guruyoga

+++++ Very well-written, Thanks Seth

Wonderful!! Thanks for sharing Shakti is bliss and wisdom, emptiness and luminosity, Empty and Full. Now that she has begun her dance of grace, all one needs to is let her do her dance of grace and just be.

Hundun, It’s all good! I acknowledge and appreciate your good intentions behind everything you have written over the years on this forum. I would much rather take the content than the tone. So, it’s all good. I, for no part, deny the utmost importance of the Guru. The entire premise of Non-dual Shaivism is - GururupaayaH - Guru is the ‘upaya’ for all the other upayas (anu, shakti, shambhava) are through his Grace. And Mark is a very fine Teacher, in fact the only one I have recommended to my students. Several folks on this forum who I speak with offline will smile at this with recognition. I have known Mark for a long time. Both of us share a similar background in Tantra and Dzogchen. More than a decade ago, when Mark was beginning to become popular after the Muktananda phase, his students were (I imagine that’s still the case) an eclectic mix. While most “got” it, there were several who did not open up to the grace and also did not persevere for they would have opened up in due course anyway. Back then, Mark’s teaching was even less “structured” in a typical sense and obviously with a reason. But I would speak to several who simply did “not” get it and gave up. Being immensely passionate about Kashmir Shaivism, it really pained me. I had several lengthy discussions with Mark on Grace (Shaktipat), upayas and so on and the difference in approach towards different kinds of aspirants. Mark did acknowledge what I have to say and I do see a lot more of content today in his teachings aimed at the category of aspirants I spoke of. The nine categories of Grace or Shaktipat map to the three Upayas (Shambhava, Shakti and Anu). Most often, practitioners today are suited for Shakti and anu upayas. You are a better qualified practitioner suited for Shaktopaya and hence readily opened up to Grace. Others, who need time to open to Grace (or cognize the Grace that already is), need something to hang on to, like a raft, which can also aid in their further opening up, and such tools as this would really help. Kashmir Shaivism insists on Mani (gems), Mantra, Mudra (pranayama, mudras, bandhas) and Aushadha (herbs) for this very purpose. Needless to say, none of this negate the importance of Guru, for they function only through his Grace. Grace is the road to a goal that is Grace. Even in the scheme of revelation of scriptures of Kashmir Shaivism, there were already the Shiva Sutras, which imparted Grace and Non-duality through the teaching, they “pointed out”, as we say in rDzog chen terminology. But this did not help all kinds of aspirants. Thus came into being the immensely practical and to-the-point Vijnanabhairava with a whole range of tools such as Ajapa, dharana on breath, space, light etc. to help advance one from Anavopaya to Shakta and further to Shambhava and so on. For someone qualifying for Shaktopaya, the techniques employed by an anu may seem lowly or mortal. But the very state of conditioned awareness of someone working with Shaktopaya will seem the same to someone else dealing with near-no-technique and non-duality (as in Shambhavopaya). It’s all really relative. And thank you for the kind words.

Who is "we"? Are you speaking for everyone of Mark's students? I have done seven intensives with him and spent several years with him, and you certainly don't speak for me. The question apparently was from a beginner. And you throw stuff like "listen to your core" - it simply doesn't make sense! These techniques stem from Vijnanabhairava and Netra Tantra and they don't "advice you to listen to your core". The teachings of the tantra are practical and simple, the results are magnificent. One need not "listen to the core" - the core makes itself evident once you listen to the breath - listening here is not 'physical listening' - simply touched by awareness, I thought I stated that. If grace is all there is (I don't disagree with this though), then why be aware of the the central channel or bellows breath or anything? There are certain tools to channel the grace, open up to it and the one I stated is what is being used in Kashmir Shaivite tradition. You can discuss the same with Mark and he will not disagree. Well, do ask him when you get a chance who he studied Paratrimshika from We can agree to disagree but if you toned down your usual pompous self a little bit, we can have a productive discussion.

