altiora

I'm not sure that silencing the mind is quite the goal, or even achievable. I think becoming detached to your mind's antics is the aim (at least for us modern mortals).

I keep returning to this method time and time again. It's perhaps the simplest and my opinion effective practice -- primarily because you can (and should) do it while engaged in daily life. Sri Ramana Maharshi states thatwhen you have a thought ask yourself, "who is having this thought?" Initially, you'll probably say "I am", in which case you ask "Who is I?".

It's devastatingly effective actually, since you just start detaching yourself from the thought. And eventually it becomes so ingrained as to become spontaneous.

You can find this written in an essay by Sri Ramana in "The Collected Works of Ramana Maharshi".

Has anyone else learnt Shuichuan since?

I don't know what you mean by "since" but I practiced it for over 2 years. I have met the teacher in person: she's a talented healer and I had some interesting experiences.

While I don't dare doubt the transmission she gave to initiate one into the practice -- I certainty felt it -- my problem with the exercises we were required to practice. Truly spontaneous qigong is actually really difficult, because of the propensity of the ego/mind to interfere. My first qigong teacher told me that, and after practicing I have to agree. My feeling with doing these exercises is was this the qi, or was this me engineering the result I wanted? I'm sure if I had a life time of meditation under my belt, I might have been able to answer that question. But leaving doubts in my mind, I desisted from practice.

Now I wonder why I was into spontaneous qigong at all. I mean just what is so wrong, or boring, with just standing still? There are moments where my body and mind alignment settle into this stillness and equilibrium and I glimpse with great clarity how the energy in my body and around me is interacting. When that happens, it leaves my most wild spontaneous qigong sessions in the dust.

I understand where the initiator of this post is coming from. Had the same experience with Zhineng qigong. Don't get me wrong, it's an excellent system. But I found it just exacerbated my ungroundedness making it hard to focus and get that fire in the belly going.

The problem I think resides in the fact that originally there weren't really, prepackaged, "systems" as we now know it: the teacher would create a programme that suits your constitution. Of course, the problem is finding a properly qualified teacher and (especially difficult for a westerner)just doing exactly what that teacher says.

Agree with Sloppy Zhang that Frantzis "Opening the Energy Gates" is a great start. But must take issue with Sloppy Zhang's comment that the exercises there are just "low energy" and that later one should "upgrade to a higher system". Frantzis' standing dissolving practice will take a life time to really understand; and indeed some qigong masters did/do nothing but stand. With all systems its a matter of application, application, application.

Get Frantzis' cheap DVD first and practice along with the book. I've come to Frantzis' system after over a decade in other qigong systems, and quite frankly think I'm likely to keep this practice for a very long time. His swings are just fantastic at work for a quick qigong workout. It's funny: when I started qigong, I saw Frantzis' system early on but dismissed it on the basis that it was "too simple". Now I arrive at square 1 again with the benefit of a beginner's mind.

Also I'd recommend his "Longevity Breathing" system. There are several CDs, including the "Ancient SOngs of the Tao" that run through the breathing system. Breathing is an aspect that seems not to get much attention from qigong practitioners, compared to pranayama and yoga practitioners.

I'm busy with that programme since it's mid winter here in New Zealand, and it's just divine for sitting under a warm meditation shawl with a hot water bottle. Truly a great practice for a hibernating, yin, body, and during the early mornings and late night. Add a few yin yoga stretches to rough it up a bit.

I think it is a justification - if you step up and make a critical post in public, don't be surprised if you get a public response. Good lesson really.

Huh? the point surely is that V should expect a response; but those of us who don't care and want the subject to stay on point shouldn't have it rubbed in our faces. Again, tell me why people feel they need to save face by highjacking other threads -- whether those people be like V in initiating it, or the people who respond? Turn the other cheek, ignore V and he'll go away.

