|
|
| good one, anya :-) |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
  
Location: A Blue State | elson - 2005-09-01 2:36 PM
There are a couple of other important points that bear thought. First, You and I need to be careful that we do not lead our weaker brothers into sin. In other words, if I practice yoga freely because my conscience is clear, but my brother thinks that there is something sinful about it, then I cannot allow my example to lead him to do something that he considers sinful. So if my practice of yoga is a danger to the faith of another Christian, then I need to do something aout that (like teach him a better understanding of theology, so that he then understands correctly that the matter is not inherently sinful.
The other point, that is most important to you, is to look deeply within yourself every class to make sure that your faith is not being changed by the Buddhist teaching.
Dale
And in the same sense, I can sing Gospel hymns (which I think is really fun) without
worshipping the Christian God. Krshna Das has a couple of Gospel tunes that he uses
in Kirtan, but the intent is all Bhakti yoga. It's all about where your mind and heart are,
I suppose.
Hare Krshna Hare Krshna Krshna Krshna Hare Hare Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
 
| Good points Dale. I try to stay out of these conversations but I have to say here for clarity: Yoga is not Buddhist teachings. Many yoga schools honour and respect Buddhist teaching and incorporate Buddhist language and sensibility just as they incorporate Hindu language and sensibility. Some schools of yoga actively teach Hindu philosophy, they may even teach some Buddhist philosophy. But people need to understand the difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. We tend to smush them together here in the west and that is not respectful or honouring the traditions properly, IMHO.
I think if many "Christians" could think freely enough to have your enlightened point of view on worship (and understood their own religion better) they would feel less threatened by yoga. And the world would be a better place!  |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | Gotta agree --- Yoga is mainly a Hindu idea. Buddhism, however, is derived from Hinduism
and many of the basic premises and goals are similar. I won't claim to understand the
nuances fully (I get myself in trouble with my teachers when my earlier interests in Buddhism
bleed into my understanding of yoga); however, if we let go of orthodoxy, we can still find
much intellectual consistency amongst the concepts of the two schools of thought. A weak
observation perhaps, as I also find much intellectual consistency between basic premises
(ethical premises, in particular) of Hinduism and Christianity, despite the utter contradiction of
dualist and non-dualist religions.
What about the following approach: remove everything from religions that addresses life
beyond death (heaven, hell, reincarnation, etc.). Once that is done, how different are
they? Do they help us to be happier or to get along with others better? If religion is only
about life after death, can we be confident that it is meaningful? Can we accept our own
end without explanation?
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| OOOoh! Good question, Bay Guy. We'll have to ponder that one for a bit. |
|
| |
|
| I don't know if anyone here has read the Dalai Lama's book, "Ethics for the New Millenium"- he basically says forget religion and just everyone be nice to each other. That in itself would be a revolution.
OK- so he doesn't say nice, he says compassionate which is more complex. But you get the idea. |
|
| |
|
| Dear Brother BayGuy, tourist and Isha:
1. What BG wrote about forgetting life beyond death or forgetting incarnation, etc. in order to end trouble with religions is all fine and good as far as Social Aspect of Religion is concerned. However, the main reason all the religious things came into existence is due to Personal problems. Regardless of how much people including great leaders in the world consider themselves to be good of many or love thy neighbours, etc, etc., each person including the saints ultimately is trying to find only individual Freedom, called as Kaivalyam in Patanjali, Moksha in Hiduism, Nirvana in Buddhism, and Salvation in some other religions. When, a person understands that it is the same God, Spirit, Universal Soul, Paramatman, etc exits in all beings, then one can attend or one attends to Universal Brotherhood properly, and also this becomes a means of their Salvation. Universal Brotherhood without individual peace, individual happiness, individual freedom in mind does not last for long. Therefore, vedas state,
aham brahmasmi, sarvam khalvidam brahma. first one understands individual spirit, and then one understands univeral spirit.
2. Now, there is no question that Buddhism is nothing but previous Vedic Teachings expressed in a particular context. Not only this, the method of meditation and all concepts related to that were gotten by Gautam Buddha from Vedic rishis of his times. Of course, he actually performed the meditation and preached to people in the context of his times, and due to his missionary activity, it formed new Philsophy/Religion/Method/whatever called Buddhism. Also, only after Buddha and Christ, did people called Vedic Philsophy as Hinduism and then in the context of social development people used the term Hinduism. There is NO Vedic text which uses the word Hindu or Hiduism.
