--- In [email protected], "emptybill" <emptyb...@...> wrote:
>Hey empty bill

Thanks for your words of encouragement.  I have already had a previous run in 
with Mr. Vaj.  When I said in a previous post that as far as I am concerned, I 
have experienced pretty much everything Maharishi promised that I would, Mr. 
Vaj could not accept that and said that I only think I have experienced 
something, but in fact he was arguing that in his mind I really have not.
The arrogance was sickening.  How can Vaj know what you or I or anyone for that 
matter have experienced.
I don't have a problem with him or anyone else being anti TM or antiMaharishi.  
To each his own.  But I do have problem when someone invalidates me with no 
basis of anything to invalidate on.

Any comments Vaj?

> Randy
> 
> Good to have someone else questioning Vaj's BS. 
> 
> This guy postures himself here as an american  natha-guru and buddhist 
> dzogchenpa. However, his simplistic identification of Narayana (as the source 
> of the tm puja) with the vaishnava sampradaya shows an amazing ignorance. 
> 
> In reality this guy is just another american spiritual hack who makes error 
> after error in his claims. He has been on this forum for four or five years. 
> He is here because he wants to "critique" (read denigrate) maharishi's 
> accomplishments and maharishi's personality. 
> 
> What he brings to the forum is a quite partial intellectual knowledge of 
> Buddhism, some nomenclature from Swami Rama's lineage, claims of initiation 
> into the Nath sampradaya and many other speculations he has generated from 
> his reading. 
> 
> As you probably know Shankara instituted five form of deity worship, later 
> amplified into six: Surya, Vishnu, Shiva, Shakti, Ganapati and Skanda. He 
> viewed and taught all as faces (identities) of Parameshvara Saguna Brahman. 
> 
> What Vaj is saying is that sectarian Shaiva-s trace their lineage from Shiva 
> and sectarian Vaishnava trace their lineage from a form of Vishnu-Krishna. 
> Vaj is therefore claiming that those Dashanami lineages of Adi-Shankara who 
> view Narayana as the source-origin of their sampradaya must be Vaishnava by 
> definition.
> This is a gross blunder confirming him to be just another cheap hack.
> 
> So if you are wondering -  "why he is here?
> He is here because: 
> 
> 1.    FFL provides him with a large forum to display his ponderous claims to 
> esoterica.
> 
> 2.    Most people here are not deeply conversant with other Asian meditative 
> traditions much less Western spiritual traditions. Thus he can present 
> himself as a pontiff. 
> 
> His main problem is that there are a few people here on the forum having both 
> knowledge and experience in other meditative traditions. However, the 
> unfortunate reality is that they don't always have time to follow his many 
> threads and negative comments. If his employer only knew how much time he 
> spends on ffl each day they would probably fire him on the spot. 
> 
> So, as a consequence, our good buddy Vajra-duta gets a free pass most of the 
> time. 
> 
> Please join us if you can and keep this rabid skunk under some kind  of 
> control by questioning and examining his every claim and assertion. 
> Odious-vajra-duta had proved to not only to be rabid but also dishonest. We 
> need help maintaining some type of vigilance here. 
> 
> PS: By the way, as far as Bhaja Govindam is concerned, Govinda was the name 
> of Shankara's guru, who was also a direct disciple of the famous advaita 
> teacher Gaudapada. 
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > On May 31, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Randy Meltzer wrote:
> > 
> > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajradhatu@> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Yes I have read Bhaja Govindam.  Shankara is famous for being an  
> > >> advaita teacher but also having the ability to have the devotional  
> > >> aspect of bhakti.  Just because he refers to Govinda in that  
> > >> treatise does not make him a vaishnavite.  And just because  
> > >> Narayana is mentioned in the tradition does not make him one either
> > > Have you been to Guru Dev's ashram in Allahabad?  There are no  
> > > Krishna/Vishnu images there.  There is however a huge shiva lingam  
> > > in the middle of the ashram.  No self respecting Vaishnavite would a  
> > > shiva lingam without a vishnu or krishna statue.
> > > And have you been to Jyotir math?  No Vishnu images there either.
> > >
> > > The point is you know nothing of the tradition of which you claim to  
> > > speak.  Everything about the shankaracharya tradition is shaivite.
> > >
> > > Anyone else what to chime on this other than Vaj.  I am open to  
> > > someone else who is knowledgable to comment on this.  Vaj thinks he  
> > > knows something about this, but I don't believe he does.
> > 
> > 
> > You are correct, all the Maths do perform Shiva-lingam worship. It is  
> > common to see the admixture of Vedic ritual and tantric and it is  
> > common to see Shiva-lingams in the Maths. It sounds to me like you're  
> > confusing the fact that Shiva lingam worship is ubiquitous within  
> > Vedic ritual with the line being a Shaivite one.
> > 
> > When I was initiated into a Shaivite sampradaya the origin of the line  
> > was Adi-shiva, not Narayana.
> >
>


Reply via email to