|
|
| http://www.praisemoves.com/ChristianAlternative.htm
Who wants to join me in a national advocacy group to let Christians and others know that yoga is NOT evil?????
Check out this site. SOmeone just sent it to me and said, "Oh I am afraid for you, watch out, yoga is brainwashing you into worshiping people and kissing their feet"
Anyone who is interested, let me know. I think we should put together a website so that people do not be taken advantage of by some propaganda loving cult wannabes. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
  
Location: A Blue State | Oh, we talked about that silly woman once before on these boards.
I feel sorry for her. She's so bound up in her fear and prejudice...may
Sri Ganesha grant her wisdom.
| |
| | |
| GreenJello - 2005-09-21 10:34 PM
Unfortunately, you're going to find ignorant people such as this any place you go.
I agree, and you can say that again!
If it's not someone saying Yoga is evil, then it's someone saying that Dungeons and Dragons is evil, Video Games are evil, or heavy metal music is evil, etc. Usually people that are very opposed to something like that aren't into listening to the other side.
People with any common sense will look into both sides of the "argument" and make a logical choice for themselves.
I personally stopped looking at sites like that becasue I believe it made my blood pressure boil.
Dragon
| |
| | |
| You are all right; this isn't worth it.
She is clearly not only NOT researched and open - but a judgemental christian (isn't "god" supposed to have that job in christianity?) and to boot - she is using propaganda and yoga asanas while babbling bible quotes?
Get the F real!
Oh well. Power to her. Hope she get's enough money from this endeaver to get a better stylist.
...and for Greenjello..... "She is so NOT flippin' sweet". Ohhhwaaaaa. | |
| | |
| There is no doubt that Hinduism is rooted in yogic philosophy. People can try to divorce yogasana from the other 7 limbs and sell it as whatever they want to, but it is what it is. What makes her so horrible is that she is profiting off of the very traditions that she is denouncing. But, she's an opportunist and religious intolerance sells these days.
Then again, I hear that her one-woman show is wonderful!  | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Here we go again, 
Booga, I posted this exact thing several months ago to the Philosophy section. Although, I found it more amusing than you did,  Let it go, roll it off your back. Just remember, we are in America and we have Freedom of Religion...or is that Freedom from Religion, Anyway, don't worry about it. There's so many people doing Yoga in America that we don't have to give this any energy...besides, remember the saying, "Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but Words can never hurt me", Remember that?? It's all talk. Always, Christians are always going behind the preacher's back to dabble in other things, why?? because their religion doesn't work for them, they get tired of hearing preaching and NO TEACHING and eventually they end up doing something alternative which eventually leads them to something like - YOGA!!! | |
| | |
|
CANT BEAT THE STUPIDITY !
| |
| | |
| I wish I were here a few months ago (just joined a few weeks ago) I would have loved to have seen that posting (wonder if it is still available actually)
It isn't the fact that she is doing her own thing that bothers me; it's that a Christian mag wrote about Yoga being evil while only interviewing her.. and yes, her capitalizing on yoga in her sick way.
It just hit a cord on me. | |
| | |
| it's interesting because one of my clients just read an article recently about hindus being upset that christians and non-hindus were teaching yoga or using yoga outside of it's context.
she asked me about it, and i said that there are groups of people like that in every religion--various forms of fundamentalists--who get stirred up about things for no reason.
i see yoga--whether it's the philosophy, mantra process, the cleansing practices, or the asanas or whatever else--as a series of disciplines that can be applied to any religious/spiritual practice. LIke prayer, yoga doesn't belong to just one religion. Like ritual worship, yoga does not belong to just one religion. It is a spiritual discipline that can be used by any. Like meditation, yoga does not belong to just one religion.
One cannot deny it's context, but the context doesn't mean that the discipline can't be applied elsewhere. The Vedic tradition gave us this wonderful spiritual technology. I think that should be acknowledged and even honored or valued. BUt it doesn't mean that to practice yoga, one must also practice vedic spirituality or be a hindu, jain, buddhist, etc. I think that yoga should be approached as a spiritual discipline, but to which spiritual belief system is really a matter of personal choice. Similarly, the context of confession in the western catholic tradition came out of the irish-catholic monastic tradition. Yet today, millions of non-monastic, non-irish, and even non-catholic individuals participate in this sacred, spiritual discipline regardless of their particular religious or spiritual beliefs. So, while the context was rather specific, the disciplines can be applied in other contexts.
similarly, it is my understanding from knowing hindus, jains, buddhists, etc, that they have a general belief of "be and do whatever you want, spiritually. if it works for you and makes you happy, then it works for me." For them, if you worship Jesus while doing yoga, it's just as good as worshipping Ganeshe, Kali, Green Tara, or the Divine Wind as far as i can tell--and from what i've been told. Whatever speaks to you as a deity image can be accessed through any number of spiritual disciplines--and yoga may be an appropriate discipline to consider.
on a bit more thought in regards to this woman and her information, there is one thing that i like about it--she is applying it to a spiritual discipline. She's taking yoga asana (and perhaps breathing techniques) and applying it specifically to her tradition. I think that this is a lot better--perhaps a slight step up--from those people who extract the asana purely for physical benefit and divorce it from any spiritual aspects. I think that yoga asana, as well as other yoga practices, are inherently spiritual and meant to develop spiritual insight. The purpose of yoga--all aspects of it--is God Realization. To divorce yoga from this is a much greater "travisty" than to divorce it from it's religious context and apply it to another, IMO.
