Buddhism, FreeMasonry and Gnosis

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   
















(Advice for those interested in Buddhism at all: At least study the Dhammapada and one of the other four selections)




posted on Sep, 11 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Hi Pachomius




Originally posted by Pachomius
What I have come to know from reading about Buddhism and discussions with Western Buddhists, is that anyone can be a Buddhist if for no other reasons than using its meditation exercise.




It is emphatically taught by authentic Buddhist Masters, that one must take refuge in the Three Jewels, and at least know the Four Noble Truths and the Four Seals before being able to be considered Buddhist.

And many Westerners who consider themselves Buddhist are unaware of this.

Now, Esoterically, one could be considered a Buddha by completing the Five Initiations of Major Mysteries of Gnosis, Sufism or Kabbalah, without formally becoming a Buddhist by the label of "Buddhist".

But the chances that someone who simply thinks that Buddhism "sounds nice"(and who then claims to be Buddhist without any esoteric training), will actually be Buddhist(either officially or by way of Universal Initiation) is very slim.

Gnosis is the same Path as Buddhism, differing only in usage of terminology, and some slightly different ways of explaining certain aspects of the Path.




What I come to know from reading about Buddhism and discussions with Western Buddhists is that Buddhists believe in the no-self, which they take care to explain as the non-reality of the self, and also they maintain the non-identity of the self or no-self from one moment to the next.




Right.

But this is easier said than done.

Theoretically, anyone can in any instant, realize the Emptiness of self and other and maintain it from moment-to-moment.

However, 99.99 percent of the time it just does not happen, and is why Buddhism offers a variety of teachings and practices(84,000 to be specific) to prepare the mind and Consciousness for Ultimate Liberation.

And not all branches of Buddhism are even in agreement as to what Atman("The Self") and Anatman("non-self") really are(or aren't).

(See the Vaibhashika, Chittamatra, Dzogchen, Madhyamika, Sautrantika and Svatantrika viewpoints)




What I have come to know from reading abut Buddhism and discussions with Western Buddhists is that the genuine authentic pure Buddhism as taught by the man Gautama is bereft of all myths and superstitious or supernatural elements.




Well the "First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma" is even seen as atheistic by some, as it only taught the intellectual and exoteric interpretations of the Tripitaka; which is Vinaya, Sutra and Abhidharma(without any mention of Tantra, Maha-Mudra or Karma-Mudra).

The Mahayana and Tantrayana(also Mantrayana and Vajrayana) schools taught the Occult or Esoteric side of Buddha's teachings, to Buddha's Initiates who were ready for such teachings.

Buddha Shakyamuni is said to have taught all three main divisions of the teachings(Sutra, Tantra and The Great Perfection), but that he only taught Sutra publically.

Many would find it appalling that Buddha Gautama Shakyamuni would have had a wife(Yasodhara) and that he would have practiced Karma-Mudra(Sexual Tantra) at all.

But that he actually did, would explain how he Built the Solar-Bodies(raised the Seven-Serpents) of the Bodhisattva before leaving the Palace he lived in, so that he could complete his Bodhisattva-vows by wandering the country to teach others.

In other words, he was already an Adept before even renouncing the life of Royalty.

Of course many "Orthodox Buddhists" of the Theraveda and Hinayana traditions would disagree with the authentic interpretations of the Mahayana and Vajrayana schools.

But this goes to show that many know-it-all Westerners who see Theosophy and Universal Gnosis as mere "new age" interpretations, are ignorant of the fact that much of what these schools claim, can be backed up by the teachings of actual Tibetan and Nepalese Lamas from authentic traditions.

In other words, they accuse The Secret Doctrine and Gnostic teachings, of many of the same things that the Hinayana schools accuse the Mahayana and Vajrayana schools of.




If you read in supposedly Gautama's words anything at least connoting myths, superstitions, or supernatural concepts and entities, they were spoken by the Gautama to accommodate to the audience of his time and clime who were steeped in myths, superstitions, and supernatural ideas and entities,




Well certainly some of the fantastical things that may be found in Buddhist scripture(Sutra or Tantra) are symbolic and not to be taken literally.

Such as the size of Mount Meru for example.

But it works both ways.

Some Buddhist-scripture teachings that sound mundane, may certainly be symbolic of highly mystical truths that are beyond mental comprehension and are related to the Subtle or Spiritual Planes.




but his true mind is in tune with contemporary Westerners who don't accept any myths, superstitions, or supernatural concepts and entities.




