Yoga - what to do about kundalini

Author

what to do about kundalini

rdg3g sfs5gs

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Disclaimer: The manifestation that is called kundalini energy has different
effects in different people so this post may not apply to everyone.

Feeling a lot of emotions with the flow of kundalini energy can be helpful
in that releasing emotions can make you feel better than if you hold them
in. However it may be incorrect to expect that there will ever be an end to
emotions if you only release them. There is often an underlying cause of
the emotion that is generating it. If this is not dealt with then, the
kundalini flow will never settle down.

However just trying to keep the kundalini flow from happening is not the
best solution either.

It can be more helpful when a lot of emotions are being released, if you
modify your meditation technique to one that involves a high degree of
relaxation - such as the following:

1) At the beginning of the meditation try to move each muscle group a few
times. Start with the toes, and work up through the feet, legs, torso,
hands, arms, neck, face. This will release muscle tension (which may
acutally release more emotion if tension is used as a defense mechanism.)

2) Then close the eyes and breathe gently for a short time to settle down.
This will relax the respiratory system.

3) Next mentally go over each each part of the body and imagine it feeling
relaxed and heavy or imagine a healing light shining on it and causing it to
feel relaxed. This will deeply relax the muscles.

4) Now visualize a pleasant scene with lots of colors, for example, a meadow
with flowers of every color in the rainbow. Visualize each flower in
sequence: red roses, orange marigolds, yellow daffodils, green grass, a blue
sky, purple irises, and white clouds. Notice a wave of relaxation that flows
with each new visualization. If flowers don't work for you, another example
might be fruits on a table set for a feast. This type of visualization will
deeply relax the mind.

5) Now begin meditating with your eyes closed. Counting the breath is a
suitable technique, there are many others... Keeping the eyes closed will
help to maintain the relaxed state.

6) If you feel comfortable then you can try meditating with your eyes
opening if that appeals to you, but if you find you are losing the relaxed
state you may want to close your eyes again.

This type of relaxing meditation is very helpful when emotions are
associated with kundalini flow because it promotes a relaxed state that
continues after the meditation is over. When you are relaxed then each
emotional thought can desensitize you to the underlying cause of the
emotion, which over time will lead to a deep peace and serenity.

cosmicmermaid@gmail.com

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Hye.
Thankyou for sharing this informative type of meditation. I will try to
do it tonight. it sounds like a good experience.
Can u explain one thing i've never understood? What is "KUNDALINI"?
What does it mean and where did it come from. Can anyone help me
explain it? I'd greatly appreciate it.

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Kundalini is just the 1st step to enlightment.
But kundalini or enlightment shouldn't be taken as a goal.
Who takes kundalini or enlightment as a goal will be lost...

june.canandwill@sbcglobal.net

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Kundalini is energy coiled up like a snake at the base of your spine
that can expand and permeate your spine and through your spine to the
rest of your body, through your nerves. It is activated by deeply
rooted spiritual awakening, from the root chakra at the base of your
spine where some say your soul resides. It is a very powerful energy
and should not be unleashed into an unbalanced complex, be the
imbalance emotional or physical because it would simply intensify the
situation already present in the person.
What is important for you to know is that the human body is not only
muscle and blood and physical organs, It is a complex diverse energetic
system that is very much in tune with the energetic design of the rest
of the universe.Both outside of the planet and on it, creations
function according to a Godly design and Kundalini from that aspect
could be seen as a gasoline reserve, a hidden power source in the human
body, which can be used and is used subtly, and unconsciously for many
reasons. For now you need to know of its existence and its power.
Respect it, practice your mediations and deepen your awarenesses. the
rest will come.

Channeled by June

Stu

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

On 2006-02-11 06:12:41 -0800, "moon" <moon_lune_lua@yahoo.co.uk> said:

>
> Kundalini is just the 1st step to enlightment.
> But kundalini or enlightment shouldn't be taken as a goal.
> Who takes kundalini or enlightment as a goal will be lost...

Hi Moon,
I am sorry to be so contentious. I do not know what it is about your
posts that provokes me. As a whole I enjoy you contribution to the
group. You are clearly a sincere seeker.

Kundalini is not step.

My understanding (remembering at all times I am just a dope on the
internet) is that Kundalini is the name given to a form of "energy".
Other name is Shakti, or the soul's energy.

As we move towards awakening (enlightenment) we practice surrender.
But we are not surrendering to something outside. We are surrounding
our selves to our underlying nature. That nature takes the form of
shanti. Shakti/Kundelini guides us towards our own true self.

The myth of the snake coiled at the base of the spine is a children's
story. Shakti energy is present in our very awareness. It is not so
much released as it is revealed.

At least thats my experience.

As for awakening/enlightenment. This is something outside my
experience. Though I have had glimpses at it, I can make few comments
on it.
--
~Stu

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Stu wrote:

> On 2006-02-11 06:12:41 -0800, "moon" <moon_lune_lua@yahoo.co.uk> said:
>
>
> Hi Moon,
> I am sorry to be so contentious. I do not know what it is about your
> posts that provokes me. As a whole I enjoy you contribution to the
> group. You are clearly a sincere seeker.

Hi Stu
Excuses accepted.

I may take a few ideas from some book or internet, but my theories are
mainly my own experiences.

Reading your post in general....you forgot something,.... to
enquire..., what is important is the question, for instance, "who am
I?", "what am I seeking?"

The reason why, i somewhat upset you, is that i don't fit any form....

It looks to me that you may be looking on and on, inside a form built
by yourself, pretending that the answer is inside your form....

And i'm outside that form,... saying there's life outside the form, ...
it's possible to live outside that form...I exist....

>
> Kundalini is not step.

it depends....
if we are talking about kundalini as the arousal of the inner energy,
it will be a step, no doubt about that
if we are talking about the flow of energy, then it's not a step: we
have it running since we were born....

kundalini arousal is a very strong experience, physically, and who
experiences it may be tempted to qualify it as step

>
> My understanding (remembering at all times I am just a dope on the
> internet) is that Kundalini is the name given to a form of "energy".
> Other name is Shakti, or the soul's energy.

that's when the kundalini arousal takes place, through the 3 main
nadis. ida, sushuma and pingala at the same time, after unblocked the 7
main blockages

>
> As we move towards awakening (enlightenment) we practice surrender.

no. enlightment is never a goal.... i would just say:
I surrender.... without pretention....

> But we are not surrendering to something outside. We are surrounding
> our selves to our underlying nature. That nature takes the form of

ok

> shanti. Shakti/Kundelini guides us towards our own true self.

nop. kundalini energy just removes blockages....

>
> The myth of the snake coiled at the base of the spine is a children's
> story. Shakti energy is present in our very awareness. It is not so
> much released as it is revealed.
>

symbolic.... but as any symbol has always some true in it...

> At least thats my experience.
>
> As for awakening/enlightenment. This is something outside my
> experience. Though I have had glimpses at it, I can make few comments
> on it.
> --
> ~Stu

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

rdg3g sfs5gs wrote:
> Disclaimer: The manifestation that is called kundalini energy has different
> effects in different people so this post may not apply to everyone.

Yes, it has little or nothing to do with Buddhism.

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Stu

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

On 2006-02-11 10:52:40 -0800, "moon" <moon_lune_lua@yahoo.co.uk> said:

> Reading your post in general....you forgot something,.... to
> enquire..., what is important is the question, for instance, "who am
> I?", "what am I seeking?"

I don't believe there is an answer to "Who am I?". When enquiring in
that direction the answer is clear as awareness turns back on itself.

>
> The reason why, i somewhat upset you, is that i don't fit any form....

Upset? Just want to set the intellectual record straight. That is the
best we can hope for the Usenet. Intellectual honesty.

>
> It looks to me that you may be looking on and on, inside a form built
> by yourself, pretending that the answer is inside your form....
>
> And i'm outside that form,... saying there's life outside the form, ...
> it's possible to live outside that form...I exist....

There is no duality between form and formless. Though I do appreciate
the psychological profile. Thank you - saved me from having to take
one of those Scientology personality tests.

;-)
--
~Stu

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Stu wrote:

> On 2006-02-11 10:52:40 -0800, "moon" <moon_lune_lua@yahoo.co.uk> said:
>
>
> I don't believe there is an answer to "Who am I?". When enquiring in

no, there is no answer... that's not the point

> that direction the answer is clear as awareness turns back on itself.
>

yes, that's the point.....it's an endless inquiry....

>
> Upset? Just want to set the intellectual record straight. That is the
> best we can hope for the Usenet. Intellectual honesty.
>

words... just words....too many details..too many mental work....

is that yoga, what you are doing?

yes, you're studying yoga, but are truly practicing yoga?

