Seer: Yogis of bygone eras still live in Himalayas

Yogis of bygone eras still live in Himalayas: Seer

“Even before I realised that the great sage, born in 1527 and attained samadhi on December 26, 1887, was there before me, he asked me when I was going to vis­it his ashram. I took it as on order and visited his ashr­am immediately”, said the swamy, adding that he had seen three siddhars in physical form during his visit to the Himalayas in 2009. He said any ordinary mortal could see yogis in cosmic form such as Mah­av­atar Baba, Syama Char­an Lahari, Yukth­esw­ara Gi­ri and Paramahamsa Yo­g­a­na­nda through penance

So according to some of the major religions on the planet (and some not so major ones) ... prayer, meditation, and penance. This removes the veil and allows us to see the cosmic or etherial.

Reminds me of some of the Catholic saints. I don't know what came first with them .. the prayer, meditation, and penance first before seeing the spirits .. or experiencing the metaphysical and then the spirits/souls telling the saint to pray, meditate and do penance.

So is the prayer, meditation and penance a form of hypnosis and they are making themselves see what they want to see? Those who have Yogis in their belief system see long dead yogis ... those who have saints in their belief system see long dead saints ... etc etc (it never seems to cross over). Or does it indeed open gateways or lift the veil to 'the other side'?? What do you think?

says the old man who needs glasses. . .

I'm not sure how people can still believe this rubbish.

I think if such advanced mentalities do exist, they are likely to be found in higher numbers in India than anywhere else. The religion in India is much more in depth than others, more creative. There are a lot of people and not so much deviance from traditional lifestyles that produced the scriptures of the world.

Many have pointed to the Himalayas as a place of mystery....

Originally posted by FlyersFan

...So according to some of the major religions on the planet...

Yoga isn't a religion. If you think so, you're Very misinformed...

reply to post by D1ss1dent


Yoga isn't just an exercise routine. In Hindu terminology yoga refers to a full lifestyle and path to knowing the divine.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Yoga is isolation and meditate, and losing of material things.

This could never happen in materialistic, preaching religious system.

Yoga is not religion.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


Its a tool, to help attain peace. You can call it god, Nirvana, Heaven, whatever.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


Thats because, Hinduism, and Buddhism along with Jainism.. are not religion... they were labelled religion when abrahamic faith came into the scene(along with some modification by people). They were Philosophies... on how to live a good life.

You can be a Hindu/Buddhist and an Atheist.

you can be a Hindu/Buddhist and be a

Its a way to attain peace.

You can get yourself pretty "high" just off of breathing exercises alone, so, maybe he was having some fun?
I do a tiny bit of yoga to remain limber, I really enjoy it. But I dont know about all of this..

I believe there is a "veil" and I do believe doing such things as meditation and prayer can help in the "lifting" of it. I don't think one religious path has this patented. I think just as the whirling dervish and the the native American shaman, those who believe in the veil, seek to lift it and preform the tasks associated with it, will find what they are looking for. But first, a person must believe, only then will it become their reality.

For those who do not believe in such things, I guess they would be right in thinking it could be self hypnosis? To a non believer, that would definetly make a lot of sense. I think it is very awesome you equated the yogis with the Christian mystics...I too see a lot of similarities between those two groups.

reply to post by Mijamija


Yoga and Prayer cannot be the same thing, i think prayer is wrong, because you are being subservient to something you do not know, or know it exist.

Yoga is just rhythmic words or chanting or nothing at all(to no particular god) to become peaceful within yourself.

Yoga was started back in around 600 BC, as a means to counter the warrior vedic Hindu beliefs.

It is more than the usual aerobics routines that humans called yoga as it is today.

Back then, it involves years and years of practice, to reject the ego of self and know your own soul, involving years of practise to achieve such states which today spiritualists would call it as out-of-body experiences, to attain serenity against the travils of human life.

It worships no diety, but seeks to fully comprehend one self and its relation to nature/universe. It was not thoroughly refined, and was the front runner of Buddhism which came later.

How true are their teachings, only the practitioners know. But for sure, they do not seek to hurt or harm any life, even ants.

reply to post by luciddream


I have a different definition of prayer than you. I was only speaking for myself personally in my post.

Do those Yogis still have my pickanick basket?

Yeah, I know. Just ignore me.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Reminds me of some of the Catholic saints. I don't know what came first with them .. the prayer, meditation, and penance first before seeing the spirits .. or experiencing the metaphysical and then the spirits/souls telling the saint to pray, meditate and do penance.

