SYs led to falsely belief supraconscious Kash, Arwin and Lalita are possessed by evil spirits

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

Ever since 1993 rank and file SYs have been led to believe by

leaders, and recently by certain WCASY members, that we are a family

of " supraconscious " individuals. The more gentler and compassionate

collective way has always been to murmur and label Kash, Arwin and

Lalita as possessed or overcome by evil spirits.

 

It was ex-world leader Yogi Mahajan who began the Inquisytion a

decade ago after discovering that Kash was able to effortlessly have

daily audience with the Adi Shakti whenever he meditated. Kash was

judged to be supraconscious and in Yogi Mahajan's opinion a danger

to the children studying at Dharamsala. Thus i also thought

" supraconscious " was akin to being possessed by some demonic force,

which Yogi Mahajan used as a legitimate reason to justify that

extreme measure in expelling Kash in order to protect other kids.

 

Today, due to an overnight email containing the dreaded 14-letter

" supraconscious " regarded by many SYs to mean demonic possession,

i went and checked its meaning. i have to agree with the respected

opinion of WCASY and SYs that Kash, Arwin and Lalita are indeed

supraconscious.

 

jagbir

 

 

 

Supraconscious

New Age Spiritual Dictionary on Supraconscious

 

supraconscious: (psychosynthesis) Autonomous realm from which higher

impulses originate

 

Supraconscious: Hindu - Hinduism Dictionary on Samadhi

 

samadhi: (Sanskrit) " Enstasy, " which means " standing within one's

Self. " " Sameness; contemplation; union, wholeness; completion,

accomplishment. "

 

Samadhi is the state of true yoga, in which the meditator and the

object of meditation are one. Samadhi is of two levels. The first is

savikalpa samadhi ( " enstasy with form or seed " ), identification or

oneness with the essence of an object.

 

Its highest form is the realization of the primal substratum or pure

consciousness, Satchidananda. The second is nirvikalpa samadhi

( " enstasy without form or seed " ), identification with the Self, in

which all modes of consciousness are transcended and Absolute

Reality, Parasiva, beyond time, form and space, is experienced. This

brings in its aftermath a complete transformation of consciousness.

In Classical Yoga, nirvikalpa samadhi is known as asamprajnata

samadhi, " supraconscious enstasy " - samadhi, or beingness, without

thought or cognition, prajna. Savikalpa samadhi is also called

samprajnata samadhi, " conscious enstasy. "

 

(Note that samadhi differs from samyama - the continuous meditation

on a single subject or mystic key [such as a chakra] to gain

revelation on a particular subject or area of consciousness. As

explained by Patanjali, samyama consists of dharana, dhyana and

samadhi.)

 

See: enstasy, kundalini, Parasiva, raja yoga, samarasa,

Satchidananda, Self Realization, trance, enlightenment.

 

 

Supraconscious: Spiritual Yoga Dictionary IV on Samadhi

 

Samadhi:

 

Samadhi ( " putting together " ): the ecstatic or unitive state in which

the meditator becomes one with the object of meditation, the eighth

and final limb (anga) of Patanjali's eightfold path; there are many

types of samadhi, the most significant distinction being between

samprajnata (conscious) and asamprajnata (supraconscious) ecstasy;

only the latter leads to the dissolution of the karmic factors deep

within the mind; beyond both types of ecstasy is enlightenment,

which is also sometimes called sahaja-samadhi or the condition

of " natural " or " spontaneous " ecstasy, where there is perfect

continuity of superconscious throughout waking, dreaming, and

sleeping

 

Supraconscious: New Age Spiritual Dictionary on Supraconscious

http://www.experiencefestival.com/supraconscious

 

--------------------------

 

 

Pitirim A. Sorokin and Paul Tillich in dialogue

 

By Mary Montgomery-Clifford

(July 1, 2003)

 

In the following column, the reader is asked to put on a bit of a

theological hat. Mary Montgomery Clifford, who has appeared

previously in this column, presents her unfolding ideas on unlimited

love in the context of the work of theologian Pitirim A. Sorokin and

altruism scholar Paul Tillich. Montgomery-Clifford is working on a

doctoral degree in this area at Chicago Theological Seminary.

