The Myth of K worship.

[Guest guest]

My opinion is that K-sakti is the mind and is everywhere, not just

inside nadis, nadis are currents of the mind. The experience is the

mind cleansing the sheaths of a spiritual aspirant, namely for

awareness to rise. This is done by cleansing prana and that's it!

All the rest is concepts, constructs, religion, belief systems and

mainly the imagination........ONS.......Tony.

Seems to me your whole opinion is your concept..... Speaking of course

from your experiences.... but in your statements you invalidate

everybody else's experiences but your own... try again.

Lynette

Lovers embrace within the fold of glorious union,

dissolve into my eyes of nothing beyond

I am.

[Guest guest]

With regard to K in whatever form people believe in it, it is the mind

and therefore doesn't lead to moksha, just siddhis. It is just worship

that's all, worship of energy and mind instead of a god form or

Ishtadevata. All in the mind!!!!!!Mostly imagination.

Its amazing how you keep insisting it is all in the mind.... All in

the mind? All in the mind??? Hmmmm... Interesting how I had so many

physical things that happened as well, perhaps triggered by the mind?

I wont deny that its possible. but are we not our body, spirit, and

mind? All three should work together in a healthy way....Your

experience is yours, and I would never say that it was wrong... but

to discredit someone elses experience because you cannot back it up,

is well..... narrow.

and when explaining things to alot of us, please try to use "average"

terms. I do not know what a moksha or a siddhi is? Nor do I worship

K, how does one do that???? lol

Lynette

Lovers embrace within the fold of glorious union,

dissolve into my eyes of nothing beyond

I am.

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

Recently I posted Ramana saying that K was the mind and that chakras

etc were all in the mind. I have not yet found one 'probably realised

sage' to endorse kundalini. Those that do seem to be into worship of

energies, gods or whatever, and haven't really turned within.

 

I have had these so called experiences since I was a child, and later

when I was on the spiritual path it was so heavy it knocked me over

from a sitting position in meditation. All my experiences have been

around the heart area and above.

 

The sages say K is the mind and it is everywhere. That it rises from

the Heart and goes to the brain and back again. Not from the

Muladhara!!

 

IMO opinion the K experience is prana, cleansing the sheaths, or in

yogic paths it is just aroused.

 

So why all these paths talking of sushumnas, citras, nadis etc? Well

there are millions and millions of infinite energy currents, in and

around the body. That's what creation is. The mind is capable of

infinite possibilities even manifestations. So if people want to

worship K and experiences, the mind obliges, even to the extent of

siddhis etc. However it is all in the area of belief and worship and

has no real validity, it is psychosomatic to a great degree.

 

My opinion is that K-sakti is the mind and is everywhere, not just

inside nadis, nadis are currents of the mind. The experience is the

mind cleansing the sheaths of a spiritual aspirant, namely for

awareness to rise. This is done by cleansing prana and that's it!

 

All the rest is concepts, constructs, religion, belief systems and

mainly the imagination........ONS.......Tony.

[Guest guest]

, JustLynette@a... wrote:

>

> Seems to me your whole opinion is your concept..... Speaking of

course from

> your experiences.... but in your statements you invalidate everybody

else's

> experiences but your own...

> try again.

> Lynette

>

> Lovers embrace within the fold of glorious union,

> dissolve into my eyes of nothing beyond

> I am.

 

Namaste,

 

Actually I usually research a lot before I utter an opinion. If I can

find no validation in accepted jivanmuktis and sages then I utter my

own conclusion, with that influence.

 

When I find Ramana, Lashmana Swami, the Buddha,( not Buddhism),

opinions agree on something and it fits my experience, then again I

utter.

 

With regard to K in whatever form people believe in it, it is the mind

and therefore doesn't lead to moksha, just siddhis. It is just worship

that's all, worship of energy and mind instead of a god form or

Ishtadevata. All in the mind!!!!!!Mostly imagination.

 

My point is that so many charlatans and supposedly enlightened

teachers grab hold of these things and then set up religions and

schools. It is all an egotistic excercise within the mind.

 

The mind has to die for liberation to occurr...ONS......Tony.

[Guest guest]

Dear Tony,

 

You wrote:

> The mind has to die for liberation to occurr...

 

Actually not, if you try to kill it, its illusive existence will be as

resilient as Tony "own illusive ego".

Or if you are waiting for the mind's death, you can wait a very long time,

the mind not being a living entity.

Just give the mind a chance to do its originally intended job... and the

mind will be an ally (Jesus: eleuterios).

 

Love, Wim

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.268 / Virus Database: 140 - Release 8/7/2001

[Guest guest]

On 8/9/01 at 3:44 PM Wim Borsboom wrote:

 

ºDear Tony,

º

ºYou wrote:

º> The mind has to die for liberation to occurr...

º

ºActually not, if you try to kill it, its illusive existence will be as

ºresilient as Tony "own illusive ego".

ºOr if you are waiting for the mind's death, you can wait a very long time,

ºthe mind not being a living entity.

