|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
jeff
USA
971 Posts |
 Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 6:01:34 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
quote:
Originally posted by jeff
Hi Christi,
Thank you for the lesson recommendations. I find it very challenging to try to compare words like "unity" and "everythingness". When the descriptions come from different perspectives/traditions, how does one know that they are describing the same thing? Or, maybe the "depth" of the same thing?
Best wishes, Jeff
Hi Jeff,
I guess, go beyond the mind, come to a place of unity, and see for yourself. All there will be, will be everything(ness). Nothing will be missing. 
Hi Christi,
I think we may have a difference on what it means to go "beyond the mind". Everythingness and oneness are still an aspect of mind (or universal mind). I have found all "thingness" to be of the mind.
Best wishes, Jeff |
 |
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 6:09:31 PM
|
Hi Christi,
Ok. Perhaps we have been misunderstanding each other.
My point is exactly what I thought I'd said many times in several posts above - there is no ONE way. Aversion, as you know, is another form of attachment. In this case, there was perceived aversion to Adya's methods.
To be clear about Bhagavan - his enlightenment occurred when he lay down and "played dead". Not after meditating for years and experiencing nirvikalpa samadhi. His teachings, as you know, have nothing about ecstasy. Neither do teachings of Papaji, Nisargadatta, Balsekar, Spira, Lucille, etc. Modern popular teachers like Tolle and Katie don't talk about Kundalini at all. Can we take up an issue with all their methods?
Kriya yoga, the epitome of cultivating ecstasy does not lead everyone to enlightenment, as you know. Neither does self-inquiry - a long time devotee of Bhagavan asked him what to do since he had been inquiring for 30 years without success. Bhagavan said keep doing it for another 30 years!! So what determines who wakes up? Is there such a thing as "the" successful formula? How can we ever assess/measure a totally subjective state like unity? Mother Theresa and Gandhi, the exemplary karma yogis of modern times, felt a tad disillusioned at the end of their lives that they didn't reach what they thought unity was.
How ridiculous to claim this or that way is the only way! This is why, in my personal experience, Grace is the biggest factor - there is absolutely nothing that I can justify doing - not the Bhakti, not the energy to practice, not the experiences that happen. I can lay claim to none of them as "mine". It is only Grace.
Seeing your last post addressed to me, I feel we are perhaps somewhat on the same page.
 |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 6:26:41 PM
|
Hi Jeff,
quote:
Hi Christi,
I think we may have a difference on what it means to go "beyond the mind". Everythingness and oneness are still an aspect of mind (or universal mind). I have found all "thingness" to be of the mind.
Best wishes, Jeff
Everythingness and oneness are only aspects of the mind when they are concepts. By "go beyond the mind" I mean go beyond all concepts, all ideas about reality, all thought, all division, all form, even the idea that there is a "you" that can go beyond all these things. Then, everything is seen as one, and that one is not separate from your true Self.
It comes as inner silence expands outwards from the witness to encompass all that is. The boundary between the internal world and the external world collapses as does (in the same moment) the division between the perceived and the perceiver. In this awakening we see that being nothing we are everything.
It is really a process of surrender and letting go. And as Adya would say... grace.
Christi |
|
|
|
chas
USA
209 Posts |
Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 6:29:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Chas
quote:
That seems a bit dubious. According to that logic, anyone who has been through a spontaneous kundalini awakening, kundalini awakening via substances, premature crown practices, and every other method are well qualified to write and teach kundalini theory and associated practices, since they "know everything from direct experience".
When I said they would "know everything from direct experience", I meant they would know everything about the process of their own awakening from direct experience. They could write extensively on the subject based on that if they wanted to, and teach others about it.
Thank you for clarifying what you meant. I disagree that "they would know everything about the process of their own awakening from direct experience."(emphasis mine) But, I think I see your point now and agree to some extent. I also agree that they could write extensively on their experience if they wanted to.
quote:
I didn't say anything about teaching "kundalini theory or associated practices". They may or may not know about that.
I recognize that you didn't say anything about teaching kundalini theory or associated practices. You said:
quote:
It is good to see Adya talking about his kundalini awakening because it got a little glossed over in some of his books, maybe because of the publishers wanting to put a certain angle on his teachings, or maybe because Adya didn't see it as being important at the time?. Maybe he is recognising the importance of it more now in hindsight? I have been a big fan of Adya for several years now but this video was the first time I have heard him mention his kundalini awakening.
It was me who said something about kundalini theory and practices when I asked you:
quote:
A hypothetical question, Christi: if you were in Adyashanti's position, and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?
(And your reply):
quote:
Once someone has been through a kundalini awakening, they don't really need formal training in it as they will know everything from direct experience.
To which I replied:
quote:
That seems a bit dubious. According to that logic, anyone who has been through a spontaneous kundalini awakening, kundalini awakening via substances, premature crown practices, and every other method are well qualified to write and teach kundalini theory and associated practices, since they "know everything from direct experience".
...
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn't happen and has no relevance. Then occasionally someone asks him about it and he says "Oh yes, that...".
If you could provide a reference for your quotes, it might help establish the accuracy and context in which they were used.
Anyhow, it seems that you have issues with Adyashanti's approach. I'm wondering what (if anything) would you have done differently if you were in his shoes?
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 7:04:34 PM
|
Hi Chas,
O.K., yes it was you that mentioned "kundalini theory and practice", whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.
Obviously, the more knowledge they have on the subject, the more they would be able to help others on the path.
I hope that clears that one up.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn't happen and has no relevance. Then occasionally someone asks him about it and he says "Oh yes, that...".
If you could provide a reference for your quotes, it might help establish the accuracy and context in which they were used.
I have never met Adyashanti in person, so I am only referring to what has been printed in his published works. I used to own some books written by him, but have given them all away now, so I am afraid I can't provide sources. But they are all available for anyone to read, and I believe the latest one is available as a free download.
quote:
Anyhow, it seems that you have issues with Adyashanti's approach. I'm wondering what (if anything) would you have done differently if you were in his shoes?
