Shen Chi Jing

From what I've learned, 2012 is related to a Baktun. According to Samael Aun Weor, the real beginning of the end is related to a Katun, around 2040-2043.

Some of the very important Secret aspects of this Mantra are explained here: http://gnosticradio.org/lectures/lectures-by-topic/buddhism/296-the-mantra-of-christ-om-manipadme-hum/view-details

From what I understand the Skandhas don't reincarnate, because they disintegrate after death like the physical body, however that when the Storehouse-Consciousness (Alaya-Vijnana) returns to a new womb, a new personality/Skandhas is built up based on the karmic 'values' or impressions (whether negative, neutral, or positive) that are carried over from lifetime to lifetime in the Alaya-Vijnana. The above might not be the best explanation, but look up the terms: Sugatagarbha, Tathagatagarbha, Alaya-Vijnana, and Cittatva. http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Cittatva%22+%22Tathagatagarbha%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari#hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&q=%22Cittatva%22+%22Alaya+Vijnana%22&mvs=0&oq=%22Cittatva%22+%22Alaya+Vijnana%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=17346l25984l0l26521l21l18l0l0l0l0l0l0ll12l0&fp=5903c4aa8dac04c5&biw=480&bih=268

Just lost the entire post I'd typed, while I was looking up a couple of quotes. Oh well, here are the said quotes anyhow (which are a lot better than what I had to say anyway ):

I've pretty much only glanced at some of Mantak Chi's writings, nonetheless I'll bet that one could develop some powers with his practices; although from what I understand, Mantak Chia's writings contain a mixture of black tantra and grey tantra or gray tantra. See also: Sacred Sex: Taoism Mercury/Hexiohehary

He does indeed. The quote is found...: HERE The Gnostic tradition states that Karmamudra (although only with sanctity (as opposed to sanctimoniousness), virtue, and compassion) is actually the very way to awaken the Kundalini; and that Pranayama, various Yogas, Meditation, etc. can awaken sparks of Kundalini. Without Sex, only sparks. With Sex (and again, only with sanctity (as opposed to sanctimoniousness), virtue, and compassion), it is said the Kundalini Herself is awakened: How is Tantra related with the development of the kundalini? Sarva Mangalam

Twinner Like was said, the Mysteries of Sexual Transmutation (the Great Arcanum or Arcanum A.Z.F.) have been very secret for thousands of years; so most monasteries probably don't even know it. Although some do of course. And if they don't know Sexual Alchemy, then they probably don't know Pranayama either. As far as I'm aware, the Roman Catholic church does not teach Pranayama (it's pretty obvious that they do not teach Pranayama). And it's very likely that some or even many Buddhist monasteries do not know or teach it. Have you read this post? Again, I'm not advocating celibacy. Best Regards

Right, I can agree that we could know the Nature of the Universe to some degree without being Omniscient. I'm simply saying that we can delude ourselves if we assume that we know It in its totality, unless we are at least Omniscient. So, I assumed too much when reading what you said about having reached awareness of the nature of the Universe. Nonetheless, we can awaken whether we're chaste or not; however it's possible to awaken positively or negatively. About sex without orgasm (although there's more to it than that), it is called Sahaja Maithuna, or Karmamudra in Buddhism. It is for working with the Drops, Winds, and Channels (Bindu, Prana, Nadi) within the Mandala of the Body, where the Deities reside microcosmically; and is said to be the most effective way of doing so.

I really doubt that the sexually deviant monks you speak of were even practicing Pranayama at all. The fact that you think that Pranayama is about removing the desire for sex, shows that you wouldn't know if it works or not, because you are ignorant regarding the very nature of it. Pranayama is not supposed to remove the desire for sex. It is supposed to transmute it to enough of a degree for us to be able to remain in physical chastity. Yet Samael Aun Weor recognized that even Pranayama is not enough to prevent wet-dreams in the long run. That's why he recommended that Spiritual aspirants be open to the idea of eventual Marriage. Nevertheless, Samael Aun Weor still taught it because it helps. This is why the Dalai Lama said that in the Higher Tantras, even wet dreams are a Tantric downfall; because he knows that with the Karmamudra Sex of White Tantra, we can avoid wet-dreams altogether. Sarva Mangalam

Unless we are literally Omniscient, we should be very careful about assuming Self-Knowledge and Knowledge of the Nature of the Universe. And even if we are Omniscient, we should still be careful about our assumptions (for example, from what I've learned, there are said to be Omniscient Beings who are not able to enter the Absolute, because they are attached to their Omniscience. How about that.). Anyhow, Chaste Sex (without orgasm) between a woman and man who are in love IS the enjoyment of the pleasures of Sex. Orgasm is an extreme, and celibacy is the other extreme. Chaste Sex however, is in alignment with the Middle Way spoken of by the Buddha.