In most cases, no.

Most self-proclaimed Buddhist contemporary Westerners who can't even name the Four Noble Truths, Four Seals and Eightfold Noble Path, are simply materialists trying to hide behind vain-intellectualism or are trying to be in fashion, without any sincere Spiritual Aspiration.

Who are they to say what is myth or superstitious and what is not, if they have not practiced enough to verify it for themselves?

This may sound harsh, but I've seen this type of thing many times.


To deny things like the Spiritual realms of the Bardos, and the Astral Body and Mental Body, etc. would not only deny the teachings of Buddhism; but also of the Native American Indians(Dream Walking), Yogis/Tantrikas(Dream Yoga) and the Kemetian followers of the Neteru(see the Duat and Amenta teachings found in the so-called "Book of the Dead").

A sincere study of Esotericism and Religion in general, shows that every genuine Religion is based on the same timeless Spiritual Wisdom(Gnosis), and is contrary to the interpretations of the materialists and scoundrels of the intellect who want keep the minds and Consciousness of the multitudes stagnant.

The materialistic Zionist-supporting Chinese Communists knew that true Spirituality can liberate Sentient Beings from mental-enslavement, and is why they attacked Tibet and kidnapped the Panchen Lama.


Anyway, to truly know what authentic Buddhism is, we must practice it through Meditation, and by staying in Chastity, and by studying with complete sincerity.


I'll try to recommend more excellent writings very soon.




Regards





[edit on 11-9-2006 by Tamahu]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I think it would be more likely that the 'black skinned buddhis' that were supposed to have helped create stonehenge were not Bon adherents but people of the Indus Valley civilisation in pre vedic times

firstly the mountainous region of tibet is not reknowned for people with 'black skin' - a lot of them are fair, wheraes the dravidian/indus valley would have been filled with much darker skinned inhabitants who are closer to what we see as black. These people were part of an advanced civilization dated around 4000 - 3000 B.C. before being displaced by the lighter skinned northern tribes. The time of stonehenge being built (according to estimates) coincides with this.

Also the Indus valley civilization was said to be seafaring, and had an extensive merchant class - this is in contrast to the Bons, who are incredibly isolated in comparison. It would make far more sense that people with dark skin, who have a trade based culture and were obviously in contact with and trading with a huge amount of other large civilizations at the time (from their seal being found in Sumeria, afghanistan etc) are more likely to have travelled to Britain. Tibet has no sea for hundreds of miles as well as being a further couple of thousand miles away from Britain anyway.

thirdly the indus valley civilization has left architecture that indicates that they had an advanced knowledge and a great interest in astrology - with streets pointing in the four cardinal directions as well as this the vedics adopted their calandar and from the translation of one of their seals they identified the great bear constellation and the 7 stars that make up the Pleiades. The fact that their calandar was adapted by the Aryans/Brahmins probably (IMO) indicates they had an advanced knowledge of astrology and an advanced calendar similar to the knowledge held by the druids.

Finally if you look at the horned god seal of the Indus valley civilization that is said to be the prototype for Shiva, he is pictured as a horned god sitting in a crossed legged position surrounded by animals. This is incredibly similar to the horned god cenunnuros as depicted much later (400B.C.) also as a horned god sitting crossed legged surrounded by animals it is possible (probable IMO) that they are depicting the same god.

so i think in conclusion a dark skinned, seafaring tribe, with a deep knowledge and interest in astrology as well as similar godforms - that also occur at the same time as stonehenge is sadi to have been built (and came to the height of their power around 2300 - 2800 B.C.) would be far more likely to be the guys in the description.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by count shivula
I think it would be more likely that the 'black skinned buddhis' that were supposed to have helped create stonehenge were not Bon adherents but people of the Indus Valley civilisation in pre vedic times




Right, the Rishis of the Tamil, Dravidians, etc.(Eastern Aethiopians for the most part)

I was not saying that Bons Built the Stonehenge; I was saying that the Tantra of Bon is very similar to said pre-Vedic doctrines of the Indus-Kush.




firstly the mountainous region of tibet is not reknowned for people with 'black skin' - a lot of them are fair, wheraes the dravidian/indus valley would have been filled with much darker skinned inhabitants who are closer to what we see as black. These people were part of an advanced civilization dated around 4000 - 3000 B.C. before being displaced by the lighter skinned northern tribes. The time of stonehenge being built (according to estimates) coincides with this.




