The End of Religion

[xexon]

I am a yogi. A practioner of the science of the soul, with no religious affiliation.

 

Aside from the physical postures, most people have little understanding of the deeper side of this science. It is concerned with untying the knot which binds you to belief, and in doing so , belief is replaced with direct perception.

 

This eliminates any need of religious symbolism to explain the workings of the divine machine. Understand that religion makes heavy use of symbolism because the populations of that day were uneducated with little worldy experience. Things had to be explained to them in a manner they were capable of understanding.

 

But now it's a new day. People by and large are well educated, and the internet has given them the ability to become worldy without leaving their chair. The old symbolism is no longer needed as much. Humanity is growing up. And it needs to be weened from symbolism.

 

So when my explanations to you about how things work don't always mesh with what you've been taught, you can understand why. There's a big difference between a children's story and a college lecture.

 

But in either case, you should pay attention. The teacher is there for you, not you for the teacher.

 

It's a slow process to remove old beliefs. They crowd the garden like last year's weeds. But the more you remove them, the more room you will have for planting.

 

I do what I do out of great love for all of you.

 

 

 

x

[Samia]

 

 

So when my explanations to you about how things work don't always mesh with what you've been taught, you can understand why. There's a big difference between a children's story and a college lecture.

 

But in either case, you should pay attention. The teacher is there for you, not you for the teacher.

 

 

 

Since you made the statement I can add the question.

 

What authority do you have to announce your idea of how things work is correct as opposed to any other poster here ? The only authority that is correct 100% of the time is god, because it is well known and well supported that humans are flawed or we wouldn`t be here in this hell. Anyway post away and if the field is one I am comfortable with I will gladly add my opinion to it.

[rohini108]

Sorry for all the caps. Nothing meant by it. Anyhow...

 

 

YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS SEEM TO BE BENT ON STERILIZING YOGA AND THE SOUL, AS IF YOU ARE NOT PART OF, OR ABOVE RELIGION. I WONDER WHAT YOU HOPE TO SEE WHEN YOU BECOME UNTIED. THE GOOD THING IS THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO PERCEIVE THE TRUTH. NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. AND RIGHT, "BELIEF IS REPLACED WITH DIRECT PERCETION." THAT'S A VERY RELIGIOUS STATEMENT. I CAN CERTAINLY RELATE TO IT.

 

AS I SEE IT, WHO CARES WHAT THE GREAT AVATARS USED TO PREACH WITH; SYMBOLISM OR SILENCE? I DON'T SEE ANY FAULT. WAS JESUS WRONG? OUT OF THEIR GREAT LOVE AND COMPASSION THEY DO WHAT THEY DO. OK, AMONGST THEMSELVES, ALL SITTING AROUND WITH GOD, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT KIND OF RAP. I THINK THE "NEED" YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DEPENDS ON THE TIME AND CIRCUMSTANCE.

 

WHAT OLD BELIEFS DO YOU FEEL ARE OUTDATED? ARE YOU SAYING THAT ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS YOGA? WHAT KIND OF YOGA? AREN'T THERE A FEW DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF YOGA?

 

YOU SEEM TO BE IMPLYING THAT YOU ARE A TEACHER. WITHOUT TEACHERS WE'D PROBABLY ALL BE DOOMED. WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR TEACHER?

 

YOUR DEMAND TO BE LISTENED TO SEEMS TO BE HEAVILY CLOAKED IN SYMBOLISM. NOT A SLAM. JUST NOTICING THAT. BUT, YES, THE TEACHER IS THERE FOR US.

 

YOU SPEAK HIGHLY OF THE INTERNET AND MODERN INTELLIGENCE. SURELY YOU HAVE BUILT A WEBSITE WHERE FOLKS CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT WHO YOU ARE. WHAT'S THE URL?

[theist]

[theist]

 

I am a yogi. A practioner of the science of the soul, with no religious affiliation.

 

Aside from the physical postures, most people have little understanding of the deeper side of this science. It is concerned with untying the knot which binds you to belief, and in doing so , belief is replaced with direct perception.

