--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff <no_reply@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <no_reply@> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > > I was investigating the Satsang movement in the context of its
> > > > historic origin, 
> > > 
> > > which is good to do
> > > 
> > > > while you mix it with Zen Buddhism and Tibetan
> > > > Vajrayana. Now that is weird.
> > > 
> > > well, the discussion has been on "modern" neo-statangs, the FF
> > > satsang, and pirmarily, IMO, posts on FFL.
> > 
> > I could be mistaken, but I think trinity may be
> > referring to a specific Satsang movement, while
> > others are using the term more broadly.
> Satsang in general means 'being together (sangha) in Truth (Sat)' and
> as such is not specific to Advaita. For example members of the
> devotional Radhasoami group are called Satsanghis.

And some,if not many,hindu related  groups hold weekly satsangs (aka
group meetings) that endup being group practice, singing bajans and
socializing. Sometimes to chagrin of the groups teacher, who in one
case I know, wants more direct focus just on the Self at satsang. 

> I refer to the term
> in the sense of the Satsang movement which has established itself in
> the west, with teachings that refer more specifically to Ramana
> Maharshi, especially as popularized by HWL Poonja, or Nisargadatta,
> that is teachers of pure Non-Duality, who usually see themselves as
> being in the line of Ramana and Poonja. There are also some other
> reference-points like Jean Klein, the teachings of Krishnamurty etc.
> My point is, that these people, like Gangaji see themselves in the
> lineage of Advaita of Ramana (or Nisargadatta like Ramesh) and teach a
> form of sudden awakening, which has a very specific background in the
> Indian tradition. (of course sudden enlightenment also exists in
> Buddhism) But the satsang movement, as I know it, uses Advaita of
> Ramana and therefore Shankara as a reference point, and here Satsang
> has a special value in the Advaita methology, like I pointed out:
> Shravana, Manana and Nididhyasana -Hearing, reflecting and
> contemplating Truth. As such it is not just a 'sharing of experiences'
> for the possible sake of aggrendizing the ego of the Satsang giver,
> no, there is a certain methology and teaching, which leads to
> self-enquiry, plus the affirmation of the ultimate truth as in the
> Mahavakyas. All this is rather obvious. Some people here are just
> pissed about the call of the Satsang givers, to give up seeking, to
> rather look at the truth which is there right now.

I don't recall people getting "pissed" at the call to give up seeking,
to look at the truth which is there right now. Its rather a more rich
matrix of views than a dichotomous satsangees and pissed-offers here
on FFL. And as a broader point, not specific to your post, its crude
polarization and compartmentalization of views into "this or that"
that obstructs communication and understanding, IMO.

For example, for what its worth, if we include FFL as a type of
satsang (you may disagree, point noted), I regularly raise questions 
and frame observations about possible contradictions in some posters
statements who claim enlightenment, and some of whom champion local
satsangs. [does that make me anti-satsang?] I see value in
questioning. And I see value in true satsang, which involves true
questioning. [does that make me pro satsang?] And I am quite open to
instant enlightenment -- which in my view can be triggered by the
intellect, a "eureka experience", which transforms itself into a
"state" not a "mere" intellectual understanding. [does that make me
pro satsang?] And I have experienced regularly  instant
"transmissions" (an odd term) / darshans from saints trough attention
used in a particular way. For example, I been glowing and absorbed in
the darshan of Mother Meera.  And  I  have for years, at least
periodically, cautioned against "seeking enlightenemnt" -- for reasons
I posted earlier this morning (essentially "seeking" is part of the
snare that keeps one bound. Drop the seeking). [does that make me pro
satsang?] And I have little  use for the term enlightnement -- as
often used it means many different things to many people, we are no
longer in TMland with a common terinology. [does that make me anti
satsang?]Yet, in contrast, one of proclamants to enlightenment, and a
friend of satsangees, is strong on the value of intense seeking [does
that make him anti satsang?]. None of this appears to fit your
"model". (which I know was not proposed as a model, but I have used as
a take-off point to explore the non-productivity of pigeon holing or
stereotyping people by one or two characteristics. (which I am not
saying you (trinity) have done. I am simply making  a general point
about a common practice on FFL.
> In this there IS a definite difference to Buddhism and also to other
> Hindu teachings like Tantra, which get rather mixed up with Vaj.
> Shankara himself wrote volumes against the Buddhists, so when Vaj
> gives old 'prophecies' from Buddhism, and applies it to the modern
> outgrowth of a competing tradition, it is just odd. 

Which schools of Buddhism did Shankara rally against. Did that include
Tibetian Buddism? And are you saying SBS, a S.,had no tantric
influence of practice? How do you classify Sri Vidya?
> For example, he always speaks of 'tests of enlightenment' but in
> traditional Advaita there are no such tests. The whole point of the
> Shankara's (higher) teaching is the truth of non-duality itself, and
> that is to be affirmed at any cost. The question of realization is not
> in the forefront, that is the teaching which leads to it. Thats my
> whole point. I am not here to declare all Satsang-givers to be
> perfectly or ultimately enlightened, but they provide a context with
> which to contemplate the ultimate Truth.

And I have not heard anyone counter that. What I have heard is that in
that environment, large speculative leaps have been observed, where
gradiosity seems to flourish, where Consciousness is conscious of
itself (CICI) appears to soon be "Brahamn Consciousness" or parallel
such things. So perhaps providing a context with
which to contemplate the ultimate Truth is a good thing, but not the
Complete thing.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to