Ahimsa and the Ethics of Self Defense

searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com

One principle familiar among practitioners of yogic systems would be that of ahimsa or harmlessness. In pranic healing, ahimsa is synonymous with the virtue of loving kindness and non-injury. In its yang (active / do) aspect, it means practicing kindness and compassion. In its yin (passive / don't) aspect, it means one is to avoid hurting others in thought, word or deed. This principle is one of the primary reasons why most yogis and ascetics are vegetarians because the taking of life, even for nourishment, is considered a violation of ahimsa.

The importance of ahimsa, especially among spiritual practitioners, can be found in the imagery of Lord Ganesha. In his book Inner Teachings of Hinduism Revealed, Master Choa Kok Sui explains that the Muladhara (Root or Basic) chakra located at the base of the spine is sometimes depicted with the elephant at the center of the chakra. The kundalini is often symbolized by a snake or serpent, but the elephant symbolism is also used. Lord Ganesha represents the aspirant who has brought the kundalini from the base of the spine to the crown, thus becoming one who has an "elephant's head."

An aspirant with such an awakened kundalini is super smart and super strong, and would most likely have acquired certain siddhis (powers) as a result of this awakening. However, Lord Ganesha is also depicted with a broken tusk. According to Master Choa, the broken tusk symbolizes ahimsa. Even though he is super smart and super powerful, Lord Ganesha does not hurt others or otherwise misuse his power. It is an ideal that every aspirant is expected to follow.

So now we come to some practical considerations. In keeping with modern times, most yogis and spiritual aspirants are no longer hermits or ascetics. We do not withdraw from the world, we instead withdraw into ourselves. Our head is now our cave, our body the mountain. Into this inner world we journey in our search for Divine Union. But because we interact with the everyday world, we may encounter situations and issues that also affect the rest of society. An example of this would be incidences of violence and violent crime.

Granted, the fact that something bad happened means it is the fruit of past karma and that one hadn't done enough to change the effect. But it still presents the problem of how to deal with a situation that holds the potential for physical violence. Assuming one's life is under threat, and there is no option for escape or diplomacy, should one just calmly accept one's death instead of earning the negative karma that comes with killing (or seriously hurting) another human being?

One may argue that common sense dictates that one's life, and especially the lives of one's loved ones, should take priority. After all, one's death can be injurious to one's family especially if they depend on your livelihood for sustenance.

Still, how much (if any) negative karma is there in killing a human being, even in justified self defense? Will it come back as an accident? A sickness? Or more violence (violence begetting violence)? Does the practice of martial arts and weapons / firearms training attract the very violence that one wishes to avoid?

All these questions sound trivial in the face of obvious and canned answers. But as a spiritual practitioner, I've wrestled with the possible implications of these actions, more so since I also enjoy the martial arts and airsoft. These are not violent practices in and of themselves but the implication is that these activities develop certain skillsets that would be useful in case of a violent confrontation.

While reading Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramahansa Yogananda, I partially got an answer to my questions. One night, Yogananda was being bit by a mosquito so he raised a hand to squash it when he stopped at the last moment because he remembered Patanjali's teachings on practicing ahimsa. Yogananda's guru Swami Yukteswar Giri, who was nearby, asked why he stopped in mid-swing. Yogananda then asked if his guru advocated the taking of life. To this, Yukteswar replied in the negative, but that the death blow had already been struck in Yogananda's mind.

Sri Yukteswar Giri then clarified that what Patanjali meant was the removal of the desire to kill. To quote Sri Yukteswar Giri's words: "This world is inconveniently arranged for a literal practice of ahimsa. Man may be compelled to exterminate harmful creatures. He is not under similar compulsion to feel anger or animosity. All forms of life have equal right to the air of maya. The saint who uncovers the secret of creation will be in harmony with its countless bewildering expressions. All men may approach that understanding who curb the inner passion for destruction."

Yogananda then asked his guru if one should offer oneself as sacrifice rather than kill a wild beast, to which Yukteswar replies, "No; man's body is precious. It has the highest evolutionary value because of unique brain and spinal centers. These enable the advanced devotee to fully grasp and express the loftiest aspects of divinity. No lower form is so equipped. It is true that one incurs the debt of a minor sin if he is forced to kill an animal or any living thing. But the Vedas teach that wanton loss of a human body is a serious transgression against the karmic law." (these quotes are from page 83 of the book).

Based on the above exchange between Yogananda and his guru, we get the sense that the knowledge of how to handle a violent confrontation (e.g. martial arts and weapons/firearms skills) does not attract violence in and of itself. It is the desire to hurt or kill that attracts similar vibrations.

