To: K-list
Recieved: 2003/03/11 15:22
Subject: [K-list] RE: Toronto Blessing . . .
From: SAC
On 2003/03/11 15:22, SAC posted thus to the K-list:
Dear Jack,
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 3:41 AM
To: K-list AT_NOSPAM kundalini-gateway.org; 'SAC'
Subject: Toronto Blessing . . .
Susan,
Here are my additional (probably last) comments on this discussion:
> Susan: I shared your inquiry with a martial arts master and a deeply
> orthodox Christian. He is also an engineer and scientist with a Ph.D.
Jack: My background (for information only): I am a Yoga student &
teacher,
Hindu, with a BSc and an MPhil in Mathematics, and have a career in
technical computer security consultancy.
The response from the martial arts master validated most of the first
part of my email in a very practical manner. Thanks for that. From my
point of view, the response was too specific and too particular, getting
involved in unnecessary detail. Although he seems to know just about
enough of some of the Indian and Chinese systems to be able to discuss
them, he does not appear to understand them deeply enough, probably
inhibited by being so deeply orthodox Christian. I believe his hidden
agenda is not so hidden.
Susan: I have known him for about a year now. His response to my letter
does not reflect his deep knowledge and understanding of these systems.
He has helped me round out my own knowledge of the way Kundalini works,
filling in the blanks, from his years of experience, knowledge and
training.
I just want to be clear he has been practicing/teaching/studying martial
arts for years, is a practicing Christian, and works/consults/teaches in
an engineering field that is too technical for me to understand...some
kind of thermal dynamics thing. So detailed rigorous inquiry is part of
his makeup.
It makes my brain hurt cause he wants me to put things in logical words
that I know intuitively.
Jack: [An aside: considering that he appears to be such a deeply
orthodox
Christian, how does this allow him to follow and teach Eastern martial
arts?]
Susan: I will say there is nothing subtle about his agendas or what he
believes. He is a man of principle and is not afraid to say so. In
knowing him as I do I can say there is no incongruency in his belief
system and his ability to teach Eastern Martial Arts and to do quite
well at it. I wondered that myself in the beginning. What I have found
is that Orthodoxy does not limit or deny the phenomenonal as does
American Christianity. This mystical tradition is seems deeper and more
authentic than what is found in American churches in my experiences. We
would be in error to make foregone conclusions on the basis of first
meeting or email.
Jack: My interest is to find a universal understanding of Kundalini, and
I
believe this is one of the main objectives of the K-List. The best
method to compare different views is to have a common glossary
corresponding to the important concepts that need to be discussed. (As
soon as we dip into a particular system's terminology, it becomes
difficult for people outside that system to follow what is being claimed
or stated.) The biggest problem in any type of discussion is that
different people have different meanings attached to the same words (and
the same meanings for different words).
> In all seriousness I disagree. See below for why...
Jack: He may disagree, but I don't agree with the reasons for his
disagreement. Unlike Mathematics and Law (?), there are no "proofs" in
most systems, and it all eventually comes down to belief. It's a bit
like "do what you want and justify it later" analogous to "shoot first,
ask later".
> Him: Some Christians...even many of the more Pentecostal<sp> consider
the> Toronto blessing suspect because it doesn't match historical or
scriptural> descriptions of the Holy Spirit, one of which is the Person
of God.
Jack: He should be aware that a lot of the recorded history (especially,
but
not exclusively, religious history) is politically motivated in the
interest of the "general public". For example, the concept of
reincarnation was banned by the Church even though it was accepted by
early Christians. Another example, it is known that Jesus was born into
a vegetarian family, but this is not widely acknowledged. It is the way
of the world that people (either individually or in groups) pick and
choose what they like, when they like, for their own purposes,
regardless of the intrinsic truth/falsehood. The justifications usually
come later. That's fine. That's freedom of choice to some extent.
However, to force one's view onto another person is morally and
ethically unacceptable.
