-- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's not a commentary on the yoga-sutra per se--it is a treatise by > Vidyaranya on Cosmic Consciousness, the jivanmuktiviveka.
Okay. Because I had searched, and couldn't find any book of Vidyaranya on Yoga Sutras. It mentions > the yoga-sutra as part of this path, but adamantly states the siddhis > are not to be sought after. So you should be careful what you say. It > is not me "trashing the siddhis" but while pointing out my own > experience, also pointing out the comments of this excellent text. I have here another copy of the Yoga Sutras, where the commentator states in a footnote to YS.III-35 .. So in the following aphorism the commentator warns us against our being proud of these accomplishments and also against our engaging them in earning name and fame. The Yoga Sutras, Bengali Baba, Motilal Barnasidas, ISBN 81-208-0154-7, ISBN 81-208-0155-5 So, you see, the interpretations vary.As it has already been pointed out to you, the siddhis are not used as a means in themselves in TM, and they can only function as much as you have aquired pure awareness. > It > is interesting since it uses Patanjali as part of the path--but stops > quoting the YS wherever there is a mention of samyama--up to the very > verse. He also warns against the use samyama for those who are > interested in Cosmic Consciousness. Since this is also my own > experience, I have commented on it. That is you are in Cosmic Consciousness, or you aren't? > It also talks about Unity > Consciousness and it's attainment and qualifications. You were alluding to Videha Mukti as unity before, but most commentators, including Ramana Maharshi regard vidaha mukti, to mean liberation *after* death. Thats not the same as unity consciousness, which is while being alive. I think you are confusing terms a lot. At the very least you must say, that there isn't any agreement, as to what term means what exactly. It is the same with the different Samadhis given in YS. They are interpreted differently by different authors. > I used an unpublished manuscript of an American Sanskrit scholar. This > was helpful since it collates numerous recensions into a definitive > text. I also have two other versions, one from the Adyar series and a > more recent one from the Ramakrishna people IIRC. They are both rather > poor translations, esp. the theosophical (Adyar) one. I agree, Theosophic translations are usually very poor. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
