"original" Hinduism vs. "original" Chris - www.ezboard.com

>

SRF Walrus

Mt. Washington, Ca

Open discussions about SRF

SRF Walrus > SRF Teachings and Ideals > "original" Hinduism vs. "original" Chris
Page 1 2	<< Prev Topic \| Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
Xnun Registered User (7/22/03 9:35 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C chrisparis, I'm sorry, I didn't mean you personally. I'm afraid I made a bad job of expressing myself. First I was puzzled by your last comment, but then I realized that I had mixed the personal "you" with the impersonal "you" in the same sentence. So, here is what I really meant to say: >>Given all your claims (which you gave from "Beyond Belief") about the Book of John are true, that it is nowhere near "God-inspired" (as the whole Bible claims to be) but fake that was written to refute Thomas, then why would anyone (like SRF or PY) use John at all to build their teachings on him, like "Word" in John 1:1 standing for the Aum-vibration? Why not just say, "Forget about John, my own teachings are powerful enough!"? Why would anyone use another person's foul apple if they own a whole garden full of good apples?<< Hope this is clearer now. If not, I could try it again in German.
dawnrays Registered User (7/22/03 9:52 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C x-nun, I was referring to Master and Jesus (He or They). I say He for myself because it is my understanding that Master is an incanarnation of Jesus (understood through my sadhanas and as I did not read this in a book, I cannot quote nor provide any "proof"). I also say "They" for people who prefer to see them as separate. My statement was not from the Bible, though I have read the Bible. I read and studied the entire bible chapter by chapter when I was 19 or so. I found it very lovely and a loving experience as you obviously do. I think most people do understand that Jesus is very unique and of course He is much loved and worshipped. I think Master felt that the teachings (of Jesus) needed to be clarified more and I don't think any disrespect was or is meant to Jesus. Most arguments have more to do with how these teachings are put into practice. Because of the extremely low and ignorant times in which He (Jesus) lived, He was forced to express much of His thoughts and teachings in poetry and parables. Many of these have been taken wrong or even literally in past and present, even by very well meaning persons. As you may have noticed, there is no shortage of arguments and disputes over the Bible within the traditional Christian Community and it's many churches. The ones most critical of each other are usually the ones with the greatest similiarities (as in different factions of the Baptist Church). My favorite Christian Church is the Quakers. They have consistantly and throughout their history stood up for Christian principles (abolition of slavery, anti-war) and have the greatest sense of equality among members within their church. It don't believe they even have "preachers" but are more into practicing their beliefs. I also like and admire the Salvation Army (many people do not realize that this is a church, also.) I am always happy to talk about Edgar Cayce, though it is my first time mentioning him on this board. He is a gem and a wonderful resource for health and wisdom. He was also a very simple and unassuming man from Kentucky who never sought to be a spiritual healer and in fact made his living for years as a portrait photographer. dawnrays Edited by: dawnrays at: 7/22/03 11:03 am
username Registered User (7/22/03 10:09 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C there are two types of quakers: traditional (no clery) and a second type with clery and sacraments (found around Whittier, California) And if I may speak frankly the Salvation Army is a christian fundamentalist church which is STRONGLY AGAINST a woman's right to choose, FIRES any one from their organization that they believe may be gay, and is very cult like in the organization with regards to their ministers. Ministers are only allowed to marry ministers, and the woman do not get paid! So if a woman minister is doing a job that would normally be paid 100,000 (say an attorney) and she is married to male minister who is a janitor, the couple receives only the wages of a janitor and a housing allowance equal to that of a janitor.
dawnrays Registered User (7/22/03 10:19 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C username, I think I knew a family who was the first type. When this family described their "meetings" they said there was no preacher but that everyone had an opportunity to be heard (as in standing up among the congregation) to say something if "the Spirit moved them". I always thought this was a beautiful way to conduct a service. I didn't know that about the Salvation Army. I am no expert but I always thought they were right on top of the charitable end (as in helping homeless, shelters). I am sorry to hear about the other things though. I guess by definition, all organizations tend to be a little dysfunctional, unfortunate. Thanx for the update. dawnrays Edited by: dawnrays at: 7/22/03 11:04 am