Of course, in a perfect world, everyone would be open minded enough to embrace the history and tradition and context of a practice as well as applying it to their own spiritual beliefs (in a comparitive religion sort of way), but alas that enlightenment hasn't come about yet. I'm sure it will in time. I mean, some cultures have been behaving like that for centuries (i'm thinking vedic, shinto, etc)!
does this make any sense?  | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | zoebird - 2005-09-22 8:23 AM
The Vedic tradition gave us this wonderful spiritual technology. I think that should be acknowledged and even honored or valued. BUt it doesn't mean that to practice yoga, one must also practice vedic spirituality or be a hindu, jain, buddhist, etc. I think that yoga should be approached as a spiritual discipline, but to which spiritual belief system is really a matter of personal choice. Similarly, the context of confession in the western catholic tradition came out of the irish-catholic monastic tradition. Yet today, millions of non-monastic, non-irish, and even non-catholic individuals participate in this sacred, spiritual discipline regardless of their particular religious or spiritual beliefs. So, while the context was rather specific, the disciplines can be applied in other contexts.
Ah yes, the vedic tradition gave us this wonderful spiritual technology.....these so called christians and whoever are not being respectful, they have abused it, they have mocked it, they have used to fit their criteria and manipulated it to mold it into what they deem it should be to control others...hmmm?? Sounds like BOGA to me, Sorry Booga, not you, better get that name changed,
What really blows my brain about this, is the fact that if their religion is so wonderful and taught them everything they need, i.e. Catholism, Baptist, Methodist, why would they need to practice Yoga?? They really should just go ride a bike or take up jogging.
Anyway, I'm sure this is going to start something up but this is only an observation. When I came to Eastern Philosophy I had long thrown in the towel when it came to religion. Religion was forced upon me as a child and I vowed then that when I grew up, I would find my path..and I did. I came to the Eastern Philosophy because it supported who I was and who I had become..and my karmic connections of course. I was NOT attached to or connected to in any way shape or form to any Western Religion or belief's. This has been extremely important factor in my spiritual journey because if I were attached to those belief's or practices, it would have hindered and been a major distraction to my practice. Thank God I was able to let it go!!! All of it. | |
| | |
| If their religion is soooo great, why do they need to take any part of Yoga and use it? (if it is so evil?)
I just had this woman email me AGAIN this morning and she said that if I think the bowing to another person is a good thing, I am evil; as we only bow to God.
My comeback was that bowing in HER RELIGION means worship; however to "bow" is simply an honor or acknowledgement of respect. So if she were in an Asian land, she would refuse to bow to say hello? That is just silly.
She kept saying in that church chat manner, "I didn't mean to make you upset" and I just replied, "You know yesterday I was upset, because I was being judged - which I thought only your God does. However, today I just feel sorry that you are in a cult like mindset and are close-minded to the lives and respect of others. You should pray about that. Or do CHristian Yoga." | |
| | |
| She is just after making money.... looks like she is setting up her own 'religion' just a big con. It makes me cross that she judges the Hindu religion anyway, aside from the fact that yoga is NOT a religion...I think it is awful that one religion judges another religion. Live and let live I say. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| Gandhi apparently said something to the effect that he would be happy to work with Christians if only he could find any who really embodied their own ideals and religion.
The thing is that she obviously got caught up in "new age" practices that were not safe, not properly taught and that did not encourage her to practice her own religion in a non-judgemental and loving way. Some would say it was not real yoga. Sad.  | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | tourist - 2005-09-22 10:07 AM
Gandhi apparently said something to the effect that he would be happy to work with Christians if only he could find any who really embodied their own ideals and religion.
(
EXACTLY! But, now a days, I am seeing this happen in other cultures too. I'm seeing it happen in Hindu's, Buddhists and Asians. They really don't embody their own ideals and religion, they are trying to be like American...to me that is what is truly sad and unfortunately, these guided souls are being misled,  I cringe when I'm around some Indian & Nepalis people here in America and the way they act against their own culture. I do believe however, because of their ingrained culture..especially Hindus and Buddhists, they will as Bruce say's, eventually "See the light", Just when they will is not very clear and maybe it won't happen in this lifetime. But, it's not a bad idea to experience another culture so you can see for yourself, it's just scary as he11 when they start converting! These Christians going into India and bribing people with money and nice food & clothes, manipulating their minds based on material things is sooo ridiculous. I enjoy reading when the Indian government throws them out! | |
| | |
| I get how one can consider devotion to Christ as a form of isvarapranidhana during their yoga practice, but I'm confused about the dualism/non-dualism issue. If the ultimate goal is union, then isn't that at odds with Christian theology, which is necessarily dualistic? | |
| | |
| She looks a bit crazy too in that pic doesn't she.
That article is full of rubbish if you ask me. I am sure she has plenty to say about running and finding "the zone", and sports which leave you serene and collected, because of course eveil things enter the body.
At least yogis don't write about how evil people's belief systems are. | |
| | |
| It is a shame that there are many Christian sects that basically will criticize anything that has mainstream appeal. I grew up in such a church in small-town NC, and I was also home-schooled and used a biology book that claimed that rock music caused "nerve-jamming" in teenage girls which made the sucesseptibal to sexual passes from boys. Going to movies, school dances, listening to any type of music other than old fashioned gospel were considered wrong. Some of it my parents enforced some they didn't, as it was largely based on opinions. Many of the people I grew up around were uneducated...not even finishing high school and weren't taught to question and fear things they know nothing about.
It is fun when I go home to NC and people tell me I look good and what I do to keep in shape and I tell them I practice yoga! Lots of "oh no, you're going to hell" looks. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | Mitch - 2005-09-22 10:42 AM
I get how one can consider devotion to Christ as a form of isvarapranidhana during their yoga practice, but I'm confused about the dualism/non-dualism issue. If the ultimate goal is union, then isn't that at odds with Christian theology, which is necessarily dualistic?
