--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <wg...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <compost1uk@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On May 6, 2009, at 1:27 AM, sparaig wrote: > > > > > > >>> As I said, we agree to disagree... > > > >>> > > > >>> Or, to quote a famous anonymous sage: there are as many > > legitimate i > > > >>> interpretations of the Veda as there are enlightened persons. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Unfortunately this is one area where the sages of the yoga-darshana > > > >> (not "the Veda") are in agreement. Generally the type of people who > > > >> subvert the angas are what would in western languages be referred > > to > > > >> as "black magicians" or in theosophical lingo "black brothers": > > give > > > >> me the magic, let me circumvent the virtues, they will come on > > their > > > >> own, just give me power, NOW. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that how you see the TM-Sidhis program? > > > > > > > > > That is how the yogic tradition perceives the intent of those > > > who try to skip the angas. > > > > > > > So you're the spokesperson for "the yogic tradition"? > > > > Self-certified? > > > > These skippable angas seem jolly arcane for such a well studied > > tradition as Yoga. > > > > You need to put Wikepedia right Vaj, eh? > > > > "The earliest reference to Angas (???) occurs in the Atharava Veda > > (V.22.14) where they find mention along with the Magadhas, Gandharis > > and the Mujavatas, all apparently as a despised people. > > > > The Jain Prajnapana ranks the Angas and the Vangas in the first group > > of Aryan peoples. > > > > According to Buddhist texts like the Anguttara Nikaya, Anga was one of > > the sixteen great nations (solas Mahajanapadas) which had flourished in > > central and north-west India in the 6th century BC. > > > > Anga also finds mention in the Jain Bhagvati-Sutra's list of ancient > > Janapadas." > > > > What's the instruction for "skipping" them? > > I think Vaj meant the 'angas' in Patanjali's Ashtanga (8 limbs)Yoga, "With > the practice of ALL of these limbs, **or means**, simultaneously, the state > of Yoga grows simultaneously in all the eight spheres of life, eventually to > become permanent." MMY Gita appendix under Yoga! >
Well - may well be so. But my point is that to assert with great authority that "The Yogic Tradition" asserts such and such of these thingies is a con (i.e. a claim to some privileged *insight* into the tradition). After all, if these angas are too arcane a subject for Wikipedia, it is hardly sensible to imply that there can be no ambiguity of interpretation hanging over them. In other words it is an instance, to go by flavour of the day, of a "thought stopper". What, when you think about, IS "The Yoga Tradition" (singular)?
