link

@Pilgrim My falling out with AYP a few years ago had to do with sangha politics and trying to bring peaceful resolution to conflicts while all this siddhi drama was being stirred up. I can appreciate much of the AYP teachings, with different views in some cases. I'm naturally more tantric than samkhya. A bunch of us eventually were kicked out as moderators, banned from posting. I get it from Yogani's angle and cant say I would do things differently if I were exactly him and his circumstances. It was quite a spectacle wasn't it? I remember you. Always enjoyed reading your posts.

I've known Jeff for 10 years or so. We met through a system/group called Advanced Yoga Practices (AYP). Yogani is the creator of the group and online community, he is #1. When I met Jeff, he was tight with a lady who was # 2 (Admin/Moderator/retreat leader) at AYP. She is the "Indian lady" who someone mentioned earlier. Jeff and #2 were exploring phenomena they called 'astral parties' on a regular basis. They invited me to join in and I did. It basically involved samyama as a group (whomever was 'In' on a given night) during sleeping hours. Jeff's role he gave himself was to provide the power to the group. Sometimes I would suggest a theme, place, or environment and would project that for the group, both in words before, and intent during, as we 'astral traveled' together. His 'power source/battery pack for others' view of himself was evident back then. In the first couple months of joining the parties, I didn't challenge him much. I saw him as more advanced because of how he would communicate in messaging and forums with a sense of authority on the way things are, his realizations and abilities, scriptural knowledge, etc. After that we would often debate a framework or teaching from various sources for days. I would say, Jeff, this conceptual level system is bogus. Its hurting people. It is false. Not true. How would you feel if someone you saw as being advanced labeled you a number 3 relative many higher numbers of their peers? Please stop? These are my friends. They are divine. Not a number. But he would explain it away. Like, 'Oh everyone wants to compare, and it's just the ego that gets offended.' So here we are. Systematic problems. Systematic traumatizing of vulnerable people. As our group grew, we all became more entangled with each other. There was a sexual component in pairs. Like him and her, me and another lady. There would inevitably be some huge drama and we'd all have a big argument in via email. We were all married to people who weren't into spirituality and "wouldn't understand" what was going on, so we attempted to not talk about these situations with our spouses. Yogani had no idea that these astral parties were becoming widespread in his community. More people being brought into the club as time went on. And his number #2 continued to administer his forum while engaging in these activities. It had to be kept from Yogani because he would always advise not to get caught up in 'scenery', 'siddhis', energy experiments and so on. In fact, this is built into his lessons also. 'Astral parties' evolved to 'heart connections', that evolved into 'sharing presence.' At some point after I dropped out (I was 'in' from 2011-14), it became 'light transmissions' and 'Jeff being the Void sucking out peoples issues and fears.' (What is the current term for what the group is 'sharing'?) I began to challenge Jeff and his ideas more as I saw him setting up power dynamics in relationships by conceptually elevating himself in terms of advancement and power, and placing others lower in his hierarchy. This activity reached an unbelievable climax when he came up with a numbering system he called 'Levels of progression', posted it on the AYP forum, and began using it to numerically label different people we were involved with. Most people would be labeled a 6. A few people who challenged his ideas or he didn't seem to like very much would be labeled a 3 or 4. Jeff would avoid labeling himself in such a way, but when pressed he would give examples of his attainments which could easily be cross referenced to his 'Level' framework. So, he would set himself up as the authority and others as less advanced or otherwise below him. This carries no small consequence when one is advising people on what to think, believe, what is true or not. One's experience in the extraordinary/siddhi while connecting will be different based on your views and beliefs of the person/spirit one is connecting with. There are many other issues that come up in these dynamics... many of them have been covered here. I have debated with Jeff for years on many of the problems that come up with the systemic use of siddhis. But he comes across as a know it all sometimes, especially via messaging when his actions or views are challenged. I'm less inclined to engage that way these days. In person, Jeff comes across very differently- much more relatable, less defensive, more willing to consider what others are saying. In person, philosophy and spirituality are more easily discussed in a light hearted way, in contrast to the super advanced online guru persona he expresses in forums and messaging. I sincerely hope that lessons are learned through all of this. I certainly have made many mistakes and try to learn from them. I see it as counterproductive to stigmatize people, shame them, or contribute to regret. All that is needed is to recognize mistakes, learn from them, make amends, change course and move on.

