Guest guest Posted October 20, 2004 Report Share Posted October 20, 2004 hope this explains more http://www.kheper.net/topics/chakras/nadis.html http://sivasakti.com/articles/tantra/the-subtle-body-art73.html http://sivasakti.com/articles/tantra/the-subtle-body-art76.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 In a message dated 10/21/2004 11:28:10 AM Mountain Daylight Time, omprem writes: > I'd like to hear from others who are interested in the notion of this > phenomenal world arranging itself to accommodate the > aspirations of the spiritual pilgrim. If it is true that 'Paths are > many, Truth is One'. perhaps there are different ways that the > same content is projected to different people/groups according > to their karma and psychology. Perhaps it is not a question of > one view being correct and the others wrong. Perhaps all views > are correct even though radically different. This implies a very > fluid universe, perhaps many universes, with one of those > planes of existence being accessible to any one person or > group. This has implications for ending strife and war as well > as for respecting all paths and those on them. It also explains > the notion that the phenomenal universe is an illusion not an > absolute reality. > > > Omprem > Hi Omprem, Barbara Brennan, in her book on spiritual healing called Hand of Light, suggests something similar to this about the phenomenal world of etheric bodies and energy arranging themselves according to the vision of the aspirant/pilgrim. She also mentions that in different cultures/countries, there are different patterns observed in the chakras, such as one being lower, higher or set off to one side, or blocked, according to that one's cultural inhibitions and etcetera. Brennan started out as a NASA scientist and took her interest in the energies of the human body and became later in her life a spiritual healer... Peace, Cathie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Those were interesting links. The first one, http://www.kheper.net/topics/chakras/nadis.html , says , 'A rival interpretation, and one that has become very popular in the West, is that the Ida and the Pingala alternate, crossing over the the Sushumna at various points, thus giving rise to the image of the Caudicus..." This idea that Ida and Pingala form a double helix around the sushumna is not only 'popular' in the West. No less an Indian authority than Swami Sivananda also thinks the same way. See 'Kundalini Yoga'. While the West did not invent this double helix concept, one cannot even say that the West embraced it , as the article implies, because of its association with the familiar caduceus. Perhaps the West embraced this notion because of its familiarity with the double helix of DNA. Or, perhaps the West does not embrace the idea of a double helix arrangement of Ida-Pingala any more than segment of the world's population. Perhaps those who claim that the double helix idea of Ida-Pingala is popular in the West are guilty of practicing a very subtle form of racism. Perhaps it is true that the West embraces the double helix concept more so than other groups. If so, and considering that the Universe accommodates itself to individual and group aspirations, then it is possible that the Universe, i.e. Brahman or Shakti, may cause Ida-Pingala-Sushumna may appear differently to different peoples in accordance with their abilities. After all, it matters not whether Ida-Pingala form a double helix or are like to two bows strings. It only matters that the pranas in these two nadis can be redirected to meet at the Muladhara, forming Kundlini and taking the Sadhaka to higher and higher spiritual experience until Nirvikalpa Samadhi is attained. I'd like to hear from others who are interested in the notion of this phenomenal world arranging itself to accommodate the aspirations of the spiritual pilgrim. If it is true that 'Paths are many, Truth is One'. perhaps there are different ways that the same content is projected to different people/groups according to their karma and psychology. Perhaps it is not a question of one view being correct and the others wrong. Perhaps all views are correct even though radically different. This implies a very fluid universe, perhaps many universes, with one of those planes of existence being accessible to any one person or group. This has implications for ending strife and war as well as for respecting all paths and those on them. It also explains the notion that the phenomenal universe is an illusion not an absolute reality. Omprem , "yogiman2003" <yogiman2003> wrote: > > > hope this explains more > > http://www.kheper.net/topics/chakras/nadis.html > > http://sivasakti.com/articles/tantra/the-subtle-body-art73.html > > http://sivasakti.com/articles/tantra/the-subtle-body-art76.