Bindi

I gather my mistake here was to say that your concept of 'light transmission' was not gnostic Christianity but manipulating kundalini energy. I now see that according to Malachi (as quoted by Tibetan Ice in post #143) gnostic Christianity itself invokes the 'Divine Mother's Force' to initiate a kundalini rising.

Jeff, that's one hell of an article! Yes it is quite dense, and on a first reading I do see similarities to what you say. Do you find that you agree wholeheartedly with Malachi across the board, I mean this article and his other articles, or do you just agree with certain aspects?

Yes I agree, ego is very tricky to always see, I trust that a higher self would fully understand the true nature of ego and how to accommodate or synchronise with it perfectly. For now I see ego as a grand looking castle that hovers next to me, inviting me to enter it at any or every step, and maybe this is the greatest need for the grace of God, to be aided in not entering there. Though you're probably right about not saying 'my', I acknowledge that I'm simply not at the point where there is no 'my', I do identify as me for now. I trust that this perception might change one day along the lines you suggest.

For me personally I would say my consciousness is moving or shifting towards my higher self to ultimately join with my higher self, which was always in contact with 'God' as the Father. And I'm always up for an in depth discussion about ego, I find it an interesting and important issue.

Thanks dustybeijing, I wasn't particularly attached to that article anyway, I'm really just trying to understand the idea of heart/mind, and in what way mind is envisioned as being of the heart.

Jeff, am I correct in thinking that you (like Malachi) see a Divine Mother 'above', where Jesus saw a Divine Father 'above'. If so, I wonder why you/gnostic Christianity see it opposite to Christianity? Is it somehow dictated by the nature of your transmissions?

No, I think my dodgy source was being overly enthusiastic, though it was quite likely that being Nietzsche was unbearable. Maybe Nietzsche's "I would believe only in a God that knows how to dance" was to blame.

I think I read in the last couple of days that Buddhist monks were allowed one illusion, and that was the illusion that there was anything to attain, but I have no idea where I read this. Sure on the two or three way street. Perhaps somewhat tangentially, your post did make me think quite a lot about how ego relates to 'destructive emotions' though.

"Buddhahood is attained through the gradual process of transforming oneself into the body of perfect enlightenment by overcoming and finally eradicating one’s destructive emotions that are veils concealing one’s true nature." Venerable Chöje Lama Phuntsok http://www.dharmadownload.net/pages/english/Natsok/0014_Leksheyling_teaching/leksheyling_teachings_0012.htm

Some famous Western thinkers thoughts on God: According to Freud, man invents God through his imagination to calm his fears. Jean-Paul Sartre, though an atheist, admitted his need for God. Walter Kaufmann referred to man as the “God-intoxicated ape.” Jung was asked if he now believed in God. "Now?" Jung asked, "Difficult to answer. I know. I don't need to believe, I know."

Thankyou 子泰, the association between happiness and chi flow especially is a truly valuable insight to me.

Thanks for the warning I won't look, and I'll keep my

I believe that God is the very fabric of all the universes which must be a generative force, as God apparently generates itself in a multitude of ways, one being matter. I think that our 5 senses blind us to our true nature which was generated by God therefore must be of God, and when we realise this blindness we start out on any number of paths to regain the experience of our true God nature. I believe that it is possible for us to perceive the nature of God as unconditional love and unconditional knowledge, though God is probably beyond this perception, but I trust that it is possible for us to experience this perception of God in matter, which we call enlightenment. It seems to me that the idea of hell as separation from God is the state we find ourselves in here on earth, though I believe in the Christian Hell the point is that a soul is forever separated from the presence of God, and that is not the case for us because enlightenment is possible, and we are also apparently aware of God in between lives. But I also think that full enlightenment therefore full re-experience of God while alive on this earth must happen to only one in many billions of people.

He specifically said he didn't want to derail this thread with a comparison between Buddhist emptiness and a Christian framework, though I disagree that this was derailing anyway. You have assumed that this includes zapping as derailing, despite his post#25 which directly correlates light transmission with zapping. Also, it seems to me that if you have experienced Jeff's light transmission, then ergo you have experienced gnostic/mystical Christian light transmission, since this is what Jeff states his light transmission is.

