1998/02/05 06:59
kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #101
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 101
Today's Topics:
FW: What is the Totality II [ Dieter Dambiec <d.dambiecATnospamstudent.c ]
Re: Healing, was Re: Help [ Antoine <acarreATnospamconcentric.net> ]
Re: Fwd: Viewing the digital clock [ Sainanda <sainandaATnospampop.netaddress.u ]
Democracy [ Antoine <acarreATnospamconcentric.net> ]
Re: Democracy [ japserATnospamwin.tue.nl ]
Re: Democracy [ Richard Wentk <richardATnospamskydancer.co ]
Dealing with "negativity," bears rep [ RadiantTchATnospamaol.com ]
Re: Healing, was Re: Help [ "James Walters" <jwaltersATnospamridgecres ]
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 18:27:31 +1100
From: Dieter Dambiec <d.dambiecATnospamstudent.canberra.edu.au>
To: "kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com" <kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com>
Subject: FW: What is the Totality II
Message-ID: <01BD3263.C3E72B20.d.dambiecATnospamstudent.canberra.edu>
It serves little purpose in understanding k if one does not discern the nature
of mind.
II - Faculties of mind
The characteristic of a human being is to attain Brahma - Infinite
Consciousness. It is, therefore, necessary to see whether Brahma - God at all
exists or not. It would otherwise be futile to attempt to get something which
does not actually exist. If Brahma - God exists, we must know what I/it is.
Every action a person performs, appears to have been executed by their physical
organs. These organs are ten in number and almost every action of a person
appears to have been performed because of these ten organs. Yet actually it is
not so.
If the mind does not work behind these, the organs by themselves cannot perform
any action. It is the mind which works and the ten organs are merely the
instruments through which the work is executed. The action which originates in
mind, only finds its external manifestation with the help of organs.
To explain we can take the example of a person seeing a book. It is the mind
only which visualizes the book with the help of the instruments of the eyes. If
the mind does not work
they eyes will not be able to see the book. For instance, a person in
senseless state either with the help of anesthesia or otherwise, will not be
able to see the book even if their eyes were wide open. In such a state of
senselessness the eyes are not damaged yet they cannot perform their natural
function due to the contact with mind being suspended. That is why under the
influence of anesthesia, the organs or organs do not function, although they
remain in perfect order.
How often, when absorbed in some though, we miss to notice a person or
recognize a friend standing right in front of us. This is only because, in
spite of eyes being in perfect order and wide open, the mind, which actually
performs all actions, does not make use of these organs - the instruments of
eyes. It is the mind which works and the organs only help in its manifestation
externally.
If it is mind only which works, how does it act with the help of these organs.
For instance seeing a book is an action which mind performs with the help of
eyes. When mind sees a book, what actually happens is that mind with the help
of eyes takes up the shape of something we call a book. This shape, like of
which the mind becomes, is different from the image which is said to be formed
on the retina. This is because mind can see and become like a book even when
the eyes are closed; while the eyes cannot see when the mind does not function.
So it is mind which becomes like the form of a book, while the action of seeing
the book is being performed.
This portion of mind which becomes like the form of a book, is the ectoplasmic
mind stuff (the done I of the mind or the object in the mind). As soon as
ectoplasmic mind stuff takes (ie does work) the form of a book, it (the book)
will have to be seen. There must, then, be something different from ectoplasmic
mind stuff (or the done I of the mind) which does the work of seeing.
The part of mind which does the work of seeing is the doer I (or ego - it has
the sense of doership of the mind being able to work).
But the doer mind will not be able to work or 'see' anything unless 'I' exists,
ie unless there is a sense of existence in the first place. So there must be a
part of mind different from 'done I' and different from 'doer I' (which,
respectively, takes the shape [done I] and performs the action [doer I] of
seeing).
This third part of mind which gives the feeling of 'I' is called the pure I
feeling (the feeling of 'I exist' - knowledge of self). Without the feeling of
existence of 'I' or knowledge of self, no action can be performed.
The collective name for these three is mind (or in sanskrit 'Antahkaranah' -
introversal psychic force).
