dwai

You are NOT qualified to critique a Spiritual Tradition if...

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, 3bob said:

quit trying to be an authority that you are not

Are you talking to me again?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marblehead said:

Are you talking to me again?

 

 

no MH, you are the often fun or flexible person,  while  somebody else here acts like a know it all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 3bob said:

no MH, you are the often fun or flexible person,  while  somebody else here acts like a know it all

Yeah, well, I understand your POV but then I understand the other POV as well.

 

Most people are more serious about life than I am.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we’re all trying to reach a deeper personal understanding through conversations.

 

It’s good not to take anything on the internet too personally. We’re all just stating what we feel is true for us.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/22/2018 at 8:25 AM, Daemon said:

@neti neti

Haven't you yet realised that what you're saying means that those who've not had this experience themselves cannot even begin to resonate with what you're obviously never going to be able to convey via words?

The opening verses of the Vijnanabhairava tantra, with which you seem to have a passing familiarity, make it clear that all this mere philosophising is a pointless exercise.

Does that make sense to you?

 

☮️

 

Great questions. We use thorns to remove thorns, upon which both are discarded. The very use of words exposes their insubstantiality, a revealing of the concepts which drive them that they may be dissolved into that from which they arose. Advaita Vedanta happens to take its stand in a position considered closest to the wielder of that finger pointing at the moon.

 

Consciousness objectifies itself, as reflections in itself, that it may know itself. A spontaneity devoid of will or assigned meaning wherein its motion and the motionlessness from which it springs, are one. For the sake of communication, we perceive one apart from itself attempting to help the other. Or, we imagine that only one, by virtue of one's nature, seems to explore one's own immeasurable potentiality. Really there is no difference between the two. They are both only concepts. The concept of others is inseparable from the concept of this sole subject dividing itself into many. Both the oneness and the twoness are purely notional.

 

As such, there has never been any experience apart from ourselves. There is neither pointlessness nor purpose in this grand internally manifested exercise. The illusion of bondage and the experience of liberation is conceptual in nature, of our own making. Uncaused results of a necessarily self-inflicted perception of imbalance, a contraction of inherent unicity such that the expansion of duality prevails, only to be consumed again and again within itself. In reality, nothing ever happens.

 

Perhaps, without rhyme or reason, the apparent churning along of this wheel of samsara is as the spontaneous pursuit of a dog chasing its own tail. Perhaps, these words persist in manifesting to illuminate those aspects which seem to have become blurred in the mirror of one's being-ness. Perhaps that which appears only appears for its self-destruction. Perhaps this is all just a display of vanity, Shakti desirous of flamboyantly decorating her Shiva. Perhaps my words are of the same nature or impulse which has prompted your questions, and perhaps nothing has been said here at all.

 

The why cannot help but be met with the classic rebuttal of the why not. It is as It is. All of this simply manifests as it must.

Edited by neti neti
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, neti neti said:

 

Great questions. We use thorns to remove thorns, upon which both are discarded. The very use of words exposes their insubstantiality, a revealing of the concepts which drive them that they may be dissolved into that from which they arose. Advaita happens to take its stand in a position considered closest to the wielder of that finger pointing at the moon.

 

Consciousness objectifies itself, as reflections in itself, that it may know itself. A spontaneity devoid of will or assigned meaning wherein its motion and the motionlessness from which it sprung, are one. For the sake of communication, we perceive one apart from itself attempting to help the other. Or, we imagine that only one, by virtue of one's nature, seems to explore one's own immeasurable potentiality. Really there is no difference between the two. They are both only concepts. The concept of others is inseparable from the concept of this sole subject dividing itself into many. Both the oneness and the twoness are purely notional.

 

As such, there has never been any experience apart from ourselves. There is neither pointlessness nor purpose in this grand internally manifested exercise. The illusion of bondage and the experience of liberation is conceptual in nature, of our own making. Results of a necessarily self-inflicted perception of imbalance, a contraction of inherent unicity such that the expansion of duality prevails, only to be consumed again and again within itself. In reality, nothing ever happens.

