Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Some Questions Answered Courtesy of Iyengar

Well as usual somebody (Iyengar, in Light on Life) has definitely thought of everything I have thought of already, phrased it better, and provided a rational and practical reassurance for the challenge of living comfortably with uncertainty. Oh spiritual stuff, you are so old and well-churned.

First, re: my concerns on art existing as a function of our self-destruction, and losing all that precious gut-wrenching beauty etc etc to the humanity-neutralizing bliss of enlightenment:

"According to Indian philosophy, art is of two types. One is called bhogakala, the art of appeasing the pleasure of the body and mind. The other is yogakala, the art of auspicious performance to please the spiritual heart of the soul."

Okay, so this is about intent, sure. I hope it doesn't mean all art becomes recordings of birds flapping and stuff like that. But I can see where this goes. Maybe there will be more on this eventually. Next!

Re: merging with the Universal (bliss = samadhi) sounds boring and impractical:

"Samadhi is an experience, which . . . is worth struggling to reach. It is transformative and utterly purifying. But what then? Samadhi is a state of being in which you cannot do. You cannot catch a bus when in samadhi. In a state of oneness, how would you be able to discriminate which one to get on? Samadhi leaves the practitioner changed forever, but he still has to get dressed in the morning, eat breakfast, and answer his correspondence. Nature does not simply disappear once and for all. It is simply that the realized yogi is never again unaware of the true relationship between Nature and Cosmic Soul."

Okay good! There's another quote about "ego" - which, even though it is undesirable and we want to get rid of it - as a necessary alias for helping us function in the world, but I can't find it right now. Yoga, she is so reasonable.

No comments:

Post a Comment