But, it then becomes evident, that these three portions of mind are only
manifestations of my mind. It is with this mind that the action of seeing a
book is performed. The action of seeing is a psychic assimilation of the
inferential waves of light from the object emitting it and that is what is
being seen.
That is, the subtle form in which the organs grasp a crude form is such that it
can be said that the idea of a book is grasped with the help of the inferential
waves (or the ideatory vibration of nerve
creating image or figure) when one sees the book with the help of the mechanism
of the eyes.
But if the eyes be closed or if one is in a dark place, one can still recognize
a book by touch. Here the idea of a book is grasped by another form of
inference or inferential waves, ie, the ideatory vibration of touch or physical
perception.
Again if someone drops a book outside the scope of visibility or out of reach
of touch, it would be possible to identify it as a book by grasping the idea
with the help of auditory inferential waves.
In this regard, quantum physics tells us that all matter is composed of waves
of some kind of frequency (long or short, the shorter then the more cruder and
solidified). Matter is crude waves. Solid matter is the crudest of waves.
Ether is the most subtlest of waves in the material sphere as it gives the
scope for space to be created. Subtler than ether are the thought projections
of the Cosmic Consciousness. Beyond these thought projections lies no
relativity and no attribution or qualification of any kind (ie relativity in
terms of time, place/space or person/frequency is non-existent due to the state
of Absolute Subjectivity which is the state of Supreme Bliss or Ananda and
which due to its infiniteness also lies quiescent in all relativity as well -
it pervades everything - Consciousness is and pervades everything).
Therefore, in the relative sphere ectoplasmic mind stuff simply comes in
contact with inferential waves (reflections of condensed states of
Consciousness) and this only happens when the doer I or the working mind wants
it to do so (either deliberately or through interaction in the course of
events). The actual action of seeing or identifying a book has to be done by
the doer I (or the mind at work) as ectoplasmic mind stuff (the resultant done
I) by itself does not possess the capacity of performing any function.
When the part of mind which works wants to see a book, what happens is that
eyes receive the inferential waves of light of the book. But this only happens
if the ectoplasmic mind stuff comes in contact with the organs of sight (ie
eyes) because the doer I wants it to. That is, even though the book may be in
the near vicinity it can be completely overlooked if ectoplasmic mind stuff
does not associate itself with the inferential vibrations of light from the
book by coming in contact with the organs of sight. This inferential vibration
which is always present in the environment in the form of waves strikes against
the ectoplasmic mind stuff to come in contact with the outside world.
Ectoplasmic mind stuff with this impact assumes the shape of the book and the
doer I (ego at work) then identifies or sees the book the shape of which
ectoplasmic mind stuff has assumed.
Similarly when the doer I (ego) wants to hear some words it sends the
ectoplasmic mind stuff outwards to come in contact with the organs of hearing -
the ears. Ears receive the sound
inferences (vibrations), which are always present in the physical environment,
through the medium of sound waves. Ectoplasmic mind stuff, with the impact of
these inferential vibrations on it, becomes the sound itself the doer I (or
working ego) hears that sound only.
This shows that whatever the doer I (or ego at work) desires or does,
ectoplasmic mind stuff takes that form. Conversely ectoplasmic mind stuff
manifests all the actions which the doer I (or working ego) performs and so all
actions leave an impression in the mind.
Ectoplasmic mind stuff (done I), ego (doer I) and the I feeling (I exist)
constitute the mind. Ectoplasmic mind stuff has only the capacity of taking
the form of what the doer I (ego) wants it to become like. Similarly the doer I
(ego) has only the capacity of action. It can only work.
There must be something to make it work or motivate it to work. That something
is the feeling of existence which gives one the feeling of 'I'. This feeling of
'I' (I exist) is derived from my mind (ie part of mind) and 'I' in my mind
makes the doer I (ego) and ectoplasmic mind stuff perform their respective
functions. Without this 'I' it would not be possible to feel or realize the
form of the book [even if, under the functioning influence of ego (doer I), the
ectoplasmic mind stuff becomes like a book]. Therefore, then this 'I' also is
a part of my mind. That is, there is another 'I' which is the "possessing 'I'"
of the feeling of individual existence or the 'I' which knows that there is a
mind (ie the 'I' feeling) which is the latent 'I'.
This aspect of 'I exist' is different than the I which works (doer I) or the I
which takes the form of the resultant (done I - ectoplasmic mind stuff). While
part of the same psychic structure its faculty is different.
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 03:14:12 -0500
From: Antoine <acarreATnospamconcentric.net>
To: Ann Morrison Fisher <annfisherATnospamstic.net>
CC: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Healing, was Re: Help
Message-ID: <34D974D3.37F7A49CATnospamconcentric.net>
Ann Morrison Fisher wrote:
> "James Walters" <jwaltersATnospamridgecrest.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >On the subject of healing, how does one do that without picking up
> the subject's symptoms ? I don't get that problem real badly, but a
> little bit comes across. The other day I had the opportunity to work
> on a dozen or so people in about an hour (first and only time I'll
> work on so many in so short a time). Since then I've noticed just a
> touch of some of their symptoms, which I'll get rid of within a day
> or so.
You can heal as many people a day as you want. The limitations is only in your
ability to tap to the infinite energies, to your attachment to certain
concepts/ideas and/or to the openness of your chakras. When you start picking
up on someone only means you are using your body energy instead of being a
clear channel.
Ann wrote:
> Sounds like you mean healing by using your hands. I'm told that it's
> important to keep both hands positive, that if one is negative you can pick
> up stuff. The few times I've done this kind of healing, it worked fine - I
> didn't pick up anything.
This is true if you can't channel energy via your body energy without being
attached in some ways to the concept/ideas that it "carries".
Antoine
--
May the God of light grant to us sight! May the heavenly peaks grant to us
sight! May God the creator grant to us sight! Give sight to our eyes and sight
to our bodies that we may see. May we see the world at a single glance and in
all its details.
Rig Veda 10.158.3-4, Vedic Experience p. 340-341
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 10:35:59 +0100
From: Sainanda <sainandaATnospampop.netaddress.usa.net>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Viewing the digital clock
Message-Id: <Version.32.19980205095246.00e1f660ATnospampop.netaddress.com>
Message-Id: <Version.32.19980205095246.00e1f660ATnospampop.netaddress.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 19:34 1998.02.03 +0000, Mystress Angelique Serpent wrote:
Dear Angelique! :)
First let me introduce myself...first time writing, but readin' K-list for
few months. I am 15 years old. I got shaktipat before 3 months, and
from then i cleaned myself to the 4th level of Kundalini cleaning.
I have a Teacher, but i thought it is nice to talk with people with the
same interests. O;-)
> Yes, this is a K-symptom..in the 80's, I went thru a long period of
>waking at 3am or shortly after.. the wierdness had me feeling slightly
>haunted, wondering what was waking me, but I did not connect it with a
>feeling of a prescence, at the time. Didn't know about K. then.
Yap! I had this expiriance... waking (nevermind when i went to sleep) at
3-4.15am... I would stand up for about 10 minutes, then went back to
sleep. Then, i would wake myself about 6am for real. That lasted for about
4 days ...
I thing it's conected with cleaning the Sva-adhishthana chakra... i mean, i
was intensive
cleaning that cakra when i had that simptoms. That lasted until i cleand
it for good, and forever ;)
...
Sometimes Teacher tolds You something, sometimes You get a word from Your
Brother,
Somethimes you hear a warning from the Animal, and somethimes You hear a
whisper
from the Tree, but we are all One, and all expiriences are line of
direction of the unescapable Path,
Path of Selfrealization, path of Godrealization!
Om Namah Shivaya! Jai Sai Ram!
-------
Sainanda
E-mail: sainandaATnospamusa.net
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 05:34:50 -0500
From: Antoine <acarreATnospamconcentric.net>
To: "d.dambiecATnospamstudent.canberra.edu" <d.dambiecATnospamstudent.canberra.edu.au>
CC: "kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com" <kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com>
Subject: Democracy
Message-ID: <34D995C9.C90D5796ATnospamconcentric.net>
I vote for Dieter to be taken off this list.
Please add your name at the end of this post if you think your finger is tired of
deleting is post, even after giving him a chance.
Antoine
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 11:56:16 +0100 (MET)
From: japserATnospamwin.tue.nl
To: acarreATnospamconcentric.net
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com (k)
Subject: Re: Democracy
Message-Id: <199802051056.LAA10993ATnospamsgan06.win.tue.nl>
Content-Type: text
Antoine said:
>
> I vote for Dieter to be taken off this list.
>
> Please add your name at the end of this post if you think your finger is tired of
> deleting is post, even after giving him a chance.
I think it's up to the mistress the decide on this, she's the list keeper
and not we. (we are only slaves ;) ) I do not think it is that nice to
attack persons, in casu Dieter, in stead of actions.
All have a happy day today!
--
Love and Peace,
Smile,
Jasper
------------------------------------------
One only leans on that which resists
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 11:35:44 +0000
From: Richard Wentk <richardATnospamskydancer.com>
To: "kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com" <kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com>
Subject: Re: Democracy
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980205113512.0096c320ATnospammail.which.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 05:34 05/02/98 -0500, Antoine wrote:
>I vote for Dieter to be taken off this list.
>
>Please add your name at the end of this post if you think your finger is
tired of
>deleting is post, even after giving him a chance.
Hey, let's not turn this into a witch hunt...
If someone else wants to point us all once in a while to a Deieter-written
website I have no problem with that. Who knows, I might even read some of
it if I can find the time.
But I agree that these long metaphysical hectorings are out of line on the
list itself, especially since they seem to have precious little to do with
K in any practically useful kind of way. And they are obnoxiously rude and
insensitive towards those who - like me - have dial-up accounts and pay for
our downloads by the minute.
But... rather than kicking Dieter off altogether, I think it might be
verrrrrrrrry interesting to change his list status to 'read only' so he can
read, but not post. :)))
Comments? :)
R.
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 06:55:16 EST
From: RadiantTchATnospamaol.com
To: Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Dealing with "negativity," bears repeating at this time...?
Message-ID: <323922b5.34d9a8a6ATnospamaol.com>
What is Evil?
(can substitute the word "negative" for evil also)
And should we be scared of it?
Let's look at the causes of "evil" behavior, to see if we might come to some
understanding of it, thereby coming to some different conclusions as to how to
deal with it....
My belief is that all behavior acted out in the world (by everyone), is a
direct reflection of how that person has come to know and feel about SELF
during his/her lifetime experiences. People treat others the way they
themSELVES feel that they should be treated. This is not a conscious logical
choice, but rather subconscious programming from, most importantly, the
childhood and adolescence, and those beliefs being confirmed over and over
again into adulthood.
Self-worth is a basic core issue that all of us are dealing with, and coming
to understand. The "head" may argue that the self definitely has a certain
amount of worth (most likely the ego talking), but that person's actions
toward self and others are the true indicators of that worth. When a person
has a knowing and feeling of worth inside, his/her actions toward self and
others reflects that in a way that leaves any observers without doubt as to
that person's amount of self-worth. Actions always speak louder than mere
words.
When I treat others with love and respect, that is a direct indicator that I
have, at least, that amount of love and respect for myself. Or I may treat
others with huge amounts of love and respect, but give myself none, and engage
in self-sabotaging behaviors. The true inner core belief (subconscious)
always wins out over the "head" and its thinking, until conscious efforts to
understand and change the "old tapes" are exerted.
In general, murderers, rapists, and such, grew up in an environment that never
nurtured their self aspects, their true worth and loveability. In fact, the
opposite usually occurs. Some of these children grew up in homes where
violence was acted out on them by people close to them, thereby accelerating
the feeling/knowing that self isn't worth very much. These children grow up
and emulate what they were taught.
Some of these children grew up in homes of neglect, again confirming to them
that they aren't worth very much in society, and again, acting out on society
what they have learned about themselves.
