PDA

View Full Version : Are we making it dogma?



Spiritualseeker
13 August 2009, 07:12 PM
Namaste,

We know that mental concepts sometimes can veil us from the Truth. For example if a christian says they have christ, yet they only know this conceptually that Christ is some far off deity bestowing favors etc... then they are not really having christ. Its more of a mental idol as Eckhart Tolle would say. However, if that person experienced Christ then there is no concepts. There is no concept of what Christ is or what God is its just pure experience of that consciousness.

So when we learn stories of Lord Siva and other deities such as Krishna and his stories... are we just creating a dogma? Wouldnt it be better to just drop these stories and concepts and experience the Divine through detachment from mental concepts?

Sherab
13 August 2009, 07:43 PM
Namaste,

We know that mental concepts sometimes can veil us from the Truth. For example if a christian says they have christ, yet they only know this conceptually that Christ is some far off deity bestowing favors etc... then they are not really having christ. Its more of a mental idol as Eckhart Tolle would say. However, if that person experienced Christ then there is no concepts. There is no concept of what Christ is or what God is its just pure experience of that consciousness.

So when we learn stories of Lord Siva and other deities such as Krishna and his stories... are we just creating a dogma? Wouldnt it be better to just drop these stories and concepts and experience the Divine through detachment from mental concepts?

Well, in order to drop concepts, we need concepts in the first place - so we can worship shiva, get interested, and then move on without concepts

Eastern Mind
13 August 2009, 08:09 PM
Vannakkam:

In my opinion, you only need the basics in terms of an intellectual understanding. After that it becomes a great barrier, that thing we call an intellect. There is a vast difference between an intellectual understanding and experiential knowledge. I don't think we need to drop the concepts, but we do need to drop the endless circular discussions. Where is that going to get you?

Most swamis recommend reading only a few books, and sticking with one philosophy. All paths (within Hinduism, at least) lead to the same goal anyway. Why try to follow them all at the same time? Kind of like having two gurus. If there is conflicting advice, who do you listen to? Of course often the 'guru' is some far off writer that the devotee doesn't even have a personal relationship with anyway. That, I see, as one of the problems with the mass marketed gurus. Are they really advising on a personal level thousands of devotees?

Stuck in dogma, not a place to be. Most of us need to work on controlling our own steadfastness, desires, and emotions. Of what use is the nature of God, if you don't have the discipline to get up and go to work, or the discipline to attempt to be non-critical?

Just my simplistic ideas.

Aum Namasivaya

Spiritualseeker
13 August 2009, 08:16 PM
Namaste,

Thank you for that thought. See I find myself in somewhat of a delima. Or perhaps I am not. Maybe it is only the mind that thinks I am in a delima. Anyways, Since I am starting the Self Realization Fellowship course laid out by Paramahansa Yogananda I will ofcourse be following the methods he taught. After a year of practice one will have a chance if he or she wishes to be initiated into Kriya yoga. Kriya yoga ofcourse is non sectarian, however due to my "attachment" to Shaivite hinduism I may have a problem. Because otherwise Its as if I am doing the teachings of Paramahansa Yogananda and at the same time making Shaivite hinduism into a creed. So its like I am practicing Sri Yogananda's way and making Shaivite as a dogma or thought stuff. I dont want to be stuck in dogma, but I just dont understand what I should do.

I am also trying not to get too caught up in conceptualization. I was watching a youtube video on Siva Shakti and how this explains the universe being manifestated into being. Then it made me wonder if the sages were just describing interdependent originations. But instead it got mixed up into God-stuff. Which I even wonder if me questioning this even matters. I wont be pleased with the intellect, yet I chase the intellect. And when the mind chases the mind it just goes into circles and tires itself out. But perhaps thats why people of Zen use koans. This however does not help me. I dont want dogma yet I dont know what I am doing if that makes sense.

Eastern Mind
13 August 2009, 08:25 PM
SS: Makes total sense. It all makes total sense. That's just where you are on the path at this time in your life. Nothing much more than that. Course that mountain top perspective doesn't really help a lot does it? lol simplistic Vedanta at its best!

Of course you have decisions to be made, but now that you have Ganapati around you, that too is easier. Just watch for His signs.

Aum namasivaya

Spiritualseeker
13 August 2009, 08:29 PM
Haha This buddhist guy at a temple once told me that if there is little doubt there is little enlightenment. Big doubt big enlightenment :)

Your right, how can I forgot Lord Ganapati.

I also have acknowledged that If I find that SRF is not for me I can just go to the shaivite temple in Orlando and learn his method. Though I am not sure if its totally a Shaivite discipline but hey its a shaivite temple.