>
> There is no duality between form and formless. Though I do appreciate
> the psychological profile. Thank you - saved me from having to take
> one of those Scientology personality tests.
>
> ;-)
> --
> ~Stu

well, thank you....

now, a last charade, about being inside a form.

there's something, that most people on this group pretend to
misunderstand...

"kundalini" is just a word, that could have many translations depending
on the tradition...

Someone already said this post that kundalini had nothing to do with
buddism (???)... Kundalini is just a word... I presume buddism have
it's own word to qualify it....

(and who said that, lives inside its own form, with no way out)

Kundalini and enlightment is something that belongs to the human
nature, there are many processes, many paths, ....

yoga didn't invent kundalini, nor tantra,....etc.. Why the pretention,
to fit kundalini inside the yoga form as an "intelectual study"?
worrying with so many details....

in the future, 5000 years from now, there will be no yoga, no buddism,
no tradition; but kundalini would still exist, with another name to
qualify it...

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

first of all, you had to explain what is the meaning of "end"
"end" is just a word...
"end of" what?

the physical world? galaxy? religions? yoga? buddism?

and also...

if we are talking about evolution, the word "end" doesn't exist.....

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

moon wrote:
> first of all, you had to explain what is the meaning of "end"
> "end" is just a word...
> "end of" what?
>

"Had to?"

> the physical world? galaxy? religions? yoga? buddism?
>
> and also...
>
> if we are talking about evolution, the word "end" doesn't exist.....

Yes dear.

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.meditation:107624 talk.religion.buddhism:390813 alt.yoga:81565

"moon" <moon_lune_lua@yahoo.co.uk> wrote

> "kundalini" is just a word, that could have many translations depending
> on the tradition...

Well, although the north pole now points towards the constellation of the
bear, it used to point towards draco - the dragon. And you can see this idea
of a serpent or dragon circling a vertical pole or tree all over the place.
In the Garden of Eden, in the symbol of the caduceus, in the Kabbalah, in
the Edomite's stone coiled snake monument halfway up Moses's Mt.Horeb, in
the ceremonial staffs of Egyprian officials. Or in Anders Honore's "A dragon
howling in a dead tree as the old zen saying goes." Or in Lion of Judah's
"...The image of the serpent doesn't provoke YHWH to jealousy. Therefore,
the image of the serpent is the image of YHWH himself."

There must be loads out there and if you find any new ones, you can... you
know... put them next to your old ones. (Everyone needs a hobby).

Jonathan

PS. Julian uses a lot of idiomatic English English phrases impenetrable to
the non-English. For instance, unless 'Lion of Judah' was also English, he'd
probably just be confused if Julian tried tapping him on the head and
shouting "Is Berni Inn?".

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

1. Sling him in the long boat till he's sober,
2. Keep him there and make 'im bale 'er.
3. Pull out the plug and wet him all over,
4. Take 'im and shake 'im, try an' wake 'im.
5. Trice him up in a runnin' bowline.
6. Give 'im a taste of the bosun's rope-end.
7. Give 'im a dose of salt and water.
8. Stick on 'is back a mustard plaster.
9. Shave his belly with a rusty razor.
10. Send him up the crow's nest till he falls down,
11. Tie him to the taffrail when she's yardarm under,
12. Put him in the scuppers with a hose-pipe on him.
13. Soak 'im in oil till he sprouts flippers.
14. Put him in the guard room till he's sober.
15. Put him in bed with the captain's daughter*).
16. Take the Baby and call it Bo'sun.
17. Turn him over and drive him windward.
18. Put him in the scuffs until the horse bites on him.
19. Heave him by the leg and with a rung console him.
20. That's what we'll do with the drunken sailor.

*) A relative of the cat-o-nine-tails

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

norbu_tragri@yahoo.com

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

moon wrote:
> Stu wrote:
>
>
> no, there is no answer... that's not the point
>
>
>
> yes, that's the point.....it's an endless inquiry....
>
>
>
> words... just words....too many details..too many mental work....
>
> is that yoga, what you are doing?
>
> yes, you're studying yoga, but are truly practicing yoga?
>
>
>
>
>
> well, thank you....
>
> now, a last charade, about being inside a form.
>
> there's something, that most people on this group pretend to
> misunderstand...
>
> "kundalini" is just a word, that could have many translations depending
> on the tradition...
>
> Someone already said this post that kundalini had nothing to do with
> buddism (???)... Kundalini is just a word... I presume buddism have
> it's own word to qualify it....
>
> (and who said that, lives inside its own form, with no way out)
>
>
> Kundalini and enlightment is something that belongs to the human
> nature, there are many processes, many paths, ....
>
> yoga didn't invent kundalini, nor tantra,....etc.. Why the pretention,
> to fit kundalini inside the yoga form as an "intelectual study"?
> worrying with so many details....
>
> in the future, 5000 years from now, there will be no yoga, no buddism,
> no tradition; but kundalini would still exist, with another name to
> qualify it...

and it will still be nothing more than just another word, just as you
said.

There might be something, some path that isn't leading to here or there
that the words 'enlightenment' and 'kundalini' and 'God' etcetcetc
might be used to try to refer to...but all these words and concepts try
to point in some direction...and that distorts everthing back into
duality, picking-and-choosing from experiences, hope-and-fear, striving
to create a safe place and denying anny experiences that don't fit into
the preconcieved spiritual 'enlightenment' longed for...

Some teachers of 'kundalini' sell such snake-oil quak remedies, some
teachers of buddhism, taoism, chistianity, blah-blah-blah-ism.

In the future people will still be people, if there is a future for
people, and there will still be this big open heart...call it energy if
you like...but it isn't kundalini or buddhism or both or not or
whatever...

or maybe it will have such names...

the point is what is now, names aside, for you...

for all of us...

what does this stuff mean? what are we actually talking about? it's
certainly something beyond myth-making concepts and words, sectarian
dogma...

if we drop the chakra/kundalini/prana words/symbols how would you
describe this unfolding during your life?

- best,
- n.

possum

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

>
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/08...801707?n=283155
> "One need only take a look at the manicured glory-mullet atop the head
> of Larry Arnold to see that not much lies beneath."
>
> http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

hello julian

i had a look at the link, thinking there is something offensive about bad
reviews on the basis of offensive hair, and having nothing better to do in
my groggy period between geeting out of bed, and having breakfast, and
doing some work.

the book reviews are a mixed bag, and are split between one star ratings
and 5 star ratings, although one of the five star ratings was from
someone who was acquainted with the author personally, so perhaps it
shouldn't count, or perhaps should count for more.

it also emerged that the author was a bus driver, and that was also a
basis for some of the bad reviews. now bad reviews on the basis of hair
and humble occupation - i found something very objectionable about this.
the site also has a measure of reviewing the reviews, and i'm glad to say
the basis of hair cut alone did not hold much sway with the other
reviewers who responded to the review of reviews questionnaire. but could
of course, have influenced any browsers who were so put off by that first
review that they didn't go any further.
i couldn't discern whether the fact that he was a driver of _school_ buses
made any difference to anyone at all.

i therefore felt obliged to check it out for myself, and found that the
lurid sensation style would make it impossible for me to read, whilst
acknowledging that i probably would have enjoyed it when i was much
younger, and in my SHC phase. i don't know how much influence the
publisher had on the writing style - there is definitely a market for this
sort of thing. i'd just got onto the page with the photograph showing the
author, in so much disfavour for his mere 'amateur' authority in the
subject- as if loving the subject isn't good enough, when mikey wondered
by, and was so struck by the offending barnet that he was moved to make
incredulous and disparaging remarks about it, like, he could talk. : )

i probably wouldn't read the book, but what's your point? : )

psm

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

possum wrote:
>
>
> hello julian
>
> i had a look at the link, thinking there is something offensive about bad
> reviews on the basis of offensive hair, and having nothing better to do in
> my groggy period between geeting out of bed, and having breakfast, and
> doing some work.
>
> the book reviews are a mixed bag, and are split between one star ratings
> and 5 star ratings, although one of the five star ratings was from
> someone who was acquainted with the author personally, so perhaps it
> shouldn't count, or perhaps should count for more.
>
> it also emerged that the author was a bus driver, and that was also a
> basis for some of the bad reviews. now bad reviews on the basis of hair
> and humble occupation - i found something very objectionable about this.
> the site also has a measure of reviewing the reviews, and i'm glad to say
> the basis of hair cut alone did not hold much sway with the other
> reviewers who responded to the review of reviews questionnaire. but could
> of course, have influenced any browsers who were so put off by that first
> review that they didn't go any further.
> i couldn't discern whether the fact that he was a driver of _school_ buses
> made any difference to anyone at all.
>
> i therefore felt obliged to check it out for myself, and found that the
> lurid sensation style would make it impossible for me to read, whilst
> acknowledging that i probably would have enjoyed it when i was much
> younger, and in my SHC phase. i don't know how much influence the
> publisher had on the writing style - there is definitely a market for this
> sort of thing. i'd just got onto the page with the photograph showing the
> author, in so much disfavour for his mere 'amateur' authority in the
> subject- as if loving the subject isn't good enough, when mikey wondered
> by, and was so struck by the offending barnet that he was moved to make
> incredulous and disparaging remarks about it, like, he could talk. : )
>
> i probably wouldn't read the book, but what's your point? : )

Just following the Kundalini paperchase....

possum

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

"Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1139756881.739979.274850@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> possum wrote:
>
> Just following the Kundalini paperchase....

ok. : ) now i get it.

june.canandwill@sbcglobal.net

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

n.
I hear you and know the mental attraction of talking and learning, as
opposed to being.
I think, there I go again, thinking,
this stuff means, this unfolding during my life is deciding how , what,
where and who I want to be. Being is what is soul to me, doing is the
brain.

