1998/03/29 19:34
kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #244
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 244
Today's Topics:
enlightment [ Peswani <peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net. ]
effective communication [ Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net ]
Re: enlightment [ Danijel Turina <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.te ]
Re: Dreams [ Druout <DruoutATnospamaol.com> ]
Re: What is Enlightenment? [ "frans" <fransATnospamtelebyte.nl> ]
Re: Dreams [ onarresATnospaminreach.com ]
Re: Dreams [ "Gloria Lee" <samyanaATnospamhotmail.com> ]
effective communication [ "Jan Barendrecht" <janbarenATnospamcorreo. ]
Re: chalta hai (fwd) [ Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com> ]
Re: What is Enlightenment? [ E Jason <lobsterATnospamclara.net> ]
Re: Street Lights [ "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamhotmail. ]
Re: pranayama [ "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamhotmail. ]
Re: I am that I am [ Ann Morrison Fisher <annfisherATnospamstic ]
Re: Foolproof Test For Enlightenment [ Mystress Angelique Serpent <mistres ]
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 21:35:47 +0500 (GMT+0500)
From: Peswani <peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in>
To: kundalini-l <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: enlightment
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.91.980329213358.14209A-100000ATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
GROWTH BY REPEATED ENLIGHTMENTS LEADS TO SELF-REALISATION OF ONE'S PATH TO
EITHER MOKSH OR NIRVAN.
WHAT IS ENLIGHTMENT? A RECENTLY EVOLVED HUMAN BEING FROM A POOL OF ANIMALS
OF AGE OF SAY 40 WILL HAV A MIND OF IMBECILE.THAT IS HE WILL HAVE A SMALL
EGO BODY (ASTRAL BODY). LET US SAY HE HAS THIS BODY OF ONE MILLION
KALAPAS. LET US ASSUME THAT TO TRANSCED THESE ONE MILLION KALAPAS WITH THE
HELP OF GURU TAKES ONE MINUTE.
A HIGHLY EVOLVED HUMAN BEING say of 40 AFTER REPEATED HUMAN BIRTHS LET US
SAY HAS 100 BILLION KALAPAS. THE SAME GURU WILL TAKE 100,000 MINUTES TO
TRANSCED THESE KALAPAS INTO HIS CAUSAL BODY. A DIFFICULT JOB BUT HIGHLY
REWARDING.
ENLIGHTMENT IS CLEARING OF ASTRAL BODY BY TRANSCEDING EITHER THRO SELF
EFFORT OR THRO GURU'S HELP. DURING THE PERIOD THIS ASTRAL BODY IS EMPTY,
THE PERSON WILL HAVE NO DESIRES OR EMOTIONS. HE WILL BE IN SAT-CHIT-
ANNAND BLISS. SAT- CHIT -ANNAND IS OUR TRUE NATURE, AND THIS TRUE NATURE
IS COVERED BY ASTRAL BODY WHICH FORMS THRO OUR EMOTIONS AND DESIRES.
IGNORANCE OR AVIDYA IS THE CAUSE OF EMOTIONS AND DESIRES.
IT IS POSSIBLE IN CERTAIN IDEAL CONDITION TO REMAIN DESIRELESS AND
EMOTIONLESS AND IN THIS SAT-CHIT ANNAND BLISS. HIGHER INTELLIGENT ENERGY
(GOD) TAKES CARE OF THE GROWTH OF SUCH PERSON. HE CAN REMAIN IN BLISS
ALWAYS. WHATEVER HIS SENSES COLLECT DUE TO HIS "LET GO" LIFE OR DUE TO HIS
"REMAINING IN THE PRESENT MOMENT", THIS PERSON NEVER FORMS ASTRAL BODY BUT
DIRECTLY FORMS CAUSAL BODY.
ENLIGHTMENT CAN COME AND GO.
WHAT IS SELF REALISATION? WHEN A PERSON IS GROWN UP TO AN EXTENT WHERE HE
COMES TO KNOW THE PATH THAT GOD HAS PROGRAMMED HIM FOR, HE BECOMES SELF
REALISED. SOME ARE PROGRRAMMED FOR LOVE,SOME FOR DEVOTION, SOME FOR
CREATIVE ART, FOR COMPASSION, SOME FOR MAGIC OR SIDDHIS SO ON SO FORTH.
BUT ALL PATHS END EITHER IN MOKSH OR IN NIRVAN.
MOKSH IS THE PATH OF SURRENDER SUITABLE FOR DEVOTION, LOVE ETC. THE SHAKTI
ENERGY OF SUCH PERSONS FORMS THIS UNIVERSE OF SUNS,STARS, EARTHS ETC.
NIRVAN IS THE PATH OF EGO TO CONTINUE TOWARDS OMNIPRESENCE, OMNIPOTENCE
AND OMNISCIENCE.
SHAHANSHAH
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 10:31:47 -0800
From: Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net>
To: Peswani <peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in>,
Kundalini Mailing List <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: effective communication
Message-ID: <351E9393.12B18140ATnospamtransbay.net>
Peswani,
I believe that perhaps your trouble lies in the tones you use for communication
with this list. It does not matter what you say to explain enligtenment, it matters
how you say it. An enlightened master was asked at different times "What is Mind?"
Once he answered "Mind is Buddha," the second time he answered "Mind is not Buddha."
There was no doubt given to either of his answers.
Perhaps this unintentional or caused by a language or cultural barrier but the
tone of your e-mails are very off-putting. If your e-mails no longer inflected these
tonal differences people would have a lot easier time understanding you. Here are
the underlying tones that I read in your e-mails.
Pride/Arrogance: The use of all capitals, suggest talking over somebody as opposed
to talking with somebody. The insistance that we believe in you as opposed to
stating your case simply and clearly. The phrases "I have been enlightened. If you
have not been enlightened, shut up," suggest an ego which makes communication very
difficult. People find it very difficult to communicate with people that talk in
this matter. Your special, get over it.
Self-Loathing: Whenever you talk about the impurities of the body, you talk in such
a manner that suggests you hate things about yourself. You are ending all need for
sleep. You must purify the channels. You have lost your enlightenment. In your
e-mails you seem to bounce between pride in your accomplishments and hatred of the
impure parts of you. When someone talks about the constant need to purify themselves
it normally suggests they have a poor self-image. Self-purification is a natural
process that will occur whether you feel the need to purify yourself or not. If you
feel the need to purify yourself then there is some part of yourself that you
dislike.
Self-pity: Phrases like "I AM ALONE" "IS IT SO VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND ME AND
MY ENLIGHTENMENT" These carry a connotation of self-pity to me, I am so
misunderstood. Well poor, poor Peshwani, nobody understands you. Nobody can see the
world the way you do. There are millions of misunderstood genius's out there and my
heart goes out to all of them.
Lack of a sense of humor: You may have a tremendous sense of humor in your culture.
Unfortunately you do not convey it. All enlightened masters have a wicked sense of
humor. The world is a bizarre and funny place. So lighten up!
You may not mean to convey these emotions. However, your e-mails convey them to us.
They are the reason you are so misinterpreted. I believe if you were to carefully
write and avoid transmitting these tones either intentionally or unintentionally you
will be able to communicate with everybody a lot better.
Dan M.
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 20:50:31 +0200
From: Danijel Turina <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: enlightment
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980329205031.00937100ATnospampop.tel.hr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 21:35 1998.03.29 +0500, you wrote:
>GROWTH BY REPEATED ENLIGHTMENTS LEADS TO SELF-REALISATION OF ONE'S PATH TO
>EITHER MOKSH OR NIRVAN.
