Guest guest Posted July 25, 2004 Report Share Posted July 25, 2004 Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can anyone tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the life force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a preliminary step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to what exactly he meant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Nisargadatta , eclectic_mike wrote: > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can anyone > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the life > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a preliminary > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to what > exactly he meant Wasn't he just trying to say: " May the Force be with you " ? :-) /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Hi, > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can anyone > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the life > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a preliminary > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to what > exactly he meant I have not come across this before. Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in which it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? Kind Regards, Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana, the vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without form which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. There are a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate Medicine. Scott Andersen <sga_email wrote: Hi, > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can anyone > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the life > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a preliminary > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to what > exactly he meant I have not come across this before. Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in which it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? Kind Regards, Scott. ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Hi, Thanks for finding this. I have absolutely no idea why Nisargardatta has said to *worship* prana or why he would say it?? Prana, vital force, etc can be charged or influenced by mind. Breath is not breath, space is not space. But if you are going to *worship* prana, you might well be advised to *worship* any God or divinity of your choosing. What then are the advantages of worshipping prana which is a more more abstract symbol for divinity than a personal God? As from the Avadhuta Gita, you cannot salute the formless being who fills all this with his self and also fills the self with his self. But the other part is wonderful, this sentence; It is this life forces's ( prana ) **conscious presence without form which has been called God** Kind Regards, Scott. Michael Mahlman <eclectic_mike wrote: " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana, the vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without form which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. There are a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate Medicine. Scott Andersen <sga_email wrote: Hi, > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can anyone > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the life > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a preliminary > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to what > exactly he meant I have not come across this before. Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in which it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? Kind Regards, Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Scott Andersen " <sga_email> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for finding this. > > I have absolutely no idea why Nisargardatta has said to *worship* > prana or why he would say it?? > > Prana, vital force, etc can be charged or influenced by mind. > Breath is not breath, space is not space. > > But if you are going to *worship* prana, you might well be advised to > *worship* any God or divinity of your choosing. > > What then are the advantages of worshipping prana which is a more > more abstract symbol for divinity than a personal God? > > As from the Avadhuta Gita, you cannot salute the formless being who > fills all this with his self and also fills the self with his self. > > But the other part is wonderful, this sentence; > > It is this life forces's ( prana ) **conscious presence without form > which has been called God** > > Kind Regards, > > Scott. I think prana is like Coca Cola. Someone asks you, " can you tell me what Coca Cola tastes like? " - then you can give her all kinds of explanations, even great theories that explains exactly how Coca Cola tastes like. But she has to *drink* Coca Cola herself to *know* the taste of Coca Cola, and then she will realize that no descriptions on earth will be able to describe what Coca Cola tastes like. In a similar way, Nisargadatta says that you have to worship prana in order to understand it, mere descriptions of prana will not make you understand it; you have to *drink* prana yourself in order to understand it, and then you will worship prana. This means that the worship of prana becomes real when you drink prana yourself, and until then, the worship will only be a kind of belief/faith. /AL > > > Michael Mahlman <eclectic_mike> wrote: > " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana, the > vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without form > which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. There are > a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate Medicine. > > Scott Andersen <sga_email> wrote: > Hi, > > > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can > anyone > > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the life > > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a > preliminary > > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to > what > > exactly he meant > > I have not come across this before. > > Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for > sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in which > it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? > > Kind Regards, > > Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Hi again, > > I think prana is like Coca Cola. Someone asks you, " can you tell me > what Coca Cola tastes like? " - then you can give her all kinds of > explanations, even great theories that explains exactly how Coca Cola > tastes like. But she has to *drink* Coca Cola herself to *know* the > taste of Coca Cola, and then she will realize that no descriptions on > earth will be able to describe what Coca Cola tastes like> Prana is something that every being inhales consciously or unconsciously whether they realize it or not. When it is done consciously prana is imbued with influence etc. >In a > similar way, Nisargadatta says that you have to worship prana in > order to understand it> Prana is not something that you have to understand with knowledge, by thinking *what* is prana, you change it with any definition. The only way that you can ''*know*'' what prana is is to experiment with it consciously, by doing breathing exercises etc. mere descriptions of prana will not make you > understand it> Yes. you have to *drink* prana yourself in order to > understand it> Yes. <and then you will worship prana.> Doing exercises with prana to understand it is not the same as *worshipping* it. He says to *worship* prana. Why *worship* prana as opposed to any God? Kind Regards, Scott. This means that the > worship of prana becomes real when you drink prana yourself, and > until then, the worship will only be a kind of belief/faith. > > Michael Mahlman <eclectic_mike> wrote: > > " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana, the > > vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without > form > > which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. There > are > > a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate Medicine. > > > > Scott Andersen <sga_email> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can > > anyone > > > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the > life > > > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a > > preliminary > > > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to > > what > > > exactly he meant > > > > I have not come across this before. > > > > Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for > > sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in > which > > it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Scott Andersen " <sga_email> wrote: > > Hi again, > > > > > I think prana is like Coca Cola. Someone asks you, " can you tell me > > what Coca Cola tastes like? " - then you can give her all kinds of > > explanations, even great theories that explains exactly how Coca > Cola > > tastes like. But she has to *drink* Coca Cola herself to *know* the > > taste of Coca Cola, and then she will realize that no descriptions > on > > earth will be able to describe what Coca Cola tastes like> > > > Prana is something that every being inhales consciously or > unconsciously whether they realize it or not. > > When it is done consciously prana is imbued with influence etc. > > > >In a > > similar way, Nisargadatta says that you have to worship prana in > > order to understand it> > > > Prana is not something that you have to understand with knowledge, by > thinking *what* is prana, you change it with any definition. > > The only way that you can ''*know*'' what prana is is to experiment > with it consciously, by doing breathing exercises etc. > > > mere descriptions of prana will not make you > > understand it> > > Yes. > > > you have to *drink* prana yourself in order to > > understand it> > > Yes. > > > <and then you will worship prana.> > > > Doing exercises with prana to understand it is not the same as > *worshipping* it. > > He says to *worship* prana. > > Why *worship* prana as opposed to any God? I think Nisargadatta was describing a state here, and not prescribing a method for reaching that state, that worshipping prana will be there when prana is understood: " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana " . That means that the worship comes with the understanding of prana as a natural consequence, rather than prana being a result of some kind of worship. /AL > > > Kind Regards, > > Scott. > > > > This means that the > > worship of prana becomes real when you drink prana yourself, and > > until then, the worship will only be a kind of belief/faith. > > > Michael Mahlman <eclectic_mike> wrote: > > > " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana, > the > > > vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without > > form > > > which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. There > > are > > > a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate Medicine. > > > > > > Scott Andersen <sga_email> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can > > > anyone > > > > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the > > life > > > > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a > > > preliminary > > > > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as to > > > what > > > > exactly he meant > > > > > > I have not come across this before. > > > > > > Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for > > > sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in > > which > > > it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Hi again, > > Why *worship* prana as opposed to any God? > > I think Nisargadatta was describing a state here, and not prescribing > a method for reaching that state> Yes, I don't think that he meant that worship be used as a *method* to reach a state, but why did he suggest that someone worship prana, *in order to understand*? >that worshipping prana will