--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, kaladevi93 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > Unfortunately cultivation of siddhis, esp, via samyama is the > > > > opposite of that, according to the Shankaracharya tradition and > > > > numerous others. > > > > > > But not necessarily according to Patanjali. > > > > And certainly not according to Madhusudana Saraswati, reformator of > > Shankaras order in the 16th century. He in his Gita Bashaya describes > > Samyama as the most effective means. And AFAIK S. is only described in > > PYS III pertaining to siddhis. So this whole stance against samyama > > being against the Shankara tradition is only hot air from someone who > > doesn't know. > > > > If that is the case then "someone who doesn't know" would be Shankaracharya Vidyaranya > and the many others he quotes! > > Once again you are confusing the triad of yogic absorptions with using this triad to > cultivate siddhis. There is a huge difference! > > How do you think samyama is actually used in non-magical traditions? You don't seem to > be aware what that method is based on your remarks!!!
If thats the case then make us aware rather than being purposefully vague here. In the quotes above Madhusudana is particularely making references to the YS, hradly a magical tradition. AFAIK the word occures only in the context of the 3rd Chapter which is about Siddhis. There has to be a distinction to be made regarding attachment to Siddhis and their practise. You are ignoring this. Otherwise give your sources.