The implication of Sri Yukteswar Giri's words is that if we totally remove the desire for destruction, we need not worry about violent death or violent confrontation. It makes sense under the lens of the Law of Attraction; there is nothing to attract. Yukteswar himself was an example of this when another disciple related to Yogananda how Yukteswar and the other disciple had chanced upon a deadly cobra that was just about ready to strike. Yukteswar calmly clapped his hands (when the normal reaction should have been to stay still and quiet) and the cobra calmed down and simply slid between his feet to disappear in the bushes.

Mahatma Gandhi's thoughts on violence adds a level of complexity to this mix:

I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully.

In this case, Gandhi makes the point that cowardice should not be mistaken for ahimsa. By cowardice, he means the fleeing of danger to one's life at the cost of the freedoms and rights (and perhaps lives) of others. Gandhi further offers his thoughts on this:

Though violence is not lawful, when it is offered in self-defence or for the defence of the defenceless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission. The latter befits neither man nor woman. Under violence, there are many stages and varieties of bravery. Every man must judge this for himself. No other person can or has the right.

In any case, self defense is always a complex subject as expounded by Gandhi above. The options that are open to Self-realized saints are not always the same options that are available to everyone else. Some potential victims would immediately respond with violence especially if they are not confident of their ability to talk themselves out of a deadly situation or feel their life (or that of their loved ones) will further be put in danger if they do not react immediately.

Still, if you do choose to respond with force, make sure you know what legally constitutes justified self defense and the rules on excessive use of force. These laws differ according to one's locality, so be aware of them in advance. I recommend Marc "Animal" MacYoung's site to get you started on strategizing for self defense because he expounds very well on some misconceptions about self defense. Read his article on the Pyramid of Personal Safety because it's very simple yet practical.

Self defense is always a case to case basis, so I say just let your inner light guide you on what you think would be the proper way to respond. If your response is consistent with your beliefs (even if that involves sacrificing one's life just so one stays true to the principle of ahimsa), then so be it. One's life is one's to live and no one else's.

Pope Benedict XVI Resigns - Is Peter The Roman Next?

liveleak.com

Earlier this week (February 11, to be exact), Pope Benedict sent shockwaves around the world when he announced his resignation from the Papacy, effective February 28, citing health reasons. The announcement was so sudden that it even caught Vatican insiders offguard. So unprecedented was the pope's move (at least in recent history) that soon after the news broke out, a couple of my friends contacted me to ask what I thought about it. The first thing that came to my mind upon hearing the news was the Prophecy of the Popes.

I became aware of the Prophecy of the Popes following the death of Pope John Paul II when a friend and I were discussing whether the (then unknown) new pontiff would be as progressive as John Paul II. The Prophecy of the Popes refers to a series of prophecies attributed to St. Malachy, a monk from the 12th century, who left behind cryptic phrases in Latin that supposedly described a line of future popes up until the last one.

According to interpretations of St. Malachy's prophecies, Pope Benedict is the one described in the Latin phrase Gloria olivae or For the glory of the olive because he chose the papal name "Benedict" after St. Benedict of Nursia. Supposedly, the crest of the Benedictine Order contains an olive branch. Ominously, only one other pope follows after Gloria olivae and that is Petrus Romanus or Peter the Roman. The full Latin phrase goes as follows:

In persecutione extrema S.R.E. sedebit Petrus Romanus, qui pascet oves in multis tribulationibus: quibus transactis civitas septicollis diruetur, & Judex tremêdus judicabit populum suum. Finis.

(In extreme persecution, the seat of the Holy Roman Church will be occupied by Peter the Roman, who will feed the sheep through many tribulations, at the term of which the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the formidable Judge will judge his people. The End.)

Understandably, the above prophecy could lead people to think that the next pope will be the much dreaded anti-Christ. And it didn't help that scant hours after Pope Benedict's surprise announcement lightning struck the top St. Peter's Basilica, adding a dramatic punctuation to this almost unheard of event (the last time a pope resigned was in the Middle Ages). This other website also lists other prophecies by saints that would seem to support the hypothesis about the end times being nigh.

However, before you start thinking that it was perhaps too early to come out of the bunker after all, let's take a closer look at other views on the prophecies. For one, theological scholars believe that St. Malachy's prophecies about the popes are a forgery, most likely made to influence some internal Church maneuverings in the 1600s. Scholars say the text only came out in the 1590s and while the list of popes up until that time was accurate, the list of popes after that time are filled with errors.

Any skeptic would point out that it would be easy for believers to identify characteristics of any pope that would retroactively fit in with the Latin phrase he is supposed to represent (much like how a major catastrophe can be made to fit in with one of Nostradamus' quatrains). Considering that all the doomsday hoopla about December 21, 2012 amounted to nothing, we should be cognizant of the skepticism about this latest doomsday scenario.

But let's say that the prophecies are not a forgery, will the next pope really be the anti-Christ? The Latin phrase qui pascet oves in multis tribulationibus or who will feed the sheep through many tribulations may sound like Peter the Roman would lead the sheep into tribulation. On the other hand, it could mean that the pope will feed (nourish) the sheep throughout the time of tribulation. In that case, perhaps we are expecting a compassionate and enlightened leader protecting the faithful in a time of hardship and challenge to Church authority. Of course, the downside is that the wording of the latter part of the prophecy seemingly indicates that this leader would be leading his Church just before its destruction.

So does this "last pope prophecy" amount to anything at all? I'm not one to give unequivocal statements, especially when it comes to prophecies and predictions, but I will share my own observations. First of all, I find the timing of the Pope's announcement interesting. It was made during the time of the new moon (a day after the Chinese New Year, but technically still considered a new moon). Generally, new moons represent a time of new beginnings, new directions and rejuvenation. One other fact worth noting is that the announcement occurred on the moon's day (i.e. Monday = Moon-day).

Now, was the timing deliberate? Don't expect any corroborating statements from the Vatican, but timing one's spells forms an important part of spellcasting. I'm sure that someone more literate in spell timing can work out if the timing of the Pope's announcement was significant from a magical standpoint (i.e. taking into account the Pope's birthdate, what zodiac sign the moon was in, etc.). In any case, it's also interesting that the Pope's resignation will take effect on February 28, a full moon (the full moon itself is on February 26, but 3 days before to 3 days after the actual full moon is considered the period of the full moon). It is the height of moon power when major workings can take place for most effect.

For me, it's also interesting that the Pope's resignation happened as we officially entered the Year of the Snake. From a feng shui perspective, this year is generally positive although we may see major changes and challenges, a manifestation of the way the snake sheds its skin. If that's the case, then the Year of the Snake is already living up to its name.

Another interesting tidbit that one of my friends mentioned is that a few years ago, the father of one of his wife's friends started a conversation about the Church with, "When Pope Benedict resigns...." So it seems this guy had an inkling that the pope would resign. My friend says that this guy is into researching these types of things. Whether this ties in to any number of other conspiracy theories out there remains to be seen.

Whatever the astrological or magical confluences that may or may not be there, the next papal conclave may start as early as March 15 so hopefully there will be a new pope by the time Holy Week rolls in. Which brings us to the next interesting tidbit. The timing of the conclave is interesting because it will happen as the Vernal (Spring) Equinox approaches. Generally, the spring equinox is a time of celebrating new beginnings. Among pagans and witches, Ostara (Eostre) is celebrated when the sun enters 0 degrees of Aries, usually every March 20 or 21. Ostara derives from the German fertility goddess Ostare and the Catholic Church adopted this practice, calling it Easter.

To quote from from a Celtic Druid site:

There is a distinct relationship between the Spring Equinox and Easter. The new religion of the Catholic Church absorbed the existing traditions and their symbols and developed a new name ‘Easter’ which is obviously a variant of a German / Saxon Goddess name whose festival was with the arrival of spring. In the pre-Catholic times the celebration of the Vernal Equinox was about new life and hope, the planting of seeds and the activation of the fertility cycle. But the Catholic Church replaced this with solemn displays commemorating Christ and Catholic dogma (written rules). The Old Testament heroine was the goddess Ishtar in thin disguise (Esther is the Aramaic word for Ishtar). Ishtar is Persian for 'star'. So Ishtar was the goddess of the morning & evening star, as well as being the Great Mother, Shining One, Lady of Visions, Priestess of Priestess', she was the source of the Oracles of Prophesy, & Possessor of the Tablets of Life's Records.

If the timing of Pope Benedict's resignation was meant to introduce regenerative energies into the Church, the next pope would certainly need those energies. The Catholic Church has been facing many scandals, often handled in a way that is less than satisfactory. These scandals have most likely influenced the declining numbers of the faithful attending church or those active in the faith. Renewal or further decline? Only time will tell the significance of this one event for the Catholic Church. But it would be interesting indeed if the new pope is elected on March 20 or 21, to coincide with the Vernal Equinox.