Susan: I think he is aware of these points...and he and I agree to
disagree on points of belief but remain with open hearts to each other.
That is also a feature of the k list. We can discuss and explore our own
belief systems, how spirituality manifests in the context of k awakening
but proselytizing or forcing someone's beliefs onto another is frowned
upon and discouraged. Respect for each others' beliefs is expected.
> Him: Ah, no. Kundalini is a purely created (see note below) effect
that> has nothing to do with God's Grace. You can be pure evil and get
there.> [etc . . .]
Jack: His pre-conditioning is obvious.
Susan: In the Daoist viewpoint, kundalini is just another energy in the
body without spiritual import, manifested or created by intent and not
as a divine intelligence. In the popular Daoist viewpoint, Mantak Chia's
earlier books held to this view. I did not share the response to the
email that you read on this list. One thing he reponded to in my reply
to him:
~~~~~~~~~~
Me: I know one erupts and/or rises. Eventually, if not immediately (and
immediately seems to rarely happen anecdotally), spiritual hunger starts
that leads to the indwelling of Divine Presence. Generally, this happens
under the direction of some type of guide or teacher. Or in my case,
spontaneously because the unbelievable desire for Union with God was
present since I was a child. Kundalini explosion took me there faster
than a ride on a laser beam.
Him: Not always. Look at **** and ****. Neither seek the Divine
Presence. Lots of people use it to seek sensation...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Susan: He brings up valid observations. I vacillate myself between the
Divine and non-divine perspectives. In fact, the more mature I get in
the energy the less I am drawn to the personal Divine perspective.
Just a small note: He does not want his identity revealed. He is too
well known and is attacked for his principles. I can certainly
understand his position on this.
> Him: What you call Christianity, Dear Heart, is neither Traditional
nor > Christian. It's a heresy (a false path) that either turns into a
good
guy > religion or a form of Calvinism.... It turns man and woman into an
empty> puppet....and relieves him of all responsibility for his actions.
Jack: What right has anyone to call any path false??? Would he like a
similar comment directed towards him by other Christians/etc???
Susan: *shrugs* Oy, we all have disagreements and we have the freedom to
disagree. He's a big boy who can take care of himself.
> Him: That's because part of the favorite American heresy is the Bible
is> the Word of God. It's not. It's the history of God's trying to get
thru to> us. The Word of God is Christ Jesus.
Jack: This sounds like gibberish. Surely, the Bible contains the words
of
Jesus Christ in the New Testament as recorded by his disciples??? Have
other Christians missed something important here?
Susan: No, he has a point. I spent three years in a fundamentalist Bible
college when I was younger. My favorite class was exegesis, which means
to study the Bible in the original languages. I started doing that, word
by word. It was the catalyst for me to leave the Fundamentalist
movement.
What he is talking about is discussed quite a bit in the Christian
world, for years. There really is no such animal as a generic Christian
if we look at things from an external perspective. Those who seriously
study the Bible can come away with two general Christian views...that as
written it is the word of God, every word and punctuation mark and only
in the King James version or that is the record of God trying to talk to
mankind through the imperfect vehicle of a person. In other words,
channeling, and there is a multitude of strongly held viewpoints between
those two points.
I could go into the discussion of the Word of God is Christ Jesus
comment from an exegetical analysis but that is really beyond the scope
and interest of this list in my opinion. It can be quite fascinating
from a Tao of Physics viewpoint but only to some of us. :)
It is such disagreements within Christianity that has created all those
different sects. This is found in other major world religions from
Hinduism,
Judaism, and any other "ism" out there. It is the nature of people to
question and differ and to defend their viewpoint vigorously and
sometimes violently.
An interesting note: the New Testament account of Jesus was written
years after he left this earth as was not written or recorded as the
words were being uttered. It was not on the spot journalism.
> Him: Such a child! I knew you were young but<evil leer>
Jack: The <evil leer> does not inspire any confidence in me about him.