So to put it another way, when I along with others accessed the "Daoist Sitting in Oblivion vs Xstian Apophatic Prayer Are they one and the same???" thread, we wanted to discuss and listen to other peoples' views on the similarities between these two things. We did not care about V's attacks, or your attempts to save your face by responding. We just didn't care. But we do care that you and V and others managed for pages to go on and on about something totally off point.

because V's criticisms are public and so responses are public

that's an explanation as to what happens not a justification. No one is compelled to respond to V.

It seems that quite a few people, myself included, are now blocking V. That deals with the V problem. However, the problem with highjacking now is these responses that people feel compelled to make and to keep the fire going. And V just thrives on it being the exhibitionist who craves attention.

Yes please I'd subscribe to such a policy. The problem is not solely a member who begins with "V" (although he is by far the worse offender). It's also the people who then reply in kind, resulting in this silly tit for tac carry on. What I just can't comprehend is why these people think the rest of us are even slightly interested, and why they can't carry on their exchanges between themselves via the email.

We have some extremely interesting threads going on, but these people are destroying the "marketplace of ideas" by drowning every one out. The threads usually just die. The end result will be that these people will be the only left posting on this site -- the others having left because of the sheer boredom and irritation -- and lacking an audience these people will leave themselves.

It is hard to point exactly when the policy should be applied and it will depend on the moderator's discretion. But I think there have been ample instances of highjacking lately, and I should imagine the first step will be for the offenders to be first warned to desist.

 

 

 

Hi alitora, I'm making new use of this wonderful "ignore posts" option. Keeps my mind at ease.

Thanks for pointing that option out for me

Can someone tell me what motivates Vajrahridaya to high jack threads like this.

It is seriously annoying. This has nothing to do with the subject matter. It's all just a projection screen of a serious out of balance and proportion ego. It is the shaktipat thread all over again.

You say:

"I do not feel though that the author's use of the term "Bully" is in any way accurate. In all the examples above the "perpetrator" was either sincerely believing they were trying to help or, to use the authors own words, they were trying to be defensive and attempting to make themselves feel less vulnerable and more in control."

You've observed the very point the author is trying to make: that despite the good intentions (if we accept that they do have them), those actions can have very negative consequences on vulnerable people. And the fact they may have had "good intentions" doesn't excuse the harm that can be done. So why quibble over the term he uses, given that it may be the writer's way of making people think? To many, New Agers are harmless flowers, so the term "New Age Bully" seems an oxymoron

Actually, I think a bully is simply someone who coerces or intimidates another. The motive or intention of the perpetrator isn't relevant to the definition; although more often enough our experience of bullyism is people who have bad intentions.

The reason New Agers are being "picked on" is that (like the priests of old) so many of them think they're paragons of virtue, that everything they do is Ok so long as it's done with "good intentions". If you put yourself on a pedestal, you've got to be prepared to take the knocks.

This is a very, very good article. I encourage everyone to read this and really think about it!

It's spot on. A lot of New Agers like to make it out that they're "love and light" etc, but yet the reality is that quite a few are control freaks and passive aggressives.

They don't like any rational debate or being required to empirically validate their beliefs -- especially when it involves selling their dubious channelled knowledge.

Any attempt to debate is shut down by saying something to the effect that the other person is letting their ego get in the way; or just ignored and buried under a deluge of "profound material" (which is usually the same vacuous nonsense regurgitated over and over).

Often these same new agers have no qualms viciously attacking anyone else's beliefs, especially rival competitors.

New age priests and priestesses avoid those -- like myself -- who will ask questions, and usually can sniff out the weak and vulnerable who they can coerce and influence.

The essence of the problem is that we talk so much about rights of expression, and that everyone has his or own own path etc. That was a force of good to liberate us from priests and popes and politicians. The downside is that has resulted is that it has given rise to this "every person is his or her own Pope/Guru" mentality, which in turn has lead some to believe that they are qualified to teach others.

I think it's time we had a debate about when should people teach, when should they claim to have knowledge that should be imparted. There are many ethical issues surrounding this, especially involving dealings with vulnerable people.