- Stephen G. Post

 

The starting point for my doctoral research on unlimited love is an

in-depth study and comparison of Pitirim A. Sorokin, the

acknowledged pioneer in the scientific study of altruism, and Paul

Tillich, one of the greatest theologians of the 20th century. This

simultaneous study is rather like experiencing the point and

counterpoint nuances of a cantata by Johann Sebastian Bach. A

comparison of Tillich and Sorokin reveals numerous parallels, many

of which are profound. These parallels contain both similarities and

differences. When correlated using methods reminiscent of the

integral knowledge methods employed by Sorokin, these similarities

and differences act as point and counterpoint to one another. Like a

Bach cantata, therefore, the Tillich/Sorokin parallels play off each

other in a grand design that is strengthened by their interaction.

 

My study of Tillich and Sorokin begins with a side-by-side analysis

of Systematic Theology, Volumes One, Two and Three by Tillich and

The Ways and Power of Love: Types, Factors, and Techniques of Moral

Transformation by Sorokin. Only a few of the Tillich/Sorokin

parallels contained in these works can be touched upon in this short

article. However, the examples will serve like the tip of an iceberg

to hint at a much grander and more significant structure.

 

To begin with, the parallels between the lives of Tillich and

Sorokin are striking. Both lived for 79 years within the same

approximate time period (Tillich: 1886-1965 and Sorokin: 1889-1968).

Both experienced a depth of religious training during childhood. The

thought processes of both men were formed to a great extent by

traumatic war and conflict-related experiences in their native

lands. Both Tillich and Sorokin escaped the oppression in their

native lands by immigrating to the United States. In the United

States, both stood out as leaders in their respective fields. Both

taught at Harvard University and published numerous books and

papers.

 

The similarities in terms of thought process and method are also

evident. Both Tillich and Sorokin, for example, issued challenges to

established authority. Throughout his Systematic Theology, Tillich

offers up critical challenges to established institutions and

scholarship, including religious, psychological, philosophical and

political structures. Sorokin challenged the narrow and technocratic

aspects of sociology, which he felt was captive to small fragments

of data while lacking in any larger systematic, cultural-historical

framework. Sorokin's challenge was grounded in the Russian tradition

of integral knowledge, a methodology that brought together religion,

psychology, ontology, cosmology, ethics, metaphysics, sociology and

biology. It was this methodology that led him to read and value

thinkers like Tillich, whom he quotes twice in the first chapter of

The Ways and Power of Love.

 

This reference reveals another similarity. For both men, love is an

ontological concept. Sorokin, for example, underscores the

importance of the ontological/love connection by quoting from

Tillich's The Protestant Era: " Love is basically not an emotional

but an ontological power, it is the essence of life itself, namely

the dynamic reunion of that which is separated. "

 

As a theologian, Tillich explores God as the ground of being

(essence of life itself) in relation to love, equating love as the

dynamic power that forms the connection with God and Being itself.

As a scientist, Sorokin explores the relationship between love and

God through a study of those like Jesus, Al Hallaj and Gandhi, whom

he considers apostles of love. His observations lead to a hypothesis

that parallels Tillich's. Such perfect love, he postulates, can be

best explained by an inflow of love from a higher source that far

exceeds that of human beings: " God, " " the Godhead, " " the soul of the

universe, " " supraconscious " and the like.

 

Both scientist and theologian independently come to the conclusion

that a special state is integral to the experience of genuine love.

For Tillich, that state is ecstasy, which occurs " only if the mind

is grasped by the mystery, namely, by the ground of being and

meaning. " Sorokin suggests a similar state when he points out that

scientific findings on the positive effects of altruism have not

succeeded in making overall human behavior more altruistic. He

concludes that something else must be needed and that the " something

else " may be " moments of immersion into supraconscious meditation

and creativity. "

 

The parallel points of difference in Tillich and Sorokin often serve

to complement rather than negate. For example, Tillich's Lutheran

and Protestant grounding led him to basically devalue the roles of

both saints and rituals. Tillich warns of the demonic danger of

saints who may fall prey to hubris, and he tends to view rituals as

exercises in superstition. The warnings are valuable but so is

Sorokin's enthusiastic study of saints and rituals. Sorokin's

research emphasizes the altruistic lessons that can be learned from

saints and the altruism-enhancing value of rituals and techniques

that increase connections to God or the supraconscious.

