Rising the Kundalini Force

[sumedh]

 

It is my method is better then yours attitude that and constant bashing of Hindus, whenever possible (on whose charity the organization is widely supported) irks most of us. I see everyone else answering to YK ignoring this point.

To be consistent, you must also say the same to those who claim that Bhakti is just the first step (and thus inferior) and that yoga etc. are higher forms -- which includes YKji.

 

Apart from the problem that this is inconsistent, the claims themselves have no scriptural support. It is quite surprising to find people favour claims without any firm basis, and put down the "HKs" and other vaishnavas whose methods are directly given in the scriptures.

[Ganeshprasad]

 

To be consistent, you must also say the same to those who claim that Bhakti is just the first step (and thus inferior) and that yoga etc. are higher forms -- which includes YKji./quote

 

Apart from the problem that this is inconsistent, the claims themselves have no scriptural support. It is quite surprising to find people favour claims without any firm basis, and put down the "HKs" and other vaishnavas whose methods are directly given in the scriptures.

 

No problem here on my part, but then I don’t see a yogi or gyani going out shouting from roof top asking people to give up their Bhakti and take up their yoga prctice, and this is not what is under discussion is it?

Hk consistently denigrate others modes of worship always maintain we are better then you attitude. This thread is about awaking Kundli yet we are told by some, what use is it just chant. Have you or anyone else addressed this objection?

It is a matter of opinion making a general statement saying there is no scriptural support but if we look hard enough we could justify almost anything but would it be Dharma? There is no agenda to put down anyone, just making observation on reality that prevails within the hk movement, the need to preach in the name of Bhakti has reached such a stage that even a dreamer feels the need to go out and preach.

 

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[complexity]

How exactly does Kundalini yoga lead to the end of reincarnation ?

 

 

DEAR SOULS

Truth is that 'GOD EXISTS' and NOTHING is important other than achieving him.Do not dwell in false dogma and doctrains. his divine name is the one which liberates us from this cycle of life and deaths.Along the path

u'll also find lot of distractions like siddhi's(powers) if one is interested in enjoying these powers will fall down evetually(to life and deaths)and have to work out again from the scratch.

just remember the lovely name of god all the time.

HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA

KRISHNA KRISHNA HARE HARE

HARE RAMA HARE RAMA

RAMA RAMA HARE HARE

!!

[sumedh]

 

No problem here on my part, but then I don’t see a yogi or gyani going out shouting from roof top asking people to give up their Bhakti and take up their yoga prctice, and this is not what is under discussion is it?

Hk consistently denigrate others modes of worship always maintain we are better then you attitude. This thread is about awaking Kundli yet we are told by some, what use is it just chant. Have you or anyone else addressed this objection?

I have seen no evidence of HKs going to the roof-tops and shouting to give up xyz and take up Bhakti either. I assume that this is not your point.

Coming to the point that HKs denigrate others modes of worship then it would not be the correct way to put it, rather worship of other deities (other that Vishnu) as Supreme is not accepted and considered to be ignorance. Worship of Vishnu knowing Him to be the Supreme Brahman is accepted (and so all the vaishnava sampradayas) while others are not accepted. As already mentioned this position is not unique to HKs and all the vedanta schools have a similar position. Others like shaiva sampradayas also have a similar position (i.e. worship of Shiva as Supreme is accepted while other deities like Vishnu are considered normal jivas) -- their position is complicated by the fact that most of them have taken to adopting Advaita which considers even Lord Shiva as a product of Maya, so they have taken Shiva to refer to self and so on...

Regarding this particular thread. We were informed by some devotees who have had experience of this, that it is dangerous when not done under expert guidance which itself is hard to find, and that chanting is the better and recommended way anyway -- so what's your problem here? This is the frank opinion of the members here, many of whom are vaishnavas.

Of course, YKji made a set of progressive claims including "chanting is unvedic and unscientific", "HKs have no sadhana", "bhakti is just a little step while kundalini etc. are higher forms of yoga" etc. You should not expect these to be accepted by others here, or do you?

It is a matter of opinion making a general statement saying there is no scriptural support but if we look hard enough we could justify almost anything but would it be Dharma? There is no agenda to put down anyone, just making observation on reality that prevails within the hk movement, the need to preach in the name of Bhakti has reached such a stage that even a dreamer feels the need to go out and preach.

 

No we cannot justify anything, and you can disprove me by providing references for the same which i would be obliged to accept. The usual practise in vedanta is to establish a theory and also show how alternative theories are incorrect and would not hold. For instance, there are a number of objections to Advaita particularly by Madhva sampradaya which have not been addressed as yet. Even Shankaracharya rejected the other philosophies of his time like shakta, pashupata, buddhism, charvaka etc. giving precise reasons for the same.

 

 

In my opinion you have made rather loose general statements, such as HKs indulge in Hindu "bashing" without providing any instance, that one can justify anything etc. Frankly i have seen a large number of "respected" advaita and arya samaj gurus who actually resort to "bashing" like Swami Agnivesh who ridicules hindus worshipping in temples, neo-advaita gurus who mock service to Deities as being stupid etc. In comparison, in the vaishnava philosophy worship of Deities is considered essential and worship of deities other than Vishnu is also accepted but not considering them as Supreme, and that worship of other deities considering them as Supreme would not lead to the ultimate goal. Anyway, it would do good to stick to the point of this thread and raise any "bashing" you see here.

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

 

Pranam Sumedji

You have made a lot of points here; a classic case of fudging the issue, no sidhanta has been discussed here is it?

Bhakti is very dear to most Hindus, we are brought up on this from our childhood, sidhnta comes later in our life and the beauty of our Dharma is there is no compulsion we choose the mode of our worship to suit our personality and then progress on our journey of self realization.

If only we take heed of what Krishna say in Bg we would not have problem and I quote

Persons of firm resolve worship Me with ever steadfast devotion by always singing My glories, striving to attain Me, and prostrating before Me. (9.14)

Some worship Me by knowledge sacrifice. Others worship the infinite as the one in all (or non-dual), as the master of all (or dual), and in various other ways. (9.15)

The problem only arise when there are factions with their own agenda to push and perhaps this is what Ykji was eluding and I quote

Yk

But I repect your bhakti movement. I find nothing wrong with it. Except for the God positioning agenda and puting my sampradaya philosophy over others agenda! I wish you were a simple bhakta lots zealing for the benevolence of the almighty! After all all that is what matters.

Love,

The only conflicting factor with Gaudiyas is putting my way over your way.

Rest is fine. Bhakti is fine. But the uncontrollable urge to prove bhakti and especially Gaudiya line of bhakti over every other line of belief is wrong! Dead wrong!

There is strong bhakti amongst yogis. There is very strong bhakti amongst tantriks. If they are real tantriks. Nothing wrong. In fact tantra requires complete surrender to the Guru first to progress. What's wrong with that? Guru is the bridge between the Lord and the disciple.

