|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
AYPforum
351 Posts |
 Posted - Jul 07 2005 : 6:51:23 PM
|
789 From: "obsidian9999" <obsidian9999@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed Apr 20, 2005 11:48am
Subject: Good amaroli and bad amaroli obsidian9999
Offline
Send Email
Hello Adam,
brother, you may know well that we have in our own Book of Knowledge
the useful yoga tip that drinking a little of one's own urine can
stimulate the immune system and boost general health (maybe not a
yoga-tip precisely, but part of the Indian health knowledge in
general). This can be called 'Good Amaroli'.
Then there is presenting philospohical argument and reason in
response to a fundamentalist diatribe against yoga. Your reasoning
is good in itself but the underlying work to which you respond is one
of pure rhetoric, not reason. There is insufficient reason in it
for reason to gain any traction against it. There is no fulcrum
there for the lever of your reason to have any power. Therefore,
responding to it with reason is akin to peeing into the wind with
your mouth open. All those precious bodily fluids gone to waste.
This can be called 'Bad Amaroli'.
Which is a fine practice too, who am I to judge. :)
--- In AYPforum@yahoogroups.com, "Adam West" <adamwest1@i...> wrote:
>
> Hi Gavin,
>
> >>The goal of yoga is the same as that of Hinduism, which is
realizing that one is Brahman, the underlying impersonal God of the
Universe in Hinduism.<<
>
> Not sure everyone would agree that this is the goal. Possibly
a problem of simplistic generalization. The defined goal also
contains a definition of Brahman, this also is to be questioned.
Aside from the problem of the semantic definition of Brahman
(Dictionary definition, which is in question), there is the problem
of the contextual definition, which is the spirit or underlying
context in which it is used. So in essence there may be a problem of
superficial analysis and interpretation of the said goals and
definitions of yoga, which it would appear are in conflict with the
authors interpretation of Christianity.
>
> >>"The physical exercises of yoga are designed to prepare the body
for the psychospiritual change vital to inculcating this idea (the
realization that one is Brahman) into the consciousness and being of
the person. Hence talk of separating yoga practice from theory is
meaningless.<<
>
> Is this an argument for the self conditioning or self
indoctrination of the proponent of yoga, which leads the yogi into
believing he is Brahman? If so has the author misunderstood the
goals of yoga, is it a symptom of superficial and lazy research? Is
it a projection of the author's personal interpretation and bias' (of
what is taking place at the psychological level), onto the apparently
unfortunate subject of self hypnosis? Is this an accurate
representation of yogic theory and practice? Or indeed, has the
author carried out legitimate studies by Ph.D clinical psychologists
and psychiatrists or sourced same, has he cited reputable
sources/authorities who have them selves done the research or
analyzed other researchers work?
>
> >>From a Christian perspective, whether the two can safely be
divided is doubtful. 'I do yoga, but Hinduism isn't involved,' is an
incorrect statement<<
>
> How credible (true/accurate) are the premises (reasons) for
this argument, as stated above, what sources are being cited to
establish their basis and accuracy? How credible are the sources
them selves? Does the conclusion follow from the premise, is it a
logically valid argument? This is important if we are to distinguish
personal opinions (and weaknesses with in the research) from quality
research with in academics.
>
> Naturally, from my perspective, ones opinions are just as valid
as good logic or credible research, one can have insightful intuitive
realizations which are out side the realm of evidence based
conclusions. Would the authors arguments/conclusions make it through
the peer review process of academic journals with in comparative
religious studies?
>
> >> A Spiritual Counterfeits Project (Berkeley, California)
publication on "Yoga" states: "For while it may suit the secular
fancy to espouse only that selected aspect (the physical) of yoga
which fits the bourgeois notion of what yoga is supposed to do (i.e.
make a beautiful body), the fact still remains that even physical
yoga is inextricably bound up in the whole of Eastern religious
metaphysics. In fact, it is quite accurate to say that physical yoga
and Indian metaphysics are mutually interdependent; you really can't
have one without the other." <<
>
> What is the general consensus of academics on this point, is
this conclusion representative of the predominant view?
>
> Absorption is the goal of the monist Hindu" (J.Isamu Yamamoto,
SCP Newsletter , March-April 1983).
>
> Is this true? Is it that simple? Would most Hindu authorities
agree with this, would most yogis?
>
> >>They seek not merely a physical death but a death that will
deliver them from both the physical and spiritual life. Extinction
is the goal of the traditional Buddhist"<<
>
> Again, how accurate is this statement?
>
> >>For this author more persuasive than any authority is the
author's personal experience in mantra yoga, hatha yoga, and
kundalini yoga. Definite altered states of consciousness are produced
by yoga. However, these states of consciousness while initially
anesthetic became with constant yoga practice progressively more
oppressive resulting in a disassociation from the external world.
