Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Chakras and concentration

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Namaste :)!

 

A doubt came to my mind about the meaning of some terms and their

difference. People often talk about activating the chakras. What does

this really mean? Is it the same as concentrating on a chakra? Some

people concentrate on the 6th chakra for example and start their

spiritual journey there. What confuses me though is the fact that

other sadhanas start from the first chakra and try to raise the

kundalini through all of them. Maybe my message is a little confusing

because I am myself confused about this subject.

 

To sum up, I could put it like this: if one concentrates on one

chakra, does this rise the kundalini to it or is it only a sort of

supernatural concentration that makes one get to know the specific

chakra?

 

greetings and smiles to all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest guest

There is only one kind of chakra that really exists, and that is the

chakra of social evolution.

All other chakras are imaginations/creations of the human mind.

The social chakras are a series of evolutionary steps that lead

mankind (the human mind, body and effort) from one level of

development to another.

These chakras are often interrupted by external stimuli or

revolution of ideas.

These revolutions can either be a setback or be a fillip to progress

of human thought.

For example, the ideas of liberalism and equality during the French

revolution, or our own Indian struggle for independence can be

considered progressive.

However, the rise of Islamic (or other religious) radical ideas can

be considered a setback for the chakra of social evolution.

 

Unfortunately, mankind has not been able to break free from these

chakras yet.

 

, "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> Namaste :)!

>

> A doubt came to my mind about the meaning of some terms and their

> difference. People often talk about activating the chakras. What

does

> this really mean? Is it the same as concentrating on a chakra?

Some

> people concentrate on the 6th chakra for example and start their

> spiritual journey there. What confuses me though is the fact that

> other sadhanas start from the first chakra and try to raise the

> kundalini through all of them. Maybe my message is a little

confusing

> because I am myself confused about this subject.

>

> To sum up, I could put it like this: if one concentrates on one

> chakra, does this rise the kundalini to it or is it only a sort of

> supernatural concentration that makes one get to know the specific

> chakra?

>

> greetings and smiles to all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Radical ideas leading to fundamentalism can be a real problem.

 

Only the Divine Ultimate has, is the Ultimate Truth,

 

And to this end there are many paths.

 

megalith6

 

 

 

, silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> There is only one kind of chakra that really exists, and that is

the

> chakra of social evolution.

> All other chakras are imaginations/creations of the human mind.

> The social chakras are a series of evolutionary steps that lead

> mankind (the human mind, body and effort) from one level of

> development to another.

> These chakras are often interrupted by external stimuli or

> revolution of ideas.

> These revolutions can either be a setback or be a fillip to

progress

> of human thought.

> For example, the ideas of liberalism and equality during the French

> revolution, or our own Indian struggle for independence can be

> considered progressive.

> However, the rise of Islamic (or other religious) radical ideas can

> be considered a setback for the chakra of social evolution.

>

> Unfortunately, mankind has not been able to break free from these

> chakras yet.

>

> , "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> > Namaste :)!

> >

> > A doubt came to my mind about the meaning of some terms and their

> > difference. People often talk about activating the chakras. What

> does

> > this really mean? Is it the same as concentrating on a chakra?

> Some

> > people concentrate on the 6th chakra for example and start their

> > spiritual journey there. What confuses me though is the fact that

> > other sadhanas start from the first chakra and try to raise the

> > kundalini through all of them. Maybe my message is a little

> confusing

> > because I am myself confused about this subject.

> >

> > To sum up, I could put it like this: if one concentrates on one

> > chakra, does this rise the kundalini to it or is it only a sort

of

> > supernatural concentration that makes one get to know the

specific

> > chakra?

> >

> > greetings and smiles to all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

, megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> Radical ideas leading to fundamentalism can be a real problem.

 

Radical ideas arise out of the conditions under which a section of

the population, or a class, has to live.

That gives rise to religous fundmentalism.

Religion, and hence fundamentalism, is inward-looking.

That is inherently dangerous, because it tells you that if there is

anything wrong within you, then *you* are responsible for it; you

and only you are to be blamed for it.

