Analogy: Veda, Aagama, Tantra, Aghora etc

August 20, 2008

Namaste Narasimhji,

Enjoyed reading both your mails. This reminds me of a koan riddle:

A MASTER was asked the question, " What is the Way? " by a curious

monk.

" It is right before your eyes, " said the master.

Monk: " Why do I not see it for myself? "

Master: " Because you are thinking of yourself. "

Monk: " What about you? Do you see it? "

Master: " So long as you see double, saying I don't and you do, and so

on, your eyes are clouded, "

Monk: " When there is neither 'I' nor 'You' can one see it? "

Master: " When there is neither 'I' nor 'You,' who is the one that

wants to see it? "

Can I request two favours from you?

First:

I would like to know if you have heard of any vamacharis in India who

followed Vama Marga successfully and realised God. All true saints I

have heard are followers of the Satwik path/right hand tantra. So

always wonder, did any body succeed in the other way? Anybody who was

well-known as a Vamamarga saint?

A few years back, I had read AGHORA -Kundalini by Robert Svoboda. In

that book one Aghori Vimalananda is mentioned. But except in that

book, I couldnt find any references to this person anywhere. Not even

in net. (The only references were the ones related to Robert

Swaboda's book and as his Guru).

Secondly, can you please help me with a question?

A week back, I was elaborating about realisation and yoga, meditation

and all such to one of my cousins who did not actually understand all

what I said. He was asking me if yoga, be it jnana yoga, bhakti yoga

or any one, is the only way to attain moksha/realisation, then what

will other living organisms like ameoba, bacteria and all will do to

attain moksha? Arent they also living organisms? (He has done his

research in Bio Informatics, hence his priority to bacteria and

ameoba). He said, if what I am saying is correct, only human beings

will be evolved and other organisms will never attain moksha. I was

breathless for a moment and did not know how to answer him. I really

felt sad (and ashamed, because I thought I could answer all questions

related to the mystery of life) that I couldnt answer him. His

question seemed stupid, but when I thought of it, isnt that a valid

question?

His question gave me a sleepless night. I thought a lot about it. If

the whole world as a maya exist only in human's mind (as per my

understanding, our mind creates this world, when through yoga,

mind/ego collapse happens, there is no world or anything and we

submerge as oneness in the omnipotent power), if it is a creation of

mind, then there should not be any world when the human species is

extinct. Right?

I dont know if I have convey my doubt clearly.

Would you be able to share your knowledge on this?

(I am asking you because, you were instrumental (though unknowingly)

in opening the wide horizon of spiritual knowledge to me years back

through just one reply to one of my questions related to Kundalini. I

am always indebted to you for that and now I realise how stupid my

questions were at that time.)

With Respects,

Jyothi

sohamsa , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr

wrote:

>

> Namaste friends,

>

> There is one more thing I wanted to include in the analogy/parable,

but did not do so due to lack of time last night. Let me expand now.

Though this is not related to the original questions, this will

complete the story.

>

> * * *

>

> There was a way to the sea through a country called " Vishnu

raajyam " [Vaishnavism]. Some people travelled the path, found a

beautiful city called Vishnupuri on the coast and the sea was close

to the city. The journey through Vishnu raajya was documented in a

book [Vishnu Purana] and the book claimed that this was a beautiful

journey and enables one to reach the sea. It also claimed that other

coastal cities were by the very same sea and reaching the sea here

amounts to reaching the sea at all other places.

>

> There was another way to the sea through a country called " Shiva

desam " [shaivism]. Some people travelled the path, found a wonderful

city called Shivanagari on the coast and the sea was right next to

it. The journey though Shiva desam was documented in a book [shiva

Purana] and the book claimed that this was an amazing journey and

enables one to reach the sea. It also claimed that other coastal

cities were by the very same sea and reaching the sea here amounts to

reaching the sea at all other places.

>

> There were some people who had never actually been to either city

nor seen the sea. Some were impressed by the description of one city

and some by the other. They were so impressed that they started

arguing which was the best city. Some even went to the extent of

condemning and putting down the other city. Some people who had seen

both the cities came forward and said, " the main thing is not the

city, but the sea itself. The sea is the same in both places. Though

different, both cities are nice and both give one the same sea. " That

did not convince the fighting factions and they continued to fight.

Later, some of them even forgot about the sea and started thinking

that the city was the main thing and not the sea. Of course, both the

cities are really beautiful. Stuck in their animosity and fights,

they could never visit either city nor enjoy the sea.

>

> * * *

>

> OK, I think the parable is complete now. :-)

>

> Best regards,

> Narasimha

>

> Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam

> Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana

> Spirituality:

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

>

> -

> Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

> ; sivacharya ;

sohamsa

> Monday, August 18, 2008 12:43 AM

> Analogy: Veda, Aagama, Tantra, Aghora etc

>

> Namaste Sir,

>

> There is no need for either Sri or Ji in addressing me.

>

> Hoping you won't mind, I am sending this reply to some

that may have some interested people. When I was

meditating before replying to you, a really beautiful and meaningful

analogy came to me and I think it is worth sharing with more people

than just you. To ensure your anonymity, I removed references in the

quoted mail below that may help one identify you.

>

> * * *

>

> First I will answer your first question in detail, because that

can automatically answer other questions.

>

> > 1. Are Vedic (Pure Vaithika rituals) different from Mantra

Shastras

> > (people explain that mantra shastra does not originate from the

vedas,

> > but classified under tantra). Did Mantra shastras not originate

from vedas?

