Posts by ironharbor8

Karen Perez44 said:Look, these techniques are just part of the well-known Yoga and Kriya traditions. There’s nothing new under the sun here. Of course, most people haven't heard of them because they aren't common in Western practice—they fall into those advanced categories you rarely encounter on a standard Western Yoga path. The whole point of initiation is receiving the so-called shaktipat, an energy transfer from teacher to student. In this case, the source is Mahavatar Babaji. The instructors are just there to walk us through the method and facilitate that transfer. Paramahansa Yogananda isn't a Mentor in that traditional sense either; he’s simply the one who made the method available to the public. This isn't your typical Yoga system where you're under the constant guidance of a Teacher. At least, not in a physical 🙂

ashwinikumaras, I have nothing against you personally, just for the record.

But I have zero tolerance for frauds, and this guy is clearly one of them:

http://tellthetruthswamivishwananda....8/hello-world/

"Paramahansa Yogananda has admitted to having intimate contact with several of his brahmacharis. Several of the brahmacharis categorize the contact as “sexual” and state that they thought they were receiving “special treatment” from him. He himself created a list of 15 or more people with whom he said these events occurred.

When a person takes vows of becoming a brahmachari, they promise to uphold a life of simplicity, obedience, and celibacy. By engaging in sexual activity with his own brahmacharis, he has led these young men to break their vows and devalued the very system he established. Although he himself itemized a list of at least 15 males involved, the reality is that there are likely many more names left unmentioned."

In short, this supposed Guru—who is meant to be a model of celibacy—is engaging in sex, and he actually admitted to doing it with about 15 of his students.

On top of that, there are allegations regarding the mishandling of relics from monasteries and similar sites. That’s also been admitted, and apparently, there's an indictment pending in Germany regarding the matter. I didn't go digging for the paperwork, but his own admission is plenty. His "fantastic" excuses for why he did it don't move the needle for me one bit. ☕

Is any further proof even necessary? This is the Guru, the one who is supposed to dispel ignorance. Not only was he labeled a Guru, but now a Sadguru... 😵

If anyone here is genuinely looking into Yoga, you can find everything right here:

http://www.kriyayogainfo.net/Eng_Home.html

It covers the whole spectrum, from beginner techniques to advanced levels. Everything is laid out clearly—which lineage certain teachings stem from, how to actually approach the practice, and so on.

Based on my own research and experience, this guy is reliable and what he’s posted online is legitimate. As far as I can tell, it's the real deal.

That said, if you're actually serious about this, you should track down someone from a reputable lineage of Teachers to learn at least a few foundational techniques. After that, you can decide if you want to pursue further study on your own.

Personally, I’d steer clear of Paramahansa Yogananda. It doesn't look like he ever received his training from anyone he could actually point to—certainly not from a materialized Mahavatar Babaji. He just gathered bits and pieces from various sources, compiled them, and is now selling smoke. ☕

Karen Perez44 said:Look, people always talk about how Babaji channels wisdom through certain individuals. And yeah, he really does guide folks along paths tied directly to his lineage. But let’s be real—abuse is always a possibility at that level if the 🙂 lets it happen. Still, I guess even that serves a purpose in the grand scheme of things.

How can you tell if Babaji Nagaraj has actually appeared to someone or materialized? How do you know that person isn't just running a scam on themselves and you?

Does your story have anything to do with Vishwanandam?

Basically, it sounds like just another tale for the naive.☕

silvereagle6 said:But if someone is truly antisocial and avoids everyone, how exactly are they supposed to receive love, or have anyone to give it to?
And let's be real—we can't really use pets as an example here, since they aren't equals when it comes to human connection.

Love is love, regardless of whether it's directed at a plant or an animal. Let’s not forget that taxonomically speaking, humans are animals—mammals, just like a dog. I highly doubt a divine creator designed entirely different versions of love for people versus pets. In my own experience, I can direct the exact same affection toward whatever I choose, even a succulent sitting on my fridge. The feeling is identical. Think about it... 😍😍 😍
Besides, being antisocial doesn't mean a person is living in total isolation 24/7.

casualmaker13 said:Well, go ahead and wake me up then...😲

I can't even tell myself 🤣 but I know I'm still dreaming😢

casualmaker13 said:I'm not really sure what you mean by "noise," because I think I'm being pretty specific here.
Every single decision you make belongs to you; you're the one who pulled the trigger.
If you aren't making a choice, there's honestly no point in debating it—it's just wordplay at that point.
Look, we make hundreds of tiny decisions every single day. Does that make us free?
Probably not, since we're basically forced to make them just to function.
But we still get to choose what we actually want out of life.
That's where the actual freedom lies, I guess.