Dear Shahanshah, no need for you to yell, I hear you quite well. :) Or is
your caps lock key stuck? ;))
But to talk about enlightenment. I have a pretty good idea of what you're
talking about. One purely technical question - you have much greater
theoretical knowledge on that matter than myself, that is obvious. I have a
pretty good idea that after being able to consciously function on atmic
level there is a higher level which I can feel at some times now, but it
isn't simple and that awareness takes all of my energy and focus. I have
heard of two versions - nirvanic level is one, and anupadaka (and adi after
that) is the other. Which one is true according to you? And is it the
ultimate level of union between inner and outer reality where everything is
perceived as nirvana, or is there still some higher level to attain?
-----
E-mail : sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr
Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1377
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 14:20:29 EST
From: Druout <DruoutATnospamaol.com>
To: CttlemanATnospampsbnewton.com, mistressATnospamdomin8rex.com
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Dreams
Message-ID: <7ad591a3.351e9effATnospamaol.com>
Dear John,
Your story was wonderfully evocative!
I'm fascinated though. You write about dreaming of an "encounter with a polar
bear..."
Coincidentally I dreamt of a polar bear two nights ago. At first I was
frighted of the creature (beautiful, snow white). then I overcame my fear and
pet his wonderful fur. He was quite tame!
Any dream interpreters out there??
Love, Hillary
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 22:46:26 +100
From: "frans" <fransATnospamtelebyte.nl>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: What is Enlightenment?
Message-Id: <199803292042.WAA16796ATnospamdegas.telebyte.nl>
Beloved list, this thread on enlightenment makes me think of
something. When i was 12 or so, i wondered what love would be. I was
pretty sure it was kissing. I remember dreaming, fantasysing about
romantic, slow, tender (didn't know about the french!)
kisses... Far from home, in the big city i had my first experience.
Studying philosophy, i was amazed there wasn't 100 meters of
bookshelf on love. With love pain came also. There was a time, for
years, i couldn't even use the word 'love' because, what is love?
Is love something about knowledge at all? Isn't love about
living? Somehow i never got to enlightenment...
I love you all, frans
Foto galery of k-list members:
http://www.telebyte.nl/~frans/we/
Kundalini Mailing List pages in Europe:
http://www.telebyte.nl/~frans/kundalini/
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 12:46:03 -0800
From: onarresATnospaminreach.com
To: Druout <DruoutATnospamaol.com>
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Dreams
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980329124603.006ca5bcATnospammail.inreach.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hillary and John,
Although I missed John's post regarding dreams (I was off line for awhile)
I offer the below information.
Totem animals: My first dream of a bear was when I was three years old...
believe it or not. It chased me, I eluded it, but that was not the end of
the bear. Later I found that we all have totem animals, mine's that bear.
Now it comes in as a playful one romping around in the snow or just
meandering around, (I don't live where there is snow). There is a URL
somewhere on totem animals, unfortunately I can't find it at this time...
someone on this list posted it some time ago.
Psychology: Because they hibernate, bears can symbolize cycles; birth,
death, or awakening. It can be that it is time for one to awaken into
activity or hibernate to renew your energy. Bears also represent mothering,
the archetype of the Great Bear. Greek mythology the bear is associated
with Artemis (Roman - Diana), goddess of the moon and woods (fertility and
the unconscious). Bears have magical and protective qualities. Remember
the Norsemen wore bearskin shirts and were fearless- also known as the
"bearsarks" because of their attire.
Dream analysis will tell you that when an animal talks to you - listen. It
has words of wisdom.
Animals represent some aspect of ourselves especially
instinctual/biological. According to Jung the more fierce an animal the
deeper the layers of the unconscious. A talking animal is an archetype for
the Self.
Animals can also represent incredibly strong, active cosmic forces. Taming
an animal refers to the desire of concern - to tame one's own instincts or
subconscious.
Hope this helps. Love dor
snip>I'm fascinated though. You write about dreaming of an "encounter with
a polar bear..." Coincidentally I dreamt of a polar bear two nights ago.