Cheya,

Thank you, Taomeow. ☺ All is well. I was playing with and following the idea of problematic entities hiding in junk around the house, and this is where it lead- in imagination. Apologies for not being more clear about my playing before. There might be some discomfort, intensity, or pain in movement of consciousness. Where did it come from? I might think that it is my tall friend compassionately penetrating me with light. Or entity possession or influence. Maybe I need some herbs, less cosmic radiation, or a good massage. In any of these cases and countless others, attention flows into form- and into an altered state of consciousness. In the imaginative story, my dear wife was downstream in the chain of events which began with creating and flowing into form, leading to an obsession with entities living in our boxes and portraits. It is conceivable that one could become that involved with the idea of foreign invaders... giving the forms the power of attention and sustaining them in such a way that before long it becomes a practical matter.

In regards to "shielding"... Some friends and I have explored it and we seem to be in agreement that the idea of shielding is not very accurate or useful. What has been effective is stop interacting and giving it attention. The energy interactions (or incursions if perceived that way- hence the shield seeking) grow stronger with attention, so the basic method is to bring attention away from it. Persistent attachments often require persistent abstinence.

Having been involved with some influential beings in "the light group" in the past (for a few years, outside of this site/chat) - I have a few things to add here: First, the energy interactions can have significant effects in many aspects of life - energetically, emotionally, mentally, in relationships, etc. Continued interaction forms a relationship which tends to include and strengthen attachments in that relationship (other attachments are also usually affected in various ways, depending on the circumstances). This type of relationship is not something to be approached in a casual way, the effects are such that it deserves thorough consideration. For these and related reasons, I don't see the chat venue as being a good medium to establish such a relationship. Yes, we are all "transmitting and receiving," regardless. However, the intentional merging, sharing presence, light, energy, etc., is- in effect- not the same as chatting or casual interaction.

From what I've seen it is consistent. You might check out the AYP book "Bhakti & Karma Yoga - The Science of Devotion and Liberation Through Action" http://www.aypsite.org/books.html#bky'>http://www.aypsite.org/books.html#bky .That would probably be the most complete resource on Bhakti in AYP. Also, there is a lot of material at http://www.aypsite.org .

I prefer this:

Devotion

Real Bhakti.

Agreed "...all true teachings lead to the same source". Fortunately, we have a lot of teachings to choose from. And, deemed classic or not, evolution rolls on. It's all divine. But, knowledge of particular things doesn't bring liberation, knowing undifferentiatedly does. Recognize that anyalysis and evaluation can only take us so far (out). We increase the obstacles to enlightenment in labeling right/wrong, correct/incorrect, etc. And divisive actions arising from these are not helping our karmic situation or the evolution of consciousness. Don't worry, bhakti will bring you home. And we can sit back in silence and enjoy the play... Ahhh lila The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao The name that can be named is not the eternal name The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth The named is the mother of myriad things Thus, constantly free of desire One observes its wonders Constantly filled with desire One observes its manifestations These two emerge together but differ in name The unity is said to be the mystery Mystery of mysteries, the door to all wonders -Tao Te Ching

TI, Dharana, dhyana, and samadhi are involved in AYP samyama, and in a way that is not contrary to yoga sutras (although the order may be different). In fact, dharana and dhyana are so basic, I hadn't given it much consideration until today. Now, my experience in AYP meditation is vastly different from yours. Early on in AYP, I had difficulty maintaining focus on the mantra. I would get lost in other thoughts, visions, etc. regularly. This lasted for a year or so. Then came the ability to keep attention on the mantra continuously. Sometimes other thought streams would occur simultaneously with the mantra. I rarely lost the mantra completely. After a few more months, I gained the ability to keep the mantra in focus without other thoughts- most of the time. One pointed concentration became strong, and the effort needed to maintain focus became less and less. One day while meditating, I sort of slipped into a space of pure awareness (which I subsequently realized has been present all along). The ability to keep a steady stream of attention on the mantra was effortless from that perspective. I saw that mind is the ultimate mantra. Mind was repeating the mantra exactly the way I started it, and it sounds exactly the same as I said it internally to begin with. Over and over. It is a machine! I am not thinking. Thoughts occur, thoughts happen. I am the subject to which the thoughts occur. AYP normally practices samyama after DM. One is already established in awareness, the mind is still. AYP works sort of backwards from traditional samyama. We are going into the practice in stillness, then picking up the sutra (dharana), then it's absorption (samadhi). A continuous stream of awareness remains throughout (dhyana). Link