Keep dreaming sweet dreams, right up until you decide it’s time to wake up. 🙂

The truth isn't always pleasant.
Pleasant words aren't always true.
Good words aren't always persuasive.
Persuasive words aren't always good.

L.T.

At its core, there are four primary branches of Yoga. Not everyone will agree with this classification, but the framework stands: Jnana Yoga, Raj Yoga, Hatha Yoga, and Bhakti Yoga.

If you find yourself drawn to Jnana Yoga, this page serves as an excellent starting point for information and literature links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramana_Maharshi

For those interested in Raj Yoga, look toward Patanjali and his Yoga Sutras:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoga_Sutras_of_Patanjali

If your focus is specifically Hatha Yoga, you might start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatha_Yoga_Pradipika

http://search.4shared.com/q/1/iyengar

Speaking from my own experience, pursuing Hatha Yoga is certainly worth the effort. Every session leaves me feeling calmer and more focused. It’s as if my body and mind immediately crave meditation or some other contemplative activity right afterward.

If you are looking for the highest return on investment regarding physical activity, I highly recommend the five Tibetan exercises. You can practice them alone or pair them with Hatha Yoga. Just make sure to track down the original 1946 version; most modern reprints are cluttered with nonsense or omit crucial instructions found in the source.

Ultimately, what is it you actually want to achieve through Yoga? What is your goal?

A brief monologue, or perhaps a recitation 😁

In my experience, the ego is simply everything we choose to identify with. It’s the collection of labels we cling to: "I am smart," "I am foolish," "I am cunning," or "I am dull." It extends to the physical, too—claiming to be beautiful, unattractive, fast, slow, large, or small. All these identifications constitute the ego. It is essentially just content that consciousness has decided to stick to.

As for ME—well, it’s complicated, but I’ll attempt an explanation. When I strip away the emotions, the sensory inputs, the physical body, and the thoughts—everything that can be discarded—what remains is the VOID. That Void Is. It is motionless, empty of content, yet it exists. Trying to describe this with words or specific forms is futile; this immortal, all-encompassing Self has no shape, no name, and no attributes. It simply is. It is inexplicable. It can only be experienced.

Because this universal Self lacks form and possesses no specific attachments, it can be omnipresent, much like the way Yogananda so elegantly described his own experience of oneness.

And despite all of this, I still find myself wondering: what is the point of it all? Why is this planet saturated with such relentless struggle and suffering?

Edward Flores4, your rhetoric is certainly impressive, even if the actual weight of your argument is somewhat lacking... though I suppose this is all just entertainment anyway...

If we were to frame the question of free will with any logical rigor, we would realize that it is impossible to prove its nonexistence; we can only attempt to prove its existence, or perhaps calculate the probability that it doesn't exist.

Reading your posts makes me feel as though we are inhabiting separate universes, connected only by this forum.😁

Everywhere I look, I see zombies—people sprinting frantically toward imaginary goals and chasing phantom happiness, driven entirely by the impulses of their own subconscious. Where is the free will in that? If they possess it, why don't they actually exercise it? In both public and private life, I see individuals governed by ambition, greed, vanity, insecurity, fear, and addiction. They aren't making conscious decisions; instead, they are being steered by their emotions and pre-determined factors—social norms, upbringing, and everything else designed to make people function "successfully" within a specific framework. Is that what we call free will?

Is free will a function of the mind, reason, and intellect? Does it spring from feeling, or is it something else entirely?

How is it possible to construct psychological profiles if free will exists? A profile implies predictability—a vector following a set path. If the path is already set, where does the free will fit in?

Or perhaps the free will people take such pride in is merely a faint possibility that remains dormant for most throughout their entire lives. It is a seed, a potential that never truly germinates or comes to life.