Susan: Eh, we flirt and there is playful behaviour in our friendship. He
has my confidence based on knowing him and his heart for over a year. I
would certainly want him at my back if I was in trouble.
***I really could not follow much of the rest of his message and gave up
trying. In fact, most of his response seemed to be "beating his own
drum" and was not very relevant to the mutual understanding objectives
of the K-List.
Susan: I think his pointing out that Kundalini is a magnifier of what we
already are is valid and I see that happening in people often. He and I
were just going to begin a discussion how a person who seems to be so
evil can have powerful kundalini. Like me, he also doesn't think that
chi, prana, or magick is the same as kundalini.
These are topics that have come up for discussion or have been alluded
to on this list before.
> Susan: I do give people the benefit of my experiences on a regular
basis.
> [. . .]
> I also own the kundalini sex list on Yahoo and moderate on the k list
> where I have been a member almost from its inception.
> I may have some responsibility. I educate/instruct when there is
interest.
Jack: That's excellent. My situation is similar in the sense that I let
everyone know my interest in Yoga/Kundalini/etc and if they want to
learn further then I am happy to instruct/teach.
------------------------
Jack: Having talked to many followers of extremist religious views, over
several decades, my abstraction is as follows:
Claim 1: Our God is the only ONE God.
Claim 2: Our way/path/system/method is the ONLY one.
Claim 2: If you are not in this way/path/system/method then you have no
chance of Heaven/God/<equivalent>.
I find that the above claims, and similar ones, to be unacceptable.
People are different. There are many paths and systems so that any
individual can find a suitable one for his/her character and
personality.
Also, we are all in the same Universe. We all see the same Nature. We
all talk about the same God. Can any one person or group force a
specific terminology or system on everyone else?
Susan: They do try, don't they? But yet, aren't we guilty of the same
thing, asking or expecting them to view the world as we do and
disparaging them if they don't? Why are we so attached to our beliefs
about That Which Is?
My own personal B.S. (belief system) is that it doesn't really matter in
the end when it is all said and done. You are who you are so you do what
you do.
And that is just what it is. If you don't like what you do, change who
you are. Can we do that and how? Depends on who you ask. That's why we
have all these choices on the how of belief systems.
As I brought up on this list before, there is a new science discipline
called neurotheology. It's basic premise is the human organism is
hardwired to believe in God or at least something "out there" with
Divine qualities. I think of Divine as something that is supranormal of
myself.
If this premise is true how will that affect the way we view or practice
our beliefs? And since Kundalini energy is intimately associated with
the central nervous system (the spinal cord and brain) what kind of
questions does that bring forth?
Jack: Recall the story/parable/fable about the four blind men who had to
describe an elephant. One said it is like a snake (trunk), one said it
is like a spear (tusks), one said it is like a small house (body), one
said it is like a fan (big ear). Others could say it is like a tree
(legs), or rope (tail), etc. Therefore, even apart from the fact that
words are no sufficient, no single person can adequately describe
God/<equivalent>. This explains to some extent why there are so many
descriptions/discussions/disagreements throughout the world.
Susan: I think this new science of neurotheology will bring more
understanding to this very thing. How convenient then to be able to
describe stuff as an amalgam of neurotransmitters, electrical impulses
and magnetic waves. Deepak Chopra has attempted to do this in explaining
the concept of the mind as a non local phenomenon in his book, "Ageless
Body Timeless Mind". Itzhak Bentov also wrote the book, "Stalking the
Wild Pendulum", to explain concepts on the mechanics of consciousness.
Hopefully, for those for whom this is a conundrum, this new discipline
will bring further understanding to this issue of Divinity and
Kundalini.
Namaste,
Susan
---
To adjust your subscription or get a reminder of your password, visit:
http://kundalini-gateway.org/mailman/listinfo/k-list_kundalini-gateway.org
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.