Kundalini is the elephant's tail, that's all.

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

Well if we are going to give validity at all to the mind, there is

only one.

 

Cakras are everywhere, if you look. The nature of energy is that it

has to move to manifest otherwise it is potential.

 

So called cakras in the human body are just areas of energy

concentration at the endocrine glands. Energy cannot stand still so it

either manifests as a wave a particle or spiralling vortices, which is

as close energy gets to standing still. For it manifests in roughly

the same place.

 

So people who look for cakras find them, it is kind of like a blind

man holding the elephant's tail and being told or believing that that

is an elephant. Cakras are everywhere, there is nothing but cakras and

energy movement!!!!People's minds, once they are told of a particular

construct then accept believe and embellish it. It is all in the

imagination in their interpretation, usually in a strict unthinking

religious type way.

 

I take the words of the great sages and add to my own experience, that

K is the mind, and that cakras are mental constructs/imagination, in

the way they are presented by many........ONS.........Tony.

[Guest guest]

Tony,

 

we don't know one another and I'm relatively new to this list so I've

been reluctant to engage you in your frequent and provocative Ex-

cathedra pronouncements on nondualism.

 

However, your utterances about Kundalini are so steeped in ignorance

that I can't hold off any longer. How can it be that a man who, by

his own admission, has no systematic experience of K or the paths

that have evolved to deal both with it's awakening and it's

development, counts himself such an expert about it? You say you've

done research? You must have left all the Tantras, Jain and Buddhist

as well as Hindu, out of your library. You say you've consulted all

the great saints and realizers and then give us a list of three?

Agreed, Buddha, Krishnamurti(was it?) and Ramana Maharshi don't teach

about Kundalini, and didn't ostensibly give Kundalini initiation. You

can be sure, however, that each of them has experienced it because

nirvikalpa samadhi is nothing more or less than the final merger of

the individual into the absolute, or the "Divine"(I just wanted to

see if I could make you flinch). all of which is to say that the

final event in the non-K practices of Jnana Yoga and Hinayana Buddhism

is also simultaneously the awakening/final merger of K sadhana. In at

least one of these cases we have a witness to the external events

that accompagnied his realization. Read "Krishnamurti: the years of

awakening" for Mary Lutens eye witness account of Krishnamurti's

vivid and extreme Kundalini experiences.

 

While all three of these illustrious realizers aren't K awakeners,

Tantric Buddhists, without exception are. Further, Shankaracharya's

lesser known mission accompagning his spreading of nondual Vedanta to

the four corners of India, is the founding of innumerable Sakti

Temples for the practical devotional expression of his nondualist

monks.

 

Many, if not most, Shankara Advaitist Sannyasis are philosophic

Vedantists and Shakti and Kali worshipping practicioners. This is

common knowledge to any old India hands. Ask your nearest swami.

 

Interestingly enough, that great nondualist realizer Nisargadatta

Maharaj practiced dualistic devotions religiously every morning and

evening, and allowed his nondualist devotees to join him.

 

But all these interesting observations are really not the center of

our dispute are they?

 

Even if we accept hypothetically that the three men you cite aren't K

realizers, what about the rest of the Indian saints and gurus? If I

use their proper names I'll fill two pages alone so I'll confine

myself to the lineages that come to mind.

 

Let's start with all the Shakta, Saivite and Jain Tantric lineages,

as well as their Tibetan Buddhist equivalents, both dual and nondual.

We can move along to the Nath and Siddha lineages of Northern India,

both in their Yogic as well as their Buddhist expressions. Let's not

leave out the Sikhs and their K lineages, including Kabir Panth and

other Bengali expressions of the poetic non-dualist schools. Perhaps

we should throw in the Bauls and their wonderful realizer poets as

well before we move out of Bengal and head south.

 

In Maharashtra we can start with Jnaneshvar, thought by many Indians

to be the greatest nondualist of them all, and his family as well as

his lineage. We can move on to the bhakti poet saints of Maharastra,

including Tukaram, Namdev and their respective lineages. We can't

leave central and western India without mentioning Sai Baba of Shirdi

and his enormously influential lineage including Meher Baba, with the

emormous impact that he has had on both the western as well as Indian

expressions of dharma. Finally, as one of the great and ongoing

lineages to spring from Maharashtra, I'm pleased to be able to

include the great Siddha Bhagavan Nityananda and his successor Baba

Muktananda and the multiple lineages that continue to grow as

expressions of their great devotion and knowledge.

