Adyashanti Intensive

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Chas,

A hypothetical question, Christi: if you were in Adyashanti’s position, and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?

Once someone has been through a kundalini awakening, they don’t really need formal training in it as they will know everything from direct experience.
I think the reason Adya downplays the importance of the process of kundalini and the whole energetic side of awakening has to do with something deeper than the fact that he was not trained in it and it is not a part of the zen tradition.
Ramana maharshi once experienced nirvikalpa samadhi and went on to become enlightened. He then said that nirvikalpa samadhi was a necessary pre-requisite for the attainment of enlightenment. Then, a few years later he said that nirvikalpa samadhi was not a pre-requisite for the attainment of enlightenment. One of his disciples said to him: “hang on a minute, a few years ago you said it was, and now you are saying it is not, what’s going on” (I’m paraphrasing here). So Ramana said: “In order for the teachings of advaita vedanta to be true, nothing can be necessary for the attainment of enlightenment”.
So it wasn’t that Ramana Maharshi changed his mind, or realized that he had been mistaken earlier, it was to do with teaching method. I think the same thing goes with Adya, that he does not want people to grasp on to energy experiences so to avoid that, he downplays the energetic aspect of awakening. So I think it is a teaching method thing rather than a lack of training thing.

[kami]

@Christi

quote:

I didn’t mean that Adya would say that unity (oneness, or everythingness in his language) is not a state of ecstasy, but rather that he would say that ecstasy is not a pre-requisite to the attainment of unity. In fact I believe he would say that nothing is a pre-requisite to the attainment of unity other than sincerity.

---

Hi Christi, And this exactly where I resonate with Adya and have a different perspective than you. I do, in fact, agree whole-heartedly with him that there is no pre-set prerequisite for awakening. Certainly not ecstasy, not bliss, not siddhis. The Vedas and Upanishads, the ultimate authority on the subject, don't refer to such pre-requisites. The Bhagavad Gita, the distillation of the Upanishads, describes paths, but when it comes to pre-requisite, I'm certain of only one thing - Grace. We can argue all we want but there is nobody that can prove that cultivating ecstasy will definitely lead to the experience of unity. It may work for you, but that was not Adya's path. As Chas mentioned, cultivation of ecstatic conductivity was not Adya's method. But energetic opening was (as it always seems to be) associated with his awakening. He is guiding people along the lines of what worked for him. There are countless ways to get to "it". As soon as the One decides to experience Itself via a particular body-mind, It will, by It's own Grace. All else is speculation until That happens. :pray:

[kami]

@kami

quote:

I didn’t mean that Adya would say that unity (oneness, or everythingness in his language) is not a state of ecstasy, but rather that he would say that ecstasy is not a pre-requisite to the attainment of unity. In fact I believe he would say that nothing is a pre-requisite to the attainment of unity other than sincerity.

---

Hi Christi, And this exactly where I resonate with Adya and have a different perspective than you. I do, in fact, agree whole-heartedly with him that there is no pre-set prerequisite for awakening. Certainly not ecstasy, not bliss, not siddhis. The Vedas and Upanishads, the ultimate authority on the subject, don't refer to such pre-requisites. As Chas mentioned, cultivation of ecstatic conductivity was not Adya's method. But energetic opening was (as it always seems to be) associated with his awakening. He is guiding people along the lines of what worked for him. There are countless ways to get to "it". As soon as the One decides to experience Itself via a particular body-mind, It will, by It's own Grace. All else is speculation until That happens. :pray:

---

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Kami,

And this exactly where I resonate with Adya and have a different perspective than you. I do, in fact, agree whole-heartedly with him that there is no pre-set prerequisite for awakening. Certainly not ecstasy, not bliss, not siddhis. The Vedas and Upanishads, the ultimate authority on the subject, don’t refer to such pre-requisites. The Bhagavad Gita, the distillation of the Upanishads, describes paths, but when it comes to pre-requisite, I’m certain of only one thing - Grace.