Sensory input was accentuated and produced an overreaction to
external stimuli resulting in anxiety. On intensive asana-meditation
courses the author experienced several blackouts during mantra
meditation sessions which lasted up to an hour and a half. No
consciousness of elapsed time and no memory of what had transpired
during the blackout existed after such an experience.
> Coping with these altered states of consciousness produced in the
author mounting tension making him easily upset by trifles (slamming
of a door, the screeching of a jet fighter plane, traffic). In many
ways the meditation/yoga experience is the classic experience of
anxiety disorder so well documented by the Australian doctor Claire
Weekes in her classic book Hope and Help For Your Nerves , which also
offers the best non clinical approach for curing anxiety disorder of
which panic attacks are common symptoms.<<
>
> How representative is one persons experience? Is a one person
study 'generalizable with in reputable academic research? Does it
show a correlation between yoga practice and the symptoms described?
Is correlation the same as causation?
>
> >>Meditation and yoga in many instances cause anxiety disorder.<<
>
> Where are the references? (citing evidence which is conclusive
and 'suggestive' of causation.)
>
> >>It is the author's belief that many of the so-
called "advanced states of consciousness" are no more than the result
of extreme sensitization, a state in which our nerves react in an
exaggerated way to stress induced by the yoga/meditation techniques,
producing an overshadowing sensory unreality similar to those induced
by consciousness altering drugs.<<
>
> The personal use of words such as 'belief', with out extensive
credible referencing, may be a red flag. Indeed to be fair though,
there are credible researchers who believe this (sorry no
references :-) One should apply the same stringent tests/questions
to their work also, personal bias' and projections sourced in
atheistic belief systems perhaps should be kept in mind.
>
> >>Blackouts, strange trance states, or insanity are listed from
even "the slightest mistake." of practicing yoga. Swami
Prabhavananda's Yoga and Mysticism lists brain injury, incurable
disease, and insanity as potential hazards of wrong yoga practice.<<
>
> Indeed this is so! Any kind of activity can if done unsafely,
lead to injury. Do the cases referred to, indicate incorrect
practice, which was unsafe, or is correct practice, indeed unsafe?
What does the research say?
>
> >>The Bible informs us that God created Adam of the dust of the
earth and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life (Genesis
2:7). Man is a created, separate being. Man can have a relationship
with the Living God by accepting His Son, God's physical incarnation,
Jesus Christ. The Bible does not teach that through yoga man can
attain progressive higher levels of consciousness so that man will
realize he is one with God and merge with Brahman as Hinduism teaches
or that man's personality can be extinguished as a flame is
extinguished as Buddhism teaches.<<
>
> Does this suggest that the author 'assumes' that if it is not
in the bible, or it contradicts same, it 'must' be wrong or untrue?
Is the author being neutral, objective, or fair in his analysis of
the evidence and to the reasoning process which lead to his
conclusions? What does this say about his openness to conflicting
arguments? Does indeed the bible actually state this? How credible
is the translations and interpretation of Biblical passages? What
were the source texts used in the translation, who did the
translating, what is their credible standing with in the research
community?
>
> >>God is so far above man that man cannot work his way up to God
through his own actions.<<
>
> Is there more than one theological source on which we can
consider our relation to God? Are there other credible Christian
scriptures which contradict this view?
>
> These questions can be applied to any and all arguments made
with in this article and of course any article and the propositions
there in. I offer no answers! How well does anything hold up to the
light of scrutiny and intuition, is the only question I have?
>
> To indulge in one personal opinion... lazy and sloppy research
and or yogic practice is dangerous with out question, as is blind
faith in all its subtleties!
792 From: "Adam West" <adamwest1@iprimus.com.au>
Date: Wed Apr 20, 2005 0:46pm
Subject: Re: Good amaroli and bad amaroli fraterandros1
Offline
Send Email
Hi Obsidian,
>>brother, you may know well that we have in our own Book of Knowledge
the useful yoga tip that drinking a little of one's own urine can
stimulate the immune system and boost general health (maybe not a
yoga-tip precisely, but part of the Indian health knowledge in
general). This can be called 'Good Amaroli'.<<
Mmm, I'm with ya so far ;-) Incidentally I used to practice amaroli, my experience agrees with its effectiveness.
>>Then there is presenting philosophical argument and reason in
response to a fundamentalist diatribe against yoga. Your reasoning
is good in itself but the underlying work to which you respond is one
of pure rhetoric, not reason.<<
Yep, still with you my friend :-)
>>There is insufficient reason in it
for reason to gain any traction against it.<<
For sure :-)
>>There is no fulcrum
there for the lever of your reason to have any power. Therefore,
responding to it with reason is akin to peeing into the wind with
your mouth open. All those precious bodily fluids gone to waste.
This can be called 'Bad Amaroli'.<<
Hehehehehehee, I love it!
>>Which is a fine practice too, who am I to judge. :)<<
Thanks mate, fun to have a giggle ;-)
In kind regards,
Adam.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
 |
|
|
|
Good amaroli and bad amaroli
Forum Locked