Twinner Actually, sexual hypocrisy is the very thing addressed in the very link that you claim I'm hypocritical for posting. So unless you've read it, it's rather silly to make accusations of hypocrisy, don't you think? The said link also explains the issue of pent up pseudo-religious people becoming sexual deviants because of their sexual-repression; and, I already addressed that issue posts ago and even pointed it out to you later in this thread, yet you keep repeating yourself as if I'd never addressed the said issue at all. Also, Sexual Transmutation (whether Pranayama or Sexual Magic) is seems very foreign and is shocking to most people because it has been veiled in the world's Spiritual Traditions for thousands of years. It has always been there; yet veiled, due to our karma. Anyway, I'm not here to tell you what to do. I'm just sharing information of which you are free to reject, accept, or meditate upon. If you don't agree with me then that's fine. Nonetheless, please stop repeating the same straw-man arguments over and over. Best Regards

Well Gnosis and The Tao share the same roots after all. That's why it was said that Pranayama breathing is prescribed for singles for staying in chastity and not becoming sexually frustrated. So if one who is single doesn't want to become healed, then they should not take the prescription! Seriously though, perhaps it's only the way that I've worded things (rather than their actual content) here, that makes them sound like "proscriptions"? Thanks.

I've not read much of Paul Foster Case's (founder of B.O.T.A.) writings, but from what I understand they're pretty good. Although when it comes to Kabbalah, Masonry, Rosicrucianism and such, I prefer more the writings of Eliphas Levi, H.P. Blavatsky, Dion Fortune, Manly P. Hall, and Samael Aun Weor. Haven't read much of William Quan Judge's (Bryan Kinnavan) work either, but it seems pretty good too. I didn't know he was an author on "New Thought" (much less a "self-help" writer). I thought rather that William Quan Judge was more of a classical Theosophist (one of the Theosophical Society's very first members in fact?). I'm going to have to say probably not on William Quan Judge being a New Thought and/or 'self-help' writer. Theosophy may have influenced "New Thought" and "Christian Science", but I don't see how the latter two could be directly linked to any real Theosophists such as H.P. Blavatsky, H.S. Olcott, Rudolf Steiner, Franz Hartmann, or William Quan Judge. I was into some 'self-help' books, 'success' books, NLP books, etc. for a brief period. Not anymore though:

Perhaps I'll have more time to elaborate on this, or previous posts, later; although for now I'll say that if you've been following my posts, you'll see that the teachings contained therein are actually expressing the Spiritual importance of embracing healthy sexuality, not rejecting it. The Initiatic Schools throughout history and in all parts of the world, have always rejected masturbation because it is actually anti-sexual. Masturbation is a unfruitful and sterile use of the sexual energy. Whereas sex between a woman and a man is healthy because it is fertile both physically and Spiritually. When the man and woman reach orgasm, they produce physical offspring. When the woman and man withdraw from the sexual act before reaching orgasm, they can then begin to further multiply their Spiritual values (this is the Kabbalistic meaning of in the Torah that states: "Be Fruitful and multiply."). In Buddhism, it is said that through the orgasm we waste the Bodhicitta, Thigle, or Jasmine Flower Drops; and it is very important to keep the Bodhicitta in our bodies as to transmute and channel through the Nadis/Channels. It doesn't matter what our moral values are; if we masturbate and/or orgasm then we waste Bindu or Thigle and disrupt the proper flow of Prana, and therefore cannot use the Nadis to their full capacity, and even damage them over time. And in the Higher Tantras in particular, the physical body is very important for realizing full Buddhahood (in Christianity, the physical body is the temple of the Holy Spirit). If we are single, then Pranayama and Meditation are prescribed as the methods for staying in chastity without becoming sexually frustrated: Sacred-Sex: Pranayama (See also Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche's Awakening the Sacred Body or Healing with Form, Energy, and Light on the Nine Purifications Pranayama) Also, a great excerpt about the unhealthy effects of not embracing our sexual nature: The Spheres of Lilith and Nahemah Sarva Mangalam

Because you don't agree with it, it's "hate mongering"? I've not back-pedaled, because I still stand by everything I've said here. When I said "my mistake", it was only because I was mistaken in accidentally mixing up one of anamatva's posts with one of your posts, nothing more. And there was no mention of me dropping this topic. Although I'm considering it....