 

Perhaps, without rhyme or reason, the apparent churning along of this wheel of samsara is as the spontaneous pursuit of a dog chasing its own tail. Perhaps, these words persist in manifesting to illuminate those aspects which seem to have become blurred in the mirror of one's being-ness. Perhaps that which appears only appears for its self-destruction. Perhaps this is all just a display of vanity, Shakti desirous of flamboyantly decorating her Shiva. The why cannot help but be met with the classic rebuttal of the why not. It is as It is. All of this simply manifests as it must.

 

That is very good articulation of the Advaidic view.  Just curious, how does Ishvara fit in this picture?  Is Ishvara also a display of vanity in this view?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, s1va said:

 

That is very good articulation of the Advaidic view.  Just curious, how does Ishvara fit in this picture?  Is Ishvara also a display of vanity in this view?

 

I would say the Advaitic perspective of that one dynamic and all-pervading function that is the viewing :)

 

A thoughtless mind settled as pure awareness, unaware of even itself, is the essence of Ishvara. Can this notion be considered a display of vanity? Sure, why not?

 

Can the notion of Ishvara as something separate from oneself to be attained, be considered a display of vanity? Sure, why not?

Edited by neti neti
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, neti neti said:

 

I would say the Advaitic perspective of that one active all-pervading function that is the viewing :)

 

A thoughtless mind settled as pure awareness,  unaware of even itself, is the essence of Ishvara. Can this notion be considered a display vanity? Sure, why not?

 

Can the notion of Ishvara as something separate from oneself that is to be attained be considered a display of vanity? Sure, why not?

 

Thanks for the reply even though I am not sure if you were stating those, or asking them as questions.  I was just curious because your post explained Advaita very well except this one concept, in my view.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, s1va said:

 

Thanks for the reply even though I am not sure if you were stating those, or asking them as questions.  I was just curious because your post explained Advaita very well except this one concept, in my view.

Thanks for asking. Just statements, which hopefully point back and further clarify what was offered previously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found some very interesting perspectives, which are congruent with AV coming from the KS discipline. 

 

Quote

Yogic Powers and the Shiva Sutras 1.19 -1.21

1.19  saktisandhane sarirotpattih

1.20  bhutasamdhana-bhutaprithaktva-visvasamghattah

 

Yogic powers are the subject of sutras 1.19 & 1.20. Over the years I have observed many who in the beginning are attracted to yogic practices when they learn that such disciplines will induce special powers, thesiddhis. I have often thought of these siddhicpowers as the proverbial carrot-in-front-of-donkey sort of enticements, which might serve to motivate the naïve or as simply seen as the ambition for power. 

Swami Lakshmanjoo is very clear in stating that real yogis do not want these powers. Why? The answer is simple and logical. These special powers exist in and affect the external hologram and therefore draw your consciousness back into that illusory world. They entangle you the same illusory energies you are endeavoring to transcend by merging into the One.

SLJ: “…this kind of achievement is attained by those yogis who have attachment for the body, attachment for disciples, attachment for the public…who have slightly come down from God consciousness. For elevated yogis…do not care for these powers or for matters of the world.”

By achieving God consciousness and being always focused, resting in the Absolute, you will have become complete in “internal consciousness…Incompletion rises in the external world. [SLJ]” 

***

Shiva Sutra 1.21

suddhavidyodyaccakresatva-siddhih

The real use for yogic power is the concentration of “energy of will for attaining the universal state of being. [SLJ]” In Kashmir Shaivism the aim of a focused will is to become the totality of the metaphysical principles that make up this universe - creation, destruction, and preservation (BHAIRAVA). Time and time again we are led back to this point. Entry into God consciousness is what matters. Entry into God consciousness will reveal the Knowledge within that waits for you and is your enlightenment.

The yogi then realizes that he/she was never anything but God. “Pure knowledge arises…whereby he realizes, “I am the whole universe. I am not only my body, I am one with the universe. [SLJ]”

As Abhinavagupta puts it, the yogi thinks this, “I am infinitely potent and absolutely pure consciousness. All this is my own divine play. It is being manifested by me through my divine powers. I am all this … [Abhinavagupta/Paramarthasara].”