TI, I agree that there are differences in methods, as I've said. I do not agree that one is right and another wrong. That is your evaluation, your judgment. My experience in each method results in unity. Subject and object joined. For me, it is not about seeing light, but that which sees. Abidance in pure awareness is enough. Being is enough. I no longer need to sit or seek bliss in meditation. I am that. I do not represent AYP. I'm not from AYP. I draw on AYP as a resource for my practice. I also draw from many other sources. My experience is unique and I do not care to exchange the minuscule and boiled down reflections of experiences in meditation with you or anyone else. It is all internally revealed. I don't want anyone to believe what I say, I only wish for others to know peace, joy, and contentment within themselves. Whatever I need on my path is presented at the appropriate and perfect time. I don't agree that AYP meditation is the same as TM or that it elicits "relaxation response". Nor do I agree that AYP claims to represent a one true interpretation of the Yoga Sutras. AYP is one way, not the only way. Nothing I've read from AYP is contrary to that. I have respect for other traditions and do not speak negatively about any of them, even if I disagree. We all need different things at different times on our paths. It is not for me to say what is appropriate for another. My purpose here is to give another perspective. Perhaps it will help someone, perhaps not. That is all I have to say. Regards, Link

Buddhi is a part of the individual mind which is part of consciousness. In samadhi, mind is still. One rests in his nature. A sutra in consciousness is but a ripple. Objects/sutras are common with each method of samyama. The transformation or modification of mind is not a problem. Attachment is a problem. Just let go. Anyone can see the differences in the methods upon investigation. It is not difficult. Your agenda to discredit AYP, let it go. Why do you hold on to this? If AYP didn't work for you, I'm sorry for you, but perhaps that is what needed to happen. Let it be and move on. No one system is for everyone, "classic" Patanjali interpretations included. Peace Link

It is not that the mind no longer functions. The mind is still. In AYP samyama, buddhi rests in space, presence, being, oneness, awareness, consciousness. Mind is not active, but not dysfunctional. Best way I could put it is- awareness at rest. The sutra is made conscious and released at intervals according to the purpose. Have you ever had the experience of waking up at the exact time you decided the previous night, without the aid of an alarm clock or anything external? This normally happens one to two minutes before my alarm goes off, or exactly when I wanted awaken when not using an alarm. It's not a willful remembering, it just happens. It happens like that with AYP samyama. It can also occur in other ways without thought, at a subtler level like feeling, or being. As I said, I have experience with "classic samyama". I'm not limited to any one system. What I type may seem crude to you, but please keep in mind that it is intended to be basic. I've considered many of the same questions you ask and have sought answers as well. I am saying basically, the difference in the two methods we are speaking of comes down to holding on vs. letting go, and intentions. To serve yourself or to serve the whole. These are the basic differences that I have found (reflection) to be important to be aware of. You can investigate this further within if you choose. One is not better or more proper or more correct than the other. When approached the same way (as practice), each method has yielded similar outcomes in my recollection. Constantly letting go is not a thought process, active process, or a doing. It is simply being. I don't know what you mean by "relaxation response". It seems like you've boiled down AYP and TM to "relaxation response". I am saying the source and the destination are the same. Being doesn't depend on using or not using objects. There are no boundaries. There is nothing I can say to convince you, it is internally revealed. "Relaxation response" or "superconsciousness"... it ultimately makes no difference. Self is beyond label and description. No, I can't describe with any accuracy. I can rule out "response". Not a response, just simply being. How about "super-relaxation beyond conceptualization, fully aware in divine love?" Edit spelling

Hi all, nice place you have here. Namaste

Hi TI, I have experience in AYP as well as other methods of meditation and samyama. There is quite a difference, as you aptly point out. The AYP method is more oriented to letting go/surrender from the beginning. For instance, in DM, no matter what thoughts and perceptions are occuring, as soon as we realize we are off the mantra, we return to it. AYP samyama and AYP cosmic samyama are similar in regards to letting go of what is happening, by releasing sutras in silence. When done correctly over the long term, the practices lead the practitioner to habitually letting go and abidance in inner silence and unity. The results I've had with classic approaches to samyama, such as those found on swamij.com, are the same as in AYP samyama in many instances. That is, dissolving, absorption, samadhi. This approach often involves asserting or holding on to personal intention or will, which can diminish or reverse progress. Of course, we have plentiful warnings to not seek siddhis and experiences. Sustained concentration can be great to train the mind to be one pointed and reach samadhi, and this will need to be integrated into daily life. I consider the AYP method to be advanced in training one-pointedness and samadhi. Add the ability to habitually let go, and this is a very effective system for many. That is not to say that other approaches are not effective. They are... just different paths up the same mountain. Link