|
|
| Bay Guy - 2005-02-07 8:57 AM
Hey, no fair editing your message while I'm responding to you!
Before you tell Brother Neel to flunk me on my exam, you'd
better reread the posts above.
So nah. 
 Shape up or ship out !!!!!!!!
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
  
Location: A Blue State | I just shipped out to another forum. Nobody is yelling at me there.
Edited by Bay Guy 2005-02-06 10:04 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Bay Guy - 2005-02-07 8:58 AM
Okay, why's it wrong??
So many things bay guy! Not one. wait till I make the list ok
Heyyyy DOOoooooooooont do that. OK OK OK I wont tell Kulkarn and Fail you ok .. Shape up !!
Edited by Thushara 2005-02-06 10:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State |
I await your reply with bated breath...
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State |
There you go editing your messages while I'm replying to them.
By the way, do you think that Reinbeaux Marz actually knows anything about yoga?
I think that there are a lot of chicky chicks who pick a clever name, get their hair
done, and start selling yoga videos.
|
|
| |
|
|
Dont wait.... Processing is very slow as the server is multitasking......  Go and do some yoga now. I will keep the answers ready for you ok ?
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State |
Okay, it's time for me to go do Pranayama and get to sleep. I will
log on again tomorrow.
Bay Guy
|
|
| |
|
| Bay Guy - 2005-02-07 9:10 AM
By the way, do you think that Reinbeaux Marz actually knows anything about yoga?
I think that there are a lot of chicky chicks who pick a clever name, get their hair
done, and start selling yoga videos.
BG, Dont worry about those things. When you see people like that, you have to keep only 1 thing in your mind. That is ;
"CANT BEAT THE STUPIDITY "
then you can ignore them (This is what my best friend tought me.. It really works., You wont be bothered about them )
Edited by Thushara 2005-02-06 10:25 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Bay Guy - 2005-02-07 8:55 AM
Oh, but Thushara -- the Truth is something that each of us must accept as a matter
of faith, if we are talking about truths that cannot be scientifically tested. What we
believe as a matter of faith is what we accept to be true, despite the lack of objective
proof. To accept that Christ or Buddha lived the lives we are told that they
lived is a matter of faith in itself, and to say that either descended from a god is
a further matter of faith. I don't like to use the word truth when I talk about things
that we take on faith.
Truth is something that each of us must accept as a matter
of faith X
Truth should never be accepted as a matter of faith., Truth should be accepted as a matter of self realization.,
if we are talking about truths that cannot be scientifically tested X
Its not always true. There are so many examples which I can show you when the truth is tested scientifically . Eg: Galileo said the Earth was round and It was true. later it was proven scientifically., Buddhism (Abhidharma pitaka) talks about other planets and today, its scientifically proven. Etc etc etc etc.. You have soooo many examples (I don’t know much about other religions so Im sorry for taking examples only from Buddhism)
I don't like to use the word truth when I talk about things
that we take on faith. X
BG, I think you have taken up with religion on faith.,, I respect that., But I don’t do that., Religion should be something which any body should be able to question at any time. Everybody should have rights to question it and find whether they say the truth. If a person is willing to live and be guided according to his or her religion, Don’t you think ……..??
., I never ever take up anything on faith unless I see there is truth in it. Not even religion. Nothing..
0
____
100
Guys!! Please please don’t be offended by my posts.. This is exclusively to BG.
Edited by Thushara 2005-02-07 8:07 AM
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | Thushara - 2005-02-07 8:03 AM
Bay Guy - 2005-02-07 8:55 AM
Oh, but Thushara -- the Truth is something that each of us must accept as a matter
of faith, if we are talking about truths that cannot be scientifically tested. What we
believe as a matter of faith is what we accept to be true, despite the lack of objective
proof. To accept that Christ or Buddha lived the lives we are told that they
lived is a matter of faith in itself, and to say that either descended from a god is
a further matter of faith. I don't like to use the word truth when I talk about things
that we take on faith.
Truth is something that each of us must accept as a matter
of faith X
Truth should never be accepted as a matter of faith., Truth should be accepted as a matter of self realization.,
if we are talking about truths that cannot be scientifically tested X
Its not always true. There are so many examples which I can show you when the truth is tested scientifically . Eg: Galileo said the Earth was round and It was true. later it was proven scientifically., Buddhism (Abhidharma pitaka ) talks about other planets and today, its scientifically proven. Etc etc etc etc.. You have soooo many examples (I don’t know much about other religions so Im sorry for taking examples only from Buddhism )
I don't like to use the word truth when I talk about things
that we take on faith. X
BG, I think you have taken up with religion on faith.,, I respect that., But I don’t do that., Religion should be something which any body should be able to question at any time. Everybody should have rights to question it and find whether they say the truth. If a person is willing to live and be guided according to his or her religion, Don’t you think ……..??