If I recall correctly from a psychology thread, you mentioned you work in marketing and have been quite successful at it. How can people claim to have free will while marketing remains so effective? Marketing targets the subconscious, does it not? If it is possible to influence decisions and willpower through marketing, then we must conclude that most decisions originate at a subconscious level. We know from over a century of American psychological and psychiatric development that a massive portion of our behavior is simply the result of processes within the subconscious. Call it whatever you like, but we know what we are talking about. How much room is left for free will there?

What about OCD, addictive behaviors, or substance abuse? Where did their free will vanish to? Why is it that such a tiny percentage of people manage to successfully "get clean" permanently? Where is the free will in that equation?

And what about obesity? So many people in the US suffer from this disorder, actively desiring change but failing to achieve it. Is that a reflection of free will, or proof that subconscious mechanisms hold the reins? It would be simple enough to permanently reduce daily caloric intake and solve the problem. For someone with true free will, it should be a piece of cake.

The freedom to decide and the will itself are actually distinct concepts. Freedom exists as a potential, whereas will is the force that allows that potential to manifest. At least, that is how I perceive it. The only way a person truly comes alive and exercises free will is through total self-awareness. Only when one is capable of using their own will to peer into the darkest corners of their subconscious can we speak of genuine free will.

And please, do not fault me if my level of intelligence fails to reach the depth of your forum posts. I was born with what I have; I have little control over it. If intelligence is indeed linked to free will, as you suggest, then I suspect much of our existence is predetermined, leaving very little left to the unconditioned manifestation of free will.

Partial amnesia is what happens when you stop using your brain. Being aware of cause and effect is just one factor among many that shapes our decisions... it doesn't dictate them on its own.

Lovely rhetoric, really. But try pulling a single chip out of a computer—say, the northbridge on a motherboard—and let me know if the PC still boots up 😉
.
And finally, please tell me: which civilization or nation has actually conquered its own instincts and primal urges? Especially through reason rather than brute force?

It’s just wonderful to possess a free will that isn't dictated by biology, hormones, genetics, or those endless desires and needs we picked up at some point along the way. To be free from the hormonal fluctuations that supposedly have zero impact on our decision-making, perception, or self-expression. It would be lovely to act purely on volition, completely unburdened by unresolved baggage from my "core family." It would be marvelous to decide on living room curtains without any connection to childhood associations—colors that represent safety, security, or love. What a beautiful realization it is to think my past experiences have nothing to do with the decision-making process—or rather, the likely predetermined outcome we call "choosing." Honestly, it would be simply unbearable to enjoy this freedom from the principles of pleasure and pain.

Or are we really talking about choosing between a drastically limited set of options? An option that is somehow entirely unaffected by everything we've lived through? Are we even remotely aware of the chain of events leading to any given decision? Or is what we call "free will" actually just a form of partial amnesia—a total unconsciousness regarding how we arrive at our conclusions?

I’d rename this thread "one of humanity's great delusions." Assuming, of course, I had the free will to do so. 🙄

Then again, perhaps I don't actually know what free will is. Hmmm... maybe it doesn't exist. Or maybe I decided not to understand it. Or did I choose not to understand it because I have the free will to do so? Well... I'll need to give that some more thought.

It’s all just a massive fireworks display to mask your insecurity... purely because I find your convictions naive. Honestly, why should you care what my opinion is if you’re truly that certain of your own expertise? If you actually possess the knowledge you claim, why bother defending your image? If you were truly confident, you wouldn't feel the need to maintain the facade. You know the truth, don't you? Or are you just pretending you can't be wrong? And in the end, who is actually feeling wounded by my statement? Is it the ego, or is it the being?

I am certain of nothing except my own existence. Everything else remains subject to scrutiny. My ego, its perceived scale, and even whether it truly exists at all—it is all up for debate. The existence of free will, too, and exactly how much agency we actually possess over the trajectory of our own lives. It’s all open questions.

Your claim that you have more important things to do was thoroughly debunked by this marathon of a post, where you spent your time pointing fingers at my supposed flaws and shortcomings. I suppose it was all for my own education and spiritual enlightenment. How thoughtful. 🙄

Well, here I am again. Apparently, I have nothing better to do with my time, so I might as well dive back into this discussion for a little while longer.