>

> * * *

>

> When people say what is in Veda and what is not, honestly I can

only laugh. They are only fooling themselves. Reciting Veda with

perfect swara or mastering a celebrated commentary does not help one

understand Veda. In fact, understanding each single verse in Veda

requires great tapascharya. Understanding a verse in Veda is neither

possible with energy flowing in Ida nadi (intuition) nor in Pingala

nadi (logic and analysis). It is possible only with energy flowing in

Sushumna nadi. It is possible with neither intuition nor logic, but

only with *revelation* and simply, for the lack of a better

expression, direct knowledge.

>

> When one meditates long enough on a verse, the verse may simply

be revealed to the yogi. THAT is the only way to understand a Vedic

verse. For most people, it is not possible to decipher even a single

verse in an entire life, let alone a passage.

>

> Bottomoline is: Almost nobody understands Veda today. What are

considered " pure vaidika rituals " are merely another variety of

rituals created by someone at some point of time. From the point of

view of authenticity as granted by Veda, there is no difference

between them and other aagamic rituals, though people ignorantly

believe otherwise.

>

> * * *

>

> A simple analogy may help clarify a lot of things related to this

complicated issue a little. What the thing in the analogy represents

is shown here and there in square brackets .

>

> Once there were many people who lived near the sea

[brahman/Aatman]. They regularly sat by the sea and enjoyed the sight

and sound of the sea [experienced Brahman]. They described the sea in

some nice cryptic poems [Veda].

>

> As people started living a little away from the sea [less

spiritually evolved], someone had to put together some instructions

on how to reach the sea. He said, " keep walking towards east " and the

instructions grew with time. People faithfully followed the

instructions [rituals].

>

> People started moving further and further inland and started

living in a landlocked desert far away from the sea. This generation

had never seen a pool of water like a lake, let alone a sea. They

faithfully performed the ritual of walking towards east, but did not

find sea. They debated endlessly whether one had to walk one mile or

two miles or three miles and formed different schools of thought.

Some walked their chosen distance, found a tree or a building or some

interesting object and even became satisfied that that was sea!

>

> Then came some great person, whose instincts led him to take a

horse instead of walking and ride it for a long distance [use of

other tools]. He did find the sea after a few months. He put together

newer instructions to reach the sea, which included riding a horse

[new aagamas].

>

> People performing the old rituals objected to this and said " but

then this horse thing is not granted by the book of sea. This is a

new path and different from the " pure " sea ritual " [ " pure " Vedic

ritual]. By now, people did not even understand what the cryptic

poems of the original " book of sea " mean, but they simply believed

that those poems taught the old " pure " sea rituals that they were

used to. They were blissfully unaware that the original instructions

were meant for someone already close to sea and the newer

instructions came from someone who actually saw the sea and knew

where they currently lived and how to get to the sea from there!

>

> Slowly many new sets of instructions involving horses, chariots

etc were taught and many new paths to the sea were outlined instead

of just instructing people to walk towards east [evolution of

mantra/tantra/yantras].

>

> One particular path through jungles was dangerous [aghora and

other dark tantric paths involving practice of sex, meat, wine etc].

Though the distance to sea was much shorter through that jungle, it

was just too dangerous and only the bravest and strongest could make

it. There were cruel dacoits and wild animals [chance of a fall in a

risky ritual] and many weak people travelling to sea via that path

were killed. A wise man who knew the entire territory well came

forward, condemned that path and discouraged people from trying that

path. Since then, even people who were strong enough to successfully

make it in that path desisted from it.

>

> As time progressed, people started fighting too much about whose

path was superior. They were foolish, not smart enough to adopt the

original instructions, of either the so-called " pure " sea path or the

so-called " new " path or other variations, for the changed geography

and changed times. Many followed the instructions blindly, hit

roadblocks and did not reach sea. Many did not even know

that " reaching the sea " was the actual goal of all their joirneys.

They only thought they were supposed to follow the instructions

faithfully and there was no need to adopt to the changed geographical

territory and time. They even condemned those who actually went to

sea, came back and gave updated directions for their place and time,

for violating tradition.

>

> * * *

>

> In case the analogy is not clear, here is a brief summary of its

points. Veda is about realizing self. Veda describes various aspects

of the state of self-realization. That is why it is considered the

highest knowledge. Other allied subjects throw some light on possible

ways to reach that state. While definitive statements can be made on

the actual state of self-realization itself, no definitive statements

can be made on how to reach it. The path depends on one's current

position!

>

> Great men in many spiritual paths, within Hinduism as well as

outside of it, came, experienced that state, understood the current

state of people around them and gave specific instructions on how to

reach that state from the current state. Some followed the

instructions and experienced the state. Some instead kept arguing

about the contradictions between paths.

>

> Please re-read the story and try to understand what each part of

the story represents. If you understand this analogy well, this can

really clarify the meaningless nature of so many debates that people

waste time with!

>

> * * *

>

> > 2. I read from somewhere that Sri Sri Adi Sankara has condemned

> > Tantrik practices. But I also hear and read that he is a great

Sri Vidya

> > Upasaka himself. If Sri Vidya has its roots from Tantra, what

did

> > Sri Adi Sankara condemn?

>

> He did condemn some vaamaachaara (left-hand) practices of tantra

like the use of sex, alcohol, meat etc.

>

> However, please go back to my analogy. A great man may condemn

the use of a short path to reach the sea if it has a lot of wild

animals and dacoits and many travellers through that path recently

lost their lives. It does not mean that path is totally unusable. It

only means that too many people incapable of travelling on that path

are using it of late and so the great man was compelled to stop the

practice.

