Someone recently wrote that enlightenment is "considered to be a state that cannot be captured in words" . This registered approximately ankle deep on my bullsh*t detector. Apparenlty to that writer, "enlightenment" is sort of like obscenity. As a famous judge once said, I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.
That is not yoga philosophy. I've been through a couple versions of the yoga sutras and a lot of the Samkhya literature, and I don't recall any use of the terms enlightenment or nirvana. I believe these are Buddhist concepts.
In my view, this illustrates one of the problems and obstacles to understanding true yoga philosophy. Yoga is widely accepted by many different religious ( and non-religious) traditions. The problem occurs when these different traditions call their own beliefs yoga.
Yoga philosophy speaks in terms of bondage and liberation. What is meant is the liberation or release of the Purusa or self from the bondage of material existence. All experience in the material world is to help the Purusa understand his true nature. Once he/she has attained this understanding, there is no reason for continued existence in the material world and the Purusa achieves Moksa; that is, liberation or release.
Self-realization is probably a better description of yoga's ultimate goal than enlightenment. It's really not so mysterious and not all that hard to express in words. The concept of Moksa is specific and independent of one's personal beliefs. It is not dogma, ideology, or religious belief. Rather it is achieved by correctly understanding the true nature of reality, in particular, the reality of one's self.
Any thoughts?
That is not yoga philosophy. I've been through a couple versions of the yoga sutras and a lot of the Samkhya literature, and I don't recall any use of the terms enlightenment or nirvana. I believe these are Buddhist concepts.
In my view, this illustrates one of the problems and obstacles to understanding true yoga philosophy. Yoga is widely accepted by many different religious ( and non-religious) traditions. The problem occurs when these different traditions call their own beliefs yoga.
Yoga philosophy speaks in terms of bondage and liberation. What is meant is the liberation or release of the Purusa or self from the bondage of material existence. All experience in the material world is to help the Purusa understand his true nature. Once he/she has attained this understanding, there is no reason for continued existence in the material world and the Purusa achieves Moksa; that is, liberation or release.
Self-realization is probably a better description of yoga's ultimate goal than enlightenment. It's really not so mysterious and not all that hard to express in words. The concept of Moksa is specific and independent of one's personal beliefs. It is not dogma, ideology, or religious belief. Rather it is achieved by correctly understanding the true nature of reality, in particular, the reality of one's self.
Any thoughts?
-
Enlightenment or realization is an on going process with no beginning point and never ending. We are already that, its just a case of breaking though the conditioning and remembering our true nature. And that is it, nothing more or less. It cannot be described because it is unobtainable, for it is who we already are.
-
Samadhi is the eighth and final limb of Ashtanga Yoga as set forth by the Yoga Sutra of Patanjali - Raja yoga is an orthodox school of Hindu philosophy which is principally concerned with the cultivation of the mind using meditation (dhyana) to further one's acquaintance with reality and finally achieve liberation. In Hindu texts one is more likely to see enlightenment referred to as nirvikalpa samadhi (undifferentiated cognition) than as nirvana, which is a term made popular by Buddha Shakyamuni.
-
>I don't recall any use of the terms enlightenment or nirvana.
>I believe these are Buddhist concepts.
The term "nirvana" is certainly used in Hindu yogic and tantric materials. "Enlightenment" is and English word and is not really a literal translation of any term used in Buddhism or Hinduism that I a familiar with. However, there are a plethora of references to realization which make reference to photisms of various types and light is also a metaphor for cognizance. -
-
>>"Enlightenment" is an English word and is not really a literal translation of any term used in Buddhism<<
"Enlightenment" is the word most often used to translate the Sanskrit word "bodhi" -- from which the Buddha and Buddhism take their names. Perhaps a better (or at least more literal) translation would be "awakening." Buddha was the "awakened one" -- Buddhism is a method of awakening.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhi
-
-
This is an interesting question. It touches on something I've been struggling with for a while now. Namely, the issue of whether the Yoga Sutras and Samkhya philosophy constitute the final word on yoga.