When you become the Oneness, why do you need to display your powers? You have realized the goal. What remains to be done? 

***

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am NOT qualified to critique a Spiritual Tradition if..I am on the internet. BUT it would be really weird if we all used the same light to understand the world around us .

 

Barriers would come crashing down, the unified principle that ties all together with a golden thread would unite us  all and we would all work together to allow humanity to take its rightful place....The divine presence and responsible in this world  BUT that is way to messed up for anyone to agree on.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the irresistible power of Sat may hold you, but you as a particular somebody can not hold it.... 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that the Revealing  and pure power of Grace uses the vessel not the other way around, granted that power also provides for the vessel or Sat Guru but they - the attuned vessel makes no claim to ruling It. (it rules them) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jeff said:

 

Could you list your quote?  Whose perspective is that? 

 

http://www.inannareturns.com/articles/shivasutras/sutra001-19-21.htm

 

it seems like it is SLJ’s perspective

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

If you look at Abinagupta’s practices and teachings, I think it is very clear to see how he recommends using those powers. Also, as described in the Shiva Sutras...

 

3.29. yo’vipastho jñāhetuśca

The one who rules the wheel of energies becomes the cause of inserting knowledge in others.

 

Directly sharing (inserting)...

Isn’t it the same way as how when people would go to Ramana Maharshi or Nisargadatta Maharaj or Papaji, their presence induced the presence in the seekers?

 

Having directly experienced what you are writing about I have no doubt about the transmission or it’s efficacy. So it’s not about that. But it’s a common understanding that siddhis are side effects  of sadhana and not the objective. Even in Yoga, siddhis are considered signs of progress but not the end in itself.   

 

I know you are not espousing siddhis as an end, and as I understand your perspective is that when we have them we should use them for benefit of others. I don’t have a problem with that. My master uses his siddhis too, but he always does it via prayer (acting as the agent of God). He consciously and willingly gives up doership. In terms of power (ie ability to manipulate the ‘matrix’), he is one of the most powerful people I’ve met. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

http://www.inannareturns.com/articles/shivasutras/sutra001-19-21.htm

 

it seems like it is SLJ’s perspective

Isn’t it the same way as how when people would go to Ramana Maharshi or Nisargadatta Maharaj or Papaji, their presence induced the presence in the seekers?

 

Having directly experienced what you are writing about I have no doubt about the transmission or it’s efficacy. So it’s not about that. But it’s a common understanding that siddhis are side effects  of sadhana and not the objective. Even in Yoga, siddhis are considered signs of progress but not the end in itself.   

 

I know you are not espousing siddhis as an end, and as I understand your perspective is that when we have them we should use them for benefit of others. I don’t have a problem with that. My master uses his siddhis too, but he always does it via prayer (acting as the agent of God). He consciously and willingly gives up doership. In terms of power (ie ability to manipulate the ‘matrix’), he is one of the most powerful people I’ve met. 

 

I think it is much different than just feeling the presence of someone.

Here is an example:

 

Quote

 

 


Significantly, the last Stanza of the second

section ends with the declaration that 'this is the initiation that bestows

Siva's true nature'. In other words, this realisation, attained through the

expanding consciousness of contemplation with the eyes open, initiates the

yogi into the liberated state, which is identification with Siva whose body

is the universe.

 
In order to attain this expanded state of liberated consciousness, the

yogi must find a spiritual guide because the Master (guru) is the means to

realisation.23 The Master is for his disciple Siva Himself for it is he who

through his initiation, teaching and grace, reveals the secret power of

spiritual discipline. Instructing in the purport of scripture he does more

than simply explain its meaning: he transmits the realisation it can bestow.

The Master is at one with Siva's divine power through which he enlightens

his disciple. It is this power that matters and makes the Master a true

spiritual guide,25 just as it was this same power that led the disciple to him

in his quest for the path that leads to the tranquility that can only be found

'in the abode beyond mind'.26 The Master is the ferry that transports the

disciple over the ocean of thoughtz7-if, that is, the disciple is ready. The

disciple must be 'awake' (prabuddha), attending carefully to the pulse of

consciousness. This alert state of wakefulness is at once the keen sensitivity

of insight as well as the receptivity of one who has no other goal to pursue

except enlightenment.
....

 When such a disciple sits before his Master, all he has to do is to gaze

at him and be aware of his elevated state to feel the fragrance (vdsand) of

the Master's transcendental consciousness extending spontaneously

within him. Abhinava explains:

So gracious is he that, by transferring his own nature to those whose

consciousness is pure, they became one with him at his [mere] sight.

 If the disciple does not possess the strength of awareness to allow the

Master to infuse this consciousness into him directly in this way while his

eyes are open, he is instructed to close them. The Master then bestows

upon him a vision of former perfected yogis (siddha) while the disciple is

in a state of contemplation with his eyes closed (nimilanasamddhi).

Through the vision of these perfected yogis (siddhadarSana)94 he

recognises their level of consciousness and so experiences it within himself.

The disciple's consciousness thus suddenly expands within him like the

violent and rapid spread of poison through the body (bhujarigagaralavat).

He thus becomes one with his Master in the unifying bliss of universal

consciousness and so, whether his eyes are open or closed, continues to

enjoy the same state constantly.

 

Edited by Jonesboy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice quote man,

btw this Grace descends not only on the prepared and advanced student...it descends upon whom it chooses whether they be a fool, buried in great karma,  a so called normal person,  a youngster, etc.. thus drawing up or implying certain limitations for It to act (which one may do and try to line up per method) is not really the case. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 3bob said:

nice quote man,

btw this Grace descends not only on the prepared and advanced student...it descends upon whom it chooses whether they be a fool, buried in great karma,  a so called normal person,  a youngster, etc.. thus drawing up or implying certain limitations for It to act (which one may do and try to line up per method) is not really the case. 

 

 

The quote and topic was about a guru, directly inserting knowledge (siddhis) and how they can be used.

 

Sure it can happen to anyone. Just like anyone can get struck by lighting. I personally would recommend the guru over just walking around hoping it will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

I think it is much different than just feeling the presence of someone.

Here is an example:

 

I think this is true for many other traditions too. For instance, when my Master initiated me, it was the same way. He is not a Kashmir Shaivism practitioner (albeit he is a great devotee of Lord Shiva). He was transmitting his daoist lineage in the way his master transmitted to him. It unfolded in exactly the same way for me. But that is what I would consider sharing presence. All it takes is "lighting" the fire. 

 

Ramana Maharshi described it like this (quoting inexactly) --

Quote

Some people are like gunpowder. Just a single spark (of shared presence) is sufficient to light them up completely. Others are like coal and there is a process of lighting the spark and fanning the embers needed before a full flame emerges. Then there are others like wet wood. They have to be dried out and only then the spark (of presence) lights them up.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

 

The quote and topic was about a guru, directly inserting knowledge (siddhis) and how they can be used.

 

Sure it can happen to anyone. Just like anyone can get struck by lighting. I personally would recommend the guru over just walking around hoping it will happen.

 

i would suggest caution along any lines of "inserting"... for Revealing Grace is a thousand times more than something like that - it is simply through deep Mystery/wisdom of the Self revealing the Self - with no insertion from an apparent outside needed.  (which is what it sounded like you were implying)

Edited by 3bob
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, 3bob said:

 

i would suggest caution along any lines of "inserting"... for Revealing Grace is a thousand times more than something like that - it is simply through deep Mystery/wisdom of the Self revealing the Self - with no insertion from an apparent outside needed.  (which is what it sounded like you were implying)

 

Thank you for pointing out the differences. Here are some more from KS.

 

From the

KULARNAVA TANTRA

 

Difficult to obtain is the Guru who pleased,

gifts to you in the fraction of a second, the

wealth of liberation, taking you across the ocean

of Samsara.