And your past actions have created this for you.

This kind of thinking gives rise to radical ideas.

 

> And to this end there are many paths.

 

I agree. And the path of non-violent reform is the right path.

Any path that requires the use of violence cannot be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

The chakra of social evolution... where is it situated then? on the

astral body? ... if the only truth for you is the social evolution

you dont need to describe it as a chakra...

 

Spiritual experiences as a result of sadhana are not imaginations.

They are states of higher consiousness and everyone can experience

them, provided one meditates. So the only way to find out if

something is true or not, is to try it and practice it and see for

onesself.

 

, silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> There is only one kind of chakra that really exists, and that is

the

> chakra of social evolution.

> All other chakras are imaginations/creations of the human mind.

> The social chakras are a series of evolutionary steps that lead

> mankind (the human mind, body and effort) from one level of

> development to another.

> These chakras are often interrupted by external stimuli or

> revolution of ideas.

> These revolutions can either be a setback or be a fillip to

progress

> of human thought.

> For example, the ideas of liberalism and equality during the French

> revolution, or our own Indian struggle for independence can be

> considered progressive.

> However, the rise of Islamic (or other religious) radical ideas can

> be considered a setback for the chakra of social evolution.

>

> Unfortunately, mankind has not been able to break free from these

> chakras yet.

>

> , "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> > Namaste :)!

> >

> > A doubt came to my mind about the meaning of some terms and their

> > difference. People often talk about activating the chakras. What

> does

> > this really mean? Is it the same as concentrating on a chakra?

> Some

> > people concentrate on the 6th chakra for example and start their

> > spiritual journey there. What confuses me though is the fact that

> > other sadhanas start from the first chakra and try to raise the

> > kundalini through all of them. Maybe my message is a little

> confusing

> > because I am myself confused about this subject.

> >

> > To sum up, I could put it like this: if one concentrates on one

> > chakra, does this rise the kundalini to it or is it only a sort

of

> > supernatural concentration that makes one get to know the

specific

> > chakra?

> >

> > greetings and smiles to all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear silentopposition,

 

"Religion ... is inward-looking".

 

If you believe, as I do, that the Divine Ultimate is Love, then I

would hope that the expression of this conviction is anything but

inward-looking!

 

Namaste,

 

megalith6

 

 

 

 

, silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> , megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> > Radical ideas leading to fundamentalism can be a real problem.

>

> Radical ideas arise out of the conditions under which a section of

> the population, or a class, has to live.

> That gives rise to religous fundmentalism.

> Religion, and hence fundamentalism, is inward-looking.

> That is inherently dangerous, because it tells you that if there is

> anything wrong within you, then *you* are responsible for it; you

> and only you are to be blamed for it.

> And your past actions have created this for you.

> This kind of thinking gives rise to radical ideas.

>

> > And to this end there are many paths.

>

> I agree. And the path of non-violent reform is the right path.

> Any path that requires the use of violence cannot be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

, "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> The chakra of social evolution... where is it situated then? on

> the astral body?

 

If you want to put it that way, then-it is within the body of

mankind. Not just within the body of one single individual, but the

entire human society.

All human beings are subject to its laws, just as we are subject to

the laws of nature.

 

> ... if the only truth for you is the social evolution

> you dont need to describe it as a chakra...

 

But it is !!

It is a chakra. It goes thru several phases, just as one person's

life goes through several phases, like brahramacharya, grihast, etc.

What makes you think that evolution is one constant linear path. It

is a more like "long waves".

So is our thought process, our religion, philosophy, etc.

The evolution of human thought mirrors the evolution of society.

 

> Spiritual experiences as a result of sadhana are not imaginations.

 

I was not talking about "spiritual experiences". In response to the

original message (which was about chakras of life), I said that the

only real chakra is that of social evolution.

Other chakras, like those of thought, religion, etc. are mirrors of

social evolution and exist only as ideas, in the idealistic realm.

Not in the real realm of life.

 

> They are states of higher consiousness and everyone can

experience

> them, provided one meditates. So the only way to find out if

> something is true or not, is to try it and practice it and see for

> onesself.

 

I am not denying the benefits of meditation and concentration.

Meditation helps achieve peace with oneself.

However, meditation is individualistic in nature.

That was my other point about religion being inward-looking.

Of coure, meditation has nothing to do with religion.

There are several people who are very good at the art of meditation,

but are not necessarily religious.

Similarly, there are people who are very religious (or rather

ritualistic), but do not meditate.

Doesn't make them any better or worse.

 

That is why it is individualistic in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I agree with you that the ultimate, as you put it, is the power of

love.

But I would strongly disagree that religion is an expression (or

implentation) of that "divine love".

It is anything but that.

On the contrary, if you look around, you will find that it is the

exact opposite.

It breeds hatred, radical ideas (which is what we talked about in

the previous message), and greed.

Show me one religion today that is not causing infinite pain and

suffering for mankind.

If you believe that God exists in every man, and in every good

action, then why do we need religion?

What is religion?

It is nothing but an aggregate of fear, class conflict and greed,

amassed over generations of human evolution.

Look at the origins of any religion and you will find the same.

 

Divine love is the love and compassion for your fellowmen.

That does not need religion to express itself.

This is what I feel.

 

, megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> Dear silentopposition,

>

> "Religion ... is inward-looking".

>

> If you believe, as I do, that the Divine Ultimate is Love, then I

> would hope that the expression of this conviction is anything but

> inward-looking!

>

> Namaste,

>

> megalith6

>

>

>

>

> , silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> > , megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> > > Radical ideas leading to fundamentalism can be a real problem.

> >

> > Radical ideas arise out of the conditions under which a section

of

> > the population, or a class, has to live.

> > That gives rise to religous fundmentalism.

> > Religion, and hence fundamentalism, is inward-looking.

> > That is inherently dangerous, because it tells you that if there

is

> > anything wrong within you, then *you* are responsible for it;

you

> > and only you are to be blamed for it.

> > And your past actions have created this for you.

> > This kind of thinking gives rise to radical ideas.

> >

> > > And to this end there are many paths.

> >

> > I agree. And the path of non-violent reform is the right path.

> > Any path that requires the use of violence cannot be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Well, the theory is well known, in which the macrocosm is included in

the microcosm and vice versa. The whole universe is included in each

individual and each individual is a part of the cosmos, the whole

existence, be that material or spiritual; physical, mental or

spiritual. And this is valid for the fourth dimension as well

(eternity is included in a single moment).

 

We cant deny the fact that there is an intense bond between the

individual and the universe as a whole. The flow of influence however

is mutual... can you influence the individual? then you will

influence the society and the cosmos generally. Can you influence the

cosmos? Then you will inevitably influence the individual. Our whole

life is actually based on the game of the law of cause and effect,

action and reaction, known in physics too as a law of Newton. And if

generalized it touches Einsteins law of relativity... everything

relates to everything after all!!

 

Now, when we try to interpete these laws through the scope of

spirituality, we can convey these concepts as the theories or the

universal soul and the universal mind. Each individual carries a

spark of the divine spark, is a part of the divine soul and is the

divine soul at the same time. This is valid for the concept of mind

too which is found in not in the pure spiritual planes but in the

causal or mental ones. The problem arises when the soul gets entagled

in the web of maya, whiches sole goal is to convince us of the

illusion of the individuality. At this point I would like to quote

once again from the writings of the great soul and yogi Paramahansa

Yogananda which clears this point in a very lucid way:

 

"Nature,with her infinite variety and inexorable laws,is an evolute

of the Singular Reality through a cosmic delusion:maya,the "Magical

Measurer" that makes the One appear as many embracing their own

individuality-forms and intelligences existing in an apparent

separation from their Creator.Just as a dreamer differentiates his

one consciousness into many dream beings in a dream world,so God,the

Cosmic Dreamer,has separated His consciousness into all the cosmic

manifestations,with souls individualized from His own One Being

endowed with the egoity to dream their personalized existences within

the Nature-ordained drama of the Universal Dream."