ºJust give the mind a chance to do its originally intended job... and the

ºmind will be an ally (Jesus: eleuterios).

º

ºLove, Wim

 

"The mind has to die for liberation to occurr..."

 

Quoting from scriptures without the 'experience' to back it -

not instructive

What is meant with the quote is that the so called "lower" mind

or "the seat of passion" can't be found anymore, nor its "content"

and the mind-body yet remains alive...

Something, not a requirement per se for a teacher, only for

supreme leisure...

 

The division of mind in "lower" and "higher" itself could be called a

"misunderstanding for the sake of argument".

 

Many if not all of seeming paradoxes would be absent from the perspective

of human functioning - and no borderline between "spiritual" and "worldly"

either... A "teaching job" for the next preaching Buddha maybe

 

Love,

Jan

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony,

>My opinion is that K-sakti is the mind

 

Use the term "conscious energy" (chiti) and I'll agree. That's why

Muktananda calls it Chitshakti, defined as "the power of universal

Consciousness." And why he calls his autobiography _Chitshakti Vilas_ or,

in translation, _Play of Consiousness_. The whole manifested universe is

Chitshakti vilas, he says.

> and is everywhere, not just inside nadis, nadis are currents of the mind.

 

Sure, Tony. And there are no wires in your house, right? The whole house

is just pervaded by electricity. ))

 

Love,

Dharma

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony,

>With regard to K in whatever form people believe in it, it is the mind

>and therefore doesn't lead to moksha, just siddhis.

 

Active Kundalini is not necessary to realize the Self, Brahman, the

Godhead, the All. But many traditions do utilize active Kundalini or Chi,

and, believe it or not, those paths work too. ) Many paths, and they all

lead to the One.

 

BTW, it's quite possible to have gifts or powers (siddhis) without active

Kundalini... did you know that?

 

Love,

Dharma

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony,

 

, "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote:

> Namaste All,

>

> Recently I posted Ramana saying that K was the mind and that

> chakras etc were all in the mind.

 

Everything perceivable/conceivable is "the mind" (not "in" the

mind). Of course, K and associated 'spiritual systems' fits into

that category. Even life energy ('Beingness') is a phenomenon of

consciousness (there is no awareness of it in deep sleep or coma, for

example).

 

That is certainly not to say that the 'K system' may not be 'useful'

in placing experiences within a context. Life energy is as "real" as

anything else perceived/conceived and is a true energy like

electricity, gravity and photons (light) are energies.

 

As for the chakras and such, there is 'room for doubt'. According to

U.G. Krishnamurthi, the chakras correspond to the 'ductless glands'

in the physical body.

> I have not yet found one 'probably realised sage' to endorse

> kundalini.

 

Kundalini is ostentibly an energy, the life-force. How to 'endorse'

energy?

> Those that do seem to be into worship of energies, gods or

> whatever, and haven't really turned within.

 

Worship has its place. As for 'within' and 'without', what are you

referring to?

> I have had these so called experiences since I was a child,

> and later when I was on the spiritual path it was so heavy it

> knocked me over from a sitting position in meditation.

 

"Spiritual experiences" are commonplace and certainly nothing to be

concerned about or even to care -- unless causing some

major 'disturbance' or issues, then it might be worth paying

attention.

> IMO opinion the K experience is prana, cleansing the sheaths, or in

> yogic paths it is just aroused.

 

Opinions are as common as belly buttons... :-)

> So why all these paths talking of sushumnas, citras, nadis etc?

 

Probably a mistake; taking "descriptive experiences"

for "prescriptions" or "paths." Such confusion is common.

> All the rest is concepts, constructs, religion, belief systems and

> mainly the imagination........ONS.......Tony.

 

All the rest of what? Everything that can be thought of,

experienced, felt, etc. are related to the mind.

 

But first, why not clear up common everyday confusions. For example,

if saying "my mind," what/who does the "my" refer to? Clear up these

sorts of confusion and 'the rest' tends to clarify 'automatically'.

 

Namaste,

 

Omkara

[Guest guest]

Dear Jan

 

You wrote:

> Many if not all of seeming paradoxes would be absent from the perspective

> of human functioning - and no borderline between "spiritual" and "worldly"

> either...

 

That "functioning" is the key... Absolutely.

> A "teaching job" for the next preaching Buddha maybe

 

ebuddha :-)

 

Love, Wim

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.268 / Virus Database: 140 - Release 8/7/2001

[Guest guest]

Dear Tim

 

You wrote:

> As for the chakras and such, there is 'room for doubt'. According to

> U.G. Krishnamurthi, the chakras correspond to the 'ductless glands'

> in the physical body.

 

No need for doubt Tim, depending on a human's function in life, energy

centres (chakras) are easily observable by people, when they have overcome

compulsive questioning the senses and whose mind (unfettered from any

pre-judice) is functioning as originally intended as an extension and aid

(eleuterios) of the senses, thereby enhancing the reach of perception.

