Question:
X-Ftn-To: Wade Humeniuk Since the White Lotus Foundation and Ganga White came up in another post, see: http://www.whitelotus.org/library2/articles/ganga/4yogas.html
It’s just one possible view; I would write something completely different. Just trying to find out what Danijel is about.
Good luck. 
) — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Response:
Hello Sahaj I do appreciate your posts. They are always thoughtful and wise! Amy
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Namaste! Indeed there exist many approaches to yoga. One could be called the forced or "hard" school and the other the soft and yielding school (although I am sure one could invent different names, but regardless the styles do differ. Although no one asked me the word, "demanding", actually does have the gist of an imperative to it (at least to me) and its usual synonyms are mandating, summoning, or commanding (which have negative connotations at least for me. However the word could also be used merely as "exacting" as in "requiring" time, effort, and energy. In that sense everything that we do or which occupies our attention or requires energy is demanding. In that sense the definition does not make much sense. In actual normal use, when some one says that an activity was demanding, they mean that it takes "considerable" or "very much" effort, time, or energy. Interesting that here we can get into two very different approaches to yoga. So one approach (hard or forceful) is the "no pain – no gain" school which is predicated upon the harder you work, the greater will be your reward. It is goal oriented and often says, "that the pain is good". This is a goal oriented school which gives a lot of structure and helps people focus. A good example is the Bikram method. At the end the deep relaxation allows for deep release. Another approach (the opposite) could be called the yin or soft school which is process oriented and which says pain is not where it is at, but rather the alleviation of force, drivennesss, stress, pushiness, and the like is the goal found in the present. This latter school brings you into the present and direct relationship and as such leads toward more spontaneous expressions and vinyasa (options). Here the original Kripalu Sahajyoga style is one example. The former school is more externally directed, male, yang, angular, and rajasic (left brained) while the latter is more female, receptive, yin. soft, round, right brained, and yielding. Of course these are all generalizations, and many yogi/yoginis teach the benefits of both. Isn’t it wonderful that the teachings of yoga are so broad and deep being able to be applied to each individual uniquely! Because I am usually too yang, tight, contracted, and left brained already, I prefer the yielding receptive and pacifying approach. This creates balance, synergy, health, and well being for me. Some one else may need more structure and even fierceness, but I would have to say no thank you. Drinking beer and watching ball games is far less demanding than the study of physics, but it’s also far less rewarding. You’ll find the similar examples everywhere. So this is again a subjective value judgement. Drinking beer is demanding on the kidneys and stresses the body. The study of mathematics and Physics also may not be rewarding to me, but may be to soem one else. When we do what we love, there is no sacrifice, and no real effort required/demanded — just love calling us into more love. <snip This seems to be at odds with surrender. Surrender doesn’t mean laziness and passive attitude. If you study mathematics several decades, you must surrender very deeply to it, and you must also find it very interesting. The same is with NBA basketball, and also with yoga and everything else. If you define surrender as doing nothing and always going where there’s least resistance, then it’s a negative quality, and I don’t teach people to acquire negative qualities. Funny I teach yoga as going toward releasing resistance. In meditation I surrender to doing Nothing. This idea is also in Patanjali’s Yoga sutras. But I agree that even footbal has an element of surrender. Here I think you as a man, may not be respecting the power of the passive, receptive, or what are often called female qualities and call them "negative". Doing restorative poses or simply "nothing" such as shavasana can be just the right thing for some people. Many people (especially in the West) are already overly stimulated and left brain over dominant. They need to learn how to relax and let go (surrender) more. On the other hand, you are right that some people are slothful (imbalanced toward tamasic tendencies)and will benefit from rajasic practices. Ahhh surrender — hard work that :-) After all, _I_ teach surrender, and you could already see that I’m not very compatible with your assumptions. According to my teaching, surrender to power makes you powerful. Surrender to God makes you divine. Surrender to knowledge makes you knowledgeable. Surrender to sin makes you sinful. So, when I