 

Chakras are in us and in everything. As we are we and all at the same

time. They can be described as astral planes and be visited through

astral travels or they can be tracked on the astral body by people

who can concentrate on the subtle body and can perceive through the

limitations of the physical.

 

So meditation can definetely not be individualistic in nature my dear

friend. Meditation is the timeless and the very ultimate science,

which can lead one in realizing ones real nature and oneness with the

cosmos. Thus, the best way to help others and the best way to help

the universe as a whole is to practice meditation.

 

 

Namaste!

 

, silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> , "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> > The chakra of social evolution... where is it situated then? on

> > the astral body?

>

> If you want to put it that way, then-it is within the body of

> mankind. Not just within the body of one single individual, but the

> entire human society.

> All human beings are subject to its laws, just as we are subject to

> the laws of nature.

>

> > ... if the only truth for you is the social evolution

> > you dont need to describe it as a chakra...

>

> But it is !!

> It is a chakra. It goes thru several phases, just as one person's

> life goes through several phases, like brahramacharya, grihast, etc.

> What makes you think that evolution is one constant linear path. It

> is a more like "long waves".

> So is our thought process, our religion, philosophy, etc.

> The evolution of human thought mirrors the evolution of society.

>

> > Spiritual experiences as a result of sadhana are not

imaginations.

>

> I was not talking about "spiritual experiences". In response to the

> original message (which was about chakras of life), I said that the

> only real chakra is that of social evolution.

> Other chakras, like those of thought, religion, etc. are mirrors of

> social evolution and exist only as ideas, in the idealistic realm.

> Not in the real realm of life.

>

> > They are states of higher consiousness and everyone can

> experience

> > them, provided one meditates. So the only way to find out if

> > something is true or not, is to try it and practice it and see

for

> > onesself.

>

> I am not denying the benefits of meditation and concentration.

> Meditation helps achieve peace with oneself.

> However, meditation is individualistic in nature.

> That was my other point about religion being inward-looking.

> Of coure, meditation has nothing to do with religion.

> There are several people who are very good at the art of

meditation,

> but are not necessarily religious.

> Similarly, there are people who are very religious (or rather

> ritualistic), but do not meditate.

> Doesn't make them any better or worse.

>

> That is why it is individualistic in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hm,

 

Maya, the great illusion. Thank you, this brings me a little closer

to the illusive something I am searching for.

 

Meditation. Science. Yes. Has not Tantra also been described as The

Science?

 

Tantra, meditation, all paths to the great liberation. Call it Mind,

call it Soul ... or Moksha.

 

At which point individuality ceases to separate self from Self.

 

Om Tara,

 

megalith6

 

 

 

, "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> Well, the theory is well known, in which the macrocosm is included

in

> the microcosm and vice versa. The whole universe is included in

each

> individual and each individual is a part of the cosmos, the whole

> existence, be that material or spiritual; physical, mental or

> spiritual. And this is valid for the fourth dimension as well

> (eternity is included in a single moment).

>

> We cant deny the fact that there is an intense bond between the

> individual and the universe as a whole. The flow of influence

however

> is mutual... can you influence the individual? then you will

> influence the society and the cosmos generally. Can you influence

the

> cosmos? Then you will inevitably influence the individual. Our

whole

> life is actually based on the game of the law of cause and effect,

> action and reaction, known in physics too as a law of Newton. And

if

> generalized it touches Einsteins law of relativity... everything

> relates to everything after all!!

