Bindi

"Those who, when attachment has ceased, have attained jñāna-siddhi [accomplishment of self-knowledge] in this very life by the power of God’s grace without any effort by the blemishless cat principle, will have strived in former lives like a monkey." – Ramana Maharshi The ‘cat principle’ or mārjāla nyāya is the principle of depending upon, yearning for and yielding oneself to the power of divine grace for salvation, like a kitten who makes no effort to move to safety but passively allows itself to be carried by its mother, whereas the ‘monkey principle’ or markaṭa nyāya is the principle of striving to cling firmly to God, like a baby monkey who clings firmly to its mother for safety. These are two analogies that are used to describe two alternative forms of devotion (bhakti), but in terms of Bhagavan’s teachings the mārjāla nyāya represents the final stage of the path of complete self-surrender, which is the culmination of self-investigation (ātma-vicāra), whereas the markaṭa nyāya represents the effort that we need to make to cling firmly to self-attentiveness. As Bhagavan teaches us in this verse, those who are able to succeed in surrendering themselves effortlessly, as he did, would have previously strived with intense effort to cling tenaciously to self-attentiveness, because only by striving thus can we attain the bhakti (love) and vairāgya (freedom from attachment) that is required in order for us to be able to surrender ourself entirely. http://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com.au/2016/03/why-is-it-necessary-to-make-effort-to.html ​

Doesn't believing 'it happens if it has to happen' somewhat nullify your original question? Wouldn't the correct response to your original question then be 'do nothing, it is a matter of grace'?

​"Moksha does not mean physical separation from all worldly affairs, but only a state of mind bereft of all impure Vasanas or clinging to worldly things, but yet working as usual amidst them. You must realise God in and through the world. This is the central teaching of the Gita." http://www.sivanandaonline.org/public_html/?cmd=displaysection&section_id=884 Was this quirk of not wasting a morsel of food an old habit resurfacing, or a new respect that developed after his 'awakening', a 'realising of God in and through the world'?

There has been a lot written about Ramana's post-awakened state, have you found any reference to residual preferences and habits?

I have a favourite top 2 that I can find little fault in, both recent and well documented - Saint Seraphim of Sarov and Ramana Maharshi, I would genuinely like to see your critique of their residual preferences and habits.

I believe 'absolute' Self-realisation is possible no matter how rare, and to deny that it is possible is to manipulate the bar lower so as to believe that the attainment one has managed is enough. So though I deny somewhat the value of 'awakening', which is patently an unfinished state, I have great respect for true Self-realisation from which there is no falling back.

To examine the knots that bind us IME is a necessary first step towards disentanglement. To examine the koshas that keep us in illusion comes before disidentification with them to sever identification at its roots. At some points trust is needed, and for some trust and faith alone may be enough, but it is sound both spiritually and psychologically to examine the bonds before extricating oneself.

It's good to see this issue being tackled directly by Scott Kiloby, it looks like he's doing some good work around it. Still it seems harder to do it this way around - 'awaken' and remove self-will (as in the emailed question here http://kiloby.com/the-essence-of-embodiment/ )and then have to work on the 'embodied' problems while feeling lethargic about it, instead of working on the embodied issues first while the will remains strong, and once they are resolved then 'awakening'. This to me is a very good reason to start work on the LDT first, not last.

“Within the city of Brahman, which is the body, there is the heart, and within the heart there is a little house. This house has the shape of a lotus, and within it dwells that which is to be sought after, inquired about, and realized.” “As one not knowing that a golden treasure lies buried beneath his feet, may walk over it again and again, yet never find it, so all beings live every moment in the city of Brahman, yet never find him, because of the veil of illusion by which he is concealed." - Chandogya Upanishad

How many thousands of Western spiritual seeker types refer to themselves as awakened, all it takes often is realising that there is more to life than material pursuits and an interest in tarot or crystals or conspiracy theory to declare onself awakened. A more institutionalised Western category are the neo-advaitan awakened/enlightened types, these claim an actual realisation of non-duality, which though possibly real, most often seems to be a head space dissociation from the suffering of the heart/mind, effective to an extent but limited because the heart and its pain have necessarily been rejected along with the mind. Then there are the Western kundalini awakened/enlightened sort, again something has definitely taken place, and they are different to how they used to be, but somehow it's not enough, they never seem to be actually enlightened, or wise, or compassionate, or capable of extraordinary feats, it's always a work in progress. An example to me of someone who seems to have attained something like enlightenment recently (last century) is St Seraphim of Sarov - a 'miracle' worker able to heal all manner of serious physical conditions in a moment with a single word, and most certainly psychic, helping people to find what had been lost or stolen, being able to see into people's hearts and knowing their thoughts and problems before they spoke, and many times saying what was going to happen in the future - and when I compare what he did for people freely with the current crop of self-proclaimed awakened/enlightened individuals who usually only have platitudes to share, they fall far short to me. I haven't heard of anyone alive at the moment whom I perceive as truly awakened/enlightened, though there might be someone who is of course who is living in anonymity.

I was given his books years ago before Oprah made him rich and famous, and I didn’t agree with his immediate awakening through staying in the present method then, and I don’t agree with it now, whether he’s popular or not. Tolle experienced chronic depression accompanied by suicidal thoughts, and it was an acute attack of this condition that led to his sudden awakening. He believes that crisis and suffering are the key ingredient and vital in awakening, in this way he seems blinkered as he presents his problem and solution as the absolute requirement for everyone. Only through crisis and suffering can you awaken. Am I required to believe that this is the only path?

They might seem Arrogant, Proud, Greedy or Abusive, but what of it, for they are the Awakened.

Tolle lets... [all criticism of his teachings] wash past. As British writer Oliver Burkeman observed in a profile of Tolle for The Guardian, "Once you've told the world that you abide in a realm of infinite equanimity, you can't very well start getting all snippy when people don't take you at your word." I would have thought equanimity and not getting snippy might apply to all the awakened.

I think he was very generous in what he had to say about Tolle's contribution to spirituality in that piece, his attitude to 'Western' spirituality in general is pretty clear though in his associated piece at https://www.christophertitmussblog.org/ekhart-tolle-money-and-kindergarten-spirituality-a-response-to-emails where he states: "Please remember that contemporary Western spiritual enlightenment mostly focuses on being in the now, a non-judging mindfulness, an end to the seeker, and a sense of oneness . You might think such teachings were deep and profound. Far, far from it. This is beginner’s stuff. What much of the West offers in the way of enlightenment belongs to the kindergarten of spirituality." I agree it's incredibly easy to not be perfect, it's the 1000's of people who claim to be perfectly realised that bother me.

Eckhart Tolle is on the Rich Man’s List. Is this the price of enlightenment?

​Is there any alchemy involved in the equation "decrease Shi Shen -> increase Yuan Shen" though? There is an interesting diagram associated with the page quoted above at https://www.wudangchen.com/blog/jing-qi-shen-transformation which I can't post here as an image unfortunately, this represents just the idea of this one school though?

I'm trying to understand why sexual energy would be considered to be the same as spiritual energy (or kundalini energy), or why all energies would be considered to be the same, I don't understand the concept without resorting to ideas like transmutation or refinement, which would make them not the same?

I kind of agree with you about this, and keeping it simple ie. the one daoist immortal spirit, it can become a matter of personal philosophy/belief/experience, whether this life progresses to an immortal spirit or whether you can jump to non-dual 'eternal awareness'.

If you are correct and a created immortal spirit remains differentiated from the 'One', then the immortal spirit remains dualistic, and just a stage towards non-duality?

This makes sense to me, with the different frequencies. And the frequency matters. A few questions... I suspect different paths create different vibration frequencies, which would appear as completely different energy patterns? How does matter relate to vibration frequency? If frequency is increased/refined in a person, this would be expressed as physical health for example? What would creating an immortal spirit look like in energy terms, the same vibration as 'the source', or still a variation, differentiated? Incease/refinement of vibration would require a very specific action as it is working against entropy?

So if someone has gone beyond all form, it may be true to say all energy is the same, but can we ever go beyond all form while we are alive? At what point can all energy is the same be actually applied to anything biological?

A slightly unenlightened list of defects which will disqualify potential students from initiation (from the Kularnava Tantra) ...

Is it resolving apparent dualities or actually transforming sexual energy though. For example, True sexual union is the union of Para Shakti that is Kundali with Atma; others do but have carnal connection with women - ascended kundalini is 'True sexual union' - is kundalini actually sexual energy then in its spiritual dimension? I am referring to energy in the world of form, not in terms of ultimate reality.

This seems to be a response to someone who said Tantra is only about kundalini and sex. My actual post was examining whether other people thought there was a difference between 'energy' (spiritual, kundalini, qi etc) and sexual energy, or if others thought all energies were equivalent as Rex seems to imply in an earlier post (below) that you and Jeff seemed to agree with, in fact Jeff referred to it as an excellent point. For the record, and just to be absolutely clear about this, I don't think all energies are equivalent, nor do I think that kundalini energy is sexual energy, this particular issue came up because I made an earlier post distinguishing between sexual energy and spiritual energy. So where do you actually stand on this issue, are all energies the same?