 

Complementary differences also give balance to the idea of attaining

altruism within the context of finite human existence. Both Tillich

and Sorokin recognize the ability of humans to achieve supreme love

through direct participation in the ground of being or the

supraconscious. However, Sorokin does not recognize that ecstatic

moments of direct participation are available to all. " It goes

without saying, " he states, " that these peaks of supraconscious

meditation and spirituality are reached only by the few `anointed'

and `chosen.' " Tillich acts as an important counterpoint here. He

recognizes that ecstatic connections with the divine are fragmentary

because existence within finitude is itself fragmentary. These

fragmentary experiences, nonetheless, are real, important and

accessible to all. Because of Tillich's insight, a number of the

important techniques described by Sorokin in The Ways and Power of

Love are made more accessible.

 

The parallel similarities in the works of Tillich and Sorokin

contribute to the bridge that is beginning to span the gap between

science and theology. Even more important is the contribution that

the counterpoint of Tillich and Sorokin's complementary differences

can make to current scientific and theological research and

scholarship in the field of unlimited love.

 

Mary Montgomery-Clifford is a doctoral student at Chicago

Theological Seminary. She focuses on unlimited love and the other-

regarding virtues.

 

Pitirim A. Sorokin and Paul Tillich in dialogue

http://www.stnews.org/Altruism-1227.htm

 

 

 

--------------------------

 

Chapter 9: Jesus and the Unconscious

 

We saw that for Jung Jesus disappeared under the weight of the

constellated archetypes. He became a carrier of the self and his own

personality was obscured. This is too limited a perspective for any

genuine Christian-Jungian conversation, for there is no room for

philosophy or faith and theology to make their contributions. What I

would like to do is to take another approach that I hope will

illustrate the interactive approach that I have been advocating all

along. But it will be just a sketch rather than a full blown

Christology profiting from the insights drawn from Jung's psychology.

 

Jacques Maritain, as we saw previously, developed the notion of a

spiritual unconscious, and towards the end of his life, when he was

in his eighties, he applied this idea to the Christology of Thomas

Aquinas and eventually wrote one of his last books, On the Grace and

Humanity of Jesus. St. Thomas, basing himself on texts like one in

the Gospel according to St. John that declared Jesus was the only

begotten of the Father full of grace and truth, had come to the

conclusion that the grace that was in Jesus' human nature in virtue

of it being the humanity of the Word, the second person of the

Trinity, had a fullness that could not increase. (p. 50) But

Maritain, devoted Thomist though he was, felt that this position was

too unilateral and undeveloped, for what did St. Luke mean when he

wrote that Jesus " grew in wisdom, in age, and in grace " ? And this

problem was no mere scholastic quibble, but involves the very way in

which we think about Jesus and relate to him. If Jesus was truly

God, was he always conscious of this fact? Dazzled by the sublimity

of the union of the human nature with the divine, and limited by a

view of human personality that tended to equate it with ego

consciousness, theologians imagined that the humanity of Jesus and

hence his ego-consciousness were filled with grace and the vision of

God. When this tendency was carried to an extreme we arrive back at

the apocryphal Gospels in which the child Jesus was aware of his

divine prerogatives and stood on his divine dignity against the

mishaps of childhood by punishing those who dared to offend him. In

short, the fact of the Incarnation inclines us to imagine that Jesus

always had a consciousness flooded with divine light. But if we

accept this approach too uncritically his humanity is diminished and

he is, as Maritain put it, a " god disguised " and not truly a man.

 

But what happens if we take the opposite course? Then we see Jesus

as a man who had no awareness of the fact that he was God, as if the

most central fact of his personality - literally, his very

personality in strict dogmatic terms -was unknown to him. Then he is

truly a man but he is close to being only a man. How could he

actually be the Word of God and not know it?

 

This is the dilemma which Maritain sets out to solve, and the way he

proceeds is highly instructive. Maritain was no real fan of depth

psychology as he knew it, which was primarily in its Freudian form.

It was wielded much too reductively and with the unconscious

identified with what he later called the deaf or instinctive

unconscious in the first decades of the century for him to be

comfortable with it. Nor do I think he had much personal experience

of its efficacy or a sense of the , wider philosophical implications

of Jung's later formulations. Yet he realized that the psychological

discovery of the unconscious was one of the greatest advances of our

age, and he reflected upon it as a philosopher. This reflection bore

fruit in his description of the preconscious or unconscious of the

spirit. Thus a psychological discovery is transformed into a

philosophical instrument which is then applied to the revealed truth

of the Incarnation.

