"Hundreds of Naga Sadhus gathered in the compound of Maya Devi Temple, befoe going in a procession to take a holy dip in the ganges. ..Sadhus gather here and perform all kind of feats, to show off their warrior skills, with their weapons, which include sticks, tridents, swords and spears...Kumbh Mela, 2010, Haridwar, Uttarakhand..."
Naga sadhu procession 1998 Kumbh Mela: [image: Inline image 1] The Naga Sadhus of India: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadhu Kumbh Mela: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbh_Mela On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Richard Williams <pundits...@gmail.com>wrote: > According to the Sage Patanjali, Raja Yoga has nothing to do with 'union > with the gods', but has everything to do with 'isolation from prakriti', > that is, the 'cessation of the fluctuations of the mindstuff'. > > To Patanjali, the Royal Yoga is the attainment of freedom, based on the > sheer willpower of the individual. The Sage Kapila said that success in > attaining freedom from suffering is found in individual willpower to > knowledge; individual freedom is not the result of any source of power > outside one's own body-mind. > > It is obvious, to even a casual seeker, that the term 'god' and 'yoga' are > contradictory. You can't have freewill and be under the power of another; > that would be a contradiction in terms, would it not? We are either free or > we are not; if free, then there is no need for yoga practice. If we are not > free, then by what means are we to free ourselves? It's that simple - there > is either other-power or self-power. > > Now, if Sage Patanjali had intended for yoga aspirants to attain > liberation by calling the out nickname of demi gods, he would have said so, > would he not? > > "Confusion arises from erroneously identifying words, objects, and ideas > with one another; knowledge of the cries of all creatures comes through > perfect discipline of the distinctions between them" (YS 3.17). > > So, ask yourself 'who am I' and then look inside yourself for the answer, > inside your own mind, and apply common sense and intelligence based on your > own experience and reasoning. Now, having tested and known your Self by > yourself, know such to be wise and true, not by mere speculation, hearsay > or because you read it, overheard it or were told it, but because you, > yourself, having known it, experienced it, and confirmed it, found it to be > wise and true. > > So, let's review what we know: > > The origin of Buddhist and Hindu yogic and tantric practices is Shamanism, > a tradition which came to India about 10,000 years ago. This tradition, > called Sramana in Sanskrit, was revived by the historical Buddha who was > called Shakya the Muni, the first historical yogin in India. He advocated > yoga and meditation which he equated with an eight-fold path, i.e. a > systematic, verifiable, technique for self-culture. It should be obvious to > even the casual seeker that Maharishi is a Buddhist, as we all are. > > Not for nothing is the Buddha depicted in Indian iconography as sitting > underneath a rose apple tree with his eyes closed! The first writing in > India appears on an Ashokan pillar at Sarnath, the Kalinga Edict. So > popular was the Buddha in ancient India that he was drafted into the Hindu > pantheon to become the ninth incarnation of Mahavishnu, one of four humans, > not counting a dwarf! > > Why do you think the cow is now sacred in India? > > According to Swami Ageananda Bharati, it is clear that the Buddhist > tantras preceded the Hindu tantras, and hence, yogic practices are tantric > in nature, e.g. the non-Vedic practices such as yoga, mudra, dhyana, > mantra, yantra, dharani, puja, pradakshina; and monasticisn, ahimsa, > instruction by sutra, relic worship, edifice architecture, etc., etc. > However, in original, pre-sectarian Buddhism there are no 'dieties'; > Buddhism has no ontology, that is, a theory of the origin of the universe. > > Yogic practices and thus yogins, and yogic practice, is firmly rooted in > the teachings of Shakya and the Sramanas such as Natatputra. According to > the teachings of the Shakya, the 33 Gods, such as Lord Brahma, Prajapati, > Mahavishnu, etc. may exist as mental mind-constructs, but they are not > 'things-in-themselves', that is, the gods conceived by humans do not have > their 'own nature', apart from and separate from prakriti and the five > evolutes and the conditions set by the activity of the three gunas. > > The gods, if they