I don't think they do. From what I understand, they are both inherently dualistic philosophies, and as such are severely limited. What I have been taught is that the goal of Patanjali's system ("he liberation or release of the Purusa or self from the bondage of material existence" as you put it), is but a step on the path to true, nondual realization/enlightenment.
As it has been explained to me, enlightenment is indeed something that cannot be captured in words, much in the same way that the feeling of being in love cannot be captured in words.
What's that famous expression? Something like "the tao that can be spoken of is not the tao." Same priniciple.
K -
-
I think humanity is only really just starting to wake up. I think we should collectively aspire to waking up and becoming aware of so much that we've not really paid attention to or cared about, known about, rather than being obsessed with the crackmeth pipe dream of Enlightenment.
"Enlightenment" at this point appears to simply be a marketing term for a marginal number of seekers, aspiring for something better, for themselves, for the world.
We are fucked as a species unless we start getting our collective shit together.
How can we hold the Hand of the gods if we can't even hold each others hand?
But this is just My Opinion today, of a consistent perception about the prevalent state of our collective awarness on giant spinning rock that we are hell-bent on paving over into a planetary shopping mall for those looking for the next greatest thing....
Or maybe this is simple just extemporaneous blathering blah blah as I multitask with other really important tasks at hand
yeah
~V~ -
-
Re: On The Nature of Enlightenment
Yesterday, 10:16 AMVerseau,
"How can we hold the Hand of the gods if we can't even hold each others hand? "
Good question ... and astute observation of the human condition.
"We are fucked as a species ..."
I assume you are referring to problems such as energy, overpopulation, food, and global warming, not to mention that religious fanatics want to kill us. I'm afraid that your solution:"...unless we start getting our collective shit together. " is not the norm. Most people seem to think that, since we're screwed anyway, its better to grab as much as you can in order to survive when the shit finally hits the fan.
What I find interesting is that, in spite of the astounding successes of science and technology, we still face such enormous problems. Or rather, we seem to be incapable of facing these enormous problems. I think the presence of these problems validates the Samkhya assertion that, even in higher worlds, suffering exists. But this raises the important question of whether seeking liberation from the suffering of material existence is really a failure to face our problems.
-
-
Re: On The Nature of Enlightenment
Yesterday, 10:51 AM>Most people seem to think that, since we're screwed anyway,
>its better to grab as much as you can in order to survive when
>the shit finally hits the fan.
I disagree. Most folks are in such deep denial that they are content to go about there lives as if nothing is wrong at all...
As long as we don't look at the problems they're sure to go away, right?
Ryan -
-
Re: On The Nature of Enlightenment
Today, 7:44 AMThat's right Ryan, global climate change is just a myth. Child slave labor doesn't really exist in Asia. I think so many people find problems overwhelming and think there's nothing they can do, so they just convince themselves that there are no problems. What can get frustrating is that when someone brings up an issue and says, "Hey we should do something about this" they are often dismissed as having "negative energy." I've even heard people say that they don't vote or even read the news because they only want to think about positive things.
It's so easy to be a ostrich and use the excuse of detachment. How can you say namaste with a straight face when you completely ignore the cause-and-effect of all your choices (such as transportation, where your food comes from, etc.)?
But I believe the teachings of yoga teach us to work hard to correct these problems because they violate the very tenets of what we supposedly espouse, such as our problems with climate change flying in the face of non-greed, but staying "detached" in the sense that we don't become obsessed and can still maintain an equilibrium. In other words, we work for change without letting ourselves get bogged down with viciousness and bitterness.
-
-
-
-
Kevin wrote:
"From what I understand, they are both inherently dualistic philosophies, and as such are severely limited. What I have been taught is that the goal of Patanjali's system ("he liberation or release of the Purusa or self from the bondage of material existence" as you put it), is but a step on the path to true, nondual realization/enlightenment."
