Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Auras & Chakras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 18-06-2011, 12:23 PM
Prokopton
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
Maybe kandalini has nothing to do with snakes

It doesn't on any literal level of course! But because a big kundalini rising does actually feel like a very powerful snake moving within the energy body, the serpent has become a fairly universal symbol of the process. Only where physical snakes are also found however... :)
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 18-06-2011, 12:26 PM
Chrysaetos Chrysaetos is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,079
  Chrysaetos's Avatar
People around the globe had to deal with poisonous snakes and other dangerous creatures. What to do? For some it meant to worship. Please them.
Over time stories are created about humans who are ''like the snake''. Snake gods are created etc.

This of course does not mean kundalini is about that, but there are a lot of cultures who worshipped the snake and likely depicted the snake for different purposes.

To say all depictions are about kundalini is like saying.. ''Well it's all a demonic teaching created by reptilian demons who wanted us to worship them.''
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 18-06-2011, 01:16 PM
Prokopton
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysateos
To say all depictions are about kundalini is like saying

To be fair, I'm not sure anyone was saying that... Uma agreed with me that it wasn't so.

I think the next question would be, how do you tell a depiction (of a snake, or indeed anything else) that represents kundalini from one that doesn't? And if the answer doesn't include a very careful reading of what the people who made the image actually said about it, then you are asking to be spanked on the behind by the truth when someone happens to point it out! There are indications sometimes of extreme interest that there was genuine kundalini knowledge in this or that culture... I'm researching this at the moment too, because it links with a lot of other interests of mine. At other times it's not mere speculation, we actually know for sure that kundalini is not meant. And then there are times when it's anyone's guess.

What can we know for sure, cross-culturally speaking, vs. what do we merely believe? A book like the one SerpentQueen linked to is full of things that one would have to take on faith, which obviously for the last 2,000 years has been an important way of thinking about spirituality in the West. The same kind of thinking is seen in the deleted images thread of Uma -- there is no evidence adduced that 'it is all kundalini', we are simply asked to take a 'leap of faith' that it is, almost to treat the onslaught of images as some kind of 'revelation' in itself, and suspend the thinking process.

The truth is we need that thinking process. It's worth pointing out (and I address this somewhat in my most recent blog post too) that we humans seem to do our best work when questioning rather than simply accepting everything on faith. All the great spiritual philosophies have had huge amounts of discussion going on. Following actual evidence has proven a way to cut out a lot of speculation. Evidence has played a far great role in spirituality than is usually seen. (See for example this great essay by David Hufford.)

This isn't to say that personal revelation of 'truth' is not valid! It is extremely important. But an incredible amount of revelation has taken place in human history, and continues to do so, which still can't always be completely trusted -- it becomes contradictory or gradually proves false, etc. So any revelation does become theory, and it requires some degree of evidence and thinking to support it. If unchecked by that kind of care, we certainly know that 'theories' become flimsy fantasies, but we know more too -- we know that there is a desperation almost, underlying them, a desperation to know prematurely, to say all is known already, to stop the questioning process.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 18-06-2011, 04:40 PM
SerpentQueen
Posts: n/a
 
Prokopton, I know I don't write as clearly and eloquently as you do, so apologies in advance. Are you advocating a more "yang" approach with less "yin"? By that I mean more evidence/rational thinking, less "flashes of intuitive insight"? If so, I would argue we need a more balanced approach.

Yes, evidence and rational thinking is absolutely critical. I would never say it is not. But it seems to me that there's a lot of evidence that points to most genius breakthroughs (Einstein) and spiritual breakthroughs as happening in a flash (Buddha). After years of practiced, studied approach.

When you start digging into it, it seems to me that the act of questioning and seeking evidence was important, but ultimately, the breakthrough was a gift. Or (and for the life of me, I can't remember which guru explained it this way - I think it was UG Krishnamurti?), it was the process of never-ending questions, that only led to more questions, and so on and so on... until the seeker just gave up, realizing he'd never reach the end. And then and only then, the gift of transcendence/insight/solution was given to him.

.... a process which one can see illustrated in the symbol of the serpent chasing it's tail... hee hee!

In your blog (which I'm very happy to now discover, and have added to my reader), you dismiss the "just do it" approach. While I'm more aligned with you and the "ask questions" approach, what about the Sufis? I have not studied them much, but from what I understand, their approach was very much a "just do it" approach and it seemed to work, no?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 18-06-2011, 07:58 PM
Prokopton
Posts: n/a
 
@SerpentQueen, nice to have you aboard as a reader!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SerpentQueen
Are you advocating a more "yang" approach with less "yin"? By that I mean more evidence/rational thinking, less "flashes of intuitive insight"? If so, I would argue we need a more balanced approach.