Mark Griffin's method is simple. He asks one to employ Bellows breath through the practice. The sound of inhalation is so and this syllable vibrates at the base of the spine (representing Shakti or Kundalini). The sound of exhalation is ham and this vibrates at the crown center (representing Shiva). Thus, on inhalation, the breath moves down to the end of the spine (which is a tad lower than the root chakra really, and is called Kula-sahasrara or the thousand petal lotus at the bottom of the spine) and ascends to the crown at exhalation. Mark clearly states that the breath inherently has the sound of soham (or hamsa) and one need not verbally or mentally utter these syllables. I agree with him in a sense because if one uttered these syllables, it would become japa and not ajapa. One only needs to maintain awareness of the breath along the central channel in the above described fashion. IMO, a beginner may benefit from actually reciting the sounds mentally. In Zazen or even in Anapanasati, sometimes we count breaths initially to keep the mind fixed. By reciting the Soham mantra (which in Tantra acquires advanced transformation into Prasada, Para, Para-Prasada and Prasada-Para etc.), one is also benefited by consciously tuning into the vibration of the breath through sound. Moreover, the tradition teaches that one does not jump into Ajapa directly but starts with Japa and lets it naturally transform into Ajapa. So, after a certain proficiency is attained, the mental chant stops automatically and one simply remains aware of the breath in the central channel. Whether one uses Hamsa or Soham is a matter of choice. There is some discussion of it here.

Ditto here!! It was appreciable of Scott to speak up. While one can argue about the receptivity of the women who had these orgasms from Drew (its debatable if they did in their worlds too, or just in Drew's) and interpret such a receptivity to mean subconsious consent on their part for whatever exchange that occured, in a way, this is literally like a rape or molestation from one angle! Imagine, if this did really occur, a lady, who is standing some place in a coffee place drinking or serving coffee, begins to experience an orgasm all of a sudden!! It can leave her confused, she may run to a doctor to get this involuntary phenomena fixed. It may lead her to a guilt if she is in a loving relationship. She may lose interest in "normal" sex post these orgasm, ruining her normal life. If she were of a religious bent and associated with an Abrahamic religion, she could believe this to be a demonic possession, involuntary orgasms are very common with a demonic possession from what I have seen in several such cases I have dealt with. Lot of things happen because of this thoughtless behavior. True, nothing of this may happen, but the possibility that this can happen is something no one here seems to be considering. Also, who knows what happened to the women who experienced these orgasms, energetically, were they harmed in anyway? Possible right? In Tantra, we have Bhairavi Chakra, Dutiyaga, Lata Sadhana and other practices which involve sexual energies and these are not undertaken by those without a firm foundation - reason being unpreparedness can prove costly driving one insane and blowing up the nerve circuits due to intense flooding of energy. Look at the example of the guy on this thread who gave up Spring Forest Qigong based on Drew's insistence of Full Lotus. Tomorrow, a noob may develop some energy, get inspired by Drew's adventures and run around doing something similar? Sifu Lin clearly seems to have pointed out grounding issues and unbalance with Drew, and for anyone who can sense energy even at the basic level, is it not obviously evident Drew is way out of balance and ungrounded? I find it rather strange that women here condone such a thing as forcing another woman into an involuntary orgasm in public. Drew is a genius, no doubt about it! I have conversed here and offline with him for years and consider him a friend. Unfortunately, balance is not something he has embraced. I don't know which moderator spoke what with him - there seem to be a group that is openly supportive of this charitable act of running around giving orgasms, but this is what he writes on his blog.

Interview

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uexhuYYZ444&feature=plcp&context=C30647f1UDOEgsToPDskIyJC94Y_phF-wzMV_IQgfW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymmu7k6WsCU&feature=related Donald Rubbo is well-known for his work on Wuji gong or Primordial Qigong. A few years ago, I saw this exact same form in Bekasi, Java and it was attributed to an immortal of some local sect.

