|
Home > Archive > Yoga > May 2005 > What is YOUR definition of "yoga"
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
What is YOUR definition of "yoga"
|
|
| Dave ©¿©¬ 2005-05-20, 11:59 am |
| Howdy!
I see a lot of hostility here that probably stems from simple semantics.
So... just so that I can tell where everybody is coming from here is a
simple multiple choice question:
WHAT IS: "Yoga/yoga"?
A: A religion
B: A philosophy
C: A discipline
D: Other (please explain.)
--
Dave ©¿©¬
http://www.howdydave.com
| |
|
|
Hi again,
My dear if Swami was really sincere in his saying that every soul is
divine, then by insisting to be aware of his/her divinity he implies
that some of divines are not aware his divinity.. Two things you
accept, whether swami was sincere but in this case divine is not aware
his /her divinity. OR Swami was not sincere in his saying....
With compassion,
Puma
| |
|
| Howdy Dave,
I was reasoning on your QUALIFIED STATEMENT,but you have asked many
questions regarding your own qualified statement.
regarding the definition of divinity,although I have used divinity in
the same contex with the SWAMI...
Are you aware of this fact dave?
With compassion,
Puma
| |
|
| Howdy Dave,
My dear, it is called discrimination if you know Swami`s word divinity
but not mine.
Blaming is not the solution,solution is in our minds and words shows it
others.When yo like as BEST Swami`s words,it is judement and same line
with yours also which is the reason why you have chosen it BEST...
I like Albuquerque best in New Mexcico...I like your HOWDY for this
reason...
With compassion,
Puma
| |
| omjaram 2005-05-22, 11:53 am |
| Puma, Puma, Puma,
As usual you are absolutely correct and I think Vivekanada would agree
with you. Vivekanada is also correct. Our job as jnanis is to reconcile
the seeming difference in these two statements and see the truth in
both. Because it is all God (divine) and therefore it has to be true.
:-)
Namaste
| |
| Dave ©¿©¬ 2005-05-22, 5:53 pm |
| Howdy!
Guess I really didn't answer my own question, I just quoted what somebody
else said! I would have to say that, for me, it starts as:
B: A philosophy.
As I delve deeper into the philosophy, I see that the only way for me to
make any progress is to practice that philosophy as:
C: A Discipline.
I've been to some discussion groups where if a person was not restricting
him/herself solely to the Vedic & Upanashad writings they were a heratic of
some sort.
IMO: Wisdom and insight can also be obtained from "other resources."
--
Dave ©¿©¬
http://www.howdydave.com
"Dave ©¿©¬" <dave@_nospam_howdydave.com> wrote in message
news:5Ydie.1370$8g.1128@news01.roc.ny...
> Howdy!
>
> I see a lot of hostility here that probably stems from simple semantics.
>
> So... just so that I can tell where everybody is coming from here is a
> simple multiple choice question:
>
> WHAT IS: "Yoga/yoga"?
>
> A: A religion
> B: A philosophy
> C: A discipline
> D: Other (please explain.)
>
> --
> Dave ©¿©¬
>
> http://www.howdydave.com
>
>
| |
| Sevenhundred Elves 2005-05-23, 11:54 am |
| puma wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> My dear if Swami was really sincere in his saying that every soul is
> divine, then by insisting to be aware of his/her divinity he implies
> that some of divines are not aware his divinity.. Two things you
> accept, whether swami was sincere but in this case divine is not aware
> his /her divinity. OR Swami was not sincere in his saying....
Yes.. hm.. well, to be absolutely frank, I can not know exactly what
Swami Vivekananda meant, the only thing I can be sure of is what I think
the passage means to me.
As you may recall, Vivekananda said: "Each soul is potentially divine.
The goal is to manifest the divinity within by controlling nature:
external and internal. Do this either by work, or worship, or psychic
control, or philosophy -- by one, or more, or all of these and be free."
To me, this is not very controversial. The goal in yoga really is to
reach and join with the divinity within. This inner divinity (often
called Ishvara, or less precise, God) is most often obscured and hard to
see because the mind is not still; just like a pool of rainwater, when
the water is disturbed, mud is whirled around in it and you can't see to
the bottom.
But when the pool is left in peace, when the water becomes still, all
the mud sinks away and the water gets transparent. Then we can what's at
the bottom.
In a similar way, the mind is often disturbed, thoughts and emotions are
whirling around, but through the practice of yoga the chitta vrittis,
the "mindstuff whirlings", are stilled, and the mind gets crystal clear.
Now, when the mind is clear as crystal, we can perceive the divinity
which lies at the bottom of our being, as a foundation, if you will.
This stilling of the mind is the method of yoga. And the awareness of
God's presence in our hearts is the goal of yoga.
I think this is, roughly, what Vivekananda meant, but as always, I may
be mistaken.
S.
| |
|
| Hi, S.Elves,
I understand DIVINITY as all there exist...But as a TOTAL,tobe divine
means to me as ALL together.So individuals are only pieces who makes
divinity as ALL TOGETHER,if each piece has been meant by SWAMI then I
can accept it,but pieces separated can not be divine,only as a piece
they reflect it.GOD`s presence covers everywhere...There is no need
any special manifestation...
This is my understanding on divinity,as a piece,as a piece Swami`s
understanding obviously different.And many others are different
too,because this example of muddy lake can be seen in many
literature...DIVINITY has everything good and bad,mud and clearity.
When we try to see it as in the lake example,we have a hard job to do
.....
With compassion,
Puma
| |
| Sevenhundred Elves 2005-05-24, 5:58 pm |
| puma wrote:
> Hi, S.Elves,
Hi, puma!