>

> If the same great man is reincarnated at a different time when

several adept souls he has a rina with are about to be reincarnated,

he may not condemn the path and instead write on travelling that

jungle path carefully!

>

> The words of great masters need to be interpreted within the

context of their desa, kaala and paatra and within the context of the

purpose of that particular birth.

>

> * * *

>

> > 3. What is vamachara? if it is the left hand method - sex,

drinks etc,

> > why must it be practiced at all?

>

> Suppose one's house is close to the market and the market noise

reaches one's house. Suppose that noise is disturbing one's

meditation, i.e. one is unable to focus on god amid all the noise.

There are two approaches one can take - (1) run away from the noise,

find a place of solitude and meditate there. (2) rise to the

challenge, meditate right there and develop the ability to turn off

the sensory input to the mind, i.e. get mastery and control over the

part of the mind that is making one vulnerable to this disturbance.

After all, the noise from outside is NOT the problem - the problem is

the *inability* of one's mind to turn off that sensory input. By

controlling one's mind, one can focus attention on god irrespective

of what is happening outside.

>

> Approach (1) is not bad. If one is weak-minded and has a decent

chance of failure with approach (2), then approach (1) is definitely

prudent and worthwhile. But, if one has a strong mind and can succeed

with approach (2), it is great. It hastens one's progress.

>

> * * *

>

> Vaamaachaara is also like that, but a more extreme form of

testing one's self-control by rising to the challenge.

>

> Please realize that vaamaachaara/aghora is not about the use of

sex, wine etc for the kick of it. It is about their use to test

oneself with the toughest challenges and hone one's self-control.

Self-realization comes when self-control is perfect and one's mind

can always be focussed on god no matter what is going on around one.

If one is either attracted or averse to any one thing, that is enough

to block self-realization.

>

> However, if one is weak, it is better to stay away from

vaamaachaara. One needs to do other practices and strengthen oneself.

If a really pure yogi with perfect self-control is able to focus on

god with all his mind even when he is drunk and sitting naked with a

beautiful naked woman tightly embracing him, then he can try that to

test his self-control and hone it. But, if that is going to tempt

one, get the mind away from god and onto a physical enjoyment, then

one better not try that path! Just as one who does not have a strong

mind to meditate amid noise should meditate in solitude and hone

one's self-control, one who does not have a strong mind to keep the

focus on god in the middle of normally depriving practices such as

wine, meat and sex should stay away from those.

>

> * * *

>

> In my analogy before, the short jungle path to the sea having the

danger of wild animals and dacoits represents the vaamaachaara path

of aghora. If one not having the wherewithal to battle and kill the

wild animals and dacoits tries that path, one may be killed.

Similarly, one who wants self-realization using this path will fall

if one does not have perfect self-control. If one takes this path

because it sounds cool or exciting, one is likely to fall. It is only

for the fittest and bravest.

>

> If there is ANY weakness in one's self-control, one can NOT

follow this path. Just as there are many paths from the desert to the

sea in my analogy, there are many paths to self-realization. One

should follow the path that is appropriate for one based on previous

samskaras, strengths and weaknesses.

>

> * * *

>

> > Is it not a fact that Sri Ambal lies above all these?

>

> :-) Sri Ambal (the Divine Mother) does not lie above or below

anything. She lies everywhere! All knowledge, all desires and all

actions of all beings are Her own different manifestations.

>

> If a yogi with perfect self-control drinks wine and sits naked

with a beautiful naked woman tightly embracing him and yet keeps his

mind fully focussed on god, his self-control, his focus on god are

all different manifestations of the Divine Mother only.

>

> As a matter of fact, even if one gives in to base instincts and

pursues carnal pleasures, his desires and actions are also different

manifestations of Divine Mother only. The Mother gives rise to so

many lower level forms with specific domains of responsibility. The

Mother takes the form of Lakshmi and Alakshmi as well. She takes the

form of Vidya and Avidya as well. All opposites and polarities are

actually Her manifestations only.

>

> However, those who are more comfortable with Lakshmi and Vidya

and uncomfortable with Alakshmi and Avidya will look at only the

former pair as manifestation of Divine Mother and remain in duality.

That is a valid point of view. However, the *ultimate* reality is

that She is All.

>

> I need to sleep now. I will stop here. Hope that put a few things

in perspective. You can send further questions to the or

to me privately.

>

> Best regards,

> Narasimha

>

> Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam

> Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana

> Spirituality:

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

>

> Sri Sri NarasimhaJI

> Namaskarams. Hope you remember me. I am a friend of <deleted>

of <deleted> temple, brother of <deleted>. We met a couple of years

ago in <deleted> temple.

>

> I have a few doubts. I would like to hear your opinion on the

same.

>

> 1. Are Vedic (Pure Vaithika rituals) different from Mantra

Shastras (people explain that mantra shastra does not originate from

the vedas, but classified under tantra). Did Mantra shastras not

originate from vedas?

>

> 2. I read from somewhere that Sri Sri Adi Sankara has condemned

Tantrik practices. But I also hear and read that he is a great Sri

Vidya Upasaka himself. If Sri Vidya has its roots from Tantra, what

did Sri Adi Sankara condemn?

>

> 3. What is vamachara? if it is the left hand method - sex,

drinks etc, why must it be practiced at all? Is it not a fact that

Sri Ambal lies above all these?

