Thursday April 1, 2010 12:00 am DR. GLENN J. MORRIS "MAHASAMADHI" GLOBAL SHAKTIPAT MEDITATION on skype.

[Vajrasattva]

Thursday April 1, 2010 12:00 am DR. GLENN J. MORRIS "MAHASAMADHI" GLOBAL SHAKTIPAT MEDITATION on skype.

 

You are al Invited.

 

Peace & god Bless

 

 

Love

 

Santiago

[buscon]

Thursday April 1, 2010 12:00 am DR. GLENN J. MORRIS "MAHASAMADHI" GLOBAL SHAKTIPAT MEDITATION on skype.

 

You are al Invited.

 

Peace & god Bless

 

 

Love

 

Santiago

 

Sounds good Santiago, two questions:

- 12:00 am but which time zone ?

- what's the skype name to connect to ?

 

Thx

[Kameel]

Midnight is Miami Florida time

[Birch]

Awesome! I'll tune in without Skype to see what happens

Hope you're well Santi.

[NeiChuan]

Hm wow thanks. Just downloaded skype a bit ago too.

[Vajrasattva]

http://www.skype.com/go/joinpublicchat?skypename=silatyogi&topic=Dr%2e%20Morris%20Maha%20Samadhi%20Shaktipat%2024hours%21%20%3a%20%29&blob=MS1hIpG0EuajI5ioxKhwRPQ5bVv8y8wEi2v_GjRb6DoK4aL8Yngq2lO7V9s7N

[3bob]

Thursday April 1, 2010 12:00 am DR. GLENN J. MORRIS "MAHASAMADHI" GLOBAL SHAKTIPAT MEDITATION on skype.

 

You are al Invited.

 

Peace & god Bless

 

 

Love

 

Santiago

 

Sounds interesting, and thanks.

Btw, are you of a Sufi school? And if you are of Muslim belief I find it very strange, and non-kosher that you are co-opting Hindu terms and meanings.

Bob

[Sunya]

Sounds interesting, and thanks.

Btw, are you of a Sufi school? And if you are of Muslim belief I find it very strange, and non-kosher that you are co-opting Hindu terms and meanings.

Bob

 

what's so great about being kosher?

 

Thursday April 1, 2010 12:00 am DR. GLENN J. MORRIS "MAHASAMADHI" GLOBAL SHAKTIPAT MEDITATION on skype.

 

You are al Invited.

 

Peace & god Bless

 

 

Love

 

Santiago

 

Edited April 1, 2010 by mikaelz

[Kunlun Enthusiast]

Mahasamadhi

 

Mahasamādhi (the great and final samādhi) is the act of consciously and intentionally leaving one's body at the time of death. [1][2] A realized yogi (male) or yogini (female) who has attained the state of Nirvikalpa Samadhi (enlightenment), will, at an appropriate time, consciously exit from their body and cease to live. This is known as Mahasamadhi. This is not the same as the physical death that occurs for an unenlightened person.

 

Hi

 

I was a personal friend of Glenn, and ocasionally trained with him, and frequently discussed things with him. Glenn died of some heart problem. He suffered from high blood pressure and some other problems of the sort. He REALLY abused his luck. Didn't have much care about his diet and didn't take his medicines. I don't think his problems had anything to do with qigong/kundalini practices, just with bad diet and unhealthy food. Maybe there was some genetic predisposition too.

 

To get the CDs and so on, contact one of the groups that carry on his training. There are two or three out there. Google Hoshinroshiryu and you'll find them. His system was a unique mixture of Qigong techniques, some Mantak inspired stuff, lots of self experimentation and meditation techniques from wherever he could get them. He studied extensively on the mental effects of practices, and his system has a lot of safeguards built into it. It's a pretty good system...