>
> I understand DIVINITY as all there exist...But as a TOTAL,tobe divine
> means to me as ALL together.So individuals are only pieces who makes
> divinity as ALL TOGETHER,if each piece has been meant by SWAMI then I
> can accept it,but pieces separated can not be divine,only as a piece
> they reflect it.GOD`s presence covers everywhere...There is no need
> any special manifestation...
I see. Maybe you reason like this: Since no single individual has a mind
or a brain big enough to contain all of God, then the totality of all
sentient beings may be enough, and/or it may be that the totality of all
of them actually ARE God. Is that it?
> This is my understanding on divinity,as a piece,as a piece Swami`s
> understanding obviously different.
Yes, so it seems. Well, like I said, I'm not 100% sure that it's the
Swami's opinion, remember it was just how I read it; it is what it means
to me. And I, personally am not really sure about what are all the exact
properties of God. However, I do believe that when the mind is still
enough, we may perceive something of God, or what I like to think of as
the divine spark in the center of our heart. I sometimes get a feeling
of this during meditation, and to me it seems to verify what has been
said by other yogis who have gone further than me.
> And many others are different too,because this example of muddy lake
> can be seen in many literature..
The "muddy waters" parable is a classic, it's very ancient (even Lao Tzu
refers to it in his Tao Te Ching), but I think it still is very apropos.
> ..DIVINITY has everything good and bad,mud and clearity.
> When we try to see it as in the lake example,we have a hard job to do
Yes, it seems that the normal state of the human mind is not stillness,
rather the opposite, so it takes quite an effort to still it. But when
we achieve the stillness, we get a better look at what is at the bottom
of the soul, whatever it is. I call it God, but the Buddhists have a
very different view on the same experience, and have other names for it.
Perhaps the Indians of North America were the wisest, when they just
called it the Great Mystery.
S.
| |
|
| Howdy Dave,
Actually we are far from your question. As this DIVINITY subject is
another issue.According to my understanding whatever exists as all
together,this makes DIVINITY. Pieces making this
unity,togetherness,all,total, can not be divine,because these pieces
seperated from the WHOLE. These seperateted pieces are not complete in
order to make DIVINITY. that is what I am trying to say.Regarding
BRAHMAN, as BRAHMAN belongs to a religion, my explanation of DIVINITY
has no relation with BRAHMAN,because,all the religions try to
monopolize DIVINITY. I do not like any sort of monopoly...Divinity can
not be under any monopoly....
Anyway now lets come to your question, You have put YOGA into only
three parts...But to me yoga means AWAKENING from all the previous
conditionings.But there is another problem here that getting into YOGA
one gets another conditioning too.These are all my ideas about yoga...
With compassion,
Puma
| |
| Sevenhundred Elves 2005-05-27, 8:55 am |
| puma wrote:
> Hi, S.Elves,
Hi, puma!
>
> I understand DIVINITY as all there exist...But as a TOTAL,tobe divine
> means to me as ALL together.So individuals are only pieces who makes
> divinity as ALL TOGETHER,if each piece has been meant by SWAMI then I
> can accept it,but pieces separated can not be divine,only as a piece
> they reflect it.GOD`s presence covers everywhere...There is no need
> any special manifestation...
I see. Maybe you reason like this: Since no single individual has a mind
or a brain big enough to contain all of God, then the totality of all
sentient beings may be enough, and/or it may be that the totality of all
of them actually ARE God. Is that it?
> This is my understanding on divinity,as a piece,as a piece Swami`s
> understanding obviously different.
Yes, so it seems. Well, like I said, I'm not 100% sure that it's the
Swami's opinion, remember it was just how I read it; it is what it means
to me. And I, personally am not really sure about what are all the exact
properties of God. However, I do believe that when the mind is still
enough, we may perceive something of God, or what I like to think of as
the divine spark in the center of our heart. I sometimes get a feeling
of this during meditation, and to me it seems to verify what has been
said by other yogis who have gone further than me.
> And many others are different too,because this example of muddy lake
> can be seen in many literature..
The "muddy waters" parable is a classic, it's very ancient (even Lao Tzu
refers to it in his Tao Te Ching), but I think it still is very apropos.
> ..DIVINITY has everything good and bad,mud and clearity.
> When we try to see it as in the lake example,we have a hard job to do
Yes, it seems that the normal state of the human mind is not stillness,
rather the opposite, so it takes quite an effort to still it. But when
we achieve the stillness, we get a better look at what is at the bottom
of the soul, whatever it is. I call it God, but the Buddhists have a
very different view on the same experience, and have other names for it.
Perhaps the Indians of North America were the wisest, when they just
called it the Great Mystery.
S.
| |
| Dave ©¿©¬ 2005-05-27, 5:55 pm |
| "puma" <puma@dowse.com> wrote in message
news:1117137456.076477.221760@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Howdy Dave,
>
> Actually we are far from your question. As this DIVINITY subject is
> another issue.According to my understanding whatever exists as all
> together,this makes DIVINITY. Pieces making this
> unity,togetherness,all,total, can not be divine,because these pieces
> seperated from the WHOLE. These seperateted pieces are not complete in
> order to make DIVINITY. that is what I am trying to say.Regarding
> BRAHMAN, as BRAHMAN belongs to a religion, my explanation of DIVINITY
> has no relation with BRAHMAN,because,all the religions try to
> monopolize DIVINITY. I do not like any sort of monopoly...Divinity can
> not be under any monopoly....
>
> Anyway now lets come to your question, You have put YOGA into only
> three parts...But to me yoga means AWAKENING from all the previous
> conditionings.But there is another problem here that getting into YOGA
> one gets another conditioning too.These are all my ideas about yoga...
>
> With compassion,
>
> Puma
Howdy Puma!
Sounds like a functional system to me.
See that?... Now I am no longer ignorant! 
--
Dave ©¿©¬
http://www.howdydave.com
|
| |
|
|