Xnun Registered User (7/22/03 11:30 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C dawnrays, >>In my meditations it is my understanding that He or They are a fallen angel, with very heavy karma. Much in the same as we all are of course, but unique in a way in that He was so great and powerful and needed to learn humility. ... I was referring to Master and Jesus (He or They).<< I think it's very interesting that Jesus would have related to himself as a fallen angel. IMHO, this would be a "turn-about" twist of the Bible. I agree, however, with you and username that many Christians and churches carry this name only nominally. Xnun
dawnrays Registered User (7/22/03 12:50 pm) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C x-nun, Yes, I always thought so too. One day I was visiting a very spiritual friend and her teenage son asked me if I would like to have a book he had ordered (but never bothered to read). As it was "spiritual" they thought I might like it. Thinking I had read enough spiritual books to last me a lifetime and not being all that interested in angels at the time, I was indifferent. He then walked out to my car and dropped in the window. It was "A Dictionary of Angels" by Gustav Davidson. It was at the time that I was separating the entities I felt I was in contact with (the dark one and the light one or Master). If we have such a hard time dealing with our own dark, deep (but ultimately interesting natures) it is certainly hard to deal with anybody else's. He (the author) used mainly Jewish sources of ranking angels, heirarchy and so on. I believe he relied heavily on the Kaballah. Anyway, as it turns out, in these teachings there are no "fallen angels" and in the early Christian Church as well. This came later as the early church sought to demonize other practices such as wicca or "the natural religeon". Lucifer himself in early Christian art was always shown in blue robes. Alot of our problems with Christianity is that we are so separated from our Jewish roots. Also, as etzchaim has noted and explained in many of her posts (her being a practicing Jew and also a yogi), it is a beautiful religeon with so much to offer. dawnrays Edited by: dawnrays at: 7/22/03 12:53 pm
etzchaim Registered User (7/22/03 12:50 pm) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C I'm finding this quite fascinating. My perspective differs a bit, being Jewish, and having spent a good amount of time dealing with Christian/Jewish issues of various sorts. This might give a bit of perspective on the issue (and then I'll duck out): The terms "son of man" and "son of God" were in common usage among Jews during the Roman period. "Son of God" is a title of reverance that one would use when speaking of a holy person, or someone of a higher level of attainment than you are. The Jewish understanding of the soul consists of 5 hierarchical levels. The lower two are the animal and human soul levels and the upper 3 are levels that are connected to God. A person who is holy has lifted themselves up to the higher levels. "Son of God" is a term of respect, and is descriptive of a level of attainment within Jewish Mysticism, not a statement of divinity, and everyone has the ability to manifest on the level of the Neshama (the Godly soul) or it's higher levels, which are indistiguishable from God. Reincarnation was accepted by Jews of the Roman period (and by many Jews today). The idea was nixed in Christianity, I believe, at the council of Nicea. The belief that Jesus is God, was also established at the council of Nicea and the remnants of the groups who did not follow this were killed off by the church at various later dates in purges against "heretics". I have come across texts that hold that Paul himself was considered a heretic during the early days, but later accepted with a few changes to his original writing. I can research that again, if people are interested. There is an enormous amount of agreement between Jewish Mysticism and Hinduism (despite the fact that one is a montheistic religion and the other is polytheistic). Christianity, in it's efforts to remove the "Judaizing" elements within early Christianity, and in it's fight for supremacy over Judaism, both politicized and changed a good deal of the original teaching. The church of James and the church of Paul were very much at odds with each other, James' church being closer to the original teachings. The infighting among Jews didn't help the situation, either! I don't think it is really possible to understand the "original" teachings of Jesus without considering the fact that he was Jewish, grew up in a Jewish world, and taught mainly Jews. There's an interesting linguistic situation in the New Testament that people who do not know Aramaic will not see. The man who was freed during the trial is named Barabbas. The word "bar" means "son of" in Aramaic. Abbas means "father" and was in common usage for "God" (Our Father who art in heaven... ), so, interestingly, the "son of God" was replaced by the "son of God" at that days crucifixion... There are many sections of the New Testament that are