3. Forgetting Religion and Being compassionate is as difficult as giving up one's bank account totally to the victims of disaster, it is exactly same. If my own sister, I mean a blood sister is in Katrina, I behave differently from my another friend in Katrina. I mean my standard of compassion is different. Only realized saints or close to that status feel the same for all beings. And, when they feel so, they do not have any wealth to share, they have already shared what they have. Thus, in a rich world where wealth is horded, no compassion is possible. However, for ending social fighting related to religion, I agree that one can forget religion and obtain some peace. But, after this peace, one shall go into search of Individual Freedom, and then knowledge of Universal spirit.
4. The difference between Yoga and Buddhism is Shoonyavaad, where concept of Universal spirit does not exist in Buddhism. This concept was debated by Adi Shankara and Buddhism influence in India was replaced by Advaita Vedanta, which was the original Philsophy.
5. I do not believe that one has to forget religion to be compassionate. But, one should forget religion because Religion is based upon a particular personality. There is only one Religion, that is the Truth, also called as God, also called as Allah, also called as Paramatman, also called as Ishwara.
Peace
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Oh my goodness.
So, would you please comment further or expand upon your comments...."The difference between Yoga and Buddhism is Shoonyavaad, where concept of Universal spirit does not exist in Buddhism. This concept was debated by Adi Shankara and Buddhism influence in India was replaced by Advaita Vedanta, which was the original Philsophy".
Neel, this is where I sometimes have a conflict due to the monastery teachings I have had previously and my Vedanta teachings now. What is the meaning of Shoonyavaad - your translation? I understand Shoonya - means empty, nothing. How can you take the Buddhist meaning of Emptiness and apply it with Yoga teachings to mean the same??? Is that possible?
Cyndiben
|
|
| |
|
| Cyndiben:
Let me take a couple of days, and I shall answer properly. If you are in a hurry, you have to research Adi Shankara's commentary on Brahmasutra, the LAST work of Veda Vyasa. Also, just for information of all, the Vyasa who wrote commentary on Patanjali is NOT Veda Vyasa who wrote Bhagavadgita, codified Vedas, and also wrote Brahmasutra and Puranas.
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | kulkarnn - 2005-09-20 4:48 PM
Dear Brother BayGuy, tourist and Isha:
1. What BG wrote about forgetting life beyond death or forgetting incarnation, etc. in order to end trouble with religions is all fine and good as far as Social Aspect of Religion is concerned. However, the main reason all the religious things came into existence is due to Personal problems. Regardless of how much people including great leaders in the world consider themselves to be good of many or love thy neighbours, etc, etc., each person including the saints ultimately is trying to find only individual Freedom, called as Kaivalyam in Patanjali, Moksha in Hiduism, Nirvana in Buddhism, and Salvation in some other religions. When, a person understands that it is the same God, Spirit, Universal Soul, Paramatman, etc exits in all beings, then one can attend or one attends to Universal Brotherhood properly, and also this becomes a means of their Salvation. Universal Brotherhood without individual peace, individual happiness, individual freedom in mind does not last for long. Therefore, vedas state,
aham brahmasmi, sarvam khalvidam brahma. first one understands individual spirit, and then one understands univeral spirit.
There is NO Vedic text which uses the word Hindu or Hiduism.
Peace
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
Dear Brother Neel,
I'm glad that you are back from your travels.
On your first point: Sarvum Khalvidam Brahma. If we understood this, there would
be no need for religion, would there?
On "Hindu" --it's basically a word made up by 19th Century British people, I think.
I'm not even sure what it means, except as a symbol of Indian philosophy and deities.
BG
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | kulkarnn - 2005-09-20 10:32 PM
Cyndiben:
Let me take a couple of days, and I shall answer properly. If you are in a hurry, you have to research Adi Shankara's commentary on Brahmasutra, the LAST work of Veda Vyasa. Also, just for information of all, the Vyasa who wrote commentary on Patanjali is NOT Veda Vyasa who wrote Bhagavadgita, codified Vedas, and also wrote Brahmasutra and Puranas.
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
No hurry Neelbhai, I am looking forward to your response. Danyabaad
Cyndiben |
|
| |
|
| Dear Brother Bay Guy:
1. Yes, I agree there is NO need to have the word Religion. But, the word already exists. Religion means returning to your own true nature or a path to return to your own nature. And, that nature is the Truth, Brahman. However, people due to Ignorance (not in a bad sense, but just grammatical meaning or fact), think that religion has to do with one person, one place, or such.
