Bindi

Are you referring here to your specific concepts of energy as light transmission and silence as light reception?

I find this post to be as full of irrelevant opposite pairs as previous recent posts on the subject of motion and rest. That these spurious synonyms are then used to substantiate a conclusion does not make that conclusion valid.

50. Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where have you come from?' say to them, 'We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image.' If they say to you, 'Is it you?' say, 'We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living Father.' If they ask you, 'What is the evidence of your Father in you?' say to them, 'It is motion and rest.'" Thomas' Jesus isn't saying he has come from the light, but that the people listening to him should use this as their response when asked where they come from. Apparently this was because proselytisers were routinely questioned about their lineage, and this response bypassed the need for a lineage. But in the meantime I have found a satisfactory answer to my question through researching the possibility of 'their' being a grammatical error: From 3 different scholars: It [established itself], and it revealed itself in their image. BLATZ And it has been shown forth in their image. LAYTON It [. . .] until they show (?) [. . .] their image. DORESSE Using Blatz's translation, the sentence in full would read 'the light revealed itself in their (their questioners) image, so in the image of humanity. And after all that, I'm finally happy with this sentence, because i think that 'God' is indeed revealed in people.

With those that can see Qi, what do they see? Yet you compartmentalised light transmission as a higher form of Qi. So on further consideration is light transmission higher or all one and the same? Do you consider light work to be internal cultivation, and a mirror of an external observation of the source light? Or do you consider light work to be a direct experience of the source light, so beyond internal cultivation? For me dreams are indeed a mirror - of the distance between my embodied consciousness and the source. My embodied consciousness is moving towards the source, it just hasn't arrived there yet. I do do a form of Qi/energy work as well which I wouldn't refer to as a mirror of an external observation of the source light. I would refer to that as partaking in small measure of the source energy.

50. Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where have you come from?' say to them, 'We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image.' If they say to you, 'Is it you?' say, 'We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living Father.' If they ask you, 'What is the evidence of your Father in you?' say to them, 'It is motion and rest.'" If 'appeared in their image' meant appeared in the image of Christ, it would have to read 'appeared in my image' as Jesus purportedly spoke these words. So grammatically it doesn't make sense that 'in their image' is in Christs image. And 'their' is plural, which needs to be taken into account when ascertaining who 'their image' was. Do you have any other ideas on this issue? So to you being chosen means being ready to receive the Holy Spirit. Though I don't see this conclusion being supported in Thomas 50, nonetheless there is biblical support for your statement, eg. 2 Thess. 2:13, "But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth."

You were happily speaking for Jeff in an earlier post (below), so I didn't realise there was a restriction on this, but fair enough. Can you give specific examples of how motion and rests sounds exactly like the Heart Sutra to you? Motion and rest as ripples on a pond and a calm body of water respectively seems quite sensible and quite a reasonable analogy. But this analogy doesn't clarify how motion and rest are 'evidence of the Father in us' for me. Can you tie it in? You seem to be proselytising here, but I would prefer to just stay focused on issues that have arisen with the Thomas 50 verse and the Holy Spirit at the moment.

Everyone is in but not of this world, even if they don't realise it. Ok, I can go along with that. It was claimed in the OP that light transmission is the Holy Spirit (kundalini), and it is this claim that I am asking proof for. This proof must relate in some fashion to the biblical understanding of the Holy Spirit since the biblical Holy Spirit has been specifically referred to. According to the bible the Holy Spirit is physically visible or audible to onlookers when it appears, and rests upon them for some time. That would be one proof, that an independent observer has either seen or heard the Holy Spirit descending on someone during a light transmission. Other proofs would be gifts directly associated with the Holy Spirit in the Bible, specifically the gifts of healing and working miracles, gifts of foretelling things to come, discerning of spirits, speaking with diverse kinds of tongues, and the interpretation of tongues. According to the bible, there are different kinds of gifts but the same Spirit distributes them (1 Corinthians 12:4) according to the will of God or the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:11), but you claim that the Holy Spirit has been transmitted despite lack of verified observation and despite the lack of any kinds of gifts being received at all. So what is left of the Holy Spirit in light transmission, when there is no evidence for it at all? Your only evidence is an experience of Unity. Fair enough you experience this, I am not questioning that, but the experience of Unity per se does not constitute evidence of the Holy Spirit - in fact the experience of unity is not specifically associated with the Holy Spirit in the bible. There is no expectation for people to see Qi when doing Qigong as Qi cannot be seen directly by the human eye, though I gather people often feel Qi. But if Holy Spirit/kundalini transmission is specifically referred to as light transmission, then I would expect light to be visible. It is a simple conclusion. What do you mean when you say that light is just a higher form of Qi? According to Dr. Sadao Hayano in his paper Measuring Qi Energy: ‘Qi wave or Qi light’ is the electromagnetic wave ( or light ) having a wave length λ = 10-5 m. Qi energy is known to have the frequency fq = 3 x 1014 cycles per sec. and a wave length λ = 10-5m, which define energy Eq = 1.99 x 10-19 Joules/photon for the Qi wave. We note that the Qi wave is in the spectral region of far infra - red light and can not be directly seen with the human eye. http://www.equilibrium-e3.com/images/PDF/Measuring Qi Energy.pdf What region of the light spectrum are you referring to which is 'higher' than infra-red light?

I'd still like this to be clarified, who is being referred to here? This verse does say that they are 'blessed' because they have eyes to see and ears to hear, it doesn't specify that they are 'chosen' which is what i asked for from scriptural references. You say being chosen is about being ready to receive, my question is being ready to receive what exactly?

Jeff says that motion and rest have to do with residing and receiving. Now you say motion and rest are the same as form and void. Just because they are opposite pairs (though Jeff's aren't really opposites, and i suspect he really means transmission/receiving) doesn't actually make them synonymous. Your examples just seem to be plucked out of thin air, they don't make sense to me, and i'm struggling enough already with seeing the spiritual relevance of motion and rest in the first place. Could someone explain the spiritual relevance of motion and rest by actually referring to the words 'motion' and 'rest'? Another example of what, motion and rest? How does this verse relate to motion and rest, or form and void? Why bold present moment? Is this in some way particularly relevant to motion and rest and form and void? So are you saying that within and outside are synonymous with motion and rest? I think even a physics professor would be getting a bit bogged down with all these apparently synonymous pairs of opposites. Motion/rest, residing/receiving, form/void, within/outside...

Life is long So are you saying we are all 'not of this world' whether we realise it or not? And that we are all one with the Father whether we realise it or not. Along the lines of Bob's "countless permutations in effect that when identified with seem to make it feel like separation is so." In John 17 Jesus asks the Father that the apostles may be one with Himself and the Father. So according to your logic the Father would just have to grant them that understanding. Yes, possibly, but again following this logic, he granted them understanding of unity in the descent of the Holy Spirit, but there were associated gifts, much as siddhis are associated with enlightenment. So to claim unity or enlightenment without the associated gifts genuinely strikes me as hollow words. What effects of unity would satisfy your criteria? Would a single experience of unity be enough to qualify someone as having realised unity? Or would the experience of unity have to be permanent? Is there any requirement to have associated gifts? Where do you set the bar? I have had 2 days in my life where I have experienced a profound level of unity, but for me visiting wasn't enough. Am I just a harder judge than you? I agree with this, I think our physical senses do blind us to the source. And yes most traditions would be just trying to get us to recognise our unity with the source. But different traditions try to get us to recognise that unity in different ways, and this is what can cause disagreements. You do light practice (though if someone could tell me why it's called light practice when no one seems to be able to actually see light I'd be much obliged). I also have a solution - develop extra sensory perception that is able to perceive that level. Vive La Différence?

Appeared in whose image? What does 'appeared in their image' mean? Is there scriptural reference to the chosen ones being those with eyes to see or ears to hear? In this passage the chosen ones seem more likely to be the children of the light, who came from the light. Yes we are all children of God, whether we are paying attention or not (with a nod to Bob). Okay, a little exploration of motion and rest. To work as an analogy surely it has to make sense on this level first. And I get the train example, my perception of motion and rest is relative. And maybe someone with physics knowledge could clarify for me if and how this means that motion and rest are actually the same? But regardless of this, what does motion and rest have to do with residing and receiving?

And kundalini (though it is not a transmission) is repeatedly referred to as an ascent. I wonder if these two, descent of the Holy Spirit and ascent of kundalini actually have an ultimately necessary relationship in us beyond any religion, ie. to be utterly complete human beings are they both necessarytogether. I didn't know that the Holy Spirit descends to the heart, not that I've ever really explored the topic.

Yes, absolutely. And I do hear those echo's, and they have my full attention

Distinguishing 'we as the chosen' is awfully close to self righteous religious aggrandisement, as 'they' are then the opposite of 'the chosen', the unchosen, the one's who didn't make the grade and don't belong to the in group. It seems divisive and self promoting. The evidence I would look for of 'the Father' in people would be unconditional love, unconditional knowledge, miraculous healing - I don't intuitively grasp motion and rest as the definition of 'the Father', it just seems so dry and soulless, maybe it would sing to a physics professor, or a mathematician?

Yes we have different opinions as to whether kundalini is an energy located in the root chakra or if it is universal consciousness, but I would agree with you that kundalini might be associated with universal consciousness if you were referring to kundalini that has been fully raised through the crown chakra. I think Kundalini in that state must be synonymous with universal consciousness. Perhaps we're just looking at opposite ends of the kundalini spectrum. Yes I believe I am separated from 'God', that is the reality I am working within. Maybe the whole question can be seen as a case of the chicken or the egg. Is it the belief that I am separated from God that causes me to be separated from God, or is it that because I in fact realise that I am separated from God that I believe that I am separated? I personally value the certain knowledge of my separation from God as it is the spur for me to work towards unity. The only thing that would change my mind on this is if I had actually achieved unity, which for me is synonymous with enlightenment, and all that that would entail. Until that day I will remain adamant that I am separated.

Apologies for the long answer - it got long because I find it interesting to explore these issues as well. Dawei, I hope you at least read it in its entirety, since you were the one who introduced these complicated issues The Gospel of John states in verse 17:11 “I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world” and then states in your quoted section (verse 17:14) “they are not of the world just as I am not of the world (2x).” So 'in the world but not of the world'. But it’s also true that in John 17 Jesus asks ‘The Father’ that "... they may be one even as We are" (John 17:11) and that "... they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us" (John 17:20). So he is specifically asking the 'Father’ that he grant them the state of Unity with the Father that Jesus already enjoys. In these sentences at least it is not a state that they have yet achieved. It is a request that Jesus makes to The Father, that he wishes the Father to grant. I think there is a contradiction between the statements that they are already not of the world versus Jesus’ request that they will still come to unity, in that 'not of the world' seems to imply unity having already been achieved. Do you agree that there might be a contradiction here? Referring to John 17 my answer to your first question would be: The source of the initiation would have to be the Father. Is the Father on this plane or beyond this plane? In John 17:11 Jesus states “I am no longer in the world; … I come to You.” IMO this places the Father not in the world, but somewhere that Jesus is going to, somewher beyond this plane. So I would say the source of this initiation is beyond this plane. I wouldn’t like to refer only to John 17 in answering this question as it is complicated by the contradiction I referred to earlier – in one sentence they are already not of this world, but in another Jesus asks that they be brought to a unity which hasn’t yet been achieved with Himself and the Father. I would like to refer instead to The Acts of The Apostles. Early on in Acts and in time after the events referred to in John 17 the apostles are still to be brought into unity with the Father. In Acts 1:5 – 1:8 the risen Jesus states that “Ye shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit not many days hence…[and] Ye shall receive power after the Holy Spirit is come upon you” This initiation was in this plane insofar as the “sound [was] from heaven as from a rushing mighty wind…[which] filled all the house where they were sitting (Acts 2:2). The result of this initiation had worldly consequences, in that the apostles could suddenly speak other languages (or be understood as if they were speaking all languages), and developed the ability to heal otherwise incurable conditions (miraculously) from this time on, such as Peter's healing of the man who had been lame from birth. Incidentally, gaining these specific abilities – speaking in different languages (or being understood as if you were speaking in another’s language), and the ability to heal on such a profound level are not gifts associated with the awakening or ascent of kundalini. Staying with John 17, I see the boundary as whether there is unity/oneness or not with the Father. It seems to me that you currently believe there is no boundary. And that the realisation of this dissolves the perceived but unreal boundary. What do you think of my understanding of the boundary as whether there is unity or not with the Father? And can you say that there is true unity with the Father without the descent of the Holy Spirit (and the power granted of the associated gifts)? Was Jesus asking for the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles when he was asking the Father that he bring them into Oneness?

Having set out on this path, my best bet is to see it through, extending how I deal with emotions rather than trying to reduce emotions hold on me. This may require my consciousness to shift into ajna chakra, ajna as the 'lotus of command', controlling all the lower chakras. I believe that where emotions can flow freely, unconditional love will follow. So my path becomes an experiment, one that I am happy to see through to its end.

But I do differentiate between these forms. For instance I don't think kundalini plays like tongues of fire above the head. Nor do I think that the Holy Spirit is trapped at the root chakra in the form of Kundalini. I completely agree with standard Hindu teaching on kundalini residing at the root chakra, sleeping there until woken up, at which point it starts to act in the particular way kundalini acts upon us, which I believe is different to the particular way in which the Holy Spirit acts upon us. Just as initiating these forms is done in different ways. Effective methods for awakening the kundalini will not result in an experience of the Holy Spirit whereas experiencing the Holy Spirit cannot be initiated by ourselves but is through the grace of God. Beyond this plane it might all be one, but for now we are on this plane, where duality must first be genuinely traversed. This is of course just my opinion, many people believe they are functioning beyond duality right now, I just personally highly doubt it.

Hi Rainbowvein. All I can suggest is that at the level I am working at, which is not an enlightened or formless state, things of the subtle body do have form, and can be worked with energetically. I personally have no problem with traversing the landscape of subtle form first on the way to formlessness. In this landscape, mainly available to me through my mother’s seeing, there is a gold disc, there are pearls, doors, gates, barriers, stairs, a palace, a tunnel, etc, etc. These images are not meditation phantasms, they’re not auras, I understand them as indicative of the underlying reality of the subtle body at specific points in time which must be traversed whether they are seen or not. Much like the chakras are there whether they’re seen or not, and whether one believes in them or not. To see or not see any of these things doesn’t change their underlying reality IMO, but visual knowledge of the subtle level does help in knowing how to direct energies at any one point in time in order to progress as efficiently as possible, directions which change regularly. The quote below captures the sense of these ‘images’ in a positive light.

I agree that God is not a person, it is an energy, and most likely the very fabric of the universes, but that energy is surely the purest form of unconditional love imaginable. The Holy Spirit which represents that energy must then surely be associated with that same unconditional love energy. As far as I can gather, this quality of energy 'descends', and is associated with the crown chakra. In Christian terminology it is 'the descent of the Holy Spirit', for example in Acts 2:2-4: “Suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled the whole house. There appeared tongues as of fire and it sat above each one of them. And they were filled with the Holy Spirit.” The fallen aspect of 'God' could be quite easily associated with kundalini that is carried near the genitals, that actually makes a lot of sense to me - what if the gnostics got it right in that sense, that there is an embodied aspect of God (not necessarily 'fallen'), but the gnostics didn't have the terminology for a separate concept of kundalini as we are familiar with it. Kundalini has been associated with fire (as the fire serpent), and the central channel that kundalini needs to travel up, Brahmanadi, is also associated with fire, as is the Holy Spirit (as tongues of fire). So I would agree that these various energies and channels ultimately have the same nature, but I also agree with T_I that they have markedly different roles to play, and to lump them all in together is just confusing and unnecessary.

From what I can gather the dantian system and the chakra system are interrelated but separate systems. It seems to me that the dantian system responds to certain physical postures, whereas the chakra system primarily responds to emotions. But they’re interrelated in that the chakra system has to be cleared to a certain extent before the dantian system should be worked with, and then when the dantian system has been completed to a great extent work on the chakra system should be resumed. Maybe dantians/chakras are like a higher level yin/yang system, like ida and pingala are simpler level yin/yang systems. This might be why it is not useful to try and compare the two systems, because they’re really chalk and cheese, but both equally important of course. I personally believe that the gold disc itself has to ascend to the MDT and then the UDT.

I tried to search TLM on TDB and got no matches. I then tried to google it and got TALISMAN MINING LIMITED, The Leprosy Mission, Télé Lyon Métropole, The Lego Movie, The Little Mermaid, Thetis Lake Monster… You get the idea. Any more info for my TDB search would be much appreciated

I'm trying to get my kids to do it and I'm lucky if they do it for 1-2 minutes. Do you know why it is necessary to do it for so long, and whether just a minute or two will still have a good effect?

Lama Yeshe gives an introduction to Buddhist psychology in this excerpt from "Becoming your own therapist."

A site that directly relates emotions to chakras: