Comments on: Meditation Quotes from King David

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 02:16:55 +0000

This is another reply to RCohen:
Previously I left out my reply to your Kaballah statement. Again, similarly to your original question “why do we need to research so many other religions/sources”, looks like here too you just stick with one source again, even within your religion : your version of Judaism.
Regarding your statement that Kaballah is most recently accessible in English through Chassidus, I suggest to check out English translation of the Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto’s books: “The Kabbalah of the Ari Zal”, and also, “138 Openings of Wisdom”.
These books are not Chassidus and, incidentally, you may discover that Chassidus sources dropped quite a lot from the Kabbalah of Luzzatto and Ari Zal …

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:47:23 +0000

RCohen, The best answer to you question comes from Rambam (Maimonides)
“Guide for the Perplexed” Book 3 Ch.51 :
… Those who undertake to investigate the principles of religion, have come into the ante-chamber (a metaphor for the “palace” of God) … but those who have succeeded in finding proof for everything that can be proved, who have a true knowledge of God, so far as a true knowledge can be attained, and are near the truth, wherever an approach to the truth is possible, they have reached the goal and are in the palace in which King lives …
————–
Why do you believe only to what your Rabbi teaches you? Is it because you happened to be born a Jew? Does this mean that if you were born in Muslim family similarly you would only believe everything what your local imam preaches without verification?
This is what Rambam calls intelligence deserving to find God: everything must be proven whatever can be proven to pinpoint the Truth, regardless who we are and regardless what our immediate environment tells us.
Only uncompromising seeker deserves to Know The Divine. Ignorance multiplies whenever individual relies on somebody’s teaching without seeking his own proof.

Here is a test showing you your patterns of thinking:
How do you know that “Intellect over emotions” principle did not come from Sanskrit teachings? Did you study Sanskrit sources and their history to arrive at such a conclusion? …Otherwise …?
Ex.: I believe Torah is God-given Divine source NOT because my Rabbi said so but based on my own investigation and comparison through all major scriptures of the World and also comparing Torah text with my own life experience… Through this hard work/study I deserved to approach the “ante-chamber” of the King…

By: RCoehn

RCoehn — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 06:11:15 +0000

Why do you have to refer to so many other religions and belief systems when you are saying it is all true from the Torah??? It’s all there. Intellect over emotions is not from Sanskrit teachings, it’s from the Torah, specifically mysticism – Kaballah which is most recently accessible in English through Chassidus (Chassidic Philosophy).

By: Bruce

Bruce — Wed, 19 May 2010 08:50:13 +0000

Reply @Abhishek
You still don’t understand difference between the language and the topic it is used to discuss. I sincerely recommend you first, before you read other articles on this website, study Gita with good commentaries such as by Paramhansa Yogananda (from SRF), Swami Nikhilananda (from Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center) or by Sri Aurobindo. Then study major Upanishads. Also recommended to study Swami Vivekananda articles on Raja Yoga and on Bhakti Yoga which will help you to understand how differences in language and paths lead to the same mind development and ultimately to Realization… Once you come to realize (as outcome of this learning) that the goals of ALL THESE PATHS are the same, only then you will understand Psalm of King David discussed here. Only then you will know that David talking about “Lord helping the heart-broken” is another language for the Buddha’s First Noble Truth – Dukkha (Pali) or Duhkha (Sanskrit) to describe human suffering as inevitable preceding state of mind before the quest for Nirvana kicks in, eventually leading to Samadhi (or Divine state of mind known as Ruach Hakodesh in Hebrew).
Please, don’t rush to form conclusion before you learn the Vedanta. Such a rush is great obstacle in learning.
Sincerely yours,
Ben

By: Abhishek Chatterjee

Abhishek Chatterjee — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:22:38 +0000

Thanks Ben, yes I would take that suggestion. Like I said, I am not very religious but growing up in a Bengali family I was always fed with the authors you mention. Specially the writings of Swami Vivekanand and Ramkrishna Paramhans.

I landed at your site in my quest to learn more about the Torah. My earlier misconceptions about the Judaic beliefs sprung up from its similarities with that of the Koran, whose ideas I simply don’t consort with.

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:30:02 +0000

By: Abhishek Chatterjee

Abhishek Chatterjee — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:08:23 +0000

I meant to say, that Buddha rejected the concept of a personal God anyway, he would have never said anything like that in any of his teachings. For him, Lords and Gods were a different plane of existence for life forms.

So when you say, “The Lord is near the broken-hearted; he is the savior of those whose spirits are crushed down.” I just said that please show me when and where Buddha said something like this, since it’s amusing to me that he would say that the Lord is near the broken-hearted or preach him being a savior. There is NO Lord! It is “you” who is responsible for your broken-heartedness. You are just a victim of the four essential truths of Buddism. You have suffering, because you have desire! You are broken hearted because you desire something and not get it!

I just pointed out a clear mistake, regardless of what the title of this topic is.

By: Ben

Ben — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:07:44 +0000

@Abhishek Chatterjee:

Is the topic of this article the nature or the name of God that you ask this question?
Please stay with the topic – this article about meditation as taught by King David. For those unfamiliar with the subject of meditation – this is a way to reveal the nature of human consciousness and develop it toward the Ultimate state – the Ruach Hakodesh in Hebrew, Samadhi in Sanskrit, Satori in Japanese, Nirvana in Tibetan/Sanskrit, Self Realization in the language of Modern day spirituality. For better understanding it uses the parallels from other spiritual cultures to show where they overlap.
Nowhere there is a any comparative analysis in this article (who needs such comparison and for what purposes?). Again – it shows that the Truth shines through all the spiritual scriptures and the points where they overlap are the pointers to the Truth.

By: Ben

Ben — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:58:25 +0000

@perry:

You are right – there is only one God. So say all the religions which are quoted here. There are though different names for Him (so is in our Bible many names are given for Him). The names are different. If you understand the Unity of God only in terms Unity of the name, then you have to re-read Bible again and notice those other names you did not see before…

By: Abhishek Chatterjee

Abhishek Chatterjee — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:46:13 +0000

“The Lord is near the broken-hearted; he is the savior of those whose spirits are crushed down. – this is a key teaching of Buddha”

Really? Which Lord did Buddha believe in?

Other than that this article is very enlightening. I think you should stop comparing and describe more about the message in perspective of the Torah.