Does Anybody Here Practice Bhakti Yoga, If So What Do You Do?

[Joseph Maynor]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti_yoga

Have you read about ISKCON?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_for_Krishna_Consciousness

Edited July 23, 2017 by Joseph Maynor

[Leo Gura]

I have a friend who's into it right now. Up to his neck in Hare Krishna.

I'm sure it can be a valid path.

But the real danger with it is that people become dogmatic zombies. This path basically makes you a zealot of your school. It can potentially become disastrous because it's basically cult behavior.

I very much doubt that it, by itself, will produce that many awakenings.

But I haven't done it myself, so I cannot be sure.

[Joseph Maynor]

@Leo Gura If you take our human reality to be Maya, then why take a sober, scientific view of life? Maybe that clings too much to a paradigm.  Maybe Bhakti Yoga is a way of liberation from that sterile kind of intellectual life.  Just a thought.  A liberation from taking life too seriously, too literally.  The scientist awakens to the realization that religion is a nice myth among his other myths of reality.  There is no right myth, no True paradigm.  So why not expand into myth a little bit, maybe progressively over time.  This has parallels to psychedelics, but on a theoretical rather than a perceptual level.  You lose the science perspective, the perspective of the careful knower, the straight, hard-nosed thinker.  You discover that that is a limited paradigm, finite perspective, role, among an infinite number of equally valid and equally ridiculous possibilities.  It's a way to dissolve need to have right answer.  This might work to dissolve your web of beliefs more.  This is tough for me too, because like you I have a very conceptual, intellectual, tough-minded "view" of our Maya.  Practicing Bhakti Yoga non-dogmatically would be key.  Kind of like experiencing spirituality through poetry rather than prose.  Through myth rather than through science.  My guess is the ideal would be analogous to a kind of poetic-prose like Emerson or Santayana's writing style, a middle-way.  After all, none of this stuff is pointing directly at the Truth anyway.  It just hints around it.  Why not fold Maya in on itself, make a tasty sandwich out of it, and then eat it for lunch?  Then laugh, meditate a little bit and actually be the Truth for a while.

"Being is magic"  "Reality is mystical"  -- Leo Gura

Watch this video on point:

 

Edited July 23, 2017 by Joseph Maynor

[Prabhaker]

@Joseph Maynor

The quality of the mind has basically changed. In Patanjali’s days, the center of the human personality was not the brain; it was the heart. And before that, it was not even the heart. It was still lower, near the navel. Hatha yoga developed methods which were useful, meaningful, to the person whose center of personality was the navel. Then the center became the heart. Only then could bhakti yoga be used. Bhakti yoga developed in the middle ages because that is when the center of personality changed from the navel to the heart.

A method has to change according to the person to whom it is applied. Now, not even bhakti yoga is relevant. The center has gone even further from the navel. Now, the center is the brain. That is why teachings like those of Krishnamurti have appeal. No method is needed, no technique is needed — only understanding. But if it is just a verbal understanding, just intellectual, nothing changes, nothing is transformed. It again becomes an accumulation of knowledge.

Osho, The Psychology of the Esoteric, Ch 4, Q 1, Excerpt

The path of devotion is easy has created much trouble. So those who are not for the path of devotion go on it. But then they cannot become like Meera or Chaitanya; it is not for them. It is not for them! They have not chosen according to themselves. They have chosen according to the fallacious concept that is prevalent.

Really, those who choose the path of bhakti, they do not really choose it to travel it. They think that through it there is nothing to be done and you gain everything. The path of bhakti is believed to be such that you need not do anything and you attain everything – that just bhakti is enough. They say that not even bhakti, but just naarn smaran – remembering of the name – will do. And particularly for the Kaliyuga!

Really, those who do not want to do anything, they choose bhakti, and bhakti is not a promise that you will attain everything without doing anything. Bhakti demands your totality. It is not just naam  smaran – you have to surrender yourself totally, but total surrender is arduous. This false belief has created so many so-called devotional people, but they are deceiving themselves.

Choose according to you yourself; be aware of yourself first. Really, if you are aware of yourself you need not choose. You will begin to move on the path that is for you. Just be aware of yourself. Feel yourself more and more; meditate and feel yourself more and more. Then do not bother about any choice.

