s1va

Yes, it is described as a special form of yoga. Going back to the OP, everything can be seen as yoga, our choice essentially. For instance each chapter of the Gita is considered as a unique yoga of it's own. The 18 chapters in the gita, constitute 18 major yogas. In the first chapter where Arjuna describes his sorrow and despondency, there are no teachings from Krishna. The chapter ends with Arjuna falling down in his chariot overcome by grief. Still, it is considered yoga and the name for that is, 'Arjuna Vishada Yoga' (arjuna's yoga of despair or sorrow). IMO, the yoga is actually not in the despair itself, but it is in him reaching out to the enlightened master in Krishna. Perhaps it is named as yoga to show that intense suffering or conflict many times leads to some kind of opening and a way forward!

One of the powerful places I visited is the Arunachala Hill, in the southern state of Tamil Nadu - India. There is something special about the entire hill area. Ramana Maharishi's ashram can be found on the bottom of the hill. Many Siddhars from the southern traditions were believed to have spent their time in and around this hill area. Some of them are believed to roam the hill area to this day. Power of Arunachala: https://www.sriramanamaharshi.org/arunachala-hill/puterea-arunachalei/ http://davidgodman.org/asaints/powerofa1.shtml

Timing of the post is also really good Maha Shivaratri festival is celebrated yesterday and today this year (Feb 13 & 14). Considered to be a very conducive time/day to think and meditate on Lord Shiva.

Even when a person's karma is burnt by other (assuming it is entirely possible), there still seems to be some individual factor that determines why certain people stand to benefit with such things. If we look at healings and miracles performed by Jesus or Krishna or some other master, in each instance it affected only certain people or only some reaped the benefit directly (to a great extent) by such actions. Even if we were to assume that everyone that came up to and asked help from these masters got some of their karma burned. The question why only certain few got to meet them in the first place, still remains. Even the greatest prophets or masters from the past did not heal everyone or did not burn the karma of everyone that they came across in their lives. May be, they helped everyone to certain extent. In all cases, some individuals or certain persons with some propensities seem to have benefited more than the others. Sometimes we say, the person was ripe or ready to receive the blessings or divine help. Which still clearly shows, the individual person has to be ready in some ways to go through such transformation or receive the blessing. The evolution of an individual and where he is, seem to matter a great extent in such things, to determine whether someone receives it, or to which degree it transforms them. Personally to me, this is a more interesting question than if someone's karma can be burned. As Buddha pointed out, ultimately perhaps it all goes back to the individual's effort in one way or other, even in receiving divine help to burn karmas, and to what extent one stands to benefit.

The verses show the great devotion Ravana had for Lord Shiva. He is considered one of the greatest devotees of Lord Shiva, along with Nandi, etc. I learn from Ravana's story that intellectual knowledge, however great it is, of not much use. Without surrender, true humility and devotion in the heart, it may be hard to cross over the attachments, desires and lust. As per scriptural knowledge, it can be very helpful or harmful depending on the person that uses them and how they apply them. Just like a knife that can cut the vegetable, can also cut the finger, if a person does not know how to handle it. Can't blame the knife in this instance. Ravana's main problem as described in Ramayana was lust. I just briefly mentioned his story yesterday in another thread right here. Ravana & Kumbakarna are supposed to be the incarnation of Jaya and Vijaya (due to a curse), who are the door guards and greatest devotees of Lord Vishnu. Yes, lust stems out of one's ego. Anyway, another vital lesson I have personally learned is, it is easy for me to point finger or notice such egoic acts on others. What I need to personally work on for my progress, eludes me many times! In truth such judgements never helped me, so I try not to judge anyone, including Ravana There are also others who are considered as demons, but were greatest devotees, some even considered worthy of worship, such as Prahlada. The lesson here for me is things such as lust can derail even some of the greatest and learned devotees of Lord. Interestingly, Ravana & Kumbakarna both get Moksha or liberation in Ramayana.

Very good point. This is something that got me thinking recently when I came across a text. There seems to be some debate and two opinions on this -- whether the Prarabdha can also be affected or negated. Per some parts of Vedanta and texts like Vivekachoodamani, it seems like this can be negated totally. Others state, it can't. Personally, I don't have a clear answer on this, sounds like it can under some circumstances. I will close my comment with that, not sure if this will fall entirely under the topic.

