stefos

Hi everyone,

I've been researching Advaita Vedanta for some time now and I haven't found a guru of Advaita Vedanta nor a Sanyasi whom I know has legitimate connections to the sampradaya itself.

Does anyone know of an authentic lineage which teaches meditation along this path please?

I am aware that Adi Sankara established 4 mathas in India and I have been particularly looking into the Sringeri Matha in Southern India.

Thanks & God bless you as you follow God,

stefos

Hi everyone,

I heard this guy Yogiraj state that "Babaji was the Fuhrer of Jesus."

When I heard that I said "This guy is so severely wrong at this point" but I continued to listen and no apology came

from him and I finally said "Done with Yogiraj FakeSiddhanath"

Beware of this clown!

stefos

@ theurgy,

Hello sir/ms./ma'am,

May I ask you what your perspective is please on modern "rosicrucian" bodies?

Thank you,

stefos

Hi Edward M,

I'll cut to the chase and assume you understand alchemical thought in general (not literal gold making)

as that is what the rosicrucians were involved with it seems. I say "it seems" because this group was/is secretive in a good way.

I was involved with AMORC but very briefly.

H. Spencer Lewis supposedly contacted a "real" Rosicrucian body in the South of France.

He also knew one of the last people who was related to a rosicrucian body in the U.S. (this lady

was a Theosophist when he knew her but he spoke w/her and she gave him some physical objects regarding

the order and discussed things.)

A rosicrucian body was established in Ephrata, Pennsylvania about 400 yrs ago by German rosicrucians from Europe.

Some say they died out...Others that they kept to themselves and shared openly very little but still exist.

Julius Sachse wrote a book called: The German Pietists of provincial Pennsylvania, 1694-1708 in which he describes this rosicrucian body...as I term it.

Now, beyond this regarding the Pennsylvania rosicrucians, I don't know. I myself want to go to Pennsylvania and investigate the Ephrata area and other areas.

In AMORC, when Lewis died, his son took over, after his son died another person took over (Gary Stewart) and some sort of scandal arose in he was eventually cleared of all charges after he resigned, I believe.

AMORC is now kind of "based" out of Canada and not the U.S. anymore.

AMORC also has "filiation" as it's called with a Martinist order.

Please understand that Martinism is not Rosicrucianism...different altogether. Martinism is called "The way of the heart." This order was started by Jean de St. Martin (French name not English.)

My opinion:

AMORC has no true rosicrucian roots because if one was to examine rosicrucian plates (pages which formed a book) one would see Kabbalah being used and expressed along with alchemical thought.

For example:

A book called "The secret teachings of the rosicrucians of the 16th & 17th centuries" is a book you can download at scribd.com (In original German and the English version too I believe). In it, Kabbalah is explicit, as is the 7 planet system along with the 4 elements & the great 3 "Salt, Mercury, and Sulphur".

Another point of concern is that most "rosicrucian" bodies today seem to have lifted material from Blavatskyian Theosophy and rarely mention Jakob Boehme. I say this because Julius Sachse mentioned that Boehme's works were found in the possesion of these rosicrucians in the area of Ephrata, Pennsylvania and I assume, not having read his book in full yet, that they did in fact look into Boehme's writings.

Take care,

stefos

I think Buddha was silent on the topic of "God". And I'm not a Buddhist and that's okay, because the Buddha himself was not a "Buddhist".

 

What get's lost in the claptrap of Buddhist teachings is that The Buddha's focus on anatta (or non-self) was to show what is not the Self. Not to prove that there is no self at all. But this has been beaten ad infinitum on TTB (and elsewhere) so let's not get into that.

 

What I can say is this -- at the end of the day, whatever resonates with you is what you should practice and follow. Also, never give up your independence (ie the need for or ability to assess something and decide whether it makes sense or not). Advaita and Buddhism have a lot in common. I chose to not get trapped in dogma. And in my humble opinion, that is a great way to be and approach this subject.

Yes to what you've stated.

The salient issue is that what DID the Buddha first i.e. "originally" teach?

I also have seen AN-atta being pushed as "not self" and conversely "no-self." The point is, is that everything created is subject to decay and ultimately is not eternal, not truly satisfying. Most modern Buddhist "schools" say that "There is no self at all on any level" not truly realizing what other religions qualify this self as! Hmmm...

The Pali texts don't represent the original teachings of the Buddha in total. They do contain parts of his teachings I would say.

It seems that "Buddhist" groups/sanghas in the west deny anything metaphysical in Buddhism...very secular thinking indeed.

Nevertheless, I'm not an Atheist and I've seen too much and as a personal side note know 2 people who have seen full bodied apparitions of an elderly nurse at the local VA that I work at! Interesting isn't it? I think so. I also have seen a being which was translucent and looked unlike what I've seen before in my life about 10 yrs. ago.