obvious retellings by non-Jews who clearly did not know the customs of the Jews. The trial is one of them. The other very obvious ones are the arguments between Jesus and the Pharisees. Todays Judaism is "Pharisaic". It was the Pharisees who wrote the Talmud. I've looked at the arguments, and all of them are the absolute strictest Pharisaic views ever given. It seems to me, as it seems to many scholars who are actually knowledgeable about the Talmud and the New Testament and are able to see past their biases, that these arguments are propaganda attempts meant to swing people over the the Christian side, and to reject the Jewish side. During the early days of Christianity, the competition between Judaism and Christianity was intense. There were a huge number of Roman converts to Judaism at that time. Pauls getting rid of circumcision and the need to keep kosher in order to become Christian were instrumental in making is really easy to decide between the two religions. In James church there wasn't really a large difference - a Gentile had to become Jewish first, before he or she became a Christian. All right... I'm ducking out.... Etzchaim Edited by: etzchaim at: 7/22/03 1:01 pm
etzchaim Registered User (7/22/03 12:58 pm) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Dawnrays, we were writing our posts at the same time! There must have been something in the air... Etzchaim Edited by: etzchaim at: 7/22/03 1:00 pm
dawnrays Registered User (7/22/03 1:00 pm) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C See I told you! etzchaim, Thought I sensed you hovering around. No need to "duck out". Your posts are fascinating and informative (as always). dawnrays Edited by: dawnrays at: 7/22/03 1:06 pm
Xnun Registered User (7/23/03 4:32 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Thank you, etzchaim, for your interesting post! However, the question remains: If it is true that the Bible is just an unreliable story book, wouldn't it have been wiser on PY's part to put the Bible aside altogether instead of weaving it into his teachings? Why use a source that is considered questionable at best and then give it a twist that wasn't intentioned by its authors (like the twist of the Book of John mentioned earlier in this thread)? Is this just a clever move of rendering the enemy motionless by embracing him? I grew up being told (and believing for the longest time) that there is no God. But then I learnt that there are powers at work behind the scenes even before I had access to esoteric books. I had this "small little voice" inside myself that would sometimes respond to my thoughts in a way that seemed so wise to me that I knew beyond doubt that this came not from myself, and in time I learnt to trust this influence. This influence was actually what prepared me to accept the AY and the Hindu believe system, which is quite a big step for someone raised in atheism. But there is also another power at work, a power that makes me understand the Bible in a new, literal, un-esoteric way ("new" means new for me because before that I knew only the esoteric interpretation, although as a kid I had given it a try to read my grandmother's Bible, but it had not made sense to me at all and was more frightening than anything else). And there were definitely two different powers at work when I planned my own death during my postulant time -- one encouraging me to become all self-centered, self-focussed, isolated in myself and concentrating on my own misery; the other one snapping me out of my self-centeredness and self-pity and making me focus on all the people I would hurt deeply by committing suicide. I am not saying that I were like a helpless puppy in the hand of these powers, without any choice on my part. But I believe that these powers know my quirks and idiosyncrasies very well and used them to influence me. I'm sure I saw this kind of thing at work when I was "power-ushered" into the ashram (I indicated a little bit of this in my first post). Starting with the way I found the AY (at that time I about had had it with books and didn't want to read anymore) until visiting California only a few months later and being "guided" into attending an ashram-admittance interview (which I had not wanted to do when I came), virtually every hindrance was moved out of my way and my own resistance was melted away as well. Now, whether being "power-ushered" into the ashram is a good thing or a bad thing is a different question. Maybe that can be decided by taking into account was has been said about the ashram on this website, for example about the weirdness and self-centeredness of the monastics, which I would definitely ascribe to the training you receive in the ashram. After I had finished my postulant training, I was conditioned in such a way that, like a bunny, I wanted to hide from everyone not wearing a sari. I think there are definitely powers at work behind the scenes, and seemingly pulling in different directions. (At least that's how I experience it.) And each discredits the other. (Being raised atheist, I have obviously learnt to listen to more than one side, and as much as there is said against the Bible, there is also just as much recent material supporting the trustworthiness of the Bible, it's just a question of looking both ways.) Nevertheless, both powers claim to be good. -- How can that be? What is the way of discriminating between good and bad here?