The next question of course is whether or not the next pope will be Roman. And by Roman, it doesn't necessarily mean Italian. It could also mean someone who is closely connected with the Roman Curia (the administrative body of the Holy See and the whole Catholic Church). In the last 170 years, only one pope was serving in the Roman Curia just prior to his election as pope, and that was Pope Pius XII who took over the Vatican in March 1939, just a few months before the start of World War 2. So Peter the Roman could just as easily mean "the Pope (seat of Peter) who was part of the Roman Curia."

Among the current frontrunners for the future papacy, only two of the candidates have strong Curial connections. They are Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Canada and Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi of Italy. Let's see if either one of these two becomes the new pope.

In the meantime, what does this mean for us personally? Right now, absolutely nothing. I mean this in the sense that it's not necessarily something to panic about, especially in light of the doubt surrounding the authenticity of the Prophecy of the Popes. But if there is a lesson to be derived from this news, it is this: the importance of spirituality.

Throughout this blog, I've kept reiterating in one form or another that it's important to develop one's spirituality, a connection with God that is not dependent on outside factors, organizations or personalities. Once we are connected to this Divine and Universal Source, we are better buttressed against any negative events. We are connected to the real and everlasting. We can see through life in a calm and objective manner and are not prone to mass blind beliefs, whatever may be happening in our projected surroundings.

The fate of the whole Catholic Church perhaps hangs in the balance, but as we wait with bated breath about the direction the Church will take, ultimately it all boils down to us as individuals. We have our own path to forge, and if we are sincere and persistent in our quest, it will lead us to the same paradise that has been promised by countless religions throughout the ages.

My Way Or The Highway?

spiritualnotreligious.blogspot.com

What constitutes the right path towards divinity and truth? The question may seem particularly relevant now when we are practically bombarded with a multitude of spiritual systems and practices that have been making their way into the mainstream, thanks to the power of mass media and the Internet. Some of them are fakes while others are authentic spiritual systems and practices. That in itself is already confusing enough, but add in the dizzying array of choices the seeker is faced with and one can come out even more confused than before.

How then should a seeker decide? On the one hand are more traditional spiritual practices, full of ritual, technique and ceremony. On the other side of the coin are those who go for a minimalist approach or who even advise no system at all, contending that the divine cannot be apprehended through mere forms and that forms are in essence illusions anyway. And even among these two approaches, there are contrasting beliefs, ideologies and methodologies about what constitutes the divine, what one's role in the universe is, what the universe even is, the limits of what one can do to influence Nature, etc.

I witnessed the interaction of such opposing viewpoints in an online discussion about programming for prosperity. One opinion contended that prosperity couldn't be programmed and that it simply comes from a proper way of life. The implication then is that if one tried to chase after prosperity through a series of procedures, the same way one inserts a coin in a vending machine and expects a treat to come out, then one could be deluding oneself and wasting one's time. It does not help that there are cases of people who have booked success in using such techniques while others have had negative results. How then is such an issue tackled?

In my personal opinion, the whole point is not in the particular technique itself but the place or consciousness that the technique is supposed to bring oneself to. No technique can be said to be wrong as long as it brings you to that place. What is this place? The realization of the divine in you.

What may be in question is the suitability of a particular technique to your unique temperament and character. For some people, that means winding and elaborate rituals in order to get to this place, for others it may just entail a simple method of relaxation and mental conditioning.

Therefore, if a seeker has found his/her path (the path that brings him/her to that place), then perhaps there really is no need for that person to keep chasing after techniques. But if one hasn't found a particular path that one is comfortable with, then we should support that person and provide opportunities to discover such a path, mainly by sharing our knowledge in case the particular knowledge we hold happens to be the key that will lead that particular seeker on his/her compatible path. I certainly have no right to discourage or tell the seeker that his/her path is wrong simply because it's different from the path I am following. Simply show the way and let the seeker find out for himself/herself (but don't forget common sense; if a particular path involves human sacrifice or something, call that person out, or call the police!).

What may be a very viable, important and needed path for me could be quite detrimental or simply unfruitful for another. As one can see, there is no one path, and that is why dogma is dangerous. All roads lead to Rome, but the very sentence implies that the roads come from different directions. You cannot hold everyone to the same path.

Let's not forget that there are different paths for different stages of development. A professional cyclist doesn't need those little balancing side wheels in order to keep a bike in balance, yet for a toddler just learning how to ride a bike such side wheels are absolutely important. Would it be right for the cyclist to insist to the toddler that such side wheels are not necessary, simply because he doesn't need it himself? Would it be right to subject the said toddler to numerous falls and possible injuries until the toddler finally "gets the hang of it" without using the balancing aid? In the spiritual path, sometimes "finally getting the hang of it" means recovering from kundalini syndrome or other problems brought about by spiritual practices that one is not ready for or compatible with.