Oh really?

















Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche(middle) is closer to the average Tibetan skin-color.

H.H. the Dalai Lama and Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche are a little light-skinned for Tibetans.

The average Tibetan skin-tone would be a little darker than the Dalai Lama's.





Also the Indus valley civilization was said to be seafaring, and had an extensive merchant class - this is in contrast to the Bons, who are incredibly isolated in comparison. It would make far more sense that people with dark skin, who have a trade based culture and were obviously in contact with and trading with a huge amount of other large civilizations at the time (from their seal being found in Sumeria, afghanistan etc) are more likely to have travelled to Britain. Tibet has no sea for hundreds of miles as well as being a further couple of thousand miles away from Britain anyway.

thirdly the indus valley civilization has left architecture that indicates that they had an advanced knowledge and a great interest in astrology - with streets pointing in the four cardinal directions as well as this the vedics adopted their calandar and from the translation of one of their seals they identified the great bear constellation and the 7 stars that make up the Pleiades. The fact that their calandar was adapted by the Aryans/Brahmins probably (IMO) indicates they had an advanced knowledge of astrology and an advanced calendar similar to the knowledge held by the druids.





As I've pointed out, I wasn't trying to imply that the Bons are exactly synonymous with the Eastern Aethiopians of the Indus-Kush.

Though I'd be willing to bet that they have mixed with them to some degree in ancient times.

It is interesting to note(as I did earlier in this thread) that the ancient people of Zhang Zhung(which make up only part of the blood of the Tibetans, the latter of who also have Mongolian blood) are said to have been Bons who were an Ancient off-shoot of some sort of the Zoroastrians.

This would certainly confirm Godfrey Higgins 'theory' that all religions are interconnected and are really all the same Universal Religion under different names, that is to say the Divine Wisdom of the Buddhas.

That the Magi, Buddhas, Kemetian Priests, Rishis, etc. were all Primitive Master Builders who followed the same Doctrine, albeit under different symbolisms.




Finally if you look at the horned god seal of the Indus valley civilization that is said to be the prototype for Shiva, he is pictured as a horned god sitting in a crossed legged position surrounded by animals. This is incredibly similar to the horned god cenunnuros as depicted much later (400B.C.) also as a horned god sitting crossed legged surrounded by animals it is possible (probable IMO) that they are depicting the same god.

so i think in conclusion a dark skinned, seafaring tribe, with a deep knowledge and interest in astrology as well as similar godforms - that also occur at the same time as stonehenge is sadi to have been built (and came to the height of their power around 2300 - 2800 B.C.) would be far more likely to be the guys in the description.




The Phoenicians(sea-faring people) are also said to have been a colony of Kemet(which was pretty much a colony of Kush), and this also shows that the Aethiopian Empire of Kush may have spread through out most of the World at one time(at least through out much of the Eastern hemisphere and some of the Western).

So here we see more connections between the doctrines of Buddha, the Druids, the Rishis and Brahmans, Canaanite Kabbalah, the Magi, etc.

Divine Wisdom or Gnosis, Ras, Buddha, Chokmah, etc.





Secret Teachings of All Ages


Doubt has always existed as to whether the name Rosicrucian came from the symbol of the rose and cross, or whether this was merely a blind to deceive the uninformed and further conceal the true meaning of the Order. Godfrey Higgins believes that the word Rosicrucian is not derived from the flower but from the word Ros, which means dew. It is also interesting to note that the word Ras means wisdom, while Rus is translated concealment. Doubtless all of these meanings have contributed to Rosicrucian symbolism.






A. E. Waite holds with Godfrey Higgins that the process of forming the Philosopher's Stone with the aid of dew is the secret concealed within the name Rosicrucian. It is possible that the dew referred to is a mysterious substance within the human brain, closely resembling the description given by alchemists of the dew which, falling from heaven, redeemed the earth. The cross is symbolic of the human body, and the two symbols together--the rose on the cross--signify that the soul of man is crucified upon the body, where it is held by three nails.




(Students of the Karma-Mudra teachings of Samael Aun Weor take note^^^)




To see some very interesting Tibetan depictions of Buddhist, Brahman and Indus-Kush Tantric dieties see the following:














From "The Secret Doctrine of Anahuac":


"The Brahmans got their cosmogony, arts, culture and science from the famous Naga-
Mayans, later called Danavas.

The Nagas and the Brahmans used the sacred symbol of the feathered serpent, an
irrefutable Mexican or Mayan symbol.