Elson and I had a discussion of that question in the Philosophy and Religion forum (which
is where this thread should be moved, IMHO). I think that we finally agreed that
in [fundamentalist] Christian theology, union with god in a non-dualist sense is not
possible. Another way to look at this, I guess, is that while yoga might be equated to
prayer, prayer in a Christian sense is supplication to the Almighty. Yogic union is essentially
the removal of avidya that prevents us from seeing that we are already god, as is everything
around us.
| |
| | |
| man, is she gonna be mad when she comes back as a chicken! | |
| | |
| Bay Guy - 2005-09-22 1:17 PM
Elson and I had a discussion of that question in the Philosophy and Religion forum (which
is where this thread should be moved, IMHO). I think that we finally agreed that
in [fundamentalist] Christian theology, union with god in a non-dualist sense is not
possible. Another way to look at this, I guess, is that while yoga might be equated to
prayer, prayer in a Christian sense is supplication to the Almighty. Yogic union is essentially
the removal of avidya that prevents us from seeing that we are already god, as is everything
around us.
Thanks BG. That was my impression as well. | |
| | |
| What really blows my brain about this, is the fact that if their religion is so wonderful and taught them everything they need, i.e. Catholism, Baptist, Methodist, why would they need to practice Yoga?? They really should just go ride a bike or take up jogging.
i see this in two ways:
First, on the one hand, if they're just looking for the physical aspects and not seeing it as a spiritual discipline, then jogging or whatever is no different. a good plan of physical fitness, stretching, and weight bearing exercise should 'do the trick'--or hey, Pilates! But then, what's interesting about some people is that these exercises also become deeply meditative--so there's this mind-body-spirit thing happening, even without yoga.
Second, i tend to think of religions--all of them--being in a constant state of revelation and evolution. right now, i'm reading this fascinating text by David R. Kinsley called "Hindu GOddesses" that gives the cultural history and meaning of various goddessses. What is interesting is that a given goddess starts out with one representation, that changes slightly over time, and then changes again, and then again to the modern idea and worship practices. The same is true of all of these various religions.
What is interesting about the information about Sri-Laksmi (which i recently read again, it's chapter 1), is that she becomes an intercessory figure in some parts of the hindu tradition around 1000-1100 CE--shortly after Mary, mother of Jesus takes an intercessory position to God the Father. In the book, there are descriptions about Vishnu the Father, being stern and wanting or needing to punish his followers, followed y depictions of how followers then prayed or worshipped Laksmi in order to beg for an intercessory action to recieve the mercy and grace of Vishnu.
Now, i'm not saying that this wasn't a naturally independent arising or that this concept of intercessory activities of wife/consort goddessses didn't exist before this particular manifestation of Laksmi, but it is interesting that Laksmi--a queen of heaven so to speak--takes on that role in certain aspects of the hindu tradition after it started with Mary. So perhaps it was a good idea that got flipped to a new context.
In this way, i think that the sharing of particular disciplines across cultures is a way that religions grow. There is evidence, for example, that there are hellenistic and vedic qualities in Jesus's teachings simply because he lived at a place of crossroads. Judaism has changed over time, and has included and excluded various practices because of these outside influences of ideas, traditions, and even spiritual disciplines.
I do not necessarily think that one religion is whole or complete. In fact, i think they they are all incomplete, and i see no reason why a person can't take good from one, add it to another to inform their own practices and spiritual development.
But, i also recognize the importance that many teachers have mentioned--that it is difficult to diligently follow multiple paths. IN this, i seek that concept of integration, of bringing things together in a cohesive fashion. THen, there is only one path--an integrated path.
One thing that confuses me, though, which is why i go to my teachers at the gurukalam and the local hindu temple with such questions, is how easy is it to be devoted to many gods and goddesses? each one has so many ways of worshipping, things that need to be done at certain times of the year and what not. . .and add to this saints and teachers who have special things that need to be done to honor them--and it seems less cohesive than say, sikhism (which is considered closest to christianity in practice and belief). And yet people seem to integrate it into the 'ebb and flow' of life.
anyway, just more questions, as always.
Anyway, I'm sure this is going to start something up but this is only an observation. When I came to Eastern Philosophy I had long thrown in the towel when it came to religion. Religion was forced upon me as a child and I vowed then that when I grew up, I would find my path..and I did. I came to the Eastern Philosophy because it supported who I was and who I had become..and my karmic connections of course. I was NOT attached to or connected to in any way shape or form to any Western Religion or belief's. This has been extremely important factor in my spiritual journey because if I were attached to those belief's or practices, it would have hindered and been a major distraction to my practice. Thank God I was able to let it go!!! All of it.
attachment to any belief hinders spirit-life, i've found. | |
| | |
| Mitch - 2005-09-22 10:42 AM
I get how one can consider devotion to Christ as a form of isvarapranidhana during their yoga practice, but I'm confused about the dualism/non-dualism issue. If the ultimate goal is union, then isn't that at odds with Christian theology, which is necessarily dualistic?
i was taught, in catholicism, that the ultimate concept of heaven was union with God. this is why the Church is often the "bride of christ"--to denote this intimate union. In the bible, marriage is considered to make 'one body' or 'one entity.' therefore, to become the 'bride of Christ' is to enter into a non-dual state with God. | |
| | |
| Yoga has never started a war that I know of, nor do people normally die because of their yoga practice.
Wars are often started because of religion, and more people die because of fights over religion than Yoga - in history, present and I presume - in the future.
