--OK, true - Enlightenment is part of the Kaballistic teachings, and? Isn't the idea to reach the "goal" as quickly as possible? There are 2 ways to do this: 1. Accept a faith-based prescription based solely on Scripture and/or Religious Tradition, or some Authority.
2. Second, rely on no religious traditions and simply examine a form of meditation totally divorced from Religious trappings and Traditions. (Sam Harris is attempting to do this - he's into investigating the physiological effects of meditation but wants nothing to do with Buddhism as a religion). Also, various clinical researchers believe that meditation-effects can be analyzied with their instruments and haven't "groked" the fact that if one extracts meditation from a Tradition, this might be like pulling up a flower by its roots. 3. Follow the guidelines established by Sakyamuni Buddha: carefully evaluate any teachings, any techniques; in the light of your own experience and accept nothing through blind faith alone. It seems to me you are in the #1 category. - In [email protected], boyboy_8 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some responses: > "> But that isn't the distinction, at least not the one > > we were discussing. It's between *names* of personal > > gods and *mantras* associated with personal gods." > > Your comment reminds me of this: in J, sometimes we can make use of > one of God's names as a mantra. It is more hinted at than overtly > stated in Kaballistic writings. Rabbi Abulafia (I think) boldly went > into more detail about this then others were happy to see in print. > In J, as you know, there is no distinction made between Hashem as > personal or impersonal God. There is no small "g" god within J. > None. There is acknoweldgement of other practices of other groups > who have lots of smaller "g" discussion and practices. It was known > and many fences were erected to block any contact with that sphere. > > "An energy within the meditator's own consciousness, one that leads > to transcendence of all forms and boundaries." > > Yes, that's true. Consider a few things for a minute. Many paths up > the mountain. One was chosen for the J's. Specifically chosen. > Taking other paths will take them along a way they were supposed to > avoid. Sounds like an implicit contradiction if the top is the > shared objective? Maybe. It was God's word so I would have to take > it up with Him. > > Consider another thing. I have a theory. I think that Judaism was > taught (by Moses) as an Ascendant Technology. TM is a transcendant > technique. They are not the same thing. They might both be strokes > in the swimming pool. One might be the breast stroke, the other a > crawl. They are not the same. The ascendant path is different. > Perhaps they both reach the same place; I really do not know. I > think that they achieve different things. > > "Again, though, the circuit is within one's own consciousness, not a > circuit between one's consciousness and something external (at least > in the esoteric TM context)." > > I hear your point. I had the following scenario go through my mind. > > "Switchboard: what number would you like me to dial for you? Ok, here > we go (dials 416-967-1111) > Switchboard: what number....yes sir, right away (dials main number at > Pentagon). > > Circuits might be just like that. You plug into what you connect > to. For example, if you invoke the energy of a high spirit, say, an > angel you happen to know that "name" of, might not this invocation > get you connected to a very specific energy within the Astral Realms? > I suppose it would. Just like that by invoking the energy of a sound > that has its place within H might just get a connection (within ones > own consciousness) of an energy we are NOT supposed to dial up? > > > "Speak for yourself, please. (I was not required to bow down when I > was initiated, nor was I encouraged to feel grateful to Guru Dev." > > I think that your experience was not the majority. Ask around. If > you didn't get the message that the Puja was a great show of > gratitude to Guru Dev, then I can't help you on that. > > "(me) No, in his teaching there is an obfuscation of what is really > going on. > > > > (you) Well, you're just contradicting here. How can you > > be so sure he didn't really believe what he was > > teaching?" > > I think you missed my point. He truly believed what he taught. He > also hid what he did not want people to take note of. Obstruction as > such in my view was almost akin to putting a stumbling block before > the blind. In the Torah this is forbidden. A person is supposed to > aspire to speak truthfully. Not a personal truth, but THE truth. I > have come to doubt that MMY spoke THE truth and this my subjective > idea/feeling/belief. I think that he would have said anything at the > outset to establish a foothold in the West, including hiding much > that would turn people off had they access to it. Hence no > translation of the latter chapters of the Gita. Hence the > transmutation of Hindu to Vedic, which in my view was a slight of > hands trick. People in the West just had so little knowledge back > then that it worked well for him. > > Referring to deities, you wrote: "What if we call them aspects > (plural) of one's own consciousness?" > > You really believe that? Ok, no, I don't. Which brings me to > another big difference between J and H. In J there is a distinct "I > and thou" relationship. There is God almighty, the Creator of my soul > and the entirety of creation and then there is me, just a small spark > of light. I and HE are not the same. I can never be Him, nor merge > on an equal basis with Him. He will always be seperate from me. In > H there is a strong basis for the belief that enlightenment is a > Union with the Divine where the individual takes on the status of the > Whole at some level of Enlightenment. You become a God person, > someone fully realized, you can also be worhshipped if enough people > think you've achieved that level. Big difference. > > Cheers, > > Fred > > [snip] >