>

> I am a little (totally) confused. Hope your reply takes me out

of the well to ask you more questions

>

> Namaskarams

> <deleted>

>

> --

> Regards

> <deleted>

>

August 20, 2008

Dear Jyothi,

Pardon me for replying to your question directed to Narasimha. But

isnt the answer to your question clear? You treat moksa as if it were

a natural desire of all living things. Moksa itself is a desire that

realistically cannot be present unless some higher chakras are

aroused. To understand this, you will need to define free will for

yourself. Most people think free will is the ability to immediately

act on their desires. To me that is not free will because most

desires themselves are simply consequences of having a body and a

mind. The body's needs create desires, and the mind's needs also

create desires. When you simply and faithfully act on them (desires)

all the time, you are nothing but a wordly automaton. This is the way

all animals are too - they are forever caught in eating because they

are hungry, mating because they need to reproduce, sleeping in order

to regain the body's energy etc. And most humans too are not very

different. They all think they have free will simply because they get

to follow their desires. At some point some of them start to question

desire and SEPARATE themselves from it. The ability to ask the

question: " Why do I have <so-and-so> desire " is the first step.

Because the person has then identified himself/herself as separate

from the desire and has developed the ability to evaluate it - " should

I satisfy it/shouldnt I satisfy it? " . No animal to my knowledge has

ever displayed this kind of consciousness. Once these somewhat

enlightened humans start questioning their desires, they see that

desires are cyclical, and they develop some form of practice to

regulate these desires. No animal to my knowledge ever regulates their

desire by THEMSELVES (the environment does, not them). Once the desire

is regulated (in those few humans), naturally the consciousness asks -

what am I then, if I am not simply the vehicle for wordly desire? This

is true free will, and at this point the first desire for moksha

arises. This is rare in humans, let alone animals.

To me, the average desire pursuing consciousness is what the Muladhara

chakra is, and this is the level of consciousness of all animals and

most humans. When they rise above it is when it makes sense to talk of

Moksha.

But I could be wrong, this is my understanding so far. I am not a guru

of any kind, these are all my personal musings.

Hope I didnt offend you or anyone else,

Regards,

Sundeep

He was asking me if yoga, be it jnana yoga, bhakti yoga

> or any one, is the only way to attain moksha/realisation, then what

> will other living organisms like ameoba, bacteria and all will do to

> attain moksha? Arent they also living organisms? (He has done his

> research in Bio Informatics, hence his priority to bacteria and

> ameoba). He said, if what I am saying is correct, only human beings

> will be evolved and other organisms will never attain moksha. I was

> breathless for a moment and did not know how to answer him.

August 21, 2008

Namaste Jyothi ji,

> Secondly, can you please help me with a question? ..snip..> He was asking me if yoga, be it jnana yoga, bhakti yoga > or any one, is the only way to attain moksha/realisation, then what > will other living organisms like ameoba, bacteria and all will do to > attain moksha? Arent they also living organisms?

> ..snip.. He said, if what I am saying is correct, only human beings > will be evolved and other organisms will never attain moksha. I was > breathless for a moment and did not know how to answer him. I really > felt sad (and ashamed, because I thought I could answer all questions > related to the mystery of life) that I couldnt answer him. ..snip..

Well, sadhana (effort) is what a being does. Phala (fruits) are decided by the Lord. If God wants, a bacteria can get moksha too. However, *usually* god has some rules of action and reaction to uphold and hence does not act out of order. So the chance of a baterium to get moksha is negligible (except at the end of this creation cycle).

It is indeed true that amoeba or bacteria have very very small chance of moksha in THAT life. However, nobody stops them from doing some good karma (possibly by *chance*), get a higher birth and eventually be born as a human and do some sadhana.

When I wrote "by chance", it may make some uncomfortable. But that is the fact. Whatever action we perform with a sense of *I-ness* behind that action becomes a karma (action) and an equal and opposite phala (fruit/reaction) will come. Suppose one donates one's eyes and feels good about the noble act and the person getting the eyes uses the newly gotten vision to look at some beautiful women, be tempted and rape them, the donor will get part of that karma! The laws of karma are complex. Thinking like "this is a noble karma. So it is good only" is incorrect. Each action results in a series of developments and begets some karma for the person. Of course, if an act is with committed with ego but not an intention to affect a particular development, the part of the karma begotten from that development is smaller (than it would be if that development was intended). Thus, even bacteria and amoeba can beget karma from the results of their actions. But it is very small and accumulates slowly. Highly taamasik beings such as trees, amoeba and bacteria take a looooong time to make progress on the ladder of kaarmik evolution.

I want to make three comments:

(1) One need not feel sorry for the amoeba and bacteria because they are mostly a long way from moksha. Not all beings need to get moksha right away. If that is needed, god did not need to create this world. If there is unmanifested Brahman and nothing else in this universe, that will solve all problems. But the fact is that manifested Brahman with infinite objects at varying levels of karmic evolution is not really a problem! That is exactly what is needed for the Lila to unfold.

(2) If you want to feel sorry, feel sorry not for amoeba and bacteria, but for those who got the valuable human birth and yet act like amoeba and bacteria spiritually. Pity those who are stuck in the cycle of happiness and sadness, elation and depression, hopes and despairs etc, without realizing that the play will end soon and what birth one will get next is uncertain!!

(3) Actually, more than others, feel sorry for yourself. Who are we to worry about others? They, their god and their gurus will feel sorry for them and do something about them. Apne ko kya lena dena? We are first responsible for ourselves. When one cannot change self and focus attention on god fully within oneself, what is the point in lamenting about the spirituality or lack of it in other people? So, we should all try to look inward and take a critical look at ourselves, given that we got a very very very valuable life as a human being.

