> > > he Hindu Philosophy states, Sidhis are by-products that come > > > on its own. > > > > > > It also states, they are distractions that should be avoided > > > at all costs. > > > > That's the same old tired misinterpretation of Patañjali! > > Everyone should believe by now, that the demonstrative > > pronoun "te" in "te samaadhaav upasargaa..." apparently > > refers MAINLY to the siddhis mentioned in the previous suutra. > > Why would Patañjali present e.g. tha flying suutra > > (aakaasha-gamanam) > > *after* that "disclaimer", if it applied to all the siddhis? > > >>>>> > > if you tell your child not to put the hand in fire, > shouldn't you tell/show the child what fire is?
Exactly. It's possible that the Yoga Sutras are a discussion of a number of real phenomena, *without* any instructions as to how they are performed. His warnings about the "obsessability" of the siddhis are pointed and IMO accurate -- just look at the rush to consider them "misinterpretations" by those who have become obsessed.