At first I was frighted of the creature (beautiful, snow white). then I
overcame my fear and pet his wonderful fur. He was quite tame!
>
>Any dream interpreters out there??
>
>Love, Hillary
>
>
>
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 13:36:36 PST
From: "Gloria Lee" <samyanaATnospamhotmail.com>
To: DruoutATnospamaol.com, onarresATnospaminreach.com
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Dreams
Message-ID: <19980329213636.26405.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>
>Hillary and John,
><<snip>>
. There is a URL
>somewhere on totem animals, unfortunately I can't find it at this
time...
>someone on this list posted it some time ago.
The url was... < http://www.animalspirits.com/ >
>
Glo Lee
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 23:12:04 +0100
From: "Jan Barendrecht" <janbarenATnospamcorreo.infase.es>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com>
Subject: effective communication
Message-ID: <01bd5b5f$b4b62aa0$LocalHostATnospamjb>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Anurag Goel wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Peswani,
>> Were you able to find the solution?
>>
>> Love,
>> anurag
>YES, I FOUND THE SOLUTION WHILE MEDITATING AND NOT FROM THESE >BIG GURUS
>I FOUND AND CHANGED TO THE TECHNIQUE OF PRAGYA (PRAJNA AS PER >PATANJALI)
>MEDITATION AND DISCOVERED THE BUDDHIC PLANE AND THE ART OF >TAPPING THE
WISDOM
>FROM THIS BUDDHIC PLANE.
>SHAHANSHAH>> >> >>
Dear Peswani,
As you are a Bodhisattva, were you able to save these big gurus from their
errant ways by your newly found wisdom?
You wrote to Harsha:
>HARSHA, HAVE YOU SEEN SELF OR HAVE YOU SEEN ATMA. THERE IS NO >SELF OR
ATMA.
>THERE IS ONLY HIGHLY EVOLVED INTELLIGENT ENERGY(SHAKTI).
>snip>
>I HAVE DONE ONLY AWARENESS MEDITATION ON THE TRUTH OF THE >MOMENT.
>THIS HAS GIVEN ME A SIDDHI OR SENSE TO SEE ANY DISEASE FROM >MILES AWAY AND
>CAPABILTY TO BURN THIS DISEASE. I BURN EVERYDAY DISEASE KARMAS >FROM EARTH
Could you tell us from what this intelligent energy evolved and to what it
will further evolve? Burning Karmas it a great achievement... Can you
destroy Karmas that originate in delusions like "amassing wealth will make
me happy" also? Forgive my curiosity, born out of ignorance, but if there is
a truth "of the moment", there has to be a truth, that is "not of the
moment". Could you inform us about the relation between both truths? Many of
us in the group are beginners, intent on learning.
>IS IT SO VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND ME AND MY ENLIGHTMENT.
>WHEN RAMANA MAHARISHI AND RAMAKRISHNA HAD CANCER AT THE END >OF LIFE,YOU
CAN
>IMAGINE THEM HAVING BLISS AND ENLIGHTMENT, AND PAIN OF CANCER
>SIMULTANEOUSLY
>BUT IF SHAAHANSHAH IS HAPPY , HEALTHY YOU CANNOT IMAGINE HIM >TO GO BEYOND
>ENLIGHTMENT TO BHODDHISATTVA.
>DOES SUCH AN INTELLIGENT EXPERIENCED HARSHA NEED SUPPORT OF >MILLIONS TO
>BELEIVE IN SHAHANSHAH. :))))))
Understanding you is a bit difficult indeed. With the teachings of
Ramakrishna and Ramana Maharishi, many are familiar, but not (yet) with the
teachings of Peswani. Because happiness is such an important treasure, could
you inform us on what your happiness depends? Belief is a bit missing in a
group that is centered about K. experience and related effects, so don´t be
too hard on us please.
In your post on enlightenment, you wrote:
[...]