> His question gave me a sleepless night. I thought a lot about it. If > the whole world as a maya exist only in human's mind (as per my > understanding, our mind creates this world, when through yoga, > mind/ego collapse happens, there is no world or anything and we > submerge as oneness in the omnipotent power), if it is a creation of > mind, then there should not be any world when the human species is > extinct. Right?

A mind is a mind is a mind. Mind creates the world, not necessarily a human mind. All minds can create a world. However, a human mind is more capable than other minds to break down that created world and return to the source. THAT is the point.

> (I am asking you because, you were instrumental (though unknowingly) > in opening the wide horizon of spiritual knowledge to me years back > through just one reply to one of my questions related to Kundalini. I > am always indebted to you for that and now I realise how stupid my > questions were at that time.)

I am glad to know that. I am actually a fool who does not know much and cannot help anyone. But the blessings of my gurus may work through me sometimes and benefit some.

> First: > I would like to know if you have heard of any vamacharis in India who > followed Vama Marga successfully and realised God. All true saints I > have heard are followers of the Satwik path/right hand tantra. So > always wonder, did any body succeed in the other way? Anybody who was > well-known as a Vamamarga saint?

Your question is kind of an oxymoron. Can good aghoris become "well-known" and come to limelight? :-)

I know one masterly aghori reasonably well. However, he is not restricted to one path. All paths are his own and he does not distinguish. He does aghora sadhanas in smashana and also Vedic sadhanas like Vedic homas with the same attitude. He chants Vedic mantras too. For example, when he chants Sri Rudram, it produces amazing energy all around. He is a bhakti yogi too. When he thinks of Krishna, he melts in devotion. When he discusses upanishads and other Vedanta texts such as Yoga Vaasishtham and BhagavadGita, his keen intellect shines forth like a Sun and illuminates the thinking of a ready audience. I have never seen anyone who has such a perfect understanding of the essence of Upanishads and exudes it in thoughts, words and actions. He has wife and children, has a full-time job and engages in several external activities and is never idle. But his level of detachment with the work he does so expertly is far higher than even ascetics who renounce everything and *try* to develop some detachment.

Bottomline is that he is an aghori, but he is also a jnaana yogi, bhakti yogi, karma yogi and raaja yogi. He is a vaidika and he is an aghori. All paths are his and he views all the same way. I don't know if all really good aghoris are like that or just he.

In any case, it is irrelevant to you if any aghori succeeded or not. If YOU are meant to succeed in aghota, you will. If not, you will not. To be safe, until the right time and right person comes, one should not venture into aghora. I want people to appreciate different things for what they are and not have unhealthy biases, but it does not mean everybody should try everything. Nuclear engineers hating politicians, politicians hating lawyers and lawyers hating doctors is bad. But one should become what one is supposed to!

> A few years back, I had read AGHORA -Kundalini by Robert Svoboda. In > that book one Aghori Vimalananda is mentioned. But except in that > book, I couldnt find any references to this person anywhere. Not even > in net. (The only references were the ones related to Robert > Swaboda's book and as his Guru).

Well, he guarded his privacy and made sure that the books came out only after he left the body. Moreover, his real name was not that. Also, he led his spiritual life in relative seclusion and not many knew him. No wonder you can't find info on him.

Bottomline is: Whether he is real or not, one can benefit from teachings attributed to him. The knowledge present in the aghora series of books is nothing short of amazing. It may shock you, but it can change your thinking from inside out and give you a clearer understanding. Vimalananda not only managed to impart great understanding to Svoboda, but also ensure that Mother Taaraa Herself would speak through Svoboda and the knowledge would come out perfect. Other books authored by Svoboda may not have the same brilliance, but those books came out just as Vimalananda intended.

There are many things in the book which could not have come from a normal person. They came from someone who had a perfect, steady and unwavering understanding of the absolute truth.

BTW, you cannot meet a good and genuine aghori unless there is a rina and *he* wants you to meet him.

Best regards,NarasimhaDo a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homamDo Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpanaSpirituality: Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.netFree Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.orgSri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

sohamsa , "jyothi_b_lakshmi" <jyothi_b_lakshmi wrote:>> Namaste Narasimhji,> > > Enjoyed reading both your mails. This reminds me of a koan riddle:> > A MASTER was asked the question, "What is the Way?" by a curious> monk.> "It is right before your eyes," said the master.> Monk: "Why do I not see it for myself?"> Master: "Because you are thinking of yourself."> Monk: "What about you? Do you see it?"> Master: "So long as you see double, saying I don't and you do, and so > on, your eyes are clouded,"> Monk: "When there is neither 'I' nor 'You' can one see it?"> Master: "When there is neither 'I' nor 'You,' who is the one that > wants to see it?"> > Can I request two favours from you?> > First: > I would like to know if you have heard of any vamacharis in India who > followed Vama Marga successfully and realised God. All true saints I > have heard are followers of the Satwik path/right hand tantra. So > always wonder, did any body succeed in the other way? Anybody who was > well-known as a Vamamarga saint?> > A few years back, I had read AGHORA -Kundalini by Robert Svoboda. In > that book one Aghori Vimalananda is mentioned. But except in that > book, I couldnt find any references to this person anywhere. Not even > in net. (The only references were the ones related to Robert > Swaboda's book and as his Guru). > > Secondly, can you please help me with a question?> A week back, I was elaborating about realisation and yoga, meditation > and all such to one of my cousins who did not actually understand all > what I said. He was asking me if yoga, be it jnana yoga, bhakti yoga > or any one, is the only way to attain moksha/realisation, then what > will other living organisms like ameoba, bacteria and all will do to > attain moksha? Arent they also living organisms? (He has done his > research in Bio Informatics, hence his priority to bacteria and > ameoba). He said, if what I am saying is correct, only human beings > will be evolved and other organisms will never attain moksha. I was > breathless for a moment and did not know how to answer him. I really > felt sad (and ashamed, because I thought I could answer all questions > related to the mystery of life) that I couldnt answer him. His > question seemed stupid, but when I thought of it, isnt that a valid > question?> > His question gave me a sleepless night. I thought a lot about it. If > the whole world as a maya exist only in human's mind (as per my > understanding, our mind creates this world, when through yoga, > mind/ego collapse happens, there is no world or anything and we > submerge as oneness in the omnipotent power), if it is a creation of > mind, then there should not be any world when the human species is > extinct. Right? > > I dont know if I have convey my doubt clearly. > > Would you be able to share your knowledge on this? > > (I am asking you because, you were instrumental (though unknowingly) > in opening the wide horizon of spiritual knowledge to me years back > through just one reply to one of my questions related to Kundalini. I > am always indebted to you for that and now I realise how stupid my > questions were at that time.) > > With Respects,> Jyothi> > sohamsa , "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@> > wrote:> >> > Namaste friends,> > > > There is one more thing I wanted to include in the analogy/parable, > but did not do so due to lack of time last night. Let me expand now. > Though this is not related to the original questions, this will > complete the story.> > > > * * *> > > > There was a way to the sea through a country called "Vishnu > raajyam" [Vaishnavism]. Some people travelled the path, found a > beautiful city called Vishnupuri on the coast and the sea was close > to the city. The journey through Vishnu raajya was documented in a > book [Vishnu Purana] and the book claimed that this was a beautiful > journey and enables one to reach the sea. It also claimed that other > coastal cities were by the very same sea and reaching the sea here > amounts to reaching the sea at all other places.> > > > There was another way to the sea through a country called "Shiva > desam" [shaivism]. Some people travelled the path, found a wonderful > city called Shivanagari on the coast and the sea was right next to > it. The journey though Shiva desam was documented in a book [shiva > Purana] and the book claimed that this was an amazing journey and > enables one to reach the sea. It also claimed that other coastal > cities were by the very same sea and reaching the sea here amounts to > reaching the sea at all other places.> > > > There were some people who had never actually been to either city > nor seen the sea. Some were impressed by the description of one city > and some by the other. They were so impressed that they started > arguing which was the best city. Some even went to the extent of > condemning and putting down the other city. Some people who had seen > both the cities came forward and said, "the main thing is not the > city, but the sea itself. The sea is the same in both places. Though > different, both cities are nice and both give one the same sea." That > did not convince the fighting factions and they continued to fight. > Later, some of them even forgot about the sea and started thinking > that the city was the main thing and not the sea. Of course, both the > cities are really beautiful. Stuck in their animosity and fights, > they could never visit either city nor enjoy the sea.> > > > * * *> > > > OK, I think the parable is complete now. :-)> > > > Best regards,> > Narasimha> > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam> > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana> > Spirituality: > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> > > > - > > Narasimha P.V.R. Rao > > ; sivacharya ; > sohamsa > > Monday, August 18, 2008 12:43 AM> > Analogy: Veda, Aagama, Tantra, Aghora etc> > > > > > Namaste Sir,> > > > There is no need for either Sri or Ji in addressing me.> > > > Hoping you won't mind, I am sending this reply to some > that may have some interested people. When I was > meditating before replying to you, a really beautiful and meaningful > analogy came to me and I think it is worth sharing with more people > than just you. To ensure your anonymity, I removed references in the > quoted mail below that may help one identify you.> > > > * * *> > > > First I will answer your first question in detail, because that > can automatically answer other questions.> > > > > 1. Are Vedic (Pure Vaithika rituals) different from Mantra > Shastras> > > (people explain that mantra shastra does not originate from the > vedas,> > > but classified under tantra). Did Mantra shastras not originate > from vedas?> > > > * * *> > > > When people say what is in Veda and what is not, honestly I can > only laugh. They are only fooling themselves. Reciting Veda with > perfect swara or mastering a celebrated commentary does not help one > understand Veda. In fact, understanding each single verse in Veda > requires great tapascharya. Understanding a verse in Veda is neither > possible with energy flowing in Ida nadi (intuition) nor in Pingala > nadi (logic and analysis). It is possible only with energy flowing in > Sushumna nadi. It is possible with neither intuition nor logic, but > only with *revelation* and simply, for the lack of a better > expression, direct knowledge.