I don't remember saying that I had issues with Adya's approach. I thought I said this:
quote:
Actually I think Adya is a great teacher. We both studied in the same tradition- Buddhism, and our paths have been very similar. He studied zen, whereas I studied Theravada Buddhism, but in practice there is almost no difference.
All the best
Christi |
|
|
|
Bodhi Tree
2972 Posts |
Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 7:23:28 PM
|
I tread lightly on this topic, but I cannot resist diving into the matrix of these matters.
I shall not attack. I shall use words and punctuated rhythms in the hopes of illuminating the topic. What point do I have to prove? I don't know. Maybe I don't have a point to prove, but maybe there's an inner flow that wants to spew forth from a clogged spicket, kind of like a fire hydrant that bursts open accidentally so passersby can frolick in the water. But who would frolick in the water? Probably only children, since adults often stay rigidly conformed in our guise of civility and politeness.
In Autobiography of a Yogi, Yogananda tells of a saint that would walk the streets naked and submerge under the Ganges River for days at time. Why did he do it? Well, it doesn't say, but at least there is some account of this peculiar use of a siddhi--testifying to the possibility for humans to break boundaries typically considered unbreakable. If a man can breathe and sustain himself underwater like a fish, what else can a man do? Maybe we are only limited by imagination, which has no limits.
The examples of human beings going beyond the norm and revealing new capabilities are abundant, and this evolutionary trend of defying notions of impossibility doesn't seem to be stopping. We just keep rolling along and discovering new ways to live and spread our wings.
So, Adyashanti seems to recognize the "pure potential" of the Absolute, and he even suggests ways to reach that "pure potential" (his "True" Meditation, his insistence on being sincere and honest, his warning not to let your "ego" fool you, etc.). He lays out a path that seems to have brought him some satisfaction and fulfillment, so naturally, he wants to share it.
But is the point of life simply to reach the Absolute? No, the point is to touch the Absolute, swim back to the surface, and manifest the gold in your unique way. Jesus said: "Thy kindgdom come, thy will be done--on earth as it is in heaven." So, isn't that point--to bring heaven into solid manifestation? We're not just nullifying and eradicating the existing manifest world; we're merging and intermingling the manifest world with the absolute potential of emptiness.
So, to me, it boils down to the ishta, the dream, the vision for one's personal life, and consequently, the lives of others. I'm so enthralled, inspired, and drawn to AYP teachings because there is a deep well of knowledge here--sprung from the experience of Yogani's life and AYP practitioners alike. But most importantly, there is an impetus and a loving challenge to live an ecstatic life that is beyond any mere shift in identification. Sure, identification and the sense of "self" shifts, but that detail seems minor in comparison to the possibilities of action (creativity, service, siddhis, and unlimited expressions of the Infinite through art, business exchange, sports, stewardship of fellow species, and on and on).
So, maybe some people become more attracted to the shift in identity, whereas others become driven by manifesting the creative flow. It's all a global balance striving to nurture and sustain the miracle of Being.
But to deny the mystery of personality/individuality (I don't mean pride or "ego") is just as foolish as denying the undifferentiated absolute. It's about threading the needle, balancing on the beam of duality and non-duality, and operating from a functional mode of enraptured ecstasy, fueled by stillness.
Dance with me, dance with me, baby. That's what God is saying to us. I think.  |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 30 2013 : 7:44:57 PM
|
quote:
My point is exactly what I thought I'd said many times in several posts above - there is no ONE way. Aversion, as you know, is another form of attachment. In this case, there was perceived aversion to Adya's methods.
Hi Kami,
Yes, there certainly seems to be some misunderstanding. I did't say that ecstasy is a prerequisite for enlightenment and I didn't say that I had any aversion to Adya's methods. What you perceive can depend in part on what you want to perceive. 
What I did say is that unity is an evolved state of ecstasy and that kundalini is an essential part of the journey.
quote:
To be clear about Bhagavan - his enlightenment occurred when he lay down and "played dead". Not after meditating for years and experiencing nirvikalpa samadhi. His teachings, as you know, have nothing about ecstasy. Neither do teachings of Papaji, Nisargadatta, Balsekar, Spira, Lucille, etc. Modern popular teachers like Tolle and Katie don't talk about Kundalini at all. Can we take up an issue with all their methods?
On the subject of Bhagavan (Ramana Maharshi), he did claim that he experienced enlightenment at a young age whilst "playing dead". But then he took up the life of a sadhu and spent many years practising pranayama and meditation in various places on the side of Arunachala and experienced nirvikalpa samadhi.
Why would someone who was enlightened spend 10 years practising pranayama and meditation? Unless of course, they were building a body of divine light?
Certainly, in the photographs of Ramana in his old age, you can see ecstasy shining from his eyes. And the same with Papaji.
As for what decides who wakes up? You could call it grace, or karma.
All the best. |
|
|
|
chas
USA
209 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 02:02:40 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Chas,
O.K., yes it was you that mentioned "kundalini theory and practice", whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.
No worries. I'm not clear on how the responses so far answer my question. I was not saying that someone could not write about their experience.
Whether or not kundalini or the "energetic component of awakening" has been "glossed over" or "downplayed" is a matter of opinion. It is possible we merely differ in opinion. Please consider the possibility that not all of the information Adya has related on the subject is being portrayed accurately in this thread. Some things appear to be written as fact but have yet to be substantiated or given complete context.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Again, I think you slightly misunderstood what I was saying there. It is not that he has ever pretended something did not happen which in fact did happen, it is just that he downplays the fact of his kundalini awakening, at least in his books, to the extent that the reader could almost imagine that it never happened at all. There is one line in one of his books which goes something like: "...and then I had some kundalini symptoms". I can't quote the exact words as I gave the book away to a friend.