Listen there is so much bilge on here and elsewhere about mantram.

There is NO danger from the mantrams themselves, because if you haven't been initiated then you are likely to get little, and in many mantrams associated with specific deities, no benefit.

For actual authority for this, Sri Sri Ramana Maharishi:

Ramana Maharshi - Initiation in Mantras is must

Question : Can anyone get any benefit by repeating sacred syllables [mantras] picked up casually?

Ramana Maharshi: No. He must be competent and initiated in such mantras. This is illustrated by the story of the king and his minister. A king visited his premier in his residence. There he was told that the premier was engaged in repetition of sacred syllables. The king waited for him, and on meeting him, asked what the mantra was. The premier said that it was the holiest of all, gayatri. The king desired to be initiated by the premier but the premier confessed his inability to initiate him.

Therefore the king learned it from someone else, and, meeting the minister later, he repeated the gayatri and wanted to know if it was right. The minister said that the mantra was correct, but it was not proper for him to say it. When pressed for an explanation, the minister called to a page close by and ordered him to take hold of the king. The order was not obeyed. The order was often repeated, and still not obeyed. The king flew into a rage and ordered the same man to hold the minister, and it was immediately done. The minister laughed and said that the incident was the explanation required by the king. `How?' asked the king. The minister replied, `The order was the same and the executor also, but the authority was different. When I ordered, the effect was nil, whereas, when you ordered, there was immediate effect. Similarly with mantras.[/i][/i]

If there is any danger, then it resides in an healthy fixation with the mantra jap. With all due respect, the original poster is showing that in revealing his or her desire for "magical powers". Ff you use Omkar, for instance, as a meditative device for providing you with something to focus on until your mind goes quiet, then there is no harm. But in that case, any results obtained from this are due to your quieting of the mind and focus, not so much due to the mantram itself.

Unfortunately, you have such people as Thomas Ashley Farrand running around saying that you just need to pick a mantra and start reciting it. That is not so, and never has been so. As is T A-F's statement that the Buddha was so concerned about the power of mantra that he repressed knowledge of them. Nothing like a conspiracy, "what-they-don't-want-you-to-know" story to sell your products. Similarly, statements from others on here that if you pick the wrong mantram for your astrological chart, all sorts of death and destruction will result.

If you want to derive benefit from mantra jap, you need to find yourself a proper teacher, and that will be hard in itself. Even harder will be trying to convince that teacher that you're worthy, and not just egoistic person looking for spiritual fixes.

Homosexuality; women's rights; children treated as human beings rather than property of their parents; freedom of expression and personal autonomy (covering I should imagine believing in eastern ideas rather than the Catholic church), coloured people having children with white people....didn't see any thing here about this but does it say that Jews are ruling the world?

Good lord, we truly are on the eve of the anti-Christ....and the fiery pits of hell.....where do we line up for a good old repentance and flagellation session for our sins.

seriously I thought this was Taobums, not some forum for these sorts of rantings of lobotomized God-warriors.

The Buddha didn't teach this. The subtle differences between the realizations are very important to understand if you are to understand Buddhism at all. If this is not your interest, this is fine. Yoga in Buddhism means to merge emptiness (does not mean the void experienced in an absorption or samadhi state), wisdom and awareness, not as a substratum of all, but as a direct insight into the nature of things including the body.

 

 

 

You can be here and be completely realized just like in the causal realm. All these realms are empty of inherent existence, thus are empty of the inherent ability to bind. None of these realms are the goal of Buddhist realization, not even the Purelands of Pureland practice are the goal of the Pureland practice.

 

read... The 31 Planes of Existence

Can we please END this discussion here and return to the subject matter of the thread, i.e. shaktipat. Several people have expressed annoyance at this diverging into Buddhism. We want it to discuss shaktipat NOT Buddhsit disputation. By contrast, Bhagawan Nityananda is actually linked to Shaktipat, since he's the source from which the Siddha school claim its shaktipat lineage.