 

Once we have this instrument our dilemma begins to look more

approachable. The human personality of Jesus is not limited to ego

consciousness with the result that we are forced to choose either

that Jesus was aware, or he was unaware of his divinity, or he was

filled with grace, or was not. Instead, Maritain distinguishes in

the humanity of Jesus between a " supraconscious of the spirit

divinized by the Beatific Vision " (p. 55) and a human consciousness

that embraces the ego, the infraconscious and the normal spiritual

unconscious. This divinized supraconscious is unique to Christ and

is not to be identified with the spiritual unconscious we all

possess. Rather it is as if the deepest center or roots of Jesus'

human soul, his spiritual unconscious, is transformed and elevated

by becoming the humanity of the Word. This supraconscious escapes

Jesus' normal consciousness, not because it is infraconscious but

because of its excessive brilliance:

 

" Imagine that I am in a cellar and I am reading there a book by the

light of a candle. To my left, beyond the circle of light of my

candle, there is the darkness of the cellar, and if I place my book

there I cannot distinguish anything in it, - this is for the

infraconscious. And to my right there is a ray of the midday sun

which, passing through a window and falling on the surface of some

object in the cellar, makes there a zone of dazzling light. If I

transfer my book there I can absolutely not read anything there

either, I am dazzled by a brightness disproportionate to the

strength of my eyes. This is for the divinized supraconscious. " (p.

55, note 8)

 

Jesus' consciousness exists in two different states. In his

divinized supraconsciousness he was aware of his divine identity and

he had a fullness of grace. But in what Maritain called

his " terrestrial " or " crepuscular " consciousness into which the

higher supraconceptual knowledge could not enter as such, he grew in

age and in wisdom and in grace. This does not mean for Maritain that

the " unconscious " of the divinized humanity of Jesus had no

communication whatsoever with his human consciousness; although

there was a " certain incommunicability " the separation between the

two was a " translucid partition " which Jesus in his human

consciousness could cross, but his supraconsciousness could only

partially enter into a human consciousness founded on the working of

the discursive mind. It is not a question of two ego

consciousnesses, but one ego-awareness surrounded by

various " unconscious " dimensions, and the divinized unconscious has

more right to the title of the center of the soul than the ego

itself. Maritain goes on to work out in considerable d tail and with

appropriate theological nuances the relationship between these two

states of consciousness, but his basic statement of the principle is

enough for our purposes. Such an approach will allow us to begin to

see how Jesus could feel the agony of abandonment if the

supraconsciousness in which he was united to the Father became

inaccessible to him at the time of the Passion. And there is no need

to make the child Jesus in his child consciousness have all sorts of

human knowledge so that his life with Mary and Joseph would be more

a charade than a true time of learning. While the different states

of consciousness in Jesus represent a unique case, we can find

certain analogies in the form of " examples from below " among which

Maritain cites Fr. Surin, the troubled French contemplative of the

17th century, " whose intellect found itself at once under a state of

mystical union that was most lofty and under a state of

psychosis... " (p. 80) With this example we have rejoined the

reflections of the previous chapter on how the archetypal psyche can

influence the spiritual life of the individual and even have an

impact on the development of dogma.

 

In the case of Jesus, however, the fruits of psychology are brought

into theology itself in order to help us explore the inner awareness

of Jesus. Maritain has opened up a way for us by which to tackle one

of the central questions of Christology, and if instead of

Maritain's view of the unconscious of the psychologists we

substitute Jung's psychoid unconscious, then our task will become

both easier and richer. Instead of trying to replace dogma with the

world of the archetypes, it is within the humanity of Jesus that the

Trinity and the archetypal psyche meet. The more we understand

Jung's psychoid unconscious the more we can pose questions of the

greatest interest for understanding the Incarnation. Let's explore

two possibilities.

 

The first centers around the human soul or form and its intrinsic

inclination to unity. The very nature of the human soul moves us

toward wholeness which happens within and without and on different

ontological levels. On the psychological plane, this quest for

wholeness expresses itself within in the process of individuation

and the variety of different types without. On a metaphysical level,

the very " weakness " of the human form is at the heart of its

multiplicity, and its self -realization demands matter and space and

time all within the context of the human community. But what will

happen if the human form becomes the human soul of a divine person?

