|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
 Posted - Jan 01 2010 : 10:01:01 PM
|
This one's kind of hard to describe; I'd suggest ....just listening.
If you like the song, there's more from the same artist, and a couple of similar artists, here.
Mazel Tov!
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
01.01.10
PS- Yes, they're Jewish. Yes, one line of the lyrics says "I've changed this body a thousand times". These guys were doing yoga a thousand years before Patanjali; no kidding. Hinduism is monotheistic. Judaism teaches reincarnation. I read up on stuff like this, so you don't have to. 
PPS- And no, they weren't necessarily first ..... but they might have been; Kabbalah and Advaitic Shaivism are the two oldest spiritual systems in the world; they pre-date the religions that they're "part of" ... by quite a bit of time ... and no one knows exactly how much. |
Edited by - Kirtanman on Jan 01 2010 10:08:01 PM |
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 02 2010 : 12:13:32 PM
|
Can anyone in the know give a brief synopsis of the method of kabbalah?
Adamant |
 |
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 02 2010 : 2:10:46 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Can anyone in the know give a brief synopsis of the method of kabbalah?
Adamant
I'd step up ...... but you said "brief".
(Oy Veda!  )
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
PS- Seriously: sure; happy to ... and I'll do so somewhere between "shortly" and "a bit later today", depending on how today's spontaneous schedule plays out.
In the meantime, there's some good background available here.
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Jan 02 2010 2:23:48 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 03 2010 : 6:05:29 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Can anyone in the know give a brief synopsis of the method of kabbalah?
Adamant
Kabbalah is a complete spiritual system, within the framework of an overall set of traditions (Judaism), similar to the relationship that Vajrayana or Dzogchen have to Buddhism, or that Kashmir Shaivism or Advaita Vedanta have to Hinduism.
Just as those traditions utilize the symbolism of a more widely used framework to highlight the reality of non-duality ... Kabbalah does exactly the same, within the larger framework of Judaism and the Hebrew language.
If anything, Kabbalah is rapidly becoming more "tradition independent" than other formal non-dual systems.
Like many non-dual paths, Kabbalah tends to be Jnana (knowing/inquiry) and Bhakti (devotion) oriented; the Jnana/Inquiry provides the wisdom; the Bhakti provides the energy.
However, having said that, it's important to note that Kabbalah has equivalent practices to anything found within yoga -- everything from mantra meditation, to pranayama, to tantric sexual practices.
And, as other non-dual traditions tend to do, they divide practices and views into a three-within-one-within-all framework ... outer (practice-based), inner (inquiry-based) and secret (awareness-based).
A great general site, with tons of information, is:
http://www.kabbalah.info/
I hope this is helpful.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Jan 03 2010 : 6:50:52 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman :)
Thanks for pointing this out! There are so many things to learn!
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
In the meantime, there's some good background available here.
I found it interesting that there is meditation and that the practice follows the breath as in this link (your link):
http://workofthechariot.com/TextFil...2-Intro.html
I also found it interesting about the small face.. like you said, it is very similar to many other teachings..
:)
TI |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 03 2010 : 7:09:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Hi Kirtanman :)
Thanks for pointing this out! There are so many things to learn!
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
In the meantime, there's some good background available here.
I found it interesting that there is meditation and that the practice follows the breath as in this link (your link):
http://workofthechariot.com/TextFil...2-Intro.html
I also found it interesting about the small face.. like you said, it is very similar to many other teachings..
:)
TI
Hi TI,
Thanks for the kind words; I'm glad it was helpful!
I'm also glad you found that heart/center article useful, too, in the Sushumna thread.
Good things are happening, as Yogani says!
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 03 2010 : 8:20:28 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Can anyone in the know give a brief synopsis of the method of kabbalah?
Adamant
Kabbalah is a complete spiritual system, within the framework of an overall set of traditions (Judaism), similar to the relationship that Vajrayana or Dzogchen have to Buddhism, or that Kashmir Shaivism or Advaita Vedanta have to Hinduism.
Just as those traditions utilize the symbolism of a more widely used framework to highlight the reality of non-duality ... Kabbalah does exactly the same, within the larger framework of Judaism and the Hebrew language.
If anything, Kabbalah is rapidly becoming more "tradition independent" than other formal non-dual systems.
Like many non-dual paths, Kabbalah tends to be Jnana (knowing/inquiry) and Bhakti (devotion) oriented; the Jnana/Inquiry provides the wisdom; the Bhakti provides the energy.
However, having said that, it's important to note that Kabbalah has equivalent practices to anything found within yoga -- everything from mantra meditation, to pranayama, to tantric sexual practices.
And, as other non-dual traditions tend to do, they divide practices and views into a three-within-one-within-all framework ... outer (practice-based), inner (inquiry-based) and secret (awareness-based).
A great general site, with tons of information, is:
http://www.kabbalah.info/
I hope this is helpful.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
I can't find any documentation about the methods you describe. Mostly I can only find philosophy. Do you have references to specific methods?
