True Prajna- true wisdom - YOGIS VS BUDDHISTS!

[Suliman]

Hey Guys i have been trying to understand the difference between the Yogis definition of Prajna and Buddhist understanding of it and in my small understanding i seem to get the impression that when Yogis speak of prajna this is connected with Energies and related enhancement in the Chakras etc ...

~~Like for instance in Gabriel Cousens(Yogi and Rabbi) book he talks of food that builds Ojas that help hold more Prajna etc...~~

 

 

Whereas the buddhist idea which i get from reading some sutras from Buddhist masters there is no doubt about it that what they refer to as prajna is not energies or working with the body and i get the indication(could be my interpretation) that they would term energy practices to do with prajna the small vehicle and so is not the true enlightenment but a coarse kind of enlightenment...

 

Like they patriach buddhist master mentions how arhats and conditioned enlightened ones are unaware of profound prajna and only cultivate superficial prajna.. And in many buddhist novels and teachings(as well as taoists) they completely deny that energy practices can lead one to the jewel in anyway so it is said in taoist circles to be "sidetracks"- {the more u practice the further away you become } - and in buddhist texts they say how it cannot lead one to buddahood.

 

Ive been confused about the distinction between the two schools of thought(kundalini yogis and buddhists) for a good time now and although ive tried to see a connection and link the two somehow ...as it was my thinking that true wisdom would be the same in every true teaching but all i can see is that the buddhist masters deny that energy practices can lead one to true "awakened to vacuity,suchness"

 

Do you think there is anyway of getting to true buddha enlightenment via the yogic way of energy practices

Opinions from guys from all backgrounds will be welcomed and it would be great to hear you guys thoughts on this as i really have been trying to find a true understanding ..of whether there is difference or sameness in the schools of thought.

 

Thanks in advance

[Vajrahridaya]

Hey Guys i have been trying to understand the difference between the Yogis definition of Prajna and Buddhist understanding of it and in my small understanding i seem to get the impression that when Yogis speak of prajna this is connected with Energies and related enhancement in the Chakras etc ...

~~Like for instance in Gabriel Cousens(Yogi and Rabbi) book he talks of food that builds Ojas that help hold more Prajna etc...~~

 

 

Whereas the buddhist idea which i get from reading some sutras from Buddhist masters there is no doubt about it that what they refer to as prajna is not energies or working with the body and i get the indication(could be my interpretation) that they would term energy practices to do with prajna the small vehicle and so is not the true enlightenment but a coarse kind of enlightenment...

 

Like they patriach buddhist master mentions how arhats and conditioned enlightened ones are unaware of profound prajna and only cultivate superficial prajna.. And in many buddhist novels and teachings(as well as taoists) they completely deny that energy practices can lead one to the jewel in anyway so it is said in taoist circles to be "sidetracks"- {the more u practice the further away you become } - and in buddhist texts they say how it cannot lead one to buddahood.

 

Ive been confused about the distinction between the two schools of thought(kundalini yogis and buddhists) for a good time now and although ive tried to see a connection and link the two somehow ...as it was my thinking that true wisdom would be the same in every true teaching but all i can see is that the buddhist masters deny that energy practices can lead one to true "awakened to vacuity,suchness"

 

Do you think there is anyway of getting to true buddha enlightenment via the yogic way of energy practices

Opinions from guys from all backgrounds will be welcomed and it would be great to hear you guys thoughts on this as i really have been trying to find a true understanding ..of whether there is difference or sameness in the schools of thought.

 

Thanks in advance

 

I guess you've never been introduced to Vajrayana Buddhism?

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewforum.php?f=40

 

Go sign up there and ask the same question there. You'll get plenty of responses. Vajrayana Buddhism has been doing the energy work for just as long as the Hindu Yogis in India, if not since earlier.

 

You can read a bit about it here, though I don't agree with some of the information, it's a pretty well informed Wiki article about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajrayana

 

It seems that mostly you are reading Mahayana Sutras which will not talk about the esoteric teachings that one needs transmission from a lineage Master in order to fully engage in.

 

Blessings!