It will be, by that very fact, elevated and transformed in its

depths which Maritain called the superconscious of the spirit, the

light and gravitational pull of which will effect the rest of Jesus'

psyche. The natural urge towards unity that the soul possesses will

be intensified. Jesus in some mysterious way will become the new

center of humanity with his very humanity becoming the connatural

instrument by which we are attracted to God. His divinized

supraconscious will become the model for our own inner

transformation and contemplation. If in our first parents the unity

of the human race existed in embryo, a unity that was not only of a

natural order but one of grace as well, then in Jesus this unity is

reestablished. Then we look to Jesus to see what we ought to become,

and any examination of his inner personality and its dimensions of

infraconscious, preconscious and divinized supraconscious will find

its counterparts by participation in us.

 

This brings us to our second consideration. If Jesus was truly human

what was his personality like? Was he a certain body and

psychological type? And if he was a certain type did he have a

fourth function? And if he had a fourth function did it have the

inferior character that we are so used to or must we make a

distinction between inferiority and lack of development? Did

original sin impose on us a certain lack of integration that goes

beyond the scope of normal development so that Jesus could develop

without the negative qualities and the outbursts we associate with

the fourth function?

 

How did Jesus experience the process of individuation? What would

his dream life be like? What symbols swirled through his unconscious

under the attraction of the divinized center of his soul? If his

human soul reached a new intensity because of its elevation as the

humanity of the Word, then would it have been the center of more

powerful synchronistic events? Could Jung's notion of synchronicity

undergo philosophical reflection and become an instrument for

exploring the kinds of knowledge that Jesus had? All these

suggestions - and they are only suggestions - are but the beginning

of a process that would happen if Jung's psychology were applied to

the study of the humanity of Jesus. Every major element could be a

stimulus to the development of a renewed philosophy of nature which

in turn could find a properly theological application. And one of

the more promising fields for such an interactive approach is the

Christian interior life which mirrors the life of Jesus.

 

Chapter 9: Jesus and the Unconscious

http://www.innerexplorations.com/catjc/jc9.htm

 

 

 

---------------------------

 

Spirit of Angels

 

Literally " messengers " , angels may be anywhere the spirit force

moves. Angels are messengers who must be heard in their own

language. As messengers in the sheerest meaning of the word, angels

may come from any realm of earth or cosmos. Angels may be visible or

invisible but all angels bear a message. The most important thing

for those who converse or wish to converse with angels is the

ability to hear and understand their messages.

 

 

THE PLACES OF ANGELS

 

The first power was placed in the four corners of the world, the

four cardinal directions or the four primary forces of the world.

These four states correspond to four elements of all existence in

heaven and earth:

 

 

Conscious

 

The conscious is all that one knows and recognizes with awareness.

It perceives and recognizes the elements of existence and copes with

survival issues. The driving energy of the conscious mind rises from

an unseen scheme of primal instinct and soul desire just beyond its

vision. The conscious mind expands its periphery by recognizing the

unseen power that motivates it. " There is no consciousness without

discrimination of opposites. This is the paternal principle, the

Logos, which eternally struggles to extricate itself from the primal

warmth and primal darkness of the material womb; in a word, from

unconsciousness. Therefore its first creative act of liberation is

matricide... Nothing can exist without its opposite; the two were

one in the beginning and will be one again in the end. Consciousness

can only exist through continual recognition of the unconscious,

just as everything that lives must pass through many deaths. " *

 

 

Unconscious

 

This reservoir of untapped information lies just beyond the grasp of

the conscious mind, compelling the conscious by its invisibility.