There is very strong bhakti amongst Shiv bhaktas and those who worship Lord Ramachandra. There is bhakti amongst worshipers of Lord Ganesha.

And I repect all these bhaktas :)Other systems are not devoid of bhakti. It is the basic element. But you can't put down everyone else and every other school of thought just because u r into some high notch bhakti fling. Un quote.

This is the Hindu way, some call it a fudge, but there is a lot to it then meet the eye.

I have a lot to thank hk for in many ways, chanting the holy name is an excellent process therefor I should learn to not criticize and take what’s best on offer.

The one who remains the same towards friend or foe, in honor or disgrace, in heat or cold, in pleasure or pain; who is free from attachment; and (12.18)

The one who is indifferent or silent in censure or praise, content with anything, unattached to a place (country, or house), equanimous, and full of devotion; that person is dear to Me. (12.19)

Jai Shree Krishna

[sumedh]

 

You have made a lot of points here; a classic case of fudging the issue, no sidhanta has been discussed here is it?

I believe we left siddhanta discussion long time back, rather this discussion with yourself was limited to accusations against HKs in particular. I do not see any "fudging the issue" in my reply, rather i tried to deal with each of your points.

The problem only arise when there are factions with their own agenda to push and perhaps this is what Ykji was eluding and I quote

Yk

But I repect your bhakti movement. I find nothing wrong with it. Except for the God positioning agenda and puting my sampradaya philosophy over others agenda! I wish you were a simple bhakta lots zealing for the benevolence of the almighty! After all all that is what matters.

Love,

The only conflicting factor with Gaudiyas is putting my way over your way.

Rest is fine. Bhakti is fine. But the uncontrollable urge to prove bhakti and especially Gaudiya line of bhakti over every other line of belief is wrong! Dead wrong!

There is strong bhakti amongst yogis. There is very strong bhakti amongst tantriks. If they are real tantriks. Nothing wrong. In fact tantra requires complete surrender to the Guru first to progress. What's wrong with that? Guru is the bridge between the Lord and the disciple.

There is very strong bhakti amongst Shiv bhaktas and those who worship Lord Ramachandra. There is bhakti amongst worshipers of Lord Ganesha.

And I repect all these bhaktas :)Other systems are not devoid of bhakti. It is the basic element. But you can't put down everyone else and every other school of thought just because u r into some high notch bhakti fling. Un quote.

Selective quoting is not proper and you have missed the context. Here are other quotes by YKji previously in this thread and i have been responding mostly to those:

There is a certain way a person evloves spiritually or materialistically.

The Hare Krishnas do not have the know-how to siddhis or sadhnas. Period.

The mantra chanting is unsientific not to mention un-Vedic!!

 

...

 

But even in simple bhakti and unsientific chanting, there are stages that one has to gradually pass.

 

...

 

I'm amazed how so far the Gaudiyas haven't claimed that Krishna was Bengali and born in Mayapur?! In the whole wide Bhagwad Gita that Krishna discourced to Arjuna everything is ignorable to you except one one chapter on Bhakti Yoga.

 

...

 

Bhakti is the first step without which you don't become qualified for any higher knowledge. Then you get the higher knowledge, and get direct perception and experience and gain Gyana. SUCH a person is the dearest to the Lord.

 

Not mentioning other silly points like in http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/1039067-post46.html , my responses were mostly to deal with these prevalent misnomers which lack any scriptural support.

 

Regarding "putting my way over your way", this has been adequately answered in the previous email. To summarize:

* There is nothing wrong with showing evidence for one's own philosophy and lack of evidence for others' (particularly when points like "chanting is unvedic", "bhakti is first step" etc. are raised).

* HKs do not reject everything else -- the vaishnava sampradayas are accepted as valid while worship of other deities is favoured considering them as exalted vaishnavas.

* The vedantic approach consists of showing validity of one's path and demonstrating invalidity of incorrect paths. This has been done by all schools and should be done otherwise there is no intellectual honesty (e.g. why doesn't a school adopt others philosophy if that is correct and superior, like YKji says that Kundalini yoga is higher form of yoga) and there would be no end to unverifiable claims. The strength and beauty of Vedanta is its comprehensiveness, preciseness and i believe that only Vedanta can stand in any rational discussion above and over other philosophies including material science.

haribol

[Ganeshprasad]

<FONT size=2>

<P>Jai Ganesh</P>

<P>Pranam sumedh ji</P>

<P>Re</P>

<P>(I believe we left siddhanta discussion long time back, rather this discussion with yourself was limited to accusations against HKs in particular. I do not see any "fudging the issue" in my reply, rather i tried to deal with each of your points.)</P>

<P> </P>

<P>I do not remember having disscussed with you but never mind that is a sure sign I am loosing it, a symptom of Kali yuga.</P>

<P> </P>

<P> </P>

<P>Re<BR>(Selective quoting is not proper and you have missed the context. Here are other quotes by YKji previously in this thread and i have been responding mostly to those: Not mentioning other silly points like in </FONT><A href="http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/1039067-post46.html"><FONT color=#606420 size=2>http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/1039067-post46.html</FONT></A><FONT size=2> , my responses were mostly to deal with these prevalent misnomers which lack any scriptural support.)</FONT></P>

<P><FONT size=2></FONT> </P>

<P><FONT size=2> </P>

<P>Sure and I can appreciate were you are coming from, and perhaps his remark were knee jerk response to some of the comments made in response to this thread but he did mend his way and thus those quotes.</P>

<P> </P>

<P><BR> </P>

<P>Re<BR>(Regarding "putting my way over your way", this has been adequately answered in the previous email. To summarize:<BR>* There is nothing wrong with showing evidence for one's own philosophy and lack of evidence for others' (particularly when points like "chanting is unvedic", "bhakti is first step" etc. are raised).<BR>* HKs do not reject everything else -- the vaishnava sampradayas are accepted as valid while worship of other deities is favoured considering them as exalted vaishnavas.<BR>* The vedantic approach consists of showing validity of one's path and demonstrating invalidity of incorrect paths. This has been done by all schools and should be done otherwise there is no intellectual honesty (e.g. why doesn't a school adopt others philosophy if that is correct and superior, like YKji says that Kundalini yoga is higher form of yoga) and there would be no end to unverifiable claims. The strength and beauty of Vedanta is its comprehensiveness, preciseness and i believe that only Vedanta can stand in any rational discussion above and over other philosophies including material science.)</P>

<P> </P>

<P> </P>

<P>Vedic Dharma has always been based on inquiry unlike abharmic religion whose aim is to convert the world to their way of thinking, danger is if we go down that route the discussion goes out of window. Just as the sun dispel the darkness Dharma based on truthfulness, purity, nonviolence and austerity lead us to the love of god. Inquiry is to seek the truth; invalidity of incorrect path has never been the object of discussion.</P>

<P> </P>

<P>Vedas are given to us based on realizations of several rishis, so I am never surprised by the differences.</P>

<P>Atri Rishi desiring a son equal to supreme Brahman not knowing who that was did his tapas and we all know what was the result. </P>

<P>If in our search of churning the Vedas the poison results, let us not dish out this because unlike Lord Shiva we are not able to digest it and I believe no poison could actually result from Vedas.</P>

<P><BR>haribol</P>

<P>Jai Shree Krishna</P></FONT>

[Guest guest]

 

 

Not mentioning other silly points like in indiadivine.org/audarya/1039067-post46.