The Upanishads contain a treatise on the science of the serpents, or, in other words, the
science of occult knowledge.

The Nagas (serpents) of esoteric Buddhism, are perfect, authentic and self-realized men,
by virtue of their occult knowledge and they are the protectors of Buddha’s Law, because
they correctly interpret his metaphysical doctrines.

The crown, in the shape of an asp — the Thermuthis — belongs to Isis, our individual
inner Divine Mother Kundalini (we all have our own).
Kundalini, the Igneous Serpent of our magical powers, coiled in the coccygeal magnetic
center (base of the spinal column), flashes likes a lightning bolt.

The great Kabir Jesus of Nazareth would never have advised his disciples to be as wise as
the serpent if it had been the symbol of evil. Neither would have the Ophites, the
Egyptian Gnostic sages of the fraternity of the Serpent, adored a living snake in their
liturgy as the symbol of divine Sophia (wisdom), If the reptile had been related to the
powers of evil." - Samael Aun Weor







Regards



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Tamahu,
Since I can not U2U (yet), I post my question here. In your previous post you had a link regarding The Fraternity of the Rose Cross. Which of the four postulates do you think correct? ..or do you have another idea?

Cheers,



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 06:28 AM
link   
EDIT; dbl post.

[edit on 13-9-2006 by thekidxii]



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Put simply about these rather offbeat ventures into Buddhism, you are talking about a derived forms of Buddhism, which contain items from other religions.
The Buddha never said there was or was not a god (or reincarnation etc...) and pure forms of Buddhism like the Zen Buddhism practiced in Thailand are much simpler than things like Tao Buddhism.
In Thailand (and also I noticed in Burma) Buddhist temples are clearly differentiated from other temples and they don't mix'n'match like they do in other countries.
You will also find Tao temples and suchlike but you will not see effigies of the Buddha within them.

Best advice is to ask a monk.
Better yet become a monk for a month.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrNECROS
Put simply about these rather offbeat ventures into Buddhism, you are talking about a derived forms of Buddhism, which contain items from other religions.
The Buddha never said there was or was not a god (or reincarnation etc...) and pure forms of Buddhism like the Zen Buddhism practiced in Thailand are much simpler than things like Tao Buddhism.
In Thailand (and also I noticed in Burma) Buddhist temples are clearly differentiated from other temples and they don't mix'n'match like they do in other countries.




Most of the monasteries in South-East Asia are of the Theraveda sect of the Hinayana(First Turning of the Wheel of Dharma)-(Outer).

Many of them don't agree with Occult Buddhism, as do the Mahayana(Inner) and Vajrayana(Secret) Schools.

This is similar to how many fanatical Christians don't accept the Gnosis that Christianity came from; and how some fanatical Muslims don't accept the Sufi Doctrine.

Buddha Shakyamuni taught all of the Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma.


And you're incorrect about the reincarnation thing MrNECROS.

See the works from the Pali canon at the top of this page.

Even the Hinayana schools accept it.


And Buddha never did mention a spook-god.

He did imply Divinity in his teachings though.

For example:

Dharmakaya= Father(Brahma)

Sambhogakaya = Son(Vishnu)

Nirmanakaya = Holy Spirit(Shiva)




Originally posted by MrNECROS
Best advice is to ask a monk.
Better yet become a monk for a month.



Or do what some of us have done, and that is to read the works of monks(or better yet, Adepts and Masters)


lamayeshe.com...

snowlionpub.com...

www.ligmincha.org...

www.wisdompubs.org...

www.gnosticteachings.org...


Though I'd agree that the best way, would be to actually join a Buddhist Order.




Regards



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by thekidxii
Since I can not U2U (yet), I post my question here. In your previous post you had a link regarding The Fraternity of the Rose Cross. Which of the four postulates do you think correct? ..or do you have another idea?



As Manly P. Hall wrote: "Doubtless all of these meanings have contributed to Rosicrucian symbolism."


The Rose is also similar, if not the same as the symbolism of the Lotus, which is a symbol of Purity and of the Divine Mother(In Tibetan Buddhism we see BU(Bliss/the Clear Light) as a Buddha rising from the Waters upon a Lotus(MA: the Womb of the Divine Mother or Wisdom/Emptiness).















The Ultimate goal of Buddhism is to Comprehend the Unity of Mother and Son; or MA: Wisdom(Darkness/Emptiness) and BU: Clarity(Light/Bliss)

The Rose is a symbol of the Yoni of the Divine Mother(Eliphas Levi has alluded to this).

This shows that the Rosicrucians had Tantric Gnosis in their symbolism.

We see in the Cross, the Crossing of the Phallus and Vagina, the Lingam and Yoni, the act of Creation.

And that the Rose is at the Crux of all this.




Regards






[edit on 13-9-2006 by Tamahu]



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Buddhism DOES NOT teach reincarnation.
It's a common theme in Thai comedys when foreigners try to pretend to be Buddhists and go on about reincarnation.
Ask a monk.



posted on Sep, 13 2006 @ 09:49 PM
link   
I think you're getting confused with Buddhisms various philosophies regarding reincarnation and return.

Most schools of Buddhism simply deny that a self-existing "Eternal Soul" reincarnates.

The philosophy is very complex and I won't get into it right now, but they do teach that a sum of values of a person is what returns to the Wheel of Samsara after that person dies(unless of course this person has gone beyond).

The gist of it is that the Buddha Nature is trapped, in a sense, within a multiple set of negative and positive values, that are imprints on the "mind"(Consciousness rather) of the "individual", and that when those values(whether negative or positive) are comprehended and eliminated, then Samsara ends for that spark of Consciousness or Buddha Nature.

In other words, the Buddha-Nature becomes a Tathagata, fully realized Buddha, or even a Paramarthasatya.




So like I said, the original Pali canon(the first set of teachings of the Buddha) teaches what would be interpreted as "reincarnation" or return to samsara.






The following will give you an idea(since the Doctrine of Krishna is almost completely identical to Buddhism):





The Bhagavad-Gita, the holy book of Lord Krishna, says the following:


"The Being is not bom, does not die, nor does it reincarnate; it has no origin; it is eternal and changeless; it is the first of all, and does not die when the body passes away."


Let our Gnostic readers now reflect upon the following contradictory and antithetical verse.


"As one sets aside wom out clothes and puts on new ones, so the embodied Being leaves its spent body and enters other new ones."


These are two opposing verses from the Great Avatar Krishna. If we did not know the key, we would obviously be confused:


"Upon leaving the body, taking the path of the fire, of the light, of the day, of the luminous lunar fortnight and of the northern solstice, those who know Brahma, go towards Brahma.

"Upon death, the Yogi who takes the path of smoke of the dark Lunar fortnight and of the southern solstice, reaches the Lunar sphere (the Astral World) and is then reborn (returns, reembodies).

"These two paths, the luminous and the dark, are considered permanent. Through the first, one is emancipated, and through the second, one is reborn (returns).

We declare that the Being, the Lord Incarnated in some perfect creature, can Return, Reincarnate...

"When the Lord (The Being) acquires a body, or leaves it, He associates with the six senses, or abandons them and passes like the breeze which carries with it the scent of flowers.

"Directing the ears, the eyes, the organs of touch, taste and smell as well as the Mind, He experiences the objects of the senses.

"The ignorant and deluded do not see Him when He takes a body, when He leaves it or has experiences associated with the Gunas. Whereas, those who have the Eyes of Wisdom do see Him."



The following verse of Lord Krishna, as an extraordinary document on the doctrine of Reincarnation, is worth meditating on.


"Oh, Bharata! Every time that religion deteriorates and irreligion prevails, I incarnate anew (in other words I Reincarnate) to protect the good, destroy evil and establish religion, I incarnate (or Reincarnate) in different times."


From all these verses of Lord Krishna, two conclusions can be logically drawn:

Those who know Brahma go to Brahma and can, if they so Desire, return, embody, Reincarnate, to carry out the Great Work of the Father.

Those who have not dissolved the Ego, the Self, the Me, Myself, go, after death, along the path of smoke, of the dark lunar fortnight and the southern solstice, reaching the Lunar sphere and are then reborn, Return, reembody in this painful Vale of Samsara.

The Doctrine of the Great Avatar Krishna teaches that the Gods, Demi-Gods, Divine Sovereigns, Titans and only Devas Reincarnate.

To Return is something very different: unquestionably it is the Return of the Kalpas, Yugas, Mahamanvantaras, Maha-Pralayas, etc.

The Law of Eternal Return of all things is always combined with the Law of Recurrence.

The egos return incessantly to repeat dramas, scenes, and events, here and now. The past is projected towards the future through the passage of the present.