etzchaim Registered User (7/23/03 5:18 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Xnun, You write: "...the question remains: If it is true that the Bible is just an unreliable story book, wouldn't it have been wiser on PY's part to put the Bible aside altogether instead of weaving it into his teachings? Why use a source that is considered questionable at best and then give it a twist that wasn't intentioned by its authors..." I can't help you if you want to take the New Testament and the Hebrew Bible literally. What I can say is that I have found, for myself, that the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings, (the Hebrew section of the text) works far better as a Mystical text, rather than a literal text, and is completely valid as itself, when a person is able to read it as a symbolic text offering deep truths about reality. When I look at it literally, I loose it's deeper, more profound and far more helpful (for me) meaning as a person on a Mystical path. I believe that what Yogananda was picking up when he read the New Testament was the inner meaning of the text, which, although I don't call myself a Christian, is perfectly valid as a Mystical tradition and is based on the Jewish mysticism that was prevelant during Jesus lifetime. Paul brought in more Hellenized mysticism. I believe Yogananda was seeing the underlying meaning that is truly what Jesus was saying. In all traditions, you will have a Mystic who is connected to God and speaks through the symbols available to him or her, and in the language of the students he or she is trying to reach, then you will have his or her followers who are in various states of that connection - or have no real connection at all, so as time goes on, often those with more "might" are able to influence the texts (or the oral teachings) and change them to suit their purposes, but a wise mystic can see the truth that remains in the teachings. This is what Yogananda did. Just about everything he said about Jesus' teachings is in harmony with Jewish mysticism, so, although I prefer the more Jewish symbol system, I do think that Yoganandaji got to the truth of the matter. I have found that once a person understands the symbolic language of a spiritual path, every true mystic is saying the same thing. There are many paths to God and they all lead to God. People just resonate to, or are more comfortable with, particular symbolic systems and not others. If you choose to take the books literally, then you, in my way of thinking, are choosing the 'Religion' over the 'Spiritual Path', which may be what you need to do at this time in your search. I would only recommend that you keep yourself open to changes within your own understanding and don't set yourself up with a "we" versus "them" approach. We are all children of God and have access to Him (or Her...). Etzchaim
chuckle chela Registered User (7/23/03 10:07 pm) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Dear Xnun, In your initial post you wrote: "But there was only one nun who seemed really genuine and who was a true inspiration for me and who happened to be my direct superior for a while. And it was for the sake of this special friendship with this senior nun that I stayed all the years I did." I'm wondering if you can tell us a bit more about this nun who was an inspiration for you. Can you tell us her name? Perhaps others such as X Insider or Borg can add some comments about this person, as well. I ask, not to pry or to ferret out the identity of this former nun (and I understand if you chose not to identify her), but because I'm interested in the qualities you found so inspiring and helpful (to the degree that it appears her leaving was influential in your decision to leave). What was it that made her seem genuine? How was she an inspiration? How did she differ from all the other nuns? I was struck by your comment that you were contemplating suicide during your postulancy training. Were you aware of any other nuns who were having such serious difficulties or struggling in other ways? What was your reaction when you heard so many other monastics had left in the past two years? Thanks.