You have hit on the debate that existed at the time the darsanas (schools of philosophy) were written. Yoga and Samkhya are indeed dualist, maintaining that spirit and matter are essentially different. This opposes the non-dualist (Vedanta) view that spirit and matter are one. Samkhya in particular takes the view that true knowledge is limited to what can be established by observation and reasoning, much like modern science. I believe that this is its appeal to modern people.
The more idealistic philosophies might take the view that liberation is just a step on the path, but you pretty much have to take their word for it.
As for "the issue of whether the Yoga Sutras and Samkhya philosophy constitute the final word on yoga. ", when I talk about yoga philosophy, I am referring to the darsanas, which does not include tantra or the Hatha Yoga Pradipika for example. Patanjali's Yoga Sutras is the authoritative document on yoga philosophy. In my opinion, the Samkhya philosophy, also included in the darsanas, is essential to understanding Yoga philosophy. Unfortunately, Samkhya has been distorted and supressed by the more idealistic philosophies which have been dominant in India for a long time. -
-
What exactly do you mean by 'more idealistic philosophies'?
What I meant by 'step on the path' was that, from what I understand, 'liberation' means something different to a Tantrika than it does to someone practicing Patanjali's yoga. And that, to borrow a Ken Wilber-ism (I'm not much of a fan, but it's appropriate), Tantra 'transcends and includes' Patanjali's system.
I haven't spent much time studying Samkhya philosophy as I find it unappealing, but from what I do know, it makes sense completely why the modern western yoga-practicing world has embraced it so thoroughly: it's a dualistic, rationalistic philosophy that meshes quite nicely with our Christian, scientific-materialistic world view.
I'm curious, why wouldn't the Tantras, Agamas, Hatha Yoga Pradipika, or the Tantraloka of Abhinavagupta (for example) be considered a part of yoga philosophy? Is that a personal preference or a generally agreed-upon academic convention?
Best,
Kevin -
-
Re: On The Nature of Enlightenment
Yesterday, 8:27 AMKevin,
Indian philosophy is generally agreed to consist of six or seven "schools" or darsanas. I'm not 100% sure but I believe that the works you mentioned are not included because technically they are not philosophy. It may also have something to do with the time period in which they were written. All of the darsanas come from roughly the 7th to 10th centuries B.C.. The works you mentioned come from later time periods.
The different schools are usually classified as orthodox or heretical, depending on whether they recognize the authority of the Vedas. The term "idealist" comes from a professor Damodoran, who believed the orthodox vs heretical classification to be inadequate. According to Damodoran:
"Philosophers who regard spirit as primary and assume world-creation in some form or other may be said to belong to the camp of idealism, while those who assert the primacy of nature to spirit may be classified as materialists."
Damodoran traces the appearance of idealist thought to the development of classes within society and the separation of intellectual labor from manual labor. But he also notes that the development of productive forces required a knowledge of mathematics and physical science, which “paved the way for a materialistic outlook on life which by its very nature clashed with the ideology of the priestly class…”
I don't know about tantra, but moksa is a well-established concept in Indian philosophy. As far as I know, there is no debate about its meaning. -
-
Re: On The Nature of Enlightenment
Yesterday, 10:33 AM>I don't know about tantra, but moksa is a well-established concept
>in Indian philosophy. As far as I know, there is no debate about its meaning.
Your kidding right?
If you were to ask followers of the Natha-Sampradaya, modern Vedanta,Vajrayana, Patanjali-yoga, Nodual Kashmir Saivism, and dualist interpretations of Sivasiddhanta what "moksa" was, you would get a plethora of answers, many of which would be incompatible with each other.
Warm Regards,
Ryan
-
-
-
-
-
-
Jeevan - it's not clear whose post you're responding to.
-
-
"How can we hold the Hand of the gods if we can't even hold each others hand?" - Verseau
Indeed! Excuse me while I refuse to acknowledge you as fellow a human being, I'm working on my enlightenment.
-
Re: On The Nature of Enlightenment
Today, 11:13 PMI was responding to Sam's post.
-
-
