--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > Quick google search yields little about chakras as spiritual 
> > thingies. There are "wheels" 
> > > mentioned, but not spiritual nexi specifical called "chakras." This 
> > appears to be a Tibetan 
> > > Buddhist term,
> > 
> > ?????
> > 
> > In Hinduism and in some related Asian cultures, a chakra is thought 
> > to be a nexus of metaphysical and/or biophysical energy residing in 
> > the human body....
> > 
> > The chakras are described in the tantric texts the Sat-Cakra-
> > Nirupana, and the Padaka-Pancaka, in which they are described as 
> > emanations of consciousness from Brahman, an energy emanating from 
> > the spiritual which gradually turns concrete, creating these distinct 
> > levels of chakras, and which eventually finds its rest in the 
> > Muladhara chakra. They are therefore part of an emanationist theory, 
> > like that of the kabbalah in the west, lataif-e-sitta in Sufism or 
> > neo-platonism. The energy that was unleashed in creation, called the 
> > Kundalini, lies coiled and sleeping at the base of the spine. It is 
> > the purpose of the tantric or kundalini forms of yoga to arouse this 
> > energy, and cause it to rise back up through the increasingly subtler 
> > chakras, until union with God is achieved in the Sahasrara chakra at 
> > the crown of the head....
> > 
> > The earliest known mention of chakras is found in the later 
> > Upanishads, including specifically the Brahma Upanishad and the 
> > Yogatattva Upanishad. These vedic models were adapted in Tibetan 
> > Buddhism as Vajrayana theory, and in the Tantric Shakta theory of 
> > chakras.
> > 
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakra
> > 
> 
> 
> As is often the case, wiki appears to be wrong. The following is where chakra 
> appears 
> upanishads as is commonly thought of in the chakra/kundilini system. As is 
> often the 
case 
> with the topsy-turvy world of Hindu thought, the latter unpanishad appears to 
> be more 
> primitive and convluted than the earlier one. Of course, the earlier one 
> emphasises TM 
> while this one doesn't mention it at all:
> 
> http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/varaha.htm
>

I take that back. The mention of chakra appears to be descriptive rather than 
prescriptive 
(to use Judy's phrase), and there is much of interest in this upanishad for 
those who think 
TM is important rather than thinking that you gotta attend to each individual 
leaf (or 
chakra). MMY's advice to follow one's own religion appears to satsify most of 
the rest of 
the admonitions found or so it appears to TB moi.








To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to