Guest guest Posted January 9, 2003 Report Share Posted January 9, 2003 To recap a little. At the beginning of Yoga Sutra, Patanjali defines the smallest of inner events, the thoughts or fluctuations (vrittis). (Later he will describe the larger events: tendencies, drives, habits.) He describes the characteristics of each type. He tells us they can be afflicted or not. They can also be restricted by two things: practice and dispassion (purity of heart- the absence of coloration about an object). In I.17 he talks about what this restriction leads to. Feuerstein I.17 The enstasy arising out of the state of restriction is cognitive, i.e. object-oriented, by being connected with the forms of cogitation, reflection, joy or I-am-ness. I have some thoughts on this. This enstasy is cognitive (object oriented, that is, pointed toward something. I think of this as Suguna Brahman.). This consciousness is cognitive of four forms: Cogitation, reflection, and what could be thought of as one, joy and I-am-ness (as they arise together). F. says several things in his commentary that are good. Among them the statement that nirodha (restriction of the thoughts) is only a necessary, not a sufficient precondition for the enstatic consciousness, that grace is also required (II.45). Also that subject object distinction is not relevant in that state. And that it (enstasy) carries an acute awareness and feeling of reality that differentiates it from ordinary and non-ordinary consciousness. I assume non-ordinary (in this sense) would be psychosis or unbalanced states. F. says that I-am-ness is present during reflection and cogitation. I have been a little successful with reading and a few other things where that is the case, mostly doing art. It is spontaneous but was greatly amplified after I gained breath control which P. explains much later. D'Andrade translates differently. I. 17 Contemplation has the following stages: Investigation: examining all the phases of an object, Discernment: recognizing the Subtle Realm of causes, Biss: knowing the ecstasy of Intuition, Self-realization: knowing the nature of the One Self. I don't think the structure of these translations is easy to relate. The sutra are very sketchy in the way they are written. John said they were notes for teaching and that makes sense. This is good though because it makes us find the meaning by inner searching. Searching may be the finest of our tendencies. Its blockage needs to be removed for some of us. B. K. S. Iyengar, who considers Patanjali as his guru translates it this way; I.17 Practice and detachment develop four types of samadhi: self- analysis, synthesis, bliss, and the experience of pure being. What F. calls the sense of I-am-ness with restriction of the fluctuations of Consciousness, I. and D. are calling pure being and One Self. Also, Iyengar is saying that the state of restriction referred to by F. is Samadhi. This could very well be, for Ramana has said that the grace is always there. (Grace being the necessary requirement once restriction is present. If so this might go a ways to understanding the omnipresent objection by some non-dualists about the efficacy of dealing with mind as a stepping stone. That there is a difference between theoretical understanding of an issue and practical application of methodology.) The crux of I.17 seems to be a description of the first stage of bliss after the restriction of the fluctuations. I.18 describes the next stage. Later. To me fear has an unknown something in it, and it is hard to put down or lay aside something with fear attached to it. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2003 Report Share Posted January 9, 2003 Hi Bob, Very nice recap. It seems that D'Andrade and Iyengar are very close together. To comment on a very small piece of your commentary ... See after the snip... , "texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@a...>" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > To me fear has an unknown something in it, and it is hard to put down > or lay aside something with fear attached to it. A simple acronym of FEAR is that fear is F-alse E-motion A-ppearing R-eal. This puts fear in its right place...first in illusion and in the emotional being. The intellect can't put an emotion aside. The fear must be faced and seen for what it is. When the truth is known about it the fear dissolves and is replaced with the ability to act. Fear is a "gotcha", that is, it creates a kind of paralysis and we can't act as long as the fear is in control. It has been said that fear give rise to "flight" or "fight". That is not quite true, there is a third state: "stuck"! Krishnamutri indicates that fear lacks reality in the present. The issue is a temporal one as he analyzes it. Fear is about something coming at us from the past, to "haunt" us as it were, or it is about the future, something "awful" is going to happen, but hasn't happened yet. Again, we can "know" this to be true, but until we face it and feel it the temporal aspect, the fear will not go away. Once the temporal aspect is realized, we become grounded and can act to change the course of the action in an appropriate way. The root of the paralysis is twofold: 1)Ignorance: we really don't know what the consequences will be; and 2)Incapacity: we don't know how to respond, we feel powerless to deal with the object of fear. Realizing the illusion aspect of these two elements allows us to deal with fear and its stimulus appropriately. To know the "facts" and to recognize our power cures the "fear disease". Just some thoughts, John L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2003 Report Share Posted January 10, 2003 This is very good John and relates exactly to what I was thinking. I think the mind is a great unknown in many ways and will always be difficult to go past till understood. It is easy to fear the unknown. Love Bobby G. > > > > To me fear has an unknown something in it, and it is hard to put > down > > or lay aside something with fear attached to it. > > A simple acronym of FEAR is that fear is > F-alse E-motion A-ppearing R-eal. > > This puts fear in its right place...first in illusion and in the > emotional being. The intellect can't put an emotion aside. The fear > must be faced and seen for what it is. When the truth is known about > it the fear dissolves and is replaced with the ability to act. Fear > is a "gotcha", that is, it creates a kind of paralysis and we can't > act as long as the fear is in control. > > It has been said that fear give rise to "flight" or "fight". That is > not quite true, there is a third state: "stuck"! > > Krishnamutri indicates that fear lacks reality in the present. The > issue is a temporal one as he analyzes it. Fear is about something > coming at us from the past, to "haunt" us as it were, or it is about > the future, something "awful" is going to happen, but hasn't happened > yet. > > Again, we can "know" this to be true, but until we face it and feel > it the temporal aspect, the fear will not go away. Once the temporal > aspect is realized, we become grounded and can act to change the > course of the action in an appropriate way. > > The root of the paralysis is twofold: > 1)Ignorance: we really don't know what the consequences will be; and > 2)Incapacity: we don't know how to respond, we feel powerless to deal > with the object of fear. > > Realizing the illusion aspect of these two elements allows us to deal > with fear and its stimulus appropriately. To know the "facts" and to > recognize our power cures the "fear disease". > > Just some thoughts, > John L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.