last warning. I am not going to tolerate any further abuse and insults from you. I cannot make myself any clearer.
After this point there will be NO further correspondence between me and you either directly or indirectly. If you transgress against me, I will report it instantly.
If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
Of course you consider me a nuisance, because with me around, you can’t get away with a lot of things. Don’t take it personally. It’s not just you, that’s what I do. Even now I don’t participate in a lot of your discussions, because I’m not going to waste my time on such things. But I can’t let you get away with everything. So be forewarned, I’ll be watching.
By what stretch of the imagination does one member of a public forum think he can demand that another member not be allowed to respond to his public posts? Surya Deva is acting as if this is his private forum and he is in charge. He would do well to remember who is the fish and who is the fisherman in this transaction.
Deleted post. I cannot be bothered lol I am going to leave it to David.
Surya
You could simply…not respond to his post? That would solve the problem.
And vice versa if need be. Lol.
Avatar, I beat you to it, that is exactly what I am doing lol I really don’t have time for trolls.
NOW that the commercial break has ended
We return you to your scheduled programming 
SO.
When you say yoga is nothing but practical psychology, do you mean a form of psychology ? Western psychology? psychology as taught under a certain author?
I do believe. That indeed, yoga is practical psychology.
I also believe. To be true, that yoga is practical physiology.
Though i do think. That most forms of psychology and physiology are incomplete.
For each tries to be autonomous, and disregards the other.
This may not be true in all circumstances. But if the current world " truly understood"psychology for instances, their wouldn’t be so many documents on it!
Whatcha think.
Your knowledge of Samkhya-Yoga is amateur, it is not based on actual reading of the scholarship and literature on the subject.
Do you think that I absorbed it from thin air? I’ve read both primary and secondary sources, so this is obviously a false statement.
Getting a grade on a college paper is not peer review. This is one more example of how Surya Deva has been trying to get credibility by inflating his qualifications. Actually it disqualifies him because it is evidence of dishonesty.
Even if you did get a good grade on a college paper, it doesn’t count for much beyond getting your first job. What have you done since then? Posting anonymously on Yoga Forums is hardly a mark of distinction.
Actually this is true, I hadn’t read Larson’s book until recently, but he is hardly the foremost scholar. The book added very little to my understanding of the philosophy. It’s main contribution is a classification system for historical development, and a summary of other scholars who have written on the subject. I’ve read other similar works that were much more in depth and made far greater contributions to the understanding of the philosophy. Larson’s book is essentially a study of the Samkhya Karika
Many of the statements you have made about Samkhya-Yoga contain obviously gaps in understanding
Since you refuse to acknowledge the Samkhya Pravachana Sutram, which is the most complete explanation of Samkhya philosophy ever written, and instead rely on a seventy verse summary and academics like Gerald Larson, its obvious that the gaps in understanding are yours.
This is simply a malevolent remark without any basis in fact and a personal attack.
I think that probably has something to do with why you are so wrong about so many things.
[QUOTE=Avatar186;75605]NOW that the commercial break has ended
We return you to your scheduled programming
SO.
When you say yoga is nothing but practical psychology, do you mean a form of psychology ? Western psychology? psychology as taught under a certain author?
I do believe. That indeed, yoga is practical psychology.
I also believe. To be true, that yoga is practical physiology.
Though i do think. That most forms of psychology and physiology are incomplete.
For each tries to be autonomous, and disregards the other.
This may not be true in all circumstances. But if the current world " truly understood"psychology for instances, their wouldn’t be so many documents on it!
Whatcha think.[/QUOTE]
I can agree that Patanjali’s yoga contains many elements of what we call psychology. It contains a sort of analysis of various categories of mental activity, and an analysis of the causes of suffering, and suggests methods for reducing or eliminating suffering. It’s not like western psychology with various types of counseling and elaborate classifications of personality types and disorders, and psychological tests. But Patanjali’s yoga also is a philosophy of liberation and associated beliefs so I don’t know how someone can say it’s just a practical psychology, unless its just an attempt to make it palatable to westerners.
This is where I allegedly flame-baited Surya Deva
Actually I gave him an opening that I knew he couldn’t resist, and he jumped on it with a vengence, while ignoring the main point of the post, which was pointing out all of the many ways that he has misrepresented me in this thread alone, which has also been done on many other threads throughout this forum.
This can be seen as a tacit admission that he has on many occasions misrepresented my words and my positions on this forum. This is a continuing pattern of malevolent personal attacks which the moderator has failed to recognize and stop. He continues this pattern of personal attack by attempting to characterize me as a nuisance and accusing me of deliberating ruining threads.
The fact is that on many occasions Surya Deva himself has deliberately ruined threads attacking not only me but others as well, moving the threads so far off topic that the subject matter is completely lost, and continuing to argue ad infinitum while refusing to acknowledge the points made by others. And yet the moderator tolerates this. Now if I legitimately oppose his ideas, I am accused of deliberately ruining threads. I say, if you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.