2. Hindu means as follows: Hindu is wrong pronuciation of Sindhu. Sindhu is a river on which a very spiritual culture developed which was the Vedic culture. That is why it is called Hindu. Then, when missionary religions such as Buddhism and Christianity came, they named Vedic culture as Hinduism. I think even Gautam Buddha and Jesus Christ were preaching only in the context of the soceity at that time and they had no problem with Hinduism, but their followers who wanted to form an Institution on this name later created a fanatic group. Same thing happened with Muhammad followers. Not only this, but even brahmins of India tried to create a financially or powerful group which was not same as the original meaning of Brahminism. All these led to fighting which is the cause of unrest seen today.
Cyndiben: With apologies, I have to be brief. For your comparitive studies related to Refutation of Buddhist Philosophy: You can study the following:
a) Patanjali Yoga Sutras - Chapter 4 - sutras 15 to 21.
b) Brahmasutra = Chapter 2 (this will be more work).
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | kulkarnn - 2005-09-21 8:14 AM
Dear Brother Bay Guy:
1. Yes, I agree there is NO need to have the word Religion. But, the word already exists. Religion means returning to your own true nature or a path to return to your own nature. And, that nature is the Truth, Brahman. However, people due to Ignorance (not in a bad sense, but just grammatical meaning or fact), think that religion has to do with one person, one place, or such.
Cyndiben: With apologies, I have to be brief. For your comparitive studies related to Refutation of Buddhist Philosophy: You can study the following:
a) Patanjali Yoga Sutras - Chapter 4 - sutras 15 to 21.
b) Brahmasutra = Chapter 2 (this will be more work).
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
About Ignorance....I've always wondered if there was a *nicer* way of putting it...I guess not huh?
Thanks Neel, where to find Brahmasutra book?? The work will be in locating one with a decent translation. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| Re: ignorance. It takes a long time and a lot of practice to get rid of our emotional response to certain words, doesn't it? I was told once by a teacher that one of my kids was "immature" and it drove me crazy for a long time. I knew that she MEANT the child was young for their grade (they have Sept and November birthdays) and most of their peers in the class were older (ie more "mature") but it still bothered me. As a teacher, she should have known to not use such emtionally charged words with a parent, I think. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Well Tourist, I think its all a matter of perception with words also. Words are so very powerful aren't they? When I saw what Neelbhai had written, I knew what Ignorance was and the way it is taught in the Veda and other philosophy's. My experience and observance of this is when you tell that to a Christian or better yet, say that to someone in the countryside where I live, they get their panties in a wad and start going nuts about it. Like - She called me Stupid, or she thinks I'm not smart, you know, Ignorance?? 
I have learned not to take so many things so **** personally - without attachment, which is what I love about the Buddhist teachings...it seems to work better in my favor when I practice this lost art,  Learning this method the Vedanta way has been an interesting path too...but the emptiness path sure is easier, |
|
| |
|
| Well, I did not mean any offense when I used the word 'Ignorance'. Whatever word one wants to use: What I meant by Ignorance is a) either not knowing some thing b) or knowing something as what that thing is NOT.
For Brahmasutra book in English, I would not actually recommend any, but if that is the only language one has to read, please see whether you can obtain:
English Translation (NOT English Commentary) of Adi Shankara's Commentary on Brahmasutra. Perhaps this may be published by Advaita Ashram, or Ramakrishna Mission, etc. Do a search.
Neelbhai
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Neelbhai,
What about the one by Swami Sivananda published by the Divine Life Society?? I was able to locate it through my friend at the University Library. That's about as good as it gets I think. Your right, there were a ton of choices but I can't read Sanskrit and it would take Satyam too many hours of frustration trying to explain and translate the text.
Don't worry, you did NOT offend anyone, we were just having an *off* topic conversation about that word and how it is used...then we compared it to other things...it's okay, really |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | kulkarnn - 2005-09-21 8:14 AM
Dear Brother Bay Guy:
1. Yes, I agree there is NO need to have the word Religion. But, the word already exists. Religion means returning to your own true nature or a path to return to your own nature. And, that nature is the Truth, Brahman. However, people due to Ignorance (not in a bad sense, but just grammatical meaning or fact), think that religion has to do with one person, one place, or such.
2. Hindu means as follows: Hindu is wrong pronuciation of Sindhu. Sindhu is a river on which a very spiritual culture developed which was the Vedic culture. That is why it is called Hindu. Then, when missionary religions such as Buddhism and Christianity came, they named Vedic culture as Hinduism. I think even Gautam Buddha and Jesus Christ were preaching only in the context of the soceity at that time and they had no problem with Hinduism, but their followers who wanted to form an Institution on this name later created a fanatic group. Same thing happened with Muhammad followers. Not only this, but even brahmins of India tried to create a financially or powerful group which was not same as the original meaning of Brahminism. All these led to fighting which is the cause of unrest seen today.