Adamant |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 04 2010 : 8:49:04 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
I can't find any documentation about the methods you describe. Mostly I can only find philosophy. Do you have references to specific methods?
Adamant
Hi Adamant,
I do ... one of the first links I provided in this thread has several; TI referenced a couple of them, above.
If you search on Kabbalah and Tantra here at the forum, you'll find a detailed post from me on tantric sexual practices in Kabbalah.
Also, if you just search on Kabbalah ... and/or yogic Judaism ... here at the forum ... you'll find links to sites, from posts of mine, that contain references to techniques.
Like other forms of Jnana-centric and Bhakti-centric practice ... the practices of Kabbalah are often found within other information.
Basically, the "time and teaching trajectory" of Kabbalah follows that of the oldest Tantric traditions is both Hinduism and Buddhism:
*It apparently originated in pre-history.
*Its oral-tradition foundation goes back to the Pentateuch (the Five Books of Moses comprising the original Torah of Judaism, aka the first five books of the Christian Old Testament) ... or roughly 1200 BCE; approximately a thousand years before Patanjali (roughly 200 BCE).
*The written tradition was between the 10th and 15th centuries, CE .. with some major Tzaddiks (Rabbis; gurus) ... teaching and writing in the 19th, 19th and 20th centuries, CE.
*The parallels in both the teachings and the techniques (between yoga/tantra and Kabbalah ... are irrefutable, and have gotten the attention of scholars within all related traditions).
If you really want to dig into some of the detail, check out:
BOOK: Meditation and Kabbalah by Aryeh Kaplan.
BOOK: The Secret of Doctrine of Kabbalah by Leonora Leet.
.. on Google Books ... and search on terms like Meditate, Meditation, Mantra, Breath, etc.
I hope this is helpful.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 04 2010 : 9:55:06 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
Thanks for the clarification. 1200 BCE is interesting, because it was the time of the creation of the Rig Veda (my own family is mentioned many times in the Rig Veda). This period is unique for the origination of the traditions of our current era. I agree that the Vedic and Hebrew traditions are united by a common link. However, like Christianity, Buddhism was an innovation, a changed view, the so-called "paradigm shift."
From what I can see, Buddhism and Christianity are the rebel yell against determinism. Both Hebrew and Hindu traditions have a heavy dose of fate involved, birthright and caste. The links you provided taught me that. I don't buy into any determinism. We created this. We are responsible for it. We can and will change it. I can't buy into the notion of a Creator, either. Any being who adheres "this is mine" suffers from delusion.
I do find kabbalah very interesting. However, I can't tell when I'm looking at a valid lineage transmission and when I'm looking at a cookey offshoot.
One other thing, from the standpoint of the nature of mind, it appears to me that the meditations of kabbalah are limited to the form realm. The view of a creator limits kabbalah, where one tries to attain the "equivalence of form" with the Creator. This is not total liberation, but liberation from one small cage of the ego into the supercage of the superego of the Creator. Whereas, the teachings of the Mahasiddhas go beyond all realms. At the same time, I wouldn't trade my AYP for kabbalah. That would be a downgrade.But this is just my humble limited opinion.
I really want to be one of the guys who is able to point out all the ways every tradition is one. However, I don't see it. I see important transformations that make one tradition and another as two different kinds, totally disconnected.
Adamant
P.S. The teachings of kabbalah of transforming one's vessel from just a will to receive into a will to bestow is beautiful, very wonderful. The form realm is not some nanny-goat realm. It's the realm of splendor and glory. It's just not real. |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 8:58:30 PM
|
Hi Adamant,
Good insights and comments; thanks.
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Hi Kirtanman,
Thanks for the clarification. 1200 BCE is interesting, because it was the time of the creation of the Rig Veda (my own family is mentioned many times in the Rig Veda). This period is unique for the origination of the traditions of our current era. I agree that the Vedic and Hebrew traditions are united by a common link. However, like Christianity, Buddhism was an innovation, a changed view, the so-called "paradigm shift."
I agree with this; as someone pointed out to me quite some time back:
"Jesus was Jewish; the Buddha was Hindu."
As in: as far as we know, neither the founder of Christianity nor Buddhism ever left the spiritual path of their birth; followers actually created those religions.
Which doesn't mean they're less valid in any way; it's about what works, not about how it started.
quote:
From what I can see, Buddhism and Christianity are the rebel yell against determinism. Both Hebrew and Hindu traditions have a heavy dose of fate involved, birthright and caste. The links you provided taught me that. I don't buy into any determinism. We created this. We are responsible for it. We can and will change it.
I'd say that the more mainstream aspects of those paths (Hinduism and Buddhism) are that way. Ironically, a lot of Kabbalists are orthodox Jews ... making for an interesting mix, in terms of worldview.
However, as it seems we agree: Advaitic view is the closest to accurate ... and philosophically, pure Kabbalah is as advaitic as it gets ... it's just often not "translated" advaitically ... as with the teachings of all religions and paths.
Ego-minds can't "get" advaitic perspective ... and so, the teachings get diluted a bit, quite often (in all paths).
quote:
I can't buy into the notion of a Creator, either. Any being who adheres "this is mine" suffers from delusion.
Absolutely agreed.
Who or what *is* the actual Creator?
Original Awareness, I'd say; the Ground of Being ..... what else creates experience? Kabbalah teaches this, btw; you just have to kind of "read between the lines" to get what they're saying ... but, as with many systems ... the advaitic view is the only way the "math" really works (the "math" being that it's all and only about how consciousness actually operates).
quote:
I do find kabbalah very interesting. However, I can't tell when I'm looking at a valid lineage transmission and when I'm looking at a cookey offshoot.
It is a bit challenging, I agree.
For me, it boils down to: does what they're saying make a LOT of sense, when sync'd up with my experience, and when sync'd up with the symbolism of any other spiritual system that I know to be valid.
Kabbalah rates at *least* as high in this area as any other system I know ... and far higher than most (Kashmir Shaivism and/or Tantric/Non-Dual Buddhism being its only full equals, as far as I've seen).
It's tough to spot this, because there is a lot of dualistic-sounding stuff ... and outright dualistic stuff ... taught in the name of Kabbalah.
However, there are also the books/groups that are utterly clear, and which express awareness-oriented teachings as well as any system.
quote:
One other thing, from the standpoint of the nature of mind, it appears to me that the meditations of kabbalah are limited to the form realm.
As with yoga, form is utilized to take one beyond form.
Kabbalah teaches of Devekut .. union/cleaving ... the equivalent of samadhi.
One good benchmark is: does the system produces enlightenment?
I'd say there are just about as many clearly enlightened Kabbalah-centric practitioners/teachers, as there are in/from any system.
And the good news, these days, is:
We don't have to pick just one.
That's the beauty; we can draw from the wisdom of anything workable from any system ... my promotion of Kabbalah is akin to promotion a new restaurant: "Hey, these guys have some really good food, too!"
quote:
The view of a creator limits kabbalah, where one tries to attain the "equivalence of form" with the Creator. This is not total liberation, but liberation from one small cage of the ego into the supercage of the superego of the Creator. Whereas, the teachings of the Mahasiddhas go beyond all realms.
Actually, Kabbalah does, too.
Just as with Kashmir Shaivism (where "Shiva" is not a separate being; Shiva is one's own original awareness ... a pearl of advaitic wisdom also made famous by Adi Shankaracharya, the founder of Advaita Vedanta: "Shivo'ham" ... "I am Shiva".
The Creator {the Will-to-Bestow} is unbound, undistorted subjective awareness; the Created {the Will-to-Receive} *is* form {physical, mental, etc.}.
This is actually a very clear, accurate teaching, once it's seen ... and Kabbalah articulates some of the nuances of it, very well, in ways I haven't seen articulated in any other tradition.
quote:
At the same time, I wouldn't trade my AYP for kabbalah. That would be a downgrade.But this is just my humble limited opinion.
I wouldn't either ... and/though to me, it's a non-issue; the teachings of Kabbalah can benefit AYP ... and the teachings of AYP can benefit Kabbalah; and both are thankfully open-architecture enought to allow for this.
quote:
I really want to be one of the guys who is able to point out all the ways every tradition is one. However, I don't see it. I see important transformations that make one tradition and another as two different kinds, totally disconnected.
I see this as kind of an angle thing:
*From one angle, at essence ... they teach the same things: how consciousness actually operates.
*From another angle, due to human variances over time, many aspect of each tradition are quite different.
quote:
P.S. The teachings of kabbalah of transforming one's vessel from just a will to receive into a will to bestow is beautiful, very wonderful. The form realm is not some nanny-goat realm. It's the realm of splendor and glory. It's just not real.
Well, again; the flow of Will-to-Bestow into Will-to-Receive ... and back again ... ever and ever ... worlds-without-end ... is the cycle of consciousness ... whether called YHVH ... or AUM. {<- that dot is a bindu, looking a lot like a dot } .. or AHAM {Kashmir Shaivism} or Spanda, or Mahamudra {as taught in Kashmir Shaivism; I realize Buddhist definitions may vary. <-- I don't know; I'm presuming you probably do}.
And, per Kashmir Shaivism: it's not so much that form realms are not real ... it's mistaking them for the *totality* of reality ... the interpretation of what "real" is ... that's not real.
Real is the fullness of being ... only here, only now (<- understanding, of course, that words get in the way ... but that's about as close as it can be said with words; reality is what is happening now; form and formless; manifest and unmanifest ... emptiness and form ... creator and created).
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Jan 05 2010 9:02:10 PM |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 10:33:31 PM
|
At least in the case of the Buddha, he laid out the Vinaya, not his followers. And Jesus said to Peter and/or Mary, "start the Church like this."
As all else you say I agree. Except about the form realm. Check out the Buddhist map of samsara from the desire realms up through the formless realms.
Adamant |
Edited by - adamantclearlight on Jan 05 2010 10:44:39 PM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Profound Kabbalah Song