exist, are subject to the same laws of karma as humans, > and when their store of karma runs out they will experience rebirth just > like you and I. According to the law of cause and effect, whatever goes up > must come down - that is, human excrement always flows down stream - the > second law of thermodynamics. > > The Shakya, Patanjali, Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhva, Nimbarka, Chaitanya, > and Vallabah and Maharishi all agree on this. > > In contrast to the gods, a Yogin, that is, one who has attained Freedom > and Immortality, has broken the chain that binds him or her to the law of > karma: a Yogin is free, liberated, that is, he has attained 'Moksha' and he > is a fully realized master of his own Self. > > A Yogin is not bound by time, neither is he bound by the restrictions of > caste or religious conventions. > > A Yogin, having mastered himself, by himself, does not see ritual acts as > the saving grace, yet he acts, due to the propensities still functioning > within his mortal coil. A Yogin is liberated while yet living, a 'jivan > mukti'. Being liberated, a Yogin is not bound by the notion of duality, > thinking, "I do this, this is my body, this is my soul, this is my self..." > etc. > > Vajrayana and Yogacara Buddhist practices, and hence Hindu Tantricism, is > non-Vedic and had nothing to do with the Aryan gods of the Vedic pantheon. > Neither does Yoga have anything to do with the Devatas of later Hinduism, > namely Lord Ramchandra, Shree Vasudeva, and Devaki, etc. The later are > merely deified heroes based on Indo-European or Dravidian mythology. The > myths associated with shamanism and yoga are akin to the Sankhya Philosophy > and not to the Vedic. > > Adept Yogins in fact, do not rely on the Demi-gods for protection, neither > do Yogins propitiate deities for mundane favors. Ritual acts, such as > propitiation, are all practices associated with the sacrifice, an Aryan > notion, and are not a part of the Eightfold-path of either the Buddha nor > Patanjali. > > If Shakya the Muni, the Sage Kapila, or the Sage Patanjali had wanted > Yogins to worship the Aryan or Dravidian gods as a means of liberation, > they would have said so, would they not? > > Based on these observations and after much reflection and research I have > concluded that bija mantras are shamanic in origin and are based on > household sounds and sounds heard in nature; simple mnemonic devices that > have no semantic meaning and they are not found in any standard Sanskrit > lexicons. Used in a special way, they are perfect tools for meditation that > is transcendental. > > And why? Because non-ideational sound vibrations don't keep a person on > the conscious thinking level. > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Richard Williams <pundits...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Concerning the twelve marks of a sadhu: hand applied, by every yogi, it >> would be a cause of concern if any marks were to appear to be 'perfectly >> applied' by using a mirror. Those marks are applied during the sanctified >> bathing, and must never be applied with using a mirror, nor even by looking >> at oneself in the reflection of their water pot. >> >> Also for the yogis who apply 'ash', who usually claim to be serving a >> delineation of a Rudra attitude, that those marks which appear as three >> lines of white ash can never be 'straight across the forehead >> horizontally'. If the ash mark appears as three equal width lines, applied >> with open three fingers, then the sadhu is probably an impostor, and should >> be ignored. >> >> Sometimes the actual mark may appear to be some sort of messy smear where >> a simile of three lines appear to be. The vertical 'U-shaped' marks of >> devotional service vary in a large variety, but they must never have any >> lower 'stem' to the 'U' such as to make it a 'Y'. It may have a series of >> marks inside the U, and a dot below the U, as also the ash marks may also >> have marks centered within it, and a dot below it. >> >> It is also permissible for the sadhu to apply such marks with only >> 'water', and thus nothing would be seen remaining. You can ask those who >> appear without marks, as to what type, and in what manner they apply their >> devotional service designations, if you are not sure about this. >> >> This latter mark seems to me, to be cosmetic, but it is apparently, one >> of the primary credentials to be validated in a Sadhu, that is, a 'Good >> Fellow'. >> >> Next - All About Yogis. >> > >