>

> Now, when we try to interpete these laws through the scope of

> spirituality, we can convey these concepts as the theories or the

> universal soul and the universal mind. Each individual carries a

> spark of the divine spark, is a part of the divine soul and is the

> divine soul at the same time. This is valid for the concept of mind

> too which is found in not in the pure spiritual planes but in the

> causal or mental ones. The problem arises when the soul gets

entagled

> in the web of maya, whiches sole goal is to convince us of the

> illusion of the individuality. At this point I would like to quote

> once again from the writings of the great soul and yogi Paramahansa

> Yogananda which clears this point in a very lucid way:

>

> "Nature,with her infinite variety and inexorable laws,is an evolute

> of the Singular Reality through a cosmic delusion:maya,the "Magical

> Measurer" that makes the One appear as many embracing their own

> individuality-forms and intelligences existing in an apparent

> separation from their Creator.Just as a dreamer differentiates his

> one consciousness into many dream beings in a dream world,so

God,the

> Cosmic Dreamer,has separated His consciousness into all the cosmic

> manifestations,with souls individualized from His own One Being

> endowed with the egoity to dream their personalized existences

within

> the Nature-ordained drama of the Universal Dream."

>

> Chakras are in us and in everything. As we are we and all at the

same

> time. They can be described as astral planes and be visited through

> astral travels or they can be tracked on the astral body by people

> who can concentrate on the subtle body and can perceive through the

> limitations of the physical.

>

> So meditation can definetely not be individualistic in nature my

dear

> friend. Meditation is the timeless and the very ultimate science,

> which can lead one in realizing ones real nature and oneness with

the

> cosmos. Thus, the best way to help others and the best way to help

> the universe as a whole is to practice meditation.

>

>

> Namaste!

>

> , silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> > , "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> > > The chakra of social evolution... where is it situated then? on

> > > the astral body?

> >

> > If you want to put it that way, then-it is within the body of

> > mankind. Not just within the body of one single individual, but

the

> > entire human society.

> > All human beings are subject to its laws, just as we are subject

to

> > the laws of nature.

> >

> > > ... if the only truth for you is the social evolution

> > > you dont need to describe it as a chakra...

> >

> > But it is !!

> > It is a chakra. It goes thru several phases, just as one person's

> > life goes through several phases, like brahramacharya, grihast,

etc.

> > What makes you think that evolution is one constant linear path.

It

> > is a more like "long waves".

> > So is our thought process, our religion, philosophy, etc.

> > The evolution of human thought mirrors the evolution of society.

> >

> > > Spiritual experiences as a result of sadhana are not

> imaginations.

> >

> > I was not talking about "spiritual experiences". In response to

the

> > original message (which was about chakras of life), I said that

the

> > only real chakra is that of social evolution.

> > Other chakras, like those of thought, religion, etc. are mirrors

of

> > social evolution and exist only as ideas, in the idealistic realm.

> > Not in the real realm of life.

> >

> > > They are states of higher consiousness and everyone can

> > experience

> > > them, provided one meditates. So the only way to find out if

> > > something is true or not, is to try it and practice it and see

> for

> > > onesself.

> >

> > I am not denying the benefits of meditation and concentration.

> > Meditation helps achieve peace with oneself.

> > However, meditation is individualistic in nature.

> > That was my other point about religion being inward-looking.

> > Of coure, meditation has nothing to do with religion.

> > There are several people who are very good at the art of

> meditation,

> > but are not necessarily religious.

> > Similarly, there are people who are very religious (or rather

> > ritualistic), but do not meditate.

> > Doesn't make them any better or worse.

> >

> > That is why it is individualistic in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Friend,

 

You are describing Humanism, a noble cause.

 

But faith is felt, to someone of a religious temperament (innate in

all), it is the very heart.

 

Ignorance is another matter entirely. The majority of us live in a

state of partial or complete spiritual ignorance. Ignorance breeds

fear, and fear of others leads to disasters.

 

The majority cling to what they perceive as *their* religion, *their*

beliefs, *their* national identities, and their insecurities which,

as above, can lead to tragedy for all.

 

Because they have forgotten that we are all the children of the One.

 

That we are - ulimately - an extension of the One.

 

And that we return to the One.

 

& because we are unenlightened or we forget, we are in misery, &

blind, abject ignorance.

 

It is Ignorance which causes the Misery you describe, that & that

alone.