Also, Christians (some not all of course - and I do consider myself a Christian of sort) - are the first to judge..yet they preach that only God judges. Even in the bible, Jesus did not judge.
| |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | zoebird - 2005-09-22 2:12 PM
Mitch - 2005-09-22 10:42 AM
I get how one can consider devotion to Christ as a form of isvarapranidhana during their yoga practice, but I'm confused about the dualism/non-dualism issue. If the ultimate goal is union, then isn't that at odds with Christian theology, which is necessarily dualistic?
i was taught, in catholicism, that the ultimate concept of heaven was union with God. this is why the Church is often the "bride of christ"--to denote this intimate union. In the bible, marriage is considered to make 'one body' or 'one entity.' therefore, to become the 'bride of Christ' is to enter into a non-dual state with God.
This is interesting. I guess it's a good place to add that some fundamentalists consider
Catholics to be heretical on certain points, and I expect that they would feel that way
about entering a non-dual state with god.
| |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | zoebird - 2005-09-22 2:11 PM
What is interesting about the information about Sri-Laksmi (which i recently read again, it's chapter 1), is that she becomes an intercessory figure in some parts of the hindu tradition around 1000-1100 CE--shortly after Mary, mother of Jesus takes an intercessory position to God the Father. In the book, there are descriptions about Vishnu the Father, being stern and wanting or needing to punish his followers, followed y depictions of how followers then prayed or worshipped Laksmi in order to beg for an intercessory action to recieve the mercy and grace of Vishnu.
One of the more interesting things that I saw in Tuscany was a fresco in a church that
illustrated Mary as an intercessor for Man -- she bared her breasts to Christ in supplication,
essentially saying: "as I nursed you, I ask you to intercede with the Father." I don't recall
the date of this fresco, but it's in the range of 1500CE.
I tend to think that the Vedic ideas were adopted by Christians, rather than visa-versa,
but that's mainly b/c Vedic philosophy predates Xtians. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | booga - 2005-09-22 7:31 PM
Yoga has never started a war that I know of, nor do people normally die because of their yoga practice.
Wars are often started because of religion, and more people die because of fights over religion than Yoga - in history, present and I presume - in the future.
Also, Christians (some not all of course - and I do consider myself a Christian of sort) - are the first to judge..yet they preach that only God judges. Even in the bible, Jesus did not judge.
Of course, you will have to separate the Hindu Nationalist Party from Yoga as a part of the
Hindu religion in order to excuse the riots and lynchings that have in India occured in
recent years. | |
| | |
| BG:
That fresco sounds amazing. i'll look it up for sure! thanks!
I tend to think that the Vedic ideas were adopted by Christians, rather than visa-versa,
but that's mainly b/c Vedic philosophy predates Xtians.
While this is most definately true, one of the things worth remembering or at least considering is how long these cultures have been in contact with each other. The silk road has been around long before christ. People traveled among groups for thousands of years--into and out of the INdus valley. Throughout all of this time, there is not only independent cultural development, but also cross cultural exchanges and exploration.
So, while i think it is pretty easy or say "this idea came from that" (for instance, the idea of calling Jesus "the Christ" in greek can be directly derrived from the concept of Krishna in india, as alexander the great brought the "x" or "krsn" sound back to greece, to denote the concept of divine man--as krishna was--and that because "christ" in greek, which was then given to Jesus by his followers throughout the roman world, as they had a strong greek influence--that is, the romans loved the greeks and any good roman knew their greek and of course, many of the texts were written in greek!)--but i think it's also important to recognize that there would have been a great deal of cross fertilization even in the early stages of individuated cultural development. and not just 'east to west' but also north to south in asia. So, it's fascinating really. | |
| | |
| You know I seen this argument on this site before, and I have seen the huge and well written views on God and yoga. So here is my two cents..
Where is the love ? Jesus said the world would know us by the love, not what fellowship you went to or what books you read, or what sports you do. Granted use some common sense that God has endowed in all of us. As for those follow something else I honor your choice. God is respector of free will so I am I.
The one thing I have seen here that makes me comeback is that you all dont lump all of us Christians together, for that I thank you.
Ash
Edited by Roobione 2005-09-26 12:06 PM
| |
| | |
| "Elson and I had a discussion of that question in the Philosophy and Religion forum (which
is where this thread should be moved, IMHO). I think that we finally agreed that
in [fundamentalist] Christian theology, union with god in a non-dualist sense is not
possible. Another way to look at this, I guess, is that while yoga might be equated to
prayer, prayer in a Christian sense is supplication to the Almighty. Yogic union is essentially
the removal of avidya that prevents us from seeing that we are already god, as is everything
around us."
On this note, a few things about how the liberation process in Christianity would be viewed in Advaita. One thing to remember is that Christians do talk about union with God, but this means being with God all the time, it doesn't mean becoming God. This is the same as in Hindu dualism and dualistic monism. Not all of Hinduism is Advaita.
Basically, the individual being takes birth according to its attachments. So if someone's primary attachment is sex, then the disembodied mind may associate with an animal since this is a relatively good place to get sex, its a good place to fullfill this primary desire.
Now if the object or entity one is most attached to is God (Ishvara, though we cannot be sure that this is what someone worshipping Christ will be attached to, but lets suppose so) or more precisely the energy of God (Ishvara-Shakti), then upon disembodiment, the mind will go to become absorbed in this energy (though not dissovled, so the sense of seperation does remain). This is good, and if the devotion was really really really strong then in a sense the mind will be able to sustain such absorption with Ishvara-Shakti for a very long time. In fact, it is said to be possible that one remains absorbed until the end of the universe, when everything dissolves back into Brahman. However, if the merit is not strong enough, then in a sense it means the mind will not have enough energy to remain absorbed in Ishvara-Shakti any longer and so according to attachments in latent form which eventually get manifested, it will take birth (ie: get attached to) another being,
Regards. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | belovedofthegod - 2005-09-26 4:19 PM
On this note, a few things about how the liberation process in Christianity would be viewed in Advaita. One thing to remember is that Christians do talk about union with God, but this means being with God all the time, it doesn't mean becoming God. This is the same as in Hindu dualism and dualistic monism. Not all of Hinduism is Advaita.