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 omprem wrote: > > > > > I'd like to hear from others who are interested in the notion of this > phenomenal world arranging itself to accommodate the > aspirations of the spiritual pilgrim. If it is true that 'Paths are > many, Truth is One'. perhaps there are different ways that the > same content is projected to different people/groups according > to their karma and psychology. Perhaps it is not a question of > one view being correct and the others wrong. Perhaps all views > are correct even though radically different. This implies a very > fluid universe, perhaps many universes, with one of those > planes of existence being accessible to any one person or > group. This has implications for ending strife and war as well > as for respecting all paths and those on them. It also explains > the notion that the phenomenal universe is an illusion not an > absolute reality. Perhaps this text from the indologist George Feuersteins book Yoga Sutra of Patanjali can be interesting for you: "Philosophy as an exercise in purely abstract thinking which remains without consequence in daily life is not something Patanjali or any other yogin would to. Their conception of philosophy is perhaps more akin to the kind of broad-minded enquiry which 'love of wisdom' originally stood for. Still the 'wisdom' (sophia) sought after in Yoga goes beyond the the sort of inspired understanding Socrates and his pupils stood for. Patanjali is concerned with the very source or possibility of all knowledge, namely the root-consciousness which he calls purusa. [...] If purusa is not just an empty concept but the symbol of an experience, which has as its content something real and not imaginary, we are led to consider the question of the fit between the concept and the reality it is intended to express. More specifically, we must ask ourselves whether the experience labeled 'prusa' is identical with the experience labelled 'purusa' in Samkhya thought, 'atman' or 'brahman' in Vedanta, 'nirvana' in Buddhism or 'God' in Christian mysticism. Those who believe in the transcendental unity of transpersonal experiencing ar emphatic that all these designations refer to one and the same reality, and that they are variations of basically the same experience. They explain the different terms and concepts they stand for as the result of the philosophical bias or linguistic preferences of those who formulated them. This explanation is too simplistic. It fails to explain why the descriptions of a supposedly uniform experience often differ considerably from each other. This fact remains unintelligible unless one assumes that there is not one single experience, labeled differently, but several distinct experiences with a number of features in common. That this is not just western sophistry is evident from the fact that this problem has been recognised long ago by the Indian thinkers themselves. [...] Ofcourse, as long as we have not ascended to the same heights as the yogins and mystics of East and West, we must suspend all judgement on the truth value of their explanations. We can merely comment on their inherent logical consistency, or lack of it, and consider their plausibility in the over-all context of available documentation of transpersonal experiences. It is the formidable task of future comparative research to document the great differentiation in this kind of experiencing and to work out some sort of structural framework within which all these varied experiences can find a place." Georg Feuersteins homepage: http://www.yrec.info/ Some consider him as the number one (in west) authority of yoga today. I have read his "bible" The Yoga Tradition, his book about Patanjali and his book about Tantra. Without doubt he has an encyclodepic knowledge of yoga but I get the impression that he knows much more about theory than practice, that is: he hasn't so much own deeper experiences of yoga to pass on. Regards Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 Some consider Wisdom to BE that which grows as a result of experience. However, if part of one's experience involves reading a lot of books and thinking abstractly about things in a detached way that has no consequence, surely some Wisdom may come from that also, because even the abstract thinker has to refer back to his/her own experience in order to assess which line of reasoning to prefer, and why... I don't believe it is possible to think purely abstractly -- all thoughts arise from some level of experience, even if it is imaginal. I don't believe in a purely abstract thinking, just like I don't believe that science is purely objective. Subjectivity is the tendency to refer back to one's personal experience for meaning. Who would sit around, with no experience of chakras, speculating abstractly on where they might be positioned or on where the nadis are? To an abstract thinker the whole topic will sound like a waste of time, so why speculate. Which underlines the point that personal expereince at some level is always at the root of all thinking, even abstract thinking. My Two Cents, Cathie In a message dated 10/22/2004 7:20:12 AM Mountain Daylight Time, lars writes: > Perhaps this text from the indologist George Feuersteins book Yoga > Sutra of Patanjali can be interesting for you: > > > "Philosophy as an exercise in purely abstract thinking which remains > without consequence in daily life is not something Patanjali or any > other yogin would to. Their conception of philosophy is > perhaps more akin to the kind of broad-minded enquiry which 'love of > wisdom' originally stood for. Still the 'wisdom' (sophia) sought after > in Yoga goes beyond the the sort of inspired understanding Socrates and > his pupils stood for. Patanjali is concerned with the very source or > possibility of all knowledge, namely the root-consciousness which he > calls purusa. > > [...] > > If purusa is not just an empty concept but the symbol of an experience, > which has as its content something real and not imaginary, we are led to > consider the question of the fit between the concept and the reality it > is intended to express. More specifically, we must ask ourselves whether > the experience labeled 'prusa' is identical with the experience labelled > 'purusa' in Samkhya thought, 'atman' or 'brahman' in Vedanta, 'nirvana' > in Buddhism or 'God' in Christian mysticism. Those who believe in the > transcendental unity of transpersonal experiencing ar emphatic that all > these designations refer to one and the same reality, and that they are > variations of basically the same experience. They explain the different > terms and concepts they stand for as the result of the philosophical > bias or linguistic preferences of those who formulated them. This > explanation is too simplistic. It fails to explain why the descriptions > of a supposedly uniform experience often differ considerably from each > other. This fact remains unintelligible unless one assumes that there is > not one single experience, labeled differently, but several distinct > experiences with a number of features in common. That this is not just > western sophistry is evident from the fact that this problem has been > recognised long ago by the Indian thinkers themselves. > > [...] > > Ofcourse, as long as we have not ascended to the same heights as the > yogins and mystics of East and West, we must suspend all judgement on > the truth value of their explanations. We can merely comment on their > inherent logical consistency, or lack of it, and consider their > plausibility in the over-all context of available documentation of > transpersonal experiences. It is the formidable task of future > comparative research to document the great differentiation in this kind > of experiencing and to work out some sort of structural framework within > which all these varied experiences can find a place." > > Georg Feuersteins homepage: > > http://www.yrec.info/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 In a message dated 10/22/2004 10:37:07 AM Mountain Daylight Time, omprem writes: > Hi Cathie > > Thanks for the reference to Barbara Brennan. I'll try to obtain a > copy of her book > > Omprem Hi Omprem, She has two books that I know of: 1) Light Emerging: The Journey of Personal Healing and 2) Hands of Light: A Guide to Healing Through the Human Energy Field Book 1) Light Emerging, is simpler. It talks about phases of grief and personal growth and some basic spiritual concepts like finding the right place to live. It talks about certain defensive auric states and interpersonal auric dynamics, as well as suckers ( etheric chords others can put out to hook into your auric field and suck energy. Bood 2) is really more advanced, though 1) has a lot of useful info as well. Book two goes into details of the chakras ( but does not discuss nadis ). Though the book does not discuss nadis, she talks about etheric chords of connection in the heart chakra, and excercises to find spiritual guidance. She talks about certain "sick" auric configurations that parallel psychological types such as schizoid, oral, massochistic. And healing techniques. I would say book one is more geared toward how to live a spiritual life as a spiritual person in a way that is friendly to your own spiritual development, while book 2 is more geared toward how to be a healer... and I guess book 2 is used as a textbook often, for healers in training :-] Blessings and Peace, Cathie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 Hi Cathie Thanks for the reference to Barbara Brennan. I'll try to obtain a copy of her book Omprem , SophiasHeaven@a... wrote: > In a message dated 10/21/2004 11:28:10 AM Mountain Daylight Time, > omprem writes: > > > I'd like to hear from others who are interested in the notion of this > > phenomenal world arranging itself to accommodate the > > aspirations of the spiritual pilgrim. If it is true that 'Paths are > > many, Truth is One'. perhaps there are different ways that the > > same content is projected to different people/groups according > > to their karma and psychology. Perhaps it is not a question of > > one view being correct and the others wrong. Perhaps all views > > are correct even though radically different. This implies a very > > fluid universe, perhaps many universes, with one of those > > planes of existence being accessible to any one person or > > group. This has implications for ending strife and war as well > > as for respecting all paths and those on them. It also explains > > the notion that the phenomenal universe is an illusion not an > > absolute reality. > > > > > > Omprem > > > > Hi Omprem, > Barbara Brennan, in her book on spiritual healing called Hand of > Light, suggests something similar to this about the phenomenal world of etheric > bodies and energy arranging themselves according to the vision of the > aspirant/pilgrim. She also mentions that in different cultures/countries, there are > different patterns observed in the chakras, such as one being lower, higher or set > off to one side, or blocked, according to that one's cultural inhibitions and > etcetera. > Brennan started out as a NASA scientist and took her interest in the > energies of the human body and became later in her life a spiritual healer... > > > Peace, > Cathie > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 " I get the impression that he (Fuerstein) knows much more about theory than practice, that is: he hasn't so much own deeper experiences of yoga to pass on." I agree with that. But his theoretical knowledge is still extremely valuable because of its clarity and depth. That exerpt doesn't really answer my query because it doesn't address the question of why different people(s) have different experiences. It fails to consider that notion that the same reality could be presented differently to different people(s). The excerpt seems to be implying that not only are there different experiences but those experiences arise from different realities. Omprem , Lars Hedström <lars@2...> wrote: > > omprem wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to hear from others who are interested in the notion of this > > phenomenal world arranging itself to accommodate the > > aspirations of the spiritual pilgrim. If it is true that 'Paths are > > many, Truth is One'. perhaps there are different ways that the > > same content is projected to different people/groups according > > to their karma and psychology. Perhaps it is not a question of > > one view being correct and the others wrong. Perhaps all views > > are correct even though radically different. This implies a very > > fluid universe, perhaps many universes, with one of those > > planes of existence being accessible to any one person or > > group. This has implications for ending strife and war as well > > as for respecting all paths and those on them. It also explains > > the notion that the phenomenal universe is an illusion not an > > absolute reality. > > > Perhaps this text from the indologist George Feuersteins book Yoga > Sutra of Patanjali can be interesting for you: > > > "Philosophy as an exercise in purely abstract thinking which remains > without consequence in daily life is not something Patanjali or any > other yogin would to. Their conception of philosophy is > perhaps more akin to the kind of broad-minded enquiry which 'love of > wisdom' originally stood for. Still the 'wisdom' (sophia) sought after > in Yoga goes beyond the the sort of inspired understanding Socrates and > his pupils stood for. Patanjali is concerned with the very source or > possibility of all knowledge, namely the root-consciousness which he > calls purusa. > > [...] > > If purusa is not just an empty concept but the symbol of an experience, > which has as its content something real and not imaginary, we are led to > consider the question of the fit between the concept and the reality it > is intended to express. More specifically, we must ask ourselves whether > the experience labeled 'prusa' is identical with the experience labelled > 'purusa' in Samkhya thought, 'atman' or 'brahman' in Vedanta, 'nirvana' > in Buddhism or 'God' in Christian mysticism. Those who believe in the > transcendental unity of transpersonal experiencing ar emphatic that all > these designations refer to one and the same reality, and that they are > variations of basically the same experience. They explain the different > terms and concepts they stand for as the result of the philosophical > bias or linguistic preferences of those who formulated them. This > explanation is too simplistic. It fails to explain why the descriptions > of a supposedly uniform experience often differ considerably from each > other. This fact remains unintelligible unless one assumes that there is > not one single experience, labeled differently, but several distinct > experiences with a number of features in common. That this is not just > western sophistry is evident from the fact that this problem has been > recognised long ago by the Indian thinkers themselves. > > [...] > > Ofcourse, as long as we have not ascended to the same heights as the > yogins and mystics of East and West, we must suspend all judgement on > the truth value of their explanations. We can merely comment on their > inherent logical consistency, or lack of it, and consider their > plausibility in the over-all context of available documentation of > transpersonal experiences. It is the formidable task of future > comparative research to document the great differentiation in this kind > of experiencing and to work out some sort of structural framework within > which all these varied experiences can find a place." > > Georg Feuersteins homepage: > > http://www.yrec.info/ > > > Some consider him as the number one (in west) authority of yoga today. > > I have read his "bible" The Yoga Tradition, his book about Patanjali and > his book about Tantra. Without doubt he has an encyclodepic knowledge of > yoga but I get the impression that he knows much more about theory than > practice, that is: he hasn't so much own deeper experiences of yoga to > pass on. > > > Regards > > Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 Omprem wrote: >(Fuerstein's) theoretical knowledge is still extremely > valuable because of its clarity and depth. Of course! His books are very good indeed. > That exerpt doesn't really answer my query because it doesn't > address the question of why different people(s) have different > experiences. It fails to consider that notion that the same reality > could be presented differently to different people(s). The excerpt > seems to be implying that not only are there different > experiences but those experiences arise from different realities. Yes, and isn't this interesting? According to Feuerstein this is something that has been discussed by the Indian thinkers, I thought perhaps that someone here on this group had read more about this and had some interesting comments. We are all different and have different perceptions and different spiritual experiences even if we do exactly the same yoga. What if there isn't one single reality? Or perhaps there is one single reality for us all but also one subjective unique reality? Regards Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 In a message dated 10/24/2004 4:08:34 AM Mountain Daylight Time, lars writes: > We are all different and have different perceptions and different > spiritual experiences even if we do exactly the same yoga. What if there > isn't one single reality? Or perhaps there is one single reality for us > all but also one subjective unique reality? > > Regards > > Lars I think this must be because we each have a unique karma. When energy comes into our body raising our consciousness through yoga or any other means, it is our own like karma and our own consciousness that we process through as we integrate this energy into our systems. And each person's karma is unique and follows it's own evolution, which is determined by Divinity and a guru or teacher may only facilitate this natural process. He/She cannot change the student into something he/she is not -- only facilitate the student to attain to whatever consciousness the student is ready to attain to attain to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 25, 2004 Report Share Posted October 25, 2004 " We are all different and have different perceptions and different spiritual experiences even if we do exactly the same yoga. What if there isn't one single reality? Or perhaps there is one single reality for us all but also one subjective unique reality?" Paths are many, but Truth is One. There are many routes to the top of the mountain but they all converge at the top and share the same view. It is instructive to read the saints and seers from different religions and spiritual disciplines. Even though they are unaware of each other, live thousands of miles away, and are perhaps centuries apart, they tend to use the same language, even the same metaphors, and describe a common view. This suggest to me that there is a single Absolute Reality that initially is perceived in many ways or presented in many ways to accommocate different karmas and psychologies but as sadhana progresses and the minds thin out, the Pure Mind apprehends a common Reality. Omprem , Lars Hedström <lars@2...> wrote: > > Omprem wrote: > > >(Fuerstein's) theoretical knowledge is still extremely > > valuable because of its clarity and depth. > > Of course! His books are very good indeed. > > > That exerpt doesn't really answer my query because it doesn't > > address the question of why different people(s) have different > > experiences. It fails to consider that notion that the same reality > > could be presented differently to different people(s). The excerpt > > seems to be implying that not only are there different > > experiences but those experiences arise from different realities. > > Yes, and isn't this interesting? According to Feuerstein this is > something that has been discussed by the Indian thinkers, I thought > perhaps that someone here on this group had read more about this and > had some interesting comments. > > We are all different and have different perceptions and different > spiritual experiences even if we do exactly the same yoga. What if there > isn't one single reality? Or perhaps there is one single reality for us > all but also one subjective unique reality? > > Regards > > Lars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.