> > > > When one meditates long enough on a verse, the verse may simply > be revealed to the yogi. THAT is the only way to understand a Vedic > verse. For most people, it is not possible to decipher even a single > verse in an entire life, let alone a passage.> > > > Bottomoline is: Almost nobody understands Veda today. What are > considered "pure vaidika rituals" are merely another variety of > rituals created by someone at some point of time. From the point of > view of authenticity as granted by Veda, there is no difference > between them and other aagamic rituals, though people ignorantly > believe otherwise.> > > > * * *> > > > A simple analogy may help clarify a lot of things related to this > complicated issue a little. What the thing in the analogy represents > is shown here and there in square brackets .> > > > Once there were many people who lived near the sea > [brahman/Aatman]. They regularly sat by the sea and enjoyed the sight > and sound of the sea [experienced Brahman]. They described the sea in > some nice cryptic poems [Veda].> > > > As people started living a little away from the sea [less > spiritually evolved], someone had to put together some instructions > on how to reach the sea. He said, "keep walking towards east" and the > instructions grew with time. People faithfully followed the > instructions [rituals].> > > > People started moving further and further inland and started > living in a landlocked desert far away from the sea. This generation > had never seen a pool of water like a lake, let alone a sea. They > faithfully performed the ritual of walking towards east, but did not > find sea. They debated endlessly whether one had to walk one mile or > two miles or three miles and formed different schools of thought. > Some walked their chosen distance, found a tree or a building or some > interesting object and even became satisfied that that was sea!> > > > Then came some great person, whose instincts led him to take a > horse instead of walking and ride it for a long distance [use of > other tools]. He did find the sea after a few months. He put together > newer instructions to reach the sea, which included riding a horse > [new aagamas].> > > > People performing the old rituals objected to this and said "but > then this horse thing is not granted by the book of sea. This is a > new path and different from the "pure" sea ritual" ["pure" Vedic > ritual]. By now, people did not even understand what the cryptic > poems of the original "book of sea" mean, but they simply believed > that those poems taught the old "pure" sea rituals that they were > used to. They were blissfully unaware that the original instructions > were meant for someone already close to sea and the newer > instructions came from someone who actually saw the sea and knew > where they currently lived and how to get to the sea from there!> > > > Slowly many new sets of instructions involving horses, chariots > etc were taught and many new paths to the sea were outlined instead > of just instructing people to walk towards east [evolution of > mantra/tantra/yantras].> > > > One particular path through jungles was dangerous [aghora and > other dark tantric paths involving practice of sex, meat, wine etc]. > Though the distance to sea was much shorter through that jungle, it > was just too dangerous and only the bravest and strongest could make > it. There were cruel dacoits and wild animals [chance of a fall in a > risky ritual] and many weak people travelling to sea via that path > were killed. A wise man who knew the entire territory well came > forward, condemned that path and discouraged people from trying that > path. Since then, even people who were strong enough to successfully > make it in that path desisted from it.> > > > As time progressed, people started fighting too much about whose > path was superior. They were foolish, not smart enough to adopt the > original instructions, of either the so-called "pure" sea path or the > so-called "new" path or other variations, for the changed geography > and changed times. Many followed the instructions blindly, hit > roadblocks and did not reach sea. Many did not even know > that "reaching the sea" was the actual goal of all their joirneys. > They only thought they were supposed to follow the instructions > faithfully and there was no need to adopt to the changed geographical > territory and time. They even condemned those who actually went to > sea, came back and gave updated directions for their place and time, > for violating tradition.> > > > * * *> > > > In case the analogy is not clear, here is a brief summary of its > points. Veda is about realizing self. Veda describes various aspects > of the state of self-realization. That is why it is considered the > highest knowledge. Other allied subjects throw some light on possible > ways to reach that state. While definitive statements can be made on > the actual state of self-realization itself, no definitive statements > can be made on how to reach it. The path depends on one's current > position!> > > > Great men in many spiritual paths, within Hinduism as well as > outside of it, came, experienced that state, understood the current > state of people around them and gave specific instructions on how to > reach that state from the current state. Some followed the > instructions and experienced the state. Some instead kept arguing > about the contradictions between paths.> > > > Please re-read the story and try to understand what each part of > the story represents. If you understand this analogy well, this can > really clarify the meaningless nature of so many debates that people > waste time with!> > > > * * *> > > > > 2. I read from somewhere that Sri Sri Adi Sankara has condemned> > > Tantrik practices. But I also hear and read that he is a great > Sri Vidya> > > Upasaka himself. If Sri Vidya has its roots from Tantra, what > did> > > Sri Adi Sankara condemn? > > > > He did condemn some vaamaachaara (left-hand) practices of tantra > like the use of sex, alcohol, meat etc.> > > > However, please go back to my analogy. A great man may condemn > the use of a short path to reach the sea if it has a lot of wild > animals and dacoits and many travellers through that path recently > lost their lives. It does not mean that path is totally unusable. It > only means that too many people incapable of travelling on that path > are using it of late and so the great man was compelled to stop the > practice.> > > > If the same great man is reincarnated at a different time when > several adept souls he has a rina with are about to be reincarnated, > he may not condemn the path and instead write on travelling that > jungle path carefully!> > > > The words of great masters need to be interpreted within the > context of their desa, kaala and paatra and within the context of the > purpose of that particular birth.> > > > * * *> > > > > 3. What is vamachara? if it is the left hand method - sex, > drinks etc,> > > why must it be practiced at all?