The unconscious takes its force from two fundamental aspects. The

first is comprised of those unconscious elements entirely personal

to the individual, relating to the unique experience of the

personality and soul. The other element is the inborn, genetic

images called the collective unconscious by Jung. " I have chosen the

term 'collective' because this part of the unconscious is not

personal but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has

contents and modes of behavior that are more or less the same

everywhere and in all individuals. It is, in other words, identical

in all men and thus constitutes a common psychic substrate of a

suprapersonal nature which is present in every one of us... Normally

the unconscious collaborates with the conscious without friction or

disturbance, so that one is not even aware of its existence. But

when an individual or a social group deviates too far from their

instinctual foundations, they then experience the full impact of

unconscious forces. The collaboration of the unconscious is

intelligent and purposive, and even when its acts in opposition to

consciousness its expression is still compensatory in an intelligent

way, as if it were trying to restore the lost balance. " (The

Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious, C.G. Jung)

 

 

Superconscious

 

The " I Am That I Am " that transcends personality from lifetime to

lifetime is the superconscious. It exists beyond the personality

identity of the conscious and the genetically inborn collective

unconscious. As Jung suggested, the superconscious is what the Hindu

called the " higher " conscious. It communicates in synchronicity and

intuition and is comprised of soul memory and past-life experiences.

The " I Am That I Am " of the superconscious is the soul that

transcends lifetimes. Jung did not postulate the existence of a soul

beyond a single lifetime as a scientific fact, although his

identification of the collective unconscious is unparalleled. Much

research has proven the existence of the soul beyond a single

lifetime, notably Raymond Moody's research in Near Death Experiences

and the success of Brian Weiss' research into past-life therapies.

Head of the Department of Psychiatry at Mt. Sinai Hospital in Miami

Beach, Florida, Weiss' premier past-life therapy is chronicled in

Many Lives Many Masters.

 

 

Supraconscious

 

The supraconscious is the aspect of pure spirit that transcends all

limits of identification from which existence on any level takes its

form. The supraconscious is the undifferentiated godhead and the

essential character of unconditional love and union.

 

Spirit of Angels

http://www.timestar.org/angel.htm

 

--------------------------

 

 

Question 1

You said, " Do you really know what you meant when you said 'tap into

cosmic love and wisdom'? Many people, especially those who have read

much but have practised little, often use phrases like this without

fully realizing their true meaning. "

 

I can easily answer your question: Yes, I know what I meant. I mean

that I want to be able to fully use the entire range of my conscious

mind. In every single task, I attempt to make full use of my

thoughts, feelings and then act. To me that is a life time task, and

actually I even believe that it is a very simple task! All it takes

is that I am attentive -- open minded and curious, like a baby --

that I actually see, hear, feel, taste and smell all there is. Maybe

it is the sum of the five senses.

Kenneth, Denmark

 

 

Answer 1

Different people from different culture and training will

understandably give different answers. Yours is a typical answer

from an educated westerner. Before I provide my answer from the

perspective of my Shaolin training, I would like to give some

comments to your answer. Needless to say, these comments are

definitely not meant to criticize or belittle your answer, as here

there is no such a thing as a right or a better answer -- it is a

matter of different perspectives. The comments are meant as sincere

pointers to help you review your answer from a different

perspective, and hopefully gain some depth from your review.

 

" I want to be able to fully use the entire range of my conscious

mind. " What about your unconscious mind, or your supraconscious

mind? Many western scientists themselves believe that the

unconscious or supraconscious constitutes 90% of your mind, the

conscious only 10%. Would you agree that tapping into the cosmos for

love and wisdom would concern more of the supraconscious than the

conscious?

 

" In every single task, I attempt to make full use of my thoughts,

feelings and then act. " Many essential life tasks, like breathing,

digestion and hormonal production, are done without thoughts,

feelings and direct actions. They are done by your unconscious.

 

" To me that is a life time task, and actually I even believe that it

is a very simple task! " Most of the simple, yet profound, tasks are

done by the unconscious. Indeed the conscious often makes things

complicated. Imagine how complicated it would be if you consciously

try to regulate your breathing to adjust to constantly changing air

temperature and chemistry. But why do you regard making full use of

your thoughts, feelings and then act (which is also to you a simple,

life time task) as taping into cosmic love and wisdom? In what ways,

for example, has eating your lunch with full thoughts and feeling,

anything to do with cosmic love and wisdom?

 

" All it takes is that I am attentive -- open minded and curious,

like a baby -- that I actually see, hear, feel, taste and smell all

there is. maybe it is the sum of the five senses " Do you mean that

when you are not attentive, such as when you are sleeping, you would

be unable, or inadequate, to tap into cosmic love and wisdom? Do you

mean that there is no cosmic love or wisdom outside your five

senses?