., I never ever take up anything on faith unless I see there is truth in it. Not even religion. Nothing..
Well, let's see.
Faith and Self-realization: if an unprovable proposition leads me to Self-Realization, then
I might accept it as a matter of Faith. Faith means believing something when there is
no objective (i.e., non-subjective) evidence to demonstrate it.
Scientifically testable ideas: Galileo made a testable hypothesis that the Earth orbited
the Sun, rather than the Sun the Earth. He had evidence to support his proposition
which was based on astronomical observation. Subsequent observations and experiments
have continued to support his claim. It is a scicentific theory, well-supported by objective
evidence. Another example is Einstein's theory of General Relativity. At the time he proposed
his theory, experimental proof was absent. BUT, it was clear enough that experiments could
be done to test the theory, and Eddington and others did so within a few years of Einstein's
introduction of the theory. If the experiments had contradicted the theory, it might have
been discarded in favor of a new theory.
In matters of theology, it is very hard to make any experiments to prove things about god,
either in the sense of demonstrating god's existence or in the sense of predicting his future
actions. We can always look back at the past and say that something happened b/c god
meant it to, but such claims are always unprovable.
When you say that "religion is something that anybody should be able to question at
any time", I agree with you completely. So long as the answers one gets to one's questions
about religion are satisfactory (to one's self), one might continue to accept that religion
as a matter of faith. If the answers don't make sense, one might abandon those beliefs.
I started questioning Christianity 30 years ago, and I rejected the whole theory completely
on the basis of its inability either to describe the world or to help me live in it. I have since
found other beliefs to describe the world (i.e., science) and to help me live in it (i.e., yoga).
Yoga has also led me to adopt other beliefs simply as a matter of faith, because these beliefs
provide me with a way to interact with myself and others without so much anger, frustration,
and despair. These latter beliefs are unprovable, but they make me happy.
|
|
| |
|
| Found an interesting quote.
Let me tell you this: Faith comes and goes. But if it is presumptuous to think that faith will stay forever, it is just as presumptuous to think that unbelief will.
-Flannery O'Connor |
|
| |
|
|
Who is Flannery O'Connor ????????????
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State |
She was a Southern American author from the mid-twentieth century.
|
|
| |
|
| Traditional yoga is yoga I and it brings you to no higher than self-realization, then you have to call God for help if you want to experience God-realization...and this is the beginning of yoga II.
What Jesus taught was yoga II and it begins straight from the oneness with God. You let the God occupy your body, then love the presence of God from the altar of your heart and the Holy Spirit will do the yoga for you. Below is how my teacher puts it.
"The Yoga that Jesus taught
The "key" to the yoga that Jesus taught is Revlations (Christian Bible, New Testement) 11:1 This scripture talks about a fellow that is given a measuring stick and asked to measure the temple, the altar of the temple and those who worship in the temple. The temple is your body, the temple's altar is your heart, and what that is being worshipped is the presence of God in your body/house/temple. What this fellow is measuring is the physiological changes, transformations if you will, that occur when God physically occupys your body and this presence of God is honored, praised, and loved from the altar of your heart.
Luke 24:52-53 "And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple praising God."
In M. Govindan,M.A's book "Babaji and the 18 Siddha Kriya Yoga Tradition" Mr. Govindan shares with the reader that the Siddhas achieved physical immortality and left with their bodies. In the translations of the words of some of these Siddhas there is mentioned that one has to be actually physically occupied by God before the transformation to physical immortality is possible. Now poor Mr. Govindan has achieved Self-Realization but he is still trying to figure out how the Siddhas achieved physical immortality. If Mr Govindan were to read Reveations 11:1, with the understanding that it talks about physical immortality, and correlate what the Siddhas said in his book with Revelations 11:1, Mr Govindan would know how physical immortality is done. Jesus also gave us a clue in John 14:20 when he said, "I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you."
Acaveyogi"
"The Simple Path
This is how it works:
It starts out that God is an honored, loved guest in your body/house/temple and that his presence in your body/house is praised from the altar that is your heart. Over time the loved presence of God in your body/house transforms your body/house into "His" body/house and you "live in the house of the Lord forever!" (Psalm 23) acaveyogi"
May the Heart's love shine on you, Bodhisattva  |
|
| |
|
| Dear Bodhisattva:
I like, in a way, you call what Jesus taught as Yoga II. Interesting. Yoga was in existence 10000 years before Jesus was born. And, that you call Yoga I. What you call Yoga II as Surrender to God existed much before Jesus was born as follows:
- sarva dharman parityajya mamekam sharanam vraja.... bhagavadgita, 3200 before Christ
- samaadhisiddhi ishwarapranidhaanat... patanjali... 300 before christ
- ishaavaasyam idam sarvam... ishaavaasyopanishad more than 4000 years before Christ.
I can site too many examples of this to fill up this whole bulletin board.
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
| Of course surrender to God existed before Jesus. It's obvious that there were many God-realizers before Jesus. But Jesus created a whole new reality in a dimension of meditation. He brought us under the law of grace. The yoga that existed before was/is based on the law of karma.
|
|
| |
|
| No, dear Bodhisattva, that is NOT true. Yoga was not only based on law of Karma before Jesus. There was a law of Grace and Bhakti and Devotional Love and surrender all these before Jesus. Jesus did NOT form new Reality. Reality is never new, it is always old, only a method of approaching reality can be new. Even then, the law of grace was not newly formed by Jesus. Yes, the way he stated to the people around him was New, and due to the background of those people, who had never heard such things before due to their background, were totally fascinated and felt it was New, Only Godly, or only Meditation, or whatever. All this existed in plenty before him. I have no ill feelings for what he said. I actually call him a great sage or a Yogi.
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
| You know, I used to think that all the masters taught the same thing in the different package and that all the paths lead to the same goal. I have actually gone through the path of jnana yoga with a little devotional twist from beginning to it's end, so what I say is something I've personally experienced. Self-realization and God-realization are two different things. What Jesus taught/teaches is a direct path to God-realization and I don't think it has existed before him. I don't say that God-realization didn't exist before, but this direct path is new. Ancient yogis did it the hard way.
About the reality. It turns out that basically you create your own reality. Where I'm coming from reality seems new every moment. Sorry if I'm messing with your reality, but that's just what we do everytime we communicate with others.
|
|
| |
|
| If someone says selfrealization and god realization are two different things, then that is definitely WRONG. when self is realized, one automatically realizes that the self has no dimensions, it has no material properties, and it is all bliss consciousness and permanent. That same self exists in everything, and it is that self which has become everything. When the last thing (it is the self which has become everything), it is called God and that is the God Realization.
this was written in vedas thousands of year ago as:
aadau aatma tatparam khalu idam brahma.
First one realizes one's own self, and then the universal self, called as Brahman, which is identical with Purusha, Purushavishesha, Parameshwara, God, etc.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for Jesus or anyone to show a new Reality. The Reality in Vedas is called Aparoksha Jnanam, which is directly perceived in meditation (the term you used above a lot) by the sages, and it was given in Sound Form as Shruti. That aparoksha reality can only be realized by others, it can never be modified or invented in an additional way.
Peace
Neel Kulkarni
www.authenticyoga.org |
|
| |
|
| Personally, I am unaffected by the religious beliefs and statements of my yoga teachers and friends, but I am a student of Christian theology who has spent thousands of hours in analytical thought and study of the religious history, doctrine, and scriptures of my faith. So I am relatively immune to Buddhist thought.
I find it necessary to avoid things in my practice that offend my God, such as chanting statements that I do not agree with, or expressing excessive veneration for yoga teachers, alive or dead (yes, some Catholics would not have a problem with this :-).
I do not find that my practice deepens my faith, or my relationship with my God, although I would not object if a Christian was able to offer true worship during yoga. True worship is not a matter of form or specific practice, but of truth and intent.
I do not divide my life into spiritual/religious vs other - my whole life is spiritual and religious and physical and mental and emotional and work and play and man and human and father and husband and friend and lover - it is all one, and in all things, God is God.
That said, I value my practice in many areas. In no particular order...
Focus and concentration. The practice of mindfulness during the dance has improved my ability to sit in stillness before my God. This part of my practice becomes a tool that helps me put aside distractions that interfere when I want to talk to God in a concentrated way.
Non-attachment or something. I am prone to get excited and anxious about some things. We all have things about ourselves that we are less fond of, and one of mine is that I can be knocked into an altered state of consciousness (or panic reaction or downshifted, or however you think about it) by certain things. My practice of observing the sensations in my body - as opposed to being the slave of these things - gives me confidence and increases my ability to lean into God & trust in Him. This sounds odd, but it is alot easier to trust God when you are not in a full-fledged panic attack.