These points were very much valid and not silly at all. That's another point that you don't want to agree with them.

 

[Guest guest]

 

 

Not mentioning other silly points like in indiadivine.org/audarya/1039067-post46 my responses were mostly to deal with these prevalent misnomers which lack any scriptural support.

(particularly when points like "chanting is unvedic", "bhakti is first step" etc. are raised).

 

Dear Sumedhji,

 

Hare Krishna!!

 

The fact is that true bhakti is not really possible without proper knowledge of the object of desire! Knowledge is knowning. When you truly know Krishna, you will be able to have true bhakti for him. God cannot be known by reading books alone. And since God cannot be perceived by mere limited sense based experience, one should endeavor to enhance his super conscious ability.

This is yoga.

Bhakti is devotion, dedication and committment to walk on this path of yoga.

This is why it is the first step. And the end is bhakti too.

It is bliss that arises of the union and knowledge experienced. Knowledge is freeing. Bhakti is freeing. Scriptural support cannot provide experience. Scriptures are the result of and are based on experience /anubhuti and not vice-versa. To ignore direct anubhuti and adherance strictly to scriptural quoting alone will not lead very far in terms of soul evolution. One can become a panda, a scholar, an acharya though. Maybe even a Guru. But to become a Sadguru, one has to go through little more and little different type of penance.

 

As far as "evidence" on the Kundalini / Kriyas yoga path is concerned, then there have been hundreds of yogis who have achieved God realization through this path. Babaji, Lahiri Mahasaya, Yukteswar Giri, Sadguru Bawa Lal dayal Maharaj (a bhakti yogi who lived for 300 years during Shajahan's reign and had direct darshan of Lord Ramachandra many times and brought back a few people from dead, had many high siddhis, but never cared for them and didn't like self advertisement), Trailanga Swami of Benaras (who lived around the same time as Bhaktivinod Thakur, Paramhansa Swami Nikhileshwarananda, Paramhansa Yogananda (who came to the U.S. much before SP and after he took mahasamadhi, his body was kept at the local morgue. According to the letter issued by the morgue director his body showed absolutely no signs of decay even after keeping there for 15 days!) and many other such yogis are the proof and evidence of achieving remarkable achievements through the practice of Kundalini / Kriya yoga. Their lives have been living scriptures and living examples of the science of yoga and God communion. If you want to deny all this, then its your sweet wish. If we go much earlier in time, then the list of sages is endless - Vishwamitra, Atri, Kanad, Pulatsya, Vashishtha Gorakhnath ... I mentioned these names at a few number of occassions to which I never really got any replies from the humble HK community. I guess you don't have any purport for this either? You may consider all this too as simply "silly points" if you desire so.

Thank God Hinduism is not restricted and narrowed down to one small region, thought, saint, form/name of God and path. That is the beauty of Hinduism. Truly Sanatana. truly dynamic and truly varied. It can give the seeker the path that suits him nature most. It has Vedanta in it and Yog in it.

 

As far as unscientific chanting is concerned, yes it is not very scientific and if is being done mechanically, simply believing that the name reciting is enough, then is un-Vedic too. Here it is important to clarify, that "chanting mantras is not un-Vedic in itself as such. But chanting the way most HKs do possibly is. Sorry for this not so positive for HK sounding note, but there is more to mantra japa than what is being told in the HK temple and CD discourses.

Instead of me explaining you the difference, I would like to ask you, whether you see any difference between the sadhna methods undertaken by Vedic sages as compared to the HKs? Are you aware of any Vedic sadhna methods apart from HK system? What was the difference between their sadhna paddhati and what you do. If what you do is best and superior, then were the rishis and sages who divised these methods, were fools?

The method of Kundalini is freeing too. But yes it is a difficult one. But if you have an able Guru, nothing like it. Simple bhakti is easier. But longer I think. I'm not denying the path. Just that it is nto enough for me. I needed a more fuller system. Further more yoga gives a thorough understanding of the tool called body that has been assigned to the soul to achieve this self realization. HK system does not deal with it. Yoga does. It deals with not only the body, but the various metaphysical energy centres (chakras) and how to elevate an ordinary consciousness into higher "Krishna consciousness", a process that is hard to achieve without the participation and proper knowledge of the important tool given to you. According to science reports, we use less than just ten percent of our brain. Do we claim to understand God with this? I don't.

But again, there is no putting down agenda here. Really! Its just a healthy comparison. There are many granths on yoga starting from patanjali yoga to Goraksh and Shiv samhita and so on.. Lord Krishna himself give the method of Kriya yoga to Arjuna where he explains how a yogi who wants to self realize and realize God, should do his sadhna. I once mentioned to you a couple of years back (I guess it was you), that Krishna explained this Kriya yog to Arjuna in Bhagwad Gita and it evoked your laughter, saying it to be untrue.

I think this is the right method, and no it is not just for those few who want to practice an out of the HKnormal way dhyan yoga. This was the Vedic way of practice. But yes if you cannot do any of this, then at least just chant!! It will give some benefit too.

 

Love

 

Jai Mahakaal! Jai Shri Krishna!

Yk.

[sumedh]

 

Sure and I can appreciate were you are coming from, and perhaps his remark were knee jerk response to some of the comments made in response to this thread but he did mend his way and thus those quotes.

 

I do not think that he "mended his way". Anyway he is entitled to his opinion but that would be questioned when expressed on a forum.

 

Vedic Dharma has always been based on inquiry unlike abharmic religion whose aim is to convert the world to their way of thinking, danger is if we go down that route the discussion goes out of window. Just as the sun dispel the darkness Dharma based on truthfulness, purity, nonviolence and austerity lead us to the love of god. Inquiry is to seek the truth; invalidity of incorrect path has never been the object of discussion.

 

This is incorrect. Read commentries (on vedanta sutra or otherwise) of any of the acharyas.

 

 

Vedas are given to us based on realizations of several rishis, so I am never surprised by the differences.

 

No, they are apaurusheya and shabd pramana. The position of experience based scriptures, or God given scriptures is rejected (as being "chakraka" or circularity) in Vedanta. Read this for an introduction on vedas (chapter 17 is available for download here ). That is why sruti is considered as primary evidence and smriti as secondary (which is paurusheya), while the experience based scriptures are not considered at all.

 

 

I think whatever needed to be said has been said.

 

haribol

[sumedh]

Namaskar

 

 

 

The fact is that true bhakti is not really possible without proper knowledge of the object of desire! Knowledge is knowning. When you truly know Krishna, you will be able to have true bhakti for him. God cannot be known by reading books alone. And since God cannot be perceived by mere limited sense based experience, one should endeavor to enhance his super conscious ability.

