Is the realization that Purusha is distinct from Prakriti tantamount to the
realization that "There is a Void outside existence which, if entered into,
englobes itself and becomes a womb?" a
"Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Angela Mailander wrote:
> If you call it "yoga" then it is unique to India.
>
That's what I said - Yoga is unique to India. Marshy
teaches Yoga - Vaj denied this, and offered no support
for his claim.
> But then, "yoga" can be translated in various
> ways into English, and so after that the question
> becomes "Is yoga unique to India in all the possible
> meanings of the word "yoga" with which we can
> render it into English?
>
Not attmpting to translate the Sanskrit word Yoga into
English. I just said that Yoga was unique to India.
> It is clear (almost a priori [because there is such
> a "thing" as a transcendental signified]) that there
> will be some renderings of "yoga" which are not unique
> to India.
>
Maybe so, but according to I. Kant, there is an apriori
knowledge of the transcendental thing.
> Union, for example, (with God, with Self, with Nature,
> with whatever it is we cannot quite name that is the
> basis of our awareness of an "I am") is prolly common
> to all that lives and, according to Rory (and me on
> occasion) all that IS anywhere, anytime, in any universe
> of its own discourse and ours "ever expanding in the
> bosom of God," as Blake would have put it. Blake had,
> maybe, seen a translation of the Gita.
>
It is a mistake to equate the word Yoga with the English
word union. According to Patanjali, the purpose of Yoga
is not to join anything, but to isolate the Purusha from
the prakriti. Patanjali agrees with Kapila: the Purusha
is totally separate from prakriti. There's no God or Self
mentioned by Patanjali in his Yoga Sutras: there is only
Purusha, the Transcendental Person - Ishvara. Marshy
agrees with this - he has said on numerous occasions that
the Purusha is separate from the prakriti.
> Yet he was as expert a yogi as any India has produced.
> (which can be argued about even longer than the question
> of why deepak left).
>
Maybe so.
> So now, after the amazing sentence about Union that
> apparently came outa my ass, we'd have to determine
> which renderings of the word yoga we shall call
> uniquely Indian and which ones are universal.
>
According to Mircea Eliade, in his book "Yoga: Immortality
and Freedom" - yoga is unique to India. My point is that
Marshy is an Indian, who has been teaching Raja Yoga, which
is unique to India; it is known as the fastest path to
enlightenment, and that Marshy has pointed out the
effortlessness of the TM technique; that TM is Yoga,
a meditation tradition that has been taught in India
for thousands of years.
"Moksha can be attained only by doing, not by a process
of effort". - Shankara
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