 

We can go on and on in this fashion until our computers collapse.

I've failed already to mention the Kriya lineage of Babaji, his

disciple, the great householder, Lahiri Mahasaya,and his disciple

Shri Yukteshvar, along with his most illustrious disciple the world

famous Paramahamsa Yogananda. Another ongoing and powerful lineage.

How could I have left out Bengal's paragon, Shri Ramakrishna, Sarada

Devi and Vivekananda and the lineage of world famous achiever monks

of the Ramakrishna Order?

 

Of course, we should mention the great female bhakti poets and song

writers Mirabhai, Lalleshvar and Jnanabhai.

 

I've failed to mention all the Sufi K lineages, but I thought I'd

confine my attentions to lineages I know something about.

 

If you read over all the lineages mentioned in this list, all of

which work with the awakened Kundalini, you might end up agreeing

with me, Tony, that the only "Elephant's tail" around here is you.

 

yours in the bonds,

eric

 

 

 

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

> Namaste All,

>

> Well if we are going to give validity at all to the mind, there is

> only one.

>

> Cakras are everywhere, if you look. The nature of energy is that it

> has to move to manifest otherwise it is potential.

>

> So called cakras in the human body are just areas of energy

> concentration at the endocrine glands. Energy cannot stand still so

it

> either manifests as a wave a particle or spiralling vortices, which

is

> as close energy gets to standing still. For it manifests in roughly

> the same place.

>

> So people who look for cakras find them, it is kind of like a blind

> man holding the elephant's tail and being told or believing that

that

> is an elephant. Cakras are everywhere, there is nothing but cakras

and

> energy movement!!!!People's minds, once they are told of a

particular

> construct then accept believe and embellish it. It is all in the

> imagination in their interpretation, usually in a strict unthinking

> religious type way.

>

> I take the words of the great sages and add to my own experience,

that

> K is the mind, and that cakras are mental constructs/imagination,

in

> the way they are presented by many........ONS.........Tony.

[Guest guest]

, EBlackstead@c... wrote:

> Tony,

>

> we don't know one another and I'm relatively new to this list so

I've

> been reluctant to engage you in your frequent and provocative Ex-

> cathedra pronouncements on nondualism.

>

> However, your utterances about Kundalini are so steeped in ignorance

> that I can't hold off any longer. How can it be that a man who, by

> his own admission, has no systematic experience of K or the paths

> that have evolved to deal both with it's awakening and it's

> development, counts himself such an expert about it? You say you've

> done research? You must have left all the Tantras, Jain and Buddhist

> as well as Hindu, out of your library. You say you've consulted all

> the great saints and realizers and then give us a list of three?

> Agreed, Buddha, Krishnamurti(was it?) and Ramana Maharshi don't

teach

> about Kundalini, and didn't ostensibly give Kundalini initiation.

You

> can be sure, however, that each of them has experienced it because

> nirvikalpa samadhi is nothing more or less than the final merger of

> the individual into the absolute, or the "Divine"(I just wanted to

> see if I could make you flinch). all of which is to say that the

> final event in the non-K practices of Jnana Yoga and Hinayana

Buddhism

 

Namste,

 

You are way off base; I have studied Indian philosophies a lot.

Tantra, scriptures et al. I have experienced all these so called K

rising experiences. I followed gurus, the whole enchilada.

 

K is an illusion, as I have described. It is the mind itself.

Nirvikalpa Samadhi has nothing to do with K or the Mind, it is beyond

them both, if that is the right word.

 

K is just experiencing, within experience, and cannot lead to moksha,

perhaps siddhis that's all. The mind has to be resolved into the

Heart/Self. Talking of Siva/Sakti joining at Sahasrara is just more

illusion and doesn't lead anywhere. There is no joining of Siva there,

perhaps only the resolving of the opposites within creation. However

still within the illusory mind.........ONS......Tony.