No that is not what I'm advocating at all! Insight is of huge importance, and yang and yin in spiritual terms should be balanced.

When you are talking about 'the breakthrough' as a gift, you have to ask, what breakthrough? Take Einstein -- General Relativity was a breakthrough in physics, that is, the area it claimed to be a breakthrough in was about how the physical cosmos functions. In order to know if it really was a breakthrough with any value, one needs to check if the cosmos really does work that way. Because however great the breakthrough might feel to the person having it, if it has no actual value in describing the physical world, it is not good or useful physics!

When it comes to understanding culture, the same thing has to apply. You can have a moment of seeing a lot of symbols and saying, well these look like widespread kundalini to me, a moment of sudden vision... but then you need to see, are you right? As humans we tend to hold onto our precious inspirations, but they become so much more valuable if they are subjected to the test of the real world, and the real world causes us to think, to have to be more creative, to have more flashes of insight, as a result of having to take it into account.

I don't know where you got this thing about dismissing the 'just do it approach'? (Maybe that initial quote from Karajan in my current post?) If so that 'approach' is not the Nike 'just do it', it's the 'just do what I tell you' approach! Which is a different thing. The point of that particular blog post was that unquestioning obedience to a set of spiritual instructions may not be the best way to encourage human spiritual creativity, which is actually what gives us so much good stuff. I'm not a fan of being told what to think for no good reason, I simply can't seem to follow even the best ideas for spiritual training, for example, without seeing why they ought to do me good. I'm not the 'faith' type! And again, I'd have to say that a good deal of the spiritual stuff I value most came exactly from that continually-probing mindset.

I also haven't studied the Sufis so I can't comment on their relevance to that...
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 18-06-2011, 08:36 PM
SerpentQueen
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prokopton
@SerpentQueen, nice to have you aboard as a reader!



No that is not what I'm advocating at all! Insight is of huge importance, and yang and yin in spiritual terms should be balanced.

I didn't *think* so but I figured it was best to ask. You have an interesting tone to your writing - it's easy for me to "hear" something different in your words, than you actually intended. If that makes sense? i.e., fault of the reader, ahem, me... not you ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prokopton
When it comes to understanding culture, the same thing has to apply. You can have a moment of seeing a lot of symbols and saying, well these look like widespread kundalini to me, a moment of sudden vision... but then you need to see, are you right? As humans we tend to hold onto our precious inspirations, but they become so much more valuable if they are subjected to the test of the real world, and the real world causes us to think, to have to be more creative, to have more flashes of insight, as a result of having to take it into account.

I do agree with this. I've seen it happen in my line of business. I'm the "big picture" type and lean towards creative insights, which are based on volumes of data and information generated by the technical people I work with. I will see the patterns and connect the dots, and have the creative flashes of insight.

But it doesn't stop there - it's a process. If the insight resonates, the technical folks then take it and run with it. As you say, testing it out, seeing if it works and "holds water." And, if it does, they often add, expand, make it even better than I would ever dream. Nobody owns the final outcome - it's completely collaborative process. It never ceases to amaze me, and I think about it a lot, how it works like that. I know I'm probably swinging away from the original topic.

The other thing I've noticed and marvel over is that often in my organization the same basic "big idea" will bubble up separately. From teams that have no connection to each other. Do you know what I mean? So what I would be interested in knowing is whether these images - IF they stood for the same basic idea - did they pop up in isolation, around same time? That's where it gets very interesting to me. (And please note - I'm not suggesting aliens came down from the sky... I like to keep an open mind, so who knows. I just think there's other explanations, as I am sure that there are no aliens visiting my organization).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prokopton
I don't know where you got this thing about dismissing the 'just do it approach'? (Maybe that initial quote from Karajan in my current post?) If so that 'approach' is not the Nike 'just do it', it's the 'just do what I tell you' approach! Which is a different thing. The point of that particular blog post was that unquestioning obedience to a set of spiritual instructions may not be the best way to encourage human spiritual creativity, which is actually what gives us so much good stuff. I'm not a fan of being told what to think for no good reason, I simply can't seem to follow even the best ideas for spiritual training, for example, without seeing why they ought to do me good. I'm not the 'faith' type! And again, I'd have to say that a good deal of the spiritual stuff I value most came exactly from that continually-probing mindset.

I also haven't studied the Sufis so I can't comment on their relevance to that...

I think my point still applied, whether it was "just do it" or "just do what I tell you."

Another angle I wonder about takes the temperament theorist approach. Four basic temperaments. Your temperament, I am going to guess, is Rational (NT). So yeah, you absolutely would want a path that is all about questioning and not having anyone tell you what to do. Whereas I am an Idealist type, so I take like a duck in water to more creative, intuitive paths. But the majority of the world are Guardians - they would, I imagine, vastly prefer a "just do what I tell you" approach, one based on tradition and ritual and yes, authority.

Ultimately it doesn't matter what path you take, does it?
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 18-06-2011, 09:17 PM
Prokopton
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SerpentQueen
it's easy for me to "hear" something different in your words, than you actually intended. If that makes sense? i.e., fault of the reader, ahem, me... not you ;-)

Well if so I have no problem clarifying... although if it's all about the blog, the comments page of it might be a better place!

Quote:
The other thing I've noticed and marvel over is that often in my organization the same basic "big idea" will bubble up separately.

Yes this does happen. IMO the ideas have 'mind of their own' and are looking for a way to be born and thrive etc.

Quote:
So what I would be interested in knowing is whether these images - IF they stood for the same basic idea - did they pop up in isolation, around same time?

I agree it's an interesting question, one that some people are studying too. Of course this is where the idea of linear time, and knowing the dates of things, turns out to be rather useful. :)

Mind you, if you're talking about Uma's big images thread, that was completely all over the shop! That was not a bunch of serpents merely, that was Bernini sculptures next to rivers next to Steiner-school child development theories... it was very higgledy.

Quote:
I think my point still applied, whether it was "just do it" or "just do what I tell you."

Well I have no problem with 'just do it' in this context. Indeed I often wish more people would! :)

Quote:
Another angle I wonder about takes the temperament theorist approach. Four basic temperaments. Your temperament, I am going to guess, is Rational (NT).

Well I don't go for the whole four temperaments thing actually, and it's non-provable, but I doubt I'd be classed as rational on any ordinary psychological instrument (if it were opposed to 'imaginative and weird', say.) I made my living as a musician for many years and would have been classed as strongly over-imaginative by most in my formative days; to most people who know me I'm an eccentric mad poet/philosopher who overdoes the meditation thing. :)

Quote:
But the majority of the world are Guardians - they would, I imagine, vastly prefer a "just do what I tell you" approach, one based on tradition and ritual and yes, authority.

There you go again -- how exactly do we know the majority of the world are "Guardians"? How can we build on that assumption, when it's simply an assumption?

I have no problem at all with tradition, ritual and authority -- I've got a lot of my best stuff from them! None of those three needs to mean that questioning is disallowed (real tradition should be alive to questioning.) But that's more a response to the blog than this thread...

This question you ask gets us right back to the subject:

Quote:
Ultimately it doesn't matter what path you take, does it?

Assuming the path you are on actually works and is right for you (and that's actually a big assumption) that's a good enough reason to follow it.

But this thread began by making a claim about the Crown Chakra. Let's assume Uma made the claim either because she knows from personal experience it is true, or trusts somebody who does. The problem then becomes, if someone else's experience contradicts hers, who is correct?

It seems clear that both are correct, therefore one cannot generalize from one's personal path to 'all others'. One cannot say, because this is true for me, it must be true for everybody (and they are all misselling, lying, mistaken, not the real thing...). One cannot make that assumption just because there exist multiple valid paths. It is often done, but it just doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny.

The reason there are so many arguments in spiritual matters is partly because people's experiences point in many different directions, sometimes agreeing, sometimes not. Unless there is full agreement no-one can say what the Crown Chakra 'always' does, or indeed that Jesus Christ is the one true Saviour, or anything else!

At least with questions about symbols there are facts to discover that can be demonstrated with some objectivity... with such huge spiritual questions, there can easily be more than one valid viewpoint.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 18-06-2011, 09:50 PM
Uma Uma is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,711
  Uma's Avatar
Fish Speaking of the OP

Quote:
Originally Posted by prokopton
But this thread began by making a claim about the Crown Chakra. Let's assume Uma made the claim either because she knows from personal experience it is true, or trusts somebody who does. The problem then becomes, if someone else's experience contradicts hers, who is correct?

The claim is made in the book The Serpent Power and other ancient texts.
The claim is made by my teacher who is a living example of living in crown chakra consciousness. He claims this state is permanent and irreversible and the culmincation of the spiritual journey whilst in a human body. He has helped to awaken temporary experiences of this consciousness in hundreds of people around this world (I never claimed he was the only teacher capable of doing this). He says his possibilities are our possibilities and that all the wisdom he shares is already within us also. It is within us becuase this is about who we are and what we are all about.
I have experienced glimpses and all that he has taught is validated to me.
I share what I know from my experiences and am honest about what I don't know.

It is said that when you know the nature of gold, you can recognize all the forms gold is made into (rings, bracelets, crowns...). To me, the forms are uninteresting. The gold is that which if you know you know everything else.

It is very clear to me that other teachers living in crown chakra consciousness have shared their teachings of this state with people from all ages and cultures. Their legacy are iconic images, literature, myths, stories and religions that were created by others who glimpsed also.
The validity of Kundalini is inherent in all of life, as above so below - the outer world reflects the inner world. Enlightened (even partially enlightened) consciousness sees this as obvious.

I started this post to guide those who are having crown chakra experiences not to debate the existence of the crown chakra. But I cannot share more advanced knowledge if the interest is focused on banal things. I offer diamonds on a purple cushion but if the interest is only in the cushion, then I must bow to that and share elsewhere when my knowledge is needed. Nothing wrong with studying cushions but I feel that the OP was hijacked into a cushions discussion and I have no interest in that (I did at an earlier stage but no longer).

Prokopton your interests on your blog will only become more enriched by meditation, because the morenyou experience the light the more you will develop the faculty of discearnment - the abilitynto see true from false. The intellect can only take us to the doorway of that experience. The goal is to jump into a space beyond mind, in order to understand mind. Mind=brow (individual), crown=cosmic consciousness (the edge of "I" existence and knowing). Beyond that is void, where an I can no longer exist.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 18-06-2011, 11:42 PM
Prokopton
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uma
The claim is made in the book The Serpent Power and other ancient texts.

Not all, and not unambiguously. Ways of connecting and interacting with the overhead space vary even within the Hindu and Tantric tradition, never mind worldwide... since other views are not necessarily false, there's nothing wrong with mentioning them.

I'm glad your teacher has experienced such success in his way, and is able to pass the experience; I believe I said from the beginning it sounded like a perfectly good way to me!

Quote:
To me, the forms are uninteresting.

Well the pictures thread was full of forms.

Quote:
The gold is that which if you know you know everything else.

... or think you do. Two of my teachers achieved -- well let's not argue about that what for goodness' sake. But that doesn't mean they know the capital of South Dakota.

If there are people here who will believe that you 'know everything' on a literal level through spiritual achievement, I guess I can't stop them believing it (although I might wonder why all the spiritually achieved argue so fiercely about what they know!) In my opinion there is a confusion here about what 'knowing' is...

Quote:
It is very clear to me that other teachers living in crown chakra consciousness have shared their teachings of this state with people from all ages and cultures. Their legacy are iconic images, literature, myths, stories and religions that were created by others who glimpsed also.

There is no way to show that everyone who starts a religion or a myth is doing so from the same kind of consciousness, let alone that their traditions are all referring to the exact same thing, or to kundalini.

Saying it is 'very clear to you' doesn't make it true. Lots of people have spiritual revelations which contradict one another. Having said that, it seems clear that the overhead space is very important in many traditions! But I never denied that. It's just that we do not know that everyone with an experience of some form of Ultimate Awakening is working from this kind of perspective... it is worth listening to them as well as to oneself in my opinion.

Quote:

The validity of Kundalini is inherent in all of life

Well you said before that it was a purely human energy! But whatever, I'm not arguing about kundalini as 'valid' or not, obviously I think it's valid since it's my way too. I'm saying that there are other energies and spiritual processes apart from kundalini, and there are awakening experiences that don't appear to involve kundalini, certainly not at first sight. And that not all awakening experiences necessarily end up in the same version of the same place.

Quote:
as above so below - the outer world reflects the inner world.

Yes, or the microcosm the macrocosm.

Quote:
I feel that the OP was hijacked into a cushions discussion and I have no interest in that (I did at an earlier stage but no longer)... Prokopton your interests on your blog will only become more enriched by meditation, because the morenyou experience the light the more you will develop the faculty of discearnment - the abilitynto see true from false.

If you're trying to imply that you're so far ahead of me that I won't understand your position until I meditate enough to do so, I think that only shows a certain inability to understand the limits of your own knowledge, and not for the first time. But if you need to judge the level of attainment in others by how much they agree with you, and are content to do that, I guess I can't do much about it -- beyond pointing out that giving oneself the right to determine the truth because of one's level of enlightenment is sheer hubris.

I know there is much beyond the intellect from personal experience. In fact I've mentioned it several times... the reason you're choosing not to believe me about that is, you assume if I had any experience I would be drawing the same conclusion from it as you draw. I don't know why you assume that... but in any case nothing is stopping you from sharing your personal way about the crown chakra! That would, in my opinion, be both wiser and more honest. If your diamonds are as good as you think they are, I'm sure people will respond.

In any case, none of that has anything to do with the fact of the universality of kundalini and its symbology. The 'cushion discussion' began with a couple of honest questions about chakras overhead and how they related to the crown chakra experience you talked about, and apparently that's not what you wanted to talk about! So, ok, that makes it a 'cushions discussion' from your lofty perspective... I will leave you to it.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 19-06-2011, 03:00 AM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 19,656
  Gem's Avatar
Maybe forget the snakes and find it makes no difference.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums