Gordon PatersonA kind of interesting voyeurism on the part of a participating yogi, Michael? Would a yogi have Any interest in this activity, unless he were also Inspector Clauseau?
Nice to read your posts. Nirguna (formerly, Gordon Darling) [Smiling].
Michael BelovedGordon Paterson, There are two kinds of siddhis or supernatural powers which are developed by yogis. These are: supernatural powers which a yogi developed deliberately supernatural powers which a yogi develops involuntarily because of assuming abilities of the subtle body which it has naturally on particular higher planes of consciousness.
The first type is considered to be asuric in the Vedic literature, which means that it is developed by criminally-minded yogis. There are people like the villains in the literature, like Ravana, Mahishasura and Hiranyashipu.
The second type is unavoidable and is considered to be suric or proper. This type develops because of it becoming a natural ability in the subtle body of a yogi when he/she reaches a higher plane, where the subtle body has such capacity there. A bird flies in this world but we do not consider that to be a siddhi because the bird has a body to which flight is effortless.
How did you use the term voyeurism?
Michael BelovedOh, why should a bird have any interest in flying or a human being even? Why should the creators of Facebook have any interest in where its users spend their money and time at every moment?
Gordon PatersonI guess I was keying off the word "intent, " prior to the execution of an action, Michael, when I brought up the term "voyeurism:" the yogi's ability to "read minds" (intent), whether or not cultivated to do such. It was a semi-humorous (and friendly) observation.
Just interesting to note that Jnanis, although open to nuisance siddhis, disregard such abilities, should they arise, but yogis give much value to their possession. Best, Nirguna
devaPriya Yogini ~For me the most important part of this extraordinary post is this:
".....a yogi becomes aware of the continuous expressive energies of other selves. At first this seems to be random but then the yogi realizes that it is selectively done by PROVIDENCE on the basis of interactive energies which nature forms based on its need to play out history."
I think unless we integrate an understanding of providence we will continue to miss the point and will be unable to take much seriously.
Also, what one person calls a siddhi, another calls a simple psychic occurence. Siddhis are very subjective and can't be lumped in together. A yogi with siddhi powers or a siddha body would have to be accessed individually. I've known plenty of intellectualists who chase siddhis like a dog chases a car.
Michael BelovedGordon Paterson, In my view, in advanced yoga practice, siddhis are absolutely necessary and prove to be very useful if they are used to further the progress of the yogi. In other words siddhis which render deep insight cause even more advancement on the spiritual path and their rejection would be foolish in my view. But I feel you are speaking about the misuse of the siddhis and the acquirement of them for criminal purposes. In Bhagavad Gita, Krishna said he used his yoga to show Arjuna the Universal Form which Arjuna requested to see. But then later in the life of Arjuna, in the Anu Gita, when Arjuna again requested to see the Form, Krishna refused to display it whimsically. I hope you are not suggesting that Krishna's first display of the Form was questionable.
Michael BelovedBut my experience above with Yogesh cites a perception which develops in the subtle body as a natural perception, not as a siddhi. Jnanis use their physical eyes to see and that itself is a siddhi but do they close their eyes so as not to use those eyes? Of course they do not because seeing is useful even for jnanis. When an ability develops in the subtle body and that ability is unusual, I feel that it should be used and not abused just as any other sensual ability. Why the habit of always jumping on new abilities, labelling them as siddhis and rejecting their developments as criminal? Should we just remain with crude insensitive subtle bodies which have no keen mystic perception? Is that the goal of jnanis?
Gordon PatersonMy apologies, Michael, for letting so much time elapse before returning to this interesting conversation. Had to go through a series of MRIs to determine the etiology of a sudden "drooping" of left side of face along with a speech mannerism Humphrey Bogart would be envious of. As it turns out, I've been bothered by a sudden onslaught of BELL'S PALSEY. Face is now returning to normal (ugh!) and my Bogartian charm has all but disappeared. Thankfully!
Because my knowledge of Yoga, at best, should be considered rudimentary, there isn't much I can contribute that would advance the discussion---other than to ask further questions?
My original observation about the possibility of a Yogi's "voyeurism," in detecting another's thought patterns, was asked somewhat in gest (and should not be construed as being criticalin any way). And, I agree that should an advanced practitioner suddenly find him-herself in possession of a siddhi that permits such eavesdropping, would keep such a "gift" secret and to use that power judiciously----not only clairvoyance, clairaudience, or others as well. So your point about Arjuna's curiosity, the second time around, on viewing again Krishna's siddhic virtuosity and being denied a repeat performance,
Gordon Patersonis understandable. What is not so easily understood for me is the ability of some of your disincarnate friends of yours to have "conversations" with you, describing in detail their present circumstances and their expressing limitations imposed upon them, but that memory evidently is not one of them. While, I'm a little familiar with various Prajnaic Functionings of Consciousness, and the limitation that Consciousness itself is not eternal, I wonder from what Source your friends in these disincarnate worlds derive their energy to maintain themselves, one presumes as "entities," having abilities to convey knowledge to a fellow (very advanced, but still incarnate) Yogi? Mental abilities become moribund with a disintegrating bio-chemical form, when that form no longer possesses sentience, granted to it by Consciousness. How does a yogi explain this?
During my brief studies in RAJA YOGA, as taught by the Tibetans (the late [or is He?] Kalu Rinpoche), I was amazed at the stories about gaining simple siddhis through thought control, "one pointedness of mind, through mental concentration. Indeed, I still can duplicate an ornate pin, through concentration (and memory, of course) and project same, three-dimensionally, into the space,
Gordon Patersonten feet in front of me. I can do this perfectly, although I am bringing back the image from 40 years ago. There are other "exercises" I can still do, after so many years, but I make mention to you of these things to suggest to you that I'm sympathetic to those who've taken other paths to their Spiritual goals, whatever they may be.
Gordon Paterson A kind of interesting voyeurism on the part of a participating yogi, Michael? Would a yogi have Any interest in this activity, unless he were also Inspector Clauseau?
Nice to read your posts. Nirguna (formerly, Gordon Darling) [Smiling].
Michael Beloved Gordon Paterson, There are two kinds of siddhis or supernatural powers which are developed by yogis. These are:
supernatural powers which a yogi developed deliberately
supernatural powers which a yogi develops involuntarily because of assuming abilities of the subtle body which it has naturally on particular higher planes of consciousness.
The first type is considered to be asuric in the Vedic literature, which means that it is developed by criminally-minded yogis. There are people like the villains in the literature, like Ravana, Mahishasura and Hiranyashipu.
The second type is unavoidable and is considered to be suric or proper. This type develops because of it becoming a natural ability in the subtle body of a yogi when he/she reaches a higher plane, where the subtle body has such capacity there. A bird flies in this world but we do not consider that to be a siddhi because the bird has a body to which flight is effortless.
How did you use the term voyeurism?
Michael Beloved Oh, why should a bird have any interest in flying or a human being even? Why should the creators of Facebook have any interest in where its users spend their money and time at every moment?
Gordon Paterson I guess I was keying off the word "intent, " prior to the execution of an action, Michael, when I brought up the term "voyeurism:" the yogi's ability to "read minds" (intent), whether or not cultivated to do such. It was a semi-humorous (and friendly) observation.
Just interesting to note that Jnanis, although open to nuisance siddhis, disregard such abilities, should they arise, but yogis give much value to their possession. Best, Nirguna
devaPriya Yogini ~ For me the most important part of this extraordinary post is this:
".....a yogi becomes aware of the continuous expressive energies of other selves. At first this seems to be random but then the yogi realizes that it is selectively done by PROVIDENCE on the basis of interactive energies which nature forms based on its need to play out history."
I think unless we integrate an understanding of providence we will continue to miss the point and will be unable to take much seriously.
Also, what one person calls a siddhi, another calls a simple psychic occurence. Siddhis are very subjective and can't be lumped in together. A yogi with siddhi powers or a siddha body would have to be accessed individually. I've known plenty of intellectualists who chase siddhis like a dog chases a car.
Michael Beloved Gordon Paterson, In my view, in advanced yoga practice, siddhis are absolutely necessary and prove to be very useful if they are used to further the progress of the yogi. In other words siddhis which render deep insight cause even more advancement on the spiritual path and their rejection would be foolish in my view.
But I feel you are speaking about the misuse of the siddhis and the acquirement of them for criminal purposes. In Bhagavad Gita, Krishna said he used his yoga to show Arjuna the Universal Form which Arjuna requested to see. But then later in the life of Arjuna, in the Anu Gita, when Arjuna again requested to see the Form, Krishna refused to display it whimsically. I hope you are not suggesting that Krishna's first display of the Form was questionable.
Michael Beloved But my experience above with Yogesh cites a perception which develops in the subtle body as a natural perception, not as a siddhi. Jnanis use their physical eyes to see and that itself is a siddhi but do they close their eyes so as not to use those eyes? Of course they do not because seeing is useful even for jnanis.
When an ability develops in the subtle body and that ability is unusual, I feel that it should be used and not abused just as any other sensual ability. Why the habit of always jumping on new abilities, labelling them as siddhis and rejecting their developments as criminal?
Should we just remain with crude insensitive subtle bodies which have no keen mystic perception? Is that the goal of jnanis?
Gordon Paterson My apologies, Michael, for letting so much time elapse before returning to this interesting conversation. Had to go through a series of MRIs to determine the etiology of a sudden "drooping" of left side of face along with a speech mannerism Humphrey Bogart would be envious of. As it turns out, I've been bothered by a sudden onslaught of BELL'S PALSEY. Face is now returning to normal (ugh!) and my Bogartian charm has all but disappeared. Thankfully!
Because my knowledge of Yoga, at best, should be considered rudimentary, there isn't much I can contribute that would advance the discussion---other than to ask further questions?
My original observation about the possibility of a Yogi's "voyeurism," in detecting another's thought patterns, was asked somewhat in gest (and should not be construed as being criticalin any way). And, I agree that should an advanced practitioner suddenly find him-herself in possession of a siddhi that permits such eavesdropping, would keep such a "gift" secret and to use that power judiciously----not only clairvoyance, clairaudience, or others as well. So your point about Arjuna's curiosity, the second time around, on viewing again Krishna's siddhic virtuosity and being denied a repeat performance,
Gordon Paterson is understandable. What is not so easily understood for me is the ability of some of your disincarnate friends of yours to have "conversations" with you, describing in detail their present circumstances and their expressing limitations imposed upon them, but that memory evidently is not one of them. While, I'm a little familiar with various Prajnaic Functionings of Consciousness, and the limitation that Consciousness itself is not eternal, I wonder from what Source your friends in these disincarnate worlds derive their energy to maintain themselves, one presumes as "entities," having abilities to convey knowledge to a fellow (very advanced, but still incarnate) Yogi? Mental abilities become moribund with a disintegrating bio-chemical form, when that form no longer possesses sentience, granted to it by Consciousness. How does a yogi explain this?
During my brief studies in RAJA YOGA, as taught by the Tibetans (the late [or is He?] Kalu Rinpoche), I was amazed at the stories about gaining simple siddhis through thought control, "one pointedness of mind, through mental concentration. Indeed, I still can duplicate an ornate pin, through concentration (and memory, of course) and project same, three-dimensionally, into the space,
Gordon Paterson ten feet in front of me. I can do this perfectly, although I am bringing back the image from 40 years ago. There are other "exercises" I can still do, after so many years, but I make mention to you of these things to suggest to you that I'm sympathetic to those who've taken other paths to their Spiritual goals, whatever they may be.
[Battery running low; must run. Nirguna
Michael Beloved