To: K-list
Recieved: 2000/09/24 15:23
Subject: [K-list] On language
From: llewellyn
On 2000/09/24 15:23, llewellyn posted thus to the K-list:
_/969834197/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Hi,
Well, we disagree on much of this - but it is a big world.
> A rose, no matter what it is called-will always smell like a rose. The
name of
> it does not change the object. The universal language seems to be sign
language
>
I tend to believe that we create our own reality and that the language is
interwoven with the reality. Call a rose a turd and it would become a turd.
Or in other words - the name and vibration is not just learned and we do
not just associate a few letters with an object and that is it - the name
(if it is not a misnomer) embodies the essence of that object in a way that
must transcend ordinary viewpoints. One can cross certain cultural barriers
with some simple gestures or facial expressions - but language conveys
layers of meaning in the vibration and in the tone. Some combinations are
soft and gentle others rough, this is part of the magic of language.
> > IF you work on making an antenna for one set of beliefs then you will
have
> > that set of beliefs reinforced.
> > And you would say, of course that is true, that is what my experience
tells
> > me.
>
> There are many truths. Different strokes for different folks. When you
study
> many philosophies you will see that underneath they are all saying the
same
> thing, different road, different language.
Yes, many ways of viewing the world. Truth just means something is
consistent within a certain framework. Each framework is different though -
whether on top or underneath - different road, different language -
different. This is the point - tune in to a country music station and you
will hear just that.
>
> > we are crystals and can be tuned - we are
> > semiconductors and transducers - bones are PN junctions - and have
> > piezoelectric properties.
>
> Scientifically we are about to evolve physically. A small part of the
brain in
> some already advanced people is crystallizing (hardening) and receiving
thoughts
> and pictures. Scientists are just discovering this and have performed
autopsies
> on people and cannot explain this phenomena.
A soft structure can have "crystal" like properties. I would think that
humans have always had the capability of receiving thoughts and pictures.
So am not sure if there is an evolution or a devolution going on. I tend to
think the verdict is still out whether or not we are advancing spiritually,
or even if that concept makes any sense.
>
> > If some of that terminolgy ends up being sanscrit
> > > because we don't have an english equilivant, or whatever, then that's
> > > ok I think. We've got to call it something, right?
>
> Absolutely. Kundalini rising is a happening thing to persons of all walks
of
> life, in all cultures. Some are not ready to hear about the shaktiput.
Give it
> another word-like halo, or your golden aura, and they can understand. I
find
> this especially true with younger folk. Once the interest has been
captured
> they may want to study further and that's when they can progress to the
> sanskrit.
>
> >
This was Bob's point that I was agreeing with. I am sure that you would
agree that the concept of kundalini is much more complex than an aura - We
are linguistically bound. And in as much as we can incorporate and
understand the meaning of the sanskrit, then that is one historical
reference to employ. Thus, it is much less an issue of progressing to the
sanskrit, then exploring sanskrit as one way of providing a linguistic
framework for the experience. But since we get into a never ending cycle of
what takes precedence, the language or the experience, we need to go beneath
the words and the experience. Underneath is the act of creating and of
destroying beliefs. This is the fundamental process - but one that is not
liked by the establishment.
> >
> > Yes, it seems so - and we also need to be kundalini explorers willing to
> > broaden spiritual experience past previous limits and yes to formulate a
new
> > language and new words to describe a new understanding of how kundalini
> > functions. It is not enough to scale the same old mountain. Our
context is
> > different - we are in a different age - or so it seems
>
> With all of the great minds in this group, maybe we can collectively pull
our
> knowledge and experiences together and create a beginner's manual to K
> rising/awakening. In simple, easy to understand, easy to read format.
Maybe post
> it so everyone can read it before they join the group.
> Sheila
>
K can have no manual and needs no manual. Everyone carries their own
blueprint encoded in their own DNA - everyone should be encouraged to follow
their own spirit and be encouraged to have spirit. Manuals are for the
unspiritual. However, that is not to say that K can not be studied and
explored and general guidance provided. A guide rule for everyone seems to
be, follow you own spirit, follow your own path.
peace and balance,
llewellyn
http://www.onelist.com/community/Kundalini-Gateway
http://www.kundalini-gateway.org
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.