Basically, the individual being takes birth according to its attachments. So if someone's primary attachment is sex, then the disembodied mind may associate with an animal since this is a relatively good place to get sex, its a good place to fullfill this primary desire.
.
Yes, there are dualistic commentaries on the Yoga Sutras, for example,
although I find them hard to understand. I am not going to get into the topic of
sex and animals, however.
 | |
| | |
| Dear BG:
Yes, in Hindu Philosophy there is dualism. Actually, there are:
Advaita - NO dualism, Dvaita - Dualism, Vishishta Advaita - Qualified Non Dualism, and Dvaitaadvaita - Dualism with NonDualism. Advaita is considered the final in all these. All others have been refuted.
Patanjali Yoga Sutras are actually an extension of Advaita. All commentaries on Patanjali which profess dualism are in that respect wrong (not in every respect).
In Hindu Philosophy, there is NO contradiction with Christianity or any thing else. Because, it states that ekam sad sadvipraa bahdha vadanti, same truth is differently described by different people. At the end, all merges into God, and becomes God. Whether you call it always staying with God or not. Always staying with God is impossible without becoming God. And, always staying with God while being different God amounts to becoming God. All discussion or description is linguistic or matter of expression. The experience is the same.
Peace
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Thanks for that clarification Neel. I found the Brahma Sutras the other day at the Hindu temple. It is an Advaita Ashrama book (I paid only $5 for it), Published in Calcutta by Swami Vireswarananda in perfect English. All this refuting has been quite confusing to say the least...but after getting though half of chapter 2, I think I'm understanding much much more and my question I had to you earlier regarding Buddhism and Yoga.
I also picked up 2 other books, Learning Hindi in 30 days and Sanskrit in 30 days. Don't be surprised if I start speaking fluently, soon, real soon
Okay, I'm off to Path padho. Kal jarur avunga | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | kulkarnn - 2005-09-27 10:29 PM
Dear BG:
Yes, in Hindu Philosophy there is dualism. Actually, there are:
Advaita - NO dualism, Dvaita - Dualism, Vishishta Advaita - Qualified Non Dualism, and Dvaitaadvaita - Dualism with NonDualism. Advaita is considered the final in all these. All others have been refuted.
Patanjali Yoga Sutras are actually an extension of Advaita. All commentaries on Patanjali which profess dualism are in that respect wrong (not in every respect).
In Hindu Philosophy, there is NO contradiction with Christianity or any thing else. Because, it states that ekam sad sadvipraa bahdha vadanti, same truth is differently described by different people. At the end, all merges into God, and becomes God. Whether you call it always staying with God or not. Always staying with God is impossible without becoming God. And, always staying with God while being different God amounts to becoming God. All discussion or description is linguistic or matter of expression. The experience is the same.
Peace
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
Dear Brother Neel,
I recall that we had some discussion of Taimni's commentary on the Yoga Sutras
(which I remember that you have not read), and that we concluded that it had dualistic
ideas in it (essentially the notion that there were many separate Purusha Visheshas that
became separate Ishwaras, etc). As a whole, this particular commentary struck me as
having a number of silly ideas in it. There are some insightful passages in other areas,
so I don't mean to say that it lacks merit. Still, I quit reading it when it got to the idea of
separate Ishwaras for each new solar system.
I think we have to be a bit careful about talking of contradictions with Christianity. I
personally do not see any contradiction of Hinduism with most aspects of Christianity;
however, I know that some fundamentalist Christians do perceive a difficulty with the idea
of man being at one with god. Essentially (and is Elson around these days?), for these
Christians, man can never become one with god: man can only stand at god's feet doing
god's will. Essential to this idea is the notion that god is superior to and separate from
man. So, the only way you can resolve this contradiction is by saying that this Christian
belief is wrong.
I myself follow the belief that all that is god is within us and around us, and that we
only confuse ourselves into seeing any separation between the two. | |
| | |
| I am proud of Cyndiben and brother BG.
When is the chai party promised by Cyndiben coming? Can we have it in Virginia please?
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | BG wrote:
Essential to this idea is the notion that god is superior to and separate from
man. So, the only way you can resolve this contradiction is by saying that this Christian
belief is wrong.
and Cyndiben responds:
You don't have to say that the Christian belief is wrong BG...it just gets refuted...that's all,
Chai party in Virginia?? Hmmm sounds interesting. Neelbhai, I hope you know of a good place where we can all crash, to hamara samay thik katega. ap ko kasht de raha hum?? | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Well GJ, perhaps if you would google the correct language, you might get your answer, I was writing in Hindi, not Sanskrit,
I said that I hoped that Neelbhai knew of a good place to stay so that our time will be spent nicely and asked him if I was giving him too much trouble. I'm practicing my Hindi language. Don't worry, achchhi bat kaho, jello ha ra,
Suva Ratri,
Cyndiben
Edited by Cyndi 2005-09-28 8:24 PM
| |
| | |
| Gee, this language thing is more interesting than Philosophy, that is tattvajnana,
tat tvam asi, tha thou art.
Neel kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | kulkarnn - 2005-09-28 11:06 PM
Gee, this language thing is more interesting than Philosophy, that is tattvajnana,
tat tvam asi, tha thou art.