This was addressed to Kami, but FYI, Adya does talk about his experience with kundalini awakening in his books and elsewhere. One notable case of this is in his book "The End of Your World," Chapter 8, entitled "The Energetic Component of Awakening". In short, it resembles nothing like what you have described above, or previously: "Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn't happen and has no relevance. Then occasionally someone asks him about it and he says 'Oh yes, that...'" You can read a few pages of it here: http://books.google.com/books?id=5_...PA148&dq=The
quote:
I have never met Adyashanti in person, so I am only referring to what has been printed in his published works. I used to own some books written by him, but have given them all away now, so I am afraid I can't provide sources. But they are all available for anyone to read, and I believe the latest one is available as a free download.
Thanks. I have his books and I've tried to find the quotes you have provided. I can't find it with Google either... I'm going to be occupied for a while, but hopefully sometime this week I can resume the search. Please let us know if you come across them in the meantime.
quote:
I don't remember saying that I had issues with Adya's approach. I thought I said this:
quote:
Actually I think Adya is a great teacher. We both studied in the same tradition- Buddhism, and our paths have been very similar. He studied zen, whereas I studied Theravada Buddhism, but in practice there is almost no difference.
I saw that. I didn't say that you said you had issues with Adya's approach. I said "it seems that you have issues with Adyashanti's approach." That seemed to be the case based on other comments of yours, and how those comments were interpreted on my end. It might be a misunderstanding, miscommunication, misinterpretation, or all of the above. Maybe we are using the term "issues" differently. The way I meant it above is similar, I think, to what Kami mentioned above regarding "aversions." It does not seem that I am the only one who is perceiving it this way. At any rate, if there are no issues or aversions remaining to discuss, I'm off to play Easter Bunny.
|
Edited by - chas on Mar 31 2013 02:22:26 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 02:59:34 AM
|
Hi Chas,
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Chas,
O.K., yes it was you that mentioned "kundalini theory and practice", whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.
No worries. I'm not clear on how the responses so far answer my question. I was not saying that someone could not write about their experience.
Sorry, I didn't realize that this question was so important to you. I'll see if I can do a better job of answering it in more detail.
Your original question was this:
quote:
A hypothetical question, Christi: if you were in Adyashanti's position, and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?
So if the question is "would I write or instruct extensively on the subject of kundalini theory and practice?" then the answer would be no. But if the question is "would I write or instruct extensively on the subject of kundalini despite the fact that I had had little or no training in kundalini theory or practice?" then the answer would be yes.
I think if Adyashanti is going to teach at all, then he has a duty to his students to include the energetic aspect of awakening in that instruction as it can impact greatly on people's lives if he doesn't. You say that he does that in his verbal teachings which is good to hear. The comment I was making is that it did not come across well in his written works and to me seemed to have been glossed over somewhat.
quote:
This was addressed to Kami, but FYI, Adya does talk about his experience with kundalini awakening in his books and elsewhere. One notable case of this is in his book "The End of Your World," Chapter 8, entitled "The Energetic Component of Awakening". In short, it resembles nothing like what you have described above, or previously: "Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn't happen and has no relevance.
Thanks for providing that link to "The end of your world", I had not seen that chapter before. It is good to see that Adya is starting to address this issue. This is the kind of thing that I was talking about and I think would have been helpful if it had been included in some of his earlier works. "The end of this world" was published in 2010, I believe? The material in that chapter is the kind of thing that I felt was glossed over in some of his earlier books such as "Emptiness dancing" and "True meditation".
quote:
Thanks. I have his books and I've tried to find the quotes you have provided. I can't find it with Google either... I'm going to be occupied for a while, but hopefully sometime this week I can resume the search.
I wasn't aware that I had provided any quotes? If you are searching for the words: "Oh, yes that..." I wasn't quoting verbatim so I don't think you will find it. I was speaking about the way in which Adya addressed the energetic aspect of awakening in his earlier published works - almost as an interesting side effect, rather than as an integral part of the awakening. With the inclusion of that chapter in the "End of your world" he is certainly putting the energetic aspect of awakening more to the forefront in his published work which is good to see.
All the best,
Christi
|
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 10:42:44 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
What you perceive can depend in part on what you want to perceive.
Yes Christi, what you perceive always depends on what you want to perceive and your own colorings.
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
On the subject of Bhagavan (Ramana Maharshi), he did claim that he experienced enlightenment at a young age whilst "playing dead". But then he took up the life of a sadhu and spent many years practising pranayama and meditation in various places on the side of Arunachala and experienced nirvikalpa samadhi.
Why would someone who was enlightened spend 10 years practising pranayama and meditation?
Hmm.. See above. Your perception of why is going to depend on your own aspirations and your own colorings. Personally, I have no idea.
All the best!
kami
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 11:49:10 AM
|
Hi Kami,
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
What you perceive can depend in part on what you want to perceive.
Yes Christi, what you perceive always depends on what you want to perceive and your own colorings.
I wouldn't say always. When there is no desire to perceive anything, then what is, is seen clearly (see my post above to Jeff about going beyond the concepts of the mind).
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
On the subject of Bhagavan (Ramana Maharshi), he did claim that he experienced enlightenment at a young age whilst "playing dead". But then he took up the life of a sadhu and spent many years practising pranayama and meditation in various places on the side of Arunachala and experienced nirvikalpa samadhi.
Why would someone who was enlightened spend 10 years practising pranayama and meditation?
Hmm.. See above. Your perception of why is going to depend on your own aspirations and your own colorings. Personally, I have no idea.
I would say that what Ramana Maharshi experienced when he was a child and playing dead was an awakening experience. He said that in that moment he came to know himself as the spirit indwelling the body. I had better put the exact quote, otherwise I will have Chas on my back chasing me up about it.
quote:
So I am Spirit transcending the body. The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death. That means I am the deathless Spirit.’ All this was not dull thought; it flashed through me vividly as living truth which I perceived directly, almost without thought-process. ‘I’ was something very real, the only real thing about my present state, and all the conscious activity connected with my body was centred on that ‘I’. From that moment onwards the ‘I’ or Self focused attention on itself by a powerful fascination. Fear of death had vanished once and for all. Absorption in the Self continued unbroken from that time on. [ramana maharshi]
So that is what I would call an awakening experience. For me, enlightenment is a much bigger journey which involves a whole process of transformation of the body and mind. That is why I said that Ramana became enlightened after many years of meditation, because that is how I understand it.
In the end it is just a question of language. Interestingly Adya also talks about awakening experiences and the journey to enlightenment from awakening, but then he also talked about his "final enlightenment" and went on to say that he had more work still to do after that. Again, it's a particular use of language around the word "enlightenment".
So you see you are right to say that Ramana Maharshi became enlightened when he was a boy, and I was right when I said he became enlightened after many years of meditation. We were simply using the word enlightenment in different ways, to mean different things. That is what I mean about letting go of fixed views as a tool for entering the state of unity. Nothing in this world is true and attachment to any idea or view will keep us in bondage and separation and act a barrier to liberation. I am sure Ramana would have agreed with me there.
All the best
Christi
|
|
|
|
jeff
USA
971 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 12:22:32 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Jeff,
quote:
Hi Christi,
I think we may have a difference on what it means to go "beyond the mind". Everythingness and oneness are still an aspect of mind (or universal mind). I have found all "thingness" to be of the mind.
Best wishes, Jeff
Everythingness and oneness are only aspects of the mind when they are concepts. By "go beyond the mind" I mean go beyond all concepts, all ideas about reality, all thought, all division, all form, even the idea that there is a "you" that can go beyond all these things. Then, everything is seen as one, and that one is not separate from your true Self.
It comes as inner silence expands outwards from the witness to encompass all that is. The boundary between the internal world and the external world collapses as does (in the same moment) the division between the perceived and the perceiver. In this awakening we see that being nothing we are everything.
It is really a process of surrender and letting go. And as Adya would say... grace.
Christi
Hi Christi,
Given your response, i think we may be talking "apples" and "oranges" regarding perception and the concept of "mind". If you don't mind, a few clarifying questions...
From your comments in this thread, I assume that you "reside" in unity... Is that correct?
What is Kundalini? Is it different from other forms of energy/light?
Thanks, Jeff |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 12:45:03 PM
|
Hi Jeff,
quote:
From your comments in this thread, I assume that you "reside" in unity... Is that correct?
Sometimes, and sometimes not. There is a long process of moving between unity and the witness that goes on for several years for most people. At times there is duality and at other times unity. It is a shift that does not involve any movement. Falling into unity is like falling into the heart, it is a very beautiful process.
quote:
What is Kundalini? Is it different from other forms of energy/light?
Kundalini is the whole energetic transformation of the body and mind in the transformation of enlightenment. Prana begins to move in a different way in the body, and the body is transformed by it. The transformation happens mostly on the subtle levels (the subtle neurobiology), but even the physical body is changed.
quote:
Given your response, i think we may be talking "apples" and "oranges" regarding perception and the concept of "mind". If you don't mind, a few clarifying questions...
If the ideas of the mind and perception confuse you, just leave them out. The rest still works. Remember what I am suggesting is one of the highest stages in yoga, so it is not an easy thing to do. But all talk of unity is really a bit meaningless without the direct experience of it. That is why it is better to practice and come to know it for yourself.
Christi |
|
|
|
jeff
USA
971 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 3:08:13 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Jeff,
quote:
From your comments in this thread, I assume that you "reside" in unity... Is that correct?
Sometimes, and sometimes not. There is a long process of moving between unity and the witness that goes on for several years for most people. At times there is duality and at other times unity. It is a shift that does not involve any movement. Falling into unity is like falling into the heart, it is a very beautiful process.
quote:
What is Kundalini? Is it different from other forms of energy/light?
Kundalini is the whole energetic transformation of the body and mind in the transformation of enlightenment. Prana begins to move in a different way in the body, and the body is transformed by it. The transformation happens mostly on the subtle levels (the subtle neurobiology), but even the physical body is changed.
quote:
Given your response, i think we may be talking "apples" and "oranges" regarding perception and the concept of "mind". If you don't mind, a few clarifying questions...
If the ideas of the mind and perception confuse you, just leave them out. The rest still works. Remember what I am suggesting is one of the highest stages in yoga, so it is not an easy thing to do. But all talk of unity is really a bit meaningless without the direct experience of it. That is why it is better to practice and come to know it for yourself.
Christi
Hi Christi,
Thanks for your responses. They were helpful in my better understanding your perceptions. I did not mean to imply that the topic confused me, only that I see it differently than you and I was trying to better understand your perspective.
I would agree as you mentioned above, that the "inner" and the "outer" are the same, but in my experience, both are still aspects of "mind". Or, as some prefer to call the outer (or existence), shared or universal mind.
In your concept of "unity", is the mind quiet? Do random thoughts or responses like anger and irritation still pop up?
Thanks, Jeff |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 6:10:44 PM
|
Hi Jeff,
quote:
I would agree as you mentioned above, that the "inner" and the "outer" are the same, but in my experience, both are still aspects of "mind". Or, as some prefer to call the outer (or existence), shared or universal mind.
Sometimes there are thoughts, and sometimes not. When there are no thoughts (the thoughtless state), this would be called nirvikalpa sahaja samadhi. When thoughts are present it would be called savikalpa sahaja samadhi. Irritation and anger require the process of identification with the mind, so no they would not be present.
The fundamental aspects of unity are that there is no outer and inner and no perceived and perceiver. Those things are seen to be illusory.
Christi
|
|
|
|
jeff
USA
971 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 6:33:03 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Jeff,
quote:
I would agree as you mentioned above, that the "inner" and the "outer" are the same, but in my experience, both are still aspects of "mind". Or, as some prefer to call the outer (or existence), shared or universal mind.
Sometimes there are thoughts, and sometimes not. When there are no thoughts (the thoughtless state), this would be called nirvikalpa sahaja samadhi. When thoughts are present it would be called savikalpa sahaja samadhi. Irritation and anger require the process of identification with the mind, so no they would not be present.
The fundamental aspects of unity are that there is no outer and inner and no perceived and perceiver. Those things are seen to be illusory.