 

This eliminates any need of religious symbolism to explain the workings of the divine machine. Understand that religion makes heavy use of symbolism because the populations of that day were uneducated with little worldy experience. Things had to be explained to them in a manner they were capable of understanding.

 

But now it's a new day. People by and large are well educated, and the internet has given them the ability to become worldy without leaving their chair. The old symbolism is no longer needed as much. Humanity is growing up. And it needs to be weened from symbolism.

 

So when my explanations to you about how things work don't always mesh with what you've been taught, you can understand why. There's a big difference between a children's story and a college lecture.

 

But in either case, you should pay attention. The teacher is there for you, not you for the teacher.

 

It's a slow process to remove old beliefs. They crowd the garden like last year's weeds. But the more you remove them, the more room you will have for planting.

 

I do what I do out of great love for all of you.

 

Shiva is getting ready to dance. And it may mean the end of the religious womb most of you have grown up inside of.

 

 

 

x

 

[xexon]

 

Since you made the statement I can add the question.

 

What authority do you have to announce your idea of how things work is correct as opposed to any other poster here ? The only authority that is correct 100% of the time is god, because it is well known and well supported that humans are flawed or we wouldn`t be here in this hell. Anyway post away and if the field is one I am comfortable with I will gladly add my opinion to it.

 

I welcome your opinions. We are all brothers and sisters of a single womb.

 

I live in a world that is going to be quite foreign to most here. There are no deities. No gods. No prayer. No worship.

 

If I am aware of my true nature, who would I pray to that I am not already?

 

All of creation is an extension of a singular conscious power. If I am aware of that extension, am I not also aware that the connection to that power as being unbroken? I can indentify with the human self and talk to you, or I can indentify with the true self and it's ability to percieve the origin of all things.

 

There's nothing in the middle except what belongs to belief.

 

I am not free of belief yet. But I slay more of them everyday.

 

 

x

[xexon]

 

Sorry for all the caps. Nothing meant by it. Anyhow...

 

 

YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS SEEM TO BE BENT ON STERILIZING YOGA AND THE SOUL, AS IF YOU ARE NOT PART OF, OR ABOVE RELIGION. I WONDER WHAT YOU HOPE TO SEE WHEN YOU BECOME UNTIED. THE GOOD THING IS THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO PERCEIVE THE TRUTH. NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. AND RIGHT, "BELIEF IS REPLACED WITH DIRECT PERCETION." THAT'S A VERY RELIGIOUS STATEMENT. I CAN CERTAINLY RELATE TO IT.

 

AS I SEE IT, WHO CARES WHAT THE GREAT AVATARS USED TO PREACH WITH; SYMBOLISM OR SILENCE? I DON'T SEE ANY FAULT. WAS JESUS WRONG? OUT OF THEIR GREAT LOVE AND COMPASSION THEY DO WHAT THEY DO. OK, AMONGST THEMSELVES, ALL SITTING AROUND WITH GOD, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT KIND OF RAP. I THINK THE "NEED" YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DEPENDS ON THE TIME AND CIRCUMSTANCE.

 

WHAT OLD BELIEFS DO YOU FEEL ARE OUTDATED? ARE YOU SAYING THAT ALL THAT IS NEEDED IS YOGA? WHAT KIND OF YOGA? AREN'T THERE A FEW DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF YOGA?

 

YOU SEEM TO BE IMPLYING THAT YOU ARE A TEACHER. WITHOUT TEACHERS WE'D PROBABLY ALL BE DOOMED. WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR TEACHER?

 

YOUR DEMAND TO BE LISTENED TO SEEMS TO BE HEAVILY CLOAKED IN SYMBOLISM. NOT A SLAM. JUST NOTICING THAT. BUT, YES, THE TEACHER IS THERE FOR US.

 

YOU SPEAK HIGHLY OF THE INTERNET AND MODERN INTELLIGENCE. SURELY YOU HAVE BUILT A WEBSITE WHERE FOLKS CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT WHO YOU ARE. WHAT'S THE URL?