Neel kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
I vote to start a Hindi/Sanskrit Language Forum...
Should'nt that be - You are that, instead of that thou art. I'm assuming that you forgot to type the letter T when you typed tha. It took me forever to find that in my HINDI book....cause it wasn't there.....it was in the SANSKRIT book,
Neelbhai, seriously, what's a good reference book for learning Hindi with English translations. My book is very limited..I need more definitions?? Does Nancy use one??
Satyam's parent's speak mostly Hindi instead of Nepalis, because his Father is Punjabi. I was hoping I could learn to speak Hindi or at least understand some things, before we visit with them next year.
Edited by Cyndi 2005-10-01 12:18 PM
| |
| | |
| Dear Kulkarnn,
"Yes, in Hindu Philosophy there is dualism. Actually, there are:
Advaita - NO dualism, Dvaita - Dualism, Vishishta Advaita - Qualified Non Dualism, and Dvaitaadvaita - Dualism with NonDualism. Advaita is considered the final in all these. All others have been refuted."
That is what the Advaitin claims, the others claim that they have refuted Advaita, etc... This is very misleading to say Advaita "is considered" the final, since this is true only of those who believe in Advaita! Ramanuja's arguments against Advaita are actually quite good, and most Advaitins would not be able to refute it.
"Patanjali Yoga Sutras are actually an extension of Advaita. All commentaries on Patanjali which profess dualism are in that respect wrong (not in every respect)."
Then we disagree on this. I follow the tradition of interpreting the Yoga Sutras according to Vyasa, who was a Samkhyan and therefore a dualist. There is no reason as far as I am concerned to consider that the Sutrakara was a non-dualist. Shankaracarya in his Vivarana clearly also accepts Vyasa as the correct interpretation of the methods of Yoga though disagrees with his philosophic basis.
That said, Raja Yoga works well with Advaitin philosophy too since the basis for Viveka-Khyati is there.
"In Hindu Philosophy, there is NO contradiction with Christianity or any thing else. Because, it states that ekam sad sadvipraa bahdha vadanti, same truth is differently described by different people."
Well, this doesn't mean there is no contradiction. Rather as Mandana Mishra says if Advaita is established, then all other positions are invalidated. If another position is established, that doesn't invalidate Advaita. Of course most people wouldn't agree but there is a good reason why he says that (other philosophies might be correct from various Vyavaharic perspectives).
However, there are clearly very serious contradictions between Christianity and Advaita.
"And, always staying with God while being different God amounts to becoming God."
This is not the position of Shankaracarya and of any traditional Advaitin in his parampara. Unless you choose to actually make always staying with God synonymous with becoming God, but such an interpretation would be flat out rejected by Christians, and all non Kevala-Advaita Vedantins,
Regards.
Edited by belovedofthegod 2005-10-01 4:51 PM
| |
| | |
| Dear BelovedOfTheGod:
Thanks for the response to my previous posting.
As for the final-ness of Advaitavada over other vadas which have partial or full dualism, one day I shall write my respone.
As for Patanjali Yoga Sutras: The commentator Shakara is NOT the Adi Shankara, the Advaitin. Vyasa is also not the Veda Vyasa of Mahabharata. Interpretation of Patanjali by Dualistic Philosophers is wrong, because Patanjali Yoga Sutras are direct extention of Advaitavada. Its culmination is in Kaivalya which leads to NON Dualism. Only the Practice is Dualistic. All practice is always dualistic and when the practice is completed, then the result is Yoga which is the union between Individual Soul and Universal soul, the real yoga, and it gives the individual which was previously considered as separate from the Paramatman, a kaivalya state which is paramatman. Then nothing remains to be done. purushaarthashoonyaanaam gunanam pratiprasavah kaivalyam svaroopapratishtha va chitishaktiriti. Last sutram of Patanjali.
As for Christianity and non contradiction with Hindu Philosophy (NOT Advaita, I meant Hindu Philosophy) which is panthiest and allows all things whicih ultimately lead to Yoga to be various paths to reach the same goal. But, since I am NOT an expert on Christianity, I shall not discuss this further. I accept any mistakes on my part.
Regards
neel kulkarni | |
| | |
| Dear Kulkarnn,
Thank you for your reply.
"As for the final-ness of Advaitavada over other vadas which have partial or full dualism, one day I shall write my respone."
I would be interested to see that, but if you manage succesfully, keep in mind that you would be the first person in the history.
"As for Patanjali Yoga Sutras: The commentator Shakara is NOT the Adi Shankara, the Advaitin. Vyasa is also not the Veda Vyasa of Mahabharata."
No doubt Vyasa is not the Mahabharata Vyasa, but Shankara really does seem to Adi Shankara. I have read the Vivarana carefully and it is really in his style and also there are a huge number of parralels with Brahma Sutra Bhasya, etc... Most scholars who have studied the text do tend to agree that it does indeed appear to be Adi Shankara. Do you have any reasons why its not Shankaracarya?
" Interpretation of Patanjali by Dualistic Philosophers is wrong, because Patanjali Yoga Sutras are direct extention of Advaitavada. Its culmination is in Kaivalya which leads to NON Dualism."
But Kaivalya is an originally Samkhyan word, there is no particular reason why it must be non-dualism.
"Only the Practice is Dualistic. All practice is always dualistic and when the practice is completed, then the result is Yoga which is the union between Individual Soul and Universal soul, the real yoga, and it gives the individual which was previously considered as separate from the Paramatman, a kaivalya state which is paramatman."
And interestingly the Sutrakara does not say any of this. Rather the Sutrakara simply says that the seer abides in his own his nature. There is nothing about identity of paramatman and brahman. Furthermore the sutrakara says Ishwara is a distinct Purusha, distinct implies difference.