be > there when prana is understood: " in order to really understand you > have to worship that prana " . I disagree I think it says the opposite, *in order* to really understand...you must worship that prana' Why? > prana as opposed to anything else? >That means that the worship comes with > the understanding of prana as a natural consequence Not from the quote as I read it; " *in order to really understand* you *have to worship that prana* the vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without form which has been called God. " I really have no idea what he said this for, why he said it. I'm going to send it to a few other people who are more familiar with Nisargardatta than I am and see what they might think. I'll let you know also any ideas they might have. Kind Regards, Scott. > /AL > > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Scott. > > > > > > > > This means that the > > > worship of prana becomes real when you drink prana yourself, and > > > until then, the worship will only be a kind of belief/faith. > > > > Michael Mahlman <eclectic_mike> wrote: > > > > " in order to really understand you have to worship that prana, > > the > > > > vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence > without > > > form > > > > which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. > There > > > are > > > > a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate > Medicine. > > > > > > > > Scott Andersen <sga_email> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but can > > > > anyone > > > > > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or the > > > life > > > > > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a > > > > preliminary > > > > > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost as > to > > > > what > > > > > exactly he meant > > > > > > > > I have not come across this before. > > > > > > > > Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for > > > > sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context in > > > which > > > > it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? > > > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > > > Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Scott Andersen " <sga_email> wrote: > > Hi again, > > > > Why *worship* prana as opposed to any God? > > > > I think Nisargadatta was describing a state here, and not > prescribing > > a method for reaching that state> > > > Yes, I don't think that he meant that worship be used as a *method* > to reach a state, but why did he suggest that someone worship prana, > *in order to understand*? > > > >that worshipping prana will be > > there when prana is understood: " in order to really understand you > > have to worship that prana " . > > > I disagree I think it says the opposite, *in order* to really > understand...you must worship that prana' > > Why? > prana as opposed to anything else? Nisargadatta's description was: Give up all questions except one: 'Who am I?' So maybe we should give up this question, and see what happens. :-) > > > >That means that the worship comes with > > the understanding of prana as a natural consequence > > > Not from the quote as I read it; > > " *in order to really understand* you *have to worship that prana* > the vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence without > form which has been called God. " > > I really have no idea what he said this for, why he said it. > > I'm going to send it to a few other people who are more familiar with > Nisargardatta than I am and see what they might think. > > I'll let you know also any ideas they might have. > > Kind Regards, > > Scott. > We often interpret the words from sages to be description of what to do, as a form of prescriptions. But I think this is meant as a *description* of what must happen for understanding of prana to be there; there has to be a worship of prana for the understanding to happen. The sage does not mean that the seeker has to think: " My master says that I must worship prana, so I must go on worshipping prana now - Prana, Prana, Prana - You are so lovely in Thy Divine form! o Prana, o Prana... " . :-) /AL > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > Scott. > > > > > > > > > > > > This means that the > > > > worship of prana becomes real when you drink prana yourself, > and > > > > until then, the worship will only be a kind of belief/faith. > > > > > Michael Mahlman <eclectic_mike> wrote: > > > > > " in order to really understand you have to worship that > prana, > > > the > > > > > vital force. It is this life forces's conscious presence > > without > > > > form > > > > > which has been called God. " Ultimate meditcidne, page 166. > > There > > > > are > > > > > a number of references to worshipping prana in Ultimate > > Medicine. > > > > > > > > > > Scott Andersen <sga_email> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > Am new to the group and its probably posted somewhere but > can > > > > > anyone > > > > > > tell me what Nisargadatta meant by " worshipping prana or > the > > > > life > > > > > > force " ? He placed a great deal of effort onto that as a > > > > > preliminary > > > > > > step before transcending the I am -- but I'm sort of lost > as > > to > > > > > what > > > > > > exactly he meant > > > > > > > > > > I have not come across this before. > > > > > > > > > > Admittedly though I have not read Nisargardattas writings for > > > > > sometime, but do you know the book it is from or the context > in > > > > which > > > > > it was written or could you post the paragraph it is from? > > > > > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Hi again > > I disagree I think it says the opposite, *in order* to really > > understand...you must worship that prana' > > > > Why? > prana as opposed to anything else? > > Nisargadatta's description was: Give up all questions except > one: 'Who am I?' If 'you' want to find out *who* you are then all thinking, *conceptualizing* and questions