say that one should surrender to God, I mean that one should acquire all the divine qualities. A nice example, but still dualistic, ja? This Power is not something that we can own, put in our pockets, or take with us when we die, ja? Rather, it is transpersonal in nature. Wu Wei for example is a profound principle in Taoism and many martial arts. The "trick" seems to me how to cultivate a practice which allows this awareness and presence to become more PRESENT in our everday life. I have read your posts where you say you think surrender is the most important ingredient, but you seem to be saying that control is also important I might _seem_ to be saying it, but I’m not saying it. Awareness, yes. Awakened consciousness, yes. Realization, yes. But control is something different. But yes, if you think that surrender means lying down in expectation of imminent death, then I understand why my words represent a problem. Yes, surrender and control A very large topic (should we get seducted further into philosophy). Vairaga and isvara pranidhana are not opposed to viveka, but we must let go of viveka as well (eventually). In other words there are appropriate practices suitable for varioius stages (thus tehre exist also inappropriate practices). Our sadhana must change (evolve) over time. The "process" (which is innately organic), it seems to me, to be furthered best by not using the word, control, but rather simple "self discipline" or sadhana as a loving and healing means moving toward that final release (surrender) so no apparent conflict (between control and surrender) arise. This process opriented approach requires cultivating receptivity, sensitivity — a listening ability as much or more so than a doingness (active component) so that the efferent and afferent nerves — the CNS and autonomic Nervous systems, the left and right brain, etc all act in resonance and sympathetic synchrony. It is interesting, is it not that Patanjali does not use the word, control (but sadhana and abhyasa). He does use the word, will; which is not part of the solution, but rather associated with the lower functions of dual existence. (especially is esposing raja yoga (Patanjali) teachings). Patanjali taught raja yoga? Well, if he did, it’s the first time that I heard of it, and I did read yoga sutra. Patanjali taught yoga of eight limbs (asta-anga yogah), AFAIK. Patanjali taught many things. Astanga yoga was only a small part (but valuable) part of the teachings. What Patanjali taught most often has become to known commonly as raj (kingly) yoga or the yoga that focuses on meditation as the major discipline, but yes, Patanjali did not use the term, raj yoga. Also there are modern yoga schools who use the term more loosely than my definition above, but all such schools that claim to practice raj yoga, also practice meditation and use Patanjali as their basis. Danjiel said: "To clarify things even further, I’d translate ’surrender’ in this context as ’samyama’, or, in a slightly different context, Isvara-pranidhana (devotion to God; one of the niyamas, according to Patanjali)." Yes, mostly it is isvara pranidhana (which is also found as one of the three practices of kriya yoga (see the beginning of Chapter 2). It is refreshing that you would also consider defining surrender as samyama (the combined practice of dharana, dhyana, and samadhi) as it usually requires great effort (demanding to master, but it’s application is indeed a transpersonal merging. Here is something from Swami Venkatesanada on Pada III of Patanajali’s Yoga Sutras, that may be of further value? "III.52 Undistracted by these, one should proceed to transcend time . By the practice of the three-fold discipline (samyama) in relation to the truth of the moment, without the interference of thought which creates the false sequence of time, there arises understanding which is born of the faculty to perceive the false as false and hence truth as truth. III.53 From such understanding flows knowledge or the natural ability to distinguish between reality and appearance, even where they do not have other obvious distinguishing marks related to their species, characteristics and location and hence seem to be similar. The possibility of confusion is thus completely overcome. III.54 Such wisdom born of intuitive and immediate understanding is the sole redeemer. It is everything. It has everything. It encompasses everything. It is the unconditioned and undivided intelligence spontaneously functioning from moment to moment in the the eternal now, without sequential relationship. III.55 When there is pure equilibrium which is non-division
… read more »
Response:
Namaste! Indeed there exist many approaches to yoga. One could be called the forced or "hard" school and the other the soft and yielding school (although I am sure one could invent different names, but regardless the styles do differ. Although no one asked me the word, "demanding", actually does have the gist of an imperative to it (at least to me) and its usual synonyms are mandating, summoning, or commanding (which have negative connotations at least for me. However the word could also be used merely as "exacting" as in "requiring" time, effort, and energy. In that sense everything that we do or which occupies our attention or requires energy is demanding. In that sense the definition does not make much sense. In actual normal use, when some one says that an activity was demanding, they mean that it takes "considerable" or "very much" effort, time, or energy. Interesting that here we can get into two very different approaches to yoga. So one approach (hard or forceful) is the "no pain – no gain" school which is predicated upon the harder you work, the greater will be your reward. It is goal oriented and often says, "that the pain is good". This is a goal oriented school which gives a lot of structure and helps people focus. A good example is the Bikram method. At the end the deep relaxation allows for deep release. Another approach (the opposite) could be called the yin or soft school which is process oriented and which says pain is not where it is at, but rather the alleviation of force, drivennesss, stress, pushiness, and the like is the goal found in the present. This latter school brings you into the present and direct relationship and as such leads toward more spontaneous expressions and vinyasa (options). Here the original Kripalu Sahajyoga style is one example. The former school is more externally directed, male, yang, angular, and rajasic (left brained) while the latter is more female, receptive, yin. soft, round, right brained, and yielding. Of course these are all generalizations, and many yogi/yoginis teach the benefits of both. Isn’t it wonderful that the teachings of yoga are so broad and deep being able to be applied to each individual uniquely! Because I am usually too yang, tight, contracted, and left brained already, I prefer the yielding receptive and pacifying approach. This creates balance, synergy, health, and well being for me. Some one else may need more structure and even fierceness, but I would have to say no thank you. Drinking beer and watching ball games is far less demanding than the study of physics, but it’s also far less rewarding. You’ll find the similar examples everywhere.
So this is again a subjective value judgement. Drinking beer is demanding on the kidneys and stresses the body. The study of mathematics and Physics also may not be rewarding to me, but may be to soem one else. When we do what we love, there is no sacrifice, and no real effort required/demanded — just love calling us into more love. <snip This seems to be at odds with surrender. Surrender doesn’t mean laziness and passive attitude. If you study mathematics several decades, you must surrender very deeply to it, and you must also find it very interesting. The same is with NBA basketball, and also with yoga and everything else. If you define surrender as doing nothing and always going where there’s least resistance, then it’s a negative quality, and I don’t teach people to acquire negative qualities.
Funny I teach yoga as going toward releasing resistance. In meditation I surrender to doing Nothing. This idea is also in Patanjali’s Yoga sutras. But I agree that even footbal has an element of surrender. Here I think you as a man, may not be respecting the power of the passive, receptive, or what are often called female qualities and call them "negative". Doing restorative poses or simply "nothing" such as shavasana can be just the right thing for some people. Many people (especially in the West) are already overly stimulated and left brain over dominant. They need to learn how to relax and let go (surrender) more. On the other hand, you are right that some people are slothful (imbalanced toward tamasic tendencies)and will benefit from rajasic practices. Ahhh surrender — hard work that :-) After all, _I_ teach surrender, and you could already see that I’m not very compatible with your assumptions. According to my teaching, surrender to power makes you powerful. Surrender to God makes you divine. Surrender to knowledge makes you knowledgeable. Surrender to sin makes you sinful. So, when I say that one should surrender to God, I mean that one should acquire all the divine qualities.
A nice example, but still dualistic, ja? This Power is not something that we can own, put in our pockets, or take with us when we die, ja? Rather, it is transpersonal in nature. Wu Wei for example is a profound principle in Taoism and many martial arts. The "trick" seems to me how to cultivate a practice which allows this awareness and presence to become more PRESENT in our everday life. I have read your posts where you say you think surrender is the most important ingredient, but you seem to be saying that control is also important I might _seem_ to be saying it, but I’m not saying it. Awareness, yes. Awakened consciousness, yes. Realization, yes. But control is something different. But yes, if you think that surrender means lying down in expectation of imminent death, then I understand why my words represent a problem.