 

Having said this:

 

There isn't much new in it, except for perhaps a few "tricks" (some pretty good, I have to say), and these in my opinion offset some of the safety guards in the system. Practicioners familiar with any good qigong/neigong system from a traditional chinese martial art will recognize most of the stuff. My main problem with it was that there was an underemphasizing of basic, movement based training methods - some sort of good qigong set with a few exercises that would move and stretch and rotate the main joints, muscle groups and meridians. The system, as written, will have people jumping off to sitting and standing practices too fast. It will create results very fast, but (and this is absolutely MY OPINION) in the long run has inherent limitations which reuire further learning.

 

It is my experience that it is the basic everyday repeating of a solid, simple, straightforward qigong system which will promote good health (perhaps not enlightenment, but good health and energy levels) and perhaps if Doc had continued his practices of this kind he might have lasted a lot longer.

 

Best

 

I am confused

[Creation]

The shaktipat is on the anniversary of Dr. Morris' passing and is in his honor.

 

Samadhi has another meaning which is less commonly known in the west: a monument in honor of a master that has passed on (i.e. passed into maha-samadhi).

 

 

My lesson from Doc: lighten up.

 

 

Kunlun Enthusiast,

 

They teach 4 simple but effective qigong movements in KAP these days, probably for the reasons given by the guy you quoted.

Edited April 1, 2010 by Creation

[3bob]

what's so great about being kosher?

 

 

Well I'm not a saint when it comes to borrowing things from various paths... having said that imo we should still remember that the various spiritual sources, lineages and or schools have made many great contributions and imo they should be recognized and given credit for doing so by us giving a certain care and handling to same. Also, it should not be implied by us in borrowing their various materails that our use of such is in any way related to how their school uses those materials in their membership unless we are a part of that membership and cleared to do so. To do otherwise is not Kosher. (so to speak in using that Jewish term)

 

Om

[Kunlun Enthusiast]

I admit I don't know much about Shaktipat, but here is what someone very experienced (I know this person rather well) wrote on a different forum.

 

 

Thanks for clarifying!

 

I don't quite understand the mechanism of Shaktipat in the Reiki or Western context so was curious.

 

From the Yoga and Tantra traditions, basically there are two paths: the well-known path of Kundalini ascending - earth meets heaven; and there is the Shiva energy descending - heaven meets earth, lost in popular practice for the most part today owing to the practical difficulties involved therein. First is initiated and accelerated by a Shaktipata and the second by a Shivapata.

 

Today, the word Shaktipata seems to be used in many ways: to heal, to balance, to awaken Kundalini etc. And also the objective is rather vague? I have heard some folks say - after Shaktipat, based on how ready the person is, the changes occur. Some may awaken their Kundalinis, some may get healed, some may be more balanced etc.

 

But this really is not true for the traditions from which Shaktipata originates. The goals, techniques etc. are clearly-defined as also the results, if performed the right way. There is no ambiguity whatsoever based on the readiness of the receiver as the purpose of Shaktipata is to kick-start the process in the recipient and get him readied for what is to come.

 

So typically, a Guru examines a disciple to determine his current state and determines what kind of Shaktipata he is ready for: Tivra, Tivratara, Tivratama - which are Sanskrit terms for intense, more intense, most intense. The goals of each of these is clear and same irrespective of the recipient for it is the preceptor who will vary his technique to bring about the desired transformation in his student. Shaktipata works at multiple levels - most importantly acting on one of the malas or impurities - anava, mayika and karmika, that respectively affect the body, mind and soul. How far does the ascended Kundalini rise, how many knots can be pierced and how many of the limiting factors in the recipient that prevent the realization of the non-dual state can be dissolved - these would depend upon on the intensity or the technique of Shaktipata.

 

But at any point, a successful Shaktipata should necessarily involve the awakening of Kundalini at the least and dissolution of the basic limiting tattvas. How many of the available Shaktipata sessions today accomplish this true objective of Shaktipata and don't base it off of - "I did it, but the recipient was not ready for more' - I don't know.