 

p.s. This is also interesting concerning Newar Buddhism as practiced in the Nepal area for a couple thousand years. It's an older form of Vajrayana that predates the form found in Tibet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newar_Buddhism

Edited June 17, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[mewtwo]

You sure about that vajrahridaya about the energy work statement? can i see some records or something of it please? Thanks

Edited June 17, 2011 by mewtwo

[ralis]

Another Buddhist thread? What a surprise!

[Vajrahridaya]

You sure about that vajrahridaya about the energy work statement? can i see some records or something of it please? Thanks

 

Of Vajrayana doing energy work? Completely sure, my Buddhist practice has to do with inner alchemical energy work.

 

Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trul_khor

 

excerpt:

 

"Tsa lung Trul khor (lit. "magical movement instrument, channels and inner breath currents") known for brevity as Trul khor (lit. "magical instrument" or "magic circle;" Sanskrit: adhisāra) is a Himalayan tantric discipline which includes breathwork (or pranayama), meditative contemplation (or dhyana) and precise dynamic movements (or Body work) to centre the practitioner and to engender the body-mind precision of a keened instrument. Chögyal Namkai Norbu Rinpoche, a prominent exponent of Trul khor, prefers to use the Sanskrit equivalent term, Yantra Yoga, when writing in English. Trul khor hones the practitioner's faculty and supports the mindstream re-emergence of natural body-mind or primordial awareness or rigpa (cf. Dzogchen).

 

Trul khor traditionally consists of 108 movements, including bodily movements (or dynamic asana), incantations (or mantra), breathwork, and visualizations, all timed to heart rhythms. The flow or vinyasa (Sanskrit) of movements are enlikened to beads on a mala. The body postures (or asanas) of ancient Himalayan yogis are depicted on the walls of the Dalai Lama's summer temple of Lukhang. Trul khor is the fruitful distillation of the confluence of centuries of ancient Bön movements, Indian yogic traditions, and Chinese movement forms (that developed into disciplines such as Tai Chi Chuan).

 

Himalayan physical yogas vary between lineages and the complexity of the practices are not disclosed until a deep level of samaya is realised by the practitioner.

Tantra is all about engaging with the energy of the individual. This is why it is considered a tantric path, because it's more about the energy, the chakras, the winds, and bringing them into the shashumna nadi. Also about getting energetic transmission from enlightened lineage for the sake of pointing the sadhakas mind in the right direction."

 

More importantly in line with your query below.

 

"Tsa lung

 

The 'subtle body' which is often referred to as the Vajra Body in medieval Tibetan Buddhist discourse is constituted by the flow of subtle energy currents: 'rtsa' (Wylie) is equivalent to Sanskrit: nāḍī, sirā, srota and dhamanī; 'rlung' (Wylie) is equivalent to Sanskrit: prāna or vāyu. Metaphorically, the two outer channels are gendered in the Himalayan tradition of Buddhism and Bon where the male channel is lunar and Moon oriented and the female channel is solar and Sun oriented which is a particular inversion of Shavite, Shakta and Shakti tantric traditions of Sanatana Dharma where the male is generally identified as solar and the female as lunar.

Tsa lung Trul khor employs the tsa lung and they constitute the internal yantra or energetic sacred architecture of the Himalayan yoga's alternate nomenclature, yantra yoga. Yantra therefore not only denotes the asana of the physical bodily posture and position and transition between asana, but also denotes the 'spiritual energy' (rlung) generated from the vinyasa of the movement but also the vajra of the subtle body, the energetic yantra."

Edited June 17, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

[Vajrahridaya]

[Vajrahridaya]

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

Ive been confused about the distinction between the two schools of thought(kundalini yogis and buddhists) for a good time now and although ive tried to see a connection and link the two somehow ...as it was my thinking that true wisdom would be the same in every true teaching but all i can see is that the buddhist masters deny that energy practices can lead one to true "awakened to vacuity,suchness"

 

Do you think there is anyway of getting to true buddha enlightenment via the yogic way of energy practices

Opinions from guys from all backgrounds will be welcomed and it would be great to hear you guys thoughts on this as i really have been trying to find a true understanding ..of whether there is difference or sameness in the schools of thought.

 

Thanks in advance

 

This has been an area of keen interest on my part recently as well.

 

Where I'm at right now is pretty much taking a middle stance on the matter, that much can be attained by prana cultivation, utilizing the same energy that we put towards sex to energize different energy zones. It seems that the majority of Taoist "Immortals" and, from what I'm reading in "The Yoga of Boganathar" also Vedic Yogi Immortals, trained themselves in this manner.

 

Buddhist Enlightenment seems to be something different, though each side might say that whoever attains one also attains the other, or that they will attain both but the other will not. There are also different influences on types of Buddhism, like Shinto in Japan, Taoism in China, and pre-existing shamanism and beliefs in Tibet.

 

There are definitely Masters in Taoism and scriptures in Buddhism that say the energy work is unnecessary to attain Samadhi and Awakening.

 

Personally, I'm of the view that even Shakyamuni tried Yogic methods before realizing his Truth, so they can be experimented with to develop discipline and health while not veering off the middle path or being obsessed with sexual vitality, since the vitality is more useful when used towards higher states of Emptiness and Harmony.

 

I'm not sure where that puts me on the map but that's where I'm swimmin' right now.

[Niklas]

Every path is different, because everyone is different.

[goldisheavy]

Hey Guys i have been trying to understand the difference between the Yogis definition of Prajna and Buddhist understanding of it and in my small understanding i seem to get the impression that when Yogis speak of prajna this is connected with Energies and related enhancement in the Chakras etc ...

~~Like for instance in Gabriel Cousens(Yogi and Rabbi) book he talks of food that builds Ojas that help hold more Prajna etc...~~

 

 

Whereas the buddhist idea which i get from reading some sutras from Buddhist masters there is no doubt about it that what they refer to as prajna is not energies or working with the body and i get the indication(could be my interpretation) that they would term energy practices to do with prajna the small vehicle and so is not the true enlightenment but a coarse kind of enlightenment...

 

Like they patriach buddhist master mentions how arhats and conditioned enlightened ones are unaware of profound prajna and only cultivate superficial prajna.. And in many buddhist novels and teachings(as well as taoists) they completely deny that energy practices can lead one to the jewel in anyway so it is said in taoist circles to be "sidetracks"- {the more u practice the further away you become } - and in buddhist texts they say how it cannot lead one to buddahood.

 

Ive been confused about the distinction between the two schools of thought(kundalini yogis and buddhists) for a good time now and although ive tried to see a connection and link the two somehow ...as it was my thinking that true wisdom would be the same in every true teaching but all i can see is that the buddhist masters deny that energy practices can lead one to true "awakened to vacuity,suchness"

 

Do you think there is anyway of getting to true buddha enlightenment via the yogic way of energy practices

Opinions from guys from all backgrounds will be welcomed and it would be great to hear you guys thoughts on this as i really have been trying to find a true understanding ..of whether there is difference or sameness in the schools of thought.

 

Thanks in advance

 

There is no way to get the real enlightenment through energy practice of any kind. Energy practice is something mundane, like say carpentry. It can help. It's a tool. It's like having a chair to meditate on can help, but at the same time, sitting on a chair is not whatsoever a guarantee of enlightenment. A yoga mat can help, but again, yoga mats do not lead to enlightenment. I hope you're starting to see the relationship.

 

Insofar people believe the energy channels are really real, this is a stumbling block on the path of realization of emptiness. Even our bodies are not ultimately real, so what to say of energy channels, which are even more mind-made than anything else.

 

Working with energy channels can give one some interesting experiences. These experiences will sometimes challenge your core beliefs. That's a useful function when or if it occurs, when it comes to enlightenment. But by itself, without contemplation, it's of no avail. In fact, if you believe you know what energy is and how it works, you are far away from enlightenment because you don't really understand emptiness.

 

If you read Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, you'll see that Yogis also understand that energy channels are sidetracks. So it's not fair to saddle Yoga with energy practices. Yogis also have Jnana, bhakti, seva, and other yogas that don't depend on any kind of energy channel practice. If you read Avadhut Gita, you'll see once again, there is no point in energy practices from the POV of enlightenment even in Hindu Yoga.

 

So energy practice is really a specific niche. It has more to do with having fun, health, some minor magic, things like that. Energy channels are appealing to people with the physicalist mindset. Energy channels are the spiritual analogues of physical structures of the body, and people who demand structures find this appealing. So instead of diving into a world void of structure, they go from the human body, which is structured, toward energy channels in the spirit, which are again, structured. So they go from a gross structure to a subtle one, and this is comfortable and fun for those people. But when they do this they don't understand the true nature of structures, which is emptiness, because they demonstrate huge commitment to these energy systems as if they were absolutely and inherently real, just like the believe the human body is.

 

So think of energy as you do of mundanely useful things, like carpentry or like plumbing. It's a useful skill and you can get paid if you know it, etc... but it's not going to make you into a wizard or give you greater understanding all by itself.

Edited June 17, 2011 by goldisheavy

[Jetsun]

I think most of our ego contractions, habits, defences, repressed emotions etc are held within and reflected in the blocks and contractions in our body, so to work with opening up the energy channels in the body you will end up coming up against your resistance to change and your ego clinging. But if you work directly with the mind you also come up against your resistance to change and your ego clinging, so as far as I can see with both methods you still come up against the same thing in the end.

 

Although there are many Buddhists who I have heard say that at one point in their training they developed mastery over the energy channels or winds as they call them sometimes they said they mastered it in previous lives so don't need to work on them any more, but I don't think you necessarily have to use elaborate exercises to work on the channels, as far as I understand things like Tummo purify the channels by burning away the blocks and other Tantric exercises work the channels also.

[Lucky7Strikes]

So think of energy as you do of mundanely useful things, like carpentry or like plumbing. It's a useful skill and you can get paid if you know it, etc... but it's not going to make you into a wizard or give you greater understanding all by itself.

Why can't you do wizardry with energy channels?

[Vajrahridaya]

Why can't you do wizardry with energy channels?

 

[Vajrahridaya]

I think Jetsun and GIH both have valid points.

[Gerard]

Opinions from guys from all backgrounds will be welcomed

 

More opinions would only create this sort of environment (and adding more pics to this colorful thread):

 

 

 

It was six men of Indostan

To learning much inclined,

Who went to see the Elephant

(Though all of them were blind),

That each by observation

Might satisfy his mind.

 

The First approach'd the Elephant,

And happening to fall

Against his broad and sturdy side,

At once began to bawl:

"God bless me! but the Elephant

Is very like a wall!"

 

The Second, feeling of the tusk,

Cried, -"Ho! what have we here

So very round and smooth and sharp?

To me 'tis mighty clear

This wonder of an Elephant

Is very like a spear!"

 

The Third approached the animal,

And happening to take

The squirming trunk within his hands,

Thus boldly up and spake:

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant

Is very like a snake!"

 

The Fourth reached out his eager hand,

And felt about the knee.

"What most this wondrous beast is like

Is mighty plain," quoth he,

"'Tis clear enough the Elephant

Is very like a tree!"

 

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,

Said: "E'en the blindest man

Can tell what this resembles most;

Deny the fact who can,

This marvel of an Elephant

Is very like a fan!"

 

The Sixth no sooner had begun

About the beast to grope,

Then, seizing on the swinging tail

That fell within his scope,

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant

Is very like a rope!"

 

And so these men of Indostan

Disputed loud and long,

Each in his own opinion

Exceeding stiff and strong,

Though each was partly in the right,

And all were in the wrong!

 

MORAL.

 

So oft in theologic wars,

The disputants, I ween,

Rail on in utter ignorance

Of what each other mean,

And prate about an Elephant

Not one of them has seen!

 

They failed to seek within their own minds; therein lies the answer.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Gerard

[Vajrahridaya]

 

So oft in theologic wars,

The disputants, I ween,

Rail on in utter ignorance

Of what each other mean,

And prate about an Elephant

Not one of them has seen! [/i]

 

They failed to seek within their own minds; therein lies the answer.