 

It is transcendence which will end it, some day, I pray.

 

Dear Lord!

 

megalith6

 

 

 

, silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> I agree with you that the ultimate, as you put it, is the power of

> love.

> But I would strongly disagree that religion is an expression (or

> implentation) of that "divine love".

> It is anything but that.

> On the contrary, if you look around, you will find that it is the

> exact opposite.

> It breeds hatred, radical ideas (which is what we talked about in

> the previous message), and greed.

> Show me one religion today that is not causing infinite pain and

> suffering for mankind.

> If you believe that God exists in every man, and in every good

> action, then why do we need religion?

> What is religion?

> It is nothing but an aggregate of fear, class conflict and greed,

> amassed over generations of human evolution.

> Look at the origins of any religion and you will find the same.

>

> Divine love is the love and compassion for your fellowmen.

> That does not need religion to express itself.

> This is what I feel.

>

> , megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> > Dear silentopposition,

> >

> > "Religion ... is inward-looking".

> >

> > If you believe, as I do, that the Divine Ultimate is Love, then I

> > would hope that the expression of this conviction is anything but

> > inward-looking!

> >

> > Namaste,

> >

> > megalith6

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> > > , megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> > > > Radical ideas leading to fundamentalism can be a real problem.

> > >

> > > Radical ideas arise out of the conditions under which a section

> of

> > > the population, or a class, has to live.

> > > That gives rise to religous fundmentalism.

> > > Religion, and hence fundamentalism, is inward-looking.

> > > That is inherently dangerous, because it tells you that if

there

> is

> > > anything wrong within you, then *you* are responsible for it;

> you

> > > and only you are to be blamed for it.

> > > And your past actions have created this for you.

> > > This kind of thinking gives rise to radical ideas.

> > >

> > > > And to this end there are many paths.

> > >

> > > I agree. And the path of non-violent reform is the right path.

> > > Any path that requires the use of violence cannot be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

The way I see it Tantra is truly The Science. Well I guess we are not

searching for the illusion, we just try to transcend it. And when

that happens, when all the karmas of the individual are nullified or

made invalid and the kundalini can remain in the 7th chakra(or nineth

to some), maybe then can one seperate self from self as you

expressed.

but who knows what all must take place for a soul to achieve

liberation? only a spiritual scientist could report that(which is

never done, for reasons which i fail to understand)..it is something

which my mind still cannot perceive, especially when i read that not

only munis and sidhas, but even rishis are not totally liberated

beings and still retain their individuality... personally... i

wouldnt mind to be a rishi with a jiva than a jiva in total

maya....lol

and

 

namaste

 

, megalith6 <no_reply> wrote:

> Hm,

>

> Maya, the great illusion. Thank you, this brings me a little closer

> to the illusive something I am searching for.

>

> Meditation. Science. Yes. Has not Tantra also been described as The

> Science?

>

> Tantra, meditation, all paths to the great liberation. Call it

Mind,

> call it Soul ... or Moksha.

>

> At which point individuality ceases to separate self from Self.

>

> Om Tara,

>

> megalith6

>

>

>

> , "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> > Well, the theory is well known, in which the macrocosm is

included

> in

> > the microcosm and vice versa. The whole universe is included in

> each

> > individual and each individual is a part of the cosmos, the whole

> > existence, be that material or spiritual; physical, mental or

> > spiritual. And this is valid for the fourth dimension as well

> > (eternity is included in a single moment).

> >

> > We cant deny the fact that there is an intense bond between the

> > individual and the universe as a whole. The flow of influence

> however

> > is mutual... can you influence the individual? then you will

> > influence the society and the cosmos generally. Can you influence

> the

> > cosmos? Then you will inevitably influence the individual. Our

> whole

> > life is actually based on the game of the law of cause and

effect,

> > action and reaction, known in physics too as a law of Newton. And

> if

> > generalized it touches Einsteins law of relativity... everything

> > relates to everything after all!!