 

 

I have no desire to "see" anything. Perhaps I should be more clear and say that I have no desire for merging with the divine. It seems to be happening on it's own with or without my participation. I don't even meditate anymore, at least in the traditional way.

 

The past 20 years or so have been like the slow unfolding of a flower. The ego became a tool rather than a master. And the rightful king now sits at the throne. It is no longer bound to the interpretations and beliefs of the world that the mind used to present it with. It can see for itself.

 

Am I perfected in this state? No, I will not make claims that I am.

 

I am still your earthly brother. I may just be a bit older in soul age and like an older brother, I've seen and done things which I can share with my younger siblings. If nothing else, maybe it will help prepare you for whatever jouney in life you must walk.

 

My own path of yoga is based on Sant Mat. I built my launch vehicle based upon those principles, but even Sant Mat has dissappeared in the rear view mirror. There is nobody here but me now.

 

If I'm a teacher, so be it. I never applied for the position, it just landed in my lap. When compassion blooms, you truely become your brother's keeper.

 

Religions, symbolism, and all the rest. Are you not weary from trying to take it all in and make sense of it?

 

The spiritual equations which take you back home are simplicity itself. All these thick holy books are but an attempt to explain them. It does so through extensive division of the truth, often at the expense of understanding. This is the fault of the mind which likes to create by dividing one thing against another for sake of comparison. Is duality not the centerpiece of all religion?

 

When you need priests to explain it to you, you have gone too far with it. You have lost the simplicity.

 

Simplicity is the way. Recombining all the divisions until there are none.

 

 

 

 

x

[Inedible]

The more I read your posts, Xexon, the happier I am to see you here.

[Beggar]

Srila Sridhar Maharaj

The Subjective Evolution of Conciousness

 

...Then Krishna says budhå bhåva-samanvitah (Bhagavad-Gitå 10.8,). Here, budhå means those of fine theistic intellect

{sumedhasah}. In Bhågavatam it is said that those of

fine theistic intellect will be able to appreciate this {yajanti hi sumedhasah}. Fine theistic intelligence is the outcome of good fortune which comes from above {sukrti}; it is not self-acquired. That

fine intellectual inner direction and guidance can only

come from the nirguna or transcendental plane. Budhå

here means “one who has a direct connection with the

nirguna or transcendental plane.” His intelligence doesn’t

come from this måyic quarter; rather it springs from the

spiritual platform. Only such a person can appreciate these

subtle points. This is said in Bhågavatam:

krsna-varnam tvisa 'krsnam

sangopangastra-parsadam

yajnaih sankirtana-prayair

yajanti hi su-medhasah

“Those who are of fine theistic intellect {sumedhasah} will

worship Sri Chaitanya Mahåprabhu in sankirtana, not

others.”

[Beggar]

Srila Sridhar Maharaj,

 

Generally, the philosophers of this world take the transcendental to be impersonal. Infinite and zero are of the same characteristic. So it is an area in which we cannot have any entrance as a subject for investigation. The subject has its stand far below; he can only conjecture some hazy thing. This is the position of the jiva-soul. So his view is only something cloudy, like sky. So the spiritual sky is also seen as one sees an infinite blue sky, that is, Brahma. Non-differentiated, non-specified, infinite space, which we cannot have any practical experience of. Nirguna. That is the summation of all negation. To us, the positive experience is confined only to this world. This ear-experience, this eye-experience, touch-experience, etc. Our property here is the sum total of these experiences and something drawn from the mental world. This is saguna. And all this experience fails to have any conjecture of that background, so that is nirguna. All experiences are absent there. The positive knowledge of our experience is completely absent there. So that is nirguna. Or so we are told by the philosophers of this world. "Parinisthito 'pi nairgunye - I am well established there. Pari - means sampurna-rupena, 'perfectly' I am established there, always in connection of what you call negation of all these positive things we experience in this world. Uttamah-sloka-lilaya grhitaceta rajarse - "But Oh Kind, here I give vent to my real stage: uttamah sloka-lilaya. Some extraordinarily higher wave, current, has carried me to some other world, and that cannot be a part of this world of experience. Uttamah - ut means udgatah tamo, urdhvde tamo. No nescience is to be traced there, no darkness, no ignorance. Of that I am sure. That sphere is all light, all knowledge. All else is below. That is rather the foundation.