Also Yoga is agreed by most people, including Advaitins, to come from "Yuja Samadhau" not "Yujyr Samyogay", so in this context Yoga has nothing to do with union. Rather it is seperating Purusha from Prakriti.
Having said that, I agree that Yoga would lead to non-dualism. I do not agree that this was the view of the Sutrakara.
"As for Christianity and non contradiction with Hindu Philosophy (NOT Advaita, I meant Hindu Philosophy) which is panthiest and allows all things whicih ultimately lead to Yoga to be various paths to reach the same goal."
Well then we have less contradictions since Christianity and Dvaita are quite similar in many ways. Neverthless in Christianity there is no belief in karma, judgement day after a single life, original sin, etc...
Regards. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| I actually don't read all of these posts - too deep for little old me - but I caught this:
Neverthless in Christianity there is no belief in karma, judgement day after a single life, original sin, etc...
Not much of a scholar of Christianity either, but I'm pretty sure there IS judgement day after a single life and original sin in Christianity! No karma, though. Slip of the keys? | |
| | |
| Hello Tourist,
"Not much of a scholar of Christianity either, but I'm pretty sure there IS judgement day after a single life and original sin in Christianity! No karma, though. Slip of the keys?"
Thank you for correcting me; that was a grammatical error on my part... No belief in karma, but yes belief in judgement day, yes belief in original sin. Its still very bad grammar but at least its clear?
GreenJello,
"I beg to differ, I think there are suggestions of karma in Christianity, but no overt references, much like their treatment of reincarnation. The thing that really sticks in my mind in "vengence is mine sayith the lord". I don't think they're talking in the next life, but rather the here and now."
Well you can force karma, reincarnation, etc... based on some statements but in such matters it is better to take the the statements that are more generally stated since this would most likely better express the intent of the text. And in any case, Christianity and Christian scriptures need not neccesarily be related. When I say Christianity I mean the beliefs that are usually called Christianity. What you are saying is that what is called Christianity may not be indicative of what Christianity really or originally is about. I agree, but of course I am referring to something approaching standard exegesis,
Regards. | |
| | |
| Dear BelovedOfTheGod:
Thanks again. I shall only make few points here in proof of my previous posting. If that is not satisfactory, I accept to a)keep quiet. b)to accept my wronghood.
1. It is NOT true that I will be the first person to attempt to prove that 'Advaitavada is Final answer and other vadas involving dualism have been refuted'. For this, study the entire brahmasutras (Cyndiben is studying this now, and I can shift the responsibility to her. I know she needs over one year to even figure it out.) with Adi Shankara's commentary on it. In that all other vadas are sufficiently refuted, establishing Advaitavada.
2. I am happy that you accepted that Vedavyasa is not the commentator of Yogasutras for whattever reasons. However, I hope you accept that Vedavyasa did prepare Brahmasutras and in fact, that was his major last work which comprehended the philosophy into one place establishing advaita philosophy.
3. I hope that you accept that Adi Shankaracharya was completely proponent of ONLY Advaita Philosophy. His work is well known in the entire worrld, giving him the status of jagadguru (guru of the universe), and he established advaita philosophy in the entire India, by establishing 4 schools which are alive todate. Now, he would not write a commentary (vivarana) on a commentary of Vyasa (who is not Vedavyasa) which proposes Dualism as a meaning of Yogasutras.
4. As for Shankara's vivarana on Yogasutras, this is the history: Of this vivaran, ONLY one and ONLY one copy was found in south India (all the works of Adi Shankara is found in many many copies, all over the India, and in many languages). In that copy, the style of writing is like that of Adi Shankara. And, also the last statement of each vivarana chapter has bhagavadpada shankara's name. When this copy was published in South India, the publishers made a note in the preface, that this statement does not necessarity prove that the authorship of this commentary is Adi Shankara, as NO other supporting proof has been found to make that statement, such as that found in ALL other works of Adi Shankara. All the works of Adi Shankara is quoted at numerous places all over Indian Scriptures or works, except ONLY This work.
NOTE: As for Christianity: The style of writing of St Paul, and others, and there is NOTHING being written by Jesus Himself, lot of various interpretations take place. Again, I am only making this comment without being a scholar. And, dualism does exist in Christianity. It may not look like that in Indian Philosophy exactly. Also, karma concept is present as a reason for what one reaps. But, then forgiveness is also present. But, then in Bhagavadgita (which definitely is long time before Jesus was even born) states that clearly, 'sarva dharman parityajya mam ekam sharanam vraja, aham tvam sarvapaapebhyo mokshyishyaami maa shuchah'. Discarding all duties, if you surrender to me alone, I shall forgive (or absolve ) you from all sins'. Anyway, what I know about Christianity may not be complete. But, whatever I know, all those concepts I have heard elsewhere. I am not stating that Christianity copied them from elsewhere. Also, I am not stating that about any other faith. But, I know that truth can be found at different places by different people, stated differently, and it all comes to one thing.
Peace
Neel Kulkarni | |
| | |
| Oh shame on this woman! Narrowmindedness to the nth degree. I may have to dedicate my next practice to her... | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | kulkarnn - 2005-10-02 5:33 PM
1. It is NOT true that I will be the first person to attempt to prove that 'Advaitavada is Final answer and other vadas involving dualism have been refuted'. For this, study the entire brahmasutras (Cyndiben is studying this now, and I can shift the responsibility to her. I know she needs over one year to even figure it out.) with Adi Shankara's commentary on it. In that all other vadas are sufficiently refuted, establishing Advaitavada.