> >

> > Now, when we try to interpete these laws through the scope of

> > spirituality, we can convey these concepts as the theories or the

> > universal soul and the universal mind. Each individual carries a

> > spark of the divine spark, is a part of the divine soul and is

the

> > divine soul at the same time. This is valid for the concept of

mind

> > too which is found in not in the pure spiritual planes but in the

> > causal or mental ones. The problem arises when the soul gets

> entagled

> > in the web of maya, whiches sole goal is to convince us of the

> > illusion of the individuality. At this point I would like to

quote

> > once again from the writings of the great soul and yogi

Paramahansa

> > Yogananda which clears this point in a very lucid way:

> >

> > "Nature,with her infinite variety and inexorable laws,is an

evolute

> > of the Singular Reality through a cosmic

delusion:maya,the "Magical

> > Measurer" that makes the One appear as many embracing their own

> > individuality-forms and intelligences existing in an apparent

> > separation from their Creator.Just as a dreamer differentiates

his

> > one consciousness into many dream beings in a dream world,so

> God,the

> > Cosmic Dreamer,has separated His consciousness into all the

cosmic

> > manifestations,with souls individualized from His own One Being

> > endowed with the egoity to dream their personalized existences

> within

> > the Nature-ordained drama of the Universal Dream."

> >

> > Chakras are in us and in everything. As we are we and all at the

> same

> > time. They can be described as astral planes and be visited

through

> > astral travels or they can be tracked on the astral body by

people

> > who can concentrate on the subtle body and can perceive through

the

> > limitations of the physical.

> >

> > So meditation can definetely not be individualistic in nature my

> dear

> > friend. Meditation is the timeless and the very ultimate

science,

> > which can lead one in realizing ones real nature and oneness with

> the

> > cosmos. Thus, the best way to help others and the best way to

help

> > the universe as a whole is to practice meditation.

> >

> >

> > Namaste!

> >

> > , silentopposition <no_reply> wrote:

> > > , "de_spell_2000" <oiokasti@h...> wrote:

> > > > The chakra of social evolution... where is it situated then?

on

> > > > the astral body?

> > >

> > > If you want to put it that way, then-it is within the body of

> > > mankind. Not just within the body of one single individual, but

> the

> > > entire human society.

> > > All human beings are subject to its laws, just as we are

subject

> to

> > > the laws of nature.

> > >

> > > > ... if the only truth for you is the social evolution

> > > > you dont need to describe it as a chakra...

> > >

> > > But it is !!

> > > It is a chakra. It goes thru several phases, just as one

person's

> > > life goes through several phases, like brahramacharya, grihast,

> etc.

> > > What makes you think that evolution is one constant linear

path.

> It

> > > is a more like "long waves".

> > > So is our thought process, our religion, philosophy, etc.

> > > The evolution of human thought mirrors the evolution of society.

> > >

> > > > Spiritual experiences as a result of sadhana are not

> > imaginations.

> > >

> > > I was not talking about "spiritual experiences". In response to

> the

> > > original message (which was about chakras of life), I said that

> the

> > > only real chakra is that of social evolution.

> > > Other chakras, like those of thought, religion, etc. are

mirrors

> of

> > > social evolution and exist only as ideas, in the idealistic

realm.

> > > Not in the real realm of life.

> > >

> > > > They are states of higher consiousness and everyone can

> > > experience

> > > > them, provided one meditates. So the only way to find out if

> > > > something is true or not, is to try it and practice it and

see

> > for

> > > > onesself.

> > >

> > > I am not denying the benefits of meditation and concentration.

> > > Meditation helps achieve peace with oneself.

> > > However, meditation is individualistic in nature.

> > > That was my other point about religion being inward-looking.

> > > Of coure, meditation has nothing to do with religion.

> > > There are several people who are very good at the art of

> > meditation,

> > > but are not necessarily religious.

> > > Similarly, there are people who are very religious (or rather

> > > ritualistic), but do not meditate.

> > > Doesn't make them any better or worse.

> > >

> > > That is why it is individualistic in nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...