Pilgrim

Also known as Pratyahara, a step into Samadhi. In another post you mention being aware even in deep sleep, this I can speak too and it is not what it is cracked up to be.

While I respect your perspective it simply is not correct outside of your tradition. Mantra transcends all traditions. From your perspective it may remain true for yourself within the system of your tradition and there can be no discussion on that because any attempt to do so would be violating the system of belief you cherish and that is not nice to do to someone. Therefore my reply is not in specific regard to demonstrating how you are incorrect within that which works for you. This reply is for those who may may stumble across this thread and be detoured by the subset of preconditions set forth in your reply, for whom it is not a good fit and discourage the use of the tool of Mantra.. ~~~~~~~~~~~ Morality is highly subjective within a given tradition or cultural reference, or religion. Mantra does not require a moral precept to work. Mantra does not even require any other supporting framework other than it must be blended with Prana. One must, MUST learn how to integrate their mind with their Chi / Prana. This is universal regardless of tradition or sentiment. Mantra requires no subjective idea or emotional context of morality to operate effectively, although it can help for a while. Mantra does not require purity of heart. If anything it is a tool which will help one develop a more pure heart. Mantra does not require a practice based on faith or a commitment of any kind. Mantra typically comes as a packaged deal with a religion or a tradition of sadhana of some kind. Mantra does not require sincerity. By the very act of making mantra the sincerity is in place already. Mantra does require focus. Everything listed above with the exception of focus is in the category of devotion and strong sentiment or Bhakti which has been used as strong emotional fuel as a source of getting ones ass on the cushion since the beginning of contrived practices. This Bhakti or strong sentiment, even with sincerity can only go so far. Mantra is independent of these things and goes places allows one to enter realms where these things of emotional feeling and sentiment simply do not exist. Where mind itself does not exist, where the witness itself does not exist. If these things of feeling are not let go of then they will tether mantra and mind will not be able to relax its grasp on sentiment nor go beyond which is the point of mantra. The purpose of mantra in the beginning is for global purification of the subtle channels and is to enter the central channel. Entering the central channel is necessary to enter Samadhi. Mantra is universal. Prana is universal but takes on different names in different cultures in different times. When the two universal principals are applied with focus all boundaries of emotion, sentiment and mind are transcended. If not in the beginning then later. One must, MUST learn how to integrate their mind / Mantra with their Chi / Prana. This is universal regardless of tradition or sentiment. If one will learn how to integrate within their tradition then they will have it all and satisfy all conditions.

Too late already.....

More proof that intelligence is not a prerequisite for wealth.

Hi Bindi I have read this story before and always enjoyed it. Thank you for sharing it. The story applies here but it does not explain why. If I tell a person chant OM mentally even sing OM for them to the best of my ability so they get the tonality and pronunciation correct. They will only learn the mantra. If by the knowing of having discovered by doing how to make mantra effective I work with a person and discover the key to their comprehension then they will understand also how to make Mantra Effective. Mantra is a science pure and simple, it works because it works and no agency or presumed authority is required to activate some mystical charm. You can practice mantra or Japa forever and get very little result, this is true but it is not because some mystical authority is required to grant you permission or so order that it be done. Just the verbal or mental repetition of Mantra is not enough. One must, MUST learn how to integrate their mind with their Chi / Prana One can discover how to do this on their own simply by doing practice. This is an uncertain way though and it is not likely many will. One may be taught specific technologies or techniques of practice where this will come to them. One may be fortunate enough to have a friend that is willing to spend time with them to help them unlock this within themselves.

Thank you, this is a wonderful function of the site hopefully software updates will not necessitate it's removal.

Requesting a PPF Thank you.

This is the wisdom of a frogs cut off leg responding to electrodes.

So far all I have met were frauds.

Depends, on if the renunciantes are true sheep or wolves in sheeps clothing bleating Kriyaaaa, Kriyaaa!!!!!

Good job Bindi

That's One Tough Ga-zoo-kas Wot hates all Pa-loo-kas Wot ain't on the ups an square ya pulled out of your pocket there!

He thought, but where is he now? No Presence No Cognition Tree falling in a forest no one present to listen, does it make a sound? Because all is conditional & temporary does it make it unreal or all the more real for its temporary state?

Lol not so surprising concerning Kriya Gurus. They do not have a good track record. A big part of the problem with Kriya as it has become known in the world is Yukteswar and all that followed him including Yogananda. There are huge problems with both of these historical figures that have been blown up to mythological proportions. Reading the writings of Yogananda is not a good idea, better off reading a comic book. Anything written by Yogananda has been heavily influenced and edited by others. Kriya is a householder practice not a practice for monastics. Lahiri Mahasaya forbid his students from becoming Monastics, He forbid the creation of groups around Kriya. Lahiri Mahasaya even went so far as to tell his chief apprentice to get rid of his whiskers and orange robe, cut his hair and marry becoming a householder and to raise a family before he would accept him. The monastics are the ones responsible for the world knowing about Kriya, they took it upon themselves to change the way it is practiced and have been on a selling spree for around 100 Years now. Some of the Ashrams built from the proceeds are truly beautiful. That people find it ineffective is a small wonder. Actual Kriya despite all the advertisement really is not a good fit for everyone. Even within the descendants of the Lahiri family there are issues such as certain descendants that were Krishnamurti followers and only use Kriya as an avenue for profit and bitch bitterly about not enough people coming to see them and how wonderful Russia is because so many come and give so much money that they have to file taxes in India. Thankfully there are other sources that held the practice as it was handed down. Does anyone even know what Gautama's practices were? I can assure you they were not Kriya as true Kriya was formulated (not modified) for the householders by Lahiri Mahasaya who came well after Gautama. Concerning Gautama and his lack of reference to God etc... it appears to me he was more of a practical sort that was more concerned with what could be done in the here and now rather than spinning off into realms or relatively little value to discuss due to the very nature of the topics. Concerning Gautama's practices I have always found it a clever argument that he found practices unnecessary in the end and developed his system instead. The whole thing falls apart here. Once you take up the practices you are no longer objective, you are no longer at the starting point of one who never has. The one who started out is changed by the practices so the one making the declaration is not the same as when they started views and opinions most certainly have been altered. Practices are tools. That is all. They are necessary. They do have there place. Does one confuse the tools with the completed house? When the house is built the tools are not needed a bulldozer serves no purpose. Before the house is built saying the bulldozer is not needed will not clear the land.

Mantra Is a great technology / tool. This is a Buddhist discussion section so I have remained silent. If it is wished come join me over at the Hindu Discussion and I will describe in the Kriya yoga section how and why Mantra is used it may or may not prove interesting. http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/43045-kriya-yoga/page-7 In the meantime I am educating myself concerning Buddhism because there is so much that parallels and so much that does not and there is much wisdom and reflection of what is known.

HI, I will come back to this right now receiving education on what Buddha and Buddhism is all about it is quite different than Vedic traditions and there are some very interesting facets that I happen to agree with as they are simply true such as Samsara. The best definition of samsara I've seen so far is from the Theravada monk and teacher Thanissaro Bhikkhu: "Instead of a place, it's a process: the tendency to keep creating worlds and then moving into them." And note that this creating and moving in doesn't just happen once, at birth. We're doing it all the time.

Lol

It is truly amazing how often things are discovered and applied with different labels, in different cultures and traditions.

Thank you for clearing up many misunderstandings. What is insight meditation? How is it performed?

Ah yes as pointed out in another thread the Siddhartha in the book met Gautama. Sorry it has been close to 30 years since I read the book. Wow 30 Years talk about something sticking with you! Great book! But was not Gautama's original name Siddhartha? Did he not follow a similar route before his awakening? Did he not do great Sadhana, practicing harsh austerities which led him to the knowledge of the middle way? I always thought the founder of the 8 noble truths was the first Buddha as with out his 8 noble truths there would not exist Buddhism. Perhaps I am confused would someone please clear this up? Thanks.

Darn you are right, it has been so many years I forgot.

Hello, This is a good thread but it would be helpful to me and I am certain others also if there was a better idea of what each is in the first place. At another thread http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/43199-gateway-to-limitless-being/page-7 I asked the following but this seems a better place for the question. I asked: Was Siddhartha from the book by Hermann Hesse the first Buddha? It is a work of fiction but it sure did a good job of explaining the process of becoming a Buddha or so it seemed anyway. Have you read the book? Is that what a Buddha is?

Was Siddhartha from the book by Hermann Hesse the first Buddha? It is a work of fiction but it sure did a good job of explaining the process of becoming a Buddha or so it seemed anyway. Have you read the book? Is that what a Buddha is? Just noticed a better place for this Question copying content there now. http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/43259-jivanmuktas-and-bodhisattvas/

The way this reads a Buddha is a soldier of some kind what is a Buddha?

What is a Buddha?