What started off as a casual comment, I ended up explaining in detail. Lesson learned, I should watch out what I state casually on forums For the record, I have no special interest either towards the concept or the practice of Sambhrama yoga. Just something that came up during discussion. I was explaining the logic behind it, as stated in some scriptures and stories.

There was a group of practitioners in ancient India called Purva Mimamsakas. They believed only in the early portion of Vedas. Per their philosophy and belief, everything happens by karma. Even the divine or 'Isvara' (God) cannot interfere in a person's karma. Therefore there is no point in praying for divine help or intervention. By karmas each person can find their own way and liberation in the end. This is not the mainstream belief. Shankara engages in debates with them and convinces (win) them, stating Iswara/Divine can intercede and help burn karmas. The debate that occurred for several days is documented. If divine can intercede and burn karmas for others, then it can do it by various means, including through other humans or masters. When we come to Buddhism, there is no such concept of one 'Iswara' / divine who can intervene. In fact, this was one of the major points of contention between Sankara and Buddhists. So, from a Buddhist standpoint, may be, the karmas can't be burned by others. I am not really sure, because there is a lot of overlap in the beliefs between the two traditions, when it comes to karmas. It is generally accepted in Hindu belief, that divine or a master can intervene with the karmas of others in various ways. Let's not confuse this with responsibility or putting effort from the individual stand point. Ultimately, every one is responsible for their karma and also for their liberation. But, this does not mean, that the divine or 'Isvara' cannot intervene and help or burn some karma for those caught up in Samsara. The divine can and does achieve this in so many ways, including by acting through another human. When it comes to Hindu Tantra also -- both right and left handed -- it is generally accepted that a qualified master can take or burn the karmas of others.

Agreed -- entirely with what you stated. All, I was trying to say was, I can't say your master or some one else did not get there, and only who I think got there, really got there hope that makes sense. This is all from our own experience, I can't challenge another's belief or experience. It is valid to them as my experiences are to me. Yes, our insides will know.

That's true. But, only the person speaking from that place will know, whether he/she is truly there or not. I can't pass judgments on who got there or not, whether some person really got there, etc. It's subjective and each person's belief at this point.

On the other hand, Krishna took credit for everything he did. But, when he says 'I' or 'Me' in Gita, it can mean two things. In some instances, he talks of himself as Krishna, the friend of Arjuna and king of Yadhava clan. There are other instances where he uses 'I' or 'Me' in a much broader sense to indicate. he is talking from the standpoint of non-dual Brahman. If some one has non-dual experience and sees no seperation, then they might very well use the 'I' in the broader sense, like how it really means to them in the expanded sense. To an onlooker, it might seem like the person is taking out of inflated ego. Even in Gita, Arjuna gets confused and challenges Krishna, when he states he gave some knowledge in the beginning of creation to Sun God. Granted, everyone is not Krishna or Jesus. Edit: The point I was trying to make was, each master from the past acted in some different or unique ways. We can't compare actions against any one for validation.

This is consistent with my understanding. Just wanted to check because 'awakened' is used in many context these days. Thanks.

What does awakened mind mean in this context?

Blessings from Buddhas or deities are not divine grace?