Scotty-san, please don't bother!!! Not a good read, in any way

Xiang Gong or the Frangrance Chikung school does not advocate Full Lotus. In fact, the grandmaster of this school Tian advised not to practice Full Lotus while practicing Xiang Gong, as also any kind of breath manipulation/regulation. I can't find the translated article by the grandmaster right away, but will post the link once I can. Xiang Gong requires one to not practice other forms of Qigong or anything that deals with Chi manipulation and that probably is the reason for this diktat on the full lotus. As a side note - I don't see the point in holding on to the posture using brute force or to the point of discomfort. Patanjali clearly states in his Yoga aphorism, Sthira-sukham asanam - Asana or posture should be 'sthira' (stable or steady) and 'sukha' (comfortable). Sthira is also not only in terms of quality but also as a measure of time - how long can one steadily hold the posture. The word 'sukha' or comfort is a qualifier to the entire thing - if it is not comfortable, then steadiness/duration of posture does not help much. Patanjali, unlike the later Hatha Yogins, recommended Asana as a tool for Dhyana (meditation) and Dhyana cannot happen if the asana is not steady and comfortable. How does one master an asana? Patanjali explains that too - Prayatnashaithilyananta samapattibhyam - one, by gradual abandonment of effort and two, meditating on the infinite. Initially, one does apply effort to accomplish the asana, but gradually, this effort should be slackened and let go for without abandoning this "effort", dhyana cannot ensue. Some translate this Sutra to mean - one can adopt any posture that is comfortable. This is perhaps stretching a tad too much. B K S Iyengar takes serious exception to this and suggests one to find sthirata (stability) and sukhata (relaxation or comfort) in one of the time tested and recommended postures such as Padmasana, Siddhasana, Vajrasana etc. (which are commonly used for Dhyana). May be that's what Drew is talking about - accomplishment of total stability and comfort - which cannot occur unless dhyana ensues, so a perfect full lotus is in a way a sign of some accomplishment. But so would be the case with any other posture like say Siddhasana...

Yes and No, of course one can get tricky and nit pick on words, but as long as the essence is understood, it's all good! It would be foolish to assume grace and the way to attain it (if at all is something that is not "already" attained as one's one inherent nature) can be technically described in word and accurately. I clearly stated that I was stating the views of the lineage of Madhura Bhakti which uses the word - sampaadayitum - which is exactly translated as "earned". If you disagree, that's fine, not that it bothers me, it just tells me you are not familiar with the different theological schools of Hinduism, each one, while seemingly different from the other, has its own charm and it is unnecessary to interpret them to fit one's own idiosyncrasies, or even a framework of Non-duality. Why not enjoy them as they are?

Pandit-ji is a proponent of the Bhakti marga, the Madhura Bhakti path to be specific. Here, one "earns" the grace of the divine or makes oneself open to receive it through selfless service, unconditional surrender to the ishta, ecstatic love for one's beloved etc.

What I found very endearing about H H was his ability to retain humor and an open mind amidst all this chaos and confusion and violence. One may argue that this is a carefully cultivated image, but I have spent short and long durations with him and my opinion is that if there is any pretense in how he conducts himself, it's near to nothing. All we see around today are people craving for power, and here is a man who gave that up, and is open enough to admit that polity needs to be returned to people (common man as he frequently puts it) and even acknowledges the fact that power was taken over by the Dalai Lamas in the past and amends are needed to correct that. I sure hope Tibet sees better days. I have personally heard from many Lamas and even normal householders some really sad stories on what Chinese oppression has done to their lives. I've also seen among Tibetans some kind of blind allegiance to the Dalai Lama without taking any responsibility on their part - H H kinda points this out too subtly in his interview. There have been some predictions made by three oracles in 2011 on what's to come in future for Tibet, but one can only wait and see. Without the charismatic face of H H representing the movement (say after he has left his body), Tibet's freedom movement is sure to lose steam.

I have the utmost respect for Sifu Lin and his good work. I did three levels with him long time ago and both he and his wife were amazing people, truly compassionate and not commercially oriented. Unfortunately, over the last few years, that seems to have changed. I also sense a change in the quality of his energy (this is just my opinion). I even removed him from my Facebook after ads and commercial stuff started appearing in excess. I don't know, if its the people around him, or the changing times and economy, but he does seem way too commercial and flashy than before. Lot of people know him now and as a result have benefited from him - that sure is something good. But over the top advertizing and some so called collaborations he keeps doing with New Age jumbos really turned me away from him lately. I do wish him the very best for the healing knowledge he has brought to many. My Dzogchen teacher - considered enlightened and consulted by even the Dalai Lama was somewhat big and never could do full lotus. His attainments of awe to a lot of high Lamas. My teacher of Tantra was considered a Siddha, and one of the few to openly exhibit his Siddhis - again considered enlightened even by orthodox Advaitins - never did Full Lotus. Trailinga Swami of Benares, one of the few Mahasiddhas to walk the earth in recent times was HUGE, he would float on Ganges most of the times and had Goddess Annapurna, the tutelary deity of Benares intercede for him on several occasions - there was NO way he could even do a half lotus. These were all considered Siddhas - by yogins, tantrics, alchemists and the mind-only folks like Advaitins or Buddhists of a similar persuasion. So obviously full lotus being any measure of spiritual attainment is absolutely silly. An ex girlfriend of mine did a lot of Yoga and was told my someone that full lotus would help burn fat or tone her waist or some stuff. She religiously would sit in full lotus while watching Tv and would not budge for like the duration of an entire movie - you know what women can do to shed their imaginary 'extra' pounds lol! Was she spiritual, not the least bit! Even in hatha yoga and tantra, Yonyasana and Ardhayonyasana are considered superior to Padmasana and that's just one example.

