--- In [email protected], cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> > --- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 9/14/05 6:29 PM, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > And MMY has always presented himself as a renegade reformer. 
By 
> the
> > > > way, those methods are from the jivanmuktiviveka, not 
Shankara 
> > himself,
> > > > are they not?
> > > 
> > > Well, no, really they are from Vidyaranya--the most respected 
> Shank. 
> > since
> > > Adi Shankara. Personally I prefer later "Shankaracharyas" who 
are 
> less
> > > Vaishnav and more tantric. In that respect Vidyaranya is the 
> > quintessence of
> > > tantra, yoga and advaita. In many respects in appears Adi 
> Shankara 
> > was a
> > > Vaishnava Cortez <cringe>.
> > 
> > Regardless. The warnings I found were all of this sort:
> > 
> > http://robgoodd.net/r_goodding.pdf
> > 
> > Pata§jali gives this sÂtra:
> > In enstasis they are obstacles; in coming out (from enstasis) 
> > (vyutth‡na) they
> > are supernatural powers. [YS 3.38]
> > 
> > 
> > Which isn't a warning per se, in the interpretation that MMY has 
> > presented of the Yoga Sutras.
> 
> And furthermore, Vyaasa's bhaaSya seems to imply (or perhaps even
> "exply") that the demonstrative pronoun 'te' (they) in 3.38 refers 
> only to the siddhis mentioned in the previous suutra:
> 
>  te **praatibhaadayaH** samaahita-cittasyotpadyamaanaa...
> 
> At least that's how I would interpret the expression
> 'praatibhaadayaH' (praatibhaa-aadayaH: praatibhaa [intuition], etc.)
> 
> Well, of course it's possible that the nominative plural 'aadayaH' 
> refers to all the siddhis mentioned in vibhuuti-paada, because
> for instance in Brahma-suutra 1.2 the word 'aadi' is in singular:
> 
> janmaadyasya yataH (janma-aadi; asya; yataH)
> 
> On the other hand, if we consider the literal meaning of
> the expression "praatibhaadayaH", it's a bahuvriihi compound
> meaning something like "praatibhaa-beginnings"  thus referring
> to a list (lists?),or stuff, that begins with the word 'praatibhaa'.
>  In English an analogous expression for, say, the days of the week 
> could be "Monday-beginning(s)", that is "Monday, Tuesday,...".
> Thus, if "praatibhaadayaH" would refer to all the siddhis, one
> would expect that "praatibhaa" would be the first siddhi mentioned,
> which it IMO isn't.

We think it's also worth mentioning that King Bhoja in His 
commentary uses the expression 

te praak-pratipaaditaaH...(~those just mentioned...)

when He refers to the siddhis that are "upasargaaH".

So the suutra can hardly refer, in Bhoja's opinion,
to Yffing, because YF-suutra comes AFTER the suutra
in question. One is supposed to make a comment AFTER
the stuff one wishes to comment upon!





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

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/
 


Reply via email to