Christi
Hi Christi,
Thanks. So "residing" in unity, there is no anger or irritation. Do you percieve there is a "sense of responsibility"? Or, is that also an attachment of the mind?
Also, if inner and outer are "illusory", does that mean from your perspective the outer world (and other people) don't really exist?
Finally, what and where is the "body of light" that you are building?
Best, Jeff |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 7:39:39 PM
|
Hi Jeff,
quote:
Also, if inner and outer are "illusory", does that mean from your perspective the outer world (and other people) don't really exist?
It is that the distinction between inner and outer is illusory. Outside what? Inside what? Do you see? Where is the line that separates the two? Other people still exist but not separated from what you fundamentally know yourself to be. They are a part of you too.
quote:
Thanks. So "residing" in unity, there is no anger or irritation. Do you percieve there is a "sense of responsibility"? Or, is that also an attachment of the mind?
It is more like a continuous flow of love. So there is compassion, and love and the desire to be of service in the world. "Responsibility" sounds a bit heavy, having a sense a bit like "what is expected of you". There are no expectations imposed from outside. Unity is a very spontaneous state as the "heaviness" of the process of attachment and identification is gone. In that freedom and spontaneity, action is motivated by love. So if I saw a child running into the road in front of a car, I would run to grab the child even if I might be hit too, but not because I "should" because I am a responsible adult, but in the same way that you would pull your own hand out of a fire to prevent it from being burned. One of the aspects of unity is that other people's pain and suffering become your pain and suffering. But pain and love can exist at the same time in the same space, so that is the grace.
Adyashanti says something similar. He says that you reach a stage where you pour all of yourself back into the world in an overspilling of divine love. That is the shift from nothingness to everythingness that he talks about. But of course by that point, the boundary between yourself and the world has broken down, so it is not so much an active pouring as a naturally occurring flow of energy and compassion and action.
quote:
Finally, what and where is the "body of light" that you are building?
To be honest I have very little idea. I am letting the process happen by itself but I don't know what will happen if anything. At the moment the crown chakra has dissolved and there is a fairly continuous flow of amrita from the top of the head downward. I would be tempted to say "into the heart", but it is not yet that clear. There is a lot of fireworks going on, that is all I can say right now.
Christi |
|
|
|
chas
USA
209 Posts |
Posted - Mar 31 2013 : 10:35:41 PM
|
quote:
Hi Chas,
O.K., yes it was you that mentioned "kundalini theory and practice", whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.
No worries. I'm not clear on how the responses so far answer my question. I was not saying that someone could not write about their experience.
quote:
Sorry, I didn't realize that this question was so important to you. I'll see if I can do a better job of answering it in more detail.
quote:
Your original question was this:
quote:
A hypothetical question, Christi: if you were in Adyashanti's position, and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?
So if the question is "would I write or instruct extensively on the subject of kundalini theory and practice?" then the answer would be no. But if the question is "would I write or instruct extensively on the subject of kundalini despite the fact that I had had little or no training in kundalini theory or practice?" then the answer would be yes.
The question was neither of those. An important part of the original question was "if you were in Adyashanti's position... and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?"
Did you mean to answer the amended questions that way? Or should your yes and no answers be swapped?
The ability to relate anything is based in large part on experience. If kundalini concepts, theory, and practices were not a significant part of your experience, how would you instruct in it? If you were in Adya's position- being him, and had experienced everything that he has, how would you have done anything differently?
quote:
I think if is going to teach at all, then he has a duty to his students to include the energetic aspect of awakening in that instruction as it can impact greatly on people's lives if he doesn't.
"Duty?" Doesn't that sound a bit heavy? Should he have felt a sense of duty or responsibility to teach about "the energetic component of awakening?"
Or maybe it happened more like this:
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
It is more like a continuous flow of love. So there is compassion, and love and the desire to be of service in the world. "Responsibility" sounds a bit heavy, having a sense a bit like "what is expected of you". There are no expectations imposed from outside. Unity is a very spontaneous state as the "heaviness" of the process of attachment and identification is gone. In that freedom and spontaneity, action is motivated by love. So if I saw a child running into the road in front of a car, I would run to grab the child even if I might be hit too, but not because I "should" because I am a responsible adult, but in the same way that you would pull your own hand out of a fire to prevent it from being burned. One of the aspects of unity is that other people's pain and suffering become your pain and suffering. But pain and love can exist at the same time in the same space, so that is the grace.
Adyashanti says something similar. He says that you reach a stage where you pour all of yourself back into the world in an overspilling of divine love. That is the shift from nothingness to everythingness that he talks about. But of course by that point, the boundary between yourself and the world has broken down, so it is not so much an active pouring as a naturally occurring flow of energy and compassion and action.
quote:
This was addressed to Kami, but FYI, Adya does talk about his experience with kundalini awakening in his books and elsewhere. One notable case of this is in his book "The End of Your World," Chapter 8, entitled "The Energetic Component of Awakening". In short, it resembles nothing like what you have described above, or previously: "Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn't happen and has no relevance.
quote:
Thanks for providing that link to "The end of your world", I had not seen that chapter before. It is good to see that Adya is starting to address this issue. This is the kind of thing that I was talking about and I think would have been helpful if it had been included in some of his earlier works. "The end of this world" was published in 2010, I believe? The material in that chapter is the kind of thing that I felt was glossed over in some of his earlier books such as "Emptiness dancing" and "True meditation".
You're welcome. "The End Of Your World" was published in 2008.
quote:
Thanks. I have his books and I've tried to find the quotes you have provided. I can't find it with Google either... I'm going to be occupied for a while, but hopefully sometime this week I can resume the search.
quote:
I wasn't aware that I had provided any quotes? If you are searching for the words: "Oh, yes that..." I wasn't quoting verbatim so I don't think you will find it.
It was stated as a quote, but I figured you meant it as a paraphrase. Still, I'm unable to locate any material regarding the type of interaction described.
quote:
I was speaking about the way in which Adya addressed the energetic aspect of awakening in his earlier published works - almost as an interesting side effect, rather than as an integral part of the awakening.
As I'm sure you are aware, it is not as common in Zen (or for those with substantial Zen influence) to talk about kundalini... His book "True Meditation" talks about the type of practices he was experienced with, and although it is not kundalini or energy focused, it is helpful for many.
|
Edited by - chas on Mar 31 2013 10:39:52 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 07:18:16 AM
|
Hi Chas,
quote:
The question was neither of those. An important part of the original question was "if you were in Adyashanti's position... and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?"
Did you mean to answer the amended questions that way? Or should your yes and no answers be swapped?
The yes and no answers would remain the same. I left out the "If you were in Adyashanti's shoes..." bit for brevity and to make for easier reading rather than to change the question.
You see, Adyashanti had been through a kundalini awakening and was (and still is) aware of the energetic aspect to awakening. The zazen practices lead to the awakening of kundalini just as any valid spiritual practices do. So although they do not use the word kundalini in zen teachings and practice, it is still an aspect of the path. So if I were Adyashanti, and I knew what he knew from my own experience, and I was teaching others about spiritual practices then yes I would speak about the energetic aspect of awakening and I would speak about it from my own experience as a part of the whole journey. And it seems like Adya does that and I am happy that he does.
My only issue there was that it was left out of the books that he published before "The end of your world" (pre 2008), because many people could read the books, do the practices in them and then that could lead to an energetic awakening that they would have no way of knowing how to handle. One problem is that people often don't associate energetic symptoms with their spiritual awakening, so in cases that are problematic they often think they just have some mystery illness that seems to go on for months or years and which the doctors cannot explain. In those cases they will not call up the author of the book and say "hey what's happening to me?" because they don't make the association.
quote:
"Duty?" Doesn't that sound a bit heavy? Should he have felt a sense of duty or responsibility to teach about "the energetic component of awakening?"
I wrote in my post above to Jeff about the relationship between responsibility and love. So whether it is seen as a sense of duty, or a sense of responsibility or a sense of compassion or love, whatever it is, the bottom line is that if a spiritual teacher does not teach their students about the energetic aspect of awakening and how to deal with it when it arises then they are not doing their job properly. It would be like an athletics coach training people how to run, but not warning them that they could sprain an ankle or tear a ligament if they don't train properly.
quote:
quote:
I wasn't aware that I had provided any quotes? If you are searching for the words: "Oh, yes that..." I wasn't quoting verbatim so I don't think you will find it.
It was stated as a quote, but I figured you meant it as a paraphrase. Still, I'm unable to locate any material regarding the type of interaction described.
Yes, I was paraphrasing, but not paraphrasing one single interaction (so please don't go looking for it), but rather paraphrasing a certain approach to teaching which is fairly common in the more advaitic approaches to spirituality.
This seems to be bothering you somewhat, so I will try and explain in detail what I meant by that.
I'll talk you through one case study, which is a true story and is happening to a friend of mine. Maybe you will be able to see from that what I meant by my comment about Adyashanti and the way the energetic aspect of awakening can sometimes be dealt with as an afterthought.
My friend went to see an Advaita teacher (not Adyashanti) and the teacher taught her to rest in her own awareness and to continually bring herself back to the sense of her True self. She went to see him every day, and every day he said the same thing: "We are the pure self, just rest in that etc. etc. ". So she practised continuously and one day had a very beautiful awakening. That lasted for a few weeks, and then things started to go wrong. Her nervous system was trying to catch up, but was not yet ready to handle the voltage of energy rushing through her body. She basically became unable to walk for much of the time, unable to think and unable to care for her son.
She went back to the teacher and told him what had happened and he said: "yes, there is an energetic aspect to awakening, don't resist it and continue with your inquiry". It was many years before she was mostly recovered and able to function normally again.
So my question to you would be: "how is Adyashanti working to avoid that scenario from happening? How does he avoid it from happening to people coming on retreat? Or to people attending his satsangs? Or to people who watch his youtube videos? Or to people who read his books, or who listen to his tapes? Where is the support structure for people who are not ready on an energetic level? ".
As a teacher, that is something that Adyashanti should certainly be thinking about. Adyashanti does address the energetic aspect of awakening, but then so did my friend's teacher. The problem was that my friend's teacher addressed it after the fact, rather than before and that caused a great deal of suffering in her case. So does Adya address it after the fact, or before, or at all in the cases of the people who bought is early books?
quote:
As I'm sure you are aware, it is not as common in Zen (or for those with substantial Zen influence) to talk about kundalini... His book "True Meditation" talks about the type of practices he was experienced with, and although it is not kundalini or energy focused, it is helpful for many.
Just because something is not common, does not mean that it should not become common, and Adyashanti seems to be one of those teachers who is leading the way in making it more common for zen teachers to address the energetics of awakening. So that is a good thing and something that I would encourage him to do more of and I hope other teachers who maybe try to avoid dealing with that aspect of awakening will follow suit.
All the best,
Christi |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 08:49:13 AM
|
Hi Christi,
Have you considered that your friend's awakening happened exactly as it should have? Is there any way for you to know it would have definitely been different if someone like you had been a catalyst? Have you not seen people in AYP dealing with undesirable effects for years and years and some even quitting because they did not agree with it? If you think one system or approach is better, what are you comparing that with? And how does that make you any different than fundamentalists sitting on their lofty thrones pooh-poohing everyone else that disagrees with them? What about all the "shoulds" and "should nots"? Are you suggesting that Adya and other teachers like your friend's "should" stop by these forums and get your advice on how to do their work?
Is this an example of living in unity, love or compassion? You keep stating you have nothing against Adya, but over and over again, you criticize him (and everyone like him), with a myriad reasons of why your approach through ecstasy is somehow better. Very interesting to see this discussion unfold!
One can sit and build up ecstasy all they want. Without inquiry, the crucial shift of identity is unlikely to happen. There is no question that non-relational inquiry is a problem either. But, once again, neither "ecstatic" nor "self-inquiring" folks can achieve real unity without Grace. This is why in the Gita, Krishna says "Of a thousand seekers, only one can know Me."
My advice to you would be if you don't like Adya (or teachers like him), don't bother following them. If others are drawn to them, let them. There is a divine plan for each of us - not likely to be the same as yours.
"There are as many paths to God as there are souls on Earth." ~ Bab Aziz
Best,
kami |
Edited by - kami on Apr 01 2013 08:55:26 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 11:02:24 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by kami
Is this an example of living in unity, love or compassion? You keep stating you have nothing against Adya, but over and over again, you criticize him (and everyone like him), with a myriad reasons of why your approach through ecstasy is somehow better.
I think you have completely misunderstood what I am saying Kami. Far from criticizing Adyashati, I have actually been praising him over and over again. I have praised not only him as a teacher and his teachings, but also the innovative way he has developed zen practice to include an understanding of the energetic aspects of awakening.
What I have been discussing with Chas are minor aspects of the path and possible refinements to spiritual practice and teaching that could be made. It is not a question of one way verses another way or spiritual fundamentalism. As I mentioned before, Adya and I are both trained in the Buddhist tradition and our practices have been almost identical over the years.
There was a time when Adya used to give shaktipat. He put a few people in hospital and so he stopped giving shaktipat. Why? Out of love and compassion.
So you see, love and compassion, arising from unity, can lead people to refine their technique and approach to spiritual teaching. Adya has done that and I think every good teacher does that.
Could Adya have known that they would not have ended up in hospital anyway? Obviously not. Could he have known that it was not the absolutely perfect place for them to be at that time? Obviously not. But he stopped giving shaktipat. So love can be a driving force for change.
Yogani has also evolved his teaching over the years and made adjustments as issues have come up. The main lessons today contain a lot of things that were not there 5 years ago. And some of those changes have been put in place to make the practices safer for people who are sensitive. So Yogani responded to issues and made adgustments, as Asyashanti did. He could have said "if you don't like it why don't you go and find another teacher?" But he didn't.
But I will say again that I think Adya is a great teacher and the things we are discussing here are minor issues related to safety.
In AYP I have seen a few people (I could count them on the fingers of one hand) struggling with issues for years on end, yes, but in every case it has been people who have ignored the basic advice being given regarding self-pacing practices. So the safety net is there. If people choose to ignore it, then I think that is up to them.
As we are evolving as a species, and as we are expanding into spiritual awareness on a global level I think we can certainly all learn from each other. If someone suggests improvements to a model or a practice or a teaching based on their own experience, that does not make them a religious fundamentalist. Just someone who has noticed something and has a possible solution to a problem.
Inquiry practice is certainly an important aspect of spiritual practice and I have never suggested otherwise. The question for me is, how can it be taught in a manner that is effective and at the same time safe for everyone?
All the best
Christi |
|
|
|
jeff
USA
971 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 11:26:49 AM
|
Hi Christi,
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Jeff,
quote:
Also, if inner and outer are "illusory", does that mean from your perspective the outer world (and other people) don't really exist?
It is that the distinction between inner and outer is illusory. Outside what? Inside what? Do you see? Where is the line that separates the two? Other people still exist but not separated from what you fundamentally know yourself to be. They are a part of you too.
As I said in the above post, I agree that there is no separation between inner and outer. Your statement above came across to me as you were saying that both "inner" and "outer" were illusory (not the distinction). You seem to be also saying that in the "Other people still exist but not separated" statement. I am just trying to understand your perspective.
I have found that any "perceived" separation of "inner" and "outer" are an attachment to the the perceived local body/mind. All that is (or can be) perceived is an aspect of mind (or universal mind). As an example, both an angry thought and the tree outside my door are just aspects of mind.
quote:
quote:
Thanks. So "residing" in unity, there is no anger or irritation. Do you percieve there is a "sense of responsibility"? Or, is that also an attachment of the mind?
It is more like a continuous flow of love. So there is compassion, and love and the desire to be of service in the world. "Responsibility" sounds a bit heavy, having a sense a bit like "what is expected of you". There are no expectations imposed from outside. Unity is a very spontaneous state as the "heaviness" of the process of attachment and identification is gone. In that freedom and spontaneity, action is motivated by love. So if I saw a child running into the road in front of a car, I would run to grab the child even if I might be hit too, but not because I "should" because I am a responsible adult, but in the same way that you would pull your own hand out of a fire to prevent it from being burned. One of the aspects of unity is that other people's pain and suffering become your pain and suffering. But pain and love can exist at the same time in the same space, so that is the grace.
Adyashanti says something similar. He says that you reach a stage where you pour all of yourself back into the world in an overspilling of divine love. That is the shift from nothingness to everythingness that he talks about. But of course by that point, the boundary between yourself and the world has broken down, so it is not so much an active pouring as a naturally occurring flow of energy and compassion and action.
While I did not mean the responsibility question as one about being imposed from the outside, I did mean responsibility in the "heaviness" of the perspective of "taking responsibility for what happens around you". Divine outpouring of love is something different than what my question related to, but your response answered my question of your perception.
quote:
quote:
Finally, what and where is the "body of light" that you are building?
To be honest I have very little idea. I am letting the process happen by itself but I don't know what will happen if anything. At the moment the crown chakra has dissolved and there is a fairly continuous flow of amrita from the top of the head downward. I would be tempted to say "into the heart", but it is not yet that clear. There is a lot of fireworks going on, that is all I can say right now.
Christi
I think that you will find that as part of the process the dissolving of the crown chakra, there will first be a dissolving/merging with the third eye, then a broader overall "integration' before it all descends into the heart.
Thanks again. Best wishes on your path.
Jeff |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4375 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 1:12:18 PM
|
Hi Jeff,
quote:
I have found that any "perceived" separation of "inner" and "outer" are an attachment to the the perceived local body/mind. All that is (or can be) perceived is an aspect of mind (or universal mind). As an example, both an angry thought and the tree outside my door are just aspects of mind.
