Yoga / Tantra General

[Anonymous No.14479252]

Thread for discussion of Yoga and Tantra. Advaita allowed but guenofaggotry disallowed. Sankhya and vishishtadvaita welcome. Do you meditate? How is your progress to samadhi?

Recommend books:
>Baghavad Gita
>Upanishads
>Yoga Sutras of Patanjali
>Light on Yoga
>The Life Divine
>Yoga for Yahoos
>Yoga of Power
>Serpent Power
>Yoga in Practice
>Tantra in Practice
>Pratyabhijnahrdayam
>Vijnanabhairava
>Siva Sutras
>Spanda-Karikas
>Para-trisika-Vivarana
>Tantraloka by Abhinavagupta

[Anonymous No.14479276]

Mahayana, vajrayana, vedas are wrong view

[Anonymous No.14479279]

Does anyone else do a bootleg form of transcendental meditation? I'm not interested in paying them money or "buying a mantra" from them, but the practice itself is extremely simple and apparently there is fairly good science backing up that it soothes and regulates a whole set of biological processes (stress, mood, etc) in subtle ways.

I think I may stick with this for a while before attempting something more philosophically rigorous. I am not interested in the "life hack" nonsense style of meditation, but the science cited by people interested in seems to indicate that even low-level TM is something every human being can benefit by practicing.

[Anonymous No.14479293]

>>14479276
The Buddha viewed your mom and said wrong view

[Anonymous No.14479314]

>>14479279
You might enjoy this book. It deflates a lot of scientific and religious nonsense that surrounds debate surrounding meditative practices. Also argues for the usefulness of actually living the philosophy as opposed to merely "lifehacking" with sitting sessions minus deeper insight so to speak.

[Anonymous No.14479340]

Sankara has a commentary on the Yoga Sutras...

[Anonymous No.14479408]

>>14479340
Have you read it? and how is it?

[Anonymous No.14479442]

>>14479408
It is advised to have commentary on the work. It is quite cryptic. The most famous is Vyasa. I am unable to comment and critique on the finer metaphysical distinctions as I have not reached the most sublime states but what I have read seems largely in agreement and thus encourages me in my path.

[Anonymous No.14479594]

>>14479276
If Theravada is right view than why does it still by and large accept the doctrine of momentariness which has been rightly criticized by both Madhyamaka and Advaita Vedanta for being completely illogical/incoherent and for not according with our actual experience in the slightest? Are you familiar with their critiques of momentariness and do you disagree with them and still think momentariness is a truth taught by Buddha or are you one of those people who say "well Theravada is original Buddhism or right view EXCEPT for momentariness etc"?; I have never seen anyone produce a serious defense of momentariness in light of those schools attacks on it but to take the latter position leaves you with the issue that a school that is supposed to be the "right view" teaches something that is wrong and a misunderstanding of Buddha's teachings. If this is the case then wouldn't that cast doubt on the whole Theravada system then? If practicing Theravada teaches to the fullest is supposed to allow one to become enlightened as a buddha or an arahant then that sort of implies that qua being enlightened it would allow one to see that momentariness was a false doctrine, if no centrally important Theravada teacher throughout history has stated that momentariness was false and led the the larger Theravada school to reconsider their position that would imply either that a) the 'enlightenment' produced by following Theravada teachings isn't really enlightenment or that b) it is so rare for people following it to become enlightened that it's nearly useless in that regard.

[Anonymous No.14479626]

>>14479594
What if attainment leads to momentariness and those attacks are proof of wrong view?

Please summarize philosophical attacks.

Recent neurological research seems to indicate some sort of framerate for consciousness which IMO supports the view.

Of course is dharma momentary too?

[Anonymous No.14479701]

>>14479626
Shankara says that the Sarvastivada school of Buddhism believes in the reality of the momentary atoms and the momentary ideas. These atoms and ideas are also supposed to form two kinds of aggregates (sanghdta). Shankara points out that belief in the theory of momentariness goes against the formation of such aggregates and renders all empirical life useless. The momentary atoms cannot combine by themselves. The momentary ideas too cannot unite themselves into the aggregate of five skandhas. And no self, individual or universal, is admitted in Buddhism which may be responsible for the unity of the aggregates. Moreover, when difference alone is taken as real and unity is discarded as illusion, how can the Buddhists logically talk of aggregates as no aggregate can be formed without unity? Even in the wheel of relative causation, the preceeding link may be taken as the immediate
efficient cause of the succeeding link only, not of the whole series. But on logical analysis, the antecedent link in the causal series cannot be regarded as the efficient cause even of the subsequent link, because the antecedent link ceases to exist when the subsequent link arises. If it is urged that the antecedent moment when fully developed (Parinispanndvasthah) becomes the cause of the subsequent moment, it is untenable, because the assertion that a fully developed moment has a causal efficiency necessarily presupposes its connection with the second moment and this repudiates the theory of momentariness.