At least a year, | |
| | |
| belovedofthegod - 2005-10-02 4:51 PMWell you can force karma, reincarnation, etc... based on some statements but in such matters it is better to take the the statements that are more generally stated since this would most likely better express the intent of the text.
I guess I'm going more with the words the written in the bible, instead of the current interpretation of them. No, I'm not attempting to put things in there, they're just not the sort of things that are generally emphasised by main-stream Christian belief. As Neel as pointed out, there is the reference to reaping what you sow. There are also references to both John the Baptist being Elijah, or Jesus being refered to as Elijah, though he later refutes this claim.
| |
| | |
| Dear Kulkarnn,
"1. It is NOT true that I will be the first person to attempt to prove that 'Advaitavada is Final answer and other vadas involving dualism have been refuted'. For this, study the entire brahmasutras (Cyndiben is studying this now, and I can shift the responsibility to her. I know she needs over one year to even figure it out.) with Adi Shankara's commentary on it. In that all other vadas are sufficiently refuted, establishing Advaitavada."
I am not saying you will be the first person to attempt, rather that you would be the first to succeed.
It is not correct to say that Shankara refutes the other vadas in the Brahma Sutra Bhasya because Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita, etc... did not exist at that time.
Furthermore, there are many interpretations of the Brahma Sutra and Shankara's is very forced at times. I would say that the Brahma Sutra does not profess Advaita, but something closer to Vishishtadvaita since it clearly says that the jiva is absolutely different from Ishwara since the jiva can't create the world, etc... Shankara can only deal with this kind of comment by saying its provisional or something.
Advaitins are the only people who accept that Advaita has been established. Dvaitins have claimed Dvaita has been established, etc... I am an Advaitin, but I think people are far too enthusiastic about such matters and do not examine them carefully enough.
"2. I am happy that you accepted that Vedavyasa is not the commentator of Yogasutras for whattever reasons. However, I hope you accept that Vedavyasa did prepare Brahmasutras and in fact, that was his major last work which comprehended the philosophy into one place establishing advaita philosophy."
I do not accept the Brahma Sutra is Advaita philosophy.
"3. I hope that you accept that Adi Shankaracharya was completely proponent of ONLY Advaita Philosophy. His work is well known in the entire worrld, giving him the status of jagadguru (guru of the universe), and he established advaita philosophy in the entire India, by establishing 4 schools which are alive todate. Now, he would not write a commentary (vivarana) on a commentary of Vyasa (who is not Vedavyasa) which proposes Dualism as a meaning of Yogasutras."
Shankara's attitude is quite simple here. He thinks that Vyasa and the Samkhyans are philosophically incorrect but he accepts that they are the experts on Yoga.
Something proponents of the Advaitins of the Yogic culture do not seem to know is that Shankara clearly says that meditation CANNOT lead to liberation. It is useful for mental purity and creating detachment, not for liberation.
"4. As for Shankara's vivarana on Yogasutras, this is the history: Of this vivaran, ONLY one and ONLY one copy was found in south India (all the works of Adi Shankara is found in many many copies, all over the India, and in many languages). In that copy, the style of writing is like that of Adi Shankara. And, also the last statement of each vivarana chapter has bhagavadpada shankara's name. When this copy was published in South India, the publishers made a note in the preface, that this statement does not necessarity prove that the authorship of this commentary is Adi Shankara, as NO other supporting proof has been found to make that statement, such as that found in ALL other works of Adi Shankara. All the works of Adi Shankara is quoted at numerous places all over Indian Scriptures or works, except ONLY This work."
A lot of people say this, but the Vivarana was quoted in several places. I forget the translation where these references are provided but I will give them to you tommorow.
Dear Greenjello,
I'm not qualified to even attempt to talk about Biblical exegesis but by the Christianity I mean the tradition as it has existed. Modern Christianity is generally the same as the one for the last 1500 years or so in major themes. The you reap what you sow seems to be something quite general, doesn't neccesarily imply karma. As for the Elijah/John the Baptist, etc... its very interesting but the Christian counter-arguments are also quite good. So on that I'm agnostic,
Regards.
Edited by belovedofthegod 2005-10-02 10:23 PM
| |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | belovedofthegod - 2005-10-02 10:15 PM
Something proponents of the Advaitins of the Yogic culture do not seem to know is that Shankara clearly says that meditation CANNOT lead to liberation. It is useful for mental purity and creating detachment, not for liberation.
Let's discuss this further. According to the Brahma Sutra Adhyasa section, and Sankara, the only way to liberation from this worldly existence (Samsara) is to get rid of this wrong notion through real knowledge of Brahman. Just as in the case of the rope and the snake, it is the knowledge of the rope alone that removes the illusion of the snake and nothing else, so also it is the knowledge of Brahman alone that brings about the cessation of this relative existence (Samsara). "A man who knows It alone truly, passes beyond death; there is no other path to go by" sv. 3.8; "He comes not to death who sees that one". Pilgramages, austerities, worship and charity -- these by themselves, without knowledge, cannot help us to attain Liberation. Their utility lies only in purifying our mind (Cittasuddhi), cleansing it of all worldliness, and thus making it fit to comprehend the Truth. When Brahman is reallized this phenomental world disappears automatically, without any further effort on the part of the individual. Knowledge of the Brahman through study of the Brahma Sutra's in absolutely necessary. | |
| | |
| Dear Cyndi,
Yes, and Shankara says (I don't have a citation with me now) that in Nirvikalpa Samadhi (which is Asamprajnata Samadhi of the Raja Yogi), like in deep sleep duality is obliterated but only temporarily since the false knowledge cannot be removed,
Regards. | |
| |
|
****** Off