Anamatva My mistake. I got your post mixed up with part of Twinner's post because I was trying to finish my post before I have to log off. Speaking of which, I'll try to come back to this thread later to reply to your post, and to provide further explanation of what I meant in regard to transmutation. Best Regards

Twinner You keep implying that I said that one should refrain from sex. I never said such a thing. -K- The rest of the text is relating specific examples of what is quoted in bold. I included it to give more of a context to what is quoted there in bold. If there's anything specific you want to know, I'll do my best to correctly address it. anamatva Retention of the semen is not repression, if it is transmuted. And transmutation is the key to the relationship between Sex and Spirituality. To separate Sex from Spirituality is not a holistic view. The two are closely related because the sexual energy is at the root of Creation Itself. How else are you even here having this conversation, if not for sex? As above, so below. The harmonious cultivation of Sexual Energy is common knowledge among Initiates, whether Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, Hebrew, Yoruba, Sufi, etc. Sarva Mangalam

-K- If you read again the words in bold within the quote brackets in my previous post, it is explained quite clearly. Or perhaps there is something more specific you're referring to? Twinner No one said that denying the sexual act is the way to God. Quite the opposite actually. This was already addressed in this thread, in the following post: Post #31 by "Shen Chi Jing"

Or as Samael Aun Weor says, that alcohol is like the very grease of the Wheel of Samsara. It isn't really a moral issue per-sé, because morals are subjective. Here is an example of abiding in the Natural State of our own Being (being able to actually be aware of the First Law); versus someone caught up in the moving mind of Samsara (in this latter case it would be wise to heed the mechanics of cause and effect by following the Second Law (the Vinaya, Ten Commandments, Shariah, etc.), that is at least until Knowing that we are at the level of Being to be able to be aware of and follow the First Law): Furthermore, what can we say of Jakob, who by the command of God, had four successive wives, Leah, Rachel, Bilhah, and Zilpah? Or Muhammed, with his many wives? Or Padmasambhava, a key founder of Tibetan Buddhism, who had innumerable sexual partners? Or Samael Aun Weor, who also took a consort near the end of his last life? To understand these examples and avoid falling into the mistake of judging or condemning what we do not know, it is important that we understand that there are two laws: The First Law: the instructions given directly to the Human Soul by the Innermost or Inner Buddha The Second Law: the written law, the vows, commandments, and other guidelines in religions (the commandments are given in Deuteronomy, which comes from deutero, second) The instructions given by God transcend the written law. The physical senses are not a reliable tool to measure the superior, first law. Thus, we cannot judge others based upon what we hear, are told, or even by what we see with our eyes. It is not our place to judge, but only to love others and have compassion for them. Jesus did not condemn the adulterous woman. Furthermore, tradition states that he took a repented prostitute for his wife: Mary Magdalene. Thus, who are we to judge anyone? Sarva Mangalam

It is actually taught in the Gnostic tradition that bachelor Yogins can send some Kundalini energy up the spine with Pranayama and such (even without Sahaja-Maithuna or Karmamudra) as to store Ojas in the Heart Chakra and stay in Chastity. However, the Gnostic Sex: The Secret Gate to Eden video is saying that the Kundalini Serpent Herself can only be fully awakened with Sexual Magic (Karmamudra) between a Woman and a Man. Also, it wasn't said that anyone should hate alcoholics, masturbators, homosexuals, etc. In fact, we should have a lot of compassion for them. I'd simply pointed out that one cannot enter Initiation in any authentic tradition while continuing to engage in the said vices (and it's not only the Abrahamic traditions that state this). I use to exist as a masturbator and alcoholic, and then I realized the harm in it, so I've stopped. And it wasn't easy. Anyhow, it's a false "new age" idea thinking that anyone would be able to enter Initiation while continuing with those vices. An analogy that one Gnostic Instructor used, was that it would be like trying to ride a bicycle in opposite directions at the same time. This being said, what's more compassionate: Encouraging people to continue to engage in harmful activities that cause suffering? Or sharing knowledge about the benefits of stopping those harmful actions, and sharing the methods to actually achieve it so that people can begin to eliminate the causes of suffering? Sarva Mangalam