 

Knowledge comes from guru, sadhu and shastra where guru refers to both chaitya guru (paramatma) and sad-guru. Endevours using only one of these will only frustrate our attempts. However, in a discussion only shastra can be referred.

 

Regarding perception of God, sruti says that only by Brahmn's will, devotion to Vishnu etc. is pure knowledge, moksha is attained. Lord Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita that only by devotion can He be known, attained. When will you learn to give pramanas for your assertions?

 

 

Scriptures are the result of and are based on experience /anubhuti and not vice-versa.

 

They are not (those that are considered as scriptures in vedanta). See previous reply to Ganesh prasadji above.

 

 

As far as "evidence" on the Kundalini / Kriyas yoga path is concerned, then there have been hundreds of yogis who have achieved God realization through this path. Babaji, Lahiri Mahasaya, Yukteswar Giri, Sadguru Bawa Lal dayal Maharaj (a bhakti yogi who lived for 300 years during Shajahan's reign and had direct darshan of Lord Ramachandra many times and brought back a few people from dead, had many high siddhis, but never cared for them and didn't like self advertisement), Trailanga Swami of Benaras (who lived around the same time as Bhaktivinod Thakur, Paramhansa Swami Nikhileshwarananda, Paramhansa Yogananda (who came to the U.S. much before SP and after he took mahasamadhi, his body was kept at the local morgue. According to the letter issued by the morgue director his body showed absolutely no signs of decay even after keeping there for 15 days!) and many other such yogis are the proof and evidence of achieving remarkable achievements through the practice of Kundalini / Kriya yoga. Their lives have been living scriptures and living examples of the science of yoga and God communion. If you want to deny all this, then its your sweet wish.

 

There is no evidence that these personalities achieved liberation. Regarding denial of these, i had been following these for quite some time in the past so fortunately acquainted with most of whom you mention. If you see their writings etc. they are found to be in direct conflict with scriptures in places.

 

 

 

If we go much earlier in time, then the list of sages is endless - Vishwamitra, Atri, Kanad, Pulatsya, Vashishtha Gorakhnath ... I mentioned these names at a few number of occassions to which I never really got any replies from the humble HK community. I guess you don't have any purport for this either? You may consider all this too as simply "silly points" if you desire so.

 

There a much larger number of Vedic sages, and as far as vedic evidence goes none of them practised Kundalini/Kriya yoga. As for "silly points", go back to that email and read it with sincerity to see its silliness.

 

 

 

As far as unscientific chanting is concerned, yes it is not very scientific and if is being done mechanically, simply believing that the name reciting is enough, then is un-Vedic too. Here it is important to clarify, that "chanting mantras is not un-Vedic in itself as such. But chanting the way most HKs do possibly is. Sorry for this not so positive for HK sounding note, but there is more to mantra japa than what is being told in the HK temple and CD discourses.

 

You need to explain as to how reciting in one way or other makes it scientific or un-scientific, or what has material science got to do with this -- mere asserting something does not make it true.

 

 

Instead of me explaining you the difference, I would like to ask you, whether you see any difference between the sadhna methods undertaken by Vedic sages as compared to the HKs? Are you aware of any Vedic sadhna methods apart from HK system? What was the difference between their sadhna paddhati and what you do. If what you do is best and superior, then were the rishis and sages who divised these methods, were fools?

 

No, you raised the objection so the onus is on yourself to explain the difference and not me. All the accepted Vedic sadhana methods involve dhyana, knowledge and devotion to Supreme. For this age scriptures say that only sankirtana works.

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 11.5.36

 

kalim sabhajayanty arya

guna jnah sara-bhaginah

yatra sankirtanenaiva

sarva-svartho bhilabhyate

 

Those who are actually advanced in knowledge are able to appreciate the essential value of this age of Kali. Such enlightened persons worship Kali-yuga because in this fallen age all perfection of life can easily be achieved by the performance of sankirtana.

 

 

Padma purana (Uttara Khanda, chapter 42)

 

dhyayan krte yajan yajnais

tretayam dvapare rcayan

yad apnoti tad apnoti

kalau sankirtya kesavam

 

Whatever is achieved in Satya-yuga by meditation, in Treta by offering ritual sacrifices and in Dvapara by temple worship is achieved in Kali-yuga by chanting the Names of Lord Kesava congregationally.

 

Visnu purana

dhyayan krte yajan yajnais-

tretayam dvapare rcayan

yadapnoti tadapnoti

kalau samkirtaya kesavam

 

The supreme goal which was attained in Satya-yuga by years of prolonged meditation; in Treta-yuga by performing extensive yajnas; in Dvapara-yuga by opulent and scrupulous Deity worship; in Kali-yuga the same results are easily had simply by the chanting of the Names of Lord Kesava.

Brahan-Naradiya purana

 

harer nama harer nama

harer namaiva kevalam

kalau nasty eva nasty eva

nasty eva gatir anyatha

 

In this age of quarrel and hypocrisy the only means of deliverance is chanting of the holy name of the Lord. There is no other way. There is no other way. There is no other way.

 

(The methods of other three yugas are specifically ruled out by emphasizing that "there is no other way" three times.)

 

There are many others. Also see the quotes provided by gHariji.

 

 

There are many granths on yoga starting from patanjali yoga to Goraksh and Shiv samhita and so on..

 

None of these are accepted scriptures (learn about what are pramanas using above links and elsewhere).

 

 

Further more yoga gives a thorough understanding of the tool called body that has been assigned to the soul to achieve this self realization. HK system does not deal with it. Yoga does. It deals with not only the body, but the various metaphysical energy centres (chakras) and how to elevate an ordinary consciousness into higher "Krishna consciousness", a process that is hard to achieve without the participation and proper knowledge of the important tool given to you.

 

Be prepared to provide evidence when you make wild claims like these.

 

 

Lord Krishna himself give the method of Kriya yoga to Arjuna where he explains how a yogi who wants to self realize and realize God, should do his sadhna. I once mentioned to you a couple of years back (I guess it was you), that Krishna explained this Kriya yog to Arjuna in Bhagwad Gita and it evoked your laughter, saying it to be untrue.

 

It was not me. It will be interesting to see the verses which you interpret as referring to Kriya yoga. Also then make an unbiased comparison with the verses referring to bhakti (which specifically rule out any other means to know Krishna) some of which have been quoted before.

 

 

haribol

[Guest guest]

After reading this description by Guruvani, I feel that kundalini yoga is more destructive than helpful. It was just terrible reading it.

 

 

For success in the tantric path, the yogi tries to please the deity of destructive illusory energy, Kali (or Durga). And the process is rarely carried out to the end. The aspirant must

completely control his physical organs by practicing the sitting postures or fasts of the hatha-yoga process, and this is simply the beginning. The yogi must meditate according to strict rules. He must sit atop a deer skin, kusa grass, and a cotton cloth, and must fix his eves on the tip of his nose. Further, he must renounce all intoxication, gambling, and animal foods, and he must practice celibacy, yes, restraining the sex urge is most important if one is to perfect the so-called yoga of sex. Contrary to much of today’s advertising, physical pleasure is not the true point of hatha-yoga.

When the yogi has complete and utter control of all his external and internal organs, then he must gradually clear his mind of all attractions and repulsions toward material things. He must neither love nor hate anything. Now the guru will advise terrible austerities that test the yogi’s tolerance of heat and cold. If the yogi passes through these calmly, then he begins a still more grueling process.

First, the yogi must cook meat and eat it without relish and also without disgust (since, more than likely, he has been a vegetarian). Then he goes to a cremation ground, where he searches through the ashes until he finds the one part of the human body that does not burn. This is a cylindrical piece of tissue about two inches long and one-half inch thick that is situated behind the navel. It does not get consumed in the flames, but glows with an eerie green light. The yogi must say the appropriate mantras and, without cringing, eat it. Then, at a time prescribed by the guru, he must cook a dead fish in a skull and similarly eat it without disgust. Then he must drink wine without being influenced by its effect. All of this prepares his nerves and emotions and makes him totally indifferent to the urges of the body. Then he kills five animals and makes their heads into a kind of seat. After the yogi sits down, the guru invokes the spirits of the animals, and they attack the yogi’s mind. If he remains sane, he can go on to the next stage - sex.

A yogini (female yogi) who has been trained in the arts of the flesh is called, and under the guidance of the spiritual master, a kind of sex act is performed. During intercourse the yogi must control his mind and constrict his stomach muscles so that he doesn’t lose his seminal fluid but instead removes the woman’s fluid. The yogi keeps the mixture of these two fluids in the base of his spine. There it will eventually enkindle the kundalini (or "serpent power"), which will rise up the spine through the susumna nerve and actually rip the yogi’s soul out of its situation in the heart and then out of the body and into the clear white light. (With their crippled minds, today’s cheaters have misconstrued this severe discipline into a license for orgies.)

Now the yogi sits for meditation and begins raja-yoga. He raises the kundalini force in the spine to the six centers of psychic power. At each of the six cakras, or psychic centers, deities who reside there offer him material powers and pleasures of inconceivable dimension. These are all tricks of Kali (Durga) to divert the yogi from success. When and if his kundalini force reaches the center located at his eyes, the yogi may then prepare for leaving his body. He must now make "the long tongue."

With a sharpened goat’s Tooth, the yogi cuts the septum, or cord of flesh, under his tongue. Day after day he cuts the septum again, so that the tongue can extend higher and higher. As it heals, the yogi cuts further. At last, he can stretch his tongue up to the middle of his nose, then to his eyes. When he can stretch his tongue to his forehead, he is ready. Then by the kundalini force the yogi raises the living soul up to the throat and inserts the "long tongue" in the postnasal passage. This keeps the soul from passing out the mouth, nose, eyes, or ears. Through mystic fire a channel opens, the top of the skull fractures, and the soul enters the clear white light. Once in this light, the yogi will probably make the mistake of thinking that he has become God. Completely forgetting his whole struggle with his body, he will fall immediately into a low form of life like that of a germ or stone. As Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.2.32) informs us. "Because of his impure intelligence, the yogi who would become one with God ultimately falls back down to the material world - no matter how severe the austerities he has performed."

[Guest guest]

 

After reading this description by Guruvani, I feel that kundalini yoga is more destructive than helpful. It was just terrible reading it.

 

It is said "If the blind leads the blind, both shall fall into the ditch"

 

If one reads ISKCON scandals, then one can conclude Krishna is a false God. The source says a lot about which direction you will go. In this case, Guruvani's source is an invalid source for knowledge on Kundalini and hence the material posted is trash.

 

Om

[Guest guest]

Well first you must ask what you hope to acheive by Kundalini yoga. If it is God you seek, then you should do what God demands. So read Bhagavad Gita and follow the instructions.

 

If you're simply seeking pleasure, that can be attained in many others ways. So ask yourself the question.

 

 

It is said "If the blind leads the blind, both shall fall into the ditch"

 

If one reads ISKCON scandals, then one can conclude Krishna is a false God. The source says a lot about which direction you will go. In this case, Guruvani's source is an invalid source for knowledge on Kundalini and hence the material posted is trash.

 

Om

[Guest guest]

 

Well first you must ask what you hope to acheive by Kundalini yoga. If it is God you seek, then you should do what God demands. So read Bhagavad Gita and follow the instructions.

 

Herein lies the problem. It is a serious mistake to assume that the Gita is the only source of information for God's instructions. The majority of the Indian population does not think so. They have other sources which they consider to be valid sources and they have no interest in the Gita. For example, the Gaudiyas worship Radha - something not instructed in the Gita and not practiced by other Vaishnavas. If the Gita is the only valid source of instruction, then along with Kundalini, Radha worship is also invalid.

 

 

If you're simply seeking pleasure, that can be attained in many others ways. So ask yourself the question.

 

If pleasure is your criteria for condemning Kundalini, then you can rest your case. Kundalini aspirants are very serious and their goals are not material. This goes back to the same problem of intolerance - inability to be tolerant of other beliefs.

 

Om

[Guest guest]

You have misunderstood. I did not condemn Kundalini yoga nor did I say it was only for pleasure. I was simply asking a question.

 

Anyway, in the material world, we have laws. The law is the same for everybody. We don't look at a court judge and say he is narrow minded, do we? But when it comes to religion, you claim that there are many ways and the Hare Krishnas are intolerant. Why is that? The Sastra clearly tells us what way is the best for Kali Yuga. You will be hard pressed to find references that suggest difficult yogas as alternative methods. Again, I'm not condemning but just asking you to research this further.

 

 

Herein lies the problem. It is a serious mistake to assume that the Gita is the only source of information for God's instructions. The majority of the Indian population does not think so. They have other sources which they consider to be valid sources and they have no interest in the Gita. For example, the Gaudiyas worship Radha - something not instructed in the Gita and not practiced by other Vaishnavas. If the Gita is the only valid source of instruction, then along with Kundalini, Radha worship is also invalid.

 

If pleasure is your criteria for condemning Kundalini, then you can rest your case. Kundalini aspirants are very serious and their goals are not material. This goes back to the same problem of intolerance - inability to be tolerant of other beliefs.

 

Om

[Guest guest]

 

Namaskar

Knowledge comes from guru, sadhu and shastra where guru refers to both chaitya guru (paramatma) and sad-guru. Endevours using only one of these will only frustrate our attempts. However, in a discussion only shastra can be referred.

 

Namaskar Sumedh ji!

What does the knowledge of yoga comes from? It is the same as to what u refered above. If the agenda is only to discuss and debate, umm yes shastra, but not only that. Yoga has a more practical aspect to it. Again, the friction in this debate is because you come from a strictly Vedanta school that does not emphasize the importance of practical experience based gyan over scriptural knowledge. This is what the pandas in Mathura, Vrindavan, Haridwar have done since the past few hundred of years. And you are not able to either grasp or accept the importance of sadhna over scriptural debate.

 

 

 

Regarding perception of God, sruti says that only by Brahmn's will, devotion to Vishnu etc. is pure knowledge, moksha is attained. Lord Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita that only by devotion can He be known, attained. When will you learn to give pramanas for your assertions?

 

Everything moves with Brahmn's will in the universe. That's a generalizing concept. But in the world sadhnas one has to earn the mercy. And not wait for it to fall in your lap as the HK believe. I have explained Bhagwad Gita's devotion before. The pramanas I gave are not acceptable for you. Only bookish words in black and white are. For me Bhakti alone, and especially HK narrow line of philosophy, is not palatable. I work with all aspects in my sadhna. There is a huge duality and conflict in the HK philosophy from the very start in every aspect of it. From the theoretical philosophy to practical everyday living. A fact that I don't gel in well with. You ahve asked me to "learn" to provide pramanas. I ask you to learn the way of sadhna. Do what Krishna instructs Arjuna in BG. Sit errect and meditate on your Agya chakra on Krishna. How about that? Would you learn? It's easy to instruct others though, and that's what HKs do.

 

 

Originally Posted by Y K: Scriptures are the result of and are based on experience /anubhuti and not vice-versa.

Sumedh: They are not (those that are considered as scriptures in vedanta). See previous reply to Ganesh prasadji above.

Well, you say - "The position of experience based scriptures, or God given scriptures is rejected (as being "chakraka" or circularity) in Vedanta." According to that you should altogether reject Bhagwad Gita which is considered a God given scripture. That is another duality.

the link to downloading ur pramana does not work. There is no file on that link.

 

 

There is no evidence that these personalities achieved liberation. Regarding denial of these, i had been following these for quite some time in the past so fortunately acquainted with most of whom you mention. If you see their writings etc. they are found to be in direct conflict with scriptures in places.

 

WOW! I didn't expect you to stoop so low in order to just push your point. Well, if that is the attitude, that you need to put down great worshippable sages like Vishwamitra, Vashishtha, Pulastya, Agastya Gorakhnath, simply to prove your point right, then I would like you to provide evidence that Prabhupada or BhaktiSiddhanta were liberated!!! What's the evidence for that Sumedh??? Can you show me an evidence for that?

And really I don't care if their writings are in conflict with your scriptures. If Lord Rama decided to sit in Shri Vishwamitra's and Vashishtha's and Agastya's feet and receive blessings, initiations, mantras and sadhnas, then these personalities are worth worshipping!!! Their accomplishments, sadhnatmak levels are unparalled by today's pigmy like devotees.

 

 

There a much larger number of Vedic sages, and as far as vedic evidence goes none of them practised Kundalini/Kriya yoga. As for "silly points", go back to that email and read it with sincerity to see its silliness.

What is Vedic evidence? The Vedic word has been thoroughly exploited by HKs everywhere. Its a support gaining tool for one. How do you know Agastya and Vishwamitra were not adept in the science of Kundalini? The HKs imagine everybody doing sankirtana. I asked you about the sabar mantra sadhnas practiced by Guru Gorakhnath. They are not Vedic. But they work. Do you have any knowledge of them? Besides the HKs do not read the Vedas. Only in a some parts. Do they read Rigveda? What about SamVeda?

 

 

You need to explain as to how reciting in one way or other makes it scientific or un-scientific, or what has material science got to do with this -- mere asserting something does not make it true.

 

My friend, This question explains the lack of understanding of the science of mantras. Reciting a mantra in one way or the right way makes it work, otherwise the effect is wasted. The energy is wasted. You will understand if you do A laghu anushthan of 1.25,000 mantras in 11 days. The effect you get with the right chanting that has the right set of mind, concentration, devotion, breathing, specific chanting method, etc. makes the difference. This is also important in any branch of mantra sadhna. Be it purely bhakti. And there are many GBC Gurus who do acknowledge the importance of right chanting and that most people are not able to do it doesn't mean that it should not be encouraged. If there is a process, it has a way to do it. Right way brings right results, doing incorrectly brings no or very less results.

Material science is nto separate from spiritual science. It is just an extension of and depended on spiritual science. You get to learn these things in Shaktism. To understand Vedas completely, I feel, one should study all the three aspects - to have a fuller understanding.

 

 

 

No, you raised the objection so the onus is on yourself to explain the difference and not me. All the accepted Vedic sadhana methods involve dhyana, knowledge and devotion to Supreme. For this age scriptures say that only sankirtana works.

 

Okay. if all the VEDIC sadhna methods do involve DHYANA, knowledge (gained through perception), and devotion and if only sankirtana works for this age, then how come you advertise yourselves as "VEDIC"? This is the catch! If you don't follow the Vedic sadhna methods and most scriptures you read are based on and colored by a 500 year tradition, then how are you Vedic??

 

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 11.5.36

Those who are actually advanced in knowledge are able to appreciate the essential value of this age of Kali. Such enlightened persons worship Kali-yuga because in this fallen age all perfection of life can easily be achieved by the performance of sankirtana.

Yes Sankirtana is present in most others schools of sadhna and philosophy too But where is it written that it is the ONLY method and that you cannot practice anything else or that Vedic sadhnas and mantras have become futile?

 

 

Padma purana (Uttara Khanda, chapter 42)

Whatever is achieved in Satya-yuga by meditation, in Treta by offering ritual sacrifices and in Dvapara by temple worship is achieved in Kali-yuga by chanting the Names of Lord Kesava congregationally.

 

This Padma Purana quoting has always been double standard thing by HKs. How come you accept Padma Purana but do not accept Shiv Gita within the same Padma Purana? Read that too. My meditation and rituals and mantras all have worked in this age of Kali! Chanting names or name of Keshava is fine! But chant it properly with the right understanding!

 

 

Brahan-Naradiya purana

In this age of quarrel and hypocrisy the only means of deliverance is chanting of the holy name of the Lord. There is no other way. There is no other way. There is no other way.

 

(The methods of other three yugas are specifically ruled out by emphasizing that "there is no other way" three times.)

 

Yes. Everything is ruled out. Just like in Islam all other religions are ruled out. Just like Catholics believe no one comes to God except through Jesus!

And the same is the HK position! That's it.

Can I come to the Lord Chanting Om Namah Shivaya and meditating on the image of Lord Shiva? Krishna says smth like - in whichever form you worship me I come to you in that form!!

 

 

There are many others. Also see the quotes provided by gHariji.

YK: "There are many granths on yoga starting from patanjali yoga to Goraksh and Shiv samhita and so on.."

 

Sumedh: None of these are accepted scriptures (learn about what are pramanas using above links and elsewhere).

 

No none of these are "ACCEPTED" by the HKs. They have no clue what is being talked about any yoga scriptures. Oh well..! Sorry guys. This one's not for you. Grab back your symbals and "pothis".