 

So, in the Shaktipata traditions of Yoga Tantra, if you ask the true Preceptor if he can tell for sure what will accomplish after the Shaktipata - Will Kundalini awaken, how far will she rise, how many knots will she pierce - he will exactly know. He will vary the intensity of his beamed shakti to accomplish what he set forth for based on his analysis. But, do most folks offering Shaktipata today know what exactly will happen after the Shaktipata? If not, it is probably simply beaming of prana or chi and not Shaktipata in the true sense.

 

I don't know if any of this makes sense, just my 2 cents.

 

So is shaktipata here beaming of chi and will awaken kundalini if the "recipient is ready"? Or this is different?

Edited April 1, 2010 by Kunlun Enthusiast

[xyz]

cant public skype because new version wont support it. -.-

[Mal]

Try http://www.oldapps.com/skype.php I use V 3.8.0.188

 

IMHO the 4 chi gongs alone are worth the price of KAP and are pretty much the mainstay of my daily practice routine.

 

My lesson from Doc: lighten up.

yes and have a laugh.

 

Much love _/\_

[Vajrasattva]

Sounds interesting, and thanks.

Btw, are you of a Sufi school? And if you are of Muslim belief I find it very strange, and non-kosher that you are co-opting Hindu terms and meanings.

Bob

 

 

shaktipat is same as "baraka"

[3bob]

shaktipat is same as "baraka"

 

Perhaps... but how coy on your part.

 

Show me a Sufi elder who has no problem at all with his sons and daughters fully embracing and becoming Hindus and thus leaving a great deal of what their family has lived for and taught them behind ----- or a Hindu elder who has no problems with his sons and daughters fully embracing Islam and becoming Muslims thus leaving behind most of what their family has lived for and taught them ----- when that day comes and such schools are totally inter-changeable then we will know what universalism really is - until then "shaktipat is the same as baraka" is effectively non-kosher talk or at best intellectual cross-correlation. (something that is easy for us to do in the "west" where even the "Christianity" that many of us believe is essentially and or inherently ours was co-opted)

 

Om

Edited April 5, 2010 by 3bob

[ShaktiMama]

Perhaps... but how coy on your part.

 

Show me a Sufi elder who has no problem at all with his sons and daughters fully embracing Hinduism and thus leaving a great deal of what their family has lived for and taught them behind ----- or a Hindu elder who has no problems with sons and daughters fully embracing Islam and thus leaving behind most of what their family has lived for and taught them ----- when that day comes and such schools are totally inter-changeable then we will know true universalism - until then "shaktipat is the same as baraka" is effectively non-kosher easy talk and intellectual cross-correlation.

 

Om

 

 

maybe this pdf will help clarify

 

s

Shakti in Islam.pdf

[Vajrasattva]

Perhaps... but how coy on your part.

 

Show me a Sufi elder who has no problem at all with his sons and daughters fully embracing and becoming Hindus and thus leaving a great deal of what their family has lived for and taught them behind ----- or a Hindu elder who has no problems with his sons and daughters fully embracing Islam and becoming Muslims thus leaving behind most of what their family has lived for and taught them ----- when that day comes and such schools are totally inter-changeable then we will know what universalism really is - until then "shaktipat is the same as baraka" is effectively non-kosher talk or at best intellectual cross-correlation. (something that is easy for us to do in the "west" where even the "Christianity" that many of us believe is essentially and or inherently ours was co-opted)

 

Om

 

Show me a real Sufi that doesn't love all, and all religions. If he or she is a real sufi they Love all no matter what or what term.

 

I use shaktipat "term" cause that is what my Guru (Dr. Glenn Morris) used when he was alive to transmit energy. It does not matter if you are any religion to receive a shaktipat. God is God, there is no God but God & the breath of God is the same no matter what "term" you give it & no matter what religion. My Sufi Sheik is from Java his family is from ancient Badui (ancient Hindu & Buddhist & kejawan shamans) & is bloodline from Walisongo muslim saints from Mecca. And he himself told me to teach what I teach cause it helps people become better and it is Tasawuf knowledge from God. My Sheik has seen what I teach and what Glenn Morris taught and aside from "terms" a lot of it is infact in sufi practices and is also found in native american shamanism, Chi kung, vedic Mahasiddha Yogas,Kriya Yogas, tibetan tantric yoga. ( I am not speaking about the "sexual" practices when i say "tantra" although that does exist ofcourse).

