Is This The Truth About Kundalini?

[Guest sykkelpump]

Your opinion was unwarranted and comes from somewhere within you that needs checking. Not only is your opinion untrue, it carries an intentionality that you should look at as you are the source of it.

 

I tried to stop this as you see in my last post because I felt a little sorry for you after your last post.But you continue.Maybe you should stop reading all thoose books,quit drinking and look somewhere in yourself.get some practice not just theory

[Guest sykkelpump]

Your opinion was unwarranted and comes from somewhere within you that needs checking. Not only is your opinion untrue, it carries an intentionality that you should look at as you are the source of it.

 

I tried to stop this as you see in my last post because I felt a little sorry for you after your last post.But you continue.Maybe you should stop reading all thoose books,quit drinking and look somewhere in yourself.get some practice not just theory

[Vajrahridaya]

I tried to stop this as you see in my last post because I felt a little sorry for you after your last post.But you continue.Maybe you should stop reading all thoose books,quit drinking and look somewhere in yourself.get some practice not just theory

I haven't actually read a book for a number of years, not a single book, and the last book I read was a fantasy book called Mipham, the first Tibetan novel and that was in 2007.

 

Before that I read a number of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche books, while practicing and having incredible awakening experiences while walking the streets of Manhattan after my transmission from him in 04'. Having various lucid dream experiences with him or other Tibetan Masters including the Dalai Lama who I never felt connected to before my transmission from Namkhai Norbu. These experiences were clarifying the view of Buddhism, as well as spontaneous occurrences of serendipity in all sorts of places around NYC, revealing the subtlety of dependent origination/emptiness. All the while I was learning how to do the various terma practices taught by Namkhai Norbu involving visualization, mantra and mudra, as I was used to just doing relatively easy bhakti chanting, in the traditional Namasankirtana style of Hinduism, as well as Swadyaya chanting of Hindu Gitas which is quite simple in comparison. The Buddhist Vajrayana and Dzogchen practices are more engaging, involving more focus from the individual who is doing the practice.

 

The Yantra Yoga is also more refined than traditional forms of Hatha Yoga, both Iyangar derivatives and Ashtanga derivatives, as the postures are conjoined with particular breathing exercises as in pranayama is performed during the flow of yogic movements that is very specific as far as where to place the inbreath and outbreath as well as the different breath holds in line with particular postures and some involve particular visualizations for specific results. All in all the practices of Vajrayana and Dzogchen are very clean, not messy and very specific in intentionality and require more engaging energy from the practitioner than most forms of Indian Yogic practice derived from Vedic understanding. Of which I still enjoy doing though. Sometimes I still go to Hindu Kirtans and practice Hatha Yoga and enjoy it.

 

During my first meeting with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche in 04', I experienced so many visions and spontaneous surges of a variety of different levels of energy going through different rapture states and correlating realizations as well as visions of the 6 realms and 31 planes of existence and their meaning both mundane and super-mundane. These experiences re-contextualized my previous experiences doing heavy practice in a kundalini tantra tradition and brought a different kind of clarity to these experiences I had previous to my Dzogchen transmission.

 

As well I was having clarity of vision with correlating psychic phenomena revealing information that contradicted my previous understanding based upon Eternalistic interpretations of reality and meditative experiences that supported the Eternalist view during my years as a Shaivite Yogi. Basically, all my previous assumptions based upon supposedly deep level Kundalini Yoga experiences were being contradicted and re-contextualized, and completely re-understood. My whole mind and brain was going through changes. So I read books by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, the person who gave me transmission.

 

So, your truths that you seem to think are real, are really a figment of your imagination. I have ideas of why this happened for you, but I won't share these ideas as I think it's up to you to figure out why for yourself.

 

If you were to sit in practice with me, during my Dzogchen "Tun" or in a group session, lets say a "Ganapuja" or "Chod"... you would change your mind. You think, much like ralis, that you are being intuitive, but your really showing how deep subjective thinking and feeling clouds intuition or actually is the experience of intuition, as there is no inherent "intuition" really, just causes and conditions within the many dimensions as mind.