I've read writings of some female Catholic saints. All that I read show that the saint was motivated out of LOVE first and foremost. The women have a passion for souls and a deep love for Jesus. They describe their love of Jesus as that of a bride for her bridegroom. Of course, this is only a human approximation of the experience of the divine. It couldn't possibly translate an other worldy experience, I'm sure.

The love then goes on to create all three things you mentioned. It is like a never ending spiritual OODA loop for them. At least that's how I understand it.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17

When I say Yoga, I include All its forms (from the lowest, hatha, to the highest).

reply to post by luciddream


,,Thats because, Hinduism, and Buddhism along with Jainism.. are not religion...
,,they were labelled religion when abrahamic faith came into the scene(along
,, with some modification by people). They were Philosophies... on how to live a good life.

Well this is a bit over-generalized. In general, anything called an "ism" is probably well on its way to being a religion, of sorts. Even so-called "scientism". But as far as yoga goes, many of us who actually have studied and practiced it would have to agree, it is not itself a religion.

Anyone who has read the Yogasutras of Patanjali and understands those sutras (=paradigmatic statements in verse) as the paradigm of yoga, cannot find anything like a religion or theology in them. Yoga is, in Patanjali's own words, citta-vrtti (mind's changing) nirodha (ceased).

That means, essentially, this: stop your mind and you stop suffering.

This is the essence of Buddha's teaching also. But not all that goes by the name "Buddhism" necessarily embodies this principle. Simply to bow to Buddha's form, a "religious" act in the superficial sense of "religion", may not seem to alleviate suffering. But for most Buddhists, it DOES alleviate suffering -- and Buddhist philosophy provides the reason for understanding how that is possible.

The traditional Buddhist understanding of Buddhism -- as a religion -- is that, even to bow and offer flowers and incense at Buddha's statue is a valid way to connect with the essence of Buddha's teaching. That is, to stop the mind, one makes a connection or dependent origination through offering. Buddhism as a religion -- of worship and offering -- leads, in this life and/or the next, to the philosophical and experiential core of Buddha's teaching, the cessation (nirodha, or "Nirvana") of suffering.

Even though this is the case, many so-called "modern" people -- with only a superficial book learning about Buddhism, Hinduism, yoga, and the rest -- claim Buddhism is not a religion, but a philosophy. Snidely they sneer at people who behave "religiously", by offering flowering and incense, and arrogantly, they think their superfcial book learning is superior to the practice of simple, humble worship, which is how most Buddhists follow Buddha his Dhamma-teaching.

This only goes to show how little they understand Buddha's Dhamma-teaching. In many Suttas (scriptures) Buddha praises worship of the Buddha, his Dhamma and the Sangha-community of monks and nuns. That is because Lord Buddha understood that for most people, philosophy and theory would not benefit their minds, but rather, simple wordless faith would bring more benefit, and quicker access to true freedom.

Also lord Buddha knew most people could not live as yogis or pure monks or nuns, so they would do better to worship and believe, so that in this life and the next, they could be happy without having to make heroic efforts.

Lord Buddha never taught, "My doctrine is not a religion, but a philosophy". I challenge anyone to find a place in the scriptures where Lord Buddha says that. I tell you, he never said anything of the sort.

This is what Buddhism teaches, what Buddhists believe, and what Buddhist philosophy explains, whether you like it or not. The reason why belief, faith and worship are valid and powerful aspects of the theory and practice of Buddhism is simple.

That is, Buddha's mind or Dhammakaya is omnipresent and identical with the pabbhassara-citta or "luminous mind" described in the scriptures, such as the Pabbhassara-Suttas, the scriptures on luminosity. To bow to Buddha makes a link with Buddha's mind and that leads, eventually, to freedom of cessation (nirodha) of mind's changing, or Nirvana.

reply to post by Namdru


But does Buddha tells you what rules to follow or sets of commands? or celebrate holidays in his place?

Im not sure where you get that saying Buddha wants you to pray to him. I thought he actually wanted to get away from religious rituals and praying systems, that is why he left Hinduism. If Buddhism was a religion, then that is everything against what Buddha set out to do.

reply to post by Namdru


Buddhism is a way of life, and not a religion as you perceived it to be.

In all truth, ALL mainstream religions are a way of life - to teach mankind the manner in which for a civilisation to grow, progress and evolve, beyond the jungles.