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org
Dear Brother Neel,
Yes, I think that the problem of religion often comes down to the problem
of authority. Who is the authority and what does the authority say? So I find
it useful to think about religion without reference to the authorities it may
contain. I have often found that the best ideas can survive critical scrutiny
without having to be protected by historical authority (this is also one of the
problems with Justice Scalia, who dresses up his prejudices in the mantle
of a static, historicist vision of the Constitution).
It is common to dismiss humanist interpretations of religion as being hedonistic
or hewing to the easy road, but such interpretations are simply practical: do our
religious beliefs improve our lives, our relationships, and our society? I can only
believe that any activity deity would insist on such outcomes, so I think that the
pragmatic standard is also theologically meaningful. All of which supports
your statements about ignorance and Truth.
On fantics --- religion has produced so many. It is powerful stuff, and sometimes weak
or needy minds are sucked into horrible and hateful interpretations of that which is
too much for the best of us to absorb.
.... BG |
|
| |
|
| Yes Brother BG:
Maximum killing has occured in the name of Religion.
neel kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | How can anyone kill in the name of their god? *It breaks my heart*.
............  |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Bay Guy - 2005-09-22 9:19 PM
How can anyone kill in the name of their god? *It breaks my heart*.
............
Have you ever read the Mahabarat BG?? It's very interesting when Krishna talks about fighting and the reasons we sometimes have to do these unpleasant things here on earth. |
|
| |
|
| Certainly a fascinating discussion.
I reflected on Kulkarnn's sentence for quite some time:
"The main reason all the religious things came into existence is due to personal problems".
Not to take it out of context, he basically says the personal peace must be gained before Universal Truth is realized. (Forgive me if I misconstrue your meaning, K.)
Or in ashram-speak, self-purification is necessary before god-realization is attained. I believe that god-realization is synomous with self-realization. That is, the self is god.
I perceive a certain truth in this line of thinking but can't help thinking that this view is a-historical.
Religion, besides being a spiritual vehicle, is a social entity and by extension a political tool.
In the past and still even in the present, the king. emperoror pharoah was literally considered God on Earth. His rule was sanctified by the divine. Religion or mythology was the state and the law and was often shaped to facilitate control.
And converesely it gave the individual a sense of identity and importance in his or her community. (If you've ever been to a good Bar Mitzvah, you know what I'm talking about.)
I think that only an elite priesthood or elect actually experienced religion/mythology as true illumination.
Reportedly, Jesus taught his disciples more advanced lessons than the masses.
Perhaps, it's a sign of human evolution, that we can, if we choose, follow various paths of spiritual evolution; paths that previously were only available to an elite.
As an aside, I believe that the Hindus view Gautam Buddha as the sixth or seventh incarnation of Lord Vishnu.Something that the Buddhists may or may not appreciate.
Years ago, I read some text by an Hindu author who had his own explanation about what happened when the Rishis sat on their Himalayan mountaintop and transcribed the Vedas.
They first postulated Brahma, or undifferentated non-dualistic energy (very similar if not identical to "The Field" of quantum physics) but it seemed that it was too abstract for humans.
Humans wanted and needed to worship something and thus archetypes, myths and religions, if you will, were invented. And if nothing else the sheer creativity of humanity in creating these symbols should be celebrated.
(Leaving aside the the thorny question of the annunaki or nefilim.)
And perhaps humans get too attached to the symbols of their own creation and forget they're symbols not Absolute Truth.
Wherever these deities are and I believe that they all exist, I doubt that they're all butting heads and arguing about who is the real and only god.
They're probably all wondering if humanity is going to get it together and not destroy itself out of sheer stupidity.
I imagine they would miss being worshipped.
|
|
| |
|
| Certainly a fascinating discussion.
I reflected on Kulkarnn's sentence for quite some time:
"The main reason all the religious things came into existence is due to personal problems".
Not to take it out of context, he basically says the personal peace must be gained before Universal Truth is realized. (Forgive me if I misconstrue your meaning, K.)
Or in ashram-speak, self-purification is necessary before god-realization is attained. I believe that god-realization is synomous with self-realization. That is, the self is god.
I perceive a certain truth in this line of thinking but can't help thinking that this view is a-historical.
Religion, besides being a spiritual vehicle, is a social entity and by extension a political tool.