We also should ask ourselves, does love and hatred matter to the lord (or divine)? Is not the Lord's compassion, the same towards a sinner and the saint? Does he distinguish between the two? No, Lord's compassion towards both of them are equal and same at all times. It is only their karma that determines their course. Out of compassion, the Lord even intervenes on this to make things easy for his devotees. Some of the stories from Puranas and Itihasas not only have deep insight, they also illustrate what true compassion is. Let's just take one more example for the Sambrama yoga. The story of Putana from Krishna Avatar. It may not exactly be called Sambhrama yoga, but the concept is the same. It is truly amazing, how these stories are connected with one another between various scriptures and puranas. The effects of karma are explained elaborately, and can be traced back like tracing the individual metal rings, connected in a chain. The story of Mahabali the asura (demon) king is very popular and described in the early puranas. Anyway, Lord Vishnu incarnates as Vamana (the little boy), to face Mahabali, and send him to the patala loka (lower realms). It is also described that Mahabali did many great virtual and meritorious things. These are also taken into consideration, it is described that the Mahabali from the current cycle, will be the Indra in the next kalpa or cycles of 4 yugas. How is Mahabali's story related to Putana story in Krishna avatar. They are millions of years or yugas apart. As they say sometimes the devil is in the details. It is described on Mahabali's story, he had a sister. She was standing with him and watching the climatic events unfold in the Vamana avatar, where Lord Vishnu tricks Mahabali with his appearance. Anyway, being in the presence of the Lord, changes something on Mahabali's sister. Her heart opens, there is a love for Lord in that form of a small boy or child. She was enamored by his appearance and even wishes that the Lord was her child and she could feed him. While Lord Vishnu does not outwardly acknowledge or show anything, this detail like any other does not escape his notice. The devotion or love always touches his heart. Anyway, this great opening or transformation that happened right there in the presence of Lord Vishnu, fast tracks her evolution. She was born as asura (demon) due to her tendencies and past karmas. But, she is closer to liberation now and had to take only one more birth. Though the lord or divine is always willing to lend a helping hand, we have to exhaust or burn some of our karmas or tendencies before getting there. Does it matter to the Lord, who wants to liberate, whether it is done in a noble way with an emotion such as love, or done with hatred such as in Sambhrama yoga and be done quickly. Based on what is described on several places, it looks like it doesn't. Krishna states in Gita while talking on transcendental knowledge, "ye yatha mam prapadyante tams tathaiva bhajamy aham mama vartmanuvartante manusyah partha sarvasah, As the devotees surrender to me, —I reward accordingly. Everyone ultimately follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.". He states, it doesn't matter to me which path or methods you choose to surrender to me, whatever be your path, as long as you come to me, I will help you progress on that very same path (of your choice) and in your own ways, and ensure that you reach the destination. It doesn't matter to him, how a devotee choses to relate, as friend, lover or enemy. If he is the transcendental lord, how can he discriminate between devotees. Krishna just does not talk about it, he demonstrates this in his life in numerous examples. His dear friend Arjuna and the one that considers him his enemy Duryodhana, both come at the same time asking for his help in the impending war. Krishna and his large Yadava army could make a big difference in the war. He gives both what they wish. One wanted his army and another wanted just Krishna on their side. Getting back to Putana's story. Steve stated early on this same thread: "Liberation requires that we deal with each and every condition in our lives in some way and release whatever relationship we have with it, whether positive or negative". Mahabali's sister had conditions that she needed to release, related to hatred and other such tendencies. The best way to release them is to have an opportunity in life where they can be expressed and released safely. Due to the association with Lord Vishnu, she gets this perfect opportunity, in the next birth as Putana in Krishna avatar. She is an asura girl (demoness) on this birth also, who Kamsa recruits to kill Krishna, when Krishna was a baby. The story of Putana can be found on the link in the sentence above or by googling. Putana gets the best opportunity to express and release whatever she needed to in her own way. She does practice hatred towards Krishna. She tries to kill him by feeding him poison milk (and fails). Krishna kills her, but she attains liberation. Further we note in the details, that she feeds the poison milk to Krishna. In the story of Mahabali, yugas back, she wanted to feed Lord Vishnu, in the form of Vamana. In her liberation, the Lord offers her even the possibility to fulfill that particular wish to feed him. Doesn't matter she fed poison milk. This illustrates the compassion of the divine is the same for everyone, to the greatest saint and the worst sinner. Just help them all in their own ways. "Ye yata mam prapadyante....". What, Putana the demoness who was filled with hatred got liberation? Yes, not just her, several other asuras that were killed by Lord Vishnu, attained liberation. There is a story behind each one linking and relating to their past karmas. The same logic can apply to some other demons killed by other God's also. What is even more interesting (might trouble some :)) is to note, that Yudhisthira who is the personification of Dharma or virtue (The eldest Pandava brother from Mahabharata), does not get liberated. He goes on to swarga (heaven) and will be back to take more births per Mahabaratha. However, Shishupala, who was filled with hatred, gets Moksha or Liberation! What is the logic? Dharma and Moksha are not the same thing. One can live the greatest virtuous life following all morals etc. and may not get liberated (may go to swarga/heaven to be born again). On the other hand, a person that was engaged in questionable acts, in one stroke or in a single moment transform and attain liberation on same life. Mysterious are the ways of karma and the divine grace.

Here is the story as narrated by Brahma. http://differenttruths.com/religion/tales-from-srimad-bhagavatam-the-arrogant-door-keepers-x/

That description is accurate. The process is described exactly as 'unraveling of it all', including the 'I', me, identification etc. all of it collapsing, and resulting in liberation.