But that is just a point of view. When there is stillness and silence present in the mind, the one thing that can prevent the transition to unity is attachment to a point of view. A point of view is “I think this… you think that… and so we are separate”, and heaven and Earth are set infinitely apart.
Unity comes when the last point of view is dropped. The person, who previously held points of view becomes transparent, almost non-existent, and what is real, remains.
What I was saying above is that Adya is completely correct, that there is nothing that is necessary for the realization of unity. Here it is:

Adya is completely right in saying that unity has nothing to do with energy or with bliss or with ecstasy.

So the Upanishads are right, as are the Vedas, as is the BhagavadGita and Adya and you. But when there is attachment to that point of view as being the only right point of view, then there is a contraction in the mind which prevents the opening into unity from taking place.
In unity, Adyashanti does not exist, and neither do the Vedas, nor the Upanishads, nor the Gita. There are no paths, or teachings. There are no points of view. Nobody resonates with anybody else. It is a supreme state, beyond the divisions of the mind.
What I was saying above is that it is just as true to say that unity results in a state of ecstatic bliss as it is to say that ecstatic bliss results in unity. It may not say that in the Upanishads or the Vedas or the BhagavadGita, but it also does not say that it is not true.
All the best,
Christi

[chas]

@Christi

Hi Chas,

quote:

Once someone has been through a kundalini awakening, they don’t really need formal training in it as they will know everything from direct experience.

---

</blockquote id=“quote”>

That seems a bit dubious. According to that logic, anyone who has been through a spontaneous kundalini awakening, kundalini awakening via substances, premature crown practices, and every other method are well qualified to write and teach kundalini theory and associated practices, since they “know everything from direct experience”.
It is possible that Adya doesn’t want folks grasping at energy experiences and thus downplays the importance of kundalini awakening. But as mentioned, that hasn’t been my (and others’) experience with him in person. Perhaps we should ask him. He might have something to say about his methods.
Regardless, I haven’t seen anything indicating he has experience with spinal breathing or its variations, mudras and bandhas, mantra meditation, etc… His background includes a traditional Zen approach according to many of his publications.

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Chas

That seems a bit dubious. According to that logic, anyone who has been through a spontaneous kundalini awakening, kundalini awakening via substances, premature crown practices, and every other method are well qualified to write and teach kundalini theory and associated practices, since they “know everything from direct experience”.

When I said they would “know everything from direct experience”, I meant they would know everything about the process of their own awakening from direct experience. They could write extensively on the subject based on that if they wanted to, and teach others about it.
I didn’t say anything about teaching “kundalini theory or associated practices”. They may or may not know about that.

Regardless, I haven’t seen anything indicating he has experience with spinal breathing or its variations, mudras and bandhas, mantra meditation, etc… His background includes a traditional zazen approach according to many of his publications.

To awaken kundalini you do not need to use pranayama, or mudras or bandhas or mantras. Basic meditation is enough. It was in Adya’s case, and in mine also.
Christi

[jeff]

@Christi

quote:

Hi Jeff,
I guess, go beyond the mind, come to a place of unity, and see for yourself. All there will be, will be everything(ness). Nothing will be missing.

---

Hi Christi, I think we may have a difference on what it means to go "beyond the mind". Everythingness and oneness are still an aspect of mind (or universal mind). I have found all "thingness" to be of the mind. :slight_smile: Best wishes, Jeff

[kami]