Nevertheless. Buddhism posited existence of metaphysical realities before the creation of this universe. This also is something that western "Buddhist" circles seem to neglect or minimize.

I "feel" like I'm a hostage here in the U.S. with these Buddhist spiritual traditions dwai. I've distanced myself from "Buddhist" groups because of how they teach what they think the Buddha first actually taught. I don't believe we'll ever know what he taught as we don't have anything more ancient than the Pali texts which came after the so-called "24 schools" period.

So it is,

God bless you

stefos

Dzogchen didnt exist during shankara's time. He debated the sarvastivadins and the vijanavadins.

Hello dwai,

I don't know if you are a Buddhist or not.

O.K.....I believe the Buddha was a Theist or believed in Brahman.

The Buddha mentioned the "unborn, undying, not-becoming, etc." Surely he didn't mean HIS mind.

Can you please comment on this? Do you believe the Buddha was an Atheist?

Thank you,

stefos

How would you consider Togel as "not Tantric"? Also, do you practice Togel?

 

Hi,

Trekcho & Togel are part of Dzogchen and not Tantra. In Tantra, energy movement is dealt with, In Dzogchen, awareness is dealt with.....Leaving the awareness "naked" as it were...Allowing the thoughts to self liberate or conversely being aware of the state of no thought.

The rainbow body is achieved after the "practices" of both trekcho & togel.

I do not practice trekcho nor togel but would love to!

I'm not aware when Chogyal Namkhai Norbu has given teachings about trekcho & togel.

I'll look into this eventually.

A book called "Heartdrops of the Dharmakaya" mentions both in detail....Nice.

stefos

You do know that this is the Vedanta Forum?

Yes, I do. In the bible, Jesus said "The Father and I are one."

Further in the New Testament, Paul says "God's spirit becomes one with your spirit."

Sounds a LOT like Advaita Vedanta right? Of course it does. Just saying!

Hi everyone,

Thank you for sharing this wonderful stuff!

I'm a Christian actually and I wanted to understand the mind better. I also want to get my masters in Cognitive or Clinical psychology to be a counselor. I'm a Theist in other words.

I do not want nor am I requesting fighting/arguing over things. Please discuss, ESPECIALLY if you desire enlightenment right?

I've been initiated into Dzogchen by Guru Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche and in Dzogchen the primordial nature IS and IS perfect with no need to "change" or "visualize" anything.

Watching without clinging is the path. Enlightenment is the fruit. In Dzogchen attainment of the rainbow body (one manifestation of enlightenment) happens after the "practices" of trekcho & togel. In Dzogchen, everything revolves around the base which is the primordial nature. Trekcho & Togel therefore are not Tantric (i.e. visualization of deity) nor are they Mahayanistic, per se, (i.e. exchanging self for other) nor are they Theravada (i.e. build up the antidotes to the 5 poisons).

Naked awareness is the state to be in as thoughts arise or not...just watching without clinging or repulsion.

It is this awareness of things as they are that reality is from moment to moment.

Please continue!

Thank you,

stefos

Can anyone here assist me?

I know the Brahma Sutra Bhashya mentions 4 schools but what's the story behind it?

Thanks

Stefos

Hi everyone,

The title says it all.

It seems that Dzogchen, which I was initiated into, seems to collaborate with the Self of Advaita Vedanta.

In Tibet, the "new" schools of Gelug, Sakya, and Kagyu all disagree that Dzogchen is an authentic Buddhist lineage although the "Rime" movement tried to reconcile some things.

Anyway, I was interested in the 4 particular schools that Shankara disagreed with and seems to have refuted in his commentary of the Brahma Sutras (Prasthanathraya).

Which ones were they and why did he disagree with them?

Does it make sense to anyone? I think I get the reasoning behind it but.....trying to get the fullest picture possible.

Also, Does anyone know if Shankara disagreed with Dzogchen?

Any insight would be appreciated!

Thank you & God bless you!

Stefos

Hi everyone,

Well, I'm new here obviously!

I have been studying buddhist thought/philosophy for some time, primarily the Pali Nikayas and Tibetan Dzogchen, some 6 yogas of Naropa studying, and some Mahamudra as well.

I have also been studying Ramana Maharshi & Nisargadatta Maharaj's viewpoints on Advaita Vedanta. I own 3 different versions of the Prasthanathrya: V. Panoli, Swami Sivananda and Swami Ghambhirananda's versions!

Finally, I have Te-Tao ching copies from Mr. Hendricks: The Ma-wang Tui discovery and the 1993 bamboo slip discovery as well.

Currently, I want to see what understanding of Buddhism Adi Sankara went against in his Brahma Sutra Prasthanathraya commentary. In other words: What did Sankara know about the 4 schools mentioned in the Brahma sutras commentary and what did they teach?

Thanks,

stefos