The Word Reincarnation is most demanding, it must not be used carelessly: No one would be able to Reincarnate without first having eliminated the ego, without truly possessing Sacred Individuality.

Incarnation is a very venerable word, signifying in fact the reembodiment of the Divine in a man.

Reincarnation is the repetition of such a cosmic event, a new manifestation of the Divine...

We are in no way exaggerating concepts by emphasizing the transcendental idea that Reincarnation is only possible for "Golden Embryos" which have achieved the glorious union with the Super-Soul in any Cycle of Manifestation.

It would be absurd to confuse Reincarnation with Return. We would be making the worst kind of mistake to attest that the ego, legion of dark, sinister, twisted "I's," can Reincarnate.

- Excerpted from The Mystery of the Golden Blossom, by Samael Aun Weor.







So Individuality is beyond egoism.

The Christ is beyond Individuality.

And AElohim or Adi-Buddha, the Absolute Abstract Space, is "beyond" the Christ.







Originally posted by MrNECROS
Buddhism DOES NOT teach reincarnation.
It's a common theme in Thai comedys when foreigners try to pretend to be Buddhists and go on about reincarnation.
Ask a monk.




They're probably making fun of Westerner's mistaken interpretations of that particular philosophy of "reincarnation"(which is probably Theraveda).



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 09:07 AM
link   
As I've said before - The Buddha never said whether there was or was not a god and likewise reincarnation.
He studied many of the old religions and thus it is not discouraged to pursue other religions when one practices Buddhism.
Many of these derived forms of Buddhism contain older more superstisous religions, it is quite comon to see Chinese temples which contain teachings of the Buddha along with the older Tao religion.
Most of Pike's misunderstandings of eastern religion are because of things like this, also he chooses to see what he wants to see and convinces himself that he has found further evidence that all religions worship "The One True God".



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu
I think you're getting confused with Buddhisms various philosophies regarding reincarnation and return.

Most schools of Buddhism simply deny that a self-existing "Eternal Soul" reincarnates.

The philosophy is very complex and I won't get into it right now, but they do teach that a sum of values of a person is what returns to the Wheel of Samsara after that person dies(unless of course this person has gone beyond).

The gist of it is that the Buddha Nature is trapped, in a sense, within a multiple set of negative and positive values, that are imprints on the "mind"(Consciousness rather) of the "individual", and that when those values(whether negative or positive) are comprehended and eliminated, then Samsara ends for that spark of Consciousness or Buddha Nature.

In other words, the Buddha-Nature becomes a Tathagata, fully realized Buddha, or even a Paramarthasatya.




So like I said, the original Pali canon(the first set of teachings of the Buddha) teaches what would be interpreted as "reincarnation" or return to samsara.






The following will give you an idea(since the Doctrine of Krishna is almost completely identical to Buddhism):





The Bhagavad-Gita, the holy book of Lord Krishna, says the following:


"The Being is not bom, does not die, nor does it reincarnate; it has no origin; it is eternal and changeless; it is the first of all, and does not die when the body passes away."


Let our Gnostic readers now reflect upon the following contradictory and antithetical verse.


"As one sets aside wom out clothes and puts on new ones, so the embodied Being leaves its spent body and enters other new ones."


These are two opposing verses from the Great Avatar Krishna. If we did not know the key, we would obviously be confused:


"Upon leaving the body, taking the path of the fire, of the light, of the day, of the luminous lunar fortnight and of the northern solstice, those who know Brahma, go towards Brahma.

"Upon death, the Yogi who takes the path of smoke of the dark Lunar fortnight and of the southern solstice, reaches the Lunar sphere (the Astral World) and is then reborn (returns, reembodies).

"These two paths, the luminous and the dark, are considered permanent. Through the first, one is emancipated, and through the second, one is reborn (returns).

We declare that the Being, the Lord Incarnated in some perfect creature, can Return, Reincarnate...

"When the Lord (The Being) acquires a body, or leaves it, He associates with the six senses, or abandons them and passes like the breeze which carries with it the scent of flowers.

"Directing the ears, the eyes, the organs of touch, taste and smell as well as the Mind, He experiences the objects of the senses.

"The ignorant and deluded do not see Him when He takes a body, when He leaves it or has experiences associated with the Gunas. Whereas, those who have the Eyes of Wisdom do see Him."



The following verse of Lord Krishna, as an extraordinary document on the doctrine of Reincarnation, is worth meditating on.


"Oh, Bharata! Every time that religion deteriorates and irreligion prevails, I incarnate anew (in other words I Reincarnate) to protect the good, destroy evil and establish religion, I incarnate (or Reincarnate) in different times."


From all these verses of Lord Krishna, two conclusions can be logically drawn:

Those who know Brahma go to Brahma and can, if they so Desire, return, embody, Reincarnate, to carry out the Great Work of the Father.

Those who have not dissolved the Ego, the Self, the Me, Myself, go, after death, along the path of smoke, of the dark lunar fortnight and the southern solstice, reaching the Lunar sphere and are then reborn, Return, reembody in this painful Vale of Samsara.

The Doctrine of the Great Avatar Krishna teaches that the Gods, Demi-Gods, Divine Sovereigns, Titans and only Devas Reincarnate.

To Return is something very different: unquestionably it is the Return of the Kalpas, Yugas, Mahamanvantaras, Maha-Pralayas, etc.

The Law of Eternal Return of all things is always combined with the Law of Recurrence.

The egos return incessantly to repeat dramas, scenes, and events, here and now. The past is projected towards the future through the passage of the present.

The Word Reincarnation is most demanding, it must not be used carelessly: No one would be able to Reincarnate without first having eliminated the ego, without truly possessing Sacred Individuality.

Incarnation is a very venerable word, signifying in fact the reembodiment of the Divine in a man.

Reincarnation is the repetition of such a cosmic event, a new manifestation of the Divine...

We are in no way exaggerating concepts by emphasizing the transcendental idea that Reincarnation is only possible for "Golden Embryos" which have achieved the glorious union with the Super-Soul in any Cycle of Manifestation.

It would be absurd to confuse Reincarnation with Return. We would be making the worst kind of mistake to attest that the ego, legion of dark, sinister, twisted "I's," can Reincarnate.

- Excerpted from The Mystery of the Golden Blossom, by Samael Aun Weor.







So Individuality is beyond egoism.

The Christ is beyond Individuality.

And AElohim or Adi-Buddha, the Absolute Abstract Space, is "beyond" the Christ.







Originally posted by MrNECROS
Buddhism DOES NOT teach reincarnation.
It's a common theme in Thai comedys when foreigners try to pretend to be Buddhists and go on about reincarnation.
Ask a monk.




They're probably making fun of Westerner's mistaken interpretations of that particular philosophy of "reincarnation"(which is probably Theraveda).



Dude - Hinduism IS NOT Buddhism.
Now you're really piling on the bull.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu"But more importantly; learn to read between the lines, and utilize the right-hemisphere of the brain along with Intuition."


It is better to take up learning activities that utilize both hemispheres of the cerebral cortex..this will also utilize the reward system of the brain and nervous system and strengthen neural curcuitry primarily in the frontal lobes.

And to learn anything properly you need to use logic that is based on an actual reality...and not imagination.


Originally posted by Tamahu"The religious texts of the world are mostly symbolic, with not much that is literal within them.."
"

Apart from Christianity and Judaism I will agree.


Originally posted by Tamahu"Some say that the authentic scriptures have a seven-fold meaning."."


Then you would also need a text with the cipher to decode and then prove this...so keep looking...and you may need to strengthen your conceptual boundaries whilst you are at it.



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by cfader
It is better to take up learning activities that utilize both hemispheres of the cerebral cortex..this will also utilize the reward system of the brain and nervous system and strengthen neural curcuitry primarily in the frontal lobes.




The reason I didn't mention the left-hemsiphere, is because it was very apparent that that's the hemisphere that some have already been more or less relying on(taking everything at face value) in this thread, instead of a balance of the two.




And to learn anything properly you need to use logic that is based on an actual reality...and not imagination.




It is a mistaken concept that many have; that what we think is "reality", is what we are actually perceiving.

This is why any authentic tradition that teaches meditation, will teach the disciple to utilize Imagination(which is different than fantasy) in combination with Will-power, in order to penetrate the noumenon of any phenomenon in question.

See this in relation to the practice of Shamatha and Vipassana and you'll see what I mean.


At the same time, if we come to any conclusions based on abstractions which totally contradict practical experience in the physical world(by ignoring relative or conventional "reality"), then we set ourselves up for failure.

This is why I agree with you that both hemispheres need to be in balance.