I feel the human energy field (aura) and its energy centres (chakras) easily

with my hands as fine radiation as I scan a client. It usually takes me only

1 minute for people (who have relinquished compulsive questioning) to feel

the same, feeling is the easiest method. I see chakras with the inner eye

the way Leadbeater has depicted them in his book on Chakras, (this man was

very good.) I have seen chakras that way from when I was 8 years old. Since

a few years I can travel into clients spine with my inner vision so to say,

I don't know how this works, and I see the colourful energy patterns as I

move up and down a person cerebro-spinal canal, I have explained that on my

web site.

I also receive inside my head, various sensations from my clients, (1)

wheezes when people's energy is deficient and when they are manipulative,

(2) whooshing waves from people who project their energy as anger outwards

(3)a kind of recoiling whowhowhoish when people direct their impatient

frustration inwards. (4) A long dull throb with anxieties, (5) A sharper

wheesh with acute panic.

 

Something more on chakras:

1. Every nerve end is an energy point, a chakra... the tiniest kind of

chakras. Depending on what I'm looking for, they are easily seen and felt, I

feel them when I hover my hand over clients and either feel charges

emanating from me or from them. I sometimes see, with my normal eyes, a

human only as a conglomeration of points of lights.

2. Small bundles of nerve ends are, what we are sometimes called, reflex

points. The ears, the feet, the hands have many. These bundles are giving

major information about energy that runs through inner organs, not only

ductless glands (about 40 points in each hand or foot) when I hover my hand

over a client's reflex points I get straight info about their inner organs.

3. Larger bundles of nerve ends emanating from the soft spots on the body,

hand palms, bottom of feet, back of knees, just below ankles, groins,

armpits, back of neck, sides of neck, just below the 'adam's apple', just

below tailbone, etc. These are sometimes called minor chakras, and have very

much to do with the immune system.

4. Large plexi of nerve end bundles, five of them, the original 5 chakras

emanating from the spine, especially connected to the ductless glands, but

also to organs that are involved with those glands. Chiropractors are very

much aware of them... or should be.

5. Two major energy centres within the skull, connected to the hypophysis

(pituitary body) and epiphysis (pineal gland). These do not emanate energy

like the nerve ends. They are of a different nature altogether, they do not

emanate from the spine. They are most wonderful and are very much observable

with buddha types. They are commonly viewed by observers as energy patterns

around bodhisattvas. These viewings (not visions) are the source of

traditional Buddhist and Hindu divine depictions, e.g. the 7 naga heads

behind and above the Buddha and subsequent bodhisattvas, that feels so

fantastic, the inner gratitude when this happens and grace are

indescribable... Those patterns can look like shimmering fully opened

peacock tails, the eye-like things are even there, or patterns are like a

thousand arms with hands (those hands are actually the same as the eyelike

things of the peacock tail, just a different colour and the function of

bestowing) There are actually 960 arms or spokes, I counted them within

myself, I did that very cleverly. (I'm a very naughty bodhisattva, I'm the

playmate of the big guys.) Those arms rotate... of course they are not arms

at all, energy seems woven through spoke like things, like a dynamic basket

weave. Or indeed, the patterns look like a large lotus flower with their

petals upwards or downward, I have seen them both. When I observed them

below myself, I knew what it was. It is our wondrous radiation reflected

against the inside of the outer shell of our aura. Ah, and the sound is

heavenly... angelic... if that is the word. Sometimes one sees very

colourful softer colours reflected against the inside of the back of one's

aura. It is not strange to mistake them for angel wings.

6. There are 5 more chakra like formations above and or below our aura, it

depends, it differs from person to person ...finer globs of energy waiting

to re-descend or re-ascend back into us... Tree of Jesse, Star of David

material (see depiction on my website) I myself have no Far East information

on that, except I that I have some incomplete scroll depictions from India.

Well one cannot have everything :-)

 

With all this, I am still the normalest guy around.

I don't have to work hard to maintain that :-)

I only write about this stuff to show that all this happens to Joes and a

Janes

That it still happens these days, Tony's scepticism notwithstanding.

One needs no buddha from the past to return,

Nor does one need to turn to a buddha or sage from the past,

Buddha is each of us...

(buddhas-r-us:)

Waiting to be welcomed

Acknowledged...

 

Tony:

> > So why all these paths talking of sushumnas, citras, nadis etc?

 

Tim:

> Probably a mistake; taking "descriptive experiences"

> for "prescriptions" or "paths."

 

That is so right on.

 

Love, Tim, Wim

buddhas-r-us

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.268 / Virus Database: 140 - Release 8/7/2001

[Guest guest]

Hi Wim,

>You wrote:

>> As for the chakras and such, there is 'room for doubt'. According to

>> U.G. Krishnamurthi, the chakras correspond to the 'ductless glands'

>> in the physical body.

>

>No need for doubt Tim, depending on a human's function in life, energy

>centres (chakras) are easily observable by people, >snip<

 

I'll second that! Many people do perceive the chakras, usually by sight

or touch or both.

>I feel the human energy field (aura) and its energy centres (chakras) easily

>with my hands as fine radiation as I scan a client. It usually takes me only

>1 minute for people (who have relinquished compulsive questioning) to feel

>the same, feeling is the easiest method.

 

It is for me.

> I see chakras with the inner eye

>snip<

 

So do I, and I know others who do - must be many people now who do or could.

>I also receive inside my head, various sensations from my clients, (1)

>wheezes when people's energy is deficient and when they are manipulative,

>(2) whooshing waves from people who project their energy as anger outwards

>(3)a kind of recoiling whowhowhoish when people direct their impatient

>frustration inwards. (4) A long dull throb with anxieties, (5) A sharper

>wheesh with acute panic.

 

What do you think the mechanism of this is? You state it in terms of

sound. Do you think the "sounds" may be a symbolic way of understanding

your perceptions?

>Something more on chakras:

> 1. Every nerve end is an energy point, a chakra... the tiniest kind of

>chakras. Depending on what I'm looking for, they are easily seen and felt,

>snip<

> I sometimes see, with my normal eyes, a

>human only as a conglomeration of points of lights.

 

I've read and been told that aura vision is a matter of the physical eyes.

There are people who have always seen these things and are surprised to

find out that not everyone does. ) And yet, when I read what's written

by people who work with this in healing, working with medical doctors

sometimes, their descriptions sometimes sound clearly like inner vision and

sometimes like a more symbolic vision (also inner vision).

 

I wonder if, for people who have good physical vision for auras etc.,

there's an in-between area where they are using _both_, and then it becomes

more inner vision, and so on. Can you tell clearly where your physical

vision has a limit - or does it blend gradually into inner vision?

>snip<

> 4. Large plexi of nerve end bundles, five of them, the original 5

>chakras

>emanating from the spine, especially connected to the ductless glands, but

>also to organs that are involved with those glands. Chiropractors are very

>much aware of them... or should be.

 

Some say there are new chakras appearing - or perhaps minor chakras

developing into something major. I can send you an article on this if you

like. Do you notice anything like that?

> 5. Two major energy centres within the skull, connected to the

>hypophysis

>(pituitary body) and epiphysis (pineal gland).

 

I don't know why there is disagreement about which of these is the

externalization of ajna (the forehead chakra) and which of sahasrara (Crown

Chakra). Can you explain that? Is it hard to tell which is which?

 

The Tibetans regard ajna as part of sahasrara. DK speaks of the "seven

centers in the head" but never gives details. I think it may refer to 7

sub-chakras or sahasrara on 7 planes. And ajna may be a sub-chakra of

sahasrara, one of the 7. Any comments?

 

BTW, he also refers to an Alta Major chakra, which seems to be near the

hypothalamus... maybe also part of the 7? Any comment? He says the

"third eye" actually refers to the blending of the head energies when the

ajna, sahasrara, and Alta Major are joined energetically. This has been my

experience - or at least, that's the way I open the third eye when asked,

by joining those three areas.

 

All this information is very interesting, Wim. I'll have to go look at

your website, when I can find the time. (sigh)

>snip<

>Sometimes one sees very

>colourful softer colours reflected against the inside of the back of one's

>aura. It is not strange to mistake them for angel wings.

 

Some people get the feeling of wings opening - I have myself. Someone said

it's energy going backwards out of chakras, which is okay and not anything

wrong. What do you think?

 

Love,

Dharma

[Guest guest]

On 8/9/01 at 10:14 PM Wim Borsboom wrote:

 

ºDear Jan

º

ºYou wrote:

º> Many if not all of seeming paradoxes would be absent from the perspective

º> of human functioning - and no borderline between "spiritual" and

º"worldly"

º> either...

º

ºThat "functioning" is the key... Absolutely.

 

Dear Wim,

 

The functioning of (other?) animals would be included...

It is a well known fact already, that taking care of

"emotional wellbeing" can make biological age as much as

16 years less than passport age - so "proper functioning"

is, when "love" is predominant Not much of a surprise...

 

º

º> A "teaching job" for the next preaching Buddha maybe

º

ºebuddha :-)

 

The job isn't exactly a 1 (wo)man's one... Consider taking

the mystery out of samadhis and the inevitable resistance

that will provoke... More of a multidisciplinary work, also

involving therapists and scientists... So that the "result"

of that work doesn't fit in a category like *just* belief,

new age, another religion, "brainy" science etc but is encompassing

all human experience and irrefutable Yet leaving room to what

is referred to as "the" mystery - "the Unknown"!

 

Love,

Jan

º

ºLove, Wim

[Guest guest]

Dharma,

 

I like what you say here, that

>What do you think the mechanism of this is? You state it in terms of

>sound. Do you think the "sounds" may be a symbolic way of understanding

>your perceptions?

 

I myself feel the chakras and different subtle energy dynamics in the chest

area. If I had to describe what I feel, using (as you hint), symbolic

terms, I'd choose a kinesthetic type of language.

 

In certain respects, all sensory information is like a symbolic language.

To say that we absolutely see the same thing that we hear (say a ringing

bell), a vast amount of internal translation is going on to relate one

stream to the other.

 

Enjoying this discussion,

 

--Greg

 

 

At 03:15 AM 8/10/01 -0700, Dharma wrote:

>

>What do you think the mechanism of this is? You state it in terms of

>sound. Do you think the "sounds" may be a symbolic way of understanding

>your perceptions?

 

....

>I've read and been told that aura vision is a matter of the physical eyes.

>There are people who have always seen these things and are surprised to

>find out that not everyone does. ) And yet, when I read what's written

>by people who work with this in healing, working with medical doctors

>sometimes, their descriptions sometimes sound clearly like inner vision and

>sometimes like a more symbolic vision (also inner vision).

>

>I wonder if, for people who have good physical vision for auras etc.,

>there's an in-between area where they are using _both_, and then it becomes

>more inner vision, and so on. Can you tell clearly where your physical

>vision has a limit - or does it blend gradually into inner vision?

[Guest guest]

Dear Dharma,

 

Wim wrote:

> > I see chakras with the inner eye

 

Dharma wrote:

> So do I, and I know others who do -

> must be many people now who do or could.

 

Sometimes I go to shows or conferences and see about forty clients in a day.

On such days I see auras with my eyes, it gets better as the day goes on.

First I see it as an oily film over the skin with all the various colours,

and point at it to people... It gets better as the day goes on...eventually

I see only auras with (-: less insignificant :-) centers of bodily matter:

"The soul being the temple of the body" I sometimes joke seriously...

> >(1) wheezes

> >(2) whooshing

> >(3) whowhowhoish

> >(4) A long dull throb, whoooooeehm

> >(5) A sharper wheesh

>

> What do you think the mechanism of this is? You state it in terms of

> sound. Do you think the "sounds" may be a symbolic way of understanding

> your perceptions?

 

I actually feel vibrations traversing various parts of my brains, those

vibrations then reach my inner ears, which transmits this as sound to my

awareness... indeed I get two impressions. Thanks for asking. It is

something like the way one can perceive an earthquake approaching... one

feels the tremor after...

Maybe I am too much like a dog or cat...? heeheehee :-')

> > I sometimes see [an aura], with my normal eyes, a

> > human only as a conglomeration of points of lights.

> I've read and been told that aura vision is a matter of the physical eyes.

 

It is..., as it is not...

> There are people who have always seen these things and are surprised to

> find out that not everyone does. ) And yet, when I read what's written

> by people who work with this in healing, working with medical doctors

> sometimes, their descriptions sometimes sound clearly like inner

> vision and sometimes like a more symbolic vision (also inner vision).

 

Inner vision it is initially, symbolic in principle, it is not... Like I

said, for me inner vision turns into real vision... more real than the

abstract (weak tea) that our mind allows us to acknowledge in day to day

life.

 

Ah that mind eh? :-)

I began to love my mind when I started to love my mind... (not a strange

sentence that, it is how I it went), and gosh did my mind fall in place,

finally being in its element... serves me so well for a long time now...

> I wonder if, for people who have good physical vision for auras etc.,

> there's an in-between area where they are using _both_, and then

> it becomes more inner vision, and so on.

> Can you tell clearly where your physical vision has a limit -

> or does it blend gradually into inner vision?

 

Your question is well put, it shows your clear intuition... and I have

answered vaguely answered it already.

> Some say there are new chakras appearing - or perhaps minor chakras

> developing into something major. I can send you an article on this if you

> like. Do you notice anything like that?

 

Yes I would like to see that article.

I do not theorize though, I just see more of what there is already... (-:

mind :-) permitting. LOL

> I don't know why there is disagreement about which of these is the

> externalization of ajna (the forehead chakra) and which of

> sahasrara (Crown Chakra). Can you explain that? Is it hard to tell which

is which?

 

I have spend a lot of time figuring this out. Before I knew anything formal

about chakras, I knew when I first heard about the pineal gland, I was 12,

that that was to do with the crown chakra... I did a lot of work with the

pituitary, the lobes (frontal, dorsal).

 

There is a regularity which showed me the way (the petal numbers are

interesting too, later maybe)

the root has a sense of 1 (perineum)

the sacral a sense of 2 (two gonads, side by side)

the navel a sense of 1 (there is more to that navel than most think)

The heart a sense of 2 (much to do with the two lungs, side by side.)

The throat a sense of 1 (thyroid)

The brow a sense of 2 (the two lobes of the pituitary not side by side, but

in front and back, two nevertheless)

The crown a sense of 1 (the pituitary)

 

When I discovered that regularity, that settled it, although I never doubted

my first intuition.

 

The discrepancy between the crown and brow sources developed from a

misinterpretation of an original scripture, I went into this deeply four

years ago, must have been in the "hatha yoga pradipika" I will look it up

again (time permitting) and... from misunderstanding a passage in Avalon's

"Serpent power" I remember clearly that I had found the source of this

confusion, I should have documented it...

 

I find that Harish Johari's book (Chakras) is written from clear

understanding based on real work. I found that his work corroborated a lot

of my work (in particular the most wonderful Soma chakra).

Beautiful line drawings and colour pictures in that book, no doubt very much

a Hindu source..., but it made me understand all those energy patterns, that

I viewed, so very well, the translation of those patterns into animal

symbology is clear to me... That is what the mind does, it associates the

closest real object or real living being with the particular energy pattern

observed. The way dreams work sometimes: Jacob's ladder was not a ladder,

but my God, have I been up that ladder a few times, and of course up and

down escalators and huge spiralling staircases; those did not exist in

Jacob's time, so his mind could not make that association. Who knows how the

mind will translate upward and transporting energies into a modes of upward

transportation in post current eras... I have been in celestial vehicles, I

hate to use the word "ufo" like, but I always knew them to be a translation

of the mind who saw me taking greater and greater flights. Nowadays my mind

does not need to translate too much anymore... I can handle this wondrous

miracle undilutedly.... the creation dynamics...The mind wishes to be

still..., it loves a good break... and then ALL THIS THAT THIS IS.

The mythical animals, I have seen pretty well all of them, the swan, the

peacock, the naga, that multi creatured being, the gazelle, (no unicorn) I

never saw the elephant though or the crocodile, but I can relate the feeling

of extreme massiveness in the body and especially the mouth and teeth (No

elephants and crocodiles in Holland or Canada).

> BTW, he also refers to an Alta Major chakra, which seems to be near the

> hypothalamus... maybe also part of the 7? Any comment? He says the

> "third eye" actually refers to the blending of the head energies when the

> ajna, sahasrara, and Alta Major are joined energetically.

 

Makes very much sense, I had to do a lot of blending and combination work to

channel the energy through the throat chakra 'bottleneck', getting it to

flow into the brow. It worked when I inwardly investigated the pituitary and

indeed, you remind me, the hypothalamus as well.

> All this information is very interesting, Wim. I'll have to go look at

> your website, when I can find the time. (sigh)

 

www.aurasphere.org

 

Ah time, eh?

You know when we run out there is always eternity...

> >Sometimes one sees very colourful softer colours

> >reflected against the inside of the back of one's

> >aura. It is not strange to mistake them for angel wings.

> Some people get the feeling of wings opening - I have myself.

> Someone said it's energy going backwards out of chakras,

> which is okay and not anything wrong. What do you think?

 

That is OK and not anything wrong with it... but (a little bit of a but) I

like my description better, LOL, you know why... because it is mine and

there is not anything wrong with that either. Enjoy yours, Dharma... hmmm

those wings we have... (when the mind is still those wings are not...)

> Love,

> Dharma

 

Yes my dearest Dharma,

Wim.

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.268 / Virus Database: 140 - Release 8/7/2001

[Guest guest]

Hey Wim,

 

I like that!

 

--Greg

 

 

At 10:48 AM 8/10/01 -0700, Wim Borsboom wrote:

 

>"The soul being the temple of the body" I sometimes joke seriously...

[Guest guest]

Hi Wim,

>Sometimes I go to shows or conferences and see about forty clients in a day.

>On such days I see auras with my eyes,

 

But not always?

> it gets better as the day goes on.

>First I see it as an oily film over the skin with all the various colours,

>and point at it to people... It gets better as the day goes on...eventually

>I see only auras with (-: less insignificant :-) centers of bodily matter:

>"The soul being the temple of the body" I sometimes joke seriously...

 

Very interesting! It improves through the day! My own eye vision isn't

anything special - just the etheric and sometimes the little lights out the

ends of the fingers - but it does improve with use, I think. And it's

better at some times than others.

 

On the other hand, I've been doing healing at long distance and not in

person here. I'm going to be working more in person here though - maybe my

vision will improve then with use.

>> >(1) wheezes

>> >(2) whooshing

>> >(3) whowhowhoish

>> >(4) A long dull throb, whoooooeehm

>> >(5) A sharper wheesh

>>

>> What do you think the mechanism of this is? You state it in terms of

>> sound. Do you think the "sounds" may be a symbolic way of understanding

>> your perceptions?

>

>I actually feel vibrations traversing various parts of my brains, those

>vibrations then reach my inner ears, which transmits this as sound to my

>awareness... indeed I get two impressions. Thanks for asking. It is

>something like the way one can perceive an earthquake approaching... one

>feels the tremor after...

>Maybe I am too much like a dog or cat...? heeheehee :-')

 

Fascinating! I have a lot of noise in my ears/head most of the time, so

I'm not sure I would notice really subtle sounds.

 

This whole subject makes me think there must be many ways to perceive these

things, and maybe the difference is in which chakras we're using and/or

which planes we're perceiving on.

 

And of course there may be a personal bent toward one or another. In

teaching a meditation group, I've found that people seem to

develop/manifest some gift(s) rather than others, as though it were natural

to them. One will "see" better, another "hear" better, another will have

some more unusual gift...

>> I've read and been told that aura vision is a matter of the physical eyes.

>

>It is..., as it is not...

 

I met a woman who told me she had found out that her husband and both her

kids saw auras around everything, clearly and naturally, without effort.

In fact, when she told them she'd learned that there are colors around

people, and some people can see them, they all answered, "Doesn't

everybody?"

 

Cayce saw auras all of his life. I went looking for a quote, but decided

to send you part of his little booklet - coming up next.

>> There are people who have always seen these things and are surprised to

>> find out that not everyone does. ) And yet, when I read what's written

>> by people who work with this in healing, working with medical doctors

>> sometimes, their descriptions sometimes sound clearly like inner

>> vision and sometimes like a more symbolic vision (also inner vision).

>

>Inner vision it is initially, symbolic in principle, it is not... Like I

>said, for me inner vision turns into real vision... more real than the

>abstract (weak tea) that our mind allows us to acknowledge in day to day

>life.

 

I've heard people say that most or even all small children see auras - and

then are conditioned NOT to see them. Are you saying something like that,

when you speak of what "our mind allows us to acknowledge"?

>Ah that mind eh? :-)

>I began to love my mind when I started to love my mind... (not a strange

>sentence that, it is how I it went), and gosh did my mind fall in place,

>finally being in its element... serves me so well for a long time now...

>

>> I wonder if, for people who have good physical vision for auras etc.,

>> there's an in-between area where they are using _both_, and then

>> it becomes more inner vision, and so on.

>> Can you tell clearly where your physical vision has a limit -

>> or does it blend gradually into inner vision?

>

>Your question is well put, it shows your clear intuition... and I have

>answered vaguely answered it already.

 

Vaguely, yes.

>> Some say there are new chakras appearing - or perhaps minor chakras

>> developing into something major. I can send you an article on this if you

>> like. Do you notice anything like that?

>

>Yes I would like to see that article.

 

Okay, I'll send it.

>I do not theorize though, I just see more of what there is already... (-:

>mind :-) permitting. LOL

 

Well, this woman is saying that she is seeing differences in numbers of

people - that is, differences from what she used to see all the time. She

thinks it's new chakras, but it may simply be minor chakras getting

stronger.

>> I don't know why there is disagreement about which of these is the

>> externalization of ajna (the forehead chakra) and which of

>> sahasrara (Crown Chakra). Can you explain that? Is it hard to tell which

>is which?

>

>I have spend a lot of time figuring this out. Before I knew anything formal

>about chakras, I knew when I first heard about the pineal gland, I was 12,

>that that was to do with the crown chakra... I did a lot of work with the

>pituitary, the lobes (frontal, dorsal).

>

>There is a regularity which showed me the way (the petal numbers are

>interesting too, later maybe)

> the root has a sense of 1 (perineum)

> the sacral a sense of 2 (two gonads, side by side)

> the navel a sense of 1 (there is more to that navel than most think)

> The heart a sense of 2 (much to do with the two lungs, side by side.)

> The throat a sense of 1 (thyroid)

> The brow a sense of 2 (the two lobes of the pituitary not side by

>side, but

>in front and back, two nevertheless)

> The crown a sense of 1 (the pituitary)

>

>When I discovered that regularity, that settled it, although I never doubted

>my first intuition.

 

Very interesting! But you seem to have listed the pituitary twice. I

think you meant to put the two-lobed pituitary with brow chakra and the

pineal with crown chakra??

>The discrepancy between the crown and brow sources developed from a

>misinterpretation of an original scripture, I went into this deeply four

>years ago, must have been in the "hatha yoga pradipika" I will look it up

>again (time permitting) and... from misunderstanding a passage in Avalon's

>"Serpent power" I remember clearly that I had found the source of this

>confusion, I should have documented it...

 

Interesting...

>I find that Harish Johari's book (Chakras) is written from clear

>understanding based on real work. I found that his work corroborated a lot

>of my work (in particular the most wonderful Soma chakra).

>Beautiful line drawings and colour pictures in that book, no doubt very much

>a Hindu source..., but it made me understand all those energy patterns, that

>I viewed, so very well, the translation of those patterns into animal

>symbology is clear to me... That is what the mind does, it associates the

>closest real object or real living being with the particular energy pattern

>observed. The way dreams work sometimes: Jacob's ladder was not a ladder,

>but my God, have I been up that ladder a few times, and of course up and

>down escalators and huge spiralling staircases;

 

Yes!

> those did not exist in

>Jacob's time, so his mind could not make that association.

 

Right... otherwise, we might have "Jacob's escalator." )))))) LOL!

> Who knows how the

>mind will translate upward and transporting energies into a modes of upward

>transportation in post current eras... I have been in celestial vehicles, I

>hate to use the word "ufo" like, but I always knew them to be a translation

>of the mind who saw me taking greater and greater flights. Nowadays my mind

>does not need to translate too much anymore... I can handle this wondrous

>miracle undilutedly.... the creation dynamics...The mind wishes to be

>still..., it loves a good break... and then ALL THIS THAT THIS IS.