In the past and still even in the present, the king. emperoror pharoah was literally considered God on Earth. His rule was sanctified by the divine. Religion or mythology was the state and the law and was often shaped to facilitate control.
And converesely it gave the individual a sense of identity and importance in his or her community. (If you've ever been to a good Bar Mitzvah, you know what I'm talking about.)
I think that only an elite priesthood or elect actually experienced religion/mythology as true illumination.
Reportedly, Jesus taught his disciples more advanced lessons than the masses.
Perhaps, it's a sign of human evolution, that we can, if we choose, follow various paths of spiritual evolution; paths that previously were only available to an elite.
As an aside, I believe that the Hindus view Gautam Buddha as the sixth or seventh incarnation of Lord Vishnu.Something that the Buddhists may or may not appreciate.
Years ago, I read some text by an Hindu author who had his own explanation about what happened when the Rishis sat on their Himalayan mountaintop and transcribed the Vedas.
They first postulated Brahma, or undifferentated non-dualistic energy (very similar if not identical to "The Field" of quantum physics) but it seemed that it was too abstract for humans.
Humans wanted and needed to worship something and thus archetypes, myths and religions, if you will, were invented. And if nothing else the sheer creativity of humanity in creating these symbols should be celebrated.
(Leaving aside the the thorny question of the annunaki or nefilim.)
And perhaps humans get too attached to the symbols of their own creation and forget they're symbols not Absolute Truth.
Wherever these deities are and I believe that they all exist, I doubt that they're all butting heads and arguing about who is the real and only god.
They're probably all wondering if humanity is going to get it together and not destroy itself out of sheer stupidity.
I imagine they would miss being worshipped.
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | Cyndi - 2005-09-22 9:25 PM
Bay Guy - 2005-09-22 9:19 PM
How can anyone kill in the name of their god? *It breaks my heart*.
............
Have you ever read the Mahabarat BG?? It's very interesting when Krishna talks about fighting and the reasons we sometimes have to do these unpleasant things here on earth.
Well, yes, it's the Bhagavad Gita, and it's really quite interesting that Krshna
tells Arjuna that his duty is to go ahead and kill the opposing soldiers while everything
else that Krshna says completely unscores the concepts of nonviolence...to the extent that
Gandhi often cited the Gita for the underlying philosophy of his nonviolent
political movement! |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Bay Guy - 2005-09-22 9:46 PM
Have you ever read the Mahabarat BG?? It's very interesting when Krishna talks about fighting and the reasons we sometimes have to do these unpleasant things here on earth.
Well, yes, it's the Bhagavad Gita, and it's really quite interesting that Krshna
tells Arjuna that his duty is to go ahead and kill the opposing soldiers while everything
else that Krshna says completely unscores the concepts of nonviolence...to the extent that
Gandhi often cited the Gita for the underlying philosophy of his nonviolent
political movement!
BG, I understand how you feel, really I do. But, we are humans on this earth and there is a time and place for fighting and war. No one wants to come to the table and disuss peace and tranquility...no way, its about conquer and divide, the strongest is the fitest and the competetion thing...hell, its taught in the school class rooms. The problem now is the persons who are making the decisions to fight are not what I call enlightened, spiritual, or even mindful about it at all - on all sides. As much as we would like to be in a perfect spiritual world, it just doesn't exist. Besides, these leaders need to completely experience the karma they are creating. The people in the world need to experience the karma they are creating by supporting it. It's necessary for their evolvement because this is where their minds are.
This is where I see certain people on the spiritual path getting confused when it comes to war and fighting. They have a hard time accepting the fact that this does truly exists in the world and it really must be accepted and dealt with positively and with non-attachment to the outcome of what might happen and what is going to happen. Shiva is going to destroy the earth one day. It will be wiped out and we will start the cycle all over again. This is part of life and its a part of humans coexisting in this world. However, I don't think it is our job to question these things as much as it is to seek enlightenment within ourselves, be the person we want the world to be, and not expect anything back from it, which includes possibly never seeing the outcome of the good that we do because it is a process and a Divine plan at work, we are merely players. The world has to evolve and so do the humans in it. Humans were put here on this planet to discover their-SELVES. Unfortunately, this is how it is done. We cannot suppress the fighting no more than we can suppress the opposite, which is non-violence. There has to be a balance. Besides, what are you going to do in a perfect world anyway?? If the world were perfect, I would not be here, that's for sure. I wouldn't bother coming back. Why would I. We are Diving beings having a Human experience aren't we??
Edited by Cyndi 2005-09-22 10:20 PM
|
|
| |
Can Christians Practice Yoga?