It all boils down to discernment and common sense. This is why even the Buddha said not to accept his words unless one has studied them and determined them to be the truth. Incorporate those spiritual practices that one resonates with and set aside the others, not necessarily because they are wrong, but either because one may not be ready for them or because one may have already outgrown such practices. But as you give yourself such a leeway, also give leeway to others who may not be as far along the path as you are.

In the end, only you yourself will recognize the path you need to be on. Be true to yourself and don't follow a series of practices simply because "that's how the famous guys do it." Such is the path to the dark side, as the Jedi Master Yoda would say. But seriously, keep smart so that you can keep safe.

You Can Heal Yourself (If You Allow Yourself To)

Philippine Star

Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to watch Anita Moorjani being interviewed by Karen Davila on ANC News Channel. To those not familiar with her case, Moorjani was suffering from stage 4 cancer and at the height of her illness she slipped into a coma in 2006. Because her organs were failing, the doctor told Moorjani's husband that she didn't have long to live. But to the amazement of everyone, especially her doctors, Moorjani came out of her coma after 30 hours and in a matter of days her cancer had completely disappeared. She went on to write a book detailing her life and near death experience entitled Dying To Be Me. It was published in early 2012 and made it to the New York Times Bestseller List shortly afterwards. The book is also now available in local (Philippine) bookstores.

There have been many cases of miraculous healings and recoveries, so what made Anita Moorjani's case stand out?  What I find striking about Anita Moorjani's story is the message that she brought back with her. Apparently, many people also resonated with the message judging by how quickly her book became a bestseller.

In describing her experiences while on the "other side" Moorjani said that she was pure essence without form. She was met by her deceased father, and although he didn't have any recognizable form, she knew him for who he was. Communication was through telepathy and although she was in a coma for only 30 hours she said it felt like she was in the spiritual realm for many months. This account is remarkable because this is similar to how a lot of esoteric texts describe existence on the other side of death.

Eventually, her father told her that it was not her time and that she had to return to her physical body. Moorjani didn't want to go back, but in the stages before returning she reached a state of pure knowing. She immediately knew why she developed cancer and just knew that she was going to be well once she got back. Central to her message is her assertion that at the core we are all pure love, and she experienced that state of love and bliss while in the spiritual realm. In that love and bliss was a state of oneness with God.

Aside from her story sounding like something out of T. Lobsang Rampa's books, Moorjani's experiences match the accounts of soul-realized yogis and saints and that's what makes her own account really powerful.

Moorjani goes on to say that the problem most people are dealing with right now, and what helped contribute to her cancer, was the state of living in fear. This is not just a fear of accidents or other forms of bodily harm, but a consciousness of fear that drives our decisions. For example, Moorjani says that most of us eat healthy not because we recognize our body as the temple of the Holy Spirit but because we fear getting sick. We keep working not necessarily from the desire to be a good provider for our family but more because we're afraid of what will happen to our family if we lose our job.

Moorjani mentioned that prior to her cancer, she had been living most of her life feeling as if she was letting people down. This sentiment came from the feeling that she never really fit in. She was an Indian who was educated in Britain. And because she was Indian, she never really fit in to British culture. But back in India, she had pick up enough Western attitudes to question some Indian cultural practices such as arranged marriages, so she didn't really fit in to Indian culture as well. And then she lived in Hong Kong. Although she could speak Chinese, again she couldn't fully fit in with the Chinese community in Hong Kong. She spent so much time trying to please others that she never really gave thought to being pleased with herself.

The message then is to look for and recognize the love that is at the core of every person's being, including one's own. With the recognition of that love, fear melts away and only a feeling of oneness remains.

Looking at it from the ordinary person's point of view, fear is the product of need and a perception of lack. Moorjani's message therefore also echoes the words of Jesus when he said:

“Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?  And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you." (Matthew 6:25-33 - English Standard Version)

We all matter whether our station be the highest of the high or the lowest of the low. As long as we're not doing wrong, what are the opinions of others compared to the opinion of God and His love? Isn't the fact that we are alive proof enough that we matter to God? And that is what Moorjani kept saying, that life is a gift.

In the end, Anita Moorjani's story gives a clear demonstration of how one's consciousness affects reality. And when one reaches that state of realizing just how valuable one is in the eyes of God, that one really does fit into the scheme of Creation and is one with God, then true healing begins.