Yes, surrender and control A very large topic (should we get seducted further into philosophy). Vairaga and isvara pranidhana are not opposed to viveka, but we must let go of viveka as well (eventually). In other words there are appropriate practices suitable for varioius stages (thus tehre exist also inappropriate practices). Our sadhana must change (evolve) over time. The "process" (which is innately organic), it seems to me, to be furthered best by not using the word, control, but rather simple "self discipline" or sadhana as a loving and healing means moving toward that final release (surrender) so no apparent conflict (between control and surrender) arise. This process opriented approach requires cultivating receptivity, sensitivity — a listening ability as much or more so than a doingness (active component) so that the efferent and afferent nerves — the CNS and autonomic Nervous systems, the left and right brain, etc all act in resonance and sympathetic synchrony. It is interesting, is it not that Patanjali does not use the word, control (but sadhana and abhyasa). He does use the word, will; which is not part of the solution, but rather associated with the lower functions of dual existence. (especially is esposing raja yoga (Patanjali) teachings). Patanjali taught raja yoga? Well, if he did, it’s the first time that I heard of it, and I did read yoga sutra. Patanjali taught yoga of eight limbs (asta-anga yogah), AFAIK.
Patanjali taught many things. Astanga yoga was only a small part (but valuable) part of the teachings. What Patanjali taught most often has become to known commonly as raj (kingly) yoga or the yoga that focuses on meditation as the major discipline, but yes, Patanjali did not use the term, raj yoga. Also there are modern yoga schools who use the term more loosely than my definition above, but all such schools that claim to practice raj yoga, also practice meditation and use Patanjali as their basis. Danjiel said: "To clarify things even further, I’d translate ’surrender’ in this context as ’samyama’, or, in a slightly different context, Isvara-pranidhana (devotion to God; one of the niyamas, according to Patanjali)." Yes, mostly it is isvara pranidhana (which is also found as one of the three practices of kriya yoga (see the beginning of Chapter 2). It is refreshing that you would also consider defining surrender as samyama (the combined practice of dharana, dhyana, and samadhi) as it usually requires great effort (demanding to master, but it’s application is indeed a transpersonal merging. Here is something from Swami Venkatesanada on Pada III of Patanajali’s Yoga Sutras, that may be of further value? "III.52 Undistracted by these, one should proceed to transcend time . By the practice of the three-fold discipline (samyama) in relation to the truth of the moment, without the interference of thought which creates the false sequence of time, there arises understanding which is born of the faculty to perceive the false as false and hence truth as truth. III.53 From such understanding flows knowledge or the natural ability to distinguish between reality and appearance, even where they do not have other obvious distinguishing marks related to their species, characteristics and location and hence seem to be similar. The possibility of confusion is thus completely overcome. III.54 Such wisdom born of intuitive and immediate understanding is the sole redeemer. It is everything. It has everything. It encompasses everything. It is the unconditioned and undivided intelligence spontaneously functioning from moment to moment in the the eternal now, without sequential relationship. III.55 When there is pure equilibrium which is non-division between the indwelling consciousness and all (objective) existence, between the non-moving intelligence and the ever-moving phenomena, between the unconditioned awareness and the rise and fall of the "The thousand thoughts" – there is freedom and independence of the infinite." End of Vibhuti Pada Swami Venkatesananda, "Enlightened Living", an interpretive translation of Patanjali’s "Yoga Sutras" – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Response:
(especially is esposing raja yoga (Patanjali) teachings). Patanjali taught raja yoga? Well, if he did, it’s the first time that I heard of it, and I did read yoga sutra. Patanjali taught yoga of eight limbs (asta-anga yogah), AFAIK. — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Since the White Lotus Foundation and Ganga White came up in another post, see: http://www.whitelotus.org/library2/articles/ganga/4yogas.html I heartily agree with the article. Just trying to find out what Danijel is about. Peace Wade
Response:
So, when I say that one should surrender to God, I mean that one should acquire all the divine qualities.
To clarify things even further, I’d translate ’surrender’ in this context as ’samyama’, or, in a slightly different context, Isvara-pranidhana (devotion to God; one of the niyamas, according to Patanjali). — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Response:
X-Ftn-To: Wade Humeniuk As you can see, serious practice doesn’t mean a boring one, but a more demanding one – and, also, more rewarding. When you say demanding, do you mean demanding of yourself, or that God is demanding?
Drinking beer and watching ball games is far less demanding than the study of physics, but it’s also far less rewarding. You’ll find the similar examples everywhere. Serious and demanding, for me, imply force, effort and struggle.