Wonderful thread I have a special place for the music of Pandit Jasraj-ji with who I had the fortune of spending some time and learn. Truly a blessed soul who earned grace of Thakurji through music. You may like some renderings by him. It is hard to miss the Madhura Bhakti in his music, where the rasas of Shringara and Karuna beautifully blend together

Not personally very fond of Anoop Jalota. Some other versions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnV51_jnlSU I also listen to Gosai Tulsidasji's Ganesh Chalisa at times: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIhKc01K1ig

Dwai, I did talk to Shibenduji and exchange notes, but I did not learn from him. My Kriya teacher was a monk who was a student of H H Keshavananda Brahmachari of Katyayani Peeth. Also studied a bit with SRF initially and Paramahamsa Hariharananda. In my lineage, which traces its yogic roots also to Babaji (haha) - is chiefly Tantric and not yoga-centric, we do practice most of the Kriyas in SRF including the Thokar, but with variation in mantras and ratios. Also, my Thokar is imperfect as I have only accomplished about 85% of Khechari.

Someone more experienced with Taoist techniques like Scotty can chime in, but I would think deep/abdominal/lower dantien breathing with breath-awareness (One Breath as we call in Kunlun school) is much more advisable and safer and more wholesome than a lot of these Spinal/Kriya-like practices - for the beginner. Even in Lahiri Baba's school, Nabhi Kriya was considered pretty important before starting other practices - something that Yogananda seems to have done away with. Hamsa Kriya (or Ajapa Kriya, that SRF calls Hong Sau) establishes breath awareness and Nabhi Kriya establishes awareness on the lower dantien (and also ming men). The Daoist abdominal breathing achieves both. So, IMO, this is a lot safer than most Pranayama techniques - its natural and not forced. It can lead the current up the spine spontaneously and without force at the right time. If one had to pick and choose a Pranayama technique, As Dwai said, Anuloma-Viloma is the way to go as it accomplishes the crucial part of nadi shuddhi. I am not sure working with Sushumna without some level of preliminary practice is very safe.