Btw, I have tremendous respect for Osho, forgot to mention that

What if it is the scriptures such as Vedas, Ithihasas and Puranas that propose this idea that intensive hatred can result in liberation, like in this example? You are still entitled to your opinion of who or what 'all' are nut jobs! I would not judge you harshly no matter your beliefs! Best wishes & Good luck!

Getting back to emotions and liberation. Let's start with the istha-devata or deity, many of us are familiar with this concept from Hinduism (also on Vajrayana part of Buddhism -- Yidam). Each person can choose their own conception of the divine based on their own tendencies. Taking this one step further along the same lines, it is stated not just the form of divine as ishta devata, but how a person relates to the divine or 'bhava' and corresponding emotion is also up to each person's choice. The relationship to divine or one's ishta devata can be any one of the various 'bhavas'. For example, Arjuna & Uddhava approached the divine (Krishna) with 'mitra bhava' (friendship). Radha approached Krishna with prema bhava (love). Many have prayed to Shakti/Parvati as Mother, and Shiva as Father (maatru and pitru bhaava). Kalidasa calls them fondly as father and mother for the entire humanity, his words: jagatah pitarau vande pArvatIparameshvarau. Hanuman was devoted to Rama with 'dasa bhava', as a servant. Each of the bhava has its own corresponding emotion associated with it. If we look at Sanskrit, there are several more names for emotions than what we generally see in other languages. One example would be 'vatsalya' is a special form of love towards one's child for example. This is where we find something interesting. It is stated that it does not matter what type of bhava or the corresponding emotion with which a person relates to the divine. It is the intensity of the emotion/bhava that truly matters and not the underlying emotion. If it is sincere and the intensity is 100%, it is said to result in liberation. Not only the foundation for various other things, the logic for Tantra can also be found on this (In tantra, it is the intensity of the union that matters). If one were to relate to the divine with love, like how Radha, Andal or Mira bhai, or several others did. It is fine, as long as the intensity of that emotion is strong, it will bear fruit or results. If such sincere love towards divine gets truly intensive, it is said to result in liberation right away. Here, it is once again not about the love, but the intensity of the emotion (which just happens to be love in this example), that really matters. Similarly, one can relate to the divine, as a friend, father, mother, child or anyway they want (even as enemy with hatred!). If the intensity of their corresponding emotion to the divine is sincere and intense, it will result in liberation. This is a beautiful logic with depth. It is like science, it will work if the emotion i sincere and has the desired intensity, irrespective of what the emotion is. We talked about relating to the divine, as friend, lover, father, mother, child, etc. There are those, who have seen the divine or God as enemy with full of hatred in their heart. The logic is supposed to work, irrespective of the emotion as described, just like how it did for those who related with love. And it did, as per the scriptures. There is a long list of examples, that can be found right from Vedas, to Ithihasas (Ramayana & Mahabaratha) to the Puranas. We already saw that no action, just by the virtue of itself is considered as a punya (merit) or papa (sin). We also saw on the last post (on this topic), that no emotion, by itself is considered either as good or bad. Per Sambhrama yoga, it is stated that is one's hatred is pure -- meaning it is without any guilt or ulterior motives, it is just intense hatred with no definable cause, other than it's own. When such pure hatred is intense enough, it is said to result in liberation. The intensity is the important parameter anyway. The initial concept of this starts from the Vedas, with the story of Jaya and Vijaya. The door guards for Lord Vishnu. This is described in detail in various puranas and itihasas also. I will post the story as a quote or link in separate thread. To mention it briefly here, the Sanakadi rishis (Sanaka, Sananda, Sanatana and Sanatkumara) visited the vaikunta once to see lord. They were stopped or interrupted by Jaya and Vijaya, the door guards of Lord Vishnu, for some reason. The Rishis, who were enlightened masters were upset and cursed Jaya and Vijaya to take birth in the world of maya/illusion for 3 times. These two realized their mistake, but were worried about taking birth in earth and getting caught up on maya and living for eons. Lord Vishnu assures them that they will get swift liberation and he will personally incarnate to ensure that. He then goes on to teach them the special Sambhrama yoga, the yoga of hatred. Advises them to practice it in their 3 births and it is stated, that it will lead to faster liberation, than the practice of love. The first time, the two were born as Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu. They practiced the Sambhrama yoga, or the yoga of hatred towards Lord Vishnu. As per the promise, Lord Vishnu incarnated as Varaha and Narasimha respectively to liberate the brothers. On their second birth, they were born as Ravana and Kumbhakarna. This time Vishnu incarnated as Rama to fulfill his promise and liberate them. On their third birth, the brothers were born as Shishupala and Dantavakra (some say Kamsa). Lord Vishnu incarnated as Krishna to liberate them, third time around as he promised. Thus, not only the basis for Ramayana and Mahabharata in some ways, this forms as the basis for various Major Puranas that are part of Hindu Scriptures. This is not the only example, there are numerous example of others (a very long list) from Hindu scriptures, who attained liberation through their emotion of hatred. If someone is interested, I can elaborate more.

