Why would you want to raise Kundalini?

[Songtsan]

Spirit (gives) unto Spirit, and in such giving is a command although not a heavy handed or forced command but an inherent and lawful action, thus forget about any stuff that is associated with attempted ego manipulation of kundalini, which is akin to attempted ego manipulation of pure Spirit - for it just doesn't work that way.

 

I think though, that the law of free will is given play to, in that Kundalini lets you do things with her, if you know how that is, and will let you run roughshod over yourself with any consequences...How many people wake it up but send it up the wrong channels, or before they have purified the nadis?

 

Think of all the corrupt gurus, possessed by ego, who have awoken the ability to give shaktipat, yet who abuse their devotees...Kundalini, although a sentient goddess who transcends petty things like egos, will allow the ego to control her willingly methinks, in that this is part of the divine play...

 

For good or evil, better or worse, and let karma be the judge...

[3bob]

At the pure Spiirt level there is only one will, thus not many wills in divergent activities such as those taking place in spun-off and more limited levels and or realms, so whatever is letting things be done to "her" is not at the pure or quintessental level since if that was so then forget about unified Source staying or being of unified Source.

Edited February 13, 2015 by 3bob

[Jetsun]

I occasionally make a foray into the Buddhist sub-forum which is somewhat dubious on my part... I also find it can be somewhat dubious when Buddhists make an occasional foray into the Hindu sub-forum... having said that I have no desire to control the forays of anyone going anywhere - although I do find it somewhat presumptuous if Buddhists related meanings to "emptiness" are bandied about here... just as Buddhists must find it somewhat presumptuous if Hindu related meanings to "eternal" are bandied about in their sub-forum...but what the hell as long as we shoot for "Right Speech"...

 

Well even the Buddhists consider emptiness to have certain qualities which they discuss in their own ways, as is always said emptiness isn't empty, so what is it that makes emptiness not empty? in Buddhism these qualities are less conceptualised and obscure whereas the Hindu traditions personify these qualities into the God's and Godesses as a means of making it easier for us humans to connect to them, but they are still ultimately talking about the same thing if you get down to the root of it.

 

The ultimate reality isn't always just an empty void, it emerges as a loving embrace of compassion or the Divine Mother, as well as the destruction of impermanence or Kali, as well as all the other ways it seemingly manifests.

[C T]

Bhakti Yoga can help get all the emotional and other motivational energies flowing in the same direction of God/Truth realisation. Even though it may focus on a deity that deity is just a humanised aspect of the divine or emptiness as a means to enable practice to get the energies moving in that direction. For example many people perform devotional practice towards the hugging Saint Amma, but unless they are confused what they are really devoted towards is the "Divine Mother" quality or aspect of emptiness/God/truth not the human form of Amma.

 

Even with Sages like Nisargadatta Maharaj even though he had a very direct one pointed focus on the "I Am" and realising the truth directly his Guru also told him that it was important for him to sing devotional bhajans every day. I think it is basically all about getting all the different parts of you and all of your energies moving in the same direction, then those energies are more likely to be in tune with or at least not in conflict with the kundalini.

 

As far as I can see many of the major religious figures and Saints combined both the qualities of relentless enquiry into the truth of things as well as a devotional aspect, they can compliment quite well as long as there is some clarity arising about what is is you are worshipping so you don't get stuck on the forms. After a time of Bhakti Yoga if it matures it is possible to see that divine quality of the deity in everything, so instead of worshipping the deity directly you can serve it by serving or appreciating the world.

(thumbs up)

[3bob]

"...in Buddhism these qualities are less conceptualised and obscure whereas the Hindu traditions personify these qualities into the God's and Godesses as a means of making it easier for us humans to connect to them, but they are still ultimately talking about the same thing if you get down to the root of it. The ultimate reality isn't always just an empty void, it emerges as a loving embrace of compassion or the Divine Mother, as well as the destruction of impermanence or Kali, as well as all the other ways it seemingly manifests." By Jetsun

 

Is that so? It sounds like you mean well but you are also taking certain liberties on both sides of fence which is why I was saying earlier that such is or can be dubious either way. On the other hand if you, me, we or "they" define things in some type of universal view or teaching that is borrowing from other traditions and coming up with something of a composite, then what you've said above could be applied to same.

Edited February 13, 2015 by 3bob

[Sahaj Nath]

i agree with basically everything that has been said about Bhakti Yoga so far...

 

but it's STILL not what i was talking about.

 

 

 

maybe at this point in the thread it doesn't even matter anymore, but i was trying to make a specific argument for the OP to address, and i don't want that argument to get lost in the suffle.

 

so this time i'll leave GOD/TRUTH out of it, in hopes of making it a little more clear:

 

 

i am driven by the desire to know things. i want to know them for myself. i wish to take nothing on faith, but to understand the universe directly, not unlike the same motivations that many scientists have. for me nothing is taboo and everything is open to experimentation purely for knowledge's sake.

 

i want to understand the universe in all its dimensions, and i want to understand myself as an integral part of the universe. i feel a deep drive to develop an understanding that is as boundless as the universe itself.

 

it is for these reasons that i have sought to raise kundalini.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Hundun

[3bob]

Where knowledge of things end true faith begins - for the "universe" per-se or of things is bound by knowledge which will never be enough in and of itself; also if a certain knowledge or to whatever degree

of it is gained only for oneself then that will soon turn to lead.

Edited February 14, 2015 by 3bob

[blue eyed snake]

being quite illiterate at this subject I still find it interesting, because kundalini just came for me, and I don't care to repeat it. neither body nor mind were up to it. Although maybe I understand that a little better now.

 

Bhakti Yoga can help get all the emotional and other motivational energies flowing in the same direction of God/Truth realisation. Even though it may focus on a deity that deity is just a humanised aspect of the divine or emptiness as a means to enable practice to get the energies moving in that direction. For example many people perform devotional practice towards the hugging Saint Amma, but unless they are confused what they are really devoted towards is the "Divine Mother" quality or aspect of emptiness/God/truth not the human form of Amma.

 

Even with Sages like Nisargadatta Maharaj even though he had a very direct one pointed focus on the "I Am" and realising the truth directly his Guru also told him that it was important for him to sing devotional bhajans every day. I think it is basically all about getting all the different parts of you and all of your energies moving in the same direction, then those energies are more likely to be in tune with or at least not in conflict with the kundalini.

 

As far as I can see many of the major religious figures and Saints combined both the qualities of relentless enquiry into the truth of things as well as a devotional aspect, they can compliment quite well as long as there is some clarity arising about what is is you are worshipping so you don't get stuck on the forms. After a time of Bhakti Yoga if it matures it is possible to see that divine quality of the deity in everything, so instead of worshipping the deity directly you can serve it by serving or appreciating the world.

 

reading this, it feels like: it's not about the object that gets the devotion, wheter it's a deity or a guru. It is about changes in the person "doing the devotion" That feels like, that what we ultimately want to embrace, or maybe are meant to merge with, is just too far away that we could feel real devotion , or maybe is surrender a better word? So the devotion to a guru or deity is like a crutch to make a human develop a little further towards his destiny.

 

On the other hand Jetsun writes that not only devotion but also inquiry into the truth of things is part of the developmental path. That suits me, it's what i'm doing here and I think I feel in that way I'm like hundun, I wanna know what this is about and see how the path goes further. ... seems both are or could be needed, depending on the person, there might be totally different paths too

 

i agree with basically everything that has been said about Bhakti Yoga so far...

 

but it's STILL not what i was talking about.

 

 

 

maybe at this point in the thread it doesn't even matter anymore, but i was trying to make a specific argument for the OP to address, and i don't want that argument to get lost in the suffle.

 

so this time i'll leave GOD/TRUTH out of it, in hopes of making it a little more clear:

 

 

i am driven by the desire to know things. i want to know them for myself. i wish to take nothing on faith, but to understand the universe directly, not unlike the same motivations that many scientists have. for me nothing is taboo and everything is open to experimentation purely for knowledge's sake.

 

i want to understand the universe in all its dimensions, and i want to understand myself as an integral part of the universe. i feel a deep drive to develop an understanding that is as boundless as the universe itself.

 

it is for these reasons that i have sought to raise kundalini.

 

Hundun poses that he searches kundalini for selfish reasons, because he wants to know, because he feels himself driven that way. Seems okay to me, why should devotion be a better ( in a moralistic sense) road. just as long as you take care of yourself.

 

remembering my own experience, not sought at all...it seems to me it'll come when the time is

ripe, and if the time isn't ripe, it won't come.

 

still...I find myself changed and the word devotion fits in...

Even though brought up an atheist it feels like: " thy will be done" in the end it's gonna merge with "my will be done" because in the end, they should become one. I find myself eh...not trying but more like being devotional to that concept/idea/feeling

[C T]

Many westerners do not know how to channel the K energy efficiently and gets into all sorts of trouble, like falling into a pit full of fire ants. Cultivating devotion is the safest, most sublime channel for directing that energy - unfortunately, this is a practice, or a way of being, alien to most westerners, hence the on-going struggle with most who are K active in the West.

 

For example, someone going to India for Kundalini Yoga and Shaktipat will be seriously advised to learn how to deeply and reverently generate Devotion as the mainstay of the path so as to avoid the many dangers associated with a non-devotional form of K practice (i was told).

 

Im only basing this on my limited 2nd hand knowledge heard/seen from practitioners i have met over the years. In my (Buddhist tantric) tradition we do not practice Kundalini Yoga. Perhaps someone like Dwai who is more knowledgeable on this subject can add a weightier perspective to this subject.

[3bob]

CT and others, I believe that in a certain way or analogy one could inter-change the K word with Dharma... having said that I think only a misled person could believe that the Dharma could be raised only for themselves.

[C T]

CT and others, I believe that in a certain way or analogy one could inter-change the K word with Dharma... having said that I think only a misled person could believe that the Dharma could be raised only for themselves.

In a sense, you are right, but in this instance, i was hoping to direct more emphasis on the usefulness of bhakti (and not solely on the term, 'raised') when integrated into Kundalini Yoga as a path, not just at those immediate phases when it first rear its head.

[ChiForce]

CT and others, I believe that in a certain way or analogy one could inter-change the K word with Dharma... having said that I think only a misled person could believe that the Dharma could be raised only for themselves.

What is the Kundalini energy anyway? The way I experienced it, is more like the hot chi or yang chi. Is fire. Is purifying fire. Is mere sensational energy with a bit of bodily healing. What is it doing to the mind? If the self desires this experience, what does the self get in return on the wisdom level? An egoistic ego wants to experience the Kundalini energy but does the mind become egoistic and selfish? Does your wisdom become egoistic and selfish? If so, how can you comprehend the teaching of the Dharma if the mind is selfish and egoistic. Can you be wise and egoistic and selfish at the same time? Kundalini energy is still a phenomenal experience. I don't believe your wisdom would enhance if the ego is attached to these phenomenal experiences.

 

Yes, I have experienced the energy at no will of my own. I didn't know what was happening to me other than one night I woke up from a vision. Sensed the yang chi or hot chi burning all over my body. Followed by the emergence of a very powerful nimitta light, in the third eye. The nimitta light was so intense that I could see it even with my eyes open. The experience was very short lived, few seconds but very, very intense or frighteningly intense. This went on for several weeks. Unfortunately, I didn't gain any wisdom and how could I since I didn't know what was happening to me. Then, I have visions about my past life.