One would need to examine a few factors to see how Yoga got to where it is today. Till about early 1920, yoga was seldom focused on mere physical health, it was more of a spiritual system. Even Hatha yoga, the most physical form, was for spiritual purposes (ha-tha - refers to sun and moon channels). Also, most often Hatha Yoga was seriously undertaken more by renunciates, yogins, brahmacharis of the ten dashanami akharas, various subsects of nath lineages etc., rather than householders and general public. Patanjali simply states sthiram sukhamasanam without elaborating on hundreds of postures seen today. In the 1920s, Maharaja of Mysore Krishnaraja Wodeyar, who frequented London, is reported to have been greatly impressed with the Gymkhanas there and the focus on physical fitness that was becoming more popular in the Western world. He was also very keen on promoting Yoga as a health science and popularizing it among general public. He was the one who funded and initiated various votaries of Yoga such as Krishna Rao, K V Iyer, Sundaram Iyer and Krishnamacharya to popularize yoga. The palace gazette even termed these as ‘experiments’ in yoga. This seems to be the beginning of the form of Yoga as we see it today. While some votaries innovated more, some like Krishnamacharya stayed close to their roots, but were still considered to be somewhat New Age in their time. One should also note that under British rule, to promote Yoga as a secular form, it was projected as ‘Physical Education’ in schools of Mysore State and much was done to segregate it from religious life, of which it was considered an integral part so far. Though learned in traditional systems such as Vishishtadvaita (Krishnamacharya was associated with Parakala Mutt) and Samkhya, his benefactors included the Nizam of Hyderabad, a Muslim and a new emerging India influenced by the West and he undoubtedly tried his best to "secularize" yoga. As for Krishnamacharya’s system, call it Ashtanga or Vinnyasa (as Pattabhi Jois later coined), he learned it from a Himalayan Guru Ram Mohan Brahmachari, based on an ancient text composed by the seer Vamana. This is highly debatable since there is no mention of this text by any other sources. Also, Krishnamacharya claimed of transmission of a text named Yoga Rahasya through visions. Moreover, Krishnamacharya traveled far and wide in his youth and spent a good amount of time in Kashi (Benaras), the center for Dashanami Akharas and also the home to Yogins and Nath tantrics - from who he most apparently received his education in Hatha Yoga. It is clear that Krishnamacharya experimented with the vast yogic discipline and arrived at his own system named Ashtanga, attributing it to visions and ancient texts most possibly to lend it greater authenticity. It is now well-known that Krishnamacharya was influenced by various gymkhanas in Mysore and actively worked on combining the western physical exercise system with the traditional yoga. Even today, more traditional teachers question his rejection of shatkarmas, emphasis on yama and niyama etc. It is also documented in the Royal Gazette of Mysore palace that Krishnamacharya constantly innovated with Asanas. When some Asanas were difficult, he changed them, came up with easier variations and so on. Being vastly learned, he was probably capable of making such modifications, but the current emphasis of Yoga as more of a Physical Exercise clearly started with Krishnamacharya. So, it would be technically incorrect to call versions promoted by Krishnamacharya and his numerous disciples - yoga or even Hatha Yoga as Patanjala Yoga or the Tantra inspired Hatha Yoga are complete schools/spiritual cultivation systems in themselves. This was also probably the reason the innovators called their schools Ashtanga Yoga, Ashtanga Vinnyasa etc. as these represent a set of physical postures derived from the classical systems. Undoubtedly, these are very beneficial for purposes of physical health and probably confer spiritual benefits to an extent too, but may not take one very far spiritually as Jetsun noted in another thread. The problem today is of innovation (or corruption) by every Tom, Dick and Harry - who have no idea of the bodily working of Pranas and Prakriti (which forms the basis of Yoga) - leading to injury and damage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38rQaA6mS70

So you can buy Wu Wei for $90? Seriously, don't you think you are doing disservice to Master Lin by irritating people continuously like you do talking about him in every thread relevant or not? Would you think Master Lin would approve of such excessive behavior? Having known him rather well, I am damn sure he wouldn't! You are doing great disservice to a genuine and compassionate teacher by dragging him unnecessarily so often as though everything you speak here is officially approved or endorsed by him. Also, why don't you just put some detail about him in your signature, that way you don't have to tire yourself and others repeatedly. Drew, moderation is a great virtue and it's high time you embrace it.

Here is a series of discourses by H H Paramacharya. Some may find it helpful: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6661464/Advaita-Sadhana

MetalNun, No one has any issues with you, your freedom or it's rather oblique expression here. We cannot really comment on your liberation or it's degree for it's no one's business, nor is it something that one can judge. However, the advice you give here - stop thinking, intellect is not useful in spirituality, some New Age Oneness ideas etc. - are what people here are respectfully disagreeing with. Inherent peace and compassion and love do not require explicit declaration, certificates from others or long words proclaiming oneness and so on. C T, Mat Black - we have a few members right here who embody those in deed, words and mere presence. But when you assert your status as "enlightened" or "liberated" and flaunt a certificate of liberation - don't expect to go unquestioned. It is TI's idea/thoughts that you are disagreeing with, and the right way to do that would be to logically debate him here. Trying to legitimize your argument on the basis of your "enlightened" or "liberated" status is not fair. There were hints of displeasure at TI's analysis and even at our questioning of your definition of Jivanmukti, quite evident in the discussion above. I wonder, how that slight displeasure crept in? May be even Jivanmuktas are prone to mood swings and bickering like everyone else? Or may be your version of Jivanmukti is different from the traditional version of it which Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi personified to the fullest. Well, it's nice to know we have a Female Ramana amongst us I am sure for someone "one" with all and having celebrity clients on a psychic hotline, this is not hard to understand. Also a suggestion, if you do not understand a label and more so don't care for one, the simple thing would be to stop using one, Jivanmukti would be a good start. Much love to you

Never seen you say something wrong