Very interesting..

 

But according to his profile here, he sounds like a Deist Monist?

 

Basically he "declares over and over again that the goal of a human birth, the goal of all life is to merge in the Absolute, to attain Mukti while still in the body." And that this is essentially achieved by faithful practice & detaching from worldliness after your Kundalini has been awakened by a Guru.So, what IS the ultimate Reality? We are all part of "God," or everything only "exists" in relation to one another - but nothing actually exists on its own?

 

Why does there need to be one or the other? i.e., every thing is God OR nothing actually exists on its own

Bhagawan's view is that the Absolute is BOTH immanent and transcendent. That is to say, the Absolute permeates everything (nothing exists separate from the absolute) but at the same time the Absolute cannot be defined by any thing since by its very nature it exceeds and encompasses all things. Clear as mud I know.

But seriously, meditate on a picture of Bhagawan. Some very interesting things can happen.

If this is a recent picture of her at age 55...WOW! WTF?

 

What about this guy? Who exactly is this Sadguru Bhagawan Nityananda?

He seems to have an immensely powerful presence?

Check out:

http://www.suprememeditation.org/bhagawan.html

http://www.suprememeditation.org/chidakasha.html

Jaya Jaya Arati Nityananda!

Saguna Rupi Govinda!

 

 

OK. So, I have been with several teachers who could give shaktipat, many people we crying out, barking, moaning, doing spontaneous kriyas, in bliss and ecstasy, but to what end? Nice phenomenon, but so what? How did it advance me, or anyone spiritually, really? I saw it as a nice sideshow, but not really central to spiritual work or development.

Good point: many people think that having feral kriyas is the point, and measure their progress (or lack of) from how spasmodic things get (cp the Kunlun craze). That's not the aim of kriyas. They are preliminary movements that indicate that the Shakti is purifying and clearing the pathways, especially on the physical level. They may continue doing so for quite some time depending on the person's karma and constiution. But the kriyas themselves aren't got to advance you spiritually: you've got to nuture the shakti in daily sadhana, reform your daily life, have a suitably qualified teacher guide you and let the Guru's grace flow. I guess that's the reason I'm pretty sceptical about en masse, or online global, "shaktipats. It's all well and good, but without the individualised support of the teacher and constant practice, people can't maximise the benefit of the shaktipat.

i posted on this page this morning for review. no one saw it.

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/7759-shaktipat/page__st__320

 

#388

Three others including me have posted the same sentiments. I actually asked the Buddha boffins to start a new thread, but that promptly got buried amidst the deluge of disputation.

Funny how a sect devoted to surmounting the ego, seems to attract those who like to out do each other in massive posts.

Wait a minute you are currently channeling your own ego and mental prejudices by stating this right now.

 

Do we stay clear of you?

Nice try. But I'm expressing an opinion based on particular cases I;ve observed (in particular, that furore over Medicine Dharma Reiki). I'm not trying to sell anyone a spiritual technique and claiming bona fides from some higher source that others can't verify objectively.

 

 

Isn't this thread supposed to be about the short list of Shaktipaters? ah, a portent of things to come...

I agree that things have gone way off topic. I couldn't care less about the Tibetan buddhist discussion since it is not why I access this thread. What interests me in this thread is the discussion on shaktipat

It's a sheer pain to have to go through screeds upon screeds of "look at how impressively knowledgable I am about Tibetan buddhist esoteria" boffins to access the posts of those of us, rapidly diminishing of us as we are, who want to stick to the topic.

I just wonder if people could start another thread on this other topic, rather than hijack. Just a thought.

well someone mailed me and said i should go back and check out the thread i had left. I have. seriously downhill. perhaps it was my difference of opinion and my traditional mindset that might have initiated it. LOL but then again, who am I, so its doubtful.....either way

 

 

Don't worry yuanqi: some of us more intelligent readers understood you fully. Your views touched the nerve of those who are insecure hence the quite irrational reactions and accusations that you were some "fundamentalist".

