stefos

The most obvious answer? That statement is not provable in the least. Furthermore, I said "he may have made that comment" which is conjecture on my part. Not a definitive statement. Norbu has been living in a predominately Catholic country since professor Tuchi invited him to teach at the University of Naples.

 

Why do you make an irrelevant statement such as;

If you PM Tibetan Ice.....He'll tell you because HE posted it initially, if I'm not mistaken.

I don't make things up.

Nevertheless, it WAS stated on this forum and quoted.

Secondly sir, If we exist in beyond the mere body & brain combo and if spiritual realities are just that "real,"

Why would a "Buddhist" teacher, the Buddha didn't come to make "Buddhism", not acknowledge this?

Rudolf Steiner in his works for example talks about Buddha, Christ, Zarathustra, etc.

He said they ALL had an understanding of the divine/transcendental and that none of them were wrong.

Finally, What wrong thing did Jesus say or do? When you keep what he said or did in context, it's a moot point.

God bless you,

Stefos

Among tibetans, both dzogchen and mahamudra are recognized as levels of practice which supersede techniques or teachings per se. The expression of such realities is unique to each individual. I can understand why Norbu would make a comment like that, but I doubt most westerners take it in the right way, since most dont have a conception of how tibetans relate to the dzogchen teachings. Its not a "system" in itself, rather it refers to an approach involving natural phenomena.

Hi 9th,

Yes.....Empowerment vs. Transmission! Not the same

"Beyond the sickness of effort........"

Yes, this describes Dzogpa Chenpo.

It's akin to people saying "Jesus started Christianity..."

I think to myself "No, Jesus didn't come to "start" another religion"

OR The Kingdom of Heaven being external misunderstood in the phrase "When I die I'm going to heaven"

God made heaven according to the Bible....Furthermore God is the goal not "going to heaven"

Blessings on you sir.......

Stefos

P.S. Is that a nice Thangka of a Rainbow body Samantabhadra I see in the middle of your pictures?

Thank you

I have been on a number of retreats with Norbu beginning in 1989. He may have made that comment given that his wife is Catholic.

OR sir, He may have made that comment because he knew what he was talking about.....The most obvious answer.

I have been on two retreats with Guru Norbu and He's not senile nor delusional.

I saw no trace of either and I was observing him quite well.

God bless you!

Stefos

Who ever said he was a joke? as far as I am aware just about everybody who met him in person regarded him as a highly realised master. You do have to be a bit careful with what you read about him though and what he taught, as apparently most of what is written about him in the English language comes from just a few sources looking through their own skewed lense of interpretation and translation, so i'm not confident what is available to us about him gives a very full picture of what he was really about. Yet I like and agree with what you write here about silence, I have met some masters who also transmit waves of silence like that.

Hi,

It appears to me that Buddhists that I've spoken with, on this forum and not on this forum, seem to "degrade" any theist of any form of theism.

I don't appreciate people who are not enlightened and who have not actually read all the available sourcework about this man making statements.

All the evidence I've read about points to SRM as a person who understood SOMETHING.

That's all sir......Buddhist speak against Theism is my problem.

If you'd like to discuss my view of "Theism" we may in private.

Thank you

 

In my head this morning for some reason I was singing "be still and know that I am god" seems the Christians tradition knew this truth too (pretty obvious) but the message has been lost. Am going to revisit the bible as I was raised Roman Catholic and understand and reintegrate all that I rejected years ago.

Hi,

You know, MANY people read the "Old Testament" and "New Testament" and don't perceive what's actually being said!

For example....Creation = The sun and moon weren't created until Day 4

Jewish commentaries from days of yore, per se, said that before the sun and moon were made, Light & Dark functioned in the form of a mixture.

Also, The Tanakh "Old Testament in English" DOES talk about Astrology as being real but that it can't be trusted beyond a certain point!

Have you heard this stuff before?

Finally, sir, Numbers in the "Old" & "New" testaments: I challenge you to read Leviticus carefully and look at the number patterns....You will see a meaning hidden below the surface of the text........I promise you that you will.