He [Krishna] is all consciousness, pure consciousness. Nothing mundane is to be traced there. This is beyond all conceptions of ignorance, beyond misconception. Uttamaih slokyate and uttamah slokah. Sloka means charitra, 'conduct.' A flow of life is be traced there which cannot be compared with anything of this mundane jurisdiction. A higher conception of life, rather the highest conception of life. I am captured totally by the charm of that sort of life, that sort of Pastimes, that sort of flow of nectarine activity.

[Inedible]

What are you trying to say, Beggar?

[Beggar]

 

What are you trying to say, Beggar?

Sridhar Maharaj:

 

This is the position of the jiva-soul. So his view is only something cloudy, like sky. So the spiritual sky is also seen as one sees an infinite blue sky, that is, Brahma. Non-differentiated, non-specified, infinite space, which we cannot have any practical experience of. Nirguna. That is the summation of all negation.

The worship of God as formless and atheism can be seen as closely related.

[Dark Warrior]

Advaita is semi-theism. It is not atheistic.

 

There are some Vaishnavas who are of the opinion that anyone who considers the truth to be Nirguna Brahman is an atheist and has no value. This is however, quite far from the truth.

 

Being a Sri Vaishnava, I am aware that the Vedas talk of the Supreme Being, Lord Narayana, as one who possesses infinite attributes. Advaitins, on the other hand, assert that Brahman is formless, incorporeal and has no attributes at all. I find Advaita an intellectual philosophy, unlike many Vaishnavas who seem to hate it. I'd call Advaita as an 'elegant error'.

 

However, this does not discount advaitins as demonic, or as atheists. It may surprise you to know that the followers of Adi Sankaracharya are also Vaishnavas. After all, Vaishnavism means 'Worship of Vishnu'. It does not mean 'Worship of Personal God as Vishnu'.

 

The mordern day advaitins have veered from the path set by Sri Sankaracharya. They worship demigods like Shiva, Durga, Kali, etc. as manifestations of Brahman. But Adi Sankara never advocated demigod worship. Although an advaitin, He firmly established that the highest Saguna Brahman was none other than Sriman Narayana.

 

Therfore, true Mayavadism, or Advaitam is Vaishnavam. Advaitins may say everything is Narayana, that Narayana has no form, that they themselves are Narayana, but they are Vaishnavas in the sense that they accept Narayana as the ultimate truth to be realised. Like I said before, Vaishnavism is simply acceptance of Vishnu above demigods. The Saguna Brahman of Advaitins is indeed none other than Vishnu. Heck, there is sufficient proof to say that Sri Sankara wore a tilak, and not the ash of Shiva as he is popularly depicted in pictures to be wearing.

 

The works such as Saundarya Lahiri, Sivanandalahiri that praise Demigods are not authored by Sankaracharya, but by another person (presumably Appaya Dikshitar) who wrote them and passed it off as Sri Sankaracharya's works. The mordern day followers of the Smarta tradition have unfortunately been mislead to believe that Adi Sankara advocated Demigod worship, so they worship Demigods as well. So, now Advaitam is corrupted.

 

And I am quite willing to accept that Advaitam is a legitimate path, just as philosophies like Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, Shuddhadvaita, Dvaitadvaita, etc. But in Kali Yuga, it is not an easy path to take. For instance, according to advaita, to become Narayana, you must let go of ego. But the mordern day advaitins, having accepted that the Self is Narayana, get egotistical and supercilious in the process. Hence, you have to possess the intellect of Sankaracharya himself to succeed through Advaita.

