Tantra, which came after classical yoga, had two new revolutionary offerings: 1 – it offered the possibility of liberation in this lifetime (as opposed to having to wait many [...]]]> I found this in Yoga Journal’s Yoga Diary, an excerpt from Getting Nerdy with Tantra by Karen Macklin, about a lecture on Tantric Yoga by Chris Tompkins:

Tantra, which came after classical yoga, had two new revolutionary offerings: 1 – it offered the possibility of liberation in this lifetime (as opposed to having to wait many lifetimes to become enlightened) and 2 – it offered practices that were life and body affirming (meaning that the Tantra practitioners saw things of daily life – eating, dancing, reading, etc.- as paths to liberation as opposed to obstacles).

… I have been studying this path for the last two years or so and I love the messages it conveys – that we can move toward a higher state of consciousness and unity with the universe, while still living in the world as householders and human beings.

Here’s a quote Tompkins provided about the Tantrik vision of samadhi, which is speculated to be taken from around the 12th Century:

“The sages say that samadhi is the perpetual realization of the sameness of the individual soul and the supreme soul.”

In other words, we are not only in the universe, but the universe exists in each and every one of us.

I haven’t had much exposure to the various philosophies associated with Yoga, just bits and pieces, but the logic and simplicity of what I have seen, read, heard and experienced appeals to me. The concept of a Universal Consciousness or Spirit of which we are all a part and dwells with each of us, seems more reassuring than a far away bi-polar anthropomorphic deity who sits in judgment, demanding that we love, fear and obey Him. It seems like a dysfunctional relationship.

For what it’s worth…

Life as Lunch

I am sandwich. And you, my friend, are apple turnover. Is it by some act of Man or God That we should meet here In this world called Lunch?

I am salami as you are fruit pie. Despite our outside differences We are made from the same [...]]]> Here’s a bit of poetry I wrote many years ago.

Life as Lunch

I am sandwich.
And you, my friend, are apple turnover.
Is it by some act of Man or God
That we should meet here
In this world called Lunch?

I am salami as you are fruit pie.
Despite our outside differences
We are made from the same flour
And we shall churn together
In the same digestive tract.

And when we reach our final destination
We shall be one and the same,
Returning to the soil to bring forth a new life
In which I may be jelly donut
And you, my friend, pastrami on rye.

©1976, Richard Romig

The poem reflects some of my basic beliefs about the cycle of life, the idea that our existence is not just one shot at getting it right. Our souls (spirits) are reborn into different bodies in different circumstances to follow a variety of paths so that we can continually learn and ultimately achieve oneness with the universal spirit.

For what it’s worth…

Why is Christianity so exclusive? It’s do it our way or burn [...]]]> Warning! Reading this post may piss you off. You may feel it’s blasphemous or heretical. You may be certain that I’m bound for eternal damnation. I make no apologies, so either get over it or let it fester and eat away at your soul.

Why is Christianity so exclusive? It’s do it our way or burn in Hell. Those are apparently the only options offered. I’m sure there are other religions, probably most Western religions, that also subscribe to the “You’re either with us or agin us” philosophy.

Particularly in matters of the spirit, it’s nearly impossible to be a Christian and even acknowledge another belief structure. You can’t be a Catholic and a Methodist or a Baptist and a Lutheran. You can’t be a Christian and a Buddhist, although to a Buddhist that’s entirely possible.

There are some who say you can’t be a Christian and also practice naturism although there is nothing in Scripture to prohibit it. I do know many Christians who are naturists (nudists).

I’ve seen where some Christians (probably with more fundamentalist beliefs), find Christianity and the practice of yoga to be incompatible although there are undoubtedly many Christians who see no problem with practicing yoga for it’s health benefits.

Yoga has profoundly spiritual aspects and does have its roots in Hinduism but it doesn’t necessarily follow that practicing yoga is anti-Christian. Yoga does touch on divinity but everyone is free to define the divine in their own way. In my yoga practice I do no pray to any gods, Hindu or otherwise. There is often a reading at the end of a yoga class but it usually touches on some aspect of leading a right life and how we should live in harmony with others and with nature.

I’ve been reading The Teaching of Buddha and The Bible. So far, I’ve found only subtle differences but nothing contradictory between the teachings of Buddha and the teachings of Christ. The most fundamental difference I’ve found is inclusiveness versus exclusiveness.

Let’s consider the theological possibility that there is only ONE God, a god that is called different names and worshipped in different ways by different religions and cultures. Does it matter if he call him God, Jehovah, Buddha, Krishna, or Bob? Does it really matter how we worship him, if we worship him at all, or even believe in him?

If we chose to believe in the deity, then our higher purpose is probably to achieve enlightenment and oneness with him. Does the path we take to unite ourselves with the deity, be it in Heaven, Paradise, or Nirvana, make a difference? Is the path we follow all that important? Maybe it’s more important to find our own path and follow it.

How do we know if we’ve chosen the correct path? We don’t. Personally, I tend to believe that it’s a process of trial and error and we’ll eventually figure it out.

For what it’s worth…

Related post: Religious Conversion