>WHAT IS SELF REALISATION? WHEN A PERSON IS GROWN UP TO AN >EXTENT WHERE HE
>COMES TO KNOW THE PATH THAT GOD HAS PROGRAMMED HIM FOR, HE >BECOMES SELF
>REALISED. SOME ARE PROGRRAMMED FOR LOVE,SOME FOR DEVOTION, >SOME FOR
>CREATIVE ART, FOR COMPASSION, SOME FOR MAGIC OR SIDDHIS SO ON >SO FORTH.
[...]
Do you mean by this that God did program you as Bodhisattva? According to
your analogy, a guru must be the equivalent of a hacker, being able to cut
out parts of the program -: )) and a skilled hacker is quite capable of
changing the program altogether. How should a Buddhist interpret this? The
primordial mind being a giant background program, consisting of individual
subroutines with back-up facility? For a Buddhist guru then Reality must be
hacker´s paradise -: ))) I am very interested in your answers. Please feel
free to use all technical terms related to computers etc. for explanation -
a modern approach is very refreshing.
Jan
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 17:23:02 EST
From: Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com>
To: peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in, hlutharATnospambryant.edu
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: chalta hai (fwd)
Message-ID: <13575cde.351ec9c9ATnospamaol.com>
In a message dated 98-03-29 05:19:57 EST, peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in writes:
<< SHAHANSHAH HAS REPLIED IN CAPITAL LETTERS >>
Harsha writes: Dear Peshwani: Use of the Capital letters was the most
impressive part of your response! But I asked you "Who" Remains after Self-
Realization to experience various planes (Buddhic plane, Atmic plane and so
on). As long as "Something" or Some "body" remains as the experiencer, there
is veil over the nature of Reality. No matter, how profound or "high" the
Superconscious States or Samadhis, they cannot solve the fundamental mystery
of existence. When Self Sees IT Self by IT Self without a hindering medium
that is the Self-Recognition or Self-Realization that I speak about. Your
definition of Self-Realization and Sat-Chit-Ananda are quite different than
mine. The Self is that Unlimited Awareness which permeates all planes of
existence and consciousness including Buddhic Plane, Atmic plane and whatever
else you can conceive of. My response does not deny your wonderful experiences
and your reality (certainly not your obvious greatness!). We have discussed
this before and I have said everyone's path is different. Your path, although
it does not involve the Kundalini Shakti directly is certainly no less than
anyone else's. And although I tease you and joke with you I also have great
love for you ( as well as sympathy!). Finally, you keep bringing up your
robust health when compared to Ramana Maharshi and Ramakrishna Paramhansa as
an additional indication of your spiritual prowess. I find this a bit odd and
funny. You fundamentally misunderstand the teaching of the great Sage of
Arunachala and the nature of Self-Realization. You say that you can see
disease from far away and you will be able to see death from far away etc. So
What dear Peshwani! So what! Who Sees! Who Dies! The fundamental questions
remain the same. ....Harsha
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 97 09:47:52 GMT
From: E Jason <lobsterATnospamclara.net>
To: "Jason S. White" <zymphtATnospambluewin.ch>, kundalini <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: What is Enlightenment?
Message-Id: <970329094752.n0003235.lobsterATnospammail.clara.net>
on 29 Mar 98, Jason S. White wrote...
>Lobster wrote:
>>WHAT IS ENLIGHTENMENT?
><snip>
>Thanks for the excellent definitions.
>Why rid ourselves of the myth of enlightenment?
Why keep the myth that it is a myth?
>We keep our ancient Greek and Roman mythology and study it as a fascination.
>It's not a limitation.
No one would suggest otherwise.
>To believe This to the exclusion of That is either blind limitation or
>decision.
>Words are myth, metaphor, subjective, individual.
>The meaning of words is never universal.
These universal words are the ones I wish to speak . . .
>So, while I believe that your definition is most excellent,
>I throw it away like the lip flapping, keyboard tapping drivel it isn't.
