Yama

[Bruce Michael]

Hi Friends,
It is interesting that Pantanjali in his Yoga Aphorisms makes this distinction between wealth and theft:

"When abstinence from theft, in mind and act, is complete in the Yogee, he has the power to obtain all material wealth."

Rudolf Steiner gives the broader definition of stealing in his summing up of Yama:

"Yama includes everything which has to be given up by one who wishes to go through a yoga training, and its precepts we find more fully expressed in the commandments: Non-lying, non-killing, non-stealing, non-extravagance, and non-desiring.

The commandment 'non-killing' is a very strict one, and holds good for all beings. No living being may be killed, or even injured, and the more strictly this is kept, the further the student is brought. It is beside the question to ask if this can be carried out in our civilization.

'Non-lying' is easier to understand when it is kept in mind that every lie is a murder on the astral plane.

'Non-stealing': That must also be carried out in its strictest sense. A European may say he is not stealing, but in the eyes of the oriental yogi the matter is not so lightly disposed of. In the countries where these precepts were first divulged by the great teachers of humanity, the conditions of life were much simpler, and the principle of theft could easily be fixed. But a yoga teacher would not agree that a European does not steal. If, for example, I appropriate in an unlawful way the working power of another person, if I procure a profit for myself, a profit that is permitted by law but that means the exploitation of another person, the yoga teacher will call that 'stealing.' Our ways of life are complicated. Many transgress this commandment without being in any way aware of having done so.

'Non-extravagance' is just as complicated. A person whose money is invested in distilleries without his knowing it, is just as much guilty as the manufacturer who distils liquors. The fact of not knowing does not change the Karma. But if you are rich your possibility of hurting others is lessened in the proportion in which you strive after frugality.

'Non-desiring' is very difficult. It implies striving to be without any wants whatever; approaching the world without a single desire, and merely doing what is demanded of us by the outer world. Even the feeling of satisfaction in bestowing benefits must be suppressed. In the yoga teachings Yama is enforced with the utmost severity, and cannot, as it is now taught, be transplanted to Europe."

-Br.Bruce

[Eclectic Mystic]

It's possible to transgress without being aware of doing so? This teaching sounds like a ressentiment tactic used by nihlists to lure spiritually impressionable people into feeling guilty, self-loathing and ultimately submissive to the "Guru"'s will.

[fourgrtkidos]

I do not agree that this lures people into self loathing or guilt. However, if you understand the truth in the statements about distinctions between wealth and theft- then yes, many people would feel guilt as a result. I don't think that is the intent- however, if we let guilt fuel change and resonsible action, then the feeling isn't in vain. I wish people would be more responsible for their feelings.

In light of these tenents- we should be much more careful in every area of our lives..... what we buy, where we work, what we invest in, what we eat.......

Personal responsibility....... many people will say this is too strict and serious to live by.

[Eclectic Mystic]

Why is there necessarily a correlation between wealth and theft? Sounds like ressentiment to me.

Furthermore, I have no reason to believe guilt is ever for the greater benefit. People already have an incentive to be in harmony with the universe- why does an incentive need to be constructed out of nowhere and enforced as if to imply that one is not already there? Did you ever consider that demonizing a person may be the only reason they would consider acting like a demon in the first place?

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by Eclectic Mystic

It's possible to transgress without being aware of doing so? This teaching sounds like a ressentiment tactic used by nihlists to lure spiritually impressionable people into feeling guilty, self-loathing and ultimately submissive to the "Guru"'s will.

Hello Electic,
Yes, karmically you are responsible. One might argue that is it is more serious if you know you are doing wrong.
If this is a truth, wouldn't you rather know it than remain in ignorance? Peace seeking doesn't get you very far either- "ignorance is bliss" etc.

Those strictures are still practiced today in India by some Yogis. The Jain in particular are careful about non-killing. In the West students have found it more difficult.
You don't have to be a Yogee- that is your choice.

Non-lying, non-killing, non-stealing are principles that a student on the Right Hand path must always aspire to. It may not be always possible to carry them out, but it must be our goal.

It may appear in this world that by lying, stealing and killing, we advance our cause, but from the higher perspective, it is not so.

You indeed, have to be careful who you follow in this world. I for one, would prefer a teacher who didn't lie, didn't steal, and didn't condone murder.

As Bob Dylan wisely said "You gotta serve somebody."

Kind Regards,
Br.Bruce

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by fourgrtkidos

I do not agree that this lures people into self loathing or guilt. However, if you understand the truth in the statements about distinctions between wealth and theft- then yes, many people would feel guilt as a result. I don't think that is the intent- however, if we let guilt fuel change and resonsible action, then the feeling isn't in vain. I wish people would be more responsible for their feelings.

In light of these tenents- we should be much more careful in every area of our lives..... what we buy, where we work, what we invest in, what we eat.......

Personal responsibility....... many people will say this is too strict and serious to live by.

Hello Michelle,

You need to be careful with the translations of Pantanjali. For example just consider Sutra two:

Translations:
[b] Yoga is the ability to direct and focus mental activity.
[D] Yoga is the ability to direct the mind exclusively toward an object and sustain that direction without any distractions.
[F] Yoga is the restriction of the fluctuations of consciousness.
[H] Yoga is the suppression of the modifications of the mind.
[R] Yoga is the restraint of mental modifications.
[S] The restraint of the modifications of the mind-stuff is yoga.
[T] Yoga is the inhibition of the modifications of the mind.

Yoga is the ability to direct the mind exclusively toward an object and sustain that direction without any distractions.
Patanjali, Yoga Sutra Chapter 1

Or as I prefer, "Yoga is the ability to still the mental substance".

I thought it was interesting that he turned the idea around about obtaining all wealth.

God Bless,
Br.Bruce

[Eclectic Mystic]

You indeed, have to be careful who you follow in this world. I for one, would prefer a teacher who didn't lie, didn't steal, and didn't condone murder.

I didn't know there were such teachers who were taken seriously. How about teachers, on the other hand, who use the Right-hand path as a guise to lure? Wouldn't one need to be just as careful? Since we are just hypothesizing, I don't need specific examples.

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

Yes, karmically you are responsible.

Thanks for the compliment, but I already knew that.


Doesn't Karma have a sort of self-regulating nature, as it were? Why do people feel like they need to take on the role of Karma Police? And so eagerly on top of that? As far as I'm concerned, Karma policing is to Karma what Eugenics is to Natural Selection.

Doesn't the universe, which I'm sure you agree is perfect, already provide me with all that I would need to ascertain these truths? And what if it turns out not to be a truth? Isn't that True Ignorance? Taking on another person's reality tunnel is noble and even a basis of eclecticism. The next step, which I notice is too often neglected, is deciding for one's self. It must be emphasized (because I don't think we're yet on the same wavelength) that this deciding occurs after and not before.

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by Eclectic Mystic

Why is there necessarily a correlation between wealth and theft? Sounds like ressentiment to me.

Furthermore, I have no reason to believe guilt is ever for the greater benefit. People already have an incentive to be in harmony with the universe- why does an incentive need to be constructed out of nowhere and enforced as if to imply that one is not already there? Did you ever consider that demonizing a person may be the only reason they would consider acting like a demon in the first place?

You missed the irony of the non-desiring Yogee having control over all wealth.

Shame can be a great motivator; not so much that it breaks a man.

Yoga is a science. Efforts in Yoga produce results.

I don't see why you would say that Pantanjali is demonising his students. He points towards a perfecting of being, and that it will take work.

-Br.Bruce

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by Eclectic Mystic

I didn't know there were such teachers who were taken seriously. How about teachers, on the other hand, who use the Right-hand path as a guise to lure?

I could give you a longer checklist than that.
People do indeed line up in their droves seeking entrance to the mock temples.

Nothing is at it seems. You can't rely on names and titles when it comes to finding a decent teacher. Some of the worst people in the world have been Priests, Bishops or even Popes.

You would expect someone who follows the Father of all Lies to practice deception.

Originally Posted by Eclectic Mystic

Doesn't the universe, which I'm sure you agree is perfect, already provide me with all that I would need to ascertain these truths?

On a smaller scale, doesn't your house contain all you need to know about the truths of plumbing and carpentry?

No the universe is not perfect. Father God is Perfect.

For the reasons of Brotherhood we all help each other out when it comes to learning. No man is an island. Truth be told, it is not possible for you to know everything there is to know without ever consulting a teacher.

The role of the teacher has lessened since the times when the Guru or hierophant demanded submission. There is a freer association with the Christian mystic and Rosicrucian.


>The next step, which I notice is too often neglected, is deciding for one's self. It must be emphasized (because I don't think we're yet on the same wavelength) that this deciding occurs after and not before.[/quote]

Of course you must decide for yourself. Any imposition on a man is a disgrace.

-Br.Bruce