Meera has never chosen. It has happened! Nor has Mahavir chosen. It has happened! If you know yourself, if you feel yourself and you meditate, by and by, you will move in the direction which is for you. You will move toward your destiny. If you choose, you will disturb things – because your choice is, after all, your choice. How can you choose your destiny? You can only allow it to happen; you cannot choose it.

If you choose, then you fall into a deep fallacy. You are bound to choose wrongly. You are wrong, so you are bound to choose wrongly! Then much endeavour will be wasted, and you will go on rationalizing, ”Why am I doing so much, and such and such is not happening? If it is not happening, then there must be some reasons! My past karmas are creating a barrier. Or, I have to make a much greater effort. Or, I need much more time. Or, I started late, so in the next life I will start early.”

Man goes on rationalizing. Rationalizations will not help. Do not try to choose. Rather, allow! Feel your swabhav – your nature – your Tao; feel your intrinsic possibilities. Be sensitive, meditate, and do not try to choose. By and by, you will move in a particular direction. That movement will come to you; it will not be a chosen effort. It will happen to you, it will grow in you, and you will begin to move.

The Ultimate Alchemy, Vol 2
Osho

 

Edited July 23, 2017 by Prabhaker

[Leo Gura]

@Joseph Maynor It sounds good in theory. But in practice dogma will seize hold of you and create ugly problems.

Enlightenment first.

Then love.

Love without enlightenment cannot work. You cannot trick yourself into loving unconditionally so long as the ego identity is still active. People who try to love without deep self-inquiry first, will find their love corrupted.

The danger of Bhakti Yoga is that you may never directly experience the Absolute, but merely convince yourself through imagery and belief that you have.

[Nahm]

@Leo Gura That's Awesome.

[Toby]

Actually, every path has Bhakti elements. You cannot really go deep in meditation and inquiry without love; you cannot go deep in love without meditation and inquiry.
Just look at for example Zen: It has plenty of Bhakti in it. The reciting / singing of mantras / sutras. The bowing / prostrating. The commitment through all kinds of outer rules.

[Leo Gura]

@Toby There is of course truth to that. Practicing a bit of love here and there is good. The question is more about: what's gonna be your primary vehicle to enlightenment? I think self-inquiry is the less-dangerous vehicle because once you grasp enlightenment, your capacity for love will skyrocket. It will flow naturally. You won't have the ego in the way as much. Whereas if you try to get enlightenment through practicing devotion, that's very iffy. It may never happen. You may just end up a fanatic who's able to love only those things which fit your paradigm of devotion. Of course that's not a guarantee. I'm sure plenty of people have become legit enlightened through Bhakti. It's more a question of percentages and risk profile.

Bhakti Yoga is good for people who are very heart-centered.

Self-inquiry is good for people who are more head-centered.

Gandhi is an interesting case-study. He devoted his whole life to spiritual practice, but I don't think he ever actually experienced the Absolute. (I might be wrong about that, but that's what my research suggests).

Mother Teresa is another interesting case-study. She devoted her whole life to spiritual practice, but her private diaries reveal that she was a deeply unhappy and neurotic person. Which suggests her grasp of the Absolute was not grounded in direct experience, but merely beliefs.

And I doubt anyone here will be as hardcore a Bhakti practitioner as Gandhi or Mother Teresa. They were super-stars in this technique.

[Guest Annetta]

I have had heart related awakenings.  I am choosing the path of the mind personally.  It seems less likely to be corrupted and misused by Other.

[AlwaysBeNice]

I think adding metta/devotion/loving practice on top of meditation practice is very good, we've often become out of touch with natural sense of brother/sister/family love, or even for nature, just adding a little every day surely can't hurt.

I like meditating on Ramana Maharshi's pictures, very powerful and on my deceased dad, fascinating and deeply touching.

Also a bit unrelated, but imagining being other people you know.. pooowerful, so profound, especially once you start to really belief or know you are them, just as much as you are.

 

[aEOf]

Premises are - chant, dance, and eat. There's a couple of other subtleties. "Food for Life". What is life? Krishna is mentioned a lot. And Prabhupada. 

Edited October 6, 2017 by aEOf
More