Peace
June

Stu

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

On 2006-02-12 08:13:30 -0800, "june.canandwill@sbcglobal.net"
<june.canandwill@sbcglobal.net> said:

> n.
> I hear you and know the mental attraction of talking and learning, as
> opposed to being.
> I think, there I go again, thinking,
> this stuff means, this unfolding during my life is deciding how , what,
> where and who I want to be. Being is what is soul to me, doing is the
> brain.
>
> Peace
> June

Getting closer to what I am talking about here. Though my terms would
be slightly different. Doing is a body phenomenon, which includes the
brain. Its very helpful for surviving in this world.

Being is.

Everything else goes into a category of spiritual advertising points.
In the realm of being there is no place for soul, kundalini, secret
mantras, pranayama, lentils, beads, little statues or other dualisms.
--
~Stu

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

norbu_tragri@yahoo.com wrote:

> moon wrote:
(...)
>
> and it will still be nothing more than just another word, just as you
> said.
>
> There might be something, some path that isn't leading to here or there
> that the words 'enlightenment' and 'kundalini' and 'God' etcetcetc
> might be used to try to refer to...but all these words and concepts try
> to point in some direction...and that distorts everthing back into
> duality, picking-and-choosing from experiences, hope-and-fear, striving
> to create a safe place and denying anny experiences that don't fit into
> the preconcieved spiritual 'enlightenment' longed for...
>
> Some teachers of 'kundalini' sell such snake-oil quak remedies, some
> teachers of buddhism, taoism, chistianity, blah-blah-blah-ism.
>
> In the future people will still be people, if there is a future for
> people, and there will still be this big open heart...call it energy if
> you like...but it isn't kundalini or buddhism or both or not or
> whatever...
>
> or maybe it will have such names...
>
> the point is what is now, names aside, for you...
>
> for all of us...
>
> what does this stuff mean? what are we actually talking about? it's
> certainly something beyond myth-making concepts and words, sectarian
> dogma...
>
> if we drop the chakra/kundalini/prana words/symbols how would you
> describe this unfolding during your life?
>
> - best,
> - n.

I allways want to keep out of words and dogma.
I try to seek truth, and go for it....

I think without words - words are mental work...
I think in a symbolic way, trying to visualize...
and then try to translate to words - that's the dificult part....
to comunicate to others...

How i see the world...
there are codes everywhere....
who talks so obviously about kundalini and spirituality is rarely an
enlightened being
the best codes are the ones that looks less pretentious...., and are
written by poets, writters, etc.
Here's a good code:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos...6839072-2085453

each time i see the films i'm able to see some more details and decode
them...

how i see kundalini? the real kundalini?
is a quest for survival

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

possum wrote:
> "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1139756881.739979.274850@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> ok. : ) now i get it.

:-) Upgrade alert : current idiom compromised :-(

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Stu

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

On 2006-02-12 12:58:22 -0800, "moon" <moon_lune_lua@yahoo.co.uk> said:

> I think in a symbolic way, trying to visualize...
> and then try to translate to words - that's the dificult part....
> to comunicate to others...

evidently.
--
~Stu

norbu_tragri@yahoo.com

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

moon wrote:
> norbu_tragri@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> (...)
>
> I allways want to keep out of words and dogma.
> I try to seek truth, and go for it....
>
> I think without words - words are mental work...
> I think in a symbolic way, trying to visualize...
> and then try to translate to words - that's the dificult part....
> to comunicate to others...
>
> How i see the world...
> there are codes everywhere....
> who talks so obviously about kundalini and spirituality is rarely an
> enlightened being
> the best codes are the ones that looks less pretentious...., and are
> written by poets, writters, etc.
> Here's a good code:
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos...6839072-2085453
>
> each time i see the films i'm able to see some more details and decode
> them...

thanx, they sound like intersting viewing...without having seen them i
do agree that basic information (code) is often expressed better in
non-verbal terms, or as stories or symbols that tweak a new range of
resonse...open some new areas...

> how i see kundalini? the real kundalini?
> is a quest for survival

interesting.

Survival of self, Self, others, All, the Universe, the next phase, or
opening to death and rebirth, non-duality of life/death
existence/non-existence, etc...? transcendence of all that, being and
non-being...?

The buddhist tantras speak of chandali rather than kundalini, which
might be interesting to compare...Kundalini is all the energy of
illusion maya/prakriti rising up to cease at the feat of her lord
Ultimate Reality...In buddhadharma tantra the sexual symbolism is
reversed - Chandali is ultimate reality/openess as flame rising up to
melt all views about self, not-self, existence, non-existence...the
fire and ice melt together into the ocean of amrita, the 'drink of
deathless' (this symbol exists in siva tantra as well...) ...seems to
be a symbol that the yogin of whatever ilk can swallow the poison of
words and see through that to openness...

"Tantra" translates as "continuity" and is sometimes described as
continuity through non-continuity...let go and everything comes back on
it's own, like a quantum leap - information continues through seeming
non-existence/vacuum...

This sense of "survival"?

- best,
n.

- best

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

norbu_tragri@yahoo.com wrote:
> moon wrote:
(...)
>
> thanx, they sound like intersting viewing...without having seen them i
> do agree that basic information (code) is often expressed better in
> non-verbal terms, or as stories or symbols that tweak a new range of
> resonse...open some new areas...
>
>
> interesting.
>
> Survival of self, Self, others, All, the Universe, the next phase, or
> opening to death and rebirth, non-duality of life/death
> existence/non-existence, etc...? transcendence of all that, being and
> non-being...?
>
> The buddhist tantras speak of chandali rather than kundalini, which
> might be interesting to compare...Kundalini is all the energy of
> illusion maya/prakriti rising up to cease at the feat of her lord
> Ultimate Reality...In buddhadharma tantra the sexual symbolism is
> reversed - Chandali is ultimate reality/openess as flame rising up to
> melt all views about self, not-self, existence, non-existence...the
> fire and ice melt together into the ocean of amrita, the 'drink of
> deathless' (this symbol exists in siva tantra as well...) ...seems to
> be a symbol that the yogin of whatever ilk can swallow the poison of
> words and see through that to openness...
>
> "Tantra" translates as "continuity" and is sometimes described as
> continuity through non-continuity...let go and everything comes back on
> it's own, like a quantum leap - information continues through seeming
> non-existence/vacuum...
>
> This sense of "survival"?
>
> - best,
> n.
>
> - best

yes....from that point of view as well...
you know, the beautiful of symbolism, is that they can be seen by many
point of view, by any culture, by any religion...any Era.....

when i wrote that, i had in mind an Earth point of view. If you see the
trylogy you'll get the point...

if we look back to History we',ll see that when there is a disease, war
or lack of food; when most people die....
there are always some survivors....the one's that succeded in their
kundalini arousal...

but of course you have the Heaven's point of view, like you
stated....birth and re-birth....
the soul wants to survive....

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

.......

(alt.meditation, talk.religion.buddhism, alt.religion.buddhism,
alt.yoga)

let's see.... considering that you are the only decent being among
those groups (with Stu as well)....

tell me: which group is formed as a cult, with strange men, that hate
women?

(which qualified and condemn me as a witch)

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Dave K

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Julian wrote:
> rdg3g sfs5gs wrote:
>
> Yes, it has little or nothing to do with Buddhism.