Eastern Mind
13 August 2009, 08:35 PM
SS: Can you post the on line link to that temple again. I'd like to have another look.

Aum

Spiritualseeker
13 August 2009, 09:24 PM
Well the original link i gave you was to a temple that is in casselbarry. Its the closest one. But the other temple is this one http://www.ymcco.com/main.html and the person on there is the Swami that is there.

Eastern Mind
13 August 2009, 09:40 PM
SS: So did you find a substantial difference between the two temples, or were they both basically the same?

Of course, as you know, I favour South Indian style, and these are probably outnumbered 4 to 1.

Aum

Spiritualseeker
13 August 2009, 09:45 PM
Namaste,

Well they are similar in the sense that at the second temple there was also a Statue devoted to Krishna, his wife, and Hanuman. Which I found interesting.

On the right side there is a Statue of siva sitting, and Lord Ganesha aswell as Linga. I am assuming its just open to all hindus. But I liked how There statue of siva was much bigger than the other one.

I also like the second one because it was smaller and quieter during the day. I could just speak to the Swami though at the time I only had 10 minutes. If I ever go back there what would be a nice gift to give the swami? Any recommendations?

Thanks
-juan

Eastern Mind
13 August 2009, 09:49 PM
SS: A typical dakshina tray might be a new shirt, some rice, a couple of vegetables, and some fruit. You can skip the shirt part. I see there is a South Indian style temple in Davies called the Siva Vishnu temple. The easy way to recognise is the spelling of Siva (south) or Shiv or Shiva (north). The styles are just different is all. There is less interaction witrh priests in the South, and its much less congregational usually.

Aum Namasivaya

saidevo
13 August 2009, 10:50 PM
Namaste SS.

I understand that you do quite a bit of loud thinking in your posts in HDF on various subjects. Most times, you also reach the right conclusion IMO.



So when we learn stories of Lord Siva and other deities such as Krishna and his stories... are we just creating a dogma? Wouldnt it be better to just drop these stories and concepts and experience the Divine through detachment from mental concepts?


To everyone of us, of all the religions, the Sun is the (deputy of) God visible to our own eyes. Yet what we see as the Sun is only the filtered image obtained from the ocean of energy in the space in between, and the gases of our own atmosphere. The rising and setting Sun appear so big and beautiful and reddish-yellow, yet it is not the image of the actual Sun but one that is surrounded by the Sun's own spectra of light. The closest we get to the actual vision of the Sun is when it is brightest right above our heads at noon, yet we can't afford to have a glance at it, except through a visual filter. Sometimes when the atmosphere is cloudy, we never have a glance at the Sun for hours or even days together.

The instructions in the Sruti (Vedas and Upanishads) and the stories in the Smriti (PurANas) are like the filter that afford us with a view of the Brahman. Having been born in a body, we cannot have a direct perception or inner view of Brahman in all its attributeless glory of Sat-Chit-AnandA in our waking and dreaming states of existence. We are not aware of the direct perception in our deep sleep, and so the spiritually inclined seek to practise the fourth of the states of existence, namely TurIya.

All of us, including the JnAnis, should only use the mind and intellect to get into that state of TurIya. If there is no fiter of the PurANas, and the dogma of the Dharma ShAstras, the highest philosophy of the Sruti would never be intelligible to us and our mind and intellect would just be a vagabond in this world of objects and sensual pleasures that constant bombard at us, in our normal states of waking and dreaming existence. Stories and dogma are like the icons and roadsigns that we need to guide us in our path. We see them keenly the first time we pass through them, and once we are accustomed to the path we have chalked out for us, we understand their actual purpose and give no more than a necessary cursory glance at them in our daily journey of life.

So the wise would fill up the mind with the dogma of the Dharma ShAstras that foster discipline and the stories, stotras and shlokas that foster devotion, so the mind is properly stilled with their clear waters, and we can direct our Will towards the Self, trying to realize the lofty philosophy of the Sruti. This is the reason none other than Adi Sankara, the greatest exponent of Advaita of our times, gave us a path of devotion and exhorted us to follow the Dharma ShAstras.

devotee
13 August 2009, 11:30 PM
Thank you for that thought. See I find myself in somewhat of a delima. Or perhaps I am not. Maybe it is only the mind that thinks I am in a delima. Anyways, Since I am starting the Self Realization Fellowship course laid out by Paramahansa Yogananda I will ofcourse be following the methods he taught. After a year of practice one will have a chance if he or she wishes to be initiated into Kriya yoga. Kriya yoga ofcourse is non sectarian, however due to my "attachment" to Shaivite hinduism I may have a problem. Because otherwise Its as if I am doing the teachings of Paramahansa Yogananda and at the same time making Shaivite hinduism into a creed. So its like I am practicing Sri Yogananda's way and making Shaivite as a dogma or thought stuff. I dont want to be stuck in dogma, but I just dont understand what I should do.