In classical yoga there are what is called the three bodies and five sheaths. The three bodies are the physical, subtle and causal. Each body comprises one or more sheath. The subtle body comprises the energetic sheath, the mental sheath and the sheath of knowledge. It is one way of understanding the world. So a tree would be a part of the physical world, a thought would be an aspect of the mental sheath within the subtle body and the sensation of being angry or irritated would be an aspect of the energy sheath (pranamayakosha) within the subtle body (sukshma sharira).
So when I say "go beyond the mind" it means go beyond thought, memory, division and form, the basic aspects of the mental sheath (manomayakosha). The tree is still there, but it is no longer outside you and no longer separate from anything else. The sensation of being angry will still be there, but will dry up in time through no longer being fuelled by the mind.
quote:
I think that you will find that as part of the process the dissolving of the crown chakra, there will first be a dissolving/merging with the third eye, then a broader overall "integration' before it all descends into the heart.
Yes, the merging with the third eye took place before the dissolving of the crown chakra. There is also the sense of integration that you mention and the descent into the heart, but not of the amrita, which is what I was expecting to happen, but rather of the whole being.
quote:
Thanks again. Best wishes on your path.
You too. |
|
|
|
AumNaturel
Canada
687 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 1:50:09 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by kami
His teachings, as you know, have nothing about ecstasy. Neither do teachings of Papaji, Nisargadatta, Balsekar, Spira, Lucille, etc. Modern popular teachers like Tolle and Katie don't talk about Kundalini at all. Can we take up an issue with all their methods?
Sri Ramana Maharshi did mention that the effects of inquiry bypass the steps of energy practices, and in the end result in the same thing (though by different means). This is my paraphrase directly from David Godman's book.
Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj may not use the words "kundalini" but certainly presents an all-inclusive picture of spiritual discipline, from sincerity, to ripeness, meditation, purification and self-inquiry. Early on, he even renounced the world to seek the secret of immortality. Here is just one quote that explains the depth of his knowledge, from "I Am That:" "Ecstasies come and go, necessarily, for the human brain cannot stand the tension for a long time. A prolonged ecstasy will burn out your brain, unless it is extremely pure and subtle."
Eckart Tolle Too? How about his famous quote: “Spiritual practices that involve the physical body, such as t’ai chi, qigong, and yoga, are also increasingly being embraced in the Western world. These practices do not create a separation between body and spirit and are helpful in weakening the pain-body. They will play an important role in the global awakening.” Quoted from 'A New Earth' by Eckhart Tolle p 158 – 9"
This is a far cry from claiming 'they have nothing about ecstasy.'
quote:
Originally posted by kami
I do, in fact, agree whole-heartedly with him that there is no pre-set prerequisite for awakening. Certainly not ecstasy, not bliss, not siddhis. The Vedas and Upanishads, the ultimate authority on the subject, don't refer to such pre-requisites. The Bhagavad Gita, the distillation of the Upanishads, describes paths, but when it comes to pre-requisite, I'm certain of only one thing - Grace.
You mention the Vedas, Upanishads, but what of Tantric texts like those of Abhinava Gupta and Swami Lakshmanjoo, all of which have kundalini as a central aspect of the path. Would those be less of an 'ultimate authority?' I have seen a simple translation of a passage in the Vedas (Yoga Chudamani Upanishad, part of the Sama Veda) describing many of the very same energy practices already used in AYP, including a detailed description of Kundalini: "The Kundalani power which is above the mooladhara, in its eight studded form would always be covering the mouth of Sushumna which is the gate of Brahman. 36." - http://www.vedarahasya.net/yogachudamani.htm
quote:
Originally posted by kami
We can argue all we want but there is nobody that can prove that cultivating ecstasy will definitely lead to the experience of unity.
There is evidence for or against something. What constitutes proof is an attitude, a 'best estimate' theory, model, or law that is subject to revision based on new evidence.
What is common to the Vedas, Upanishads, Tantric texts? A common denominator, the human nervous system, in all of its depth. This much is clear in the lessons, and from Sri Patanjali.
quote:
Originally posted by kami
There are countless ways to get to "it". As soon as the One decides to experience Itself via a particular body-mind, It will, by It's own Grace. All else is speculation until That happens.
One could call that speculation as well. Let's not be so quick to denounce the faculties of the mind and philosophical systems which have grown out of it. There is evidence, and that much is enough to tread any path, be it of grace, tantra, advaita-vedanta, eclectic, etc. |
|
|
|
kami
USA
920 Posts |
Posted - Apr 01 2013 : 5:46:46 PM
|
Hi Aum,
The point of this discussion is not whether there is an energetic component or not. It is about claiming superiority of one "path" over another. Nobody here is disagreeing that there is an energetic component, as all our posts above relay.
The teachers you mention above - Ramana, Nisargadatta, Tolle do NOT prescribe ecstasy as a means to enlightenment. That was the point I was making. You are right - they all acknowledge the energetic component of awakening, but cultivating ecstasy is not their teaching. The Vedas (and Upanishads which are part of the Vedas) pre-date the Tantric texts that you mention and are the most widely accepted authoritative texts on the subject of Brahman. Nowhere did I say the tantric texts are not valid. Of course they are! But are they the only valid paths? That was my point - these particular teachers and teachings don't follow the path that might be yours or mine. Can we be ok with that? There are countless approaches to the Divine. And they are all valid.
Besides, none of the above is the point of all this.
This discussion is about tolerance. It is about letting teachers teach what they are called upon to teach. It is about seeing that each of our paths is unique and we will be drawn to teachers and teachings exactly as it is supposed to unfold. God/Divine is allowing these teachings already, so who are we to critique them?
Does this world need any more "us vs. them"?? If we can't live and let live, our yoga is yet to bear fruit.
Can we know the truth in its entirety? The only thing I can know for sure is what is verified in my direct experience. Beyond that it is indeed all hearsay and speculation.
Best,
kami |
Edited by - kami on Apr 01 2013 6:22:32 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Adyashanti Intensive