Some children grew up where power was asserted "over" them in a sexual manner,
and go on as teens and adults, acting out that behavior learned. And where
there are no or small amounts of self-worth to begin with, based on the
environment these children grew up and learned in, there is no want or desire
to be anything different than what they already know of themselves. Why
improve? They're worthless anyway (their false conditioning) - may as well
just stay that way. They don't feel as if they are worth even improving, and
don't have the belief that they could be any other way.
And most all people grew up in an environment that taught what you "must do"
to "get" love and respect, to one degree or another. Very few of us were
taught that we were loved unconditionally, just because we were/are who we
were/are, and for no other reason. Some people have learned that people who
love them treat them violently (or with neglect, or with rape or incest,
etc.), so they have a twisted view of what love is, and act it out to "show"
love. ETC........
So, keeping this train of thought in mind, does evil per se' really exist? I
believe that all humans are inherently good; all humans are Divine extensions
of God (or whatever your term for a higher power is). All humans do not know
this, feel this, or act on this, but I believe it is there anyway. My belief
is that evil is only ignorance, and that any "self" has the potential to be
loving towards all others.
What would this world be like, then, if we still had our trials and jails, but
while being imprisoned, these people were given a sort of love therapy, to
increase their sense of self-worth and self-love? And to continue on from
these programs into applicable programs based on HOW to change their old tapes
(while still continuing the love therapy)?
What would these people be like when they emerged from prison? How likely
would it be that they would be TRULY reformed (transformed)? I look forward
to the day when people realize that all so-called evil people are just sick -
sick with diseased thinking & perceptions, so-to-speak, and that all they need
are some helping hands UP. It may takes months, it may takes years (dependent
on each individual's progress), but people are inherently worth that time,
love, and attention, to help them make the transition from one world (self-
hate and acting that out) into the next (love, forgiveness of previous self's
ignorance, and acceptance of self, past and present).
Think of the differences that could be made to and within this world with the
application of love....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spirit Snippets
Barbara Ellen ATnospam)-}}--}}--
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 05:16:10 +0000
From: "James Walters" <jwaltersATnospamridgecrest.ca.us>
To: Ann Morrison Fisher <annfisherATnospamstic.net>, acarreATnospamconcentric.net
CC: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Healing, was Re: Help
Message-Id: <199802051318.FAA05337ATnospamridgecrest.ca.us>
Antoine,
Thank you. I went and talked to someone who re-iterated the advice
you just gave me. I tried it both on myself and someone else and it
works wonderfully. Knowledge like this usually come with a lesson :).
James
> Ann Morrison Fisher wrote:
>
> > "James Walters" <jwaltersATnospamridgecrest.ca.us> wrote:
> >
> > >On the subject of healing, how does one do that without picking up
> > the subject's symptoms ? I don't get that problem real badly, but a
> > little bit comes across. The other day I had the opportunity to work
> > on a dozen or so people in about an hour (first and only time I'll
> > work on so many in so short a time). Since then I've noticed just a
> > touch of some of their symptoms, which I'll get rid of within a day
> > or so.
>
> You can heal as many people a day as you want. The limitations is only in your
> ability to tap to the infinite energies, to your attachment to certain
> concepts/ideas and/or to the openness of your chakras. When you start picking
> up on someone only means you are using your body energy instead of being a
> clear channel.
>
> Ann wrote:
>
> > Sounds like you mean healing by using your hands. I'm told that it's
> > important to keep both hands positive, that if one is negative you can pick
> > up stuff. The few times I've done this kind of healing, it worked fine - I
> > didn't pick up anything.
>
> This is true if you can't channel energy via your body energy without being
> attached in some ways to the concept/ideas that it "carries".
>
> Antoine
>
>
> --
> May the God of light grant to us sight! May the heavenly peaks grant to us
> sight! May God the creator grant to us sight! Give sight to our eyes and sight
> to our bodies that we may see. May we see the world at a single glance and in
> all its details.
>
> Rig Veda 10.158.3-4, Vedic Experience p. 340-341
>
>
>
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.