I am also trying not to get too caught up in conceptualization. I was watching a youtube video on Siva Shakti and how this explains the universe being manifestated into being. Then it made me wonder if the sages were just describing interdependent originations. But instead it got mixed up into God-stuff. Which I even wonder if me questioning this even matters. I wont be pleased with the intellect, yet I chase the intellect. And when the mind chases the mind it just goes into circles and tires itself out. But perhaps thats why people of Zen use koans. This however does not help me. I dont want dogma yet I dont know what I am doing if that makes sense.

Namaste SS,

If you remember that is why I warned you about reading too much from different philosophies. I did tell you that it might lead you to confusion.

You have studied Buddhism a little too much to attract confusion on the path of Bhakti that you have chosen. Buddhism is only part of the whole Truth. They have taken just one path ... the path of knowledge ... whereas Hinduism has other paths too & they are no less valid than the path of knowledge. Being a Shaivite/Vaishnavite has no clash with the path of knowledge but that you can understand only after attaining a certain degree of spiritual elevation.

Regarding attaching with form & God .... concepts ... blah blah blah

Suitability of any path / doctrine depends upon at what stage you are. Lord Krishna says in Chapter - 12 of Bhagwad Gita that the paths of Nirguna Brhaman (which is akin to Buddhism) & the path of devotion to Saguna Brahman ( worshipping any form) lead you to the same destination. He further says that the path of Saguna Brahman (God in form) is easier & therefore better because the man is in form.

The form that you worship becomes your protector, guide & God ... the depth of devotion is the keyword here. If you can do without that ... that is again ok ... but that doesn't mean that the former path is a dogma unless you become so egoist that you cannot respect other paths any more ! Beware of getting caught too much in intellectualism ! The Spirituality is much more than intellectual understanding.

OM

rkpande
14 August 2009, 05:51 AM
If one has to name a religion of the world, which totally follows true spiritual democracy, then that would be Santana Dharma. We have Sruti as our constitution which can never be amended but it can be interpreted as per one’s intellect. Supreme judges of the yore have variously interpreted it in their own ways and we have those six philosophies. Each such interpretation has brought about different sects. As they say “That which exist is one; sages call it variously”
Every sect or their methods of application only teaches one thing, to drop the mind and come to a state of no-mind, the state of turiya.
Even Meera Bai, would have to ultimately drop Krishna to reach him.
Absence of presence is Sunnayta, the great void of sat chit and annanda.

“To drop there concepts and experience the divine” is what you said, is absolutely correct. That’s the path to be chosen.

brahman
25 August 2009, 05:27 AM
Namaste,

We know that mental concepts sometimes can veil us from the Truth. For example if a christian says they have christ, yet they only know this conceptually that Christ is some far off deity bestowing favors etc... then they are not really having christ. Its more of a mental idol as Eckhart Tolle would say. However, if that person experienced Christ then there is no concepts. There is no concept of what Christ is or what God is its just pure experience of that consciousness.

So when we learn stories of Lord Siva and other deities such as Krishna and his stories... are we just creating a dogma? Wouldnt it be better to just drop these stories and concepts and experience the Divine through detachment from mental concepts?

What happens if one attempts to pilot an extremely technically designed Super Robot ,without necessary control of software?

This chapter will discuss some of the problems typically encountered when using robots. This may help you to create a framework for thinking about control that may require in preventing control failure

The most common kind of robot failure is not mechanical or electronic failure but rather failure of the software that controls the robot.

For example, if a robot were to run into a wall, and its front touch sensor did not trigger, the robot would become stuck, trying to drive through the wall.

This robot is not physically stuck, but it is "mentally stuck": its control program does not account for this situation and does not provide a way for the robot to get free. Many robots fail in this way.

A few words of advice: most people severely underestimate the amount of time that is necessary to write control software. A program can be hacked together in a couple nights, but if a robot is to be able to deal with a spectrum of situations in a capable way, More work will be required.

Also, it is very difficult to be developing final software while still making hardware changes. Any hardware change will necessitate software changes. Some of these changes may be obvious but others will not. The message is to finalize mechanical and sensor design early enough to develop software based upon a stable hardware platform.