must stop. Even the question 'Who am I?' is only a pointer, and who asks it? The above advice is completely contradictory also. So long as there is thinking, a ME is bound, asking questions is no different. Every question, every conceptualization binds a ME. > So maybe we should give up this question, and see what happens. :-) I wasn't asking the question to find out who I am. Only to discuss this, I cannot myself see the reason for saying what he said and for using prana specifically. If you are going to give up this question in order to make use of the his advice to give up all questions in order to realize, then you must give up all questions and conceptualizations, and not just this one that you and I have been discussing. > We often interpret the words from sages to be description of what to > do, as a form of prescriptions> Yes, which most of time misleads or leads to more conceptualizing. >But I think this is meant as a > *description* of what must happen for understanding of prana to be > there; there has to be a worship of prana for the understanding to > happen> Yes, this is how I have read it also, except that he doesn't mention an understanding of prana only understanding. The sage does not mean that the seeker has to think: " My > master says that I must worship prana, so I must go on worshipping > prana now - Prana, Prana, Prana - You are so lovely in Thy Divine > form! o Prana, o Prana... " . :-) No, he doesn't mean that one should do the above! But don't you think that *worship* is an odd choice of word used in context with prana in order to understand? Kind Regards, Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Scott Andersen " <sga_email> wrote: > Hi again > > > > I disagree I think it says the opposite, *in order* to really > > > understand...you must worship that prana' > > > > > > Why? > prana as opposed to anything else? > > > > Nisargadatta's description was: Give up all questions except > > one: 'Who am I?' > > > If 'you' want to find out *who* you are then all thinking, > *conceptualizing* and questions must stop. > > Even the question 'Who am I?' is only a pointer, and who asks it? > > The above advice is completely contradictory also. > > So long as there is thinking, a ME is bound, asking questions is no > different. > > Every question, every conceptualization binds a ME. Eckhart Tolle said what I find to be an interesting statement. He said that when people become more present, when they reach a certain 'level' of the new state of consciousness, then they can simply choose to stop thinking. What a marvelous statement. Simply by choosing to become fully present without thought the thinking stops. But I think that as long as one is completely caught in the level of thinking, it is not possible to stop thinking. The choice has to come from a deeper knowing than thought. > > > > So maybe we should give up this question, and see what happens. :- ) > > > I wasn't asking the question to find out who I am. > > Only to discuss this, I cannot myself see the reason for saying what > he said and for using prana specifically. > > If you are going to give up this question in order to make use of the > his advice to give up all questions in order to realize, then you > must give up all questions and conceptualizations, and not just this > one that you and I have been discussing. Quite right! :-) > > > > We often interpret the words from sages to be description of what > to > > do, as a form of prescriptions> > > > Yes, which most of time misleads or leads to more conceptualizing. > > > >But I think this is meant as a > > *description* of what must happen for understanding of prana to be > > there; there has to be a worship of prana for the understanding to > > happen> > > > Yes, this is how I have read it also, except that he doesn't mention > an understanding of prana only understanding. Yes, understanding, not understanding of prana as I wrote. > > > The sage does not mean that the seeker has to think: " My > > master says that I must worship prana, so I must go on worshipping > > prana now - Prana, Prana, Prana - You are so lovely in Thy Divine > > form! o Prana, o Prana... " . :-) > > No, he doesn't mean that one should do the above! > > But don't you think that *worship* is an odd choice of word used in > context with prana in order to understand? Maybe worship of prana in itself can lead to understanding for some people, and it was for them this was mentioned. Or maybe he used the word worship to point to a state of immense gratitude, a state for which there are no words, but some word or combination of words had to be used. Also he could by prana mean God, or the God-force, and that worship of prana is the same as worship of God which is a form of gratitude for the All. Or maybe he was just making a confusing statement so that the intellect would go around, and around, and around until it would be exhausted so that something new could penetrate the human being. Many sages talk about a vertical dimension as the new state that will replace (complement, transcend) the ordinary horizontal dimension of thinking about past and future. /AL > > > Kind Regards, > > Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2004 Report Share Posted July 30, 2004 Hi again, > Eckhart Tolle said what I find to be an interesting statement. He > said that when people become more present, when they reach a > certain 'level' of the new state of consciousness, then they can > simply choose to stop thinking> I find it interesting when 'masters' proclaim things like *when* people reach a new stage of development or consciousness that they *can* stop thinking etc etc.. Anyone, you or I *now* with practice, can stop thought, empty mind is a *meditation practice* and not only available as a sought after lofty height of accomplishment only achievable by those who have reached a certain state. I believe advice like the above can be misleading because people believe it is more difficult than it really is, or that the capacity to have a vacant mind is only available to a select few who have 'reached a certain state'. What a marvelous statement. Simply by > choosing to become fully present without thought the thinking stops.