>The mythical animals, I have seen pretty well all of them, the swan, the

>peacock, the naga, that multi creatured being, the gazelle, (no unicorn) I

>never saw the elephant though or the crocodile, but I can relate the feeling

>of extreme massiveness in the body and especially the mouth and teeth (No

>elephants and crocodiles in Holland or Canada).

 

Yes, we speak of universal symbols, but I don't suppose one would be likely

to "see" an elephant in a land where no one had ever seen a real elephant.

In past times, that is. Nowadays, with books and modern communications, I

suppose anyone might.

 

Which reminds me of a story. Some years back, I was on a list where

someone asked the meaning of "I've seen the elephant!" Finally the answer

came. It seems back in the South of the U.S. - I forget the date, but over

a hundred years ago - there were stories of this weird BIG animal with a

huge long nose, but no one quite believed such an animal could exist. But

occasionally someone would get to a city where they saw a small travelling

circus with a real elephant!! So the saying came about... and "Now I've

seen the elephant!" means, "Now I've seen everything!!!"

>> BTW, he also refers to an Alta Major chakra, which seems to be near the

>> hypothalamus... maybe also part of the 7? Any comment? He says the

>> "third eye" actually refers to the blending of the head energies when the

>> ajna, sahasrara, and Alta Major are joined energetically.

>

>Makes very much sense, I had to do a lot of blending and combination work to

>channel the energy through the throat chakra 'bottleneck', getting it to

>flow into the brow. It worked when I inwardly investigated the pituitary and

>indeed, you remind me, the hypothalamus as well.

 

A friend in another country once asked me to open his third eye, but NOT to

raise his Kundalini, because he wanted to work with Reiki first, as a

preparation. So I stayed away from the spine and just ran energy in

through the forehead and crown and down to the third chakra. It worked

fine, though he had a bit of a headache briefly.

 

>> >Sometimes one sees very colourful softer colours

>> >reflected against the inside of the back of one's

>> >aura. It is not strange to mistake them for angel wings.

>

>> Some people get the feeling of wings opening - I have myself.

>> Someone said it's energy going backwards out of chakras,

>> which is okay and not anything wrong. What do you think?

>

>That is OK and not anything wrong with it... but (a little bit of a but) I

>like my description better, LOL, you know why...

 

Actually, I was speaking of feeling something there, rather than seeing

something. It could be a perception of energy.

 

Love,

Dharma

[Guest guest]

Just quickly, Dharma

 

Wim:

> >On such days I see auras with my eyes,

 

Dharma:

> But not always?

 

Function is what counts, I do not walk around with my screwdriver all day,

only when I need one, will I get it. Seeing auras and chakras is like that

for me. I never pry into people's life unless asked for insight... I can

turn off this skill as easily as I can turn off this computer in a minute to

go to bed. (Actually that is way harder, Dharma you are keeping me up... but

hey I love this...

 

Yes I wrote "pituitary" twice, and... you caught it and understood it

rightly. Just to show, how translation and interpretation errors could

easily happen. If you were Arthur Avalon and you were translating what I

wrote in Dutch, via Sanskrit into English (I'm pretty sure now, that it was

Avalon who wrote so ambiguously on this topic.) the same may have

occurred....

 

I loved Greg little gaffe in his "Seeing" & "hearing" post:

"But without any seeming links between this cheat-area sensing and anything

else,

 

"Cheat-area in the chest, yep really" I thought laughingly, "it must have to

do with false emotions, and cheating... heeheehee"

 

Love, Wim

 

Bedtime, I do snore...

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.268 / Virus Database: 140 - Release 8/7/2001

[Guest guest]

Hi Wim,

>Just quickly, Dharma

>

>Wim:

>> >On such days I see auras with my eyes,

>

>Dharma:

>> But not always?

>

>Function is what counts, I do not walk around with my screwdriver all day,

>only when I need one, will I get it. Seeing auras and chakras is like that

>for me. I never pry into people's life unless asked for insight... I can

>turn off this skill as easily as I can turn off this computer in a minute to

>go to bed.

 

Fascinating!

>(Actually that is way harder, Dharma you are keeping me up...

 

Sorry about that.

>but

>hey I love this...

 

Me too.

>Yes I wrote "pituitary" twice, and... you caught it and understood it

>rightly. Just to show, how translation and interpretation errors could

>easily happen. If you were Arthur Avalon and you were translating what I

>wrote in Dutch, via Sanskrit into English (I'm pretty sure now, that it was

>Avalon who wrote so ambiguously on this topic.) the same may have

>occurred....

 

Right.

>I loved Greg little gaffe in his "Seeing" & "hearing" post:

>"But without any seeming links between this cheat-area sensing and anything

>else,

>

>"Cheat-area in the chest, yep really" I thought laughingly, "it must have to

>do with false emotions, and cheating... heeheehee"

 

On the other hand, maybe a "cheat-area" could be where you can take a

shortcut. And he has unusual Heart Chakra perception, I think.

 

Love,

Dharma