Kundalini = chi = ki = joriki = power of concentration (i.e. samadhi
sort of)

>
> http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Dave K wrote:
> Julian wrote:
>
> Kundalini = chi = ki = joriki = power of concentration (i.e. samadhi
> sort of)
>
Dave K wrote:

> Julian wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Kundalini = chi = ki = joriki = power of concentration (i.e. samadhi
> sort of)

Samadhi itself has two stages, samprajana-samadhi,
or an enstasis where there is still object-consciousness,
and asamprajata-samadhi or nirbija-samadhi,
where there is no longer any object-consciousness
(asamprajnata-samadhi became known later in Vedanta circles as
nirvikalpa-samadhi).
The point to be noted about yoga is that its whole soteriology is based
upon the
suppression of mental fluctuations so as to pass firstly into
samprajnata-samadhi
and from there, through the complete suppression of all mental
fluctuations,
into asamprajnata-samadhi, in which state the Self remains solely in
and as itself
without being hidden by external, conditioning factors imposed by the
mind (citta).

Duality, such as the fundamental distinction between subject and
object,
is obliterated in deep sleep and in Samadhi, as well as in other
conditions such as fainting, but duality is only temporarily
obliterated for it reappears when one awakes
from sleep or regains consciousness after fainting, and it also
reappears when the
yoga arises from Samadhi. The reason why duality persists is because
false knowledge (mithyajana) has not been removed.

The attainment of Samadhi is not a sufficient cause to eradicate false
knowledge,
and since false knowledge is the cause of bondage, Samadhi cannot
therefore be the cause of liberation.

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

moon

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

being is a state if the soul nodoubt...

but

the process of learning and doing is more complex...

if learning=listening from someone else , then is a mental work
if learning= means being aware of the truth we discover by ourselves,
then is our soul...

if we're doing= as a result of thinking, then is a mental work
if we're doing= as a result of a genuine intuitive process, then is our
soul...

Dave K

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Julian wrote:
> Dave K wrote:
> Dave K wrote:
>
>
>
> Samadhi itself has two stages, samprajana-samadhi,
> or an enstasis where there is still object-consciousness,
> and asamprajata-samadhi or nirbija-samadhi,
> where there is no longer any object-consciousness
> (asamprajnata-samadhi became known later in Vedanta circles as
> nirvikalpa-samadhi).
> The point to be noted about yoga is that its whole soteriology is based
> upon the
> suppression of mental fluctuations so as to pass firstly into
> samprajnata-samadhi
> and from there, through the complete suppression of all mental
> fluctuations,
> into asamprajnata-samadhi, in which state the Self remains solely in
> and as itself
> without being hidden by external, conditioning factors imposed by the
> mind (citta).
>
> Duality, such as the fundamental distinction between subject and
> object,
> is obliterated in deep sleep and in Samadhi, as well as in other
> conditions such as fainting, but duality is only temporarily
> obliterated for it reappears when one awakes
> from sleep or regains consciousness after fainting, and it also
> reappears when the
> yoga arises from Samadhi. The reason why duality persists is because
> false knowledge (mithyajana) has not been removed.
>
> The attainment of Samadhi is not a sufficient cause to eradicate false
> knowledge,
> and since false knowledge is the cause of bondage, Samadhi cannot
> therefore be the cause of liberation.

ok.

>
>
> http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Dave K wrote:
> Julian wrote:
>
>
> ok.
>

Oh... but I paid for a full half-hour! :-(

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Julian wrote:

[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Oh... but I paid for a full half-hour! :-(

Sorry

There is a certain ambivalence toward yoga on the part of the followers
of Vedanta. It can be seen in Brahmasutra 2.1.3, "Thereby the Yoga is
refuted," which offers a rejection of yoga following upon the rejection
of Sankhya philosophy. The problem as Sankara sees it is that yoga
practices are found in the Upanishads themselves, so the question
arises as to what it is about yoga that needs to be rejected. Sankara
says that the refutation of yoga has to do with its claim to be a means
of liberation independent from the Vedic revelation. He says, "... the
sruti rejects the view that there is another means for liberation apart
from the knowledge of the oneness of the Self which is revealed in the
Veda." He then makes the point that "the followers of Sankhya and Yoga
are dualists, they do not see the oneness of the Self." The point that
"the followers of Yoga are dualists" is an interesting one, for if the
yogins are dualists even while they are exponents of
asamprajnata-samadhi (nirvikalpa-samadhi), then such Samadhi does not
of itself give rise to the knowledge of oneness as the modern exponents
of Vedanta would have us believe. For if it did, then it would not have
been possible for the yogins to be considered dualists. Clearly the
modern Vedantins, in their expectation that Samadhi is the key to the
liberating oneness, have revalued the word and have given it a meaning
which it does not bear in the yoga texts. And, we suggest, they have
given it an importance which it does not possess in the classical
Vedanta, as we are able to discerm it in the writings of Sankara....
PING

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

"Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote
> Dave K wrote:
has different[vbcol=seagreen]
everyone.[vbcol=seagreen]
samadhi[vbcol=seagreen]
different[vbcol=seagreen]
everyone.[vbcol=seagreen]
samadhi[vbcol=seagreen]
based[vbcol=seagreen]
> Oh... but I paid for a full half-hour! :-(

I'm only in a position to theory-swap on this weighty issue but you say
"false knowledge" is the cause of bondage. Patanjali has it that ignorance
is the ultimate cause of bondage and defines it thusly: (2:5) "...taking the
non-eternal, impure, duhkha and non-atman to be eternal, pure, sukha and
atman (respectively)." The Buddha has it that ignorance is the final
'fetter' and periodically uses 'sanna' in place of ignorance in the
dependent origination sequence in the sense of 'misinterpretation'.

Samatha (/Samadhi),via the jhanas, is held to weaken craving and
Insight/vipassana via mindfulness is held to destroy both craving and
ignorance. Likewise, for Patanjali, (1:12) the suppression of the
citta-vrttis is brought about by persistent practice and non-attachment.

The Buddha had it that what determined whether someone attaining the last
stage of the jhanas went on to liberation or not was the degree of
attachment to that last stage. Likewise (1:16) that is the highest
non-attachment in which, on account of the awareness of the purusa, there is
cessation of the least desire for the gunas. Or (4:29) In the case of one
who is able to maintain a constant state of non-attachment even towards the
most exalted state of meditation and to exercise the highest kind of
discrimination, follows dharma-megha-samadhi.

Samadhi, although the last-listed of the eight limbs of yoga is not the end
of yoga. e.g. (3:9) Nirodha Parinama is that that transformation of the mind
in which it becomes increasingly permeated by that condition of nirodha
which intervenes momentarily between an impression which is disappearing and
the impression which is taking its place.

Jonathan

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:
> "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote
> has different
> everyone.
> samadhi
> different
> everyone.
> samadhi
> based
>
>

I'm only in a position to theory-swap on this weighty issue but you say
> "false knowledge" is the cause of bondage. Patanjali has it that ignorance
> is the ultimate cause of bondage and defines it thusly: (2:5) "...taking the
> non-eternal, impure, duhkha and non-atman to be eternal, pure, sukha and
> atman (respectively)." The Buddha has it that ignorance is the final
> 'fetter' and periodically uses 'sanna' in place of ignorance in the
> dependent origination sequence in the sense of 'misinterpretation'.

I find it kind of sort of like easy, with my 'idiomatic' tendancy,
to equate false-knowledge with ignorance.

Samatha (/Samadhi),via the jhanas, is held to weaken craving and
Insight/vipassana via mindfulness is held to destroy both craving and
ignorance. Likewise, for Patanjali, (1:12) the suppression of the
citta-vrttis is brought about by persistent practice and
non-attachment.

The Buddha had it that what determined whether someone attaining the
last
stage of the jhanas went on to liberation or not was the degree of
attachment to that last stage. Likewise (1:16) that is the highest
non-attachment in which, on account of the awareness of the purusa,
there is
cessation of the least desire for the gunas. Or (4:29) In the case of
one
who is able to maintain a constant state of non-attachment even towards
the
most exalted state of meditation and to exercise the highest kind of
discrimination, follows dharma-megha-samadhi.

Samadhi, although the last-listed of the eight limbs of yoga is not the
end
of yoga. e.g. (3:9) Nirodha Parinama is that that transformation of the
mind
in which it becomes increasingly permeated by that condition of nirodha
which intervenes momentarily between an impression which is
disappearing and
the impression which is taking its place.

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.meditation:107653 talk.religion.buddhism:390957 alt.yoga:81603

"Advaita Bob" <advaita.bob@gmail.com> wrote
> Julian wrote:
>
>
>
> Sorry
>
> There is a certain ambivalence toward yoga on the part of the followers
> of Vedanta.