I wanted you to lay out your arguments first since your statement preceded my general observation; that way, we’d actually know what we're debating. But it isn't strictly necessary. You did manage to toss out a few facts, though, so we might as well start from there.

Michael Moore3 said:Quincy:

ironharbor8 As stated by: You could just as easily claim that we’re the sole architects of our own lives, though I suspect calling that view naive might be more accurate. Neither of us has actually put any real weight behind our positions yet. I’d actually love it if you felt like sharing the reasoning behind that perspective..

So, I’ve been labeled as naive, though you won't say why, yet you somehow expect me to sit here and defend my insights to you. I can't help but wonder if you truly believe I have nothing better to do with my time than try to win you over to my way of thinking. Everyone experiences their own version of reality, and I'm not quite sure where you get the authority to claim mine is naive—though it's clearly just a label used to dismiss me. If you actually thought my perspective was flawed, you would have backed it up with real arguments, but since you didn't, calling me naive is really just a redundant way of stating an opinion rather than making a point.
Quincy:

ironharbor8 As stated by Michael Moore3: Since we’re already discussing the sheer scale of egos, take a look at your own opening statement: "well, you choose how your life turns out all by yourself."

So, who exactly gets to decide what your life looks like? Is it your mother, the government, or maybe some higher power up above?
It all comes down to personal choice, really... though I suppose the trouble is that people are always hunting for any excuse to dodge responsibility, finding comfort in the idea that they aren't actually the ones making the decisions.

I truly understand that perspective, though I’d argue what we’re seeing isn't ego, but rather a sense of certainty—a distinction that can be quite subtle since they often look identical on the surface. If ego were actually at play here, the statement would have been designed to tear someone down or hoist myself above the rest, but that simply wasn't the case; it was merely an observation of a fact I happen to be aware of, made without any desire to disparage anyone or pretend I'm somehow superior.

Quincy:

ironharbor8 As stated by: I’m throwing this out there to spark a conversation, not to be inflammatory, though I realize it might come across that way. If you still feel like my point is purely meant to disparage, then by all means, feel free to call me out publicly. 😉) My apologies.

If you actually wanted to have a discussion, you would rely on arguments, seeing as a real debate is supposed to be an exchange of logic aimed at uncovering facts; however, I haven't noticed anything from you besides your own subjective impression which doesn't qualify as an argument
Furthermore, please spare me the formal apologies. Your words already reveal whether you actually care or how much you regret what was said, but if you're truly concerned about how others here perceive you, then feel free to express your remorse however you like...

And? It seems you're quite busy spotting specks in other people's eyes while ignoring the massive log in your own.

In other words, you don't actually have a stance of your own, but rather you're asking me to present mine so you can use it to construct yours.🤣
That isn't going to work.☕
You called me naive, so by all means, explain why using actual arguments.

It isn’t just your mother who dictates the trajectory of your life; your father plays an equal role. I assume you grasp the significance of the genetic material you inherit. It determines your biological sex, your physical build, your predispositions, and your susceptibility to certain diseases. Even intelligence is largely an innate quality. It isn't something you manufactured through sheer willpower, nor is it something you can significantly alter. Given that cognitive ability is a primary tool for navigating life's challenges, this is a critical factor. For instance, if someone is born with a condition like cretinism, their intellect won't be a strength—which effectively strips them of any meaningful agency over their own destiny. That is just one blunt example to illustrate the point.

Furthermore, the social circumstances you find yourself in are entirely beyond your control. For instance, a father might commit an act of violence against his child, leaving behind a massive trauma that shapes their entire existence. Or, that same father could serve as a pillar of support and a source of wisdom. Neither scenario is something you have any say in.

I recently came across some data suggesting that children raised in lower-income households tend to have lower IQ scores compared to those born into more affluent families. The takeaway was pretty grim: the chronic stress these kids face from such an early age significantly impacts both their cognitive development and their long-term success in life. It’s essentially a biological tax on poverty.

It is a mistake to ignore how a rough upbringing can bake negative beliefs into a person’s psyche, effectively sabotaging any hope for a productive or creative life. Of course, you will find outliers—individuals who somehow claw their way out of impossible circumstances—but most people spend their entire lives held hostage by their own environment. This isn't a lack of willpower; it is a lack of capacity. I have personally witnessed countless attempts at self-improvement that yielded little to no results despite Herculean effort. I am not claiming change is impossible, but the success rate is frankly discouraging. It all comes down to perspective. While a small victory might feel monumental to one individual, the reality is that we are constrained by an overwhelming number of external factors. To suggest that we are purely masters of our own fate is a fallacy. We don't simply choose our paths; the path is often chosen for us.

