[Advaita-l] vajrOli yOga & shankara bhagavatpAda
bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Wed Feb 12 05:17:49 CST 2014
praNAms Sri Subbu prabhuji
In the Yogasutra there is no requirement that one 'learns' the siddhis
someone else. The siddhis come to the yogi of their own at various
times/stages of his yoga sAdhana.
> Atleast to do this yOga sAdhana one should have the yOga guru is it
not?? Though shishya directly & instantly learn 'siddhi-s', to achieve
some yOga siddhi-s a systematic sAdhana of yOga under the guidance of the
'guru' is required. We all know how important the siddhi-s like parakAya
pravesha, vajrOli, travelling in Aksha mArga etc. are important in these
episodes of shankara biography. But through these biographies we hardly
come to know who is this yOga teacher who taught yOga sAdhana that fetched
shankara yOga siddhi-s :-)) Anyway, if gOvinda bhagavatpAda, guru of
shankara is a yOga pUrusha and ashTAnga yOga praveeNa & siddha purusha
these doubts can be put to rest. But for this inference, no dependable
source material available in digvijaya-s :-))
It is also stated at the end of enumerating the various siddhis in the
yogasutra that siddhis are obstacles
to the yogi in gaining his ultimate purushartha and therefore one should
not crave for them.
> And it is also worth to be noted that these siddhi-s should not be used
to boost one's own ego !! If we go by digvijaya's it appears that
shankara was so disparate to prove that he was the master of all sciences
(including kAma shAstra) and he wanted to show the ubhaya bhArati that he
is 'sarvajna' hence nothing can escape his sight..To have he practical
knowledge of kAma shAstra (nAyaka-nAyaki kaLa shAstra) he was ready to go
to any extant and did the parakAya pravesha, used the vajrOli yOga siddhi
etc. just to quench the question of an orthodox housewife, who asked a
totally unrelevant question to the 'para purusha' or an young saNyAsi, who
had come to prove the supremacy of uttara mImAmsa over pUrva mImAmsa !!??
Has shankara started his debate claiming that he is sarvajnA and anyone
can ask any irrelevant question?? I dont think so.
That said, there is no need to bring in the vajroli in this connection.
> I am not able to understand this!!?? vajrOli Yoga siddhi helped
shankara to maintain his celibacy though enjoying practical knowledge of
kAma shAstra with king's queens (one hundred), So, dont you think we need
to know from where he got this siddhi atleast through these biographies
When questioned by Saraswati at the time of sarvajna peeTha ArohaNa about
the 'defilement' caused if any by the mingling with the King's wives,
Shankara does not say that 'no sin has been caused'. He only says that
sinful action was performed with his sharIra and for what was done in
another sharIra does not affect this sharIra'.
> My dear prabhuji please think, shareera, being an inert thing cannot
act on its own, the antaHkaraNa that entered king's inert (dead) body is
that of the yati, who enacted through king's body with the karaNa of the
saNyAsi. If you use a rifle to shoot someone to death and say I have not
done this it was the rifle that shot him...do you think it is a sane
answer at the court of law?? shankara's justification here is no better
than this :-))
In other words, he does not seek any apology by invoking the vajroli or
any such thing.
> but you know one of the justifications that shankara provided to his
shishya padmapAda before parakAya pravesh is vajrOli :-))
[In this verse Shankara says: 'This knowing the kAma kalA practicals
through this (king's) body will not be censurable since I will be
only the ways of shiShTa-s by resorting to another's body.]
> My dear prabhuji again a real shishtA cannot lost himself in kAma
bhOga, forgetting his own yati - Atma svarUpa, a real shishta if at all he
was mere witness to all these activities, very much aware of his parakAya
pravesha purpose, would have come back to his original body as per the
previously agreed time, as you know he has not returned to his body as
assured before :-)) There was no need for his shishyA-s to roam around in
search of the yati-antaHkaraNa and bhOga deha to make an effort to WAKE
him up !!! Anyway, if one wants to give excuses as above, obviously
further questions would arise to doubt the credentials of these episodes
and rationality behind these justifications.
> If it is mere guru - leela and poetic imaginations at its best, then no
need for all these diggings :-))
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list