Thanks ;-) I am most happy for it to be considered drivel by those who know
better. If I knew better I would throw it your way.
>Yes. It is my belief in the interpretation, my insistance on requiring
>explanation, my assuredness that what I read is Absolutely True that blinds
>me, not your inadequacy of expressing the inexplissable.
>But I love that inadequacy. That mystery.
Everything is imperfect
but there is nothing wrong with that
Love is inadequate for that mystery that is Absolutely inexpressable
>We are only sure of our definitions when all mystery is gone.
>When we no longer "question the legitimacy of any experience."
>If you find yourself in the company of those who are spiritually mature,
>then you must question the direction they would give you.
Never question the foolish
they are always right
the wise know they are wrong
>*Insisting* on your own direction is foolish.
That is why I insist on not insisting
>As is following theirs unquestioningly because they know what's "best."
>One believes what one believes because there is no choice but to believe
>something.
Then I have no choice but to believe nothing
>That something could be anything - what you read in a book, what you read on
>the internet or the thought you had on your way to work.
>That something could be everything or nothing, yet there is still be room
>for refinement.
>This is the way to remove the stagnation of constant transformation.
Well said.
>Many thanks Lobster.
Many thanks to you Jason
thankfully Lobster
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 17:12:34 PST
From: "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Street Lights
Message-ID: <19980330011235.26431.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Just a few comments on the street light issue:
It is (at least in some cases) a very real event to turn off street
lights. I did it for years and still do on occassion.
Yes, most of the street lights one can turn-off are unstable which is
logical. Which set of bookshelves would be most apt to turnover if you
leaned against it, one leaning against the wall and made very stable or
one standing in the middle of the floor with no bolts at all attached to
it? Same logic here.
To examine my own experience with one particular light: I know it was me
because I used to walk the same route on my evening walk and get the
same "greeting" from it. As I approached from my home it would go off
when I reached the same mailbox everytime, it didn't matter the time of
night, it came back on as I passed a particular driveway on the other
side of the light. On my return it would go off at the driveway and on
when I passed the mailbox. For it to have been just cycles and luck I
would have needed to have gone the same distance each night at the same
speed and those nights I went farther or was stopped by a driver asking
directions or delayed by a loose, angry dog they would have all have to
have been timed in sync with the on-off light cycle. I've studied and
worked with statistics too many years to believe the odds of hitting
that all the time is better than something times 10 to the minus 90 or
so.
By the way I don't know that this is K, I believe it may be prana. I
could do it before I got K under control and out of Vajra nadi. But
Vajra would be one of the most likely routes if it is K, it is easy to
get to the brain centers that control psychic powers through that nadi
(and I have always had psychic powers).
I can tell you, at least in my case, it was highly correlated with
anger, the madder I was the more lights I could kill. I started doing
experiments. I'd make myself madder and madder by thinking about
something or someone I could get really pissed at and I could shutdown
lights at a greater distance and kill lights that had always worked
before.
The lights that always went off went off on my walk could have been
because I was always angry in those days, at least a little bit. I once
blew completely up at my dogs because of a problem they created in the
garage (no I'd never hit them, I just wanted to put my fist through the
concrete block wall I was so mad). I did as quick a fix as I could and
rushed to a very very important appointment seriously late. When I got
home I noticed the bulbs in three of the four light fixtures in the
garage were shot, all had worked when I went into the garage that
morning and no one had turned any lights on or off so there were no
power surges.
That's my two bits.
Namaste,
Joe
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 17:21:13 PST
From: "Joseph Miller" <joemillerATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: pranayama
Message-ID: <19980330012114.3038.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
I don't want to get into the debate on pranayama but feel responsible to
make onne comment on the issue of breath retention and pranayama in
general.
If you're going to do pranayama, beyond the universally recognized safe
things like slow restful "belly" breathing or what many westerners call
alternate nostral breathing, have or get a good well-trained teacher,
not just a good book!