Hi Bob, I respect what you say as your opinions. But, when they conflicted with what is stated as dharma, with respect to this topic and relevant to my discussion, I was merely pointing them out politely. I still respect your thoughts and opinions the same way I did when you called what I described or me, as 'nut job', just few posts back. The question is do you afford the same basic courtesy to others? Tolerence and humility are the fundamental pillars in Hindu belief. Just because I point out such things, it does not mean, I am correcting or a guru. Thanks for your insights. I still stand by what I said on fixed spiritual "laws"in Hindu belief. Love & Light, Siva.

Let's start with the emotions. Like how we discussed no action, just by the virtue of that action alone, cannot be classified as punya (or meritorious action) or pApa, it is various other factors that make an action a dharmic activity or otherwise. We also saw the example, killing is not a sin universally under all circumstances, in Hindu belief. Sometimes, killing is the only right course of action and Dharma. If one hesitates to do such activity, he may be committing the sin and not otherwise. Is this not what Krishna tells Arjuna in Gita, when he hesitates to wage war and pierce the heart of this near and dear with arrows? In the same way, an emotion, just by its own virtue is considered neither good nor bad. All of our emotions are given to us for a reason and served to protect or aid us at one time or other. Anger, fear, hatred, all the so called negative emotions are there for a reason. They served and may still serve us at times. Then what would make an emotion right or wrong, various factors once again. This is the fundamental. We will proceed further on the next posts to see how emotions can be channeled for liberation. @Boundlesscostfairy. - we are on the topic and hopefully done soon. Sorry, I am trying to do the best I can. I had to describe some basics that can help understand the concepts. Next, I will describe more on how emotions such as hatred can liberate, and also see numerous examples that describe these scenarios from scriptures, including from Ramayana and Mahabharata. The root of this logic comes from the Vedas themselves.

Going back to what I stated on puNya and pApa (merit and sin) in Hindu belief, Swami Chinmayananda explains this beautifully in his book, 'On wings and wheels', which is a book based on Vedanta. He states there are no fixed laws or commandments in Hindu scriptures that define what is a merit and sin. This does not mean there are no merit and sin. There are punya and pApa. But, no action, just by the virtue of that action alone can qualify as a punya or pApa. There are various other factors that make the determination. Such as, intent of an action plus, If an action produces restlessness or guilt inside a person or their own insides or conscience does not agree or repels against an action, such action is considered as a pApa/sin for that person. If some one is about to engage in an action, their own insides scream stating this is not right, still they go ahead do it, overcome by desire, that would definetly constitute as a pApa or sin. So, this is all about each person and the circumstances. What is considered as a merit for one under certain circumstances, can be a sin/pApa for another under same or different circumstance, and vice versa. Some may not understand our agree with this. This is what it is per Hindu beliefs. It's fine to have difference of opinion and there is lot of tolerance in the system. Let's take an example. If we are to make a rule stating, anyone that cuts opens another person's body with a knife, resulting in the death of that person is a killer committing sin. Many doctors that do surgeries where patients die would fall under this category. Not just this, it does not say anywhere killing is wrong and a sin. Killing or murder is considered the right course of action or Dharma on various circumstances. One example would be war and for Kshatriyas, it is okay to kill under various circumstances. It is important one understands this, before we go on to emotions and liberation, in the next post. If someone is opposed to this idea, I have no intention to argue with them to prove any point. It is what it is in Hindu belief -- from the Vedas. If you are not happy, sorry, I am unable to do anything, in this case

There are no fixed spiritual laws or commandments in the Hindu religion or Sanatana Dharma, as opposed to some other beliefs. Plus tolerance is a cornerstone in Hindu system, no matter what a person believes.

Protection need not be because of fear (always). I am walking on the road, a stone is failing on my head. I may move, duck, or shield from the falling stone to protect myself. This may not be due to fear. I think this is the point CT is getting at.