[skp]

Dark Warrior,

 

Very well said. Krishna Himself confirms this when Krishna says that the people whose minds are attached to the path of impersonalism (Avyakta-aasakta chetasah) tread an exceedingly difficult path (Klesho Adhikaras Teshaam).

 

Hare Krishna!

 

 

 

Advaita is semi-theism. It is not atheistic.

 

There are some Vaishnavas who are of the opinion that anyone who considers the truth to be Nirguna Brahman is an atheist and has no value. This is however, quite far from the truth.

 

Being a Sri Vaishnava, I am aware that the Vedas talk of the Supreme Being, Lord Narayana, as one who possesses infinite attributes. Advaitins, on the other hand, assert that Brahman is formless, incorporeal and has no attributes at all. I find Advaita an intellectual philosophy, unlike many Vaishnavas who seem to hate it. I'd call Advaita as an 'elegant error'.

 

However, this does not discount advaitins as demonic, or as atheists. It may surprise you to know that the followers of Adi Sankaracharya are also Vaishnavas. After all, Vaishnavism means 'Worship of Vishnu'. It does not mean 'Worship of Personal God as Vishnu'.

 

The mordern day advaitins have veered from the path set by Sri Sankaracharya. They worship demigods like Shiva, Durga, Kali, etc. as manifestations of Brahman. But Adi Sankara never advocated demigod worship. Although an advaitin, He firmly established that the highest Saguna Brahman was none other than Sriman Narayana.

 

Therfore, true Mayavadism, or Advaitam is Vaishnavam. Advaitins may say everything is Narayana, that Narayana has no form, that they themselves are Narayana, but they are Vaishnavas in the sense that they accept Narayana as the ultimate truth to be realised. Like I said before, Vaishnavism is simply acceptance of Vishnu above demigods. The Saguna Brahman of Advaitins is indeed none other than Vishnu. Heck, there is sufficient proof to say that Sri Sankara wore a tilak, and not the ash of Shiva as he is popularly depicted in pictures to be wearing.

 

The works such as Saundarya Lahiri, Sivanandalahiri that praise Demigods are not authored by Sankaracharya, but by another person (presumably Appaya Dikshitar) who wrote them and passed it off as Sri Sankaracharya's works. The mordern day followers of the Smarta tradition have unfortunately been mislead to believe that Adi Sankara advocated Demigod worship, so they worship Demigods as well. So, now Advaitam is corrupted.

 

And I am quite willing to accept that Advaitam is a legitimate path, just as philosophies like Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, Shuddhadvaita, Dvaitadvaita, etc. But in Kali Yuga, it is not an easy path to take. For instance, according to advaita, to become Narayana, you must let go of ego. But the mordern day advaitins, having accepted that the Self is Narayana, get egotistical and supercilious in the process. Hence, you have to possess the intellect of Sankaracharya himself to succeed through Advaita.

[tackleberry]

The word 'avyakta' has nothing to do with impersonal at all. It simply means 'unmanifest.' Even the Lord, if unmanifest, can be referred to as avyakta, it doesn't mean he's impersonal. Any sentient being is, by default, personal, couldn't possibly be impersonal.

 

So if one translates avyakta as impersonal, it comes down to: worship of jada prakriti. Evidently, nobody, least of all an exalted soul like Arjuna, is going to ask a question like that. Hence, avyakta upasana couldn't possibly refer to the worship of the impersonal.

[Inedible]

 

Sridhar Maharaj:

 

The worship of God as formless and atheism can be seen as closely related.

 

I'll agree with you if you are saying that atheists tend to be religious people. Some of them are serious fundamentalists, too. They like to say things like my science can beat up your god.

[cbrahma]

A religion is the fossil remains of a spiritual movement.

[theist]

To look at it from another perspective religion can be seen as the end of animal life and the beginning of human life.

[xexon]

A master can pass the divine flame with a touch or glance. One flame lighting another. Like the passing of an Olympic torch.

 

Religion tries to rub scriptures together to make fire. All they hand you is a stick without the flame.

 

 

x