Quote:
|
Originally Posted by deLord
I've still not completely come to terms with the duality of "do nothing - universe will do/give everything necessary" vs "you have to do some work / sadhana". So --- which one is it? Why not play computer all day? Or completey ignore the spiritual way? If nothing can be achieved but only given by grace or surrender (I do not yet completely understand this concept).
|
If there is someone telling people to do nothing, I don't know anything about that. My religion's teachings say that we should try to do the right thing, which is not always the pleasant thing, in whatever situation life hands us -this is what I meant when I used the word dharma. If someone follows this advice, they will always have plenty to do. And, of course, there is further instruction if you want to know about God/Brahman.
If you can surrender the things that are out of your control or beyond your current ability to understand, at the very least it will save you from worry. Your inner state is important.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by deLord
If siddhis have nothing to do with enlightenment, then why is it that some people say siddhis come under way anyway so it's no use to strife for them?
|
Reputable teachings say they are not something worth striving for. We can see from scriptures that it is not an indication of how wise or good someone is, it is only an indication of someone's ability to focus on one thing for great lengths of time. Some people interpret parts of Yogasutra as being about powers, but I maintain it is more useful when those verses are read as metaphorical.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by deLord
Why will only so little people have siddhis?
|
We do not know how many people do, I gave some reasons for this in my first post.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by deLord
For example what about Baba Lokenath who used to fulfill every wish he was asked for? He certainly did not hold back his powers as most people pray; and from what I read he was the most advanced embodied being I can imagine and that I heard of.
|
I really like this question, I had never thought about it before.
Maybe this was his enacting karma yoga*. I imagine it like, if I could see everyone who came near me as vision of Jagadamba (God), I would feel irresistible compulsion to serve. In which case he might have experienced every encounter on the level of God interacting with God, whereas here we think it was a person doing something for another person.
This would be different to showing off or wanting to change the world, because those people had to go to him, which one could take to mean that they were already part of his existing karma. In contrast, if someone is making decisions based in a sort of 'I want this and I don't want this other thing' way of thinking, even if they have good intentions, they are initiating goodness knows what new karma.
*Karma yoga is where you do everything as offering to God. They say, actions done in service to God, in an attitude detached from all outcome, will burn through existing karma and will not create new karma. That last part is open to different interpretations, but it is still all good, because even if it did create new karma a bhakta would not mind, because they are detached from all outcome and still in service to God, their beloved.