Ultimately what you're on about is integrity and respect for cultural heritage.

Shaktipat has a specific meaning within the spiritual systems that originate from the subcontinent; it is only given by those who have the lineage authorisation to give it. Those who do not satisfy these two elements should not be using the term shaktipat. Use some other term, because you are trying to "pass off" and misappropriate what doesn't belong to you.

People should be honest about what they teach. It is simply not good enough to say "shaktipat" is a concept that is prevalent in all cultures, so therefore I can rightfully use that term to describe whatever I do. Call it initiation, attunement or something. But I guess they know that shaktipat sounds exotic, and has been used for thousands of years in India, so it's a great sales pitch to attract students. I challenge those who claim they do shaktipat to tell me why they can't use another term.

It is the same as westerners who use the term "Lama", and are not authorised by any Tibetan Buddhist school. It's wrong and disrespectful to Tibetan culture to use that term. So too the same with the term "reiki" when what you teach is completely different from Usui Sensei, and is instead something you've invented or "channelled".

One final thing: I connected with you about your 30 hour flight to India. I could have taken "shaktipat" by taking a 3 hour trip to Australia, but decided to take a 30 hour trip to the USA (yes, there is actually a teacher who can give Shaktipat over there).

Thanks Shakti Mama. I am attuned to levels 1 to 3 of Usui System and got interested in KR on account of kundalini. I would be very interested to know why a long term reiki master who channeled kuthumi turned so anti-reiki.

Anyone who thinks they can "channel" things -- and tell you that with a straight face -- must have some serious mental issues. From my experience, they have unstable egos and are attention seekers. Steer clear.

Dear Susan,

 

How can someone who does not have 300$ receive Shaktipat? I read on this thread that being open and asking for it gets one Shaktipat? But I don't find that happening for me because I am not ready or being open? Are there any practical methods to receive shaktipat from ascended masters, like mantras, meditations etc.? Also does reiki awaken kundalini? I am contemplating Reiki as it seems simple and attunement is shaktpat?

 

Thanks.

You need to find a realised teacher to get shaktipat. Ask that teacher to show you his or her lineage. Study that teacher's life and actions before you commit. Realised teachers are not to be found on this site hawking their wares. Shaktipat is only given to those who are sincere, not those who are just curious. Shaktipat is not a magic bullet that gives you thrilling mystical experiences (although for some it does but only due to their karma). Shaktipat it is only the "kick start" to your practice: you have to do a heck of work to advance, and you need the teacher to guide you. Go read what yuanqi has posted above, and Muktananda's "Secret of the Siddhas" to understand shaktipat. Yuanqi speaks the truth; and that truth upsets the "every person is his/her own pope" brigade.

People change.

 

I initially got into meditation, so I could clean up my mind, so I could get women. Now I'm into meditation, because I enjoy it and it is damn cool. I'm actively passionate about spiritual development.

 

It doesn't need to be flashy, but attention getting. If somebody told me to just hold the kunlun position, I'd be like... meh. But in experiencing bliss, I'm immensely intrigued, and have been practicing it regularly for a year.

 

High level masters tend to be walking advertisements anyway.

 

It may be true that some are fickle minded, but some aren't.

 

Does it really matter if the website/marketing is flashy, if it causes thousands of people to become happier and healthier?

 

Does it really need to be plain, modest and simple, so that you can feel good/superior/whatever or so it fits into your student/teacher paradigm?

Actually, there are times I wish people would read and place in the context of what was being discussed, instead of this pseudo-intellectual clap trap with it's "paradigm" this and "paradigm" that. My point was explicitly related to Kunlun, and how I pray Jenny never becomes like that certain other peddler of dubious wares.

And with respect to your last sentence, you don't know me, so don't presume anything about what I think.

I have very little time for petty oneupmanship.