Hi Christi,
Ok. Perhaps we have been misunderstanding each other.
My point is exactly what I thought I’d said many times in several posts above - there is no ONE way. Aversion, as you know, is another form of attachment. In this case, there was perceived aversion to Adya’s methods.
To be clear about Bhagavan - his enlightenment occurred when he lay down and “played dead”. Not after meditating for years and experiencing nirvikalpa samadhi. His teachings, as you know, have nothing about ecstasy. Neither do teachings of Papaji, Nisargadatta, Balsekar, Spira, Lucille, etc. Modern popular teachers like Tolle and Katie don’t talk about Kundalini at all. Can we take up an issue with all their methods?
Kriya yoga, the epitome of cultivating ecstasy does not lead everyone to enlightenment, as you know. Neither does self-inquiry - a long time devotee of Bhagavan asked him what to do since he had been inquiring for 30 years without success. Bhagavan said keep doing it for another 30 years!! So what determines who wakes up? Is there such a thing as “the” successful formula? How can we ever assess/measure a totally subjective state like unity? Mother Theresa and Gandhi, the exemplary karma yogis of modern times, felt a tad disillusioned at the end of their lives that they didn’t reach what they thought unity was.
How ridiculous to claim this or that way is the only way! This is why, in my personal experience, Grace is the biggest factor - there is absolutely nothing that I can justify doing - not the Bhakti, not the energy to practice, not the experiences that happen. I can lay claim to none of them as “mine”. It is only Grace.
Seeing your last post addressed to me, I feel we are perhaps somewhat on the same page.

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Jeff,

Hi Christi,
I think we may have a difference on what it means to go “beyond the mind”. Everythingness and oneness are still an aspect of mind (or universal mind). I have found all “thingness” to be of the mind.
Best wishes, Jeff

Everythingness and oneness are only aspects of the mind when they are concepts. By “go beyond the mind” I mean go beyond all concepts, all ideas about reality, all thought, all division, all form, even the idea that there is a “you” that can go beyond all these things. Then, everything is seen as one, and that one is not separate from your true Self.
It comes as inner silence expands outwards from the witness to encompass all that is. The boundary between the internal world and the external world collapses as does (in the same moment) the division between the perceived and the perceiver. In this awakening we see that being nothing we are everything.
It is really a process of surrender and letting go. And as Adya would say… grace.
Christi

[chas]

@Christi

Hi Chas

quote:

When I said they would “know everything from direct experience”, I meant they would know everything about the process of their own awakening from direct experience. They could write extensively on the subject based on that if they wanted to, and teach others about it.

---

</blockquote id=“quote”>
Thank you for clarifying what you meant. I disagree that “they would know everything about the process of their own awakening from direct experience.”(emphasis mine) But, I think I see your point now and agree to some extent. I also agree that they could write extensively on their experience if they wanted to.

@Christi

Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn’t happen and has no relevance. Then occasionally someone asks him about it and he says “Oh yes, that…”.

If you could provide a reference for your quotes, it might help establish the accuracy and context in which they were used.
Anyhow, it seems that you have issues with Adyashanti’s approach. I’m wondering what (if anything) would you have done differently if you were in his shoes?

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Chas,

O.K., yes it was you that mentioned “kundalini theory and practice”, whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.
Obviously, the more knowledge they have on the subject, the more they would be able to help others on the path.
I hope that clears that one up.

quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn’t happen and has no relevance. Then occasionally someone asks him about it and he says “Oh yes, that…”.
If you could provide a reference for your quotes, it might help establish the accuracy and context in which they were used.

I have never met Adyashanti in person, so I am only referring to what has been printed in his published works. I used to own some books written by him, but have given them all away now, so I am afraid I can’t provide sources. But they are all available for anyone to read, and I believe the latest one is available as a free download.

Anyhow, it seems that you have issues with Adyashanti’s approach. I’m wondering what (if anything) would you have done differently if you were in his shoes?

I don’t remember saying that I had issues with Adya’s approach. I thought I said this:

Actually I think Adya is a great teacher. We both studied in the same tradition- Buddhism, and our paths have been very similar. He studied zen, whereas I studied Theravada Buddhism, but in practice there is almost no difference.

All the best
Christi

[Bodhi_Tree (Cody)]

I tread lightly on this topic, but I cannot resist diving into the matrix of these matters.
I shall not attack. I shall use words and punctuated rhythms in the hopes of illuminating the topic. What point do I have to prove? I don’t know. Maybe I don’t have a point to prove, but maybe there’s an inner flow that wants to spew forth from a clogged spicket, kind of like a fire hydrant that bursts open accidentally so passersby can frolick in the water. But who would frolick in the water? Probably only children, since adults often stay rigidly conformed in our guise of civility and politeness.
In Autobiography of a Yogi, Yogananda tells of a saint that would walk the streets naked and submerge under the Ganges River for days at time. Why did he do it? Well, it doesn’t say, but at least there is some account of this peculiar use of a siddhi–testifying to the possibility for humans to break boundaries typically considered unbreakable. If a man can breathe and sustain himself underwater like a fish, what else can a man do? Maybe we are only limited by imagination, which has no limits.
The examples of human beings going beyond the norm and revealing new capabilities are abundant, and this evolutionary trend of defying notions of impossibility doesn’t seem to be stopping. We just keep rolling along and discovering new ways to live and spread our wings.
So, Adyashanti seems to recognize the “pure potential” of the Absolute, and he even suggests ways to reach that “pure potential” (his “True” Meditation, his insistence on being sincere and honest, his warning not to let your “ego” fool you, etc.). He lays out a path that seems to have brought him some satisfaction and fulfillment, so naturally, he wants to share it.
But is the point of life simply to reach the Absolute? No, the point is to touch the Absolute, swim back to the surface, and manifest the gold in your unique way. Jesus said: “Thy kindgdom come, thy will be done–on earth as it is in heaven.” So, isn’t that point–to bring heaven into solid manifestation? We’re not just nullifying and eradicating the existing manifest world; we’re merging and intermingling the manifest world with the absolute potential of emptiness.
So, to me, it boils down to the ishta, the dream, the vision for one’s personal life, and consequently, the lives of others. I’m so enthralled, inspired, and drawn to AYP teachings because there is a deep well of knowledge here–sprung from the experience of Yogani’s life and AYP practitioners alike. But most importantly, there is an impetus and a loving challenge to live an ecstatic life that is beyond any mere shift in identification. Sure, identification and the sense of “self” shifts, but that detail seems minor in comparison to the possibilities of action (creativity, service, siddhis, and unlimited expressions of the Infinite through art, business exchange, sports, stewardship of fellow species, and on and on).
So, maybe some people become more attracted to the shift in identity, whereas others become driven by manifesting the creative flow. It’s all a global balance striving to nurture and sustain the miracle of Being.
But to deny the mystery of personality/individuality (I don’t mean pride or “ego”) is just as foolish as denying the undifferentiated absolute. It’s about threading the needle, balancing on the beam of duality and non-duality, and operating from a functional mode of enraptured ecstasy, fueled by stillness.
Dance with me, dance with me, baby. That’s what God is saying to us. I think.

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

My point is exactly what I thought I’d said many times in several posts above - there is no ONE way. Aversion, as you know, is another form of attachment. In this case, there was perceived aversion to Adya’s methods.

Hi Kami,
Yes, there certainly seems to be some misunderstanding. I did’t say that ecstasy is a prerequisite for enlightenment and I didn’t say that I had any aversion to Adya’s methods. What you perceive can depend in part on what you want to perceive.
What I did say is that unity is an evolved state of ecstasy and that kundalini is an essential part of the journey.

To be clear about Bhagavan - his enlightenment occurred when he lay down and “played dead”. Not after meditating for years and experiencing nirvikalpa samadhi. His teachings, as you know, have nothing about ecstasy. Neither do teachings of Papaji, Nisargadatta, Balsekar, Spira, Lucille, etc. Modern popular teachers like Tolle and Katie don’t talk about Kundalini at all. Can we take up an issue with all their methods?

On the subject of Bhagavan (Ramana Maharshi), he did claim that he experienced enlightenment at a young age whilst “playing dead”. But then he took up the life of a sadhu and spent many years practising pranayama and meditation in various places on the side of Arunachala and experienced nirvikalpa samadhi.
Why would someone who was enlightened spend 10 years practising pranayama and meditation? Unless of course, they were building a body of divine light?
Certainly, in the photographs of Ramana in his old age, you can see ecstasy shining from his eyes. And the same with Papaji.
As for what decides who wakes up? You could call it grace, or karma.
All the best.