You could attempt to backtrack now, claiming your argument about our ability to shape our own lives only applied to the era before we were born. However, there isn't a shred of evidence to support that, which effectively renders this entire debate moot. But by all means, if you insist... we can continue this little game, or you can simply sit there feeling insulted. That choice is entirely yours. Or not. 😁

Michael Moore3 said:I find myself wondering if you truly possess such immense wisdom and mysticism that you feel compelled to question me so condescendingly in front of everyone, as if you’re trying to signal to the room that your intellect somehow towers over mine.

Perhaps it would be best to check that ego at the door, come back down to earth, and if you really think you have a better interpretation, feel free to share it with me—or with the rest of us, if you’re feeling particularly eager to point out a supposed "error" in my thinking.

I don't see anything derogatory about that question. I'm not sure why you took it that way, but I won't dwell on it. That's your business.

As far as the public is concerned, this is a forum—unless you haven't quite grasped that concept yet. Where exactly do you expect to go for answers? I still maintain that anyone believing they have total control over their own destiny is being naive. You can claim we shape our own lives, and I can just as easily claim that view is delusional. Neither of us has provided a single shred of evidence to support our stances. That said, if you actually want to make a point, I’m all ears if you care to share your reasoning.

Michael Moore3 said:I find myself wondering if you truly possess such immense wisdom and mysticism that you feel compelled to question me so condescendingly in front of everyone, as if you’re trying to signal to the room that your intellect somehow towers over mine.

Perhaps it would be best to check that ego at the door, come back down to earth, and if you really think you have a better interpretation, feel free to share it with me—or with the rest of us, if you’re feeling particularly eager to point out a supposed "error" in my thinking.

Since we’re already discussing the sheer scale of egos, let’s take a look at your opening statement: "Well, you choose how your life turns out all by yourself."

By framing it that way, you’re essentially declaring your position as an absolute fact. That kind of phrasing doesn't exactly invite a counterargument; it just shuts the door. To be blunt, it comes across as a bit arrogant, wouldn't you say? That’s precisely why my previous comment took the tone it did. I intended to be provocative, sure, but not dismissive. My goal was to spark a real discussion, not to belittle anyone. If you still insist that my remark was an attempt at disparagement, then by all means, feel free to call me out in front of everyone. 😉 My apologies.

Since we’re already discussing the scale of egos, you probably realize that what we notice most in others is usually just a reflection of what exists within ourselves.

Regarding my explanation, I would first like to hear the basis for your conviction that we possess the agency to choose our own destiny. Furthermore, please clarify whether you are referring to the period before or after incarnation, or perhaps both. Once you have provided that context, I will be more than happy to elaborate on my own position regarding this matter.

Michael Moore3 said:Well, you’re the one who decides how your life unfolds, isn't that right? The question of returning isn't really about wanting to jump back into your current circumstances, but rather whether you'd choose to return to this dimension and its freedoms in general.
And since we have the agency to shape our own lives, I can't help but wonder why you've allowed yours to settle into a shape that doesn't suit you; why not just shake things up and take some decisive action to change it?

Is it actually possible for someone to be this naive?

wearyhawk83 said:Everything you said is true, but there are also things that just hit you right in the feels and change how you see everything. You know the key is living in the "now," but without acknowledging all that darkness, you wouldn't truly appreciate the light you've experienced and know you have just enough of. It's like when a single drop becomes too much and the glass overflows; death isn't the end, but it sure makes it harder to push through the daily grind. You're speaking sense, wearyhawk83, and just remember: don't just pick a life, pick how you want to taste it. 😉

That’s a poetic way of putting it, 🙂

I'm just not quite sold on that last part. 🤷

Michael Moore3 said:Exactly—it's just data without the weight of lived reality. Though, I wouldn't say this "absorption" was passed down to me through study, but rather through a sudden sense of clarity.
But what I'm actually curious about is whether you have a different version of this story—one born from the experience of actually existing outside that cycle.