Breath retention or force exhaling, other than that instructed by a good
teacher, is dangerous and potentially damaging to one's health and K
process.
This all goes back to teachings that have been passed down (and "on the
books") for several thousand years. It isn't new and it isn't something
I or my teacher have come up with.
If you want to screw up either your health or process or both, have at
it! My duty is to point out the dangers what you choose to do is your
business.
Namaste,
Joe
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 19:54:39 -0600
From: Ann Morrison Fisher <annfisherATnospamstic.net>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: I am that I am
Message-Id: <l03010d01b144aafd0e05ATnospam[207.71.51.191]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Peg:
><< The name was considered too holy to pronounce aloud, and therefore
> "Adonai" or "Lord" was spoken in its place and still is when the scriptures
> are read aloud in Jewish services. >>
>
>In some reference I have since lost, there was a reference to YHVH as never
>being spoken, not because it was "too holy," but because the sound caused some
>sort of manifestation. Have you ever heard this?
I don't recall exactly that, but I think Graves says something about the
high priest passing on the name by whispering it. And probably only in the
Holy of Holies, the inner sanctum of the temple.
Also he talks about the teaching of "The Chariot," the Merkabah. Says it
had to be taught reverently in the right setting. Gives a story about a
rabbi travelling with two students. One asks him something about "The Work
of the Chariot," and he stops them, they get off their asses or whatever,
and they sit down somewhere quietly so he can talk about it. Story goes
that if you speak about it lightly, you could get struck by lightning.
Graves makes a case that the original name was all made of vowel sounds
that were sacred to the goddess, which is why not written. You can see how
the name YHWH could be spelled all with vowels.
Love,
Ann
P.S. Now that I think about it, the Hebrew word for "holy" that's used in
Exodus connotes something pretty near physical. There are warnings at one
point for the Hebrews not to touch the mountain of God, lest they die, and
that word figures in there. A rabbi could probably explain that - it's
been a long time, I can't even think what the word is.
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 19:19:38
From: Mystress Angelique Serpent <mistressATnospamdomin8rex.com>
To: Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com>
Cc: plslalATnospamemail.msn.com, david.bozziATnospamsnet.net, kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Foolproof Test For Enlightenment!
Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19980329191938.4567fd74ATnospamdomin8rex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 21:12 28/03/98 EST, Harsha1MTM wrote:
>In a message dated 98-03-28 20:47:34 EST, plslalATnospamemail.msn.com writes:
>
><< Nah! You got the wrong end of the equation! Check for a "you". If none
>is
> found then "you" are enlightened. But "you" can't check for a "you" in
> enlightenment. And you know this!
> >>
>
>Harsha: Beautiful! Clear, simple and delightful. Indeed "Who" remains to
check
>for "anything."
>
Boyoboyoboy.. just when I think I've got it handled, Y'all go and change
the definitions on me.. I lost track of Who "I" am a few years ago.. near
as I can tell, my personality is the infinity of monkeys who wrote Hamlet..
there are a lot of personalities in/out there, even some aliens and
archangels.. but which of them is me??? They all are.. there is only One of
Us.. didn't think that meant I'm enlightened tho.
Here all this time I've been figuring walking on water was the proper
credentials.. making magic dust, and stuff.. got firewalking handled,
already.. and I have been spotted in places where I'm not.. consciously
present.
But this idea that you are not enlightened if you use personal pronouns,
does not make much sense to me.. after I split into an infinity of monkeys,
and lost "my" mind, having no idea any longer who the thoughts in my head
belonged to, I got very uncomforrtable referring to self as "I" but after
many experiemts that made me sound either like Queen Victoria or the man
from Mars, or like there was more than one of me and I needed a table for
several, I gave up on it.
Our language is just not equipped to speak without personal pronouns and
still make much sense.
Blesings, Mystress.
>
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.