1997/10/08 05:09
kundalini-l-d Digest V97 #500
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 97 : Issue 500
Today's Topics:
Reply to your thoughts on:Is Morality relative? of Oct3,97
Re: favorite charities
Re: Kundalini and Holy Spirit (was Pentecostal Kundalini)
Re: Namaste and Mangalum
Re: Kundalini and Holy Spirit (was Pentecostal Kundalini)
Re: favorite charities
Re: Namaste and Mangalum
Re: Unidentified subject!
Re: Unidentified subject!
Kundalini Joy Spot
Re: Namaste and Mangalum
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 18:39:05 -0700
From: indra <indraATnospamsmartt.com>
To: SchrLLATnospamaol.com
CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Reply to your thoughts on:Is Morality relative? of Oct3,97
Message-ID: <343AE439.12A7ATnospamsmartt.com>
Hello Linda !
Sorry to acknowledge your reply so late.For the past few days I had lot
to take care of , hence the delay.
In principle, I do not intend to point fingers at anyone. For something
inside me tells me the truth, when interacting with people in
person,when I look straight on to their eyes. Many may call it psychic
ability , but I do not. They are natural to everyone, provided we are
centered, our mind clear of any thoughts, when we really listen. Truth
reveals on its own, it does not require any other prop.
I agree with you that people are not what they present themselves to be.
The reason I believe that right from our childhood we have been so
conditioned and always taught to look out for answers , instead of
looking within. Most of us go about with a mask of perosnality, and
possibly stay with it our whole lives. When we can make our personality
the same as our soul nature, you will find miracles do happen, if we
wish to call them miracles.
I have experienced out of the darkness comes the light,out of silence
come out the answers. As if the answers are all there like radio waves,
all we need to do is tune in to the particular wave and the answer
surfaces on our mind's lake. Some call it intuition.
If you look at our lives , normally after a commute to work and back for
a couple of hours, working 7-8 hours, attending to family or personal
chores for another 3-4 hours, and after normal sleep time of 7-8 hours,
we are hardly left with 2-4 hours to ourselves, when we can really
nurture ourselves inwardly. And of the 3-4 hours for ourselves everyday
do we seldom even think of of going within, other than doing something
outwardly. This is the difficulty which we all have to face if we think
it appropriate for us to go within.
On weekends we have a little more time to nurture ourselves compared to
the week days.
The outward activity or interactive situations do impose their auras,and
our auras interact to create a resultant. But if we choose not to
identify with the mixing of the auras and yet observe and discern with a
clear head and heart, then we find most situations work out naturally.
When we impose ourselves within the structure, and we cannot read minds,
we hurriedly react instead of a heartfelt and head discerned response.
It is very true when you mention that 'we need to harken back to our own
individual selves to get grounded and tune in to our innermost light."
On one level we are all one no doubt, but just think how many of us look
at everything in our lives from that standpoint. We choose to identify
more with individuality than with the One in ALL or the All in One.
It is also true that we need to have our individuality in this three
dimensional world. The real experience is how we relate to everything
around and within us and maintaining a sense of harmony between the
two, and to have a balance.
Other who are not at the same level as your understanding, many a time
create problems for us, don't they. It is matter of thinking and
understanding on both sides so that all relationships can be expanded
on the points of commonality, instead of differences. In the process,
someone has to give in , step back. But taking a step backward at the
time may in all possibility turn in your favor, later.
In this modern age we expect almost everything to happen at the push of
a button, but the ways of Nature are slow moving but they do become long
lasting.
In Love, Life and Light,
Indra
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 22:21:27 -0400
From: heidi <heidiATnospamadan.kingston.net>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: favorite charities
Message-Id: <199710080221.WAA00387ATnospamadan.kingston.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> Giving and giving without getting anything back, leads to resentment and
>burnout. Not a very holy state.. even Christ got a foot massauge, and a
>nice palm leaf donkey ride parade.. and was way grateful for both.
>
Mystress
It is of the utmost importance to replenish oneself as often as needed for,
if we allow our "well" to dry up, there will be nothing left to give to the
thirsty.
buckets of Love
Am
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 19:19:17 +0100
From: Gloria Greco <lodpressATnospamintercomm.com>
To: Kurt Keutzer <keutzerATnospamsynopsys.com>
CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Kundalini and Holy Spirit (was Pentecostal Kundalini)
Message-ID: <343A7D24.6AB1ATnospamintercomm.com>
Kurt Keutzer wrote:
>
> Gloria writes:
> >HI Kurt,
> >Actually I meant to write one is not better then the other, they are
> >just coming from different places with different frequencies, I was glad
> >to find in a book called Cosmic Shakti Kundalini by Sadguru Sant
> >Keshavadas the eternal cosmic or universal is called Maha Kundalini
> >while in the individual psychic energy is called Kula Kundalini. I was
> >glad they made a distinction since there is certainly a difference to me
> >in frequency and power. Maha only comes down from the crown when you are
> >ready to work with cosmic power while kula is doing the work in the
> >preparation of this event.I do believe it has to be experienced to be
> >understood. Gloria
>
> I presume we're all writing from our experience here but 1) I feel my
> experience is only one leg of the tripod - the others being direction from
> (more) realized teachers and from the classical literature. So were I to
> draw only on my own experience I would say that the rising of the kundalini
> - obliterating my identity at the heart and leading me to a complete sense
> of universal unity at the crown was a far more profound experience
> (albeit temporary)than the blissful drip of the holy spirit from above.
Gloria:
Here is where we are hitting the snag, you are assuming the Holy Spirit
coming down from the crown is a blissful drip, from my experience it
comes down with so much power when it meets up with kundalini that you
would think you would die for sure. There is no description of it, and
it to continues to enter just as kundalini continues to climb and work.
This is how the regeneration is done and why some folks don't stay in
the body to long. What most people speak of in churches as the baptism
of the Holy Spirit is not what I'm referring to although that is a part
of it just as a kundalini release is a part of the awakening process.
When it actually creates and finishes its path through the nerve pathway
it is absolute power.
Holy Spirit fire is the Ain Sof Ore of the Jewish/hebrew tradition and
it sits at the 8th chakra above the head once that chakra has form as is
prepared to go into action in harmony with the seven in the body. This
is where the distinction of power is, I'm speaking of working with it as
you work with kundalini. At this point kundalini is a mild dragon in
comparison, Ain Sof Ore is divine will manifest. Or the Malu Kundalini
of the eastern thought. It represents divine cosmic power instead of
individual. Gloria
ternet for spiritual growth.
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 19:30:01 +0100
From: Gloria Greco <lodpressATnospamintercomm.com>
To: indra <indraATnospamsmartt.com>
CC: David Hodges <dhodgesATnospamrecol.com>, kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Namaste and Mangalum
Message-ID: <343A7FA7.3508ATnospamintercomm.com>
indra wrote:
>
> David Hodges wrote:
> >
> >
>
> The words Namaste and Mangalam or Mangalum. (Spelling in English may
> differ).
> The Sanskrit original for Namaste is Namaste Ashtu meaning the Divine in
> me salutes the Divine in you. Coloquially it also means I bow to you.
> The South Indian version of this sanskrit word is Namsakaram.
> The South Indian Languages are different from the Sanskrit Mother
> language so to speak, of which all the North Indian languages are the
> children,not illegitimate though. But all South Indian languages have
> similar words with slightly different spelling (ie: sound)which are
> derivatives from the Sankrit.
> In Sanskrit the root word for "keep well" in english is Mangal.
> For purposes of poetical rhymes the same word is used as Mangalam.
> The mangal actually goes beyond the feeling of keeping weel alone. It
> has an affinity to be expressed from the heart as in " Sincerely wish
> you all the best, or sincerely wish you keep well. It is very difficult
> to ewxpress the real feeling of Mangal or Mangalam in words.
> Hope this gives more light to your question.
>
> In Love, Life & Light,
>
> Indra
One or two words say so much, thanks for sharing that. Gloria
--
Enter The Silence to Know God ... and... accept life as the teacher.
Gloria Joy Greco
e-mail me at : lodpressATnospamintercomm.com and visit our homepage at:
http://users.intercomm.com/larryn/
My homepage is to help individuals learn how to use the internet for
spiritual growth.
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 19:37:37 -0700
From: indra <indraATnospamsmartt.com>
To: Sunil R Peswani <peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in>
CC: Graham Dumpleton <Graham.DumpletonATnospamnms.otc.com.au>, kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Kundalini and Holy Spirit (was Pentecostal Kundalini)
Message-ID: <343AF1F0.4872ATnospamsmartt.com>
Sunil R Peswani wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Oct 1997, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>
> > > Kurt Keutzer wrote:
> > > > Earlier Gloria said:
> > > > Kundalini is connected to the universal in that
> > > > >it is a step in the process. Gloria
> > > >
> > > > I've been letting this sit - while continuing to think about it. I am
> > > > inclined to believe that kundalini and cosmic energy-clear light-holy
> > > > spirit are not really different - they are just situated differently in the
> > > > human body. ....
> > >
> > > HI Kurt,
> > > Actually I meant to write one is not better then the other, they are
> > > just coming from different places with different frequencies, ... Gloria
>
> The energy coming from higher level is much much better compared to
> any type of kundalini energy generated.
> ram
>
> >
> > The way I see it, "energy is energy".
> Graham Dumpleton (grahamdATnospamnms.otc.com.au)
> >
> >
> Matter is also a form of energy, but it is different from any
> heat or electric energy. Thought is also a form of energy but again it is
> not same as heat or electric energy.
>
> Kundalini energy is of many types. It is energy of astral thought level.
> K-energy of hate level tends towards matter more compared to k-energy of
> love level.
> But higher energy is way beyond these k-energies.
>
> E X P E R I E N C E D .................r a m.
I am rather surprised to find that a few choose to define everything fro
m the standpoint of ego. They profess they are the experienced, but the
post of Experienced Ram, is quite misleading,according to my humble
opinion. May be he knows it all, but how come he is still in three
diemnsions like us mortals gaining experience and learning on this
earthly plane.
Any way it's his choice how he/she wishes to express to those around ,
in this mortal plane.
Indra
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 1997 20:16:54 -0700
From: indra <indraATnospamsmartt.com>
To: heidi <heidiATnospamadan.kingston.net>
CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: favorite charities
Message-ID: <343AFB25.1763ATnospamsmartt.com>
heidi wrote:
>
> > Giving and giving without getting anything back, leads to resentment and
> >burnout. Not a very holy state.. even Christ got a foot massauge, and a
> >nice palm leaf donkey ride parade.. and was way grateful for both.
> >
> Mystress
>
> It is of the utmost importance to replenish oneself as often as needed for,
> if we allow our "well" to dry up, there will be nothing left to give to the
> thirsty.
>
> buckets of Love
>
> Am
Heidi !
Resentment, Burn Outs and Anger comes from the nonfulfillments of our
expectations, and when we fail to emphathize or understand the other.
I will relate an experience of my own on what receiving means when not
expecting anything and giving in the first place.
I met a genuine spiritual person of this list. I was invited to visit.
After and hour of chatting I was shown a collection of very beautiful
crystals.I was particularly feeling one of them time and again, there
was no thought making me do it.My host took up that same crystal and
gave it to me for me to keep. I did ask if it was okay. I accepted the
giving graciously and acknolwedged the giving. There was no expectation
of anything involved. I am sure my host felt the same way when the
crystal was handed over to me to keep. So there was no expectation on
either side, but some understanding of our inner selves which makes us
to be , in the being .
No expectation , no resentment or burnouts.
So is the scenarios you presented aluuding to Jesus receiving a foot
massage. it is the feeling behind the giving that counts. we can choose
that expecting something and feel resentment when we do not receive
back.
So it is our own creation how we give and receive and with what motive
behind.
In Love, Life & Light,
Indra
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:04:14 +0500 (GMT+0500)
From: Sunil R Peswani <peswaniATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in>
To: David Hodges <dhodgesATnospamrecol.com>
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Namaste and Mangalum
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.91.971008105609.27206A-100000ATnospamgiaspn01.vsnl.net.in>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Tue, 7 Oct 1997, David Hodges wrote:
> Sorry if this is a bit off-topic, but I have seen people using both Namaste
> and Mangalum as sign-offs for their posts, the latter only once. I have
> heard "mangalum" (don't know if that is the correct spelling) in chants but
> don't know what it means. I remember hearing that Namaste means "The God in
> me salutes the God in you", but I'm not sure if that is right.
>
> So my questions for any Indian experts on the list -
> What do these words mean> Are they Sanskrit or what?
> When is it appropriate to use one or the other?
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
Your above meaning of Namaste is correct. Mangalam briefly means "well
wishes" or "best wishes". Both are originally Sanskrit words. Namaste is
popular in North India and Mangalam is popular among Pundits of North and
South India. All Indians educated and uneducated understand Namaste while
Mangalam is considered a little scholarly and all Indians may not
understand its meaning.
ram>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 16:29:34 +1000 (EST)
From: Graham.DumpletonATnospamnms.otc.com.au (Graham Dumpleton)
To: ombabajiATnospamhotmail.com (Colin Jones)
Cc: Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject!
Message-Id: <199710080629.QAA27615ATnospambaldric.pad.otc.com.au>
Content-Type: text
> Fellow Spririts,
>
> The following is an essay which I wrote. It is the result of my years
> of contemplation and search for "Ultimate Truth". I hope you enjoy
> it...
>
> ...
>
> Every single thing that appears to exist within the universe is merely
> a perception in the mind. .... The idea that you or anyone else
> actually exists as an individual is merely an appearance in the mind.
> In reality there are no localised points of consciousness, there is
> only one Unchanging Being. There can be no separation from this Unity,
> not for anyone ever, not even in the slightest. This is a complete
> denial of even the concept of individuality.
In other words you are saying that the only thing that actually exists is
God. We don't actually have our own consciousness and for that matter
neither does God. There is just God's mind and nothing else.
> Continuously become aware of yourself as unidentifiable
> Unchanging Being. Live as Truth as much as you can, until you revert to
> it spontaneously. Watch your mind continuously, moment to moment, and
> free your mind of all thoughts that contradict Truth.
But how can we do that. In order to be able to watch the mind entails having
something separate to the mind. How can the mind watch the mind. Consider
when we are thinking about something and our mind wanders. It is not our mind
that realises it has wandered, it is something else. If there weren't something
else to notice the mind wandered and draw it back to what we initially
were thinking about, it would just keep on thinking about whatever it
wanted and there is no way it could be controlled. Your argument thus
seems contradictory, your own statements indicating that there must indeed
be some sort of individuality or separation with the greater mind so as to
allow to exist our personal minds. But we still need that separate thing
to watch our mind, another separate thing within the greater mind. Let
us call that consciousness for the time being.
> Detach yourself from things that makes the mind restless or
> disturbed.
What is this "yourself"? You have said that everything is the mind and
since everything is in the mind, what makes us restless is the mind. So
what we must do is detach the mind from the mind. This can only work
if the "yourself" is actually consciousness. That is, our true
being is this consciousness and the personal mind is something which exists
when we are in this physical plane.
> To go beyond the mind like this, it must first be eased into a silent
> state.
And now we must "go beyond". How can we do this if there isn't some sort of
separation, some sort of individuality. For the mind to go beyond itself is
impossible if the mind is everything.
The only real difference between your ideas and those who generally go around
saying that we are all God, is that you specifically say that there is no
concept of separate consciousness whereas others would say there is, but
that the intent is to evolve so as to merge back into the whole.
This idea that we are all God is so full of contradictions. A Guru will say
that we are all God and that the only difference between himself and his
followers is that he remembers that he is God. If God knows everything and
each of us is God, how can we forget that we are God. A Guru will say that to
bring enlightment and know we are truly God, we must meditate on God. Does
this mean we should meditate on ourself, after all we are God are we not.
Further, if we are all God, how can the concept of Karma ever exist. Karma
says if we do something bad, that something bad will happen back to us. But
if I am God and you are God and I do something bad to you to hurt you, then
I am immediately hurting myself, which is actually hurting everyone as after
all everyone is actually God. If everything that everyone does actually affects
everyone anyway and does so immediately, how can there be individual
accounting for Karma, after all, you already got back the result of what you
did.