I had a tooth go bad the other day (abcess insode a crown). Usually, this would fill me with concern over being able to get in to see my dentist before it blows up, but this time, I was able to experience the pain, sort of sink into it, and become an observer of the sensation, instead of the victim of the pain. I was not able to hold that seat very long, of course, but it was a great confidence-builder, and very freeing.
Much of practical Christianity is about freedom from the lusts which diswtract and decieve us from following God with a whole heart, so this experience was good for me. Again, it was not a faith-builder per se, but it gave me another good tool, and strengthened me.
Physical exercise. I have been exercising for the last couple of decades, and have achieved a pretty decent physical capability. As my program became increasingly yoga instead of lifting & cardio, I find that my endurance and strength have not declined as much as I had expected, and I have fewer stress injuries :-).
Fellowship and sharing. When I practice with others, it is often with one or another teacher from the Anusara school of yoga, and we tend to use the first part of the class in fellowship. Occasionally, when my turn comes, I speak of the greatness of my God, of His acts of devotion to His people, and of my love for Him. This aspect does tend to build, or at least compliment, my faith, because, hey, I'm always happy to speak of my Beloved :-).
Cheers....
|
|
| |
|
| Bobhisattva :-)
What an amusing interpretation of these scriptures!
Just goes to show that you can make a sentence mean anything by inserting it into the context of your choice.
But to understand what the bible means, wouldn't you want to study the Jewish culture of the authors, the patterns of the source languages of those times, and the scholorship of 2000 to 4000 years of students of that book?
|
|
| |
|
| What I talk about here is something that I'm experiencing. The problem is that it doesn't go along with traditions. Yogis don't accept what I'm saying and christian don't accept what I'm saying. I can't blame them the usual belief about the subject is more enticing.
My point of view is that
Self is all that is...whole creation and beyond, but God is beyond beyond.
There's a part of self that is beyond understanding and then there's a part of
God that is beyond understanding.
Self-realization is becoming one with the part of self that is beyond
understanding(+universal self) and God-realization is union of the part of God
that is uncomprehensable and part of self that is uncomprehensable.
Self-realization is individual self merging with universal self and this
is ananda...bliss of self being in oneness with itself. But at this point if you
become 'yoked' to God you'll loose that bliss...and this is why so few stick
into oneness with God. The bliss is the last trap. I can't blame them, even the
part of self that is beyond understanding is way too scary to most. Talk about
taking a look at God...many run away screaming.
When you are yoked to God you don't loose your individuality. Your
individual bodymind becomes occupied by God and is transformed from inside out.
Kundalini fades away at this point and the Holy Spirit continues the work.
Eventually you become like God is and can step clean out of creation.
|
|
| |
|
| I find it necessary to avoid things in my practice that offend my God, such as chanting statements that I do not agree with, or expressing excessive veneration for yoga teachers, alive or dead (yes, some Catholics would not have a problem with this :-).
Elson:
Your posts generally seem well reasoned. I cannot make sense of the above statement.
Why would "your" God be offended by chanting? I presume it is you who is more offended than your God. Do you believe that the God of each religion is different, or that the God of your religion is the "real" God? If so, where does that put the followers of other religions? On the path to he%$?? |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
Location: A Blue State | elson - 2005-04-15 2:19 AM
I find it necessary to avoid things in my practice that offend my God, such as chanting statements that I do not agree with, or expressing excessive veneration for yoga teachers, alive or dead (yes, some Catholics would not have a problem with this :-).
Elson --- Are you saying that some Catholics are not practicing christianity? |
|
| |
|
| Bay Guy - 2005-04-15 12:25 PM
elson - 2005-04-15 2:19 AM
I find it necessary to avoid things in my practice that offend my God, such as chanting statements that I do not agree with, or expressing excessive veneration for yoga teachers, alive or dead (yes, some Catholics would not have a problem with this :-).
Elson --- Are you saying that some Catholics are not practicing christianity?
I've read statements where Hindus consider the invocation to Patanjali as if they were praying to a god. This would be reprehensible to those from the reform tradition. Protestants talk directly to God, and him only. Since some Catholics pray to Mary or to other Saints as an advocate for them, this use of an intermediary may not be offensive to them.
Edited by MrD 2005-04-15 9:31 PM
|
|
| |
Yoga and Jesus Christ