 

More significantly, you have not attempted to clarify what you mean

by cosmic love and wisdom. What you have explained can be applied to

tapping into cosmic hatred and ignorance, or doing mundane jobs, or

in fact to anything. What you have suggested is being attentive, in

thoughts and feelings, in whatever you do, but you have not

explained why or how this will lead to cosmic love and wisdom.

 

If I use the phrase " tapping into cosmic love and wisdom " , generally

my meaning is as follows. Cosmic love is to be distinguished from

personal love, and cosmic wisdom from worldly wisdom. If I go hungry

so that my child could eat, it is a manifestation of personal love.

Personal love is instinctive; every mother knows this very well. If

a mother gives away her child's food, even though her child is

hungry, to a stranger who needs the food more urgently, it is a

manifestation of cosmic love. Cosmic love is usually not

instinctive; it has to be acquired through cultivation.

 

All the knowledge we have gained through science and (western)

philosophy is worldly wisdom. Knowing that a molecule of water is a

compound of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen, is an

example of worldly wisdom. Thinking that if a student studies hard,

he will pass his examination well is another example.

 

Worldly wisdom is bound by a set of conditions -- a fact that many

people may not be aware, and which often causes some scientists to

be dogmatic. Water, for example, is a compound of hydrogen and

oxygen only if we use the conventional western scientific paradigm,

which constitutes a set of conditions. Ancient scientists of other

cultures, who were equally intelligent and capable but who used

different sets of conditions, described water differently.

 

Even when we use the western paradigm, but if we change the

conditions slightly, such as studying the water under an electron

microscope instead of using electroanalysis, water would no longer

be a compound of hydrogen and oxygen but a mass of distantly spread

sub-atomic particles. Thinking out conditions why studying hard does

not definitely enable a student to pass his examination well, is

quite easy.

 

Cosmic wisdom is transcendental, i.e. it transcends sets of

conditions, and at the highest level is not bound by any conditions.

Cosmic wisdom is almost always obtained by great masters from direct

experience at heightened level of consciousness. Lesser minds learn

such cosmic wisdom from the masters. When Jesus said that those who

believe in him and follow his teaching, will go to heaven, Jesus was

generously sharing some great cosmic wisdom.

 

I am not a Christian, and therefore do not follow a set of

conditions normally applied to Christians, yet from my Shaolin

training, which has nothing to do with Christianity directly, I can

vouch with conviction that Jesus was stating a great cosmic truth.

Indeed, Jesus is a shining example of cosmic love and cosmic wisdom.

 

How does one tap into cosmic love and cosmic wisdom? Through

meditation, which is the training of mind to bring it to heightened

levels of consciousness. In Shaolin terminology, it is entering Zen.

Hence, meditation is not just sitting cross-legged, and Zen is not

just speaking in riddles. Basically, meditation or Zen is mind

training, and has to be properly learnt from a master -- not read

from a book and then teach others.

 

The most fundamental way to meditation or Zen is sitting in a lotus

position thinking and feeling nothing. It is a most simple and

profound task. It is difficult for those not initiated into Zen to

appreciate, or even imagine, how such an apparently simple task can

help the practitioner tap into the cosmos. On the negative side, it

is easy for many people, especially in the West where traditional

Zen training is rare but where Zen is usually studied (as

distinguished from practised) from books, to learn it superficially

and quickly teach others, thereby wasting their own and others'

time, and sometimes bringing adverse effects.

 

In the Shaolin training, Zen is also attained through kungfu and chi

kung. In fact kungfu, chi kung and Zen are integrated; it is in the

much diluted kungfu and chi kung which are wide-spread today, that

the energy and mind aspects are missing. When you, for example,

perform a kungfu movement and directly experience (not merely recall

having read) your energy flowing with your movement, or when you

perform a chi kung movement and directly experience your mind (or

spirit) merging into the universal mind, you are tapping into the

cosmos.

 

But there are other forms of meditation which you can practise on

your own. One such form is prayer. If you pray sincerely and deeply,

especially if you do so habitually, you can raise your mind to

heightened levels of consciousness, and tap into cosmic love.

Another good example is chanting scriptures, sutras or mantras. At

first you may not understand what you chant, but when your mind has

reached heightened levels of consciousness through devoted chanting,

glimpses of cosmic wisdom will flash into you.

 

http://wongkk.com/answers/ans99b/oct99-3.html