[chas]

@Christi

Hi Chas,

O.K., yes it was you that mentioned “kundalini theory and practice”, whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.

No worries. I’m not clear on how the responses so far answer my question. I was not saying that someone could not write about their experience.
Whether or not kundalini or the “energetic component of awakening” has been “glossed over” or “downplayed” is a matter of opinion. It is possible we merely differ in opinion. Please consider the possibility that not all of the information Adya has related on the subject is being portrayed accurately in this thread. Some things appear to be written as fact but have yet to be substantiated or given complete context.

@Christi

Again, I think you slightly misunderstood what I was saying there. It is not that he has ever pretended something did not happen which in fact did happen, it is just that he downplays the fact of his kundalini awakening, at least in his books, to the extent that the reader could almost imagine that it never happened at all. There is one line in one of his books which goes something like: “…and then I had some kundalini symptoms”. I can’t quote the exact words as I gave the book away to a friend.

This was addressed to Kami, but FYI, Adya does talk about his experience with kundalini awakening in his books and elsewhere. One notable case of this is in his book “The End of Your World,” Chapter 8, entitled “The Energetic Component of Awakening”. In short, it resembles nothing like what you have described above, or previously: “Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn’t happen and has no relevance. Then occasionally someone asks him about it and he says ‘Oh yes, that…’” You can read a few pages of it here: http://books.google.com/books?id=5_TM1yhEeIsC&pg=PA148&dq=The

I have never met Adyashanti in person, so I am only referring to what has been printed in his published works. I used to own some books written by him, but have given them all away now, so I am afraid I can’t provide sources. But they are all available for anyone to read, and I believe the latest one is available as a free download.

Thanks. I have his books and I’ve tried to find the quotes you have provided. I can’t find it with Google either… I’m going to be occupied for a while, but hopefully sometime this week I can resume the search. Please let us know if you come across them in the meantime.

I don’t remember saying that I had issues with Adya’s approach. I thought I said this:

quote:

---

I saw that. I didn't say that you said you had issues with Adya's approach. I said "it seems that you have issues with Adyashanti's approach." That seemed to be the case based on other comments of yours, and how those comments were interpreted on my end. It might be a misunderstanding, miscommunication, misinterpretation, or all of the above. Maybe we are using the term "issues" differently. The way I meant it above is similar, I think, to what Kami mentioned above regarding "aversions." It does not seem that I am the only one who is perceiving it this way. At any rate, if there are no issues or aversions remaining to discuss, I'm off to play Easter Bunny. :slight_smile: :pray:

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Chas,

quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Chas,
O.K., yes it was you that mentioned “kundalini theory and practice”, whereas I was meaning that someone who had been through an awakening could speak about their own experience with regards to kundalini, and even write about it, despite the fact that they had received no formal training, because they would know about their own awakening from their own experience.
Sorry about the confusion there.
No worries. I’m not clear on how the responses so far answer my question. I was not saying that someone could not write about their experience.

Sorry, I didn’t realize that this question was so important to you. I’ll see if I can do a better job of answering it in more detail.
Your original question was this:

A hypothetical question, Christi: if you were in Adyashanti’s position, and likely had little or no training in kundalini theory and practices, would you write or instruct extensively on the subject?

So if the question is “would I write or instruct extensively on the subject of kundalini theory and practice?” then the answer would be no. But if the question is “would I write or instruct extensively on the subject of kundalini despite the fact that I had had little or no training in kundalini theory or practice?” then the answer would be yes.
I think if Adyashanti is going to teach at all, then he has a duty to his students to include the energetic aspect of awakening in that instruction as it can impact greatly on people’s lives if he doesn’t. You say that he does that in his verbal teachings which is good to hear. The comment I was making is that it did not come across well in his written works and to me seemed to have been glossed over somewhat.

This was addressed to Kami, but FYI, Adya does talk about his experience with kundalini awakening in his books and elsewhere. One notable case of this is in his book “The End of Your World,” Chapter 8, entitled “The Energetic Component of Awakening”. In short, it resembles nothing like what you have described above, or previously: "Yes, that is the interesting thing about Adyashanti, he meditates for years, goes through an intensive kundalini awakening, comes out the other end enlightened and then talks, for the most part, as if it didn’t happen and has no relevance.

Thanks for providing that link to “The end of your world”, I had not seen that chapter before. It is good to see that Adya is starting to address this issue. This is the kind of thing that I was talking about and I think would have been helpful if it had been included in some of his earlier works. “The end of this world” was published in 2010, I believe? The material in that chapter is the kind of thing that I felt was glossed over in some of his earlier books such as “Emptiness dancing” and “True meditation”.

Thanks. I have his books and I’ve tried to find the quotes you have provided. I can’t find it with Google either… I’m going to be occupied for a while, but hopefully sometime this week I can resume the search.

I wasn’t aware that I had provided any quotes? If you are searching for the words: “Oh, yes that…” I wasn’t quoting verbatim so I don’t think you will find it. I was speaking about the way in which Adya addressed the energetic aspect of awakening in his earlier published works - almost as an interesting side effect, rather than as an integral part of the awakening. With the inclusion of that chapter in the “End of your world” he is certainly putting the energetic aspect of awakening more to the forefront in his published work which is good to see.
All the best,
Christi

[kami]

@Christi

What you perceive can depend in part on what you want to perceive.

Yes Christi, what you perceive always depends on what you want to perceive and your own colorings.

@Christi

On the subject of Bhagavan (Ramana Maharshi), he did claim that he experienced enlightenment at a young age whilst “playing dead”. But then he took up the life of a sadhu and spent many years practising pranayama and meditation in various places on the side of Arunachala and experienced nirvikalpa samadhi.
Why would someone who was enlightened spend 10 years practising pranayama and meditation?

Hmm… See above. Your perception of why is going to depend on your own aspirations and your own colorings. Personally, I have no idea.
All the best!
kami

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Kami,

quote:
Originally posted by Christi
What you perceive can depend in part on what you want to perceive.
Yes Christi, what you perceive always depends on what you want to perceive and your own colorings.

I wouldn’t say always. When there is no desire to perceive anything, then what is, is seen clearly (see my post above to Jeff about going beyond the concepts of the mind).

quote:
Originally posted by Christi
On the subject of Bhagavan (Ramana Maharshi), he did claim that he experienced enlightenment at a young age whilst “playing dead”. But then he took up the life of a sadhu and spent many years practising pranayama and meditation in various places on the side of Arunachala and experienced nirvikalpa samadhi.
Why would someone who was enlightened spend 10 years practising pranayama and meditation?
Hmm… See above. Your perception of why is going to depend on your own aspirations and your own colorings. Personally, I have no idea.

I would say that what Ramana Maharshi experienced when he was a child and playing dead was an awakening experience. He said that in that moment he came to know himself as the spirit indwelling the body. I had better put the exact quote, otherwise I will have Chas on my back chasing me up about it.

So I am Spirit transcending the body. The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death. That means I am the deathless Spirit.’ All this was not dull thought; it flashed through me vividly as living truth which I perceived directly, almost without thought-process. ‘I’ was something very real, the only real thing about my present state, and all the conscious activity connected with my body was centred on that ‘I’. From that moment onwards the ‘I’ or Self focused attention on itself by a powerful fascination. Fear of death had vanished once and for all. Absorption in the Self continued unbroken from that time on. [ramana maharshi]