Judaism, Christianity and Islam teaches monotheism, but with moral and ethical guidelines, a moral compass concept that primitive uneducated ancestors can grasp, to progress and evolve.

Yoga, Upanishism, Brahmaism, Buddhism, even Confucianism, are too ways of life - to comprehend the self and nature first as a moral compass to progress and evolve.

The only differences between the middle eastern and indian mystics belief lays in the worship. Mystics believe in the worship of self, to acheive progression and evolution, while middle eastern beliefs teaches the worship of our common Creator, to follow His guidelines, to achieve progress and evolution.

Buddhism are in many ways similar to yogaism. The only difference is that Buddhism breaks up the complex and convoluted logic of yogaism, and makes it simpler inorder to HELP laymen whom seek for enlightenment and serenity while living on Earth easier and rational, if he/she applies the mind to it.

As with all religions, when the Teacher passes on, many interpretations or mis-interpretations develope almost immediately, and thus schisms occur due to flawed beings that humankind are. Buddism did split into a few branches of beliefs, and so did yogaism which split into many more.

Ultimately, true knowledge can only be gained from the SOURCE material, and NOT interpretations of flawed mortals. It is NOT the words alone uttered there and then, for words spoken then were often based upon the situation and often taken out of context.

Rather, it IS the essence of what had been spoken that will be relevant for one to deal with daily living, when comprehended fully, and not just on words taken out of context.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by Namdru

 

But does Buddha tells you what rules to follow or sets of commands? or celebrate holidays in his place?

Im not sure where you get that saying Buddha wants you to pray to him. I thought he actually wanted to get away from religious rituals and praying systems, that is why he left Hinduism. If Buddhism was a religion, then that is everything against what Buddha set out to do.

edit on 12/10/2012 by luciddream because: (no reason given)

I never say that Buddha *wants* you to pray to him. He never says that. My point is, it is permissible to do so -- but not mandatory.

As far as worship and rituals go, Lord Buddha never said "I am opposed to this" or "I am opposed to that". He was more subtle, and what he does say, leaves many options open for us, including the option of viewing Buddhism as a philosophy, and not as religion.

For example, the Dhammapada states,

He for whom there is neither this shore
nor the other shore, nor yet both,
he who is free of cares and is unfettered —
him do I call a Brahmin.

Now a Brahmin, as most on this thread would know already, is someone born into a priestly caste, of Indic racial and cultural descent, in a "Hindu" country -- meaning, these days, mostly in India. The caste system of Hindu law (Arthashastra) explicitly sacralizes, or sanctifies, such birth -- and profanizes, or discriminates prejudicially, against low-caste rebirth e.g. as a Shudra (servant class) or Chandala, Dhobi etc. (that is, "scheduled" peoples or outcastes). Moreover the Vedas claim that special benefits are to be had by performing certain rituals -- rituals only Brahmins are allowed to perform, whereas others, should they perform or even listen to them, might have molten lead poured in their ears (which is what Kautilya says in his Arthashastra, literally).

That was the sense of religion, worship and such that Lord Buddha was opposed to. A true Brahmin is not mumbler of Mantras per se, but one "free of cares and is unfettered", according to Buddha.

Note however that Lord Buddha nowhere says, "One who mumbles mantras and is born in the Brahmin caste can never be free." In fact, history records that many Brahmins who mumbled mantras, performed the duties of their caste and also followed Lord Buddha, became Arhats or Nirvanized individuals. Not only could one be a "religious" Buddhist and realize the fruits of the Buddhist path, it is also possible (though by no means, the easiest way) to be a religious Hindu and also realize the fruits of Buddhism. Not only that, one could be a religious Hindu _elitist_ -- a law-abiding, ritual-performing Brahmin -- and also reach Nirvana.

By the same token, one needn't be any of that to reach Nirvana. Buddha's closest disciples included high-caste (aristocrat, Kshatriya-warrior caste) individuals, like his cousin Ananda, as well as Brahmins (e.g. Shariputra), Shudras (Upali the Barber) and so on. All became Arhats or liberated (vimokshi) individuals.

I doubt that any Brahmins of the sort to pour molten lead in the cleaning lady's ear, would want to practice Buddhism though. Buddhism -- like Hinduism of the sort most practice nowadays -- holds ahimsa (non-harm) to be the essence of its doctrine. Not all Brahmins are of the fire-and-brimstone, pour-molten-lead-in-their-ears, fundamentalist variety -- just as not all Christians are of the Pat Robertson, let-the-buggers-burn-in-hell variety!