Lucifer: Details


From a Buddhist perspective, there are two perspectives which are like two trees that share the same roots. To explain it Kabbalistically, we can say that the true nature of a thing is the Ain Soph, which transcends duality, the perceiver and perceived etc. That is the Seity. On the other hand, under the Absolute, within the created and manifested universe, duality is the seed of everything that seems to exist. The problem occurs when you don't understand both of these perspectives.

If you forget about the Seity, then you believe that everything is happening and occuring as it seems to be happening according to your so-called awareness--this is the root ignorance and this is why the ego becomes identified.

On the other hand, if we were to think that there isn't relative existence and that dualism is a lie, then we ignore the understanding of the mechanics of the manifested universe (which leads again into delusion) and therefore could not ever attain liberation from the mechanics of this universe.



Therefore, in order to be liberated or above Good and Evil, you must have the Knowledge of Good and Evil.




Ra Un Nefer Amen's "Metu Neter" explains much of this in a very concise manner.





Originally posted by Tamahu"The religious texts of the world are mostly symbolic, with not much that is literal within them.."



Apart from Christianity and Judaism I will agree.




I'll have to disagree.

There's just no way one could understand the books of the Bible or Qur'an without the commentaries of the Talmud and Zohar, or the commentaries of the Sufi Adepts.

Unless of course one is Adept themselves in Meditation; but such a one might still get confused, without an Intellectual understanding of the Cosmology and Cosmogony of the Kabbalah.




Then you would also need a text with the cipher to decode and then prove this...so keep looking...and you may need to strengthen your conceptual boundaries whilst you are at it.




As I've said, the commentaries of the Zohar, Tantras(Kangyur and Tengyur), etc.


"strengthen your conceptual boundaries"?

I'll leave that to the money grubbing preachers and modern materialistic "scientists".

The teachings of the Geshe's of Tibet, for example(real scientists), teach the usage of logic in a concise way, while also learning in meditation how to tear down all conceptual boundaries.



The following work: Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World Conception should be a worthy study in relation to these sciences.





Regards




[edit on 16-9-2006 by Tamahu]



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Speaking of conceptual boundaries.




Originally posted by MrNECROS
Dude - Hinduism IS NOT Buddhism.
Now you're really piling on the bull.




Buddhism and Hinduism are not synonymous per se', however they are essentially the same.

As Master Yeshua said:



"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill."



Buddha Shakyamuni did not reject Divinities such Brahma and Vishnu.

What he did reject, is the fanatical interpretations of them that many Brahmans of the time were believing in.

It's like how Yeshua rejected the anthropomorphic Jehovah that many Jews of the time were believing in.

But of course most Christians don't see this in the scriptures.





Regards



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Cool Thread! Buddhism Rocks!


Mr. Necros - Zen (i.e. Chan) Buddhism Originated in China. The Founder of the Zen School of Buddhism was Bodhidharma. As the story goes one day the Buddha (i.e. Siddharta - the Historical Buddha) was to give a Teaching. All of his students/followers gathered around but the Buddha did not say a word. The Buddha instead picked a Flower & then Smiled. The Students were stumped - no-one understood - except Bodhidharma of-course. It was in that very Instant that Bodhidharma became Enlightened. They call this the: "Direct Mind to Mind Transmission". Bodhidharma Migrated to China soon after.



Gnosis is the same Path as Buddhism, differing only in usage of terminology, and some slightly different ways of explaining certain aspects of the Path.


Yes it is very interesting - if you read the message that Jesus is trying to give us in my Signature (which was surpressed by Orthodox Christianity) it was to look *With-in* your self for God or the Divine. I feel that this is *VERY SIMILAR* to the Concept of Buddha Nature in Buddhism!

There are many other various similarities as well!


Jn

posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   
From the Gnosis website-


Introduction to Gnostic Meditation

A complete treatise on all the steps one must ascend in order to achieve real Meditation: the acquisition of information by the consciousness, free of the interference of the mind.


www.gnosticteachings.org...


Meditation and Gnosis makes a good link between Buddhism?, Buddhism being based around Meditation.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Gnosis, the knowing. buddhism, the understanding.freemasonry, the seeking. all esoteric knowledge based on exoteric belief systems.All understanding is come to as GALAHAD in the grail quest found out at the moment of death.Thus all quests can only be proved individually at the moment of death and the rebirth.This is esoteric knowledge. It does not matter what faith or belief you follow the only path is to death and that is the moment of knowing. Bless all see you in haven



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   
EDIT


[edit on 9-11-2006 by Tamahu]





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join