Little amount of knowledge can be gained together in a couple nights, but if a man is to be able to deal with a spectrum of situations in a capable way, More work will be required, more knowledge to be required, more stories to be read and more sastras to be learned.

Brahman

Spiritualseeker
25 August 2009, 07:34 AM
Namaste,

Thank you all for the responses. I almost forgot about this thread. I have seen some good replies and I do understand that worshipping God in a form may be a preliminary for what is to come of higher knowledge through Being and Wisdom. Since this thread is back on top again I would like to just share something and ask all of you your opinions. This passage I got from a book called "The Compass of Zen" by Zen Master Seung Sahn



There are many paths that one can follow in order to attain this point. We have many religions and spiritual ways. But actually there are just two kinds of religion in this world: subject religions and object religions. Following object religion means believing in some kind of power or opposite being outside yourself. It means believing in some kind of power that controls this world and controls human beings. People think that if they believe in this god or power they will get something: they will get happiness or some good feeling. Maybe they will get special energy or magic powers or holiness. Perhaps they will go to heaven. Some practitioners of these traditions say they want to "become one" with this god, and may use some meditation practice to do this. But this is still making some object to become one with, so that is an object religion.

Buddhism is a subject religion. It seeks direct insight into the very nature of existence itself, beginning with insight into the nature of our eing. "What am I?" "What is this 'I" and where di it come from " "When I was born where did I come from? When I gdie where will I go?" When you just ask yourself these questions, at that point all thinking is completely cut off. Inside and outside completely become one. Also subject and object completely become one, because without thiking there is no subject or object. When you ask the question--"What am I"? "Only dont know..." then you, the universe, and everything-Boom!-become one. So Buddhist teaching always point directly to the nature of your mind.


Atanu briefly touched on the subject of how people may think there is duality when worshipping a deity, but that is just a misconception. However, I have contemplated this idea that perhaps it is an object religion. It may be only because I was burned out with the God concept from Islamic creed that only left me spiritually bankrupt. Like times when i am reciting Om Namah Sivaya or reciting it silently with each inbreath and out breath sometimes I feel that it is just an outward worship to some being. So does this Zen master have a point? Or is it just his ignorance of Sanatana Dharma that caused him to make his comments?

-juan

bhaktajan
25 August 2009, 12:59 PM
Dogma: 1.a system of principles or tenets, as of a church.2.a specific tenet or doctrine authoritatively laid down, as by a church: the dogma of the Assumption. 3.prescribed doctrine: political dogma. 4.a settled or established opinion, belief, or principle.

also,

A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/doctrine).
A principle or belief or a group of them: "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present" (Abraham Lincoln).http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dogma

bhaktajan
25 August 2009, 01:20 PM
There is more than Duality. There is more than Ying & Yang.

There is a Trinity. There is a triumphant Trinity that composes the manifest creation.

1 Brahman (Void ~ the 'Field')
2 Param-atma (paramount-soul ~ the 'Individual(s)')
3 Bhagavan (the Personalism Personified~ the 'Over-seer')

These three things encompass all of existence.

If there is a 'Bhagavan' ---then also, there is the 'Field' ---then also, there are the known/knowable objects that 'Rise & Fall' [propelled by the 'Time-factor'].

Bhagavad-gita explains that these three are progressive rungs of the ladder of Yogic perfectional Knowledge.

Bhagavad-gita explains that 'knowledge' and 'detachment' is the formula to be freed of illusion.

Brahman = Absolute zero
[Physics: "Absolute zero" is a temperature marked by a '0' entropy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy). It is the coldest temperature theoretically possible and cannot be reached by artificial or natural means.

Param-atma = the progentitor Personality en-toto ---expanded into consciousness individuals.

Bhagavan = the first Person beyond the Manifest cosmos ---engaged in his own personal Pastimes which are full in all personal opulences [IOW, the concept & definition of God-Almighty]

bhaktajan
25 August 2009, 01:27 PM
The principle is:

"How do we know who are Father is? Ask your Mother."

Similarly, all knowledge is passed down 'directly' by only those who received 'thee knowledge' from a bonefide line of succession.

Carpenter learns from carpenter. Computer Professor learned from an earlier computer teacher. A Motor mechanic learned automobile-mechanics from an earlier mechanics teacher.

This is the process of transmitting 'Knowledge' ---such 'Knowledge' therefore is 'absolute' [not subjective].

Enjoyment is subjective. Works/Acts/Duties are objective reality.

Spiritualseeker
26 August 2009, 11:51 PM
buuuump