Take care...

Another verse from the Bible SRM constantly quoted was 'I AM THAT I AM' from Exodus 3:14. He said it summed up his whole teaching and the whole truth.

 

I would love to hear how people interpret it.

In Hebrew, this phrase means "I will be what I will be"....Present tense, not future.

Furthermore, All things are resolved into God.

The "New Testament" says that "God is Love"

The Apostle Paul in the "New Testament" says "Love is patient, kind, is not envious, does not boast, DOES NOT SEEK ITS OWN, etc."

I'd like to stop right here and let's think about this for 2 secs......O.K.

The problem with people is that we are selfish.....God according to biblical definition "DOES NOT SEEK ITS OWN" in other words....God is selfless....SELFless my friend.

So, when I see teachings about the non-dual state, either in Buddhism or in Vedanta, I say "Yes....The self must go."

Finally, In Galatians Chapter 5, The Apostle Paul talks about the "deeds of the flesh."

What is the hub round which these "deeds of the flesh" spin? The self.

I send my well wishes to you

Stefos

No one can empower you. When you understand this, that's called "empowerment." When you don't understand this, that's called "disempowerment."

Hello,

I think you've fundamentally misunderstood what I've stated.........Let me REstate it:

I received Guru Yoga Transmission by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, NOT an empowerment.

Transmission is NOT empowerment.

One "empowers" things like lungta....Tantric Vajrayana practice entails the giving of "empowerments."

NOT Dzogchen.....Dzogchen entails receiving transmission...A BIG difference sir.

The purpose of transmission is to see the nature of the mind as it's called in Dzogpa Chenpo.

Thank you and I love you...really (Please don't take that in a sexual manner, it is not meant as such!)

Stefos

you instead lose stuff . Lots of stuff!

 

Just stuff that got on the way anyways....

 

(my present newbie understanding at least; though I'm sure I'll loose that soon too lol)

My friend....Have you received Shaktipat from a real Guru or Transmission from a Dzogchen master?

You gain something alright = An understanding that this physical dimension is simply provisional.

The Lord Jesus Christ loves you and heck so do I.

Stefos......Blessed with transmission from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche and by God's manifesed presence

I started noticing this last 2011. Whenever I stare at objects, they get deformed or dented, or scratched, but very subtly. Sometimes thin plastics, like the ones used as supermarket bags and clothes develop tiny holes, just small holes, like a bit smaller than the "zero" --> 0 font that you see on your keyboard. This 2014 I noticed that printed stuff like the design on a sim card or the paint-like material that you see on a bag or shirt gets chipped off, like it disappears when I stare at it, again, very subtle. The damage to metals are more noticeable though. It gets tiny dents or it becomes slightly bent.

 

Before this happened my family has been damaging my things compulsively behind my back, they break wires of my chargers, earphones, etc. They put scratches on everything that I own, even simple ATM cards or ID's. They are sick people. They also dissolve anything that can be dissolved by muriatic acid, they fade the prints on my shirt or the coating on my phone/keypad. Basically everything they I own or use they damage, even the basin that I use even if they bought it! They do it to annoy me and get a reaction from me.

 

So would you guys say that since I have adopted a routine to examine my items for damages ever since 2009 up to now, would you say that my family feud had something to do with me acquiring this ability because I now sort of anticipate seeing new damages that my brain creates it for me? They put holes in my clothes too, by the way. The things really change in front of my eyes. I was holding a small nail recently and I was busy doing something with my other hand, and when I looked at the nail it got slightly bent already. It's quite a hassle since when I buy new gadgets, just staring at the screen as I use it makes it acquire PK damages!

 

If you have this, can you give me tips on how to get rid of this? Or if that's not possible, how can I control it so that it won't happen? Metals are the most vulnerable, next would be plastic and rubber. Clothes would be the least vulnerable.

 

Do you have TK or PK? If yes then feel free to share your experiences, I might learn something from it.

