Baddogma's Meta Cafe- Polite Discussions About Scientific Mysticism and General Weirdness

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I confess I love the fresh smell of popping corn in the cinema. I transcend to another state, a peaceful piggy girl eating popcorn state.

i also stick my tongue out on top of the popcorn bucket so the popcorn sticks to it and it angers my husband greatly.
Evil?
possibly.

I'd like to pose a question to the thread.

Okay.

The book, Kundalini: The Evolutionary Energy in Man which was written by Gopi Krishna, and was published in India in 1967 and in the United States and Britain in 1970, has had a tremendous influence on the development of the concept of the "Kundalini Experience" in Western culture. And why would it not have...

"The illumination grew brighter and brighter, the roaring louder, I experienced a rocking sensation and then felt myself slipping out of my body, entirely enveloped in a halo of light...I felt the point of consciousness that was myself growing wider, surrounded by waves of light...

I was now all consciousness, without any outline, without any idea of a corporeal appendage, without any feeling or sensation coming from the senses, immersed in a sea of light simultaneously conscious and aware of every point, spread out, as it were, in all directions without any barrier or material obstruction...bathed in light and in a state of exaltation and happiness impossible to describe."

-Gopi Krishna (same link as above)

...?

Gopi Krishna's book was also an early provider to a Western audience of the concept of the "Kundalini Casualty"...

By his own account, Gopi Krishna's initial experience triggered a transformative process that lasted for twelve years. During this time, the sensations of light, splendor and joy alternated with – and were often completely overshadowed by – sensations of fire, unbearable heat and bleak depression.

My question is this: In light of what we are likely learning from modern developments in epigenetics, how do you all think that this might change, or amend, the definition of "Kundalini Casualty".

a reply to: Bybyots

I've read everything ever written by Gopi Krishna.

Epigenetics is a tough one to correlate.

I take it, that you have a theory?

You first.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Heart tissue.

*quietly recedes back into mushroom form in the dark*

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Heart tissue.

*quietly recedes back into mushroom form in the dark*

You have a theory about Epigenetics and heart tissue?

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Epigenetics is a tough one to correlate.

Oh God, c'mon, Kev...

In light of what we are likely learning from modern developments in epigenetics, how do you all think that this might change, or amend, the definition of "Kundalini Casualty".

Maybe it's something we already know.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

MIB are terrified of microwave ovens. That's interesting, no?

Kev

a reply to: Bybyots

Sigh.

Testosterone Epigenetics is one of the secrets of Kundalini.

One of the secrets of how the world came to be so messed up too.

But your very specific question...has me slightly uneasy.

It's fascinating for the shoe to be on the other foot.

Btw...Oxytocin has epigenetic effects too.

In fact the entire nectar cycle can be analyzed from this standpoint and ties sweetly into cultural anthropology from 4000 BC.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

And another question:
Did you ever think about the possibility that not only Earth has her own "personality" but all the other heavenly bodies do so too?
I mean how is it, that in almost every culture the same stars end up with the same attributes/personalities?
I know some of them can be traced back to their periods, as in end of winter=> time for war. But couldn't there be more layers of truth?

Isn't it maybe possible they function as neurons for a bigger being, the whole universe network forms an independent intelligence?
I know this isn't exactly new as others thought the same thing before me, but what do you think? Is the universe itself the artist formerly known as God?

a reply to: Bybyots

It's interesting, those who are fixated upon the notion of Universal consciousness within all living things to the extent that they deny individuation are channeling the Andromeda complex, a fatalistic dogma that can see nothing beyond and will eventually lead to a case of the light being on but nobody at home.

The beast that torments them during this entrapment, Cetus, represents organic life at the most fundamental level, to the extent were differentiation between the animal and vegetal has no relevance, it probably is the case that the sea serpent will begin to de-evolve the person at the most fundamental levels, transforming their minds into something resembling pea soup.

If Buddhist monks and New Age mystagogues were prettier and could manage a decent scream for help perhaps they'd be worth rescuing, but generally they're not.

a reply to: Bybyots



Hello there, it's possible that kundalini (which I had to google several pages back, but I'm thinking is some kind of yoga) is able to switch on or off gene expression, which is what we're learning from epigenetics. In essence, it has resparked the old nature vs nurture debate so if you have the genes for say being a yogic pillar of light, you can switch on the mechanisms for altering your genetic expression to be that. Presumably if enough generations do that, the genes will remain 'on'.

My question is this: In light of what we are likely learning from modern developments in epigenetics, how do you all think that this might change, or amend, the definition of "Kundalini Casualty".

(Googling Kundalini Casualty now) Something about 'ego death' and negating all wants, feeling god-like? It sounds a bit like memory ie sense of self is being impaired and therefore my best guess is that it wouldn't be long until 'Kundalini Casualty' ended up in the DSM V.
I shall await someone who knows what they're talking about to explain better.

a reply to: Peeple

I saw a brilliant article a few days ago looking as the cross-cultural correlations between language.

We create words to label people, places, actions, thoughts, and more so we can express ourselves meaningfully to others. Do humans' shared cognitive abilities and dependence on languages naturally provide a universal means of organizing certain concepts? Or do environment and culture influence each language uniquely?

archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.co.uk...

Sorry I can't post the pics, I'm at work.

B x

originally posted by: Kantzveldt
a reply to: Bybyots

It's interesting, those who are fixated upon the notion of Universal consciousness within all living things to the extent that they deny individuation are channeling the Andromeda complex, a fatalistic dogma that can see nothing beyond and will eventually lead to a case of the light being on but nobody at home.

The beast that torments them during this entrapment, Cetus, represents organic life at the most fundamental level, to the extent were differentiation between the animal and vegetal has no relevance, it probably is the case that the sea serpent will begin to de-evolve the person at the most fundamental levels, transforming their minds into something resembling pea soup.

If Buddhist monks and New Age mystagogues were prettier and could manage a decent scream for help perhaps they'd be worth rescuing, but generally they're not.

I don't know if you have read any of my posts, but if you have, I deny "universal consciousness" from the beginning to the last of my posts. I call that concept twaddle.

Now of course that didn't make me popular back at the club house; in fact it got me expelled.

The thing which is actually "universal" is "structure", in an endless play of interaction with a "restlessness". This cycle of interaction produces the semi-illusionary concept of "consciousness", but "individuation" is not to be despised, but rather the suffering engendered is as I stated in an earlier post "one of the pillars which keeps reality in place".

From the background of Hindu systems, I'm certainly not an Advaitist, nor a Dvaitist, both being syncreit distillations of earlier systems, which I would view as being closer to correct than the more modern ones.

These concepts I came to find out post ipso facto, are in fact part of some of the earlier shamanistic systems that have any written records, such as Kashmiri shamanism.

Now no doubt, given your extensive archetypal system, you will "correct me" and what not with all these Sumerian and astrological correspondences.. which is fine.... . I don't use "off the shelf systems", but merely report what I've seen.

I'm utterly fascinated that you do not agree with a type of system which I spent years studying, but then "left".

Kev

a reply to: beansidhe

It was even part of the DSM IV:

"Religious or Spiritual Problem"

It has an expanded inclusion in the DSM V:

You can even read about it in the national institute of health;

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

a reply to: Peeple

Well now that Kantzveldt is in the thread, you'll probably get an answer you like better from the perspective of the Sumerian system .

I can merely note from my own experience, that each world which has living beings, generates it's own "Trickster"; you might even say that these Heavenly Tricksters communicate with each other across the so-called interstellar void; which of course it is not; the "void" at least to the senses of some, and in particular myself, I call "the fullness" and presumably at a lower level is the superconducting strings of life (structure under force of evolution due to restlessness) which even now science is modelling with super computers.

What I find interesting about the concept of "Tricksters", is that Life/Consciousness itself is a rather perverse thing; at endless war with itself.

One could envisage a world without a "tricky" Trickster, and presumably some are; however the fact that consciousness itself is rather a "slight of hand trick", being both a nearly permanent feature while also being non-existent at the same moment, makes Tricksterish behavior nearly inevitable in any archteypical space.

Now the larger question of whether stars, planets, etc are 'sentient' like in certain Gaia systems is slightly difficult for me to discuss properly.

The base unit I call "Divine babies / semi-sentient primordial black holes" are present "everywhere" in greater concentrations on planets with organic life; bu this is not to be confused with "universal consciousness" nor "matter itself being consciousness" across the board (though at a "higher level" this looks true-ish, but it's not per se).

Non-temporal structure quivers with basic awareness, only when paired with the "restlessness".

Now, I suspect that many worlds apparently barren of "organic life", team with "inorganic life", as the analogues in space and time of the "Two Lovers" and their babies in seed form are innately restless, and would evolve vast numbers of living things, given any sort of matrix, including in the Plasma Kingdoms.

These matters aren't terribly easy for me to form into words, as they are merely first hand reports.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Whether you see this as a relatively localized phenomena doesn't interest me, the fact remains you found yourself on the edge of a certain precipice unable to move beyond.

A basic issue with Buddhism and Hinduism is the early schism within the Pantheon were Hinduism became the preserve of Deva tradition and the Iranian concern with the Asura, an issue then because those higher spiritual qualities with regards to the management and administration of life are the concern of the Asura.

The schism never occurred in Mesopotamia, which is why when you'd gone as far as the tradition of Enki could take you, correspondent to Andromeda in terms of astral symbolism, at that point it would be time to say hello to Enlil's side of the family, shamanism was covered at a relatively low level by Assaluhi, a son of Enki.

It's not a case of wishing to correct , you reached the highest level of awareness with regards to what is symbolized by the Andromeda constellation but then realized that within the traditions you had studied there was no way forward, i merely explain why, i mean after all you're one up on the Atheists, they're only at the sea serpent level, appreciation of Biology and Evolution.

If you would like to see this in terms of a ladder you're at step three of seven, were the first level is the Field Constellation within the seas, the basic nutrients for the development of life, step two the sea serpent, the fundamentals of organic life, step three Andromeda the Divine consciousness within sentient creatures...thus you have managed to become self aware, but then so has everybody else because it's the natural condition, though i appreciate there are differing extents to that.

a reply to: Kantzveldt

I really enjoy all of your threads and am very happy you joined the Café Club!
Could you go a bit more into detail about Andromeda? Or do you have a link?

originally posted by: Kantzveldt
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Whether you see this as a relatively localized phenomena doesn't interest me, the fact remains you found yourself on the edge of a certain precipice unable to move beyond.

A basic issue with Buddhism and Hinduism is the early schism within the Pantheon were Hinduism became the preserve of Deva tradition and the Iranian concern with the Asura, an issue then because those higher spiritual qualities with regards to the management and administration of life are the concern of the Asura.

The schism never occurred in Mesopotamia, which is why when you'd gone as far as the tradition of Enki could take you, correspondent to Andromeda in terms of astral symbolism, at that point it would be time to say hello to Enlil's side of the family, shamanism was covered at a relatively low level by Assaluhi, a son of Enki.

It's not a case of wishing to correct , you reached the highest level of awareness with regards to what is symbolized by the Andromeda constellation but then realized that within the traditions you had studied there was no way forward, i merely explain why, i mean after all you're one up on the Atheists, they're only at the sea serpent level, appreciation of Biology and Evolution.

You are perfectly correct.

Yes, indeed, I took the tradition as far as it could go, and found I had been "abandoned" on a distant shore.

I'll even take your words as a side-ways compliment. LOL.

I've had to develop my own mythology to go further, and it has served me well.

I do suspect that I'd have been better served with a less mentally unstable cultural referent, as Dvaita and Advaita are signs of a cultural schism, no doubt due to the invasion of the natives in Northern India.

I guess the only reason that I'm not apologetic, is that I've gained real-life experience at the deepest levels (of part of the vast canvas); I"m not trapped by words, concepts, or cultural systems.. which can of course produce excellent results; but I am at hazard of "going off the rails" due to not having a road-map, except of course I do have allies.. the beings which i call "the two lovers", the two great feathered serpents which bind together earth and sky.

Does your cultural system acknowledge and name these two entities? I imagine so; one has to be blind not to see them.
Cultures around the world obsess about the obvious one, and don't see the "hidden one".

BTW, I hope there is no friction between us.. I enjoy your posts quite a lot, despite the rather interesting omissions and sometimes archetypal obfuscations (you don't give enough background info for people to make sense of everything you say).

Of course I do the same. That preceding paragraph should be interpreted as "Welcome"! I would love to learn a bit more of your system, just like I enjoy learning more of beansidhe's system.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Sounds a bit like you found the answer to which came first, chicken or egg. Does it really matter though?
I can agree with the trickster being created by life, but the question remains, who has the bigger influence? Are we the tricksters master or is it ours? Have you ever tried to manipulate it? Maybe it is just a part of the brain and it is connected to others and tricky thing is simply confusion?

a reply to: beansidhe

That's interesting. Thank you for the link!
I would guess since our brains are not very different no matter what culture, it only allows for a limited range of conceptual possibilities. Even all invented phantasy languages follow the same rules. Like Hildegard von Bingens.