 

 

Originally Posted by Y K: Further more yoga gives a thorough understanding of the tool called body that has been assigned to the soul to achieve this self realization. HK system does not deal with it. Yoga does. It deals with not only the body, but the various metaphysical energy centres (chakras) and how to elevate an ordinary consciousness into higher "Krishna consciousness", a process that is hard to achieve without the participation and proper knowledge of the important tool given to you.

 

Sumedh: Be prepared to provide evidence when you make wild claims like these.

 

You really think yoga's giving understanding of body, energy and using it properly for God communion is wild claim? How silly can you get? What can I do if you are blind to the evidence I refered to? Go and read on Trailanga Swami of Benaraas. By the way, you can find his picture and reference on the home page of Indiadivine site too. If you don't consider his life of 300 years as an evidence and mere "pothis" as evidence, then i feel sorry for you Sumedhji. But I know these are not your words. I know where it is coming from. The person who spoke on this was never an authority on branches like Dhyan, kundalini, kriya yoga. All he did was claim that the ultimate aim of yoga is to go into service of krishna. So why did Krishna give Arjuna yoga and devotion? Arjuna was right there with Krishna already!! In his service. His best friend! No penance required!

 

If a blind man insists on "showing" him the way, I point a finger to the way nearby. But his definition of showing is through words that the understands. That's not my job. I'm not a regular discourse Guru. But if you really want to understand yoga, I suggest you at least buy two books -Autobiography of a Yoga by Paramhansa Yogananda and Kundalini Yoga by Sivananda Swami. You will get some more insight. And you will find the verses by Krishna in BG too

 

 

It was not me. It will be interesting to see the verses which you interpret as referring to Kriya yoga. Also then make an unbiased comparison with the verses referring to bhakti (which specifically rule out any other means to know Krishna) some of which have been quoted before.

I referred to the verse in Dhyana yoga chapter. Find them!

Again, you say "make a comparison"!! I can't believe how deeply rooted is the desire in HKs to compare, argue, defeat, fight all and all, prove, oneself superior, etc!

Of course Krishna says devotion/bhakti. But he also gives a method to channelize it.

You have half the picture. Is there another method he gave in BG? Did he say book distribution? Did he say Namahata? Did he say the word sankirtana ONLY? Did he ask Arjuna to grab a mridanga and kharatala? Arjuna's final convincing adn acceptance came AFTER Krishna's yogic Kriya of activating his Agya chakra and showing his universal form. And it was NOT one form. For more learning, enquire sincerely into the way Krishna worshipped Shiva in the ashram of Upmanyu Rishi!

To learn more, enquire into what method Arjuna applied to worship Lord Shiva, again at Lord Krishna's instructions. I would like to know how many people saw Lord Krishna appear before them and give them a boon as per the method instructed by Prabhupada. Arjuna's method worked as per Krishna's instructions. Are you following Krishna?

Krishna gave a method! But I'm not implying that you would accept it.

 

haribol

BolHari!

YK

[Guest guest]

 

You have misunderstood. I did not condemn Kundalini yoga nor did I say it was only for pleasure. I was simply asking a question.

 

Anyway, in the material world, we have laws. The law is the same for everybody. We don't look at a court judge and say he is narrow minded, do we? But when it comes to religion, you claim that there are many ways and the Hare Krishnas are intolerant. Why is that? The Sastra clearly tells us what way is the best for Kali Yuga. You will be hard pressed to find references that suggest difficult yogas as alternative methods. Again, I'm not condemning but just asking you to research this further.

 

Nothing like a civil conversation.

 

1. There is no common set of Shastras addressing all Hindus; we have a whole plethora of them. Each brand will argue for itself, but in the end, no one has convinced everyone that his own brand is so good that it can replace everything else. It has happened with other religions, but never with Hinduism.

 

2. Even those traditions that deal with common Shastra such as the Gita offer different interpretations. The dominant and leading tradition today that follows the Gita is Shankara’s Advaita tradition. Numerous counter-traditions that popped up subsequently have failed miserably to make a dent on Advaita. Can we conclude that Advaita must be the correct interpretation and drop everything else? It does not work that way.

 

In the light of the above, how is it possible to conclude that Kundalini and other spiritual approaches are inferior? There are no grounds to do so. You may not approve of them; your interpretation of your shastras may not approve of them; but that means nothing to the Kundalini aspirant or Yogi.

 

Like I said above, the majority of the Gita followers reject your interpretation of the Gita. Have do you address that to yourself?

[Guest guest]

 

Herein lies the problem. It is a serious mistake to assume that the Gita is the only source of information for God's instructions. The majority of the Indian population does not think so. They have other sources which they consider to be valid sources and they have no interest in the Gita. For example, the Gaudiyas worship Radha - something not instructed in the Gita and not practiced by other Vaishnavas. If the Gita is the only valid source of instruction, then along with Kundalini, Radha worship is also invalid.

So true!! There is no mention of Radha in any Vedic scriptures!!! Again, it comes to the question - how Vedic are the HKs.

 

If pleasure is your criteria for condemning Kundalini, then you can rest your case. Kundalini aspirants are very serious and their goals are not material. This goes back to the same problem of intolerance - inability to be tolerant of other beliefs.

Om

... and this is what is happening here.

[Guest guest]

 

So true!! There is no mention of Radha in any Vedic scriptures!!! Again, it comes to the question - how Vedic are the HKs.

 

Although Radha is not mentioned in scripture, it is still OK to believe and worship Radha as the HKs do. However, the problem here is their double standards. They are very lenient and relaxed when it comes to wild interpretations and relaxing standards to suit their convenience, but are very judgmental when the same is done by others.

 

To ask the question, can a HK preach his philosophy in a positive way by saying "hey...it is perfectly alright to do what you are doing as all paths ultimately lead to the one supreme reality. However, we do have a path if you are interested to make a switch..."

 

The answer seems to be NO. The HK's negative approach is "Your way is wrong. You are worshiping false Gods, false Gurus, have material goals and are doomed unless you switch over to my affiliation"

 

It is only natural that people do not take to such aggression kindly.

[Guest guest]

 

Although Radha is not mentioned in scripture, it is still OK to believe and worship Radha as the HKs do. However, the problem here is their double standards. They are very lenient and relaxed when it comes to wild interpretations and relaxing standards to suit their convenience, but are very judgmental when the same is done by others.

 

To ask the question, can a HK preach his philosophy in a positive way by saying "hey...it is perfectly alright to do what you are doing as all paths ultimately lead to the one supreme reality. However, we do have a path if you are interested to make a switch..."

 

The answer seems to be NO. The HK's negative approach is "Your way is wrong. You are worshiping false Gods, false Gurus, have material goals and are doomed unless you switch over to my affiliation"

 

It is only natural that people do not take to such aggression kindly.

 

Agree Two Hundred percent. This is the true picture, why HKs generate conflict. It is the radical, judgemental and placing my way, my form of God, my worship method over yours approach, that is a way put off and offensive.