FYI most of those PDF's of Samael Aun Weor's writings contain tons of mistakes. They are often bad translations, are missing entire paragraphs, add things that aren't in the original, etc. Christ is not only limited to the Christian tradition. When studying the attributes of Christ, it is quite clear that Christ is, in Its totality, Bodhicitta in all four of Its aspects: Outer, Inner, Secret, and Ultimate or Innermost-Secret. As for Lucifer, Samael, Abraxas, Satan, the Demiurge, Yaldabaoth, Baphomet, etc.; let's just say for now that studying Kabbalah along with Buddhism, would unveil many interesting things regarding this. I'm not about to tackle that one in this thread right now though. It's all a matter of how you are able to and/or want to utilize your time. For some, studying all of the traditions is more inspirational and is therefore of practical use; and for others studying anything aside from one particular tradition is more or less a distraction. Interestingly, the Gnostics (such as Samael Aun Weor), the Platonists/Neo-Platonists, and the Sufis (such as the Ismailis and the Naqshbandi Order) have all used the expression the "Golden Chain" or the "Golden Thread" for centuries, if not much longer. There's more of a connection between the Western (and/or "Middle Eastern") and the Eastern traditions than most would even begin to imagine. Masonic authors like H.P. Blavatsky, Manly P. Hall, Godfrey Higgins, Kenneth R.H. Mackenzie, Gerald Massey, Albert Pike, John Yarker, etc. have provided an overwhelming mass of evidence for the existence of the Gnosis that is at the heart of all authentic traditions. Even Vajranatha (John Myrdhin Reynolds) who has worked closely with Lopon Tenzin Namdak, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, and other Masters; has contributed to this field, particularly in the context of Buddhism. Well it's not about becoming an "expert". It's about coming to the realization that some traditions have lost much of the meaning of their original teachings; and that without teachers like Samael Aun Weor, many of the teachings of some traditions would remain obscure. I don't know how many times I've seen people who are full of pride about their so called mastery of the teachings of their tradition, yet they don't even recognize some of the basic prerequisites that are found in their religion (contemporary exoteric Christianity being the most common example of this). Anyhow, no; I'm no expert in anything. Nevertheless, much of what I write on forums and such, is at least worthy of examine; even if the "experts" don't think so. By practicing, applying the Scientific Method, and by Meditating. If it didn't prove to be a fruitful endeavor for you, doesn't mean that it won't be for others. And like I'd said, there are, as far as I can tell thus far, differences between the Dzogchen approach and the approach of the Gnostic Teachings. And I don't intend to mix up the two teachings where there are (apparent) contradictions. On the other hand, the said two teachings clarify many things in regard to one another; so long as we're careful to not make connections where (apparently) none exist. And like I'd also said, the Gnostic Teachings seem to be more akin to Tantrayana (the Path of Transformation) than they are to Dzogpa-Chenpo (the Path of Self-Liberation). In fact, at this point I'm more interested in the Gnostic Teachings than I am Buddhist Tantra proper (although maybe this will change after I study the Guhyagarbha Tantra and a commentary or two); yet I am overall more interested in Dzogchen than I am the Gnostic Teachings. The fundamentals of Gnosis are very important in any case: Chastity/Sexual Magic, Meditation, Bodhicitta, the blessing of the Elementals of plants when working with plants, and the Communion/Eucharist (known as Ganapuja or Ganachakra Puja and Pancatattva in Tantra). Again, maybe the Gnostics teach pure Dzogchen in their 2nd or 3rd Chamber, I don't know. Also, I've seen statements written by Samael Aun Weor that could indicate the Dzogchen View, however I'm not currently qualified to make a definitive statement about those said statements. Best Regards

Ya'll are welcome. And good luck.

There's a book (forgot the title) that talks about a diet of organic brown rice with grated organic Japanese radish (daikon I'd assume) with organic toasted green tea on the side, that sounds worth a try. Seems like to do it for a few weeks or so would be a good cleanse. I would add organic orange juice to that mix though. Apparently Vitamin C is very important, and you can't really get it from most vitamin supplements because they don't have the necessary bioflavanoids like OJ has. However maybe the sugar-content of OJ would lessen the effectiveness of the other positive aspects of such a diet (even though it is a natural "good" sugar) ? And it would be better to drink the tea and orange juice at different times of the day.