Xnun Registered User (7/24/03 9:24 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Hi chuckle chela, I'd be very happy to tell you about this senior nun. And even though I think that everybody, who knew her, would know who I'm talking about anyway, I am also sure she wouldn't appreciate to have her name all over this board. (For the same reason I also took the other name above out of my post). If you really need to know, I can tell you privately. I am sorry if this is going to include a lot about myself, too, but I think that simply stating some qualities without relating to real situations, as I perceived them, wouldn't really help you understand what I am saying. And please be also patient with my English as I am trying to cope with the vocabulary that I have at hand. Wish I could convey to you the pictures that are stored in my mind. The reason why I considered her genuine is that she didn't seem to wear a mask. When I watched this nun over a period of time, there was just something I still cannot really put my finger on. She seemed to have the same love and concern for everybody, her words and actions (and probably body language as well) were without contradictions, she showed understanding for my situation as a newcomer in the PA (Postulant Ashram) in a way that was not just cheap, cheerful talk, and when I watched her, I had the feeling that she had nothing to hide and wasn't holding back anything. Watching her was like seeing someone whom you really would want to have as your friend. And it was actually through this nun that I learnt what a wonderful thing it is to go without masks myself, because her genuineness and openness just drew the same reaction from me. When she pointed out a flaw to me (and there were many ), she did it in such a loving way that I could not but admit them gladly. Although she was extremely busy with her duties in the ashram and had way more on her plate than she should have had, she still would take the time for people approaching her with problems, even if that meant staying up very late at night. She had no problems to admit her humaneness and didn't put a halo around herself. When her counselees (in the ashram everyone was assigned a counselor who was the only person to whom we were to speak about our problems) approached her with a personal problem, she would usually search in her own past where she had struggled with the same problem and then give the counsel from this perspective. She was also not beyond making mistakes, as no human being is. And there was certainly enough pressure on her to excuse that. But she was so humble that it was possible to walk up to her and say, "Look, I have a problem with what you did to me," and though she wouldn't say much, she would acknowledge you by changing her actions, which is worth more than a thousand words IMO. Sometimes she was so humble that it was even shocking. When I worked in her office, I sometimes had to witness how a certain Bni. (who seemed to have some power, although I never figured out how this worked) behaved toward this senior nun in such a rude and abusive way, but she would just take it without retaliating. She was very understanding of the situation of the postulants, of whom she was in charge as the PA housemother. One day we (the postulants) had annoyed her because we had not acted as quickly in a situation as we should have. Soon after that I had a conversation with another postulant sister who felt that the postulants needed a free weekend and I should ask Sr. about it because I was working in her office. But I felt that I couldn't ask her for a free weekend taking into account the recent trouble and I said that she would probably rather drill us like a drill sergeant, to which the other postulant jokingly replied, "Yeah, send us up a mountain full pack three times." Then we decided that this mountain would have to be Mt. Ryan at Joshua Tree National Park where the postulants had had an outing several months ago. So I thought this was funny enough that I could present our plea to Sr. in this way, asking her if she wanted to send us up Mt. Ryan full pack three times because of the trouble we had caused this week. She looked at me with big eyes, and when I explained the whole plot, she choose to give the postulants the free weekend instead. So she demonstrated also a great amount of humor and compassion. Or one day I got into trouble with another senior nun (who had been around already when PY was there). That day I had been in charge of the postulants' setting up of a room for the nuns' Thanksgiving banquette, which involved moving furniture and setting up folding tables and chairs. So I took three other girls with me to get the folding chairs. They were stored in a little room inside the recreation room. But in the rec. room this senior nun was sitting watching tv. I didn't think anything of it and just marched through to get the chairs. Well, it didn't take long and this senior nun was towering above me inside this tiny storage room, ranting at me how I dared to march through like this when she was censoring tapes for the nuns' movie night (which was supposed to be a secret, but after she blurted it all out, it wasn't a secret anymore). I looked at the other girls who were just horrified, I looked at the nun towering above me with a dark red face, looking as if she was wanting to hit me very badly, and I secretly admired her self-control for not doing so, and all the while I kept apologizing, but I did not really feel guilty because we were just doing the work we were supposed to get accomplished. When we were finally out of this room again and setting up the chairs, Sr. came and I told her all about what had happened. And even though she did not laugh, I could tell she was amused. And she went to settle this matter with this other senior nun for me. Later she did the same for some novices who were in this other senior nun's counseling group. This senior nun had kept treating her counselees in such an abusive way, that they finally went to Sr. to ask her for help -- with the result that all counselees were taken from this other senior nun, which speaks volumes IMO. To sum it up, she simply stood out because of her loving concern for others and willingness to help others, and many of the nuns in the ashram felt very attracted to her. IMO, she was in this way towering as an example above all the other nuns I knew. Regarding the suicide question, well, I was aware of people struggling with issues, although most of the time I didn't know what they were struggling with because we were not supposed to talk with each other about our problems. The only person you may talk to about problems is your counselor. But there are always reasons why you may not be able to talk to a counselor, like the counselor is way too busy, or you don't get along very well with your counselor, or your counselor is just not the right person to talk about a particular problem, etc. So, issues can easily spill over without anyone knowing what's going. As it was, I never told my counselor about it. (In my case, PA housemother, counselor and work supervisor were all the same person.) She noticed that something was wrong with me, but for some reason communication had stopped between us, and she had had enough other things on her plate as to really inquire what was going on with me. -- Until now I had told only one other person about this (after I was out) because she had mentioned similar thoughts at some point, and so I knew she would understand me. That's basically all it takes for me to feel better about a situation, to talk to people who were in the same situation. And that's also why I was willing to share this piece of information on this board, because of all the others who are mentioned here who have either felt suicidal or have even gone through with it. If you tell people who never had this experience, they are shocked how you can even think about suicide, but if you share with someone who has experienced the same thing, healing can take place. My reaction about so many leaving within two years? Well, certainly I was surprised. Guess somehow I had imagined things had continued as I knew them. But then there is also much gladness for those who jumped off, hoping that they will get their lives off the ground again and that they will be able to deal with past issues in a healthy way. Edited by: Xnun at: 7/24/03 12:09 pm
etzchaim Registered User (7/24/03 2:58 pm) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Xnun, Thank you for sharing this. It's refreshing to hear about the people like the nun who inspired you. I went through a suicidal time, too, so I can relate to that. I hope that things go well for you now and you are finding people who are supportive and loving. I found the part about the senior nun censoring movies rather interesting. Ultra-Orthodox Jewish parents do this as a matter of course for books, movies and computer games. Some will not even allow their children to see movies, and even those who do, never in a movie theater. The internet is restricted by religious programs that only allow proper "Orthodox" sights through. Parents will not allow their children to read a book before they read it themselves, and most are not acceptable. I'm really struck by the similarities, sometimes. Etz
Xnun Registered User (7/25/03 2:01 am) Reply	Re: "original" Hinduism vs. "original" C Etzchaim, >>I went through a suicidal time, too<< I'm glad you pulled through!!! >>I hope that things go well for you now and you are finding people who are supportive and loving.<< Thank you! Yes, I'm doing fine now, because now I have friends whom I can ask to pray for me when I get down or discouraged, and either I will see a direct answer, or if it's not God's will to change a specific circumstance, He will nevertheless renew my strength, give me peace and confidence in Him and help me keep walking with Him. It's unlike anything in the ashram where we never prayed for specific needs of people (even knowing about those needs might have "pulled down" our consciousness); we would do only this Aum-chant at the end of our group meditations. And this was also the way in which prayer requests of members were taken care of. For example, someone would write in and say please pray for me because I'm going to have surgery on March 16 or something. And eventually the person would receive some of the standard answers like, so sorry we have taken so long to answer your letter but be assured that we were praying for you on your day of need. Yes, we were chanting Aum every day, so probably also on their day of need. Xnun Edited by: Xnun at: 7/25/03 3:49 am

Page 1 2

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend

Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image

Topic Control Image

Click to receive email notification of replies

Click to stop receiving email notification of replies

jump to:

- SRF Walrus - SRF Teachings and Ideals -

Powered By ezboard� Ver. 7.32
Copyright �1999-2005 ezboard, Inc.