Not necessarily. Programming in Borland Pascal 7 is demanding, but I used to spend days, months and years programming in it and I found it to be great fun. Reading 1000 pages of written material is demanding, but if the book is good, I’m usually having a great time doing it. I don’t deny that there are demanding things that indeed "imply force, effort and struggle", and that they usually indeed are spiritually harmful. Drilling a hole in your own head would surely qualify by your merits, and there indeed are people who think that it’ll make them more spiritual, but I was not talking about that stuff. Is this what you mean?
Nope, and I also think that you could have come to that conclusion sooner, because I already explained what I meant. This seems to be at odds with surrender.
Surrender doesn’t mean laziness and passive attitude. If you study mathematics several decades, you must surrender very deeply to it, and you must also find it very interesting. The same is with NBA basketball, and also with yoga and everything else. If you define surrender as doing nothing and always going where there’s least resistance, then it’s a negative quality, and I don’t teach people to acquire negative qualities. After all, _I_ teach surrender, and you could already see that I’m not very compatible with your assumptions. According to my teaching, surrender to power makes you powerful. Surrender to God makes you divine. Surrender to knowledge makes you knowledgeable. Surrender to sin makes you sinful. So, when I say that one should surrender to God, I mean that one should acquire all the divine qualities. I have read your posts where you say you think surrender is the most important ingredient, but you seem to be saying that control is also important
I might _seem_ to be saying it, but I’m not saying it. Awareness, yes. Awakened consciousness, yes. Realization, yes. But control is something different. But yes, if you think that surrender means lying down in expectation of imminent death, then I understand why my words represent a problem. (especially is esposing raja yoga (Patanjali) teachings).
Patanjali taught raja yoga? Well, if he did, it’s the first time that I heard of it, and I did read yoga sutra. Patanjali taught yoga of eight limbs (asta-anga yogah), AFAIK. — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Response:
X-Ftn-To: Brian Krishna, Jesus, Buddha, Babaji, were/are all God realised beings, perfected Yogis, but they don’t have or need certificates to prove it! However, given that yoga generally includes a physical aspect, it is prudent to expect recognized and relevant credentials for someone who is, practically speaking, responsible for guiding you through something that could, conceivably, harm you if done improperly. Yes, but I think that you two are talking about different things. Precisely. That’s the danger of in using the word "yoga" as if it means one specific thing.
Yes, that’s the big part of the problem. With all sorts of yoga around, the term ‘yoga’ can mean almost anything, so one needs to be specific. <I agree with mostly everything you wrote, no need to comment — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Response:
I’m afraid that it’s not fun and games, but it brings far more joy. Unfortunately, people who are emerged in the eternal joy and blissful wisdom can seem very uninteresting in comparison with all those parties where people have so much fun that most of them blow their brains out sooner or later, when they realize the futility of it all. As you can see, serious practice doesn’t mean a boring one, but a more demanding one – and, also, more rewarding.
When you say demanding, do you mean demanding of yourself, or that God is demanding? Serious and demanding, for me, imply force, effort and struggle. Is this what you mean? This seems to be at odds with surrender. I have read your posts where you say you think surrender is the most important ingredient, but you seem to be saying that control is also important (especially is esposing raja yoga (Patanjali) teachings). I certainly hold that view, control and surrender are constantly dancing. Wade
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I also have visions of deadly serious and humorless yogis sitting around "doing" yoga. Wade Wade, I agree with you. More than 1 time I meet "serious Yogis" who missunderstood seriousness and spirituality with humorlessness and beeing rigid. As Lars quoted Anon: "He who practices Sukhasana becomes an immobile, frozen,transcendent sculpture of living flesh …" – it once was an horrible experience to me sitting beside someone who very seriously tried this! Yes, you never answered my mail
Didn’t I ? I thgought I answered it here. I’m sorry Lars – I’m very busy right now these days and it can happen that to answer some mail I do simply forget. Maybe you can send it again to me? I will do my very best to answer it then as soon as possible. Thank you Sat Nam – Hari Har Singh Sat Nam – Hari Har Singh So lets don’t suffer even more while we are here on this planet and
reject our humanity in order to be "spiritual". Rejection is not spiritual. Integration – to bring the opposites (man + woman, physical + spiritual, dark + light) together – Re-ligio (religion) – Yoga – to heal – that is what spirituality is about. But here is somehing which doesn’t fit.
