Analogy: Veda, Aagama, Tantra, Aghora /Jyothi

[Guest guest]

Om Datta GuruHi Jyothi,NamasteA small noteHe 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?Every organism is born to complete a karma and thats his moksha, incidentally most of us are unable to partake of our karma with full bhakti & nishpeksha bhava which is what limits it from experiencing Godhead in that act. By pressing my mothers feet i find the highest amount of feeling closer to God but thats my notion of moksha and who says its not real moksha. The very notion of moksha at times is considered inappropriate in certain higher circles of spirituality, karma therein is given the highest importance and thus one can say it is biased especially those who have this craze over attaining moksha. I am not saying u or anyone has it. The puranas are filled with stories where one has attained moksha without even wanting it or doing anything to acheive it consciously. The bacteria does his karma which in turn gives prana to someone else and maintains the balance in the Universe which in itself is a great act and thus the karma continues. Within the body of Brahman we are all moving left right and center and finally whether we want it or not at the end of yuga we would merge with his heart.RegardsSJsohamsa , "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>> >>