 

Sorry, I must say, Buddhism isn't a theology. It would also see all these opinions, the people behind the opinions and the animal as empty of inherent existence, dependently originated, thus all the opinions are both true, but not ultimate.

 

But yeah, I'm just being trite. LOL! Thanks Gerard.

[Non]

I dunno I'm liking the idea of Jnana Yoga, Advaita Vedanta and Atma Vichara.

 

As for what system is oldest? I thought the Indian systems were the oldest.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I dunno I'm liking the idea of Jnana Yoga, Advaita Vedanta and Atma Vichara.

 

As for what system is oldest? I thought the Indian systems were the oldest.

 

I'd say the Indian systems are a close reflection to the earlier ancient Egyptian systems, but there's not a lot of the system available to study save for everything which came after and has essentially the same principles (chakras, kundalini, astral travel, etc.)-- just while we're on the topic (I started a thread relating to this but it didn't get too far..).

[Otis]

I agree with Gold is Heavy that emptiness does not correspond with "knowledge" of energy systems. I think the systems are training wheels, to get the practitioner up and riding, but what the systems point to is not knowable in a formal sense.

 

IME, however, it is entirely possible to explore "energy work" without any formal system, to stay empty to concepts about the "energy", while still practicing in that realm.

 

In fact, approached without a system, the "energy" is really a metaphor for emptiness, because it describes sensation without perception. That is: feeling sensation so purely that I become it, without deriving any meaning from the data. That is both emptiness and energy exploration, without contradiction.

[Vajrahridaya]

(I started a thread relating to this but it didn't get too far..).

 

Where? What was it's name?

[Vajrahridaya]

In fact, approached without a system, the "energy" is really a metaphor for emptiness, because it describes sensation without perception. That is: feeling sensation so purely that I become it, without deriving any meaning from the data. That is both emptiness and energy exploration, without contradiction.

 

Sure, but there are "passed down the lineage" systems that have particular results, such as body temperature regulation, the ability to get nutrition without physically eating, and as well the Jalus, or rainbow body, and plenty of other things that come about through these master lineages of energy training. Because due to understanding emptiness, there is not one thing that we are, and other things that we are not. We are everything and there is as well no designation for a "we". So, since energy is part of the entire process, it's important to get to know ones personal energy, and how it works on a personal level in reference to our deeply held concepts of "self" and "other."

 

Of course, the Buddhist tradition is very keen on not doing these deeper exercises unless one has an experiential cognition of dependent origination/emptiness. Which is why they are kept secret as not to harm beings as some of these practices can lead to incredible harnessing of power that can be used for both self detriment and/or harm to others as well.

Edited June 17, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

I'd say the Indian systems are a close reflection to the earlier ancient Egyptian systems.

 

Yes, but we don't really have any surviving lineages to tell us that they do lead to the same results as the current lineages from India (and surrounding regions) and China (and surrounding regions).

Edited June 17, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

I dunno I'm liking the idea of Jnana Yoga, Advaita Vedanta and Atma Vichara.

 

As for what system is oldest? I thought the Indian systems were the oldest.

 

You'd really enjoy Vasisthas Yoga then. Seriously, take a look. It was an incredibly mind opening work for me through my process as an Atma Vicharian, in the Vedantin and Shaivite Sampradayas of my past study and practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Vasistha

 

I recommend the unabridged version by Swami Venkatesananda. http://www.amazon.com/Vasisthas-Yoga-Venkatesananda/dp/0791413640/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1308352259&sr=8-1

 

It's quite a large book, even in this version which is abridged as compared to the original sanskrit.

 

I'm into dependent origination/emptiness now, so I don't personally agree with every single nuance in the book. But, it's a good book for Atman Vicharians, actually considered one of the best books for Atma Vicharians, and I'm not the only one to think this.

[forestofclarity]

Prajna is a form of knowing. It comes from the word jna, as in jnani and vijnana, which stands for knowing. Then you have the prefix pra- which may mean several things, such as supreme, great, etc. (although David Loy translates it as spontaneous).

 

So prajna is greater knowing. How do you compare such a thing?