> Yes, and anyone willing to put in the time can achieve a state of empty mind devoid of thought. > But I think that as long as one is completely caught in the level of > thinking, it is not possible to stop thinking. The choice has to come > from a deeper knowing than thought. If you wrestle with your mind to stop thinking, it will only fight the control trying to be imposed on it. Stopping thinking is about letting the mind settle of it's own accord, then the *need* for thoughts do not arise also. If you examine your thoughts first it then becomes easier to make the mind empty because you know better the nature of the thing you are trying to understand. > Maybe worship of prana in itself can lead to understanding for some > people, and it was for them this was mentioned. Or maybe he used the > word worship to point to a state of immense gratitude, a state for > which there are no words, but some word or combination of words had > to be used. Also he could by prana mean God, or the God-force, and > that worship of prana is the same as worship of God which is a form > of gratitude for the All. Or maybe he was just making a confusing > statement so that the intellect would go around, and around, and > around until it would be exhausted so that something new could > penetrate the human being. Many sages talk about a vertical dimension > as the new state that will replace (complement, transcend) the > ordinary horizontal dimension of thinking about past and future. Yes, could be any of the above, I myself am confused as to why he said it. I have posted some other material that Nisargardatta has said about prana also. Kind Regards, Scott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2004 Report Share Posted July 31, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Scott Andersen " <sga_email> wrote: > > Hi again, > > > Eckhart Tolle said what I find to be an interesting statement. He > > said that when people become more present, when they reach a > > certain 'level' of the new state of consciousness, then they can > > simply choose to stop thinking> > > I find it interesting when 'masters' proclaim things like *when* > people reach a new stage of development or consciousness that they > *can* stop thinking etc etc.. > > Anyone, you or I *now* with practice, can stop thought, empty mind is > a *meditation practice* and not only available as a sought after > lofty height of accomplishment only achievable by those who have > reached a certain state. > I believe advice like the above can be misleading because people > believe it is more difficult than it really is, or that the capacity > to have a vacant mind is only available to a select few who > have 'reached a certain state'. > > > What a marvelous statement. Simply by > > choosing to become fully present without thought the thinking > stops.> > > Yes, and anyone willing to put in the time can achieve a state of > empty mind devoid of thought. > > > > But I think that as long as one is completely caught in the level > of > > thinking, it is not possible to stop thinking. The choice has to > come > > from a deeper knowing than thought. > > If you wrestle with your mind to stop thinking, it will only fight > the control trying to be imposed on it. Stopping thinking is about > letting the mind settle of it's own accord, then the *need* for > thoughts do not arise also. > > If you examine your thoughts first it then becomes easier to make the > mind empty because you know better the nature of the thing you are > trying to understand. > > > > > Maybe worship of prana in itself can lead to understanding for some > > people, and it was for them this was mentioned. Or maybe he used > the > > word worship to point to a state of immense gratitude, a state for > > which there are no words, but some word or combination of words had > > to be used. Also he could by prana mean God, or the God-force, and > > that worship of prana is the same as worship of God which is a form > > of gratitude for the All. Or maybe he was just making a confusing > > statement so that the intellect would go around, and around, and > > around until it would be exhausted so that something new could > > penetrate the human being. Many sages talk about a vertical > dimension > > as the new state that will replace (complement, transcend) the > > ordinary horizontal dimension of thinking about past and future. > > > Yes, could be any of the above, I myself am confused as to why he > said it. > > I have posted some other material that Nisargardatta has said about > prana also. > > Kind Regards, > > Scott. In the direct contact with what is, the obstacles to freedom are revealed, and the seeker exposed. Once the clear insight of nowness comes, the obstacles begin to crumble, and the story of one's life fades away like mist before stark sunlight. That prana which has always been there now turns the stiffness into a blazing fire. Listen, somebody, please, bring me another can of Prana, that liquid Healer for mind body and my fragmented soul! :-) /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2004 Report Share Posted July 31, 2004 Hi again, <In the direct contact with what is, the obstacles to freedom are revealed, and the seeker exposed. Once the clear insight of nowness comes, the obstacles begin to crumble, and the story of one's life fades away like mist before stark sunlight. That prana which has always been there now turns the stiffness into a blazing fire. Listen, somebody, please, bring me another can of Prana, that liquid Healer for mind body and my fragmented soul! :-)> Thankyou for this Who needs William Blake? Kind Regards, Scott. ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. 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.