[Anonymous No.14479712]

>>14479701
Again, if it is said that the mere existence of the preceeding moment means its causal efficiency
(bhdva evdsya vyaparah), this too is untenable, because no effect can arise without imbibing the nature of the cause and to admit this is to admit the continuity of the cause in the effect which would overthrow the theory of momentariness. Again if the preceeding moment is admitted to last till the arising of the succeeding moment, cause and effect will become simultaneous; and if the preceeding moment perishes before the arising of the succeeding moment, then the effect would arise without a cause. Hence, either momentariness or causation is to be given up. Again, these Buddhists believe in three uncaused (asamskrta) reals (dharmas) which are evidently not momentary for they are uncaused. These are space (akdsha), the revolution of the wheel of causation or pratityasamutpdda in which the destruction of each momentary link after its arising is eternally going on (apratisankhyanirodha) and nirudna where the process of the causal wheel is stopped for ever through pure knowledge (pratisahkhyd-nirodha). If these three are admitted as uncaused eternal realides, then the theory of universal momentariness is given up. And if, to save the theory of momentariness, these three are declared not as ‘reals’, but as ‘negation’ (abhava-matra) further contradicdons would arise. It would be illogical to regard space as merely ‘negation of covering' or emptiness (avaranabhava), for space provides room for extension of things.1 Again, to say that the causal wheel is merely ‘negation of permanence’ would be untenable, for this ‘negation of permanence* (nityaivabhava) applies only to a momentary link, and not to the wheel itself which is eternally going on, even though the liberated may escape from it. Even to say that the process or the flow of the series is ‘eternal’ only in the sense of ‘enduring’ (santati-nitya) is to give up momentariness. Moreover, there must be some unchanging eternal conscious being to perceive
this flow, as consciousness of change necessarily presupposes an unchanging consciousness.

[Anonymous No.14479720]

>>14479712
Again, if each unit flashes only for a moment, then even the talk of the flow is ruled out, for there is nothing to flow. This would lead to complete annihilation of all empirical life. Further, to treat nirvana as mere ‘negation of suffering* (duhkhabhava) would be to give up nirvana as Buddha taught and to give up nirvana would be to blow up Buddhism. If nirvana is complete annihilation, none will try to attain it. Again, if Ignorance is destroyed by Pure Knowledge then the theory of universal destruction without any cause is given up; and if it is destroyed by itself, then the path of spiritual discipline prescribed by Buddha becomes futile. Again, the facts of knowledge, memory and recognition give a death-blow to the theory of momentariness. Knowledge necessarily presupposes the eternal transcendental Self as its foundation. Everything else may be momentary, but not the undeniable Self which is self-shining. Memory also presupposes the self. Memory and recognition imply consciousness of at least three moments —the first moment in which something is experienced, the second moment in which its past impression is revived or it is again experienced and the third moment in which the first and the second moments are compared and the thing remembered or recognised as the same. Even if identity is rejected and similarity substituted in its place, a subject who persists for at least three moments is necessary to compare and recognise two things as similar. Again, if the self is a stream of momentary ideas, the law of Karma and the moral life and bondage and liberation will all be overthrown. One momentary idea will perform an act and another will reap its fruit. One idea will be bound, another will try to obtain liberation, and still another will be liberated. It is thus clear that the theory of momentariness destroys all empirical and moral life and renders the teachings of Buddha about bondage and liberation useless.

[Anonymous No.14479736]

>>14479701
I think that may be a bad faith reading. Admitting unity as illusory is no more problematic than admitting multiplicity as illusory -- and in both cases, one upholds a conventional view as not false on the conventional level but misleading on the ultimate.

[Anonymous No.14479758]

thoughts?

[Anonymous No.14480017]

>>14479736
>Admitting unity as illusory is no more problematic than admitting multiplicity as illusory
Admitting unity as illusory leads to the following problem which is not faced by those who maintain unity while admitting multiplicity as illusory:

"And, to say, like the Buddhist, that difference alone is real and unity an appearance, is highly absurd, for if difference be the very nature of things, then there would be no difference among them at all. Again, difference being ‘formless’, the objects themselves would* be ‘formless'. Again, difference being of the nature of negation, objects themselves would be of the nature of negation. Again, difference being dual or plural, no object would be the same single object for the same thing cannot be both one and many. Hence, it has to be admitted that unity alone is real and difference is only an appearance. Difference in qualities does not imply difference in reality."

[Anonymous No.14480021]

>>14479758

moar

[Anonymous No.14480042]

>>14479758
procedurally generated dwarf fortress dialog does not qualify as literature

[Anonymous No.14480073]

>>14480021
The Holy Madmen of Tibet - David di Valerio

>>14480042
what

[Anonymous No.14480140]

>>14480042
kek, take that back though

>tfw no religious addon for dwarf fortress whereby your dwarfs can form sects, have holy wars, and become prophets

[Anonymous No.14480241]

>>14480017
Everything is formless tho...

[Anonymous No.14480254]

>tfw if guenonfag doesn't get replies he will reply to himself to justify posting more walls of text

FUCKKKK

[Anonymous No.14480279]

>>14480254

chill, theres at least 9 guenonfags in here

[Anonymous No.14480285]

>>14480279
go to bed matthew

seriously though, to guenonfag, let the thread breathe

[Anonymous No.14480297]

>>14480285

you know what? i think you're the real guenonfag trying to take the heat off yourself. prove you aren't guenonfag right now

[Anonymous No.14480312]

how about that part in the Gita where krishna reveals himself huh thats some heavy shit

[Anonymous No.14480334]

>>14480241
evidently not, we can discern that the objects we detect have forms from their distinct appearance and qualities, if everything was formless it would be impossible for us to be communicating with each other right now

[Anonymous No.14480602]

I genuinely love Hinduism but you fucking spergs are the worst.

[Anonymous No.14480691]

>>14480334
We aren't communicating...

[Anonymous No.14480696]

>>14480254
That guy came into a thread about Tantra and Yoga and accused Hinduism and non-Theravada Buddhism of being the wrong view in an unprompted manner. If you didn't want me replying to him by pointing out the illogicality and incoherent nature of Theravada doctrine then maybe you should have told your friend to hold his tongue. If you accuse other people and schools of being wrong then you should expect replies disagreeing with you, it's foolish to whine about people simply responding to pointed attacks that you or someone else made.

[Anonymous No.14480708]

>>14480696
Not every one line shitpost requires an entire thread worth of copy and pasting one's own prior writings in response

[Anonymous No.14480743]

>>14480312
Arjuna said: O Lord, I see in Your body all the gods and multitude of beings, all sages, celestial serpents, Lord Shiva as well as Lord Brahmaa seated on the lotus.

O Lord of the universe, I see You everywhere with infinite form, with many arms, stomachs, faces, and eyes. Neither do I see the beginning nor the middle nor the end of Your Universal Form.

I see You with Your crown, club, discus; and a mass of radiance, difficult to behold, shining all around with immeasurable brilliance of the sun and the blazing fire.

I believe You are the imperishable, the Supreme to be realized. You are the ultimate resort of the universe. You are the protector of eternal Dharma, and the imperishable primal spirit.

I see You with infinite power, without beginning, middle, or end; with many arms, with the sun and the moon as Your eyes, with Your mouth as a blazing fire whose radiance is scorching all the universe.

The entire space between heaven and earth is pervaded by You alone in all directions. Seeing Your marvelous and terrible form, the three worlds are trembling with fear, O Lord.

These hosts of demigods enter into You. Some with folded hands sing Your names and glories in fear. A multitude of Maharishis and Siddhas hail and adore You with abundant praises.

Rudras, Adityas, Vasus, Saadhyas, Vishwedevas, Ashvins, Maruts, Ushmapas, Gandharvas, Yakshas, Asuras, and Siddhas; they all amazingly gaze at You.

Seeing your infinite form with many mouths, eyes, arms, thighs, feet, stomachs, and many fearful teeth; the worlds are trembling with fear and so do I, O mighty Lord.

Seeing Your great effulgent and various-colored form touching the sky; Your mouth wide open and large shining eyes; I am frightened and find neither peace nor courage, O Krishna.

Seeing Your mouths, with fearful teeth, glowing like fires of cosmic dissolution, I lose my sense of direction and find no comfort. Have mercy on me! O Lord of gods, refuge of the universe.

The sons of Dhritaraashtra along with the hosts of kings; Bheeshma, Drona, and Karna together with chief warriors on our side are also quickly entering into Your fearful mouths having terrible teeth. Some are seen caught in between the teeth with their heads crushed.

As many torrents of the rivers rush toward the ocean, similarly, those warriors of the mortal world are entering Your blazing mouths.

As moths rush with great speed into the blazing flame for destruction, similarly all these people are rapidly rushing into Your mouths for destruction.

You are licking up all the worlds with Your flaming mouths, swallowing them from all sides. Your powerful radiance is burning the entire universe, and filling it with splendor, O Krishna.

Tell me who are You in such a fierce form? My salutations to You, O best of gods, be merciful! I wish to understand You, the primal Being, because I do not know Your mission.

[Anonymous No.14480858]

>>14480708
They're not my writings, they're from a book. I was genuinely interested in how he squared Theravada's acceptance of momentariness with his belief that Theravada is correct. He then asked me to post some of the philosophical/logical critiques of momentarieness and so I complied with his request.

[Anonymous No.14481343]

>>14479408
You can read it online here

https://archive.org/details/SankaraOnTheYogaSutrasTrevorLeggettMLBD1992

[Anonymous No.14482479]

Bump

[Anonymous No.14483505]

Yea, i'm making progress. I go the vyakaran(grammar) route, though

Check Patañjali out. He isn't just credited with the yoga darshan; but also the ayur veda, and the vyakarana mahā bashya. A huge grammar book; and commentary on the maheshvara sutras of pānini. Damn, i wish i could read all that shit. Nah, im using secondary literature. Once im able to read all those grammar books ill no longer need to