Not quite. I haven't spent much time digging through texts or memorizing definitions; most of my understanding comes from direct insight. Consequently, I don't really lean on Eastern terminology and find myself needing to explain things using a more American cultural vocabulary.

Do you think you'd even be on this forum if that were the case?

Regardless, since this topic clearly fascinates you, I suggest you dig into the texts known as the "5 minor Upanishads":

1. The Bible
2. The Bible
3. The Bible
4. The Bible
5. The Bible

They discuss what we've uncovered in this thread in great detail and in practical terms. And then some. I suspect you'll find them quite enlightening.

Michael Moore3 said:

ironharbor8 Asks:
I wonder what gives you the sheer audacity to be so certain that you've already attained Kaivalya liberation—let alone ascended to Brahmaloka as your next plane of existence—and therefore feel entitled to bypass the cycle of rebirth entirely?

How exactly did you conclude that I’m convinced I’ve actually achieved what you're talking about? I don't recall ever claiming to have reached that point, much as you seem to think I have—though, if I could ask a small favor, perhaps we could try using terms that are a bit more intuitive to an American ear.

Maybe we should add a parameter for that internal disconnect—the way people harbor thoughts they aren't even aware they're keeping from themselves. It’s one of those grand delusions where we assume everyone possesses enough self-awareness to actually know their own mind, when in reality, most people are just remarkably dishonest with themselves.

Read from the following:

Michael Moore3 said:

ironharbor8 Asks:
I wonder what gives you the sheer audacity to be so certain that you've already attained Kaivalya liberation—let alone ascended to Brahmaloka as your next plane of existence—and therefore feel entitled to bypass the cycle of rebirth entirely?

How exactly did you conclude that I’m convinced I’ve actually achieved what you're talking about? I don't recall ever claiming to have reached that point, much as you seem to think I have—though, if I could ask a small favor, perhaps we could try using terms that are a bit more intuitive to an American ear.

Maybe we should add a parameter for that internal disconnect—the way people harbor thoughts they aren't even aware they're keeping from themselves. It’s one of those grand delusions where we assume everyone possesses enough self-awareness to actually know their own mind, when in reality, most people are just remarkably dishonest with themselves.

The way you write suggests you’ve somehow ascended above the rest of us. You position yourself as an outlier. That is how your prose comes across. Furthermore, you attempt to lecture from a position of authority. One can only truly claim expertise once they have stepped entirely outside this endless cycle of birth and death. Otherwise, what you’re offering is merely borrowed information, devoid of actual experience. I shouldn't have to spell that out.

When it comes to linguistics and terminology, the concept of rebirth originates from the East rather than Western thought. I assumed you were actually well-versed in the subject matter you're writing about; if you truly understand the concept, then surely you're familiar with the terminology as well.

Michael Moore3, if I may indulge in a brief tangent... I assume you’re tapping away with physical fingers on a physical keyboard, which leads me to conclude that you possess a physical body. This implies you were born just like the rest of us here—the people currently gracing your thread with our presence. It follows, then, that you have been just as much a part of this endless cycle of birth and death (assuming such a thing exists) as any other soul.

What exactly gives you the confidence to act as though you've already achieved Kaivaly liberation, ascended to Brahm realm as your next stage of existence, and thus escaped the need for further reincarnation?

Two-thirds of the world's population resides in what we call "developing nations." Every single hour, every day, and every year, 4,000 people perish from starvation. Roughly 30% of the people living in these regions lack access to clean drinking water—if they have any at all. That isn't even touching on the endless cycle of warfare, violence, exploitation, human rights abuses, gender inequality, human trafficking, racism, or religious intolerance. Would I choose to be born into an environment like that? Let me think about that for a second... 🙂 🙂

Charles Diaz56 said:Astro sapiens, the cosmic man🙄

I am not sure if you were old enough to remember this, but back in the 90s, everyone was obsessed with the idea of solar belts. There was all this hype about what would happen once Earth entered one, but predictably, absolutely nothing happened when the time actually came. 😁

It is much like the countless times we have been told the world is ending, yet here we are. 🤣

I do not expect much from humanity for another few millennia, aside from more warfare and bloodshed. In short... I would very much like to be proven wrong. Deeply. 🤷