Hey Player......

I have not had TK or PK but I have had prophetic visions both in trance & non trance states.

Furthermore, I have had a psychometrist "read" my keys and tell me what I was wanting to do..and she was right. There was no "normal" way she could have known nor did I give her verbal or body cues.

Finally, sir/ma'am, after a lifting of a veil type thing from my eye area, I have seen bands of color paralleling the ribcage of a lady one day: The colors were a twinkling pastel green (closest to the ribcage) and then twinkling pastel purple. From research I have garnered that I had a perception of seeing a part of the "astral body" of this person........That kind of perception has never happened to me again.

We can talk any time you want.

Jesus loves you man/ma'am!

Stefos

P.S. I bet you weren't expecting that were you? LOL!

My perceptions have been different...even as a child there was no way I could have thought about what I've been through.

Howdy y'all!

Soooo....Sri Ramana Maharshi said that silence speaks while language stops silence.

SRM meant that the Self is silence.

Furthermore, SRM, based on different people's testimonies which I believe are true, is said to have "sent out" waves of silence on & over people which precipitated a direct knowledge of the Self!

In other words........He wasn't a joke.

Comments please!

Stefos

Guru ratings here.... http://www3.telus.net/public/sarlo/RatingsR.htm

This is the most ridiculous thing I've seen IN MY LIFE.......hands down.

Rating Gurus? If one observes the guru, one would understand the guru...particularly if one actually sat down and spoke with the guru and observed the guru's actions!

Is that NOT the way to test?

Jesus said "A bad tree cannot bear good fruit....Nor a good tree bad fruit."

Consider this.........

Stefos

 

Franklin says of Consciousness without-an-Object and without-a-Subject (which, for elegance, he contracts to Consciousness without-an-Object) that it is "Consciousness that is absolutely neutral with respect to the presence or abscence of objects". It transcends the distinction between Samsara (the ‘world field’, where objects are taken as independently existent) and Nirvana (Consciousness-without-an object, but with a subject), which accounts for the dialectical structure of his Aphorisms on Consciousness without-an-Object. For each of the major notions (Space, Time, Law, etc.) that he introduces, Consciousness without-an-object is neither that nor its opposite.

He subsequently found that Consciousness without-an-object corresponds to the state of consciousness that the Tibetans call rigpa. Of course, the state is not exclusive to the Tibetan tradition, but is simply Primordial Awareness, that is Natural Awareness (free of conceptual overlay)—our Buddha nature (our Enlightened essential nature, which is ordinarily obscured).

- Ron Leonard

I am just sharing the detailed views of someone who considered Brahman and Rigpa (as in Dzogchen) to be similar, as in regards to the topic of this thread.

Dear 9th,

You are officially excellent.

I thank you for your kindness and not brow beating me nor people in this discussion to death.

Yes, I've received transmission in regards to Dzogpa Chenpo through Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche and I've been to a number of retreats with him present.

Now....Why are people so mean about Brahman and Rigpa?

Hmmmm? Why?

I spoke with a Buddhist in Vermont and this person emphatically said "There is NO God" in a very angry manner.

It seems to me that many so-called "Buddhists" are very angry people who had a notion about "God" and never questioned what they believed AND never really read the Tanakh or New Testment.........Period.

I own the Nikayas in English both from Wisdom publications & from the PTS.....

I also own the Visuddhimagga & Vimuttimagga (a text on which the Vis. was culled from)

I have never flipped out nor "lost my cool" and I believe in God because of my experiences in my life not because of a book!

Guru Norbu Rinpoche actually even stated that Jesus was a Dzogchen master!

Reality IS stranger than fiction.

Comments please sir......

With much love

Stefos

P.S. I appreciate the Thangkas you have posted......Particularly Samantabhadra...E MA HO!

I don't know about Dzogchen, but from little I know about Brahman is that Brahman is said to be beyond name and form (nirguna, or beyond the gunas). So when you make comparisons and contrasts, you are already talking about name and form, and not about Nirguna Brahman.