[Ganeshprasad]

Jai Ganesh

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center bgColor=#ffffff>Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad

Vedic Dharma has always been based on inquiry unlike abharmic religion whose aim is to convert the world to their way of thinking, danger is if we go down that route the discussion goes out of window. Just as the sun dispel the darkness Dharma based on truthfulness, purity, nonviolence and austerity lead us to the love of god. Inquiry is to seek the truth; invalidity of incorrect path has never been the object of discussion.

 

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

your reply

This is incorrect. Read commentries (on vedanta sutra or otherwise) of any of the acharyas.

What part is incorrect, is it the highlighted in bold only, do you agree with the rest?

Search for invalidity of incorrect path could never lead us on the path of enlightenment.

Bring in any reference I would like to know if you please. Yes it is true that we should know what is right and what is wrong but going towards the tunnel of dark ness will not lead to light.

We chant in our prayers;

Asatoma Sadgamaya

Thamaso Maa Jyothir Gamaya

Mrithyor Maa Amrutham Gamaya

Aum Shanti Shanti Shantihi

Meaning: Lead me from the unreal to the real. Lead me from darkness to light. Lead me from death to immortality. May there be peace everywhere.

Sarve Sukhinah Santhu

Sarve Santhu Niraamayaah

Sarve Bhadraani Pashyantu

Maa Kaschid Dukhabhaag Bhavet

Aum Shanti Shanti Shantihi

Meaning: May all possess happiness. May all be healthy (free from all diseases). May all see beauty. May there be good fortune and no misery anywhere. May there be peace everywhere.

Aum Bhadram Karnebhihi Srunuyaama Devaaha

Bhadram Pashyemaa Kshibhirya Jatraaha

Sthirai Rangai Stushtuvaamsa Stanoobhihi

Vyashema Devahitam Yadaayuhu

Aum Shanti Shanti Shantihi

Meaning: Aum Hey Devaas, who are in the form of light, let our ears hear all good things. Hey worshippable Devas, let our eyes see good and holy things. May we spend this life given to us by God in continued prayers to You with a strong body, sound in health.

These are our noble Vedic thoughts that yearns for peace and harmony on our path of self-realisation.sorry to say the narrow view of mine is better than yours attitude only brings discord.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center bgColor=#ffffff>Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad

Vedas are given to us based on realizations of several rishis, so I am never surprised by the differences.

 

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

your reply

No, they are apaurusheya and shabd pramana. The position of experience based scriptures, or God given scriptures is rejected (as being "chakraka" or circularity) in Vedanta. Read this for an introduction on vedas (chapter 17 is available for download here ). That is why sruti is considered as primary evidence and smriti as secondary (which is paurusheya), while the experience based scriptures are not considered at all.

 

Apaurusheya that may be but it still remains subject of interpertation, or else vedas as establised by sankracharya would be accepted by all, and thus we would be all be his deciples.

So be my guest; win an argument based on sruti, which is not even a subject of this discussion.

May common sense prevail.

Tulsidas Goswami writes

O Lord, let any one accept any sadhana, he is free to follow its pursuit.

But to me Your name is the granter of all boons.

Karma, upasana, jnana - the various paths outlined in the Vedas for the emancipation of the soul - all are good.

But I seek only one shelter and that is Your name; I seek nothing besides….

Goswami belonged to no sect he did not open any samprdaya, yet his work and his sadhna inspires million over the years.

haribol

Jai Shree Krishna

[meez]

Hello, I was just reading this because its subject has caught my interest. I'm new here, and I wanted to share my experience with Kundalini.

 

I was recently introduced to Kundalini Yoga (due to my wife) in the summer of last year, and since then, my wife has been involved in learning Kundalini Yoga so that she may become a teacher. She is going through a program that requires her to complete many ours of not just Kundalini Yoga but other types of Yoga as well.

 

While I can't comment on how it relates to Hinduism because I have very little knowledge of it (thats why I'm here), I can tell you that her teachers and the people involved are some of the kindest, most caring people I have ever met.

 

I'm not sure who Guruvani is, and I'm certainly not here to debate his/her knowledge, or to debate anything for that matter. From what I see though, what my wife is learning, and subsequently passing on to me, is knowledge of the body, mind, and spirit. She has never been required or even asked to do anything that she didn't feel comfortable doing. There have never been any stipulations attached to her practicing Kundalini Yoga, and there most certainly have never been any negative/evil teachings. She would be the first one to leave if there had been.

 

As I said earlier, I'm not here to debate, I just wanted to share my experience regarding Kundalini. Others are certainly entitled to their opinions without question from myself or anyone else. Be well!

[sumedh]

 

So true!! There is no mention of Radha in any Vedic scriptures!!! Again, it comes to the question - how Vedic are the HKs.

 

Please do not pose as if you know the vedic scriptures when you do not. Sri Radha is mentioned in multiple places in accepted sadagamas including Padma Purana (4.2, 4.7, 4.20, 4.23, 5.70-83, 6.93), Brahma vaivarta Purana (2.49, 9.34 etc.), Narada Purana (2.80-81), Brahma Purana (Chapter 7) and others. These also clarify that the special gopi mentioned in Srimad Bhagavatam is Sri Radha so that those quotes also apply to Her. It is also clearly stated that Sri Radha is Lakshmi in these evidences, so that whatever the Sruti says about Lakshmi is applicable to Her. Srila Baladeva Vidyabhushan also quotes many sruti pramanas for this (e.g. Purusha-bodhini upanishad, Gopala-tapani upanishad) but since these have not been quoted by previous acharyas and people question the authenticity of these texts, we do not quote them in a discussion.

[sumedh]

 

What part is incorrect, is it the highlighted in bold only, do you agree with the rest?

In a broad sense, yes.

Search for invalidity of incorrect path could never lead us on the path of enlightenment.

Knowledge of right path automatically means knowledge of incorrect paths also. This is what means by "tamaso maa jyotir gamaya".

sorry to say the narrow view of mine is better than yours attitude only brings discord.

blah, blah... The problem of discord is primarily that of abrahamic religions who have no culture of civil, rational discussion nor any frameworks for such. Please don't try to bring in these kind of arguments here.

 

 

Apaurusheya that may be but it still remains subject of interpertation, or else vedas as establised by sankracharya would be accepted by all, and thus we would be all be his deciples.

Yes, people are free to give their own interpretations and vedanta provides the framework to show correct and incorrect interpretations which many acharyas have done. Agreeing with any interpretation, however incorrect/absurd, for fear of an imagined "discord" is stupid and not vedantic way (and not even appropriate in modern scientific way).

Goswami belonged to no sect he did not open any samprdaya, yet his work and his sadhna inspires million over the years.

 

This is not quite right, since Tulsidasji is said to belong to Ramanandi sect coming from Sripad Ramanuja.

So be my guest; win an argument based on sruti, which is not even a subject of this discussion.

You are welcome to start by presenting quotes about kundalini yoga from sruti which is the topic of this thread.