Satanism, Buddhism and Hinduism

Now I make a return to the religious quotations. This time on the connections between three religions that have had an effect on my way of looking at the world. The first quote comes from a message board and it deals with buddhist tantra metaphysics. It speaks about the void/sunyata/emptiness. The second quote is on hinduism and the tradition that looks upon the ultimate source as the mother, in this case Kali. The dynamic darkness that is the foundation of reality. The third quote comes from a organization called the satanic reds. I don't care for their political orientation but their metaphysical side is very interesting indeed. Here they use Satan as the ultimate symbol for, what I consider, to be the same thing as the void in buddhism, and kali in hinduism.

Originally posted as a part of the lashtal forums:
http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-2355-highlight-empty.phtml

You claim Dharmakaya is 'Wholly Other' but this is not held universally. Many Tantric Buddhists will claim "Nirvana is Samsara. Samsara is Nirvana." The point is the non-dual nature of it, I think. The idea of something being "Wholly Other" while devoid of duality (of "others") boggles my mind. Further, this enlightened consciousness isnt necessarily static. "Bede draws on a quote from a great Zen teacher, Suzuki, in which he said that 'Sunyata [what you claim is True Nature] is not static but dynamic.' ...In the void there is a constant urge to differentiate itself. And the whole creation is the differentiation of the void...At the very moment of the differentiation it returns to itself. It is always coming out and returning." The void flows out in differentiation and simultaneously returns to the void. "That is why the Buddhists say that Nirvana and Samsara are the same," says Fr. Bede. 'Ultimately they are one.'"

Really, I think contemplating whether a state that transcends dualities is dynamic or static, because it seems the description would transcend the dynamic/static duality as well, no? It is no doubt that if one manifests into the 'differentiated state' of normal consciousness there would at least appear to be a dynamic flow of things (time-space, causality, etc.) It is said, 'Before Satori, chop wood & carry water; after Satori, chop wood & carry water.'

The quote on hinduism comes from the book "KALI - the black godess of dakshineswar" by Elizabeth U. Harding:

You see her as black because you are far away from her. Go near and you will find her devoid of all color. The water of a lake appears black from a distance. Go near and take the water in your hand, and you will see it has no color at all. Similary, the sky looks blue from a distance. But look at the atmosphere near you; it has no color. The nearer you come to God, the more you will realize that he has neither name or form.

And:

In dense darkness, O Mother, Thy formless beauty sparkles;
Therefore yogis meditate in a dark mountain cave.
In the lap of boundless dark, on Mahanirvana's waves upborne,
Peace flows serene and inexhaustible.
Taking the form of the Void, in the robe of darkness wrapped,
Who art Thou, Mother, seated alone in the shrine of samadhi?
From the Lotus of Thy fear-scattering Feet flash Thy love's lightnings;
Thys Spirit-Face shines forth with laughter terrible and loud.

And now this is from the satanic reds:
http://www.apodion.com/vad/article.php?id=12&aid=145

1. Satan is the "dark force" that permeates all of nature and motivates all things to act according to their inner nature. The Boundless Darkness Itself is SAT. The ACTION of emanating out of, unfolding out of, springing forth, is TAN. The motivator and the act of motivating all things are together: Satan. Satan is that which is the origin of all and the unmoved mover, and it is described by both the unfolding and the thing unfolded: Satan

2. All things have a beginning where all was one.

3.The "big bang" came from a spark within the one Dark Presence and all that results from the "big bang" is permeated by the Dark Force. The universe was emanated by this force going from Chaos-Dark into Cosmos-Light.

4. All things, over time in the cosmos, become separate and change without ceasing to change.

5. All things are constantly motivated to change according to environment, and then they change the environment by being in it, of it: there is a dialectical interaction. If they do not do this they perish and go into dissolution; but this is not destruction; it is only more change.

6. All things are constantly motivated to change by inner urge. This is "Self Becoming" or "Self Evolving." All beings everywhere have it. Most living things have this solely and together with their own species, as if linked. When the individual becomes into, the species becomes into; in fact, large groups of similar living things speciate in this manner and diversify. A thing can not become what it is not already at it's inner core, at it's fundamental essence, nor can it resist becoming "what it is" as that center of itself moves forward in time. The thing "becomes into" what it is. One can have inner truth of what they are and actively increase their potentialities, or one can flow with what one is. If one resists it or tries to become, in the inner sense, what one is not, one will become Nothing - Klippoth.

7. All things have an individual characteristic, a unique identity that defines what they are and become. They are a singularly occurring event in time/space.

8. All things are ultimately connected, even if they appear to be separate, in the great web of life.

9. And all this is the esoteric meaning of "Do as Thou Wilt" for that truly is the whole of the Law, Cosmic Law and SAT-TAN-ic Law. The joyful act of Doing and Becoming-Into is Love. It is experienced as Joy. Being is Joy. Joy radiates Love just as the sun radiates light.

Now my belief is that they all describe the same reality but they all use different words. This of course has to do with traditions, geography and other such things. There are definately parts which are non-compatible between the different views but I think the base is the same. Non-dual, formless into form etc.

Now what differes the most is probably the practice. I for one do not want to be called a buddhist because I dont agree on the morals and the ethics that they subscribe to. The same may be said on the other two religions as well. In regards to hinduism I have a hard time with the very theistic bend. I never liked the word God or what it symbolizes as some conciousness, a being that acts upon his/her own will. Im not a theist and therefore I interpret hinduism symbolically. It does describe a reality that is very real but it is made into myth for people to easier connect with it. Fritjof Capras book "the tao of physics" describes this quite well, how religious myths can be connected to scientific discoveries and "truths".