 

Difficult to obtain is the godly Guru who

gives to the disciple his own capacity in a

moment without any ceremony or effort; who

gives instruction in knowledge which instantly

promotes faith, is easy and gives happiness of

the Self.

 

He is the Guru who goes on giving knowledge

with facility, without strenuous practice

and the like, as one moves from island to island.

Difficult to obtain is the Guru whose mere

instruction gives rise to knowledge, even as food

gives instant contentment to the hungry.

Many are the Gurus like lamps in house and

house; but rare is the Guru who lights up all

like the sun.

 

Many are the Gurus who are proficient to the

utmost in Vedas, and Sastras; but rare is the

Guru who has attained to the supreme Truth.

Many are the Gurus on earth who give what

is other than the Self; but rare is the Guru in

the worlds who brings to light the Atman.

Many are the Gurus who know petty

mantras, medicaments; but rare is the Guru

who knows the Mantras handed down by the

Nigama, Agama and Sastra.

 

Many are the Gurus who rob the disciple of

his wealth; but rare is the Guru who removes

the afflictions of the disciple.

 

Many are they who are given to the discipline

and conduct according to varna (class),

asrama (stage) and kula (family); but he who is

devoid of all volition is the Guru rare to find.

He is the Guru by whose very contact there

flows the supreme Ananda; the intelligent

man shall choose such a one as the Guru and

no other.

 

By the mere sight of him whose intelligence

is active only till the advent of experience, one

attains liberation, there is no doubt of it.

Rare is the Guru who has eaten up Doubt

which has engulfed the three worlds with all

that is moving and unmoving.

As in the vicinity of fire the butter gets

melted, so in the proximity of the holy Guru all

sin dissolves As lighted fire burns up all fuel - dry and

moist - so the glance of the Guru burns up in a

moment the sin of the disciple.

As a heap of cotton blown up by a great

storm scatters in all the ten directions, so the

heap of sins is driven away by the compassion

of the Guru.

As darkness is destroyed at the very sight of

the lamps, so is ignorance destroyed at the very

sight of the holy Guru.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

No, the meaning and relative approach is different.

Okay. By that do you mean in one case it seems like a passive thing (seeker comes in proximity of the sage and gets enlightened by induction) whereas in the other, an active thing (seeker is given active transmission by the sage)?

 

In case of the AV masters, they just point to the truth that is already in the seeker. The Seeker is already Brahman. Just a removal of the veil is needed to point to the truth.  I'm adding a video of satsangs with Papaji. NOTE: I've selected Papaji as he is from the old guard (Direct disciple of Ramana Maharshi) whose method has been captured on video.

 

Spoiler

 

Quote

 

I think my point has been lost regarding this discussion.  Your point of your master doing something "acting as the agent of God", again highlights the difference that I have been trying to show.  In KS, one does not act as an agent of God. That agency or not is basically the point I have been trying to show. :) 

I don't think its been lost. 

"Agent of God" or "Instrument of God" only happens when one's personal identity is known to be as just a role. It depends on the temperament of the jiva (predicated on prarabdha karma) as to how they view this. Some simply identify with and as God themselves, while others choose to view themselves as bhaktas. My Master's perspective is that of a bhakta (devotee). Similar was the perspective many sages (such as Sri Ramakrishna). 

 

One question that arises is as follows --

 

If the seeker is not ready (ie they've not done sufficient work in purifying), such as someone who's at level 3 or lower (per your method), would it be possible to do a transmission to them, and will it result in their attaining self-realization (awakening)?


It seems, that the individuals seem to have work to do (effort to turn their minds inward and away from body-mind-world identification) before a transmission like that can have an effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

Okay. By that do you mean in one case it seems like a passive thing (seeker comes in proximity of the sage and gets enlightened by induction) whereas in the other, an active thing (seeker is given active transmission by the sage)?

 

The difference is that there is both ways in KS.  Remember that realization in KS is "conscious" where one has direct access to the Jiva going to Siva level previously discussed.  Your passive thing is always ongoing, but the conscious/active is much stronger and allows a whole new set of possible practices.  An example below is described by Ahbinagupta with the ritual of adoration...

 

"This is the reason why during the rites of adoration of the circle one must remain attentive and not allow anyone to enter whose consciousness is in a dispersed state and not concentrated and absorbed, because he will be a source of contraction. In the practice of the circle one must adore all of the bodies of all those present because since they have all penetrated in the fullness of consciousness they are as if they were in our own body. If through some negligence a stranger succeeds in entering, the initiated ritual may proceed together with him provided that he does not enter in a state of contraction. Such a one, if divine grace falls upon him, will become concentrated and absorbed with the various rituals, but if he is struck by a sinister and malevolent power of the Lord, he will criticize the group."

 

It is vastly more powerful because in passive mode, the transfer is only based upon the level/potential of the person.  In what you call active mode, it is possible for the master to share directly at a higher level.  Sort of like the person can draft directly at that higher level.

 

13 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

In case of the AV masters, they just point to the truth that is already in the seeker. The Seeker is already Brahman. Just a removal of the veil is needed to point to the truth.  I'm adding a video of satsangs with Papaji. NOTE: I've selected Papaji as he is from the old guard (Direct disciple of Ramana Maharshi) whose method has been captured on video.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I don't think its been lost. 

"Agent of God" or "Instrument of God" only happens when one's personal identity is known to be as just a role. It depends on the temperament of the jiva (predicated on prarabdha karma) as to how they view this. Some simply identify with and as God themselves, while others choose to view themselves as bhaktas. My Master's perspective is that of a bhakta (devotee). Similar was the perspective many sages (such as Sri Ramakrishna). 

 

One question that arises is as follows --

 

If the seeker is not ready (ie they've not done sufficient work in purifying), such as someone who's at level 3 or lower (per your method), would it be possible to do a transmission to them, and will it result in their attaining self-realization (awakening)?


It seems, that the individuals seem to have work to do (effort to turn their minds inward and away from body-mind-world identification) before a transmission like that can have an effect.

 

I chose the above quote to answer your question at a more detailed level about a "level 3". It is less about the transmission, but about the acceptance and letting go in that space.  But, in my terms a level 3 has not opened their heart, and so are in KS terms in a state of contraction, hence they would not be a good candidate for something like a ritual of adoration.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

The difference is that there is both ways in KS.  Remember that realization in KS is "conscious" where one has direct access to the Jiva going to Siva level previously discussed.  Your passive thing is always ongoing, but the conscious/active is much stronger and allows a whole new set of possible practices.  An example below is described by Ahbinagupta with the ritual of adoration...

 

"This is the reason why during the rites of adoration of the circle one must remain attentive and not allow anyone to enter whose consciousness is in a dispersed state and not concentrated and absorbed, because he will be a source of contraction. In the practice of the circle one must adore all of the bodies of all those present because since they have all penetrated in the fullness of consciousness they are as if they were in our own body. If through some negligence a stranger succeeds in entering, the initiated ritual may proceed together with him provided that he does not enter in a state of contraction. Such a one, if divine grace falls upon him, will become concentrated and absorbed with the various rituals, but if he is struck by a sinister and malevolent power of the Lord, he will criticize the group."

 

It is vastly more powerful because in passive mode, the transfer is only based upon the level/potential of the person.  In what you call active mode, it is possible for the master to share directly at a higher level.  Sort of like the person can draft directly at that higher level.

That the methodology differs is perfectly understandable.

20 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

I chose the above quote to answer your question at a more detailed level about a "level 3". It is less about the transmission, but about the acceptance and letting go in that space.  But, in my terms a level 3 has not opened their heart, and so are in KS terms in a state of contraction, hence they would not be a good candidate for something like a ritual of adoration.

Traditional teachers typically ask the individual to do what is called a purascharana  before any transmission is done. The individual is again re-evaluated after the purascharana is completed to see if they are ready for advanced transmission (could be energetic or jnana).  The purascharana is what triggers antahkarana shuddhi (purification of the mental components). 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites