--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > I like the way the greatest yogin in the line of Shankara, after Shankara, > Vidyaranya, puts it: > > Knowledge of Unity Consciousness > > 5. "The Renunciation of the Knower" > > 5.1 The Path of the Paramahamsa Yogins > > 5.1.4. The two terms ["paramahamsa" and "yogin"] are used together in order to > exclude someone who is only a yogin and someone who is a paramahamsa. > Someone who is only a yogin is a person who, because of his lack of the > knowledge > of truth, is attached to amazing feats of yogic power, such as knowing the > past, > present, and future, yogic flying, etc., and has made efforts toward this or > that (siddhi) with the various samyama formulae. Consequently he > becomes separated from the highest aim of human existence, Unity > Consciousness. > -- > jiivanmuktiviveka > > 5. atha paJcamaM vidvasaMnyaasaprakaraNam > > 5.1 yoginaaM parahaMsaanaaM margaH > > 5.1.4 kevalayoginaM kevalaM paramahaMsaM ca vaarayituM padadvayam uktam > kevalayogii tattvajnaanaabhavena trikaalajnaanaakazagamanadiSu > yogaizvaryacamatkaaravyavahaareSv aasaktaH saMyamaviZeSais tatra > tatrodyuktas, tataH paramapuruSaarthaad bhraSTo bhavati. > > The oral tradition of Patanjali is rather explicit in that it doesn't > cultivate mundane siddhis consciously at all, but instead is interested in > mastering the "fourth pranayama" whereby one masters samadhi beyond > restraints of time. Unfortunately for people relying on books, the YS aren't > taught in the written sequence, some parts are actually completely skipped > over. Many yogic texts rely on oral instruction and are deliberately filled > with such traps. > > Vidyaranya's classic "Knowledge of Unity Consciousness" has numerous quotes > from other sages which backs up this assertion. It's only in disreputable > fallen yogis like Mahesh Varma that we see financial leverage of people's > fascination with yogic powers. Of course it also has the advantage of causing > delusion to arise in the students who fall for it. At that point, it doesn't > matter what one says, once delusion sets in, they'll defend their anthill of > delusion with everything from linguistic gymnastics to faked quantum physics. >
----------------------- OK! Please, just don't claim anymore, that Patanjali *himself* was against practising the siddhis, unless you can prove that the pronoun 'te' in 'te samaadhaav upasargaa...' refers to all the siddhis, not just those mentioned in the previous suutra! (Vyaasa: 'te *praatibhaadayaH*...')