So that is what I would call an awakening experience. For me, enlightenment is a much bigger journey which involves a whole process of transformation of the body and mind. That is why I said that Ramana became enlightened after many years of meditation, because that is how I understand it.
In the end it is just a question of language. Interestingly Adya also talks about awakening experiences and the journey to enlightenment from awakening, but then he also talked about his “final enlightenment” and went on to say that he had more work still to do after that. Again, it’s a particular use of language around the word “enlightenment”.
So you see you are right to say that Ramana Maharshi became enlightened when he was a boy, and I was right when I said he became enlightened after many years of meditation. We were simply using the word enlightenment in different ways, to mean different things. That is what I mean about letting go of fixed views as a tool for entering the state of unity. Nothing in this world is true and attachment to any idea or view will keep us in bondage and separation and act a barrier to liberation. I am sure Ramana would have agreed with me there.
All the best
Christi

[jeff]

@Christi

Hi Jeff,

quote:

Everythingness and oneness are only aspects of the mind when they are concepts. By “go beyond the mind” I mean go beyond all concepts, all ideas about reality, all thought, all division, all form, even the idea that there is a “you” that can go beyond all these things. Then, everything is seen as one, and that one is not separate from your true Self.
It comes as inner silence expands outwards from the witness to encompass all that is. The boundary between the internal world and the external world collapses as does (in the same moment) the division between the perceived and the perceiver. In this awakening we see that being nothing we are everything.
It is really a process of surrender and letting go. And as Adya would say… grace.
Christi

---

Hi Christi, Given your response, i think we may be talking "apples" and "oranges" regarding perception and the concept of "mind". If you don't mind, a few clarifying questions... From your comments in this thread, I assume that you "reside" in unity... Is that correct? What is Kundalini? Is it different from other forms of energy/light? Thanks, Jeff

[Christi (Tristan Dorling)]

Hi Jeff,

From your comments in this thread, I assume that you “reside” in unity… Is that correct?

Sometimes, and sometimes not. There is a long process of moving between unity and the witness that goes on for several years for most people. At times there is duality and at other times unity. It is a shift that does not involve any movement. Falling into unity is like falling into the heart, it is a very beautiful process.

What is Kundalini? Is it different from other forms of energy/light?

Kundalini is the whole energetic transformation of the body and mind in the transformation of enlightenment. Prana begins to move in a different way in the body, and the body is transformed by it. The transformation happens mostly on the subtle levels (the subtle neurobiology), but even the physical body is changed.

Given your response, i think we may be talking “apples” and “oranges” regarding perception and the concept of “mind”. If you don’t mind, a few clarifying questions…

If the ideas of the mind and perception confuse you, just leave them out. The rest still works. Remember what I am suggesting is one of the highest stages in yoga, so it is not an easy thing to do. But all talk of unity is really a bit meaningless without the direct experience of it. That is why it is better to practice and come to know it for yourself.
Christi

[jeff]

[quote=“Christi”]
Hi Jeff,

What is Kundalini? Is it different from other forms of energy/light?

Kundalini is the whole energetic transformation of the body and mind in the transformation of enlightenment. Prana begins to move in a different way in the body, and the body is transformed by it. The transformation happens mostly on the subtle levels (the subtle neurobiology), but even the physical body is changed.

Given your response, i think we may be talking “apples” and “oranges” regarding perception and the concept of “mind”. If you don’t mind, a few clarifying questions…

If the ideas of the mind and perception confuse you, just leave them out. The rest still works. Remember what I am suggesting is one of the highest stages in yoga, so it is not an easy thing to do. But all talk of unity is really a bit meaningless without the direct experience of it. That is why it is better to practice and come to know it for yourself.
Christi

---

Hi Christi, Thanks for your responses. They were helpful in my better understanding your perceptions. I did not mean to imply that the topic confused me, only that I see it differently than you and I was trying to better understand your perspective. I would agree as you mentioned above, that the "inner" and the "outer" are the same, but in my experience, both are still aspects of "mind". Or, as some prefer to call the outer (or existence), shared or universal mind. In your concept of "unity", is the mind quiet? Do random thoughts or responses like anger and irritation still pop up? Thanks, Jeff