|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Cato
Germany
239 Posts |
 Posted - Mar 26 2024 : 10:54:09 AM
|
For some reason, my inner voice longs for consistency and being all of a piece when it comes to (yogic) philosophy. I'm not an eclectic kind of guy.
For example, some time ago I read various texts of Paramahansa Yogananda, amongst others (parts of) his second coming of christ. It is beautifully written and he also strives to show the sameness of western and eastern thought, of Christianity and yogic philosophy. He does a great job, it appeals to me very much. In other text, he nicely maps out aspects of the circle of life and death. It can be of great help when dealing with death in personal life. AYP as (mainly) a set of yogic practices does not go into detail here very much. As I long for my consistency, I then wonder if it fits together (i.e. AYP practices and Yogananda (or other) yogic philosophy) or if it is some kind of deluding oneself by ignorant cherry picking. It comes to mind that as Yogananda does a great job for the "science of yoga" and philosophy, why not doing this recommended set of practices? For me, that it is not a serious question, I'm just trying to illustrate my longing for consistency.
Do you have similar thoughts? |
Edited by - Cato on Mar 26 2024 10:55:55 AM |
|
|
Blanche
USA
873 Posts |
Posted - Mar 28 2024 : 1:48:11 PM
|
Hi Cato,
The need for consistency is understandable when the mind is confronted by discrepant viewpoints. Where is the Truth? How does everything fit together?
The underlying assumption is that there is an ultimate Truth that is accessible to the mind to put into words. But is it so?
As Jon Fosse writes in The Other Name (Septology I-II), I believe just in God, in God's presence, yes, and its absence too, yes, I can never doubt that, because it's reality, not belief (p.98). There is a point beyond which one knows not with the mind, but because one is That.
Knowing by being means that expressing anything in words is limiting it.
Why there are so many viewpoints? Why there are apparently incompatible systems of philosophy? Any system of philosophy reflects the underlying level of spiritual development of its creator. If we think about spiritual evolution as climbing a mountain, it is easy to see that the view from the valley will differ and even contradict the view from other points up the path, all the way to the top. Once we see this, we find that some systems of philosophy are broader and allow the perspective of other narrower systems of philosophy. There is more a difference in perspective than a difference of essence.
We may want to cultivate discrimination and allow the possibility that there is still much more to learn and know. 
Edited because of the numerous "?" that showed up in the published version. |
Edited by - Blanche on Mar 28 2024 1:50:57 PM |
 |
|
|
Cato
Germany
239 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2024 : 6:11:36 PM
|
Blanche, I like the picture of climbing a spiritual mountain with different viewpoints.
I would like to stay with the example of Paramahansa Yogananda (but there are many more). He excellently connected western and eastern thought and is regarded as an enlightened being. He also laid out a set of yoga practices to follow the spiritual path. His work as a whole is consistent.
In your image, such a being would be standing on the top of the spiritual mountain. However, many travellers - me too - read those works, find them inspiring and convincing, and then choose other practices they think suite them better. Then thoughts may come to mind like: Who am I to know it better? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Yogic philosophy