Well, it's all quite simple (or it will be by the time I've ignored all of
the philosophical subtleties).

> It can be seen in Brahmasutra 2.1.3, "Thereby the Yoga is
> refuted," which offers a rejection of yoga following upon the rejection
> of Sankhya philosophy. The problem as Sankara sees it is that yoga
> practices are found in the Upanishads themselves, so the question
> arises as to what it is about yoga that needs to be rejected. Sankara
> says that the refutation of yoga has to do with its claim to be a means
> of liberation independent from the Vedic revelation.

Archaeologists have found artifacts from the Indus Civilization e.g. at
Mohenjo-Daro showing people meditative postures and suchlike yoga-related
stuff. This is from before the time that the Aryans with their pre-Vedic
revelations arrived. So it's reasonable to assume that they nicked
meditation and yoga etc. from the natives and slowly incorporated it. (It's
not big business among the Aryans that stayed in Europe).

> He says, "... the
> sruti rejects the view that there is another means for liberation apart
> from the knowledge of the oneness of the Self which is revealed in the
> Veda." He then makes the point that "the followers of Sankhya and Yoga
> are dualists, they do not see the oneness of the Self." The point that
> "the followers of Yoga are dualists" is an interesting one, for if the
> yogins are dualists even while they are exponents of
> asamprajnata-samadhi (nirvikalpa-samadhi),...

The two are not identical (at least to Patanjali) but Samadhi is only a
'means' in Yoga rather than the end (analogous to the jhanas being a 'means'
in Buddhism but not the end).

> ...then such Samadhi does not
> of itself give rise to the knowledge of oneness as the modern exponents
> of Vedanta would have us believe. For if it did, then it would not have
> been possible for the yogins to be considered dualists. Clearly the
> modern Vedantins, in their expectation that Samadhi is the key to the
> liberating oneness, have revalued the word and have given it a meaning
> which it does not bear in the yoga texts. And, we suggest, they have
> given it an importance which it does not possess in the classical
> Vedanta, as we are able to discerm it in the writings of Sankara....
> PING

The problem is that the the ultimate meditative state - liberation, nirodha,
nibbana etc. described identically (in terms of properties / lack of
properties) by all schools will not bear all of the inferences drawn from
different people of different schools having experienced it. (E.g. to the
yogis or vedantins, it was enough to be identified with 'self' whereas since
the Buddha had a different set of criteria for what could qualify as 'self'
(if anything) it didn't). What it seems to come down to is, "You can't also
have been liberated unless you share my inferences".

Jonathan

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

"Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote
> Mayura wrote:
energy[vbcol=seagreen]
has[vbcol=seagreen]
in[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
because[vbcol=seagreen]
false[vbcol=seagreen]
say[vbcol=seagreen]
ignorance[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> I find it kind of sort of like easy, with my 'idiomatic' tendancy,
> to equate false-knowledge with ignorance.

I assumed at the time of writing that that was the case but can you give me
an example of "false knowledge"?

Jonathan

> Samatha (/Samadhi),via the jhanas, is held to weaken craving and
> Insight/vipassana via mindfulness is held to destroy both craving and
> ignorance. Likewise, for Patanjali, (1:12) the suppression of the
> citta-vrttis is brought about by persistent practice and
> non-attachment.
>
> The Buddha had it that what determined whether someone attaining the
> last
> stage of the jhanas went on to liberation or not was the degree of
> attachment to that last stage. Likewise (1:16) that is the highest
> non-attachment in which, on account of the awareness of the purusa,
> there is
> cessation of the least desire for the gunas. Or (4:29) In the case of
> one
> who is able to maintain a constant state of non-attachment even towards
> the
> most exalted state of meditation and to exercise the highest kind of
> discrimination, follows dharma-megha-samadhi.
>
> Samadhi, although the last-listed of the eight limbs of yoga is not the
> end
> of yoga. e.g. (3:9) Nirodha Parinama is that that transformation of the
> mind
> in which it becomes increasingly permeated by that condition of nirodha
> which intervenes momentarily between an impression which is
> disappearing and
> the impression which is taking its place.
>

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:
> "Julian" <julianlzb87@gmail.com> wrote
> energy
> has
> in
> the
> because
> false
> say
> ignorance
> the
>
> I assumed at the time of writing that that was the case but can you give me
> an example of "false knowledge"?

I would suggest something like the notion of individual existance
would be a good example... Other beliefs, neigh probably most or all,
like the earth being flat, fit the brief too.

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:

I shouldn't be here, it's not at all a sport I practise, but here I am
so let's try and throw my weight around a bit.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The Buddha had it that what determined whether someone attaining the last
> stage of the jhanas went on to liberation or not was the degree of
> attachment to that last stage. Likewise (1:16) that is the highest
> non-attachment in which, on account of the awareness of the purusa, there is
> cessation of the least desire for the gunas. Or (4:29) In the case of one
> who is able to maintain a constant state of non-attachment even towards the
> most exalted state of meditation and to exercise the highest kind of
> discrimination, follows dharma-megha-samadhi.

Very abstract to me all this is. First this obsession about
non-attachment. We are at the last stage (already whereof it is the
last stage is unclear to me, from a practical POV that is), there is
hardly any attachment left, but since it is the last bit, one seems to
be overly aware of it. It's unbearable. The slate is almost clean and
then there is this teeny weeny speck of attachment left somewhere in a
corner, nobody would notice. I mean who pops by to visit you at that
last stage? I imagine the doorbell and the phone don't ring that often.
But still one feels it needs to be get rid of. All one has left to be
attached to is this attachment and the wish to get rid of it. What a
viscious viscious circle. All this yoga and all these yoga ladders and
stages and uncoiling of snakes, flushing cakras to arrive at the very
starting point: you have to surrender your will

> Samadhi, although the last-listed of the eight limbs of yoga is not the end
> of yoga. e.g. (3:9) Nirodha Parinama is that that transformation of the mind
> in which it becomes increasingly permeated by that condition of nirodha
> which intervenes momentarily between an impression which is disappearing and
> the impression which is taking its place.

Is this nirodha then the default condition of consciousness?

Bob

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:

I shouldn't be here, all I wanted to say in my circumvoluted ways in
this thread is that Julian was a plagiarizing thief
(http://www.realization.org/page/doc2/doc200.html) and dragged me into
it as well.

>
> Well, it's all quite simple (or it will be by the time I've ignored all of
> the philosophical subtleties).

Great, chop away.

>
> Archaeologists have found artifacts from the Indus Civilization e.g. at
> Mohenjo-Daro showing people meditative postures and suchlike yoga-related
> stuff. This is from before the time that the Aryans with their pre-Vedic
> revelations arrived. So it's reasonable to assume that they nicked
> meditation and yoga etc. from the natives and slowly incorporated it. (It's
> not big business among the Aryans that stayed in Europe).

Although... there is also this bit of copperwork with Cernunos, the
stag lord, which reminds very much of the Pashupata image from
Mohenjo-Daro you refer to. The Aryans that stayed in Europe probably
had better things to do than yoga.
http://paganinstitute.org/T/cernunnos.html

>
> The two are not identical (at least to Patanjali) but Samadhi is only a
> 'means' in Yoga rather than the end (analogous to the jhanas being a 'means'
> in Buddhism but not the end).
>

I don't see why that couldn't be the case. You could have a genuin
experience and build a "wrong" theory around it. Anyway, even a "right"
theory wouldn't give one that experience.

Clearly the[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> The problem is that the the ultimate meditative state - liberation, nirodha,
> nibbana etc. described identically (in terms of properties / lack of
> properties) by all schools will not bear all of the inferences drawn from
> different people of different schools having experienced it. (E.g. to the
> yogis or vedantins, it was enough to be identified with 'self' whereas since
> the Buddha had a different set of criteria for what could qualify as 'self'
> (if anything) it didn't). What it seems to come down to is, "You can't also
> have been liberated unless you share my inferences".

Yes it merely boils down to after-satori, like after-ski in the lounge.
You can identify with all there is left when the yucky stuff has gone,
or you don't. I feel that identification is something more natural,
whereas non-identification (not necessarily refusal of identification)
isn't and more self inducing.

Bob

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Advaita Bob wrote:
> Mayura wrote:
>
> I shouldn't be here, all I wanted to say in my circumvoluted ways in
> this thread is that Julian was a plagiarizing thief

Wow! Did you work that out all by yourself...?

"If you steal from one author it's plagiarism;
if you steal from many it's research." - Milson Wizner

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Julian wrote:
> Advaita Bob wrote:
>
> Wow! Did you work that out all by yourself...?

You won't fool me. It takes one to know one.

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Advaita Bob wrote:
> Julian wrote:
>
> You won't fool me.

Hardly necessary on the face of it.

Cheers m'dear.

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Advaita Bob wrote:

!!! (Unfortunately, the full post of which yours above was a part never
showed up on my unreliable newsreader). To me, if that was true in this
instance, that's excellent news. Because Julian is quite sweet and has many
lucid moments and I could blame the content of his post on the bone-idle,
careless moron and sectarian bigot that was plagiarized. What they seem to
have done is only manage to read about 18 'sentences' into a 200ish
'sentence' tract before getting bored. Then they've tried to crudely equate
whatever terms happened to appear in that fraction with items from Buddhist
dogma before rushing to a QED.

The first five 'sentences' deal with yoga being the inhibition of the
modifications of the mind etc. and the next six list these five (right
knowledge, wrong knowledge, fancy, sleep and memory) and explain each one.
So by sentence 8 - "wrong knowledge ('...mithya-jnanam...') is a false
conception of thing whose real form does not correspond to such a mistaken
conception". Now they've got something that sounds vaguely equatable with
the Buddha'sand Patanjali's 'master-problem' - ignorance/avijja/avidya
(which Patanjali deals with later). Likewise with the shoddy bits on
samadhi, 'duality' etc.

Jonathan

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

"Advaita Bob" <advaita.bob@gmail.com> wrote
> Mayura wrote:
>
> I shouldn't be here, it's not at all a sport I practise, but here I am
> so let's try and throw my weight around a bit.
>
last[vbcol=seagreen]
there is[vbcol=seagreen]
one[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Very abstract to me all this is. First this obsession about
> non-attachment. We are at the last stage (already whereof it is the
> last stage is unclear to me, from a practical POV that is), there is
> hardly any attachment left, but since it is the last bit, one seems to
> be overly aware of it. It's unbearable. The slate is almost clean and
> then there is this teeny weeny speck of attachment left somewhere in a
> corner, nobody would notice. I mean who pops by to visit you at that
> last stage? I imagine the doorbell and the phone don't ring that often.
> But still one feels it needs to be get rid of. All one has left to be
> attached to is this attachment and the wish to get rid of it. What a
> viscious viscious circle. All this yoga and all these yoga ladders and
> stages and uncoiling of snakes, flushing cakras to arrive at the very
> starting point: you have to surrender your will

Well, you could always imagine it differently. For instance, the Buddha,
Patanjali, Sankara etc. are all sat in well-worn leather armchairs in the
snug of the Eagle and Child (like Tolkein's 'Inklings') and any one of them
pauses from tugging on his pipe (so to speak ;) and looks meaningfully to
the others and says, "You know, what seemed to make the difference for me
was that one day I simply felt no more attachment towards that final stage".

They all seemed concerned that people might mistake one of the higher
meditational stages for having 'arrived'. The Buddha's 'mindfulness' is his
response to the kid in the back seat's "are we nearly there yet?" and
'non-attachment' Patanjali's.

end[vbcol=seagreen]
mind[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Is this nirodha then the default condition of consciousness?

I think it makes the teachings of India-derived meditative schools more
comprehensible to see it like that - although I have no reason to believe
so. To the Buddha, the enemy is 'dukkha', which comes in three varieties -
unpleasant sensation, the imperfection of something being conditioned, and
the suffering arising from change in something that one clings to. The
last two imply each other because, as the Buddha has it, whatever changes
can't be 'self-existent' so must be conditioned/dependent.

So all we need now is some experience in which there's physical pain and no
apparent change, conditionedness, dependence which is what meditators claim
to have found. The cure is a perfect fit for the disease. Or vice versa,
because I suspect that if you got a random jury to thrash out and categorize
their experience of 'unsatisfactoriness', it wouldn't come out to anything
resembling the Indian meditative schools' representation of it.

I don't think there is an experiential default state which you would get to
if only you could eradicate or suppress all of the obscuring contaminations
of it. The Buddha's version is held to take lifetimes of dedication and
effort to attain and is only temporary in this life. Physical pain and the
imperfection of the conditioned both return as does what changes, leaving
only the clinging to that eradicated in this life. And the only guarantee
that that was just a foreshadowing of the state appertaining after physical
death was if the superstructure from his philosophical wibblings happens to
be correct. There's about as much chance of that as there is of his beliefs
about sun-stroking and the causes of earthquakes being correct. Not he could
have heard that his meditative experience didn't make his philosophical
wibblings true. I mean, he was the "Blessed One... worthy, perfectly
enlightened, endowed with knowledge and virtue, happy, knower of worlds,
matchless tamer of men, teacher of gods and men, awakened and blessed".

Jonathan

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:
>
> !!! (Unfortunately, the full post of which yours above was a part never
> showed up on my unreliable newsreader). To me, if that was true in this
> instance, that's excellent news. Because Julian is quite sweet and has many
> lucid moments and I could blame the content of his post on the bone-idle,
> careless moron and sectarian bigot that was plagiarized.

Cheers mate.

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:
>
>
> !!! (Unfortunately, the full post of which yours above was a part never
> showed up on my unreliable newsreader). To me, if that was true in this
> instance, that's excellent news. Because Julian is quite sweet and has many
> lucid moments and I could blame the content of his post on the bone-idle,
> careless moron and sectarian bigot that was plagiarized. What they seem to
> have done is only manage to read about 18 'sentences' into a 200ish
> 'sentence' tract before getting bor...

Cheers mat...

http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

Julian

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Advaita Bob wrote:
> Julian wrote:
>
>
>
> You won't fool me.

No need.

--
http://ptlslzb87.blogspot.com/
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:
>
> !!! (Unfortunately, the full post of which yours above was a part never
> showed up on my unreliable newsreader).

Neither have you reacted to my post with a link to a picture of my
visionary archeologist and an official demand for a review of Sankhya
Aphorisms of Kapila! :-( Don't you use the google news thingy?

> To me, if that was true in this
> instance, that's excellent news. Because Julian is quite sweet and has many
> lucid moments and I could blame the content of his post on the bone-idle,
> careless moron and sectarian bigot that was plagiarized.

He's a real darling (and a handsome buggar too, a bit like the portrait
of the young Rembrandt with long curly hair in his atelier).

As for the sectarian bigotry, that seems to be only a phase one
sometimes goes through. Don't worry, it will pass. I should know.

> What they seem to
> have done is only manage to read about 18 'sentences' into a 200ish
> 'sentence' tract before getting bored. Then they've tried to crudely equate
> whatever terms happened to appear in that fraction with items from Buddhist
> dogma before rushing to a QED.

Hey, that's my method, although mine tends to be even more intuitive
(but don't ask me of what)!

> The first five 'sentences' deal with yoga being the inhibition of the
> modifications of the mind etc. and the next six list these five (right
> knowledge, wrong knowledge, fancy, sleep and memory) and explain each one.
> So by sentence 8 - "wrong knowledge ('...mithya-jnanam...') is a false
> conception of thing whose real form does not correspond to such a mistaken
> conception". Now they've got something that sounds vaguely equatable with
> the Buddha'sand Patanjali's 'master-problem' - ignorance/avijja/avidya
> (which Patanjali deals with later). Likewise with the shoddy bits on
> samadhi, 'duality' etc.

The problem is that these sort of technical terms have been used in
different times, in different contexts to mean different things. If
someone on a sort of unifying mission then tries to point out their
common or similar meaning, it's pretty harmless AFAIAC.

Bob

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:

> They all seemed concerned that people might mistake one of the higher
> meditational stages for having 'arrived'. The Buddha's 'mindfulness' is his
> response to the kid in the back seat's "are we nearly there yet?" and
> 'non-attachment' Patanjali's.

Most likely, but would the child in the back seat settle for that? They
might have to throw in the odd visit to McDonalds or so.

Hmm, you gave me the most wonderful idea for a meditation approach
testbank. What other approaches could we test? The "Drop it" approach?
"Are we nearly there yet?" "Just drop it". Or "Be here and now". Or "No
self please".

What approach would work best in both the short and long run?
Apparently at Iyengar yoga seminars they put up signs reading "Enjoy
your pain". Or we have the Orwellian Newspeakian "enlightenment is here
and now" approach stating "War is peace, pain is pleasure, impure is
pure" etc.

However one looks at these approaches, they do look a lot like
diversion tactics.

[vbcol=seagreen]
> I think it makes the teachings of India-derived meditative schools more
> comprehensible to see it like that - although I have no reason to believe
> so. To the Buddha, the enemy is 'dukkha', which comes in three varieties -
> unpleasant sensation, the imperfection of something being conditioned, and
> the suffering arising from change in something that one clings to. The
> last two imply each other because, as the Buddha has it, whatever changes
> can't be 'self-existent' so must be conditioned/dependent.
>
> So all we need now is some experience in which there's physical pain and no
> apparent change, conditionedness, dependence which is what meditators claim
> to have found. The cure is a perfect fit for the disease. Or vice versa,
> because I suspect that if you got a random jury to thrash out and categorize
> their experience of 'unsatisfactoriness', it wouldn't come out to anything
> resembling the Indian meditative schools' representation of it.
>
> I don't think there is an experiential default state which you would get to
> if only you could eradicate or suppress all of the obscuring contaminations
> of it.

And anyway you could talk or conceive the hypothetical default state
into any state you want it to be.

> The Buddha's version is held to take lifetimes of dedication and
> effort to attain and is only temporary in this life. Physical pain and the
> imperfection of the conditioned both return as does what changes, leaving
> only the clinging to that eradicated in this life. And the only guarantee
> that that was just a foreshadowing of the state appertaining after physical
> death was if the superstructure from his philosophical wibblings happens to
> be correct. There's about as much chance of that as there is of his beliefs
> about sun-stroking and the causes of earthquakes being correct.

That doesn't really seem to matter much to him. We can still easily
recognise the joke he played on Nanda, but the other jokes he could
have played on us are perhaps harder to recognise as such because they
come so near existing and generally admitted and respected
jokes/beliefs.

Bob

Mayura

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

"Advaita Bob" <advaita.bob@gmail.com> wrote
> Mayura wrote:
>
> Neither have you reacted to my post with a link to a picture of my
> visionary archeologist and an official demand for a review of Sankhya
> Aphorisms of Kapila! :-( Don't you use the google news thingy?

(Souldn't you be at work doing all that grown-up stuff?) Sorry about that
but it never showed up (and I don't even know what the google news thingy
is). I'll react if you add it to the bottom of this or suchlike and it shows
up. It was because my own ISP's newsreader was so crappy that we all moved
over to the free Berlin one but I had to move back once it became
unavailable.

many[vbcol=seagreen]
bone-idle,[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> He's a real darling (and a handsome buggar too, a bit like the portrait
> of the young Rembrandt with long curly hair in his atelier).

Maybe I can bribe Jan to lie and describe me in similar terms.

> As for the sectarian bigotry, that seems to be only a phase one
> sometimes goes through. Don't worry, it will pass. I should know.

Now there's a thing. Before Christmas we had these Jehovah's Witnesses and
there was a younger one going through his spiel pointing me to various bits
in their literature with an older one who seemed to be overseeing the
process and making sure that he was doing it correctly. At one point, he
pointed me to some snippet out of some Catholic journal and then asked
whether I thought that, really, all Christians should believe in what it
said in their own Bible. I pulled him up on this around the point that he
seemed to be drawing himself and his sect with infinite care and detail
while just bundling the rest of the Christian world - billions of people
over thousands of years into an amorphous lump and painting them any old how
with a yard-broom.

Then, just after Christmas, I had to go for a meal at my uncle's and they
were all 'being' self-employed country-folk trying to maintain their
traditional activities (like fox-hunting) in the face of persecution by this
crudely-drawn amorphous mob of townies, taxmen, socialists, the EEC,
bueacracy gone mad etc. who didn't care about them. I didn't know whather
that was true but I was certain that these people didn't care about this
mob, so maybe, if it was true, it was their 'karma' or something. My mother
and I were the only ones there who were born in the country and had spent
all our lives there and we spent most of our time taking the mickey. I
couldn't refer them to the methodology of the JWs because my uncle's
grandson was there and his mother was one. But the main participants were in
their seventies, so I don't think the tendency has to pass.

So, 'when I rule the world', people will have to specify a religious
adherence for five years and stick with it (or drop out but not move). Then
each sect will be forbidden from promulgating their own doctrines. All the
sects will get put into a hat and pairs drawn out at random. Then each
pair-member will have its promulgating done by the other pair-member. So
they'll have to thrash out mutual agreements whereby they both agree not to
screw-over their representation of the other sect (and keep to them). After
five years, they get re-paired. That should finish most of them off.

equate[vbcol=seagreen]
Buddhist[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Hey, that's my method, although mine tends to be even more intuitive
> (but don't ask me of what)!

one.[vbcol=seagreen]
mistaken[vbcol=seagreen]
with[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> The problem is that these sort of technical terms have been used in
> different times, in different contexts to mean different things. If
> someone on a sort of unifying mission then tries to point out their
> common or similar meaning, it's pretty harmless AFAIAC.

Indeed (although that's not what Julian's nickee at Nicheren Mission Control
or wherever was doing

Jonathan

Stu

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

On 2006-02-14 05:38:25 -0800, "Advaita Bob" <advaita.bob@gmail.com> said:

> Apparently at Iyengar yoga seminars they put up signs reading "Enjoy
> your pain". Or we have the Orwellian Newspeakian "enlightenment is here
> and now" approach stating "War is peace, pain is pleasure, impure is
> pure" etc.
>
> However one looks at these approaches, they do look a lot like
> diversion tactics.

That would be an excellent description. For people who are just
beginning their search often the best approach is to lead them towards
ways of experiencing alternative consciousness. Diversionary tactics
are an excellent first step.

Those who have "progressed" beyond the first step know that no steps
were necessary.
--
~Stu

szewma@hotmail.com

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

rdg3g sfs5gs wrote:
> Disclaimer: The manifestation that is called kundalini energy has different
> effects in different people so this post may not apply to everyone.
>
> Feeling a lot of emotions with the flow of kundalini energy can be helpful
> in that releasing emotions can make you feel better than if you hold them
> in. However it may be incorrect to expect that there will ever be an end to
> emotions if you only release them. There is often an underlying cause of
> the emotion that is generating it. If this is not dealt with then, the
> kundalini flow will never settle down.
>
> However just trying to keep the kundalini flow from happening is not the
> best solution either.
>
> It can be more helpful when a lot of emotions are being released, if you
> modify your meditation technique to one that involves a high degree of
> relaxation - such as the following:
>
> 1) At the beginning of the meditation try to move each muscle group a few
> times. Start with the toes, and work up through the feet, legs, torso,
> hands, arms, neck, face. This will release muscle tension (which may
> acutally release more emotion if tension is used as a defense mechanism.)
>
> 2) Then close the eyes and breathe gently for a short time to settle down.
> This will relax the respiratory system.
>
> 3) Next mentally go over each each part of the body and imagine it feeling
> relaxed and heavy or imagine a healing light shining on it and causing it to
> feel relaxed. This will deeply relax the muscles.
>
> 4) Now visualize a pleasant scene with lots of colors, for example, a meadow
> with flowers of every color in the rainbow. Visualize each flower in
> sequence: red roses, orange marigolds, yellow daffodils, green grass, a blue
> sky, purple irises, and white clouds. Notice a wave of relaxation that flows
> with each new visualization. If flowers don't work for you, another example
> might be fruits on a table set for a feast. This type of visualization will
> deeply relax the mind.
>
> 5) Now begin meditating with your eyes closed. Counting the breath is a
> suitable technique, there are many others... Keeping the eyes closed will
> help to maintain the relaxed state.
>
> 6) If you feel comfortable then you can try meditating with your eyes
> opening if that appeals to you, but if you find you are losing the relaxed
> state you may want to close your eyes again.
>
> This type of relaxing meditation is very helpful when emotions are
> associated with kundalini flow because it promotes a relaxed state that
> continues after the meditation is over. When you are relaxed then each
> emotional thought can desensitize you to the underlying cause of the
> emotion, which over time will lead to a deep peace and serenity.

Hello, is there a meditation technique which can be used while arguing
with someone?

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Mayura wrote:

> (Souldn't you be at work doing all that grown-up stuff?)

:-) But I am. Not doing much grown-up stuff though.

> Sorry about that
> but it never showed up (and I don't even know what the google news thingy
> is). I'll react if you add it to the bottom of this or suchlike and it sh=
ows
> up.

I will try if it isn't too long.

[vbcol=seagreen]
>

Maybe I can bribe Jan to lie and describe me in similar terms.

She probably would, but those Wellingtons were a mistake, I guess.

