Elizabeth Magill, Lower Lough, 2006.
There are a few things I want to come back to. One is Rosa's question of the value of samadhi and the questions on what meditation is good for (if I recall correctly). First, keep in mind that Yoga is a methodology, a HOW TO manual for spirituality. This is not a set of formulas one debates trying to find apriori reasons. It's more knowing-as-doing, doing-as-feeling.
To find out about Yoga's validity one has to try it.*
There are at least two ways of looking at this: You don't accept a whole model but take some of its parts, or you reinterpret the parts. I propose the latter. Let me address some of these concepts as I see them:
Elizabeth Magill, Parlous Land, 2006.
1. Reincarnation is repetition. Is repetition the same throughout? The idea is that (R)eality is a ground of reverberating intensity. If that ground is difference (perpetual differentiation) then repetition cannot be of the same, but only of the different, i.e, the renewal of the different.
2. Purification is pris de conscience! (i.e., taking charge). As in quantum physics where the observation alters the result of the experiment, purification takes one's disturbing one's -ongoing- movie.
Jeff Wall, After Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, 1999.
We live at a par of our unfolding. So, as the moving-picture plays, there is a possibility to see it -AS IF- we were outside it. This position of "being-outside" as "being-inside" means that you can interact with yourself. This is what the yogis call niyama.
You have two options: (a) like so many people, you live inside the movie and just let the movie play (doing nothing), or (b) you choose to possibly change aspects of your own story as it unfolds.
3. Attachment is as difficult as it is obvious. We are amidst a raja vortex of forces. We're matter, only in a high state of complexity. And matter craves matter. Yet, MIND being an emergent property of matter, can sort of detach itself from matter. This is the difference between sattvas and tamas.
Elizabeth Magill, Oncoming, 2006.
4. Attainments. Now comes the big one: What is samadhi? Riding with the wind.
Finding oneself (being-one-with- ______). Of course, that is too general to make sense. What's key is that this finding of oneself needs to have a goal. Pursuing the goal is a way to do it. **
We must not forget Patanjali's caveat about samadhi which is a point he shares with Nietzsche's own idea of rapture: "... the path to one's own heaven always leads through the voluptuousness of one's own hell."
This is why Patanjali is so careful about attachments. If the voyage into the horizon of the infinite fills us with a "thrill," this is because something is glimpsed in samadhi which is in excess of the human, something that is "too much." A voyage into the eye of the maelstrom: Nobody can do it for you.
5. Dhyana asks: Why not thinking about non-thinking?
See you tomorrow with more nonsense.
*Only then, as the French say, en connaissance de cause one can say it's not good. But, is chess (as good as it is) good for everybody? **In keeping with Buddhism's central teaching of pluralism that there are many ways to heaven, we can say that Yoga is another way.