That happens sometimes These lamayogis who have been meditating for 50 years or so in a cave, they didn’t integrate or ground themselves?
I don’t know, we would have to ask them. It’s an individual thing. It’s not that monks do reject their humanity auomatically. It’s all about the attitude you have. Have you read Lama Govindas book The Way of the Wite Clouds?
No. Lars, you show me how much I still have to read! There are so many books piled on my shelfs still waiting to be read … A german lamastudent who travelled around in Tibet in the thirties.
That’s interesting! I’ll like to read that – I’m shure there is a german translation of it. He describes such monks, as David-Neel does in her book Mysteries in Tibet.
Not everybody is designed to live the life of a monk. Spirituality does have many facetts. And there is a quote that says something like: "the marygold does not try to become a sunflower." This want’s to say that we have to find and life what we really allready are and not what we imagine to wannabe. Sat Nam – Hari Har Singh
Response:
I also have visions of deadly serious and humorless yogis sitting around "doing" yoga. Wade Wade, I agree with you. More than 1 time I meet "serious Yogis" who missunderstood seriousness and spirituality with humorlessness and beeing rigid. As Lars quoted Anon: "He who practices Sukhasana becomes an immobile, frozen,transcendent sculpture of living flesh …" – it once was an horrible experience to me sitting beside someone who very seriously tried this!
Yes, you never answered my mail Sat Nam – Hari Har Singh So lets don’t suffer even more while we are here on this planet and reject our humanity in order to be "spiritual".
Rejection is not spiritual. Integration – to bring the opposites (man + woman, physical + spiritual, dark + light) together – Re-ligio (religion) – Yoga – to heal – that is what spirituality is about. But here is somehing which doesn’t fit. These lamayogis who have been meditating for 50 years or so in a cave, they didn’t integrate or ground themselves? Have you read Lama Govindas book The Way of the Wite Clouds? A german lamastudent who travelled around in Tibet in the thirties. He describes such monks, as David-Neel does in her book Mysteries in Tibet. Lars
Response:
X-Ftn-To: Sahaj Yogi So maybe to arrive back on subject, what I look for in a teacher of Yoga is happiness and shakti. Have they reached a joyful relationship with "Self" in the practice that they teach? Is the joy genuine, filled with shakti, peace, and love or is it a merely ego based, self engrossed, and a self important type of self satisfied pride or pleasure?
I guess most will know what you expect and fake it. Or, at least, the sophisticated ones will. The good thing is that they don’t know what to fake, because they most likely never saw the real thing. But, they know how _you_ imagine spiritual people. Today, if you want real spirituality, listening to Mike Oldfield is the safest bet. — Homepage: http://www.danijel.org
Response:
Many organizations offer certification for yoga instructors. My own instructor is certified by the Kriapalu Institute. What are they franchise chains
Not at all. Kripalu is the largest center for yoga and holistic health in the US, serving people of all backgrounds for more than 20 years. They offer a large number of experiential yoga, self-discovery, holistic health, and spiritual programs that present ancient yogic principles in a contemporary, accessible, yet profound way. Their educational programs are designed to provide participants with tools they can apply in their daily lives to foster their long-term growth and development. I’m not affiliated in any way with Kripalu, other than being a satisfied student of one of its certified instructors. Hope that clears up your confusion.
–
Twists. Lengthens the spine, compresses the internal organs. 9) Sitting Asanas. Lotus, Sage, Cobbler,… 10) Prone Asanas. On Back and Front. 11) Inversions. Headstands, Shoulder Stands, Plough, …. . Reverses gravity on the body, changes blood circulation, .. 12) Moving Asanas. Increases energy in the body. Perhaps there could be a discussion of a Hatha practice of the week. Then one could go deeply into the details of what goes on in that practice, the problems, the benefits,… We could start anywhere, how about with Neti (Nose/Sinus Kriya)? Wade 
Categories: Yoga Instructors | 
No Comments »
, but I surely wish to learn it! I’m glad to hear you are doing so well, busy as it is. How is your sister doing btw? Are you an aunt yet? I hope things are going well with her too. Take good care hon, I’ll write you some more in the next couple of days. Love, Marloes ps. I say *A* at work today. It always makes me feel good to see her, she reminds me of you.