In the OP it's about gnostic light transmission, the term changes to Christian mysticism transmission some time later. Also I have already quoted Jeff's reference to zapping in post #25 of this thread where he “Acknowledg[es] that light transmission can feel like your body is rearranging and you are being zapped with a million volts.” His post seems to directly contradict your contention that your personal experience with zapping has nothing to do with light transmission. I feel like there is a strong tendency in your group to gloss over or otherwise ignore certain aspects of Jeff's light transmission. Why not use this thread to explore some of these seemingly contentious issues?

okay, but I had meant zapping specifically in relation to Jeff's light transmission. Why is it so inappropriate to examine certain aspects of light transmission in detail?

No, you're right. Can we discuss zapping (another favourite topic of mine )?

Jonesboy, Jeff wasn't saying I was derailing this thread with a discussion of kundalini but with the concept of form and void, which as you and I know you introduced as a synonym for motion and rest. Actually Jeff even thanked you in that specific post, so as far as I knew you were correct and he supported your comparison. Since form and void as a concept did actually start to make sense to me, I was happy to explore the concept of 'motion and rest' as 'form and void'. Through the heart sutra as you suggested, through the Zen story that I put forward, it was all to understand 'motion and rest' from Thomas 50. It didn't seem like derailing at the time to ask whether 'void' was then synonymous with 'emptiness', and I still can't understand why it wouldn't be, but I guess my exploration of motion and rest/form and void and emptiness is over here. FWIW, I personally am glad that you supplied that equation motion/rest = form/void.

According to the OP On the topic of confusion… Perhaps this might add some clarity. This is a clear definition of Gnostic Christianity and Light transmission by Tau Malachi from the Sophia Fellowship. Note that gnostic light transmission cannot be separated from the gnostic transmission in authentic gnostic tradition. Jeff, it seems to me that there is so much confusion because you are a self-proclaimed gnostic light transmitter with no authentic lineage, whose transmission seems to be associated not with authentic gnostic transmission but with kundalini – see for example post #25 of this thread where you “Acknowledg[e] that light transmission can feel like your body is rearranging and you are being zapped with a million volts.” This is not gnostic Christianity. This is manipulating kundalini energy. It’s a shame that you are unable to explore your transmission ability with any degree of objectivity, which might add clarity to what is actually occurring, instead of obscuring its true nature in confounding theory.

When I was asking what 'motion and rest' meant exactly, Jonesboy supplied this: The correctness of this statement was not challenged at the time, so I have been assuming that rest = void as far as this thread goes. Am I now to assume that his statement was wrong?

I am more than happy that you would answer directly Jeff. So rest = void but not emptiness?

Jeff states that he often calls transmission and reception the Holy Father (silence/rest) and Holy Spirit/Mother (motion/light/energy") respectively. So in Jeff's terms does transmission/the Holy Father/silence/rest equal emptiness or not?

You did read this sentence at the end of his story didn't you? "don't be attached to Samadhi -- you must 'pass' Samadhi. Zen means 'everyday mind,' not special states of mind. Moment to moment keeping a clear mind is what's important." So perhaps he has gone far enough after all... What to you is the nature of emptiness? edit: I see there is another thread that is questioning whether emptiness is nothing. There hasn't been a definitive answer there yet. Is a clear mind emptiness or nothing? Or empty fullness and potential? I prefer the latter concept myself. Which is similar to Jeff's concept of infinite potential. Does emptiness=empty fullness=nothing=infinite potential=void=full void=rest? And only the permanent experience of this is to enter into reality (past Samadhi)?

You wrote "In the purest form I often call [transmission and reception]...the Holy Father (silence/rest) and Holy Spirit/Mother (motion/light/energy"). Post#117 on this page, referred to by you from another thread. I see I mixed them up and asked if energy was light transmission and silence was light reception because without referring directly to your definition I went with the association that I intuited as correct. Still, I would have expected your answer to just clarify my mix up. But now you say I am off track. Honestly Jeff, how can I ever understand what you are going on about if you keep changing what you mean like shifting sands, with a different response according to the season? What does "energy is more like attached light" even mean?

A Zen story by Master Seung Sahn about form and emptiness. It is said that insight concerning the truth of things liberates, and knowing that ultimately everything is nothing is that truth. How does this relate to the heart sutra, and motion and rest, and form and void?