Prana = Spirit = Kundalini?

Spirituality
#21

Hey guys.

If you attempt to classify Spirit as Surya Devi is doing, you’re always going to fall into the same trap that Surya Devi is falling into. And that trap is? Essentially, it’s the same thing as Surya Devi has noted as a limiting factor: “3-dimensional” consciousness. Otherwise known as duality.

If you really want to know the answers to these things, you should realize that they cannot be known intellectually, at least by us. They are a part of the mystery, and you can live the mystery, but not know it.

Look, it’s like the saying: [I]You can’t have your cake and eat it too![/I]

Generally speaking,

the mystery referred to as Kundalini is the [I]process [/I]by which humans become [I]purified[/I].

Spirit is the ethereal form of Life.

Prana is akin to the wind.

#22

Would it be fair to say that there is, on the surface, no difference been prana and Kundalini. The difference comes from the consciousness that observes it? So on a lower level, they are seen as the same, but as one awakens they become different because the conscious is there at the spine and knows?

#23

[QUOTE=lotusgirl;40441]Would it be fair to say that there is, on the surface, no difference been prana and Kundalini. The difference comes from the consciousness that observes it? So on a lower level, they are seen as the same, but as one awakens they become different because the conscious is there at the spine and knows?[/QUOTE]

Lotusgirl,

No, it would not be fair to say that.

Kundalini is a [I]process[/I], and only that.

We don’t know what Prana is. Prana is like the wind, it flows and it moves and we can feel it. Prana is ethereal, that is, it exists in the space/ether. We can say this much at least.

We just do not know enough about these things to make an definite judgments.

#24

@Bonemarrow

And what do you base this on that Kundalini is only a process? Does Kundalini have substance? So you don’t think Kundalini is pure energy?

#25

Lotus Girl,

No.

Kundalini is itself not energy, but rather is mechanical in nature, specifically related to the human anatomy, or rather, higher-animal kingdom anatomy: alternating bilateral vertebrates, possessing ida, pingala and sushumna, and bearing weight through intersecting axes and planes of rotation. Kundalini is suspension within or locomotion of prana along sushumna by mechanical means, so there’s process involved in doing that, but that process for us is yoga.

Boney,

Is “feeling” not a form of knowing?

We do know what prana is. We feel it and have a means to influence it, purification being one of them. You have to concentrate very hard and realize. Have you ever heard of “harmonic-resonance?” It’s a good place to start: Om vibrates, prana resonates. It’s very important to consider these principles.

peace,
siva

#26

[QUOTE=core789;40351]Hi Asuri,

Kundalini shakti is the energy potential.It encapsualtes the physics, the dynamics, the interplay of (characteristically) psycho-sexual energy originating at the store-house of energy located at the base of the pelvis or muldhara chakra, coiled up supposedly like a serpent 3 and a half times,waiting patiently to rise ,break through the obstructions via shushumna awakening and find free passage as it ascends up to the crown,then matures and refines, & eventually cavorting with Shiva & finding fruition in union.It is a kind of holy communion.

Shiva is pure bliss consciousness, the witness who needs shakti to awaken each other’s potential. So there is no shakti without shiva,observer(or spirit, essence) without observed (this body). When folk relate the feelings of being filled with the Holy Spirit i can’t help at the least draw analogies like you say between them recounting principally experiences of the ecstatic bliss feeling that accompany devotional mania or religious experiences.But you need a guiding force to guide shakti awaken her otherwise in some sense it is just prana,lifeless and without spirit or at least a body as we know it to inhabit it.

There is metaphor and literal conceptualisation, and both are equally valid and in some sense are both at the same time, i.e regarding the concept of kundalini or any of these other concepts…Also i think you can explain this phenomena, Holy spirit,kundalini shakti and her union with shiva, the witness or spirit or certainly do a decent & pretty respectable job of it scientifically.[/QUOTE]

Actually I think you did a pretty respectable job of describing it here.

#27

[QUOTE=bonemarrow;40444]Lotusgirl,

No, it would not be fair to say that.

Kundalini is a [I]process[/I], and only that.

We don’t know what Prana is. Prana is like the wind, it flows and it moves and we can feel it. Prana is ethereal, that is, it exists in the space/ether. We can say this much at least.

We just do not know enough about these things to make an definite judgments.[/QUOTE]

I agree to a certain extent that kundalini is primarily a practice. But it is also symbolic. It is called shakti - power, and a particular kind of power at that.

śakti शक्तिः 1 (a) Power, ability, capa- city, strength, energy, prowess; -4 The active power of a deity, regarded as his wife, female divinity; 8 The power inherent in a cause to produce its necessary effect.

#28

[QUOTE=siva;40436]

The “Holy Spirit,” you could say, is the force of prana combined with an ascension principle. Are these part of the Holy Trinity? What’s missing?

Om = God, The Father
Prana = The Son (the resonance of Om)
Kundalini = Holy Spirit/Ghost (earth to heaven ascension priniple).
[/QUOTE]

I propose a slightly different cosmology.

God, the Father = Om. His investment (clothing or body) is Mahat, the first evolute of Prakriti. This is stated fairly directly in Samkhya literature and can be inferred from yoga literature.

The Son comes from the Father. His investment is Ahamkara, the second evolute of Prakriti. In Samkhya philosophy, Ahamkara springs from Mahat. From Ahamkara evolves the both the perceived and the perceiver.

The Spirit = Prana, the common modifications of the internal instruments, through which the Father and Son communicate and propogate the creation.

Remember folks, you heard it here first.

#29

Haha, here we go again, argument over what something “is” and “isn’t” This is the game the 3D consciousness plays. It divides, and subdivides ad infinitum and ends up confusing itself and tying itself in a knot. Just as we can see here with this pointless discussion on the difference between Kundalini, Prana, Brahman.

The wiser ones amongst us know that we cannot say what something “is” because it ends up in a fallacy at some point, when we realise it isn’t what we say it is. They said Pluto was a planet, and now they say it is an asteroid. There is a debate on what a “race” is and what makes one Caucasian, and one Negroid another Mongloid. There is even debate on whether genes really exist and how do you demarcate from one to the other. The fallacy within language is an old problem known to wise philsophers. In the Zeno paradox a problem is posed on when do we know that a pile of grains makes a heap. Answer. We don’t know.

Language is arbitrary and it is only serves as a pragmatic tool to help us organize our daily life. It does not at all point to actual realities of things. When we say something 'is" we are only talking about that thing from a limited point of view from our 5 senses, that can only apprehend a fraction of the universe at any moment. It cannot know the totality of anything. To say all is Brahman is like saying all is all, so there is no fallacy here. It is recognising that everything is ultimately one. Not two, not three. But one. One substance. Of course that makes sense everything that exists must issue forth from something. It cannot issue from nothing, because nothing produces only nothing. Ultimately, everything can be reduced to one ultimate cause or substance.

What does a chair, table, tree, building all have in common? They are all names for forms chair, table, tree. These are all forms that are constructed within our mind and we start to see them as isolated objects out of habit. Everytime we make an observation we subconsciously infer continuity of the same object, because we are seeing an object that is exhibiting the same behaviour, so we assume it endures. This is because of our 3D consciousness which gives this impression.

The wise, however, whether it be the great British philosopher David Hume, the enlightened Buddha or the modern philosopher giant Karl Popper know that nothing every remains at rest, it is in constant activity. It is not the same object. This has now been proven by modern physics which shows that at the microscopic level matter is just constant activity. Our 3D consciousness does not show us. This is why you should be skeptical of your 3D consciousness. The wise sages and philosophers have always been skeptical of their 3D consciousness. The common man, however, takes it for granted. This is why the common man is a common man and not a sage.

It is now proven in modern physics that there is no objective existence of anything. Everything exists in mutual interdependent relationships. To say something has suchness is to say that it exists as a relationship with everything else. The same has been known by the wise sages since time immemorial.

What this have to do with Prana = Spirit = Kundalini. I will tell you in the next post.

#30

[QUOTE=Asuri;40427]If that were true, then when we die, the whole world would vanish along with us. In my opinion, actually believing in what you have said here is quite delusional. So is believing that you have transcended the “3-D consciousness”, which allows you to feel yourself to be superior to everyone.[/QUOTE]

Nope, because “we” never die, because we are never born. What is born and what dies is the body which is what we perceive and control. This body however is constantly dying and being replaced throughout our life. The world exists only isofar as there is a consciousness to perceive it. So it will remain as long as consciousness is there. And consciousness which is never born and thus never dies, is always there. So the world remains.

If everybody in the world were to suddenly start seeing the world with 4D consciousness the world that you know will know longer exist in anybodies mind. They will see a whole new world. Just as insects who are operating from 2D conscousness do not see the world as we see it.

How one sees the world is based on what consciousness they see it with.

Speaking of which, you said the link I provided does not contain a definition of Prana. Click on it and surprise yourself :wink:

#31

Hey guys…

Siva, look… prana is great and all but it’s still a part of the world of forms. Yeah, it’s possible for one to feel prana like one feels a wood table. But it’s still part of the world of duality. It’s no more real or illusory than that wood table.

Lotusgirl, Kundalini is nothing. Just disregard it altogether, because it’s only a name that some people gave to something a long time ago. These stories you read about Kunalini on the internet can be pretty outrageous.

Always take ancient writings with a grain of salt. They were written in very different times in very different cultures for very different people.

Asuri, i think you’re too caught up in the definitions and categories. It just doesn’t matter.

Just think of Kundalini as a natural psycho-biological process, much like puberty.

#32

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;40476]Nope, because “we” never die, because we are never born. What is born and what dies is the body which is what we perceive and control. This body however is constantly dying and being replaced throughout our life. The world exists only isofar as there is a consciousness to perceive it. So it will remain as long as consciousness is there. And consciousness which is never born and thus never dies, is always there. So the world remains.

If everybody in the world were to suddenly start seeing the world with 4D consciousness the world that you know will know longer exist in anybodies mind. They will see a whole new world. Just as insects who are operating from 2D conscousness do not see the world as we see it.

How one sees the world is based on what consciousness they see it with.

Speaking of which, you said the link I provided does not contain a definition of Prana. Click on it and surprise yourself ;)[/QUOTE]

What is 4 D consciousness exactly?

Honestly, nothing you have said makes much sense. My impression is that you are only spreading confusion. :confused:

The world exists just as surely as Self exists.

It’s an expression of the Universal Spirit. The world does not exist outside of creation, it is a part of creation.

Energy does not die. Atoms do not die. You think that bodies die, but actually they just change. There is never any more or any less.

#33

Right, coming to the matter of Prana, Kundalini and Brahman. These are all Vedic terms and Vedic concepts. So it is important to see how the Vedic people understood them. The best place to look is in the Upanishads.

The Vedic people describe Prana as the life force or life energy that originates from the Self and is inseparable from the self. It is present not just in the body, but in every thing in creation. The Sun has prana, plants have prana, rocks have prana. They describe the entire universe as a network of pranic channels, pranic forces and pranic plexus points(called Chakras) It’s all prana baby. Now Prana can be quantified as more prana or less prana. The vedic people say, for example that certain objects, geometries, directions have more or less prana. The human body is described as a microcosm of creation so it too has a network of pranic channels, pranic forces and pranic plexus points. It too can either be receiving more prana or less prana.

Now there is something called Kundalini which is described as a potential cosmic energy. The word Kundalini itself means, “coiled up” very much like a spring holding potential energy. This potential energy is released gradually into the pranic circuit of the human body, as the body become more and more purified. What does this mean? It means that blockages are removed to allow the prana to flow. The natural result of this the body becomes filled with more and more pranic energy. This impacts on the “Chitta” i.e., the consciousness of the person because there is a direct relationship between prana and chitta and a result the chitta settles and one begins to experience this qualitatively as different states of consciousness. There comes a point when all the potential energy enters the human body and one becomes completely filled, the entire pranic circuit of the body lights up, and one experiences this qualitatively as infinite bliss, self-realization, communion with the divine, enlightenment, being filled with spirit.

Similarly, Kundalini exists within nature as well as an infinite and potential energy that we can extract energy from at any point in space. The amount of energy we extract, as modern physics has calculated, is so great that within the space of a cup, there is enough energy to boil all the oceans in the world. Now, boy, that is a lot of energy! Can you imagine what would happen if we learned to tap Kundalini within nature and release the infinite storehouse she has? Well, this is the energy that we are releasing into our body through our spiritual practice. This is why playing with Kundalini is dangerous as she can destroy our body if our body is not ready to receive her.

To speak of many prana - vyana, samana, udana, apana, chakras, nadis and kundalini is as absurd as speaking of many kinds of energy: potential, kinetic, light, heat, sound. It is all one universal energy. Likewise, there is only one prana and this one prana does many functions. There a prana that functions upwards, a prana that functions downwards, one that functions in our digestive system and so on. There are not several pranas as much as there are not several winds, one that blows left, one that blows right, one that blows up, one that blows down :wink: It is all just one prana.

Finally, the Vedic people realise that prana is actually really Brahman. It is the life energy that animates the entire universe and where else can such a universal life energy emanate from. It emanates from the source itself. Brahman. Why does this life energy have an effect on chitta? That is because they are both the same substance. If they were different, then they could not affect each other. A magnet can only attract a magnetic object because both the magnet and the magnetic object contain the same substance. Likewise, the prana affects the chitta, because they are the same substance.

I think my explanations so far have been very comprehensive and well illustrated that no room for doubt should remain. Alas, I know the rest of this thread is going to continue as it is going - in 3D consciousness mode :smiley: This stuff is not for the common man :wink:

#34

Honestly, nothing you have said makes much sense. My impression is that you are only spreading confusion. :confused:

No, this is because you struggle with the English language. My name is Surya Deva by the way, not Surya Devi.

Read what I have written carefully, I am saying exactly what you are saying, but in different words.

It’s an expression of the Universal Spirit. The world does not exist outside of creation, it is a part of creation.

Energy does not die. Atoms do not die. You think that bodies die, but actually they just change. There is never any more or any less.

Yep, I have already said that. See if you can spot it.

#35

Look dude, I’m not trying to start something with you.

You are trying to understand these things intellectually, when in fact they cannot be understood intellectually.

I mean no offense to you. But you are confusing the people that read these posts and are looking for real answers. The information you are providing has not been collected from personal experience, rather, you are regurgitating what you have read elsewhere.
:slight_smile:

#36

I have already worked you out my friend. You have a spiritual superiority complex. You have so far gone around posting in many threads telling everybody they do not understand, they are all relying on intellect. What are you relying on then?

In fact if you read carefully I am saying pretty much the same thing as you that we cannot rely on the intellect to know these things. That logic, language confuses the mind. However, for you to admit I am saying the same thing, would undermine your superiority complex.

Next time, share your viewpoint without the arrogance. Okay, I get it, your viewpoint is the intellect cannot understand these things. Stop ramming it down my throat. I don’t agree. I think the intellect can show the way.

#37

Asuri’s first post:

I thought I would start a new thread for this, to keep the other thread from getting too far off topic.

Try one more thread! Thanks.

#38

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;40489]I have already worked you out my friend. You have a spiritual superiority complex. You have so far gone around posting in many threads telling everybody they do not understand, they are all relying on intellect. What are you relying on then?

In fact if you read carefully I am saying pretty much the same thing as you that we cannot rely on the intellect to know these things. That logic, language confuses the mind. However, for you to admit I am saying the same thing, would undermine your superiority complex.

Next time, share your viewpoint without the arrogance. Okay, I get it, your viewpoint is the intellect cannot understand these things. Stop ramming it down my throat. I don’t agree. I think the intellect can show the way.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, it sounds like i’ve touched a nerve, which was not my intention. I’ll let you have your soap box dude.

#39

[QUOTE=bonemarrow;40502]Sorry, it sounds like i’ve touched a nerve, which was not my intention. I’ll let you have your soap box dude.[/QUOTE]

Nah, you’ve not touched a nerve. I know too well to not be affected by posts like yours. You have stated your viewpoint in a very arrogant way by first assuming your viewpoint is correct and then telling me I am confusing people, patronizing me and others for their views, when you simply could have stated your viewpoint without the arrogance. Like I said elsewhere, you will not get anywhere with that arrogance. I will ignore all future posts by you if you maintain that attitude.

Anyway, you have helped taken this thread of course. So to bring it back on course, lets start here:

You are trying to understand these things intellectually, when in fact they cannot be understood intellectually.

How do you know these things cannot be understood intellectually?

#40

People’s judgments are their own and it has nothing to do with me.

I will answer your question, though it is obvious i am not welcome here.

The intellect simply cannot grasp the Spirit. To the mind, the Spirit will always be unfathomable.

The mind is a tool. The ego is the self of the mind.

The Spirit is Life! The Divine is the Self of the Spirit.

Mind does not know Spirit.

I hope this helps you understand my point.