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Now there's a thing. Before Christmas we had these Jehovah's Witnesses and
> there was a younger one going through his spiel pointing me to various bi=
ts
> in their literature with an older one who seemed to be overseeing the
> process and making sure that he was doing it correctly. At one point, he
> pointed me to some snippet out of some Catholic journal and then asked
> whether I thought that, really, all Christians should believe in what it
> said in their own Bible. I pulled him up on this around the point that he
> seemed to be drawing himself and his sect with infinite care and detail
> while just bundling the rest of the Christian world - billions of people
> over thousands of years into an amorphous lump and painting them any old =
how
> with a yard-broom.

Generalising

> Then, just after Christmas, I had to go for a meal at my uncle's and they
> were all 'being' self-employed country-folk trying to maintain their
> traditional activities (like fox-hunting) in the face of persecution by t=
his
> crudely-drawn amorphous mob of townies, taxmen, socialists, the EEC,
> bueacracy gone mad etc. who didn't care about them. I didn't know whather
> that was true but I was certain that these people didn't care about this
> mob, so maybe, if it was true, it was their 'karma' or something. My moth=
er
> and I were the only ones there who were born in the country and had spent
> all our lives there and we spent most of our time taking the mickey.

So if I understand you right the genuin country-folk (like you and your
mum), who are fed up with the traditional activities and the
traditional common criticism rituals (bonding) etc., have to deal with
arrivist country-folk, who have to make up for a lack of authenticity
by behaving like a caricature of country-folk? Hmm, that reminds me
when years ago during a visit to India and Nepal, I met some young
Westernised Tibetans. Me in my traditional robes, complete with
rosaries, reliquaries (I refused to go as far as carrying a prayer
mill) defending traditional ideas and those young Tibetans defending
Western values. That was quite funny, but both of us were quite serious
about our newly acquired bigotry. We had not assimilated the values
that were so dear to us, we merely served and carried them.

> couldn't refer them to the methodology of the JWs because my uncle's
> grandson was there and his mother was one. But the main participants were=
in
> their seventies, so I don't think the tendency has to pass.
>
> So, 'when I rule the world', people will have to specify a religious
> adherence for five years and stick with it (or drop out but not move). Th=
en
> each sect will be forbidden from promulgating their own doctrines. All the
> sects will get put into a hat and pairs drawn out at random. Then each
> pair-member will have its promulgating done by the other pair-member. So
> they'll have to thrash out mutual agreements whereby they both agree not =
to
> screw-over their representation of the other sect (and keep to them). Aft=
er
> five years, they get re-paired. That should finish most of them off.

They should have asked you for ideas about the cultural revolution.

>
> Indeed (although that's not what Julian's nickee at Nicheren Mission Cont=
rol
> or wherever was doing

I don't know, like Caesar I went, I copied and I pasted.

Bob

Mayura wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
-[vbcol=seagreen]
ty[vbcol=seagreen]

I had to read up on Channa a bit in order to understand your
allegations
about the poor man
http://www.metta.lk/pali-utils/Pali...ames/channa.htm I think his

is the fate of those who have known great men before they were great.
He
knew too much, don't you think? Buddha couldn't stand it when he was
teaching seeing Channa stand there in a corner leaning against a wall,
whispering stuff in the ears of a bikkhu standing next to him,
chortling
and sometimes even getting the giggles.
[vbcol=seagreen]
(see[vbcol=seagreen]

Phillips again eh?
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
t his[vbcol=seagreen]

I think we were too awe struck ourselves to notice the teachers. I am
sure there were copious thanks. After he discovered the fountain pen he
was going back to his home on his bike (it was in the Netherlands you
know), when he saw two strange men in an upcoming car strangely staring
at the fountain pen. I remember he showed us the pen, but in our
innocence we thought it was just an ordinary fountain pen.
You can see his picture (Leo Kluytmans) on
http://www.peelverhalen.nl/CD2.htm He says very much to the point that
Abraham too was initially mocked.
[vbcol=seagreen]
tles[vbcol=seagreen]
by[vbcol=seagreen]
gone[vbcol=seagreen]

And a portrait of himself in a white blouse at the backcover?
[vbcol=seagreen]
e or[vbcol=seagreen]

Just as an aside, have you already come across this text, THE S=C1NKHYA
APHORISMS OF KAPILA. http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sak/sak1.htm
I thought that might be up your street. And I need an expert review to
see if its worth my while to go through the whole 6 chapters.
[vbcol=seagreen]
to[vbcol=seagreen]
ce,[vbcol=seagreen]

:-) Yes. And at the same time I can't help noticing (we differ on
this
point I know) that when we are born we are this very basically
formatted
harddisk, which must be as default an experience human experience can
be. But as you suggested thinking about "default" states is a priori
thinking.=20

Bob

"Can we fix it? Yes we can!"

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Stu wrote:

[vbcol=seagreen]
> That would be an excellent description. For people who are just
> beginning their search often the best approach is to lead them towards
> ways of experiencing alternative consciousness. Diversionary tactics
> are an excellent first step.
>
> Those who have "progressed" beyond the first step know that no steps
> were necessary.

I agree on the general idea, but the whole approach can become so
systematised, codefied, fossilised that it doesn't work anymore. A
systematised diversion loses its "diversion" feature and simply becomes
another orthodox "path" to follow. Like organised transgressions (in
order to acquire freedom) are no longer transgressions.

"beginners" "lead" "ways" "steps". It all smells so much of to-do
lists, checklists and control that a genuin diversion would be most
welcome.

Bob

Advaita Bob

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

szewma@hotmail.com wrote:

> Hello, is there a meditation technique which can be used while arguing
> with someone?

Well, my mother always advised me to count til ten, but under the
header of this thread I take it you must be looking for something more
exotic.

Tell the person you are arguing with, you need five minutes. You must
stay in the same room as that person so that none of the vibes you give
off will be lost. Sit on the floor cross-legged. Breath in deeply three
times, then breath out in a noisy way stretching arms and fingers as
much as you can, while wiggling them a bit. Sit on your knees and
hands. Throw your legs in the air 3 times while shouting OM. Then throw
your arms in the air clapping them while shouting AH.

Stand up and return to the person you were having your argument with.
You will notice a dramatic change in tht person's attitude.

Bob

"Can we fix it? Yes we can!"

dee

2006-02-25, 9:32 pm

Advaita Bob wrote:
> szewma@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Well, my mother always advised me to count til ten, but under the
> header of this thread I take it you must be looking for something more
> exotic.
>
> Tell the person you are arguing with, you need five minutes. You must
> stay in the same room as that person so that none of the vibes you give
> off will be lost. Sit on the floor cross-legged. Breath in deeply three
> times, then breath out in a noisy way stretching arms and fingers as
> much as you can, while wiggling them a bit. Sit on your knees and
> hands. Throw your legs in the air 3 times while shouting OM. Then throw
> your arms in the air clapping them while shouting AH.
>
> Stand up and return to the person you were having your argument with.
> You will notice a dramatic change in tht person's attitude.
>
> Bob
>
> "Can we fix it? Yes we can!"

Lol :D thanks... thanks.

A friend just taught me to say this regardless, "yes yes, I know, yes,
I know I know...." Hopefully that would end all arguments... huh? I
think they call this strategy - I'll accept your opinions on this, but
don't expect me to change my attitude towards it. :D

Uncle Weasel

2006-02-25, 9:33 pm

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 1:44:07 -0500, szewma@hotmail.com wrote
(in message <1139985847.548789.145290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ):

> Hello, is there a meditation technique which can be used while arguing
> with someone?

Yes. It's called mindfulness, equanimity, and compassion.

---Uncle Weasel

--

(samsara is only a spectator sport if you're a fan...)
---Pete Watters, Phoenix daredevil

dee

2006-02-25, 9:33 pm

Uncle Weasel wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 1:44:07 -0500, szewma@hotmail.com wrote
> (in message <1139985847.548789.145290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ):
>
>
> Yes. It's called mindfulness, equanimity, and compassion.
>
> ---Uncle Weasel
>
> --
>
> (samsara is only a spectator sport if you're a fan...)
> ---Pete Watters, Phoenix daredevil

Were you being compassionate when answering that question?

Uncle Weasel

2006-02-25, 9:33 pm

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:39:38 -0500, dee wrote
(in message <1140017978.631683.139430@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> ):

>
> Uncle Weasel wrote:
>
> Were you being compassionate when answering that question?

Despite being a smartass, I was truthful and intended to be helpful. What do
you think?

---Uncle Weasel

--

Face it Weasel, you have coopted Zen and are using it like everything
else you have used in your rambling life of 50,000 miles, trying to find
the ultimate high - and playing Mr. Defiant.
---Ardent/Zenmar

dee

2006-02-25, 9:33 pm

Uncle Weasel wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:39:38 -0