On May 9, 2010, at 3:35 AM, cardemaister wrote:
>
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On May 8, 2010, at 4:50 PM, cardemaister wrote:
> >
> > > 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*...')
> >
> >
> > I can only tell you what I was instructed, mouth to ear, in the Patanjali
> > trad. If you want to make up something else, go for it.
> >
>
> So, you appreciate "those guys" more than commentators like e.g.
> Vyaasa (te praatibhaadayaH...*) and Bhojadeva (te praakpratipaaditaaH...**)?
My teacher taught based on oral tradition and the 24 most reputable
commentaries on the YS. So no, it wasn't just limited to Vyasa. Patanjali is an
oral and experiential tradition. Without a teacher you'll never understand it,
as it cannot be learned from books or from linear reading.
>
> * Can only refer to some "list" where 'praatibha' is first.
>
> ** Can only refer to the suutras *before* III 36 (or whatever it's
> in various editions), not for instance the YF suutra. Most probably
> refers only to the suutra "previously mentioned", even though
> 'praak-pratipaaditaaH' is in in plural (praatibha: intuition;
> shraavana: hearing; vedana: touch; aadarsha: sight; aasvaada: taste;
> vaartaa: smell)
>
> prAJc , f. {prA3cI} turned forwards, being in front, facing; turned
> eastwards, easterly; previous, former; m. pl. the eastern (people or
> grammarians). Acc. w. {kR} bring, offer, promote, further; w. {kalpay} turn
> one's front towards. n. ***{prA3k} ({prAG}) in front, before (w. abl. of pl.
> & t.); eastward, in the east of (abl.); formerly, previously, first, at
> first, from now***. Instr. {prAcA3} forwards; abl. {prAca3s} from the front.
> f. {prA3cI} ({ñdiz}) the east.
>
> [Vaj, I really wish you knew Sanskrit better than you seem
> to. Same might apply to your Patanjali gurus... ;)]
My Patanjali guru was a pundit of Sanskrit and knew over a dozen other
languages.
Your confusion on this verse is because you don't know which verses it's
pointing to in the first and second pada and the principles of delusion implied
from Samkhya, the kleshas, etc. "Te", "these", refers to the 8 kinds of
darkness, the 8 kinds of stupidity, the 8 kinds of Big stupidity, etc. Really
these forms of delusion and stupidity aren't limited to such lists, but are
actually infinite, like the ways of awakening. But since yogic siddhis lock one
into fascination and obsession at the level of the waking state, it locks you
out of the interiority required for mastery of samadhi and the atman. That why
it's said siddhis increase the samskaras of outwardness, the mind scars of the
outward-stroke. One merely has to look at TM "sidhas" and their obsession with
yogic hopping to see these dynamics of delusion at play, locking the believers
into it's trap. But they stick around and buy product, take recertification
courses, etc. so it has the effect that Mahesh desired: cash flow.
Have you seen "David Wants to Fly" yet?
