That's it! Now I've got it. SBS was the head of the danda sannyasins and a
practitioner of Samaya Shri Vidya. MMY, being a kshatriya, has more latitude -
he can get away with practicing the Kaula Shri Vidya - those women are his
little dainties.
Mmmm - little dainties. Makes me feel like Homer Simpson.
As far as these pundits go, I couldn't find one to discuss any intriguing
points, so I tried to bait (rather than debate) one into a discussion. Found
out he had little interest in it ... sniff.
TurqBnimble, of course, was the emergency responder who attempted to defend
him from the terrorist attack - ishvara, buddha, better, best ... woof woof arf
arf is a mantra test.
By the way, imo, Madhyamaka is highly overrated. The tibetans have turned it
into a philosophical requirement, much like Aquinas for the Roman Catholics.
Unfortunately, it can't actually be the middle of anything because it ends in
negation.
Shankara was quite accurate - from nothing you only get nothing.
empty
empty mess is the only ness
"Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
cardemaister wrote:
> etena yogaH *pratyuktaH* (brahmasuutras, II 1.3.) :0
>
This is outrageous! You're telling me that Shankara
wrote a vivarana on Vyasa's commentary on Patanjali's
Yoga Sutras? And that the pundits on Usenet and FFL
withheld this information from me for nearly 10 years.
For what purpose, I wonder? This seems tyo be a pattern
with some TMer informants - withholding information.
First, they wouldn't tell me the meaning of the bija
mantras, then they refused to tell me where all the
money was going, then they tried to hide the fact that
Marshy was having relations with his female students.
Now I find out that Shankara wrote about the Yoga
Sutras and not a single respondent has a thing to
say about it. Some pundits they turned out to be.
This is the final straw with these punditsters.
I can only conclude that they are devious, lying
soundrels, and intellectually dishonest. They've
confused Middle Way Buddhism with Adwaita Vedanta!
There is no Being in God - the Transcendental Person
is an illusion, Brahman is a "nothing". And the
Marshy is a left-handed, tantric basket weaver.
Go figure.
> > Billy-Jim wrote:
> > > Have you read Shankara's vivarana on Patanjali's
> > > sutras dealing with Ishvara?
> > >
> > Bill - You are wasting your time here. From what I
> > can tell, not a single informant on this forum has
> > even heard of Shankara's vivarana on Patanjali's Yoga
> > Sutras. Years ago on Usenet, I tried to strike up a
> > dialog on this subject, to no avail. This is not
> > surprising, considering that the most informed
> > respondents here can't even tell the difference
> > between Shankara's Vedanta and Nagarjuna's Madyamaka.
> > Judy Stein and Michael Dean Goodman proved, using
> > Nagarjuna's Four Negations, that Brahmna was devoid
> > of Being. Can you believe that?
> >
> > Read more:
> >
> > The Vivarana sub-commentary to Vyasa-bhasya on the
> > Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.
> > Translated by Trevor Leggett
> > Routledge & Kegan Paul 1983
---------------------------------
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