 

This is a good and humbling insight. I have friends that tell me, "you should be a psychic for hire and make money with it." Or... "You should read auras and tell people their past lives." Because these things spontaneously happen for me. I've read peoples minds, sure, and told them what I read and I'm not talking about general things, but specific things that these people said in their minds with reactions from these people, sometimes in shock, "that's exactly what I was thinking, word for word." But, I am not sure about the validity of any of these things because I understand how deep subjectivity goes within an individual, as well as inter-subjectivity within a group of karmically connected individuals. What people call intuition, is generally just deep subconscious conditioning based upon lifetimes of habit patterning both individually and in groups, as well as left overs from lives as an animal running in a pack.

 

I hope this information was clear enough and not misunderstood.

 

Life is actually pretty complicated in all it's expressions, and sometimes it takes some unpacking of detail to get to the heart of things. Theists say, "God is in the details." Well... for a Buddhist, "Buddhahood is in the details."

 

p.s. I probably should apply more energy to my private practice at home than I do here. Even though I consider all things and every aspect of my day as part of the practice.

Edited December 13, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Mokona]

My friend, if you want to raise the "traditional" argument. Your academic friends can verify that Kundalini is worshipped as a goddess. She is referred to as a goddess countless times in countless texts. She is always connected to awareness and consciousness. There is no tradition that claims kundalini is not an intelligent force. If you are talking about a force of energy that has no consciousness, then you are talking about Prana not kundalini. Physical sensations are more connected to prana than kundalini.... Vajrahridaya though coming from a buddhist perpective is also in line with Hindu tanrics in his understanding that Kundalini is directly connected to Karma and awareness.

 

As to your second statement, according to most traditional yogic masters, you cannot manipulate the chakras. By placing your attention on any energy point will result in any number of physical/mental/emotional experiences. This is not manipulating chakras nor is it kundalini. Vajrahridaya has the traditional understanding. According to yogic masters, the only way to open chakras, is to stimulate kundalini through spiritual awareness. This is why yogis teach Bhakti (devotional) yoga, Karma yoga (good deeds) and Hatha (physical) yoga which would include any physical exercises that manipulate prana. (which is what you are refferring to). traditionally one cannot truly practice yoga (raising kundalini) without all of these aspects. When this unified approach is successful, the individual grows in awareness, the kundalini is drawn upward to the closest unopened chakra up the spine. When the individual releases karmic blockages through better understanding of the relationship of the self to the Divine, Then the chakra opens and Kundalini is attracted to it.

 

With this understanding, what you are talking about, although a very wonderful, respectable and beautiful experience, is a physical practice stimulating prana, not kundalini....

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________________________

 

I'm typing on my mobile, and it might effect the quality here, sorry.

If I may interject, sir, my experience and that of several other practictioners I have met is that it is easy to dirctly effect a chakra, or manipulate one for any number of effects in a persons mental state or mood, or directly energetic, or by going through different energy bodies. It all depends on what you have learned. Don't limit yourself, it is exciting and fun to learn!

[三江源]

Oh lordy... what does writing complicated mean anyway?? I think you mean I write opaquely. Or incomprehensibly?

 

I think your response is subjective and valid for you. So, I would suggest not reading what I write if you get a bad inner reaction to any of it?

 

I think writing complicated means using twenty words where ten would do, resorting to extended metaphor to dramatise your ideas, clouding your position with supposed back - up from random quotes and sources that could be refuted if anyone could actually be bothered, and driving forward an agenda with your words that means the reader has to work hard to get past your agenda to find if there is actually any content amongst the form.

 

I dont think you do any of that.

 

What it is, is when you see through a comment, from your point of view, and invite people to self examine, to perceive their own view, V., your suggestion usually is met with reactivity which takes the form of personal jibe, ie deeper reactivity,or of course, simply a rationale of why they dont have to examine their own view. We are all good at manufacturing those..

[Vajrahridaya]

I think writing complicated means using twenty words where ten would do, resorting to extended metaphor to dramatise your ideas, clouding your position with supposed back - up from random quotes and sources that could be refuted if anyone could actually be bothered, and driving forward an agenda with your words that means the reader has to work hard to get past your agenda to find if there is actually any content amongst the form.

 

I dont think you do any of that.

 

What it is, is when you see through a comment, from your point of view, and invite people to self examine, to perceive their own view, V., your suggestion usually is met with reactivity which takes the form of personal jibe, ie deeper reactivity,or of course, simply a rationale of why they dont have to examine their own view. We are all good at manufacturing those..

 

Sweet... I hear that. I know I'm guilty of any one of those at one point or another.

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence cat!

[三江源]

you are very welcome.