 

To put it another way, to make mind questions about the ultimate is not unlike forming body questions about the mind, asking about the color and shape of the mind.

Hey player,

I've received transmission insofar as Dzogchen is concerned.

Words are needed to point to something but they ultimately don't mean the thing.

Teachers are EXTREMELY important but are provisional......Teaching as well........Merely provisional.

Stefos

Hi all,

The abyss is a Greek word (Aveesos in Greek....I'm Greek by the way & it's my first language.)

Quote from Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology.

In our English Bibles, the Greek word abyssos [a [busso"] is transliterated as "abyss" (RSV "bottomless pit") in every instance except Romans 10:7, where it is translated "the deep." In the Septuagint abyssos [a [busso"] translates Tehom almost exclusively, but in rare instances ShuLam ( Isa 44:27 ), MeshuLam ( Job 41:22 ), and Racha ( Job 36:16 ).

In the Old Testament abyssos [a [busso"] is invariably descriptive of the watery depths of the earth, whether oceans or springs, in contradistinction to the land (e.g., Psalm 77:16 ; 78:15 ; 106:9 ; Isa 51:10 ; Amos 7:4 ), although in Psalm 71:20, "the depths of the earth" are spoken of in a manner almost signifying death (however, it probably means no more than the depths of one's troubles on earth). Abyssos [a [busso"] never translates Sheol, so in the Old Testament it never carries the idea of the realm of the dead or the afterlife. In Genesis 1:2 the total inchoate earth is called "the deep, " over which the Spirit of God hovered.

During the intertestamental period the situation began to change and the meaning of abyssos [a [busso"] broadened to include the idea of death as well as the realm of demonic spirits (e.g., Jub 5:6; 1 Enoch 10:4, 11).

In the New Testament the changeover is complete. Abyssos [a [busso"] is never used to refer to the waters of the earth. Here it is used in two ways. First, in Romans 10:7 Paul uses it specifically to mean "the realm of the dead, " drawing from Deuteronomy 30:12-14, but not quoting exactly. He contrasts "ascent into heaven" with "descent into the abyss, " but because Christ was there, the abyss should not be conceived as an evil or demonic realm. Second, Luke (8:31) and John ( Rev 9:1-2 ; 11:7 ; 17:8 ; Revelation 20:1 Revelation 20:3 ) describe the abyss specifically as the dwelling place of demons and the beast and as a place of confinement unto judgment that is under God's control. In lu 8:31 the demons beg Jesus not to send them into the abyss, knowing that they will no longer be free to wreak havoc on the earth. Here, abyssos [a [busso"] is similar to tartarus [tartarovw] in 2pe 2:4, where the angels that sinned are confined until the judgment. In John's vision of the fifth trumpet ( Rev 9:1-11 ), the shaft leading to the abyss is opened, releasing the demonic hoard of locusts. Their ruler is "the angel of the abyss, " whose name is Destruction (Heb. Abaddon; Gk. Appolyon). The beast who ascends from the abyss ( Rev 11:7 ; 17:8 ) presents a complex picture. Combined, it represents the antichrist, demonic power, Rome (i.e., political power as supportive of the harlot), and ultimate evil. This beast is to be thrown alive into the "fiery lake of burning sulphur" ( Rev 19:20 ). Satan is chained in the abyss for a thousand years ( Revelation 20:1 Revelation 20:3 ), until he, too, is thrown into the lake of fire ( Rev 20:10 )

Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell
Copyright © 1996 by Walter A. Elwell. Published by Baker Books, a division of
Baker Book House Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan USA.
All rights reserved. Used by permission.

Does this help?

Stefos

I think it does.

Zoom:

 

You still owe me to quote a logical reason your guru gave why a good book allegedly can't replace a "direct transmission".

I can say one thing about Dzogchen transmission: It is "done" by the teacher/Master to the student not thru a book.

No book can give direct transmission.

My Guru Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche has always stated that you need a teacher for direct transmission or another form of transmission: Showing a crystal rock and peacock feather without the teacher saying anything. I can't say more about this as this is part of samaya!

Now, Jiddhu Krishnamurti himself was a teacher of "choiceless awareness" and even he, who was anti-guru in the sense that the guru was THE penultimate to be trusted unequivocally, walked people through the "process" of actual choiceless awareness. He always said things like "Go further into it sirs" or "Please, the speaker is not merely talking" or "Take a journey along with the speaker" etc. to get people actually involved IN choiceless awareness and not just make an intellectual abstraction out of it.

Stefos.......My 1 cent worth

I think if Krishnamurti really knew jack he wouldn't have wasted his life on trying to kill jack.

O.K. !

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this.

It appears to be a play on words but I have a disconnect going on.

Care to share this in plainer language?

Thanks

Stefos

The Alchemists Guild ( Ankh Morpork)

Motto: OMNIS QVIS CORVSCAT EST OR.

All that glitters is gold.

Likely the loudest among the guilds in Ankh-Morpork, but not politically powerful.

The Alchemists' Guild is known more for its failures than its successes. That is to say, more people (in fact, everybody in the city) are aware of the explosions produced by the guild's members rather than the actual products and services they render.

The guild building is blown up a few times a month, and is therefore under a perpetual state of repair. Supposedly, an alchemist's goal is to turn things into gold; it is strange, then, because it should be hard to make metals explode. In reality, the alchemists also mess with all sorts of chemical reactions.

Their development of the Octo-cellulose film led to the moving pictures industry, and the guild president was, for quite a while, leader of the industry (in Moving Pictures). Another notable project was to transmute things into artificial ivory, so that billiard balls could be made without going to the trouble of getting the tusks off the elephants (appears in Men at Arms). Alchemists dabble in everything they can get their hands on.

The Alchemists' Guild would make a very bad neighbour.

Hi and Thanks

At this point in my game (i.e. life) I'm not pursuing alchemical things although I like the alchemical plates I've seen in reproductions of old texts.

That's about it.

Stefos

 

9. The mind is as space, embracing all. I am beyond mind. In reality, mind has no independent existence.

10. How can it be said that the Self is manifest? How can it be said that the Self is limited? I alone am existence; all this objective world am I. More subtle than space itself am I.

11. Know the Self to be Infinite consciousness, self-evident, beyond destruction, enlightening all bodies equally, ever shining. In It is neither day nor night.

12. Know the Self to be one, ever the same, changeless. How can you say: "I am the meditator, and this is the object of meditation?" How can perfection be divided?

13. You, Self, were never born, nor did you ever die. The body was never yours. The ancient scriptures have repeatedly affirmed: "This is all Brahman."

14. You are all the Absolute Reality, free from all change, the same within and without, Absolute bliss. Run not to and fro like a ghost.

15. Neither unity nor separation exist in you nor in me. All is Self alone. 'I' and 'you' and the 'world' have no real being.

- Avadhuta Gita

That is cool.

Thank you

Stefos

to truly know whether dzogchen is same as or different from brahman one would have to know one or the other experientially.

This is basically the only answer...........Verbal dialogue ends at a certain point my man.

No word or language can fully convey the absolute.

Thank you

 

apparently two people are getting me mixed up with somebody else?

My apologies.......Please forgive me.

I don't know who said this but "Whoever you are....I apologize."

What a convoluted mess.

IMHO - if someone only sees the 'clarity' side and considers it eternal, substantial, unchanging essence, source of everything, (traditional traits of Brahman as an 'ontological absolute') that is partial.

 

If someone only sees the 'emptiness' side, everything being a dynamic process with no ultimate substance, that is partial.

 

If someone sees both as united, reality being a dynamic process with no ultimate substance in which minds are by principle fundamentally enlightened, that is complete.

 

The way Brahman is usually described seems to me to lean towards 'clarity only', whereas Dzogchen makes a big point of going straight for 'clarity and emptiness', avoiding a slant towards one alone.

 

Though obviously someone might use the word 'Brahman' without any idea of ontological absolute, since Brahman is generally portrayed that way while Dzogchen emphatically disagrees with that as described in earlier posts, I consider Brahman and Dzogchen to correspond, but not to be the same.

Dzogchen & Brahman do correspond.

Sir, you haven't answered my question really:

Sri Ramana Maharshi

Guru Padmasambhava

Jiddhu Krishnamurti

Were they "enlightened" to any degree?

If so, WHAT degree?

You see, Islam/Judaism/Christianity all state that there is one God and one way.

The same is stated by SRM, GP, JK...........in other words, really there IS exclusivity in understanding THAT.

I look forward to your insights....with gratitude.

Stefos

There is a direct link between tantric alchemy and hermetic alchemy in regards to operations involving mercury.

Hi and thanks,

I don't think that like is Buddhism.......I think that like is Yogic in nature and I believe the main person is Paracelsus

due to his travels. One thing I noticed was his magical squares: In yogic circles, magic squares are still used today.

Paracelsus in his famous "Books" portrays the same vein of expression...not exactly the same however.

Various other groups like the Troubadors and Alchemists and such either did possess or wanted to posses these practical teachings and hence the songs of the Troubadors and the Alchemical plates of the alchemists.

Ultimately, the Rosicrucians used plates for the same reason as the alchemists....Hidden in plain sight.

I suppose that maybe they had this knowledge and hence the need for secrecy while trying to get peoples interests perked up in order to search them out within each respective group/order.

Stefos

See in particular the illustrations in "The Rosary of the Philosophers."

http://www.alchemywebsite.com/rosary0.html

The White Stone is Lunar, the Red Stone is Solar. I (for one) don't think the parallel is accidental at all.

 

Don't worry, it's very unlikely that anybody would associate you with Alistair Crowley.

 

Interesting... Do you have a reference/link for Oxygen playing such a role?

Hi,

In response to your answers:

A. Red & White...no I don't think it's coincidental.

B. Crowley....yes, I was tired and lazy when I wrote that.

C. The reference is "Autobiography of a yogi" by Paramahamsa Yogananda.

He says that Kriya yog is oxygenating the blood so that the physical body lives longer. I believe he states that it changes into light or light like essence when practiced enough. I probably am mistaken however!

Toodles,

Stefos

P.S. I look forward to "interesting things" from you too!

and stefos has implied that I am arrogant, and told me to 'be honest' and 'not B.S. me'.

 

As for Stefos he is not me, and imo he struck un-fairly several times.

Hi 3bob,

Here's the break down......

I don't think you're arrogant.

By saying "Be honest" I meant to level with me in an open & easy to understand manner.

By saying "Not B.S. you" I meant to express non-academic & "put yourself in an unenlightened persons position" thoughts about the matter

In no way should you take what I've said to you to be construed as an attack on your person.....Nope! I don't do that.......That is unloving.

Rather because of "certain experiences" that I've had, I want to make sure I'm not being duped.

I do apologize if you felt that I "Struck" you.....Again, I simply want true answers and not conjecture/speculation/philosophical wrangling. By the way, I'm not accusing you.

For example:

Sri Ramana Maharshi......Was he enlightened or not? Many people saw him & he was legit, not fake. Many true stories exist.

He expressed Sat-Chit-Anand

Guru Padmasambhava...Was he enlightened or not? Many people saw him too & he was legit, not fake. Many true stories exist.

He expressed the nature of mind which is Dzogchen.

Jiddhu Krishnamurti....Was he enlightened or not? Ditto.....He was very dogmatic when it came to "coming upon that which is eternal" Period. Krishnamurti denied both Sat-Chit-Anand & Dzogchen BUT he did state "the eternal" and he did teach "choiceless awareness" and it's self liberating mechanism which is also taught in Dzogchen! Krishnamurti blew off the Buddha's sayings as well: Both in the Pali & Mahayana texts.

Krishnamurti "lived the teachings" No nonsense with him. People are still alive who lived with the man in a communal setting.

Now,

Are there conflicting forms of enlightenment?

Different levels of enlightenment?

OR Is one completely right and the other completely a liar?

There we have it! Could you please answer and give brief explanation sir. I'm curious to see what you say!

Stefos

Thank you folks (as I don't know both your genders ) nor does it matter.

Alchemy is interesting........My current understanding is that alchemical experiments were done both in a lab

and spiritually speaking.

As someone who's studied eastern tantricism, both Buddhist & so called "Hindu" I can see the similarities:

Alchemy has the 3 great ingredients: Salt, Mercury, Sulphur (?)

The subtle energy lines in the body are: Ida, Pingala and Sushumna (Sanskrit names). I can't remember the Buddhist names but they coincide exactly.

Alchemy deals with the reconciliation/unification/bypassing of the male/female duality.

Tantrism deals with the unification/bypassing of the male/female duality as well.

In Alchemy, the colors red & white figure predominantly and as symbols of gold & silver

In Tantrism, the colors red & white (in the "Hindu" lineage, denote the solar & lunar channels)

In the final analysis, I believe that Rosicrucianism incorporated alchemical motifs along with magic (not Alistair Crowley folks...don't associate me and him) and Kabbalah and dealt with transformation, spiritually and perhaps physiologically as well. In Tantrism, both "Hindu" and Buddhist, the body is seen as something with can be actually changed by the particular practices of each tradition.

As an example, Tibetan Buddhists believe in the rainbow body and in Kriya yoga, oxygen saturates the bloodstream in effect slowing the aging process down.

More to come,

Stefos

Dzogpachenpo and the Brahman of Vedanta are nothing alike whatsoever. The Dzogchen tantras went to great lengths to separate themselves from eternalistic views like those found in Advaita Vedanta, Sāṃkhya Yoga, etc., even mentioning Ādi Śaṅkarācārya by name when refuting the view of Advaita yoga. Dzogchen explicitly rejects the views of Advaita Vedanta, Sāṃkhya Yoga, and other Hindu yogas.

I disagree.......Dzogchen & Brahman are the same in their essential nature.

Kadag & Lhundrub = Sat Chit Anand

Both are empty & full NOT just Shunya.....sorry my man....I have to disagree player.

The Theras Pali texts even slip up and include the famous "Unborn, Undying, Uncreated, Unformed" passage and that when you read it carefully is NOT talking about a big old void Shunya....It's talking about consciousness not Shunya.

Read it yourself.

Stefos

Why are you trying to teach Buddhists about Buddhism?

 

Buddhism doesn't propose an ontological absolute. That is the Buddhist position on the matter, based on all the teachings - not just a few cherry-picked misinterpreted quotes.

 

Of course the actual experience is beyond all this intellectual thought... but for the sake of being able to talk about it, Buddhism describes all things as empty, while Vedanta describes Brahman as an ontological absolute, and these descriptions are mutually exclusive. The experience doesn't fit in any description, but these descriptions are still pointing at two different things.

Who said they point to 2 different things?

Have you attained to that level? Sir, humility is required especially when it comes to the "absolutes" of any spiritual path.

Also, sir I'm not trying to elevate myself but I am trying to point out that the Pali texts are emphatically NOT indicative

of what the Buddha first taught....they are redactions & are biased toward the Theras approach.

Other ancient schools existed and it doesn't mean because they died out that the Theras OR any other group had the sum total of the Buddha's teachings En Toto, so to speak.

Does this make sense? I know it does for me anyway.

Stefos

P.S. Take it easy, we are friends here NOT enemies.

Let the ego drop....that's what I want.

Yahoo! The book I've waited for for at least six months has finally shipped!

 

http://www.amazon.com/Naked-Seeing-Perfection-Visionary-Renaissance/dp/0199982910/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390705825&sr=8-1&keywords=Naked+seeing

HI Tibetan Ice,

Hope you're doing well.......Just an FYI for you: This friday I meet with a Drikung Kagyu Lama regarding Mahamudra meditation & empowerment.

I've already told him that I received transmission through CNN Rinpoche and actually belong to a Gar of Guru Norbu's as well.

What do you think? Will he accept me as a student?

Take care.......Thanks for the book recommend.........Sweet

A school? Probably not, because organizations tend to come and go. But a direct lineage is undoubtedly a reality.

 

The Rosicrucians followed a system of direct teacher-student transmission. In fact, many teachers had multiple students.

 

Considering the importance of the knowledge they possessed, to think that there is nobody alive today who knows the secrets of alchemy would mean that they intentionally wanted this knowledge to die off and/or there was nobody available to carry it on. Both are preposterous.

Hi FraterUFA,

Which organization do you belong to sir/ma'am if I may ask publicly and kindly ask for a response in private?

Yes. (Without getting into what one might consider valid 'roots' ... one could even say that AMORC { not my tradition} is Rosicrucian in nature and has 'roots' in Europe .)

 

Here is the dilema; one of the books many people like or seem to say has validity is Case's 'The True and Invisible Rosicrucian Order -

 

http://ehrati-occultbooks.blogspot.com.au/2010/05/paul-foster-case-true-and-invisible.html

 

Although I like the book , the title does outline the dilemma

 

 

Well, in retrospect, I say they are not essential , they certainly helped me ... they may be integral to you or others. I dont mean to suggest anyone should avoid them or that they have no worth ... but I also dont see that they need to be essentially Kabbalistic , although this is one of the frameworks back then, in an hermetic context.

 

I worked with these for a while :

 

 

at times some of the emblems triggered things in me that I was trying to work out or come to terms with , that I just couldnt frame, the symbology here helped me a lot (as it does with all mystical subjects) , but the dynamics were unfolding in multiple areas as well, the emblems helped but the essential 'messages' and realisations IMO come through nature or working with and in the processes of nature.

 

Also, they were developed from a different mindset ... to use them with some modern mindsets might lead to very different conclusions. When I have further explored my own mindset and understood the old mindset more I may do revision on these ... and then I could have a different opinion.

 

 

Its hard to tell without seeing what you are refering to, I tried a search and noting came up.

 

Also this statement is a little confusing to me:

 

"I have the book "The Secret symbols of the Rosicrucians of the 16th & 17th century" in English & in the original German.

In it, "Figura Magia et Cabbalistica" is mentioned, translated into English it means "Figures which render/show/are of Magic & Kabbalah." So, to my immediate understanding any real Rosicrucian group must teach magic & Kabbalah and if they don't, they're probably a fake Rosicrucian body."

 

It seems the book has some Kabbalistic and magical 'figures' ( ? ) ... okay, a Rosicrucian system can or does and did use them historically, it is integral to an hermetic development in Europe and that did include Kabbalah and magic and astrology and alchemy and ... but I dont see how not teaching Kabbalah and magic makes them a fake group. It depends on whether one looks at means or aims.

 

What is the aim of the Rosicrucian ? If that aim can be achieved by better methods in a new time should we still insist on the old forms and not incorporate the new ?

 

There is the whole issue of what constitutes 'teaching' as well. In my tradition it was not 'teaching' kabbalah and magic ... but it used them to teach and communicate the aims and to assist and outline the stages of growth, initiation and development (and the the things that can occur during these stages to the individual internally and externally). To learn the actual essentials of Kabbalah and magic was up to the individual, whether from others in the group as a network ( which at times resulted in people with a specific developed skill being able to teach those 'more advanced' in the group hierarchy ) . Some level of education was required and some examination as there is little point of doing a ceremony if you dont understand the symbolism and correspondences . So, they didnt teach magic and kabbalah but used it to teach.

 

(I hope that made sense ? )

Hi Nungali,

Which organization do you belong to sir/ma'am if I may ask publicly and kindly ask for a response in private?

Thank you both,

Stefos

I will return the answer in kind privately as well.