> > > > Suppose one's house is close to the market and the market noise > reaches one's house. Suppose that noise is disturbing one's > meditation, i.e. one is unable to focus on god amid all the noise. > There are two approaches one can take - (1) run away from the noise, > find a place of solitude and meditate there. (2) rise to the > challenge, meditate right there and develop the ability to turn off > the sensory input to the mind, i.e. get mastery and control over the > part of the mind that is making one vulnerable to this disturbance. > After all, the noise from outside is NOT the problem - the problem is > the *inability* of one's mind to turn off that sensory input. By > controlling one's mind, one can focus attention on god irrespective > of what is happening outside.> > > > Approach (1) is not bad. If one is weak-minded and has a decent > chance of failure with approach (2), then approach (1) is definitely > prudent and worthwhile. But, if one has a strong mind and can succeed > with approach (2), it is great. It hastens one's progress.> > > > * * *> > > > Vaamaachaara is also like that, but a more extreme form of > testing one's self-control by rising to the challenge.> > > > Please realize that vaamaachaara/aghora is not about the use of > sex, wine etc for the kick of it. It is about their use to test > oneself with the toughest challenges and hone one's self-control. > Self-realization comes when self-control is perfect and one's mind > can always be focussed on god no matter what is going on around one. > If one is either attracted or averse to any one thing, that is enough > to block self-realization.> > > > However, if one is weak, it is better to stay away from > vaamaachaara. One needs to do other practices and strengthen oneself. > If a really pure yogi with perfect self-control is able to focus on > god with all his mind even when he is drunk and sitting naked with a > beautiful naked woman tightly embracing him, then he can try that to > test his self-control and hone it. But, if that is going to tempt > one, get the mind away from god and onto a physical enjoyment, then > one better not try that path! Just as one who does not have a strong > mind to meditate amid noise should meditate in solitude and hone > one's self-control, one who does not have a strong mind to keep the > focus on god in the middle of normally depriving practices such as > wine, meat and sex should stay away from those.> > > > * * *> > > > In my analogy before, the short jungle path to the sea having the > danger of wild animals and dacoits represents the vaamaachaara path > of aghora. If one not having the wherewithal to battle and kill the > wild animals and dacoits tries that path, one may be killed. > Similarly, one who wants self-realization using this path will fall > if one does not have perfect self-control. If one takes this path > because it sounds cool or exciting, one is likely to fall. It is only > for the fittest and bravest.> > > > If there is ANY weakness in one's self-control, one can NOT > follow this path. Just as there are many paths from the desert to the > sea in my analogy, there are many paths to self-realization. One > should follow the path that is appropriate for one based on previous > samskaras, strengths and weaknesses.> > > > * * *> > > > > Is it not a fact that Sri Ambal lies above all these? > > > > :-) Sri Ambal (the Divine Mother) does not lie above or below > anything. She lies everywhere! All knowledge, all desires and all > actions of all beings are Her own different manifestations.> > > > If a yogi with perfect self-control drinks wine and sits naked > with a beautiful naked woman tightly embracing him and yet keeps his > mind fully focussed on god, his self-control, his focus on god are > all different manifestations of the Divine Mother only.> > > > As a matter of fact, even if one gives in to base instincts and > pursues carnal pleasures, his desires and actions are also different > manifestations of Divine Mother only. The Mother gives rise to so > many lower level forms with specific domains of responsibility. The > Mother takes the form of Lakshmi and Alakshmi as well. She takes the > form of Vidya and Avidya as well. All opposites and polarities are > actually Her manifestations only.> > > > However, those who are more comfortable with Lakshmi and Vidya > and uncomfortable with Alakshmi and Avidya will look at only the > former pair as manifestation of Divine Mother and remain in duality. > That is a valid point of view. However, the *ultimate* reality is > that She is All.> > > > I need to sleep now. I will stop here. Hope that put a few things > in perspective. You can send further questions to the or > to me privately.> > > > Best regards,> > Narasimha> > > > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam> > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana> > Spirituality: > > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org> > > > > > > Sri Sri NarasimhaJI> > Namaskarams. Hope you remember me. I am a friend of <deleted> > of <deleted> temple, brother of <deleted>. We met a couple of years > ago in <deleted> temple.> > > > I have a few doubts. I would like to hear your opinion on the > same.> > > > 1. Are Vedic (Pure Vaithika rituals) different from Mantra > Shastras (people explain that mantra shastra does not originate from > the vedas, but classified under tantra). Did Mantra shastras not > originate from vedas?> > > > 2. I read from somewhere that Sri Sri Adi Sankara has condemned > Tantrik practices. But I also hear and read that he is a great Sri > Vidya Upasaka himself. If Sri Vidya has its roots from Tantra, what > did Sri Adi Sankara condemn? > > > > 3. What is vamachara? if it is the left hand method - sex, > drinks etc, why must it be practiced at all? Is it not a fact that > Sri Ambal lies above all these? > > > > I am a little (totally) confused. Hope your reply takes me out > of the well to ask you more questions> > > > Namaskarams> > <deleted>> > > > -- > > Regards> > <deleted>

August 21, 2008

Dear All,

All Yoga deals with the Evolution of Consciousness, behind the Evolution of the Species.

The unicellular Amoeba has evolved to Man. Man is a transitional creature and will evolve to Superman.

There are three types of men, based on the triune gunas

Animal Man

Human ManDivine Man

The tamasic man is the Animal Man. The Rajasic Man is the Human Man and Satwic the Divine Man. They are defined as per the preponderance of the Gunas.

At the summit is the Divine Man, serene in the enjoyment of Absolute Truth. This is the summit of Evolution, the Transfiguring Hour.

During the course of Evolution, the amoeba become ape and man and reaches the Summit. The Latent Life Force will evolve naturally to its preordained limit.

So the amoeba attains Self Actualisation ultimately, through the evolutionary route.

Thanx and regards

G KumarProfessional writer, programmer & bloggerhttp://www.e.net

-

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

; sohamsa ; sivacharya

Thursday, August 21, 2008 7:50 AM

Re: Analogy: Veda, Aagama, Tantra, Aghora etc