 

So if you have an issue with what I teach how I teach why I teach go take it up with Allah directly or what ever you would like to call the Divine.

 

Only when we can break down the false walls of illusions that keep us seperate from the Divine within us all can we become really "hu- man".

 

Peace "wsalams"

 

Santiago

[3bob]

maybe this pdf will help clarify

 

s

 

Hello Shaktimama,

 

I've been reading those types of essays for 30+ years... and I more or less understand where they are coming from. The fact is we don't see the masters and lineage holders of various major and minor schools of Hinduism or Sufism (not to mention or involve all of the other types of schools) giving up their total control, power, influence, and self-perpetuating ways when it comes to same and replacing that with universalism. Traditional Hinduism and Islam in this world do not mix, at best they tolerate one another; and that would be a comparitively wonderful state imo.

 

Om

[Kameel]

Life is cross-cultural,

Life is multi-functional,

Life is beautiful.

Celebrate this!

 

3BOB,

Create or transend any language limitations you wish.

Om to you.

Edited April 5, 2010 by Kameel

[3bob]

Show me a real Sufi that doesn't love all, and all religions. If he or she is a real sufi they Love all no matter what or what term.

 

I use shaktipat "term" cause that is what my Guru (Dr. Glenn Morris) used when he was alive to transmit energy. It does not matter if you are any religion to receive a shaktipat. God is God, there is no God but God & the breath of God is the same no matter what "term" you give it & no matter what religion. My Sufi Sheik is from Java his family is from ancient Badui (ancient Hindu & Buddhist & kejawan shamans) & is bloodline from Walisongo muslim saints from Mecca. And he himself told me to teach what I teach cause it helps people become better and it is Tasawuf knowledge from God. My Sheik has seen what I teach and what Glenn Morris taught and aside from "terms" a lot of it is infact in sufi practices and is also found in native american shamanism, Chi kung, vedic Mahasiddha Yogas,Kriya Yogas, tibetan tantric yoga. ( I am not speaking about the "sexual" practices when i say "tantra" although that does exist ofcourse).

 

So if you have an issue with what I teach how I teach why I teach go take it up with Allah directly or what ever you would like to call the Divine.

 

Only when we can break down the false walls of illusions that keep us seperate from the Divine within us all can we become really "hu- man".

 

Peace "wsalams"

 

Santiago

 

Ah, now that was not so coy. It shows to me your "Abramhamic" tendencies (as in "there is no God but God") which have nothing to do with most of the Hindu revealed teachings. (and co-opting those terms is still non-kosher, in the Jewish meaning of that term)

 

Congratualtions on your diverse background but do not call it traditional Islamic Sufism or traditional Hinduism, it sounds very much to be a hybrid and granted the Spirit can and will use any means possible or form to do it's work.

 

Om

Edited April 5, 2010 by 3bob

[ShaktiMama]

Hello Shaktimama,

 

I've been reading those types of essays for 30+ years... and I more or less understand where they are coming from. The fact is we don't see the masters and lineage holders of various major and minor schools of Hinduism or Sufism (not to mention or involve all of the other types of schools) giving up their total control, power, influence, and self-perpetuating ways when it comes to same and replacing that with universalism. Traditional Hinduism and Islam in this world do not mix, at best they tolerate one another; and that would be a comparitively wonderful state imo.

 

Om

 

When do traditionalists ever really mix? It is the mystics who understand the correlations. One also does not speak of sufis when one is in the company of traditional muslims. As in traditional Hinduism do not speak of Tantrics for that is black magic.

 

Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity have many, many offshoots and variations. To characterize the whole of a religion by one faction is unfortunate and to me propagates separation and division. It seems the ones who gets the most press are the most strident and restrictive. This makes them seem authoritative in their appearance and can lead true seekers away from a more subtle, soul centered practice that does not focus on the externals. Those who practice the "letter of the law" over the heart of Spirit are people I stay away from. The mystics of different spiritual traditions that I have met are inclusive and universalistic.

 

If it is not in the school it doesn't mean that inclusiveness or universalism is dead to people. People practice in secret for a reason.

 

But we do see masters and lineage holders do mix and can be inclusive. From Yogananda to Hazrat Inayat Khan for examples. Steps forward towards universalism in our perception may be baby steps but they are still steps and to be encouraged.

 

I have met tantric sufis from other countries who are held in derision by the traditionalists and also actively attacked. They are knowledgeable in Hindu, Islam, and Christian scriptures and discuss with intelligence the correlations between these systems.

 

susan

[Vajrasattva]

Ah, now that was not so coy. It shows to me your "Abramhamic" tendencies (as in "there is no God but God") which have nothing to do with most of the Hindu revealed teachings. (and co-opting those terms is still non-kosher, in the Jewish meaning of that term)

 

Congratualtions on your diverse background but do not call it traditional Islamic Sufism or traditional Hinduism, it sounds very much to be a hybrid and granted the Spirit can and will use any means possible or form to do it's work.

 

Om

 

 

haha when did I call it what you say I called it?

 

 

"traditional Islamic Sufism or traditional Hinduism"?

 

 

I just teach train & share

 

Peace

S

[Kunlun Enthusiast]

Below is an offline conversation I had with a friend who has studied Hindu and Tibetan tantras thoroughly and practiced under several masters. I guess it could be useful. If not please ignore.

 

 

Sam,

 

Not one thing holds for all, and so generalizations are not safe all the time. That said, it is indeed true that New Agers go with the assumption that all paths are same, all paths lead to Rome etc. This is like we say in our Advaita, Self is verily the Brahman – when the Self is already what it is, what is the need to do anything at all? The need for practice, which the neo-advaitins fail to note, is not to “unite” what already is one but to dispel the ignorance that they are separate. The practice is to bridge the discrepancy between what is and what is thought of as "is". All practices, in the theistic sense, have the variegated or shabala Brahman (Brahman with Maya) as the objective and this is the realm of duality and names and forms. The “all is one”, “all paths lead to Rome” etc. can probably be consumed at some level on the level of non-duality or advaya, but in the lower domain, it makes no sense. Every path has its own goal. For example, hatha yoga stems from patanjala system which is dualistic, so a Jnana Yogi interested in non-duality will use this as a step in a systematic scheme to get to the place where he can contemplate on the non-dual. If one mixes and matches techniques from various paths with the assumption that he is picking the best of all worlds, most of the time it leads to disaster or limited success.

 

The other issue is of contradiction and redundancy. One would never want to mix a fire path with a totally water path – not in the beginning at least, speaking of contradiction. And then you have the chandali kriya/tummo kind of practices and other heating of the cauldron kind of exercises. Why would one adopt both and run into the risk of overdoing or simply end up with redundancy?

 

Another issue is of lineage energies and subtleties. How many great hindu yogins or Buddhist mahasiddhas adopted 300 different styles of practice? How many who did that have become great yogins or siddhas in the real sense? Every path has a specific energy associated with it and mixing it with something else does not gel well. In Lahiri baba’s system, initiation into twelve-letter mantra is done at the higher stages and this involves an energetic link with the sixteen Siddhas who go all the way back to Narada. There is a specific lineage of Gurus associated and a specific pattern of energy with this system. If you take the practice of a Vajrasattva or a Hamsa Tara, there are again specific initiations going all the way back to a Dhyani Buddha from who they emanated and a specific Siddha who revealed the Sadhana. These are complete systems with specific dos and don’ts and unique in terms of energetic patterns. It is best to adopt one system, study with a master and practice till fructification. It is most of a time a misnomer that some additions will “accelerate” the practice or make it faster. Remember that the masters who designed these practices very thoroughly considered the pros and cons and we also have the testimony from successful practitioners. Be careful before you dismiss "traditions" as completely useless. Traditions are not bad most of the time, some traditionalists are, you cannot equate the two.

 

The other issue I see with this mix-it-all-up type of approach is the total lack of theoretical background. Any real teacher worth his title will not tell you to practice blindly without understanding why, how and what. Take tantra for example, after initiation, siddhanta shravana (explaining the theory) is the very next activity where the student systematically studies the origin, goal, required mindset, and why’s, how’s and what’s of the practice. Buddhist anuttara tantra stresses equally on it as well, as without the right view, the intent of that specific practice is never gauged and thus never accomplished. One always studies the Mahayana sutras and the chosen branch of tantra (anuttara, yogini-kaula etc.) along with the practice. With all this mixing up, the teacher and practitioner have no clue about any of this. Abandonment of theory and focus on blind practice is something every master has warned against – be it Nagarjuna or Abhinavagupta.

 

And then what about the technicalities? Many practice tummo today but as a physical practice. It never ascends to the state of a full-blown chandali as the New Agers did not study the traditional way from a Tibetan master and just picked a technique from here and there. Did they bother to find out about the mantra for Janguli and the associated transmission which transforms tummo? Did they learn the pre and post kriyas that need to accompany chandali? Did they learn the importance of shamata and vipashyana practices that are a must with energetic yoga? Without all these, you are missing out on the total package and the results it could generate. IMO, understanding the origin, theory and socio-cultural contexts of a practice should be the very first step one should undertake even while evaluating a practice one may wish to adopt. Disregarding the cultural aspects and trying to lift these systems out of their containers and trying to piece them together as some sort of a universal method devoid of religious and cultural identity is unneeded and impossible.

 

So my advice to you would be, because you asked, to stick to one practice, and do it well. Has Max not stressed the same in terms of Mao Shan? Listen to the man, he is one of the few who knows what he is talking.

 

Edited April 5, 2010 by Kunlun Enthusiast

[3bob]

When do traditionalists ever really mix? It is the mystics who understand the correlations. One also does not speak of sufis when one is in the company of traditional muslims. As in traditional Hinduism do not speak of Tantrics for that is black magic.

 

Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity have many, many offshoots and variations. To characterize the whole of a religion by one faction is unfortunate and to me propagates separation and division. It seems the ones who gets the most press are the most strident and restrictive. This makes them seem authoritative in their appearance and can lead true seekers away from a more subtle, soul centered practice that does not focus on the externals. Those who practice the "letter of the law" over the heart of Spirit are people I stay away from. The mystics of different spiritual traditions that I have met are inclusive and universalistic.

 

If it is not in the school it doesn't mean that inclusiveness or universalism is dead to people. People practice in secret for a reason.

 

But we do see masters and lineage holders do mix and can be inclusive. From Yogananda to Hazrat Inayat Khan for examples. Steps forward towards universalism in our perception may be baby steps but they are still steps and to be encouraged.

 

I have met tantric sufis from other countries who are held in derision by the traditionalists and also actively attacked. They are knowledgeable in Hindu, Islam, and Christian scriptures and discuss with intelligence the correlations between these systems.

 

susan

 

Susan,

 

I thought that was well said by you. And yes, as you've mentioned - there have been and are a few masters and "newer" lineage holders that are inclusive, although like I've implied they are comparitive hybrids and are out-numbered and out-gunned in this world by schools that are not inclusive.

 

Such is the great diversity although it's not in very much unity. (and spin-offs related to that particualr saying and some of the schools who may like to use it sound inclusive but they really are not, imo) Do I want to change them? no, that is their job if or when they see the need.

 

Om

Edited April 5, 2010 by 3bob