These and other contradictions show that this whole argument that each of
us is God (the Supreme God) starts to look a bit silly. True individuality
has to exist for something like Karma to work. Now I am not saying that
we are totally distinct from God. To say that is putting us at the same level
of God and again pushing that we are each God, but totally separate Gods
and really throws out the window the idea of there being a surpreme God
who cannot be challenged. We are to God like light is to the sun. We are
an emanation from God, a spark of the divine. We are not equal to God yet
we are his creation and he is in us. Further do we always stay separate from
God and always have individuality. If in the end we all merged back with
God, what was the point of the whole exercise. After all, God is surpreme
and knows everything and thus supposedly has nothing to learn.
Now, I know that there will be a long queue of people waiting to disagree
with this. Well, before you post back saying "but, but", take the time to
first read:
http://www.cebu-online.com/lifeforce/you_are_not_god.html
This is another Jagad Guru writing and before you start thinking that I am
a Jagad Guru disciple, I am not. The only reason I have mentioned him
in two messages now is that I just happened to stumble onto him last
week and thus his stuff is recent in my mind. Finding his stuff though
was quite refreshing as it mirrored many of my own thoughts and was
certainly a change from the more traditional and somewhat stale teachings
given by Gurus in the west.
Now this should be an interesting debate, but, please read what Jagad Guru
says. What I give is so superficial compared to what he has to say and perhaps
it may just make you look at things a little bit differently.
Enjoy. :-)
--
Graham Dumpleton (grahamdATnospamnms.otc.com.au)
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 03:00:27 PDT
From: "Colin Jones" <ombabajiATnospamhotmail.com>
To: Graham.DumpletonATnospamnms.otc.com.au
Cc: Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject!
Message-ID: <19971008100029.19574.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Dear Graham,
> > Detach yourself from things that makes the mind restless or
> > disturbed.
>
>What is this "yourself"? You have said that everything is the mind and
since everything is in the mind, what makes us restless is the mind. So
what we must do is detach the mind from the mind. This can only work if
the "yourself" is actually consciousness. That is, our true being is
this consciousness and the personal mind is something which exists when
we are in this physical plane.
Everything that can be put into words is obviously going to be
contradictory to Truth, since Truth existed before the words and is
beyond them. The words are simply meant to be a pointer to Truth, a
pathway that if followed WITHOUT THINKING may result in the removement
of the mind, with removal of the pathway simultaneously. In a dualistic
world, everything must appear to be contradictory. The fact that you
see contradiction, when in fact Truth consists wholly of Unity,
obviously points to the fact that you must move beyond the point of
seeming contradiction!
As for the "yourself" that I am referring to, I am speaking to YOU!
I am speaking to the ego, the part of you which believes itself to be
individual and separate from God. It is the most appropriate way of
speaking to something which exists in a world of separation. But I am
not saying that "you" exist, only that you think you exist. Like a
mirror reflecting the circumstances. But without any mirror or
circumstances!
I am certainly not saying that you must detach the mind from the
mind. I am saying that you must extinguish that which believes itself
to be anything other than Pure Unchanging Consciousness.
> > To go beyond the mind like this, it must first be eased into a
silent state.
>
>And now we must "go beyond". How can we do this if there isn't some
sort of separation, some sort of individuality. For the mind to go
beyond itself is impossible if the mind is everything.
Firstly, the mind is certainly not everything. It is in essence
absolutely nothing, a concept. And the separation I speak of is not.
It is merely a thought, a creation of an illusioned mind. And the mind
is not necessary to exist, so by extinguishing it's thoughts of
individuality, Pure Unchanging Being is experienced. Going Beyond is
merely another way of saying Returning to the Source, ie. it is not a
going forward but rather an un-knowing of that which is not.
>This idea that we are all God is so full of contradictions.
I am not sure you read my essay correctly! It is certainly not going
to be understood by your mind! It is beyond the concept of mind. The
idea is to Experience it, not analyze it.
>A Guru will say that to bring enlightment and know we are truly God, we
must meditate on God. Does this mean we should meditate on ourself,
after all we are God are we not.
Yet again, I wonder if you have read my essay correctly? How can you
meditate on yourself as God, unless you meditate on Pure Unchanging
Consciousness. Meditating on your ego is only going to help you
understand the illusional world. Certainly your ego is a part of God,
but it is not ALL of God. And the only way to contemplate ALL of God is
to contemplate the Void, the Source, that which has never changed...
>Further, if we are all God, how can the concept of Karma ever exist.
Karma says if we do something bad, that something bad will happen back
to us.
Yes, it will happen to the individual, ie. the part of you that
dillusionally thinks it exists as a separate being!
>These and other contradictions show that this whole argument that each
of us is God (the Supreme God) starts to look a bit silly. True
individuality has to exist for something like Karma to work. Now I am
not saying that we are totally distinct from God. To say that is putting
us at the same level of God and again pushing that we are each God, but
totally separate Gods and really throws out the window the idea of there
being a surpreme God who cannot be challenged. We are to God like light
is to the sun. We are an emanation from God, a spark of the divine. We
are not equal to God yet we are his creation and he is in us. Further do
we always stay separate from God and always have individuality. If in
the end we all merged back with God, what was the point of the whole
exercise. After all, God is surpreme and knows everything and thus
supposedly has nothing to learn.
Well certainly you are welcome to your opinion. After all, all paths
will obviously end up in the same goal eventually.
Love & Blessings,
Colin
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 06:30:50 -0400
From: "Ed Arrons" <eeaATnospamaug.com>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Kundalini Joy Spot
Message-Id: <199710081031.GAA20137ATnospamsandia.aug.com>
Just a thought:
The Joyous essence of Supreme Consciousness fills the lower chakra
until released as Kundalini. When the release occurs appropriately
in meditation the Joy flows into our everyday experience.
>>I have as a 'target' in meditation a "Transcendence Point", a place
or focus in consciousness that lies precisely between my inner self and
the outer world. When a perfect balance is struck, I find an opening
into the Realm of Joy. The 'Joy Spot'.
The gravity of everyday reality will pull me back, abruptly and unknow-
ingly -until I become aware of the loss and renew the process. A recent
experience brought me back to ground zero and I had to do some intense
'climbing'. I find myself going through numerous cycles each day -with
increasing frequency. Each time I do, the time it takes me to focus and
find the point of balance is reduced.....the duration of effect, increased.
>Question:
What does this place or focus feel or look like? What comes to your mind
when you focus on this ?
I experience a momentous shift in perception from the sequential to the
simultaneous: First I see the collection of things which is the everyday
world; I take a full breath and close my eyes -then slowly release my
breath and open my eyes; now I see the world in its Oneness. A Oneness
of pure Joy. A Joy that fills my being with a gentle radiance, making my
encounter with others a joyous adventure. This is the closest I have
gotten to feeling unconditional love in my everyday reality.
A big challenge is how to experience this on the Internet. If this could
be achieved the effect on our world would be profound.
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 1997 07:35:06 -0400
From: David Hodges <dhodgesATnospamrecol.com>
To: indra <indraATnospamsmartt.com>
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Namaste and Mangalum
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971008073506.009e4a40ATnospammail.recol.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Indra,
Thanks very much. This was very helpful and was exactly what I was
looking for.
Mangalum,
David
At 03:53 PM 10/7/97 -0700, indra wrote:
>
>Hello David,
>The words Namaste and Mangalam or Mangalum. (Spelling in English may
>differ).
>The Sanskrit original for Namaste is Namaste Ashtu meaning the Divine in
>me salutes the Divine in you. Coloquially it also means I bow to you.
>The South Indian version of this sanskrit word is Namsakaram.
>The South Indian Languages are different from the Sanskrit Mother
>language so to speak, of which all the North Indian languages are the
>children,not illegitimate though. But all South Indian languages have
>similar words with slightly different spelling (ie: sound)which are
>derivatives from the Sankrit.
>In Sanskrit the root word for "keep well" in english is Mangal.
>For purposes of poetical rhymes the same word is used as Mangalam.
>The mangal actually goes beyond the feeling of keeping weel alone. It
>has an affinity to be expressed from the heart as in " Sincerely wish
>you all the best, or sincerely wish you keep well. It is very difficult
>to ewxpress the real feeling of Mangal or Mangalam in words.
>Hope this gives more light to your question.
>
>In Love, Life & Light,
>
>Indra
>
>
-----------------------------------------
David Hodges
203-776-4874
RECOL, LLC An Internet Solutions Company
http://www.recol.com
davidATnospamrecol.com
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.