Edited February 15, 2015 by ChiForce

[3bob]

In a sense, you are right, but in this instance, i was hoping to direct more emphasis on the usefulness of bhakti (and not solely on the term, 'raised') when integrated into Kundalini Yoga as a path, not just at those immediate phases when it first rear its head.

 

Well I think we could borrow a saying from Christianity along these lines although not of or in exact context, namely:

 

"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" Matthew 6:33

 

Thus and in correlation to certain paths and we could say something like, "first seek the core meaning and truth then kundalini shall be added to do its work in a spiritual context.

[3bob]

What is the Kundalini energy anyway? The way I experienced it, is more like the hot chi or yang chi. Is fire. Is purifying fire. Is mere sensational energy with a bit of bodily healing. What is it doing to the mind? If the self desires this experience, what does the self get in return on the wisdom level? An egoistic ego wants to experience the Kundalini energy but does the mind become egoistic and selfish? Does your wisdom becomes egoistic and selfish? If so, how can you comprehend the teaching of the Dharma if the mind is selfish and egoistic. Can you be wise and egoistic and selfish at the same time? Kundalini energy is still a phenomenal experience. I don't believe your wisdom would enhance if the ego is attached to these phenomenal experiences.

 

Yes, I have experienced the energy at no will of my own. I didn't know what was happening to me other than one night I woke up from a vision. Sensed the yang chi or hot chi burning all over my body. Followed by the emergence of a very powerful nimitta light, in the third eye. The nimitta light was so intense that I could see it even with my eyes open. The experience was very short lived, few seconds but very, very intense or frighteningly intense. This went on for several weeks. Unfortunately, I didn't gain any wisdom and how could I since I didn't know what was happening to me. Then, I have visions about my past life.

 

One can not be divided and unified at the same time... man that's a whole bunch of rhetorical like questions at once right now I'll the leave the others for the others. Agreed about the intensity - like having your having your head blown off although not being like that down the road from what very little I know.

[Sahaj Nath]

CT and others, I believe that in a certain way or analogy one could inter-change the K word with Dharma... having said that I think only a misled person could believe that the Dharma could be raised only for themselves.

 

actually, it's very misleading to conflate Kundalini with Dharma. doing so just kills any intelligent discussion. Dharma is just too slippery a concept and opens the door to all kinds of dogma & circular reasoning. when talking about K we can agree that we're generally talking about the same energy and process. it's more clearly defined, i think.

 

plus, "only for themselves" is part of the false notion that i'm arguing against. the very process of spiritual development is a process of ever-expanding the self until it is all-inclusive. from ego-centric, to social-centric, to ethno-centric, to national-centric, to world-centric, to cosmo-centric... each phase being more inclusive, more expansive, until ultimately the self is fully identified with ALL. at the level of the supra-causal, there is no distinction; everyone and everything is always, already everywhere.

 

Many westerners do not know how to channel the K energy efficiently and gets into all sorts of trouble, like falling into a pit full of fire ants. Cultivating devotion is the safest, most sublime channel for directing that energy - unfortunately, this is a practice, or a way of being, alien to most westerners, hence the on-going struggle with most who are K active in the West. 

 

For example, someone going to India for Kundalini Yoga and Shaktipat will be seriously advised to learn how to deeply and reverently generate Devotion as the mainstay of the path so as to avoid the many dangers associated with a non-devotional form of K practice (i was told). 

 

i just don't believe that this is very meaningful anymore. Kundalini Shakti is here now. established. and there are fools in both the West AND the East who do not know how to channel the K energy and get themselves into trouble. but there are also brilliant, non-traditional minds here in the West who for years have experimented, innovated, and distilled the core principles from old and unnecessarily dogmatic ways. 

 

EDIT: and also in India, the Siddhas were legendary for their unique, innovative, non-traditional ways which occasionally their students would later turn into new traditions. this still occurs.

 

it's up to the individual to do their due diligence. but generally speaking, we know and understand more today than we did hundreds of years ago. and we have the ability to lay all the major traditions & systems side-by-side and study them in a way that we never have before. for all of our shortcomings here in the West, this is a real strength that we have.

 

and this is NOT me saying that tradition is wrong or bad; i'm merely arguing that tradition is not the only way, and it never has been.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Hundun

[Sahaj Nath]

Kaivalya Upanishad seems to speak my language. it also emphasizes devotion to the Guru, and i don't have a problem with that, just that it's very old world and perhaps not quite as applicable today and in the West in the same way that it was then and there.

 

 

 

Not by work, nor by progeny, nor by wealth, but by devotion to him and by indifference to the world, does a man reach immortality.

Retire into solitude. Seat yourself on a clean spot and in erect posture, with the head and neck in a straight line. Be indifferent to the world. Control all the sense organs. Bow down in devotion to your Guru. Ten enter the lotus of the heart and there meditate on the presence of Brahman—the pure, the infinite, the blissful.

Unmanifest to the senses, beyond all thought, infinite in form, is God.

 

The seers meditate on him and reach the source of all beings, the witness of all.

 

He who knows him conquers death. There is no other way to liberation.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Hundun

[3bob]

yet in a way it is paradox for that which springs forth from source is not of indifference in any way!

 

Chandogya upanisad, Chapter XXVI — Self—knowledge

 

1. "For him who sees this, reflects on this and understands this, the prana springs from the Self, hope springs from the Self, memory springs from the Self, the akasa springs from the Self, fire springs from the Self; water springs from the Self; appearance and disappearance spring from the Self, food springs from the Self, strength springs from the Self; understanding springs from the Self, meditation springs from the Self, consideration springs from the Self, will springs from the Self; mind springs from the Self speech springs from the Self, the name springs from the Self the sacred hymns spring from the Self the sacrifices spring from the Self—ay, all this springs from the Self."

Edited February 16, 2015 by 3bob

[ChiForce]

yet in a way it is paradox for that which springs forth from source is not of indifference in any way!

 

Chandogya upanisad, Chapter XXVI — Self—knowledge

 

1. "For him who sees this, reflects on this and understands this, the prana springs from the Self, hope springs from the Self, memory springs from the Self, the akasa springs from the Self, fire springs from the Self; water springs from the Self; appearance and disappearance spring from the Self, food springs from the Self, strength springs from the Self; understanding springs from the Self, meditation springs from the Self, consideration springs from the Self, will springs from the Self; mind springs from the Self speech springs from the Self, the name springs from the Self the sacred hymns spring from the Self the sacrifices spring from the Self—ay, all this springs from the Self."

I thought the Self is the nature of the mind, not an ego self????   

[3bob]

I thought the Self is the nature of the mind, not an ego self???? 

 

mind is a term used in different ways by different paths... one description I'll bandie about with is that mind is all things, while Self is not such or not limited to a being a thing, thus mind can ever reach Self and also remain mind although mind is connected to it through stages of transformation; reverse those transformations and what is still there as always - not a thing so to speak yet that does not mean nothing.

Edited February 16, 2015 by 3bob

[stefos]

what does "selflessness" have to do with the raising of kundalini? because it's something that J. Krishnamurti said?

 

that doesn't even make sense! it's empirically disproved by just about EVERY person who has ever risen their kundalini.

 

in a non-dual reality where GOD ALONE exists, do terms like "selfish" or "selfless" even have any meaning?

 

my highest aspiration has never been to "selflessly serve," as you put it. my spiritual life has been driven almost solely by the desire to know GOD/TRUTH via direct experience.

 

you seem to attribute an importance to our species that i do not. i think it's quite acceptable for us to destroy ourselves entirely, if that is to happen, and i don't think the universe will care any more about the extinction of our species than we care when black ants and red ants commit genocide.

 

Hi,

 

I will indulge in a final post on this forum because this is tiresome nonsense is enough for me....really.

 

Many people on this forum and the Buddhist forum claim to know what Krishnamurti taught when they in fact don't.

Krishnamurti taught that change can only happen when we are Choicelessly Aware and not forcing Choiceless Awareness.

Fundamental to "the teachings" which came out of that vessel, Krishnamurti, was no "me" or "self"

He did posit an ultimate reality and a relative reality and he stated that for the ultimate to be, the "me/self" had to die.

 

So Hundun, let's share:

First, I don't really know your perspective spiritually speaking.

 

It does appear that your are a syncretist

 

My caution: Be careful about combining different spiritualities IF that's what you're doing.

I have my own views and I tread cautiously with these matters.

 

Second, Anyone today can read a book about Kundalini from a Vajrayana perspective, Shaivistic, Yogic or Western "Rosicrucian/Alchemical" perspective.  So What?  Words are words.......What actual Kundalini is, is debatable!  Ego death is not debatable.

 

Third, The proof is in the pudding, the actual fruit or phala of the actual Kundalini (if it exists) actually having had been manifested.

 

In this 3 ringed circus of a discussion, I have not heard anything about being SELFless which means what?

 

Nonduality which IS the dissolution of the "me/ego" not the promulgation of siddhis & riddhis through a particular "Kundalini" sadhana or quasi-sadhana.  Every path which teaches that siddhis/riddhis manifest in the course of a particular sadhana also says to not pursue those things but ultimate reality which is not the power manifested in a siddhi or riddhi.

 

That is the point of Advaita Vedanta/Kashmiri Shaivism, Jnana Yog and of Dzogchen/Mahamudra...Ultimate Reality.

 

Many people are fascinated by Clairvoyance, Clairaudience, Thought projection/reading, etc.  Understood, it's pretty fascinating stuff really!

They aren't the point.  If one is Theistic, Union with God/Brahman is the point...If one is Non-theistic (ex. Buddhist) then oneness with the Dharmakaya is the point or Nibbana/Nirvana.

Examples:

1. Ramana Maharishi taught about the Self not the self, which is to say Brahman. In Shaivism, All is Shiva = Brahman

2. Dzogchen is about ultimately saying, being, doing all things in the state of presence which is where the ego is gone and the nature of mind acts or is instead of the proverbial "monkey mind."  The same goes for Mahamudra...same goal as Dzogchen.

 

So finally and again I ask, Why do people want to "Raise the Kundalini?"  What is your motive (It's a rhetorical question, not one I want an answer to)

 

The goal is non-duality and the raising of the Kundalini doesn't need to happen for the non-dual state to be.

Power hungry people want powers that "the common man" doesn't have.............if one is honest about this.  Which is why bozos in the New Age and in the Eastern religions can bloat human selfishness by promising powers, namely from the opening of the chakras through sadhana.  A real teacher/guru will say "Nonduality is the goal."

 

Be Blessed! So Long!

Stefos

Edited February 18, 2015 by stefos

[dogson]

This is the great variable schism - we have a deep, soul-directed impulse to evolve; and simultaneously, we have this quasi-dreamlike experience of individual self that wants to survive and do well, which means amassing power to some extent - power being the ability to DO THINGS - power to have a great life! Whatever that means individually.

 

As a cultivator and jing-retaining, herb-eating maniac, I discovered this thread "100 days retention" which really struck home. It isn't about just not excreting jing for 100 days - it's literally existing in nondual consciousness for 100 days straight. That's how you actually cultivate. From a scientific perspective, enlightenment is a wave function of the brain. Our limited self is vibrating one way - a very limited way - and that actually "takes" energy to maintain, whereas when the wave function changes, you become one single force with the greater energy field of the universe. That's when "miracles" start happening, because your intent and the intent of everything around you is in harmony. It looks like superpowers, but in reality you have simply dissolved the barrier that comes with the illusion of separateness.

 

The fish wants to be in the ocean. It's not arrogant. The fish is meant to be in the ocean. If you take it out of the ocean as we have done psychically/spiritually, and put it in a bowl of tap water, it doesn't really thrive.

[Sahaj Nath]

i read your words and i'm left wondering if English is your first language. that's not intended to be mean; it's just that it's difficult to follow your thoughts when some of the same words are shifting meaning in different contexts. i find that to be a common point of misunderstanding with people for whom english is not their first language.

 

it's understandable if you find this tiresome. there's been a lot of sniping in this thread. a lot of bickering just for the sake of bickering. so i DO appreciate that you bothered to respond at all. and i promise you that my only motive is understanding. i'm not trolling you or anyone else.

 

Krishnamurti taught that change can only happen when we are Choicelessly Aware and not forcing Choiceless Awareness.

Fundamental to "the teachings" which came out of that vessel, Krishnamurti, was no "me" or "self"

He did posit an ultimate reality and a relative reality and he stated that for the ultimate to be, the "me/self" had to die.

 

the word "choiceless" i find a bit cumbersome, but i'm basically in agreement with this. so is everyone else who has debated with you so far in this thread. see, THIS "selflessness" is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the "i want to serve humanity with no regard for myself" type of selflessness. the one you describe here is clinical, whereas the other is moral/dogmatic.

 

 

So Hundun, let's share:

First, I don't really know your perspective spiritually speaking.

 

It does appear that your are a syncretist

 

My caution: Be careful about combining different spiritualities IF that's what you're doing.

I have my own views and I tread cautiously with these matters.

 

aw, don't worry about me, i'm doing fine. in my view there's only one spirituality, and every culture's wisdom regarding it has a place at the table. the Siddhas of ancient and present time are known for their heretical, ecclectic, and often unique approaches to spirituality. it's not for everyone, but it does work for some.

 

Second, Anyone today can read a book about Kundalini from a Vajrayana perspective, Shaivistic, Yogic or Western "Rosicrucian/Alchemical" perspective.  So What?  Words are words.......What actual Kundalini is, is debatable!  Ego death is not debatable.

 

i think if anything, the opposite is true like i said earlier. it would not be difficult for us to agree on what kundalini is. it's a tangible phenomenon that triggers various processes in the individual. it's been pretty well-documented at this point.

 

the concept of ego-death is trickier. the clinical definition of ego doesn't always match up with the spiritual definition, and different spiritual groups may disagree with each other as well. but in this instance i can understand what your meaning is.

 

the problem, i say again, is that you can interchange "ego death" with "selflessness," but "selflessness" does not always mean "ego death" in the way that you've used it at different times. makes it difficult to follow your thinking.

 

Third, The proof is in the pudding, the actual fruit or phala of the actual Kundalini (if it exists) actually having had been manifested.

 

and yet there are folks here telling you that their Kundalini IS awakened, and you've just dismissed them. that runs completely contrary to this point, doesn't it?  i could spend pages describing what i have undergone and what yogic processes are still spontaneously unfolding within me, but you don't seem prepared to accept any of that as legitimate.

 

In this 3 ringed circus of a discussion, I have not heard anything about being SELFless which means what?

 

Nonduality which IS the dissolution of the "me/ego" not the promulgation of siddhis & riddhis through a particular "Kundalini" sadhana or quasi-sadhana.  Every path which teaches that siddhis/riddhis manifest in the course of a particular sadhana also says to not pursue those things but ultimate reality which is not the power manifested in a siddhi or riddhi.

 

That is the point of Advaita Vedanta/Kashmiri Shaivism, Jnana Yog and of Dzogchen/Mahamudra...Ultimate Reality.

 

nonduality is the natural condition that is always already the case. when you define it as "dissolution of the ego," it doesn't really make sense. there's a lot of confusion of terms there.

 

and i'm not sure what your point is about siddhis. i think you're assuming people just want to awaken kundalini for magic powers or something. i honestly don't think anyone has stated that. and if they have, they are in the minority. but be careful not to create a false dichotomy of people who are either seeking power or egolessness. that's a false contruct and a gross oversimplification of the views being shared here.

 

i think this pretty much responds to everything else you wrote as well, so i'll just leave it here.

 

 

EDIT: it occurrs to me that you didn't exactly respond to my comment. you just kind of abandoned all the moralizing language of compassion and service and stuff. but that's precisely the stuff i was taking issue with. *shrugs*

Edited February 18, 2015 by Hundun

[Orion]

My first kundalini experience was spontaneous, when I was a child. It was incomplete back then... the energy only embodied the torso, it was relatively rootless and did not reach the crown. In my 20's my kundalini experiences became a lot more full body. What can I say about kundalini, from my mere perspective?

 

It connects every part of one's anatomy to every other, including a link between the physical and non-physical anatomy (if it is a complete kundalini experience.) It creates a strong activation of the non-egoic aspect of the being, which is rooted in presence awareness and a "higher" form of non-linear wisdom. In my experience it causes "me" to step out and a force much greater than me, that we all share a connection to, to step in. It is, in essence, dissolving duality.

 

Now... in terms of seeking it, I don't relate because it's something that just happens. What people have to understand is that the energy within us (if you can call it that) has its own intelligence, its own direction, and its own guidance. There is no "you" in it and therefore no point in controlling it. Some people are kundalini junkies because they like how it feels, but they're relating to the experience through unresolved chakras. To me, kundalini is a byproduct of an authentic practice where power is moving through. The important thing to note is that the power is not yours, you are merely its humble guide. It might start from your root but when it connects beyond the body you become a conduit for something beyond you.

 

I agree that self-proclaimed gurus are not usually to be trusted. Guru is something that others call you, and not what you call yourself. Also, the guru is a non-material body of knowledge that kundalini work taps into. It is non-linear and beyond our direct comprehension via the semantic/egoic mind. It's a wisdom that travels though, but is not owned or grasped. That's why I find it puzzling that some people look at a single human being and say "THAT'S the guru, right there!" When there's nothing really in there.

 

The person embodies the guru, but they aren't the guru. There's no separation. That's what kundalini has taught me.

Edited February 18, 2015 by Orion

[allinone]

imho

guru is in you yes perhaps, sexual energies are rising to the head, memories are attached to it, you will see it and reaction happens, cultivating more and more it, will eventually understand the code of memories then next time you can work with it more directly and at some point you dissovle it or merge with it and whole new percpective will rise and can work with next guru.

Guru is past longterm memories what unconsciously are clouding 6th chakra or consciousness.

Edited February 19, 2015 by allinone

[phore]

In the typical orgasm most people expeience a moment where their concious minds are overidden and they breakthrough into and ecstatic state of consciousness.  Then the charged virya is expelled through the genetals and the kundalini energy along with it. 

 

When the Kundalini energy is raised it produces the ecstatic sensation, associated with orgasm, in a sustainable way.  The sensation of a large kundalini awakening may last for an elongated period of time. 

 

The ecstatic breakthough that occurs in the orgasm is extendid for the duration of the kundalini rising experience.  This typically results in experiences of a distinctly psychic or spiritual nature.  The person in this case experiences life beyond the ego.  The ego comes back after the initial rise but the person does not forget the egoless state. 

 

If a person learns to raise the kundalini energy at will through practice and experimentation, the person may experience that egoless state at will.  This egoless state tends to translate into a totality of experience (nonduality).

 

The reason why people seek to raise the Kundalini is because it is an ecstatic path to nondual awareness. 

 

Many traditions consider the kundalini as a lesser path, because of the sexual connotations.  Tantric, Tao and other traditions consider the Kundalini to be a natural occurance conducive to rapid spiritual awakening. 

 

Love and Light

Tony