[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[azgrey]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@... wrote:

 Rolfing is not (yet) approved.  On one of the BatGap interviews, a woman said 
 she gave and received a lot of energy work before and after unfoldment. And 
 cited Rolfing (thats different from Ralphing) as a method for huge release 
 of emotional (pain body) energy stored in ones muscles (and perhaps subtle 
 body parts associated with muscles.) I know Rolfing was popular among some TM 
 teachers in the early 70's. Anyone tried it recently? Effects?  


I was on the mend after tearing my left Achilles tendon
maybe 6/7 years back. My tendon had healed but I was 
not pleased with how the rest of my body had changed
in response to months and months of not walking the way 
my body was designed to walk.

Did a little research and found this guy just blocks from 
my house. He sure wasn't cheap. My Chinese acupuncturist
worked with him on lots of pro athletes. The photos of him are 
not very accurate as he is now much older. No blonde curly hair. 
He insists he could still grow it but his vows as a Zen priest and 
lineage holder of some variety forbids it. He invited me several
to sit with his group in Tempe. I explained that I had been there, 
done that, and had returned the t-shirt cuz I didn't like the fit. 
There is something about having somebody waiting to smack 
me with a stick that creeps me out. Theravadan practice better
suits my nature.   
 
http://www.jeffreymaitland.com/

Interesting guy. He helped me greatly. It is my understanding 
that there was a huge divisive split some years back in the 
Rolfing world over the purity of the teachings. Basically, 
Jeff was part of the vanguard that insisted that the strict 12
and only 12 step program of Rolfing that MUST always be 
performed in exactly the same order could and should be
modified to individuals. In short, learn the principles and then
think for yourselves rather than blindly following the connect 
dots teachings. Part of the modernizing of the method was that
they found proper results could be fully achieved without the
terrible pain that was often associated with the technique.
Gentle Rolfing. 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[PaliGap]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/273611

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@
wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@
  wrote:

 On the other hand, where I see things differently to you,
 is that I don't believe, as you say, that there are any *actual
 rules* that can be assigned to this thing we refer to as the
 scientific method.

 I don't understand you here. The method is a collection of rules.
 That is pretty much all it is. The variables come in when we
 apply them.

You would think so, but when it comes down to it, what ARE those rules?
I think folks have found that when they try to examine that idea
close-up, the ground seems to open up on them alarmingly. I 
wonder what rules you have in mind?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
  wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:

 These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
 to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
 
 1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
 valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
 disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
 describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
 this belief system.
 
 2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
 a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
 manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
 people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
 (Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
 in scriptures.)

False dichotomy.
   
   I wasn't presenting them as a dichotomy but as a place to
   start the discussion.
  
  As a place to start the discussion, it's inadequate
  because it leaves out a major perspective.
 
 Thus the term start.
 
  
There's a whole field of psychotherapy
in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
along with standard psychotherapy.
   
 
   So these are licensed mental health professionals who
   are using this model in their practice or spiritual
   people with psychotherapy training?
  
  I haven't checked their credentials, Curtis. I got the
  impression at least some of them were trained in
  psychotherapy and licensed and have chosen to use this
  approach in their practice.
  
   I wonder about the ethics if the first
  
  OMG, that is hilarious.
 
 People whose trust by the public is based on their credentials certified by 
 the state as a mental health authority adding in a field of speculation that 
 has no oversight or even standard definitions is a violation of the ethical 
 trust their position holds.  How you find this funny is beyond me.
 
  
   and the training basis for the second.
   
The two systems are seen as complementary, in other words.
The chakra experiences are assumed to be very real but can
be signs of mental disorders if they're causing distress,
but also of spiritual progress if they're not.
   
   I can understand that some people may believe this.  I am
   not sure they are speaking with the full authority of the
   people who license mental health professionals.
  
  As is this.
  
And how
   does a person know that they are dealing with an expert
   in the area of chakras?  There is no standard of
   knowledge to use as a reference.
   
   So I don't see how this solves the issues I brought up.
  
  I don't believe I suggested that it solves anything.
  Please don't put words in my mouth.
 
 Creating a combative perspective out of nothing.  
 
 Well at least you got to use an OMG. That must have been satisfying for you.
 
 
  
  
  
  
We are still left winging it with an area that seems to have 
  profound consequences in mental health.
   
   Do you have a person who from your search seems to represent the 
  needed knowledge in both areas that you think would inspire 
  confidence?  I don't doubt that a search will lead to plenty of 
  people making such claims. How could we evaluate such claims of 
  this specialized knowledge?
 


Curtis,
Word of mouth can work.

Acupuncture, network-chiropractic, cranial-sacral are three
credentialed disciplines that deal with the subtle energies and might 
be helpful to meditators having troubles with their subtle systems.
These disciplines certainly are about the subtle system and are progressed from 
faith-healing to the point where they are offered in hospitals, get doctor's 
referral and some insurance coverage now.  

Is work in process.
It seems chakras are coming.  Trivedi and John Douglas are both
getting themselves studied to the end of showing people
like you who are poor in experience with it and slow to accept that there is a 
reality there which other people do experience.

This evidently is work in progress within science. 
People certainly are using chakra energy work with good result.
There is a reality to that.  Word-of-mouth as, subtle energy work makes for a 
consumer's report until there is accreditation.   

A couple years ago at an academic science research conference Janet Sussman  
http://www.timeportalpubs.com/about.htm   gave a presentation on chakras.  A 
brain researcher there 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Apr 1, 2011, at 11:37 PM, seventhray1 wrote:

 Warning:  Grammatically Challenged Reply:
 
 I kind of get the impression that you are describing a very linear process.
 
For me it would be more like an experiential lab that a teacher went through, 
using themselves as the experiment and the experimenter. They learn by living 
it and then share. It's not a living tradition if awakening isn't passed on.
   And my experience on what I would call the spiritual journey has been 
 anything but.  And the one thing I don't, or won't do is doubt my experience.
 

For me, discrimination is key, as self-deception and ego expansion are so 
common. It's so common to project the most exalted beliefs onto the most 
inconsequential experiences. That is, sadly, just human nature.
   I don't care if I'm stuck in some pseudo/shallow samadhi during meditation, 
 or if I am stuck on some relative plane with little chance of progressing in 
 my outer life.  I am enjoying the ride, and I try to live in the present.  I 
 trust my experience, and it has been my teacher.
 

I trust my experience some of the time and other times I do not. The path if 
anything has shown how the ego works.
   Whether I have a formal teacher doesn't matter to me.  Sometimes I get the 
 impression that the credentials of your teachers mean more than the 
 experiences you might have. 
 

We were discussing teachers. I just won't tolerate phonies or businessmen 
disguised as gurus anymore. Of course experience and the hundreds of 
realizations one will have are very important, self deception (other than 
learning what it is and how it operates) isn't that important, or blabbing 
about them out of context. That's been the crux of my own training.
 What I would never do is try to pick apart my experinece and determine if the 
 faculty of intuition that has been the foremost principle for me is based on 
 the highest teaching, or something lesser.  On the other hand, whatever you 
 are doing seems to work for you.
 
 And I guess you must have taken a pretty big bite out of the TM apple because 
 if you would have just looked at it, and walked away, I don't  think you 
 would be such a heavy poster on this site.  Having said that, I mostly enjoy 
 your insights.  But you seem to take a more formal, or academic approach 
 which doesn't really appeal to me.
 
 

Compared to my fellow practitioners, some of who are actual academics or 
scholars, I'm not much so. From what I can tell I'm a typical married tantric 
in a lot of ways. But I am informed. 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Apr 2, 2011, at 12:03 AM, Yifu wrote:

 Vetting by resume can be helpful, but the bottom line: direct experience. 
 Vaj's family judged the book by the cover and thus missed out on something; a 
 frequent happenstance among intellectual elites who fail to take the plunge.  
 The Skeptic Michael Shermer is a typical example, although he did have some 
 experience as an Evangelical Christian before becoming a athiest.


They realized he was a conman, long before most did.

I'd say they were pretty insightful.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 
  These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
  to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
  
  1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
  valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
  disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
  describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
  this belief system.
  
  2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
  a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
  manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
  people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
  (Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
  in scriptures.)
 
 False dichotomy.

I wasn't presenting them as a dichotomy but as a place to
start the discussion.
   
   As a place to start the discussion, it's inadequate
   because it leaves out a major perspective.
  
  Thus the term start.
  
   
 There's a whole field of psychotherapy
 in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
 various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
 se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
 seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
 as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
 along with standard psychotherapy.

  
So these are licensed mental health professionals who
are using this model in their practice or spiritual
people with psychotherapy training?
   
   I haven't checked their credentials, Curtis. I got the
   impression at least some of them were trained in
   psychotherapy and licensed and have chosen to use this
   approach in their practice.
   
I wonder about the ethics if the first
   
   OMG, that is hilarious.
  
  People whose trust by the public is based on their
  credentials certified by the state as a mental health
  authority adding in a field of speculation that has
  no oversight or even standard definitions is a
  violation of the ethical trust their position holds.
  How you find this funny is beyond me.
 
 It's funny because you don't know what the hell you're
 talking about.

Your point adds to the discussion which I appreciate.  The attitude that comes 
along with that addition, not so much.  Ignoring that...

For me the question does come down to ethics. And although you are focusing on 
the more freewheeling psychotherapy I was including all mental health 
professionals including psychiatrists.  Your point is that there is no legal 
oversight over psychotherapists and it is left up to them what is ethical.  
Point taken. I don't know which states would actually call a person out if they 
felt the practices had gotten too wacky or got complaints.  But again this is 
more of a legalistic side.  The boards only go so far to insure that a person 
had been properly licensed.  You seem to be equating ethics with enforceable 
legality.  I am not.  Someone may have the legal right to do something that is 
still unethical in my view.

For me, using a thoery that is as contradictory in its details from different 
sources would be unethical.  Vaj has made a case that someone could gain 
experiences from a person who themselves can show where they learned it seems 
like a step in the right direction.  I wonder about the actual exposure to 
chakra thoery of anyone combining it in their practice.  These are ethical 
questions that remain.

 
 From an article on the standard of care in psychotherapy
 and counseling (be good to read the introduction too,
 but the quoted paragraphs are specifically relevant here):
 
 -
 The standard of care is a particularly difficult
 issue in psychotherapy, as there are hundreds of 
 different orientations and approaches to treatment 
 (Lambert, 1991). Each is based on a different 
 theoretical orientation, a different methodology, 
 philosophy, belief system and even worldview. Beyond 
 the agreements of do not harm, and do not have sex 
 with current clients, and always respect clients' 
 dignity, autonomy and privacy, there is no consensus 
 on how to intervene, help or heal. For example there 
 is no one standard, or method or way for the 
 treatment of anxiety. Psychoanalysis, cognitive-
 behavioral, existential, biologically based 
 psychiatry, Gestalt and pastoral counseling all 
 define, explain and treat the anxiety in very 
 different terms. Not one of them will follow the 
 others' standards
 
 The respected minority doctrine also applies to 
 new techniques, which as yet do not have well 
 established scientific or research support.  This 
 provision allows for new or experimental 
 psychotherapeutic techniques to be carefully, 
 cautiously and ethically employed even though the 
 theories and/or practices are still being developed 
 and tested. Most successful 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote:



Curtis,
Word of mouth can work.

To spread misinformation as well as good information.  As social creatures we 
are inordinately swayed in our beliefs by this.

Acupuncture, network-chiropractic, cranial-sacral are three
credentialed disciplines that deal with the subtle energies and might
be helpful to meditators having troubles with their subtle systems.
These disciplines certainly are about the subtle system and are progressed from
faith-healing to the point where they are offered in hospitals, get doctor's
referral and some insurance coverage now.


Interesting point about the growth of science.  How do we  test new ideas and 
sort them out from ideas that are bad ones.  Not a clean process.


Is work in process.
It seems chakras are coming. Trivedi and John Douglas are both
getting themselves studied to the end of showing people
like you who are poor in experience with it and slow to accept that there is a
reality there which other people do experience.

Are you aware that people can believe they are experiencing things that are in 
fact imagined?  Do you take all faith healers at face value?  If you don't buy 
someone's claim do you believe you are just poor in experience?  You are 
making these evaluations just as I am Doug.  You are deciding that some ideas 
are better or more substantiated than others.  We may just be coming from a 
different standard of what we leave in or what we take out.  The kind of 
experience you are talking about is highly overrated IMO.


This evidently is work in progress within science.
People certainly are using chakra energy work with good result.
There is a reality to that. Word-of-mouth as, subtle energy work makes for a
consumer's report until there is accreditation.

Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated to its psycological 
sway over its epistemological validity.  Big problem in advancing our 
knowledge.  We suck at evaluating claims and tend to overestimate our ability 
to do so.  It is as big a problem for me as it is for you.


A couple years ago at an academic science research conference Janet Sussman
http://www.timeportalpubs.com/about.htm gave a presentation on chakras. A
brain researcher there measured and collected her while she did her energy work
and it pegged the meters. Academically this is the work this guy is doing ,
measuring 'healers'. Evidently there is a reality there by experience. Science
is catching up. Credentials likely will come in time.

Why give any value to the process of science if you are not going to actually 
evaluate claims in light of the most obvious principles?  You seem content to 
use it if it appears to support a belief, but unwilling to use it if it reveals 
your actual lack of support of beliefs.

dents in the energetic bodies  I'm gunna leave it at that.


 MUM does
not have to endorse them. People can certainly check them out. However, by
experience it could be very useful to some meditators. An affliction with
meditators can be that while their mental fields are opened they are not
necessarily open or connected at all in their body energy fields. It makes for
a tough dis-integrated receptacle to have spiritual experience in generally.
There's a reality to that.

Not by just asserting it as true as you are doing.  I get the appeal of 
anecdotal evidence within a small community.  I am subject to this influence 
too.  We need to study how it impedes our quest for truth if we are sincere.  
We need to be ready to be wrong a lot about things that FEEL sooo right. 


Some people can be very helpful (knowledgeable) with this kind of problem and
have a lot of experience with it in the different ways it manifests.


We are obviously working from a different choice of proof systems.  While you 
view me as poor in experience I view you as using science as a convenience to 
add credibility to claims without really respecting its methods.  Fair enough 
at least we are chatting about those differences.





 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
   curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
   wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
   curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 
  These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
  to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
  
  1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
  valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
  disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
  describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
  this belief system.
  
  2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
  a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 
 -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
 
 
 
 Curtis,
 Word of mouth can work.
 
 To spread misinformation as well as good information.  As social creatures we 
 are inordinately swayed in our beliefs by this.
 
 Acupuncture, network-chiropractic, cranial-sacral are three
 credentialed disciplines that deal with the subtle energies and might
 be helpful to meditators having troubles with their subtle systems.
 These disciplines certainly are about the subtle system and are progressed 
 from 
 faith-healing to the point where they are offered in hospitals, get doctor's
 referral and some insurance coverage now.
 
 
 Interesting point about the growth of science.  How do we  test new ideas and 
 sort them out from ideas that are bad ones.  Not a clean process.
 

Insurance companies help. Mine has a huge list of alternative modalities, cites 
research on them, and approves those that have have scientific support for 
effectiveness. They approve my visits to a chiropractor. And they approve 
acupuncture if the symptom is pain. (So I said, hey, my Pain Body is flaring 
up, I need acupuncture for pain relief.). 

Rolfing is not (yet) approved.  On one of the BatGap interviews, a woman said 
she gave and received a lot of energy work before and after unfoldment. And 
cited Rolfing (thats different from Ralphing) as a method for huge release of 
emotional (pain body) energy stored in ones muscles (and perhaps subtle body 
parts associated with muscles.) I know Rolfing was popular among some TM 
teachers in the early 70's. Anyone tried it recently? Effects?  
 
 Is work in process.
 It seems chakras are coming. Trivedi and John Douglas are both
 getting themselves studied to the end of showing people
 like you who are poor in experience with it and slow to accept that there is a
 reality there which other people do experience.
 
 Are you aware that people can believe they are experiencing things that are 
 in fact imagined?  Do you take all faith healers at face value?  If you don't 
 buy someone's claim do you believe you are just poor in experience?  You 
 are making these evaluations just as I am Doug.  You are deciding that some 
 ideas are better or more substantiated than others.  We may just be coming 
 from a different standard of what we leave in or what we take out.  The kind 
 of experience you are talking about is highly overrated IMO.
 
 
 This evidently is work in progress within science.
 People certainly are using chakra energy work with good result.
 There is a reality to that. Word-of-mouth as, subtle energy work makes for a
 consumer's report until there is accreditation.
 
 Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated to its psycological 
 sway over its epistemological validity.  Big problem in advancing our 
 knowledge.  We suck at evaluating claims and tend to overestimate our ability 
 to do so.  It is as big a problem for me as it is for you.
 
 
 A couple years ago at an academic science research conference Janet Sussman
 http://www.timeportalpubs.com/about.htm gave a presentation on chakras. A
 brain researcher there measured and collected her while she did her energy 
 work
 and it pegged the meters. Academically this is the work this guy is doing ,
 measuring 'healers'. Evidently there is a reality there by experience. Science
 is catching up. Credentials likely will come in time.
 
 Why give any value to the process of science if you are not going to actually 
 evaluate claims in light of the most obvious principles?  You seem content to 
 use it if it appears to support a belief, but unwilling to use it if it 
 reveals your actual lack of support of beliefs.
 
 

While I generally agree with your POV and points, I am also greatly humbled by 
the vast amounts of things science does not know and/or doesn't have the tools 
to detect. (Dark matter, dark energy, the vastness beyond what Hubble has given 
us, a cure for the common cold, what women really want, the 10^28 different 
states that arise in any human given different patterns of neuronic 
connections, who shot JR, and why one sox is always missing after doing 
laundry, all come to mind). For me, thinking that science has anywhere near all 
the answers is mass hubris.  

dents in the energetic bodies  I'm gunna leave it at that.
 
 
  MUM does
 not have to endorse them. People can certainly check them out. However, by
 experience it could be very useful to some meditators. An affliction with
 meditators can be that while their mental fields are opened they are not
 necessarily open or connected at all in their body energy fields. It makes for
 a tough dis-integrated receptacle to have spiritual experience in generally.
 There's a reality to that.

Some of it, for me, is having a model of how things work in mind, may be 
hypotheses, may be more established empirically, and doing things that are 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Apr 2, 2011, at 11:20 AM, tartbrain wrote:

 Rolfing is not (yet) approved.  On one of the BatGap interviews, a woman said 
 she gave and received a lot of energy work before and after unfoldment. And 
 cited Rolfing (thats different from Ralphing) as a method for huge release 
 of emotional (pain body) energy stored in ones muscles (and perhaps subtle 
 body parts associated with muscles.) I know Rolfing was popular among some TM 
 teachers in the early 70's. Anyone tried it recently? Effects? 

Eva Reich, Wilhelm's daughter, was a friend of ours and she guided me into this 
type of work, which really originated with her father as Orgonomy. Ida Rolf was 
one of WR's students. So I went through the entire rolfing sequence, guided by 
advice from Eva. I found it extremely helpful in gaining a self sustaining 
root relaxation for my body and my energy.

Apparently rolfing can be quite painful for some people, esp. the levels which 
work with releasing the psoas muscle but I really enjoyed it thoroughly.

A great and entertaining read on this type of deep body work is Orson Bean's 
Me and the Orgone. Often hilarious and deeply inspirational.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:
...

 Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated
 to its psycological sway over its epistemological validity. 

I suspect I'm inadvertently channeling Card here, but what
is the difference between the above and the following:

Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated
to its psychological sway over its validity.

What does epistemological add?

Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. Justificationism
i.e. the idea that 'we should believe in only those things
for which we have good supporting evidence' is just one
school or theory of Epistemology. 

Epistemological validity seems to me to be close to an
oxymoron in that Epistemology is the theory of validity,
not a standard for validity. 

I am being picky. But isn't that the oxygen on which
words, concepts, discussions thrive? In the same way
as a guitarist will be ***picky*** about keeping her
guitar in tune?...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@... 
wrote:

Always good to consider an edit for simplification especially with a 
potentially pretentious word like epistemological.  In most conversations I 
would not use it. But here on FFL life some posters like Doug use a system for 
assessing validity that is outside the methods accepted by the field.  So in 
this case I am making clear where I am coming from.  Doug likes to use some of 
the terminology of the epistemology of the scientific method while ignoring its 
actual rules in favor of a subjective valuation.

I would say that, for me, figuring out where a person is coming from in their 
relationship to epistemological standards is key for understanding the 
perspective of the poster.  That includes myself since I am often guilty of 
failing to apply them rigorously. 

I don't consider your point picky at all.  I welcome any challenge to justify 
me using the E word!




 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 ...
 
  Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated
  to its psycological sway over its epistemological validity. 
 
 I suspect I'm inadvertently channeling Card here, but what
 is the difference between the above and the following:
 
 Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated
 to its psychological sway over its validity.
 
 What does epistemological add?
 
 Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. Justificationism
 i.e. the idea that 'we should believe in only those things
 for which we have good supporting evidence' is just one
 school or theory of Epistemology. 
 
 Epistemological validity seems to me to be close to an
 oxymoron in that Epistemology is the theory of validity,
 not a standard for validity. 
 
 I am being picky. But isn't that the oxygen on which
 words, concepts, discussions thrive? In the same way
 as a guitarist will be ***picky*** about keeping her
 guitar in tune?...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
 curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
snip
   People whose trust by the public is based on their
   credentials certified by the state as a mental health
   authority adding in a field of speculation that has
   no oversight or even standard definitions is a
   violation of the ethical trust their position holds.
   How you find this funny is beyond me.
  
  It's funny because you don't know what the hell you're
  talking about.
 
 Your point adds to the discussion which I appreciate.
 The attitude that comes along with that addition, not
 so much.

Yeah, well, my objection is to *your* attitude as
expressed above, that you're somehow qualified to
evaluate the ethics of practitioners in a field of
which you have little knowledge.

 Ignoring that...
 
 For me the question does come down to ethics. And although
 you are focusing on the more freewheeling psychotherapy I
 was including all mental health professionals including 
 psychiatrists.

I don't think there would be many psychiatrists doing
chakra therapy. In any case, since they're MDs, they'd
be subject to a different set of requirements.

 Your point is that there is no legal oversight over 
 psychotherapists and it is left up to them what is ethical.

Again, that's only with regard to approach. Do not harm,
and do not have sex with current clients, and always
respect clients' dignity, autonomy and privacy are
absolute ethical requirements for psychotherapists.

 Point taken. I don't know which states would actually call
 a person out if they felt the practices had gotten too
 wacky or got complaints.

If there were complaints, in any state, they'd be
investigated, and if the complaints were deemed valid,
the therapist would be called out. But if clients are
satisfied and feel they've been helped, wackiness per
se would likely not set off any alarms. (Complaints
might come from families or even friends or conceivably
employers if the client didn't appear to them to have
been helped, however, no matter how happy the client
was with the therapy.)

 But again this is more of a legalistic side.  The boards
 only go so far to insure that a person had been properly
 licensed.  You seem to be equating ethics with enforceable 
 legality.  I am not.  Someone may have the legal right to
 do something that is still unethical in my view.

Well, we all have different views as to what we consider
ethical. Some might consider that medicating a client as
the sole treatment is unethical, for example. Some might
think the whole disease model of psychotherapy is
unethical. That's basically what the quotes I posted were
trying to get across, that even within the profession
there's little agreement. And I'd suggest that the views of
laypersons as to what is and isn't ethical cover an even
broader range and are clearly not as well informed.

 For me, using a thoery that is as contradictory in its
 details from different sources would be unethical.  Vaj
 has made a case that someone could gain experiences from
 a person who themselves can show where they learned it
 seems like a step in the right direction.

I looked at a few Web sites of chakra therapists, and
they all gave a precis of the therapist's experience and
background with regard to chakras.

In any case, I'd suggest that the appropriate criterion
is not whether details from different sources are in
accord, but whether clients are helped. That's very
different from the medical model, of necessity, because
the process is so much more subjective.

Client A might find working with Therapist X, who uses
one set of details, more helpful than working with
Therapist Y, who uses a different set. With Client B,
it might be the reverse. Is there an ethical issue
here?

An editing client of mine with whom I later became
friends was a psychotherapist. She had devised her own
method of therapy and claimed (to me, don't know if she
ever told her clients) she received guidance in 
applying it from certain discarnate entities. I don't
think she was licensed, and I don't recall where she
received training, but she had quite a bit, including
in Gestalt and Rolfing. Don't think she used chakras
specifically, but she would have been familiar with
the theory.

In any case, she had more clients than she could
handle, many of whom practically worshipped her
because of what they felt she had done for them. She
was constantly getting referrals and would have to
turn some of them down because her schedule was
aready full.

By the time I made her acquaintance, she was in her
60s, with decades of work behind her, and she
continued seeing clients well into her 80s. Far as
I'm aware, she never had a complaint filed against her.
Is there an ethical issue here?

 I wonder about the actual exposure to chakra thoery
 of anyone combining it in their practice.  These are
 ethical questions that remain.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 ...
 
  Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated
  to its psycological sway over its epistemological validity. 
 
 I suspect I'm inadvertently channeling Card here, but what
 is the difference between the above and the following:
 
 Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated
 to its psychological sway over its validity.
 
 What does epistemological add?

Use of redundant words, that is dual words, is well, clear duality. And is thus 
non-duality trap #47. No, wait Eva green already has 40-60. So it is trap 67.

 
 Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. Justificationism
 i.e. the idea that 'we should believe in only those things
 for which we have good supporting evidence' is just one
 school or theory of Epistemology. 
 
 Epistemological validity seems to me to be close to an
 oxymoron in that Epistemology is the theory of validity,
 not a standard for validity. 
 
 I am being picky. But isn't that the oxygen on which
 words, concepts, discussions thrive? In the same way
 as a guitarist will be ***picky*** about keeping her
 guitar in tune?...

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
   
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 snip
People whose trust by the public is based on their
credentials certified by the state as a mental health
authority adding in a field of speculation that has
no oversight or even standard definitions is a
violation of the ethical trust their position holds.
How you find this funny is beyond me.
   
   It's funny because you don't know what the hell you're
   talking about.
  
  Your point adds to the discussion which I appreciate.
  The attitude that comes along with that addition, not
  so much.
 
 Yeah, well, my objection is to *your* attitude as
 expressed above, that you're somehow qualified to
 evaluate the ethics of practitioners in a field of
 which you have little knowledge.

Well if that is the new standard then  I'll look forward to seeing your posts 
restricted to editing in the future.I seriously doubt you have any more insight 
into the validity of chakra knowledge than I do.


 
  Ignoring that...
  
  For me the question does come down to ethics. And although
  you are focusing on the more freewheeling psychotherapy I
  was including all mental health professionals including 
  psychiatrists.
 
 I don't think there would be many psychiatrists doing
 chakra therapy. In any case, since they're MDs, they'd
 be subject to a different set of requirements.
 
  Your point is that there is no legal oversight over 
  psychotherapists and it is left up to them what is ethical.
 
 Again, that's only with regard to approach. Do not harm,
 and do not have sex with current clients, and always
 respect clients' dignity, autonomy and privacy are
 absolute ethical requirements for psychotherapists.
 
  Point taken. I don't know which states would actually call
  a person out if they felt the practices had gotten too
  wacky or got complaints.
 
 If there were complaints, in any state, they'd be
 investigated, and if the complaints were deemed valid,
 the therapist would be called out. But if clients are
 satisfied and feel they've been helped, wackiness per
 se would likely not set off any alarms. (Complaints
 might come from families or even friends or conceivably
 employers if the client didn't appear to them to have
 been helped, however, no matter how happy the client
 was with the therapy.)
 
  But again this is more of a legalistic side.  The boards
  only go so far to insure that a person had been properly
  licensed.  You seem to be equating ethics with enforceable 
  legality.  I am not.  Someone may have the legal right to
  do something that is still unethical in my view.
 
 Well, we all have different views as to what we consider
 ethical. Some might consider that medicating a client as
 the sole treatment is unethical, for example. Some might
 think the whole disease model of psychotherapy is
 unethical. That's basically what the quotes I posted were
 trying to get across, that even within the profession
 there's little agreement. And I'd suggest that the views of
 laypersons as to what is and isn't ethical cover an even
 broader range and are clearly not as well informed.

I think I am more well informed about what might constitute reliable knowledge 
than some of the wackier therapists.  That is my complaint with them.  It has 
been my experience with the whole medical profession that they are not trained 
in good thinking skills in medical school so I need to participate in any 
decisions for therapy that concerns my health.  They are just as subject to 
thinking to cognitive errors as any of us and seem clueless that this is a 
factor to consider.

 
  For me, using a thoery that is as contradictory in its
  details from different sources would be unethical.  Vaj
  has made a case that someone could gain experiences from
  a person who themselves can show where they learned it
  seems like a step in the right direction.
 
 I looked at a few Web sites of chakra therapists, and
 they all gave a precis of the therapist's experience and
 background with regard to chakras.
 
 In any case, I'd suggest that the appropriate criterion
 is not whether details from different sources are in
 accord, but whether clients are helped. That's very
 different from the medical model, of necessity, because
 the process is so much more subjective.
 
 Client A might find working with Therapist X, who uses
 one set of details, more helpful than working with
 Therapist Y, who uses a different set. With Client B,
 it might be the reverse. Is there an ethical issue
 here?

The only test I have seen that compared therapies seemed to suggest that the 
only measurable quality that related with outcome satisfaction with the therapy 
was the rapport the patient has with the therapist.  I guess it all depends on 
what we are talking about.  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@ 
 wrote:
 
 Always good to consider an edit for simplification especially with a 
 potentially pretentious word like epistemological.  In most conversations I 
 would not use it. But here on FFL life some posters like Doug use a system 
 for assessing validity that is outside the methods accepted by the field.  So 
 in this case I am making clear where I am coming from.  Doug likes to use 
 some of the terminology of the epistemology of the scientific method while 
 ignoring its actual rules in favor of a subjective valuation.
 
 I would say that, for me, figuring out where a person is coming from in their 
 relationship to epistemological standards is key for understanding the 
 perspective of the poster.  That includes myself since I am often guilty of 
 failing to apply them rigorously. 
 
 I don't consider your point picky at all.  I welcome any challenge to justify 
 me using the E word!

That's generous of you - I sometimes wonder whether
my interest in such things is a bit, well, 'maladjusted'
or some such! ;-)

I would come back to a point though which I feel something
for. You say, for example, 'Doug likes to use some of the
terminology of the epistemology of the scientific method
while ignoring its actual rules...'

I see where you're coming from there (and sympathise). 

On the other hand, where I see things differently to you,
is that I don't believe, as you say, that there are any *actual
rules* that can be assigned to this thing we refer to as the
scientific method.

Given the huge role played by this idea of the scientific
method in our culture, in our time, in our psyches, I take
this consequence to be hugely significant.

It's as if, for many people, the previous ages' certainties
of Religion have been replaced by a belief in Science. It is
the opium of the atheists. And this faith in Science is, at
rock bottom, a faith in method - in other words an epistemological
view (back to our word!).

How I see it though is that all attempts to *grasp* this method
(especially as a set of rules) fail. You might say it's a story
started by David Hume, then a rearguard action from Kant followed
by the 19th  20th century positivists, then severely disrupted
by Peirce, Duhem, Popper, Kuhn, Feyarabend et. al.

Where that leaves us (IMO) is that, whether or not Science 
works, (it obviously does to an extent!), HOW it works is
something of a deep mystery. It's NOT reducible to a set 
of rules. 

And I find that intriguing!

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@... wrote:

Many fascinating points!  I'll comment below.

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, PaliGap compost1uk@ 
  wrote:
  
  Always good to consider an edit for simplification especially with a 
  potentially pretentious word like epistemological.  In most conversations 
  I would not use it. But here on FFL life some posters like Doug use a 
  system for assessing validity that is outside the methods accepted by the 
  field.  So in this case I am making clear where I am coming from.  Doug 
  likes to use some of the terminology of the epistemology of the scientific 
  method while ignoring its actual rules in favor of a subjective valuation.
  
  I would say that, for me, figuring out where a person is coming from in 
  their relationship to epistemological standards is key for understanding 
  the perspective of the poster.  That includes myself since I am often 
  guilty of failing to apply them rigorously. 
  
  I don't consider your point picky at all.  I welcome any challenge to 
  justify me using the E word!
 
 That's generous of you - I sometimes wonder whether
 my interest in such things is a bit, well, 'maladjusted'
 or some such! ;-)
 
 I would come back to a point though which I feel something
 for. You say, for example, 'Doug likes to use some of the
 terminology of the epistemology of the scientific method
 while ignoring its actual rules...'
 
 I see where you're coming from there (and sympathise). 
 
 On the other hand, where I see things differently to you,
 is that I don't believe, as you say, that there are any *actual
 rules* that can be assigned to this thing we refer to as the
 scientific method.

I don't understand you here.  The method is a collection of rules.  That is 
pretty much all it is.  The variables come in when we apply them.
 
 Given the huge role played by this idea of the scientific
 method in our culture, in our time, in our psyches, I take
 this consequence to be hugely significant.

Not understanding its values and limitations is a big problem in society.  

 
 It's as if, for many people, the previous ages' certainties
 of Religion have been replaced by a belief in Science. It is
 the opium of the atheists. And this faith in Science is, at
 rock bottom, a faith in method - in other words an epistemological
 view (back to our word!).

I'm not sure faith is the right term.  I would use earned confidence. As far as 
sciences relationship to, atheism is concerned I don't believe it is my opium.  
More like my cup of coffee!  And I do not limit my own confidence to things 
which happen to be easy to apply the scientific method to.  I believe that we 
can know things in lots of different ways and some things are not well suited 
to that kind of analysis.  The arts give us a completely different lens to view 
our lives through but they are no less valuable for their lack of application 
of the scientific method.  But many claims made in spiritual systems are in 
fact stated in a falsifiable form so the method can help sort fact from fantasy.

It certainly was not the application of the scientific method that led me away 
from believing in any of the God myths I am aware of as being literally true. 
It had more to do with studying the history of ideas and reading the scriptures 
and asking myself, how would I know if this was true?  What is the proof system 
being offered for these assertions?  Some scriptures, like the New Testiment, 
use fragments of the evidence methods contained in the scientific method 
because these are natural ways for people to test credibility and were only 
formalized recently in history.  But you see the attempts at using things like 
consensus among witnesses just as we do here on FFL.  And just like here they 
are used unconvincingly to me often times.

 
 How I see it though is that all attempts to *grasp* this method
 (especially as a set of rules) fail. You might say it's a story
 started by David Hume, then a rearguard action from Kant followed
 by the 19th  20th century positivists, then severely disrupted
 by Peirce, Duhem, Popper, Kuhn, Feyarabend et. al.
 
 Where that leaves us (IMO) is that, whether or not Science 
 works, (it obviously does to an extent!), HOW it works is
 something of a deep mystery. It's NOT reducible to a set 
 of rules. 

I think we know why some of the rules work.  You may be transcending my level 
of theoretical analysis.  Philosophy has a way of challenging some basic 
tenants that we take for granted in how we actually live our lives and test 
ideas in the real world.  I see the scientific method to be useful in making 
fewer mistakes not eliminating them.  I'll certainly read anything you care to 
write expanding this topic.  I would welcome the mental stretch.

 
 And I find that intriguing!

Being intrigued with theoretical topics is such a 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
snip
 People whose trust by the public is based on their
 credentials certified by the state as a mental health
 authority adding in a field of speculation that has
 no oversight or even standard definitions is a
 violation of the ethical trust their position holds.
 How you find this funny is beyond me.

It's funny because you don't know what the hell you're
talking about.
   
   Your point adds to the discussion which I appreciate.
   The attitude that comes along with that addition, not
   so much.
  
  Yeah, well, my objection is to *your* attitude as
  expressed above, that you're somehow qualified to
  evaluate the ethics of practitioners in a field of
  which you have little knowledge.
 
 Well if that is the new standard then  I'll look forward
 to seeing your posts restricted to editing in the future.
 I seriously doubt you have any more insight into the
 validity of chakra knowledge than I do.

I meant the field of psychotherapy in general. I don't
have any insights at all into the validity of chakra
therapy, nor did I claim to. But I do know enough about
the field of psychotherapy, just from reading and
observation (and plain common sense), to be aware that
there are far too many different approaches being used
besides those that are mainstream for a layperson to
state with assurance that their use by a licensed
practitioner violates any ethical trust.

I was pretty sure that state boards wouldn't have any
say in what approaches were permissible on an ethical
basis either, went and checked, and found I was correct
(the quotes I posted).

snip
   But again this is more of a legalistic side.  The boards
   only go so far to insure that a person had been properly
   licensed.  You seem to be equating ethics with enforceable 
   legality.  I am not.  Someone may have the legal right to
   do something that is still unethical in my view.
  
  Well, we all have different views as to what we consider
  ethical. Some might consider that medicating a client as
  the sole treatment is unethical, for example. Some might
  think the whole disease model of psychotherapy is
  unethical. That's basically what the quotes I posted were
  trying to get across, that even within the profession
  there's little agreement. And I'd suggest that the views of
  laypersons as to what is and isn't ethical cover an even
  broader range and are clearly not as well informed.
 
 I think I am more well informed about what might 
 constitute reliable knowledge than some of the wackier
 therapists.  That is my complaint with them.  It has
 been my experience with the whole medical profession
 that they are not trained in good thinking skills in
 medical school so I need to participate in any
 decisions for therapy that concerns my health.  They
 are just as subject to thinking to cognitive errors
 as any of us and seem clueless that this is a factor
 to consider.

I don't disagree, but is this what you call an ethical
issue??

snip
 The only test I have seen that compared therapies seemed
 to suggest that the only measurable quality that related
 with outcome satisfaction with the therapy was the rapport
 the patient has with the therapist.

Exactly, as I went on to say.

 I guess it all depends on what we are talking about.
 Some of the psychiatric conditions that seem to appear
 in people who attribute the symptoms to chakras seem
 to be severe enough that egging them on that this is a
 natural growth would be as unethical as telling a
 person YES, there is a demon inside you.

I don't know that anybody, client or therapist,
attributes the symptoms to chakras. And I have not
gotten the impression from anything I've read about
chakra therapy that clients are egged on that this
is a natural growth.

Rather, it seems that negative chakra experiences are
viewed as a reflection in the physical/energetic system
of the psychiatric condition, and that they represent
something *having gone wrong* with natural growth
that needs to be attended to and put back on track.

Not really all that much different from, say, various
physical pains that don't have an organic cause, i.e.,
negative chakra experiences involve somatization of
psychological disturbance.

  An editing client of mine with whom I later became
  friends was a psychotherapist. She had devised her own
  method of therapy and claimed (to me, don't know if she
  ever told her clients) she received guidance in 
  applying it from certain discarnate entities. I don't
  think she was licensed, and I don't recall where she
  received training, but she had quite a bit, including
  in Gestalt and Rolfing. Don't think she used chakras
  specifically, but she would have been familiar with
  the theory.
  
  In any 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[shanti2218411]

   FWIW anxiety is a sx of many different psychological disorders.
   The tx  of anxiety would largely be based on what the underlying 
   disorder is.A simple phobia would be treated in much different 
   fashion than would the anxiety that is associated with a terminal 
   illness.A considerable amount of research has been done on what 
   are the most effective treatments for various disorders.With 
   respect to phobias repeated exposure to the stimuli that
   generates the phobic behavior is clearly the most well supported 
   form of treatment.To treat phobias with another form of therapy 
   (e.g. psychodynamic therapy)would in IMO be unethical especially   
   if the client were not advised of the fact that the behavioral
   treatment would much more likely result in a successful outcome.
   OTOH, anxiety associated with a personality disorder is much 
   more problematic to treat.However, what research that has been
   done would suggest that more comprehensive forms of therapy, 
   e.g. schema therapy/dialectical behavior therapy,are more likely
   to help with more pervasive and developmentally based problems 
   such as personality disorders( that often have anxiety as a sx).

   It seems to me mental health professionals who use forms of 
   therapy such as chakra therapy have an ethical and professional
   obligation to identify a clear theoretical framework and a body
   of evidence to support using it.Lacking the latter, they would at
   least have the obligation to explain to their clients that the 
   therapy they are using does not have research support and is not
   based on well established psychological models.As an aside while
   I have had experiences which supported the impression that
   chakras exist,I don't think a subtle energy model would make 
   much sense to most people.I do think this might be a good model
   for people who already subscribe to a worldview that includes the
   notion of subtle energy or chakras.I think the latter is the case 
   since helping people to understand why the are anxious very often
   helps to make them less anxious.
   
   





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
   curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 snip
  People whose trust by the public is based on their
  credentials certified by the state as a mental health
  authority adding in a field of speculation that has
  no oversight or even standard definitions is a
  violation of the ethical trust their position holds.
  How you find this funny is beyond me.
 
 It's funny because you don't know what the hell you're
 talking about.

Your point adds to the discussion which I appreciate.
The attitude that comes along with that addition, not
so much.
   
   Yeah, well, my objection is to *your* attitude as
   expressed above, that you're somehow qualified to
   evaluate the ethics of practitioners in a field of
   which you have little knowledge.
  
  Well if that is the new standard then  I'll look forward
  to seeing your posts restricted to editing in the future.
  I seriously doubt you have any more insight into the
  validity of chakra knowledge than I do.
 
 I meant the field of psychotherapy in general. I don't
 have any insights at all into the validity of chakra
 therapy, nor did I claim to. But I do know enough about
 the field of psychotherapy, just from reading and
 observation (and plain common sense), to be aware that
 there are far too many different approaches being used
 besides those that are mainstream for a layperson to
 state with assurance that their use by a licensed
 practitioner violates any ethical trust.
 
 I was pretty sure that state boards wouldn't have any
 say in what approaches were permissible on an ethical
 basis either, went and checked, and found I was correct
 (the quotes I posted).
 
 snip
But again this is more of a legalistic side.  The boards
only go so far to insure that a person had been properly
licensed.  You seem to be equating ethics with enforceable 
legality.  I am not.  Someone may have the legal right to
do something that is still unethical in my view.
   
   Well, we all have different views as to what we consider
   ethical. Some might consider that medicating a client as
   the sole treatment is unethical, for example. Some might
   think the whole disease model of psychotherapy is
   unethical. That's basically what the quotes I posted were
   trying to get across, that even within the profession
   there's little agreement. And I'd suggest that the views of
   laypersons as to what is and isn't ethical cover an even
   broader range and are clearly not as well informed.
  
  I think I am more well informed about what might 
  constitute 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shanti2218411 kc21d@... wrote:
snip
 It seems to me mental health professionals who use forms of 
 therapy such as chakra therapy have an ethical and professional
 obligation to identify a clear theoretical framework and a body
 of evidence to support using it.Lacking the latter, they would at
 least have the obligation to explain to their clients that the 
 therapy they are using does not have research support and is not
 based on well established psychological models.

I'd be in favor of that. It would apply to a whole host
of different therapies, though. It might also be good
to point out to the client that even the most mainstream
therapies were first used in the absence of a clear
theoretical framework or body of supportive evidence.
You have to start somewhere, in other words.

As an aside while
 I have had experiences which supported the impression that
 chakras exist,I don't think a subtle energy model would make 
 much sense to most people.I do think this might be a good model
 for people who already subscribe to a worldview that includes the
 notion of subtle energy or chakras.

I'd guess this is usually the case, that people who
go in for chakra therapy have some knowledge of it
and have found it appealing.


I think the latter is the case 
since helping people to understand why the are anxious very often
helps to make them less anxious.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 
 -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
 
 
 
 Curtis,
 Word of mouth can work.
 
 To spread misinformation as well as good information.  As social creatures we 
 are inordinately swayed in our beliefs by this.
 
 Acupuncture, network-chiropractic, cranial-sacral are three
 credentialed disciplines that deal with the subtle energies and might
 be helpful to meditators having troubles with their subtle systems.
 These disciplines certainly are about the subtle system and are progressed 
 from
 faith-healing to the point where they are offered in hospitals, get doctor's
 referral and some insurance coverage now.
 
 
 Interesting point about the growth of science.  How do we  test new ideas and 
 sort them out from ideas that are bad ones.  Not a clean process.
 
 
 Is work in process.
 It seems chakras are coming. Trivedi and John Douglas are both
 getting themselves studied to the end of showing people
 like you who are poor in experience with it and slow to accept that there is a
 reality there which other people do experience.
 
 Are you aware that people can believe they are experiencing things that are 
 in fact imagined?  Do you take all faith healers at face value?  If you don't 
 buy someone's claim do you believe you are just poor in experience?  You 
 are making these evaluations just as I am Doug.  You are deciding that some 
 ideas are better or more substantiated than others.  We may just be coming 
 from a different standard of what we leave in or what we take out.  The kind 
 of experience you are talking about is highly overrated IMO.
 
 
 This evidently is work in progress within science.
 People certainly are using chakra energy work with good result.
 There is a reality to that. Word-of-mouth as, subtle energy work makes for a
 consumer's report until there is accreditation.
 
 Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated to its psycological 
 sway over its epistemological validity.  Big problem in advancing our 
 knowledge.  We suck at evaluating claims and tend to overestimate our ability 
 to do so.  It is as big a problem for me as it is for you.
 
 
 A couple years ago at an academic science research conference Janet Sussman
 http://www.timeportalpubs.com/about.htm gave a presentation on chakras. A
 brain researcher there measured and collected her while she did her energy 
 work
 and it pegged the meters. Academically this is the work this guy is doing ,
 measuring 'healers'. Evidently there is a reality there by experience. Science
 is catching up. Credentials likely will come in time.
 
 Why give any value to the process of science if you are not going to actually 
 evaluate claims in light of the most obvious principles?  You seem content to 
 use it if it appears to support a belief, but unwilling to use it if it 
 reveals your actual lack of support of beliefs.
 
 dents in the energetic bodies  I'm gunna leave it at that.
 
 
  MUM does
 not have to endorse them. People can certainly check them out. However, by
 experience it could be very useful to some meditators. An affliction with
 meditators can be that while their mental fields are opened they are not
 necessarily open or connected at all in their body energy fields. It makes for
 a tough dis-integrated receptacle to have spiritual experience in generally.
 There's a reality to that.
 
 Not by just asserting it as true as you are doing.  I get the appeal of 
 anecdotal evidence within a small community.  I am subject to this influence 
 too.  We need to study how it impedes our quest for truth if we are sincere.  
 We need to be ready to be wrong a lot about things that FEEL sooo right. 
 
 
 Some people can be very helpful (knowledgeable) with this kind of problem and
 have a lot of experience with it in the different ways it manifests.
 
 
 We are obviously working from a different choice of proof systems.  While you 
 view me as poor in experience I view you as using science as a convenience 
 to add credibility to claims without really respecting its methods.  Fair 
 enough at least we are chatting about those differences.


Curtis, that's nice.  Actually there are folks in life here who have
apprenticed and done long time of experience in this very work.
It's not just the maha-saints and healers coming around like
Mother Meera, Ammachi, Karunamayi, John Douglas, Trivedi, others coming through 
and such.
In arguing against it, could you let your own (limited) epistemology hang other 
people up
from the experience of getting help with their own spiritual experience?
Would there be a time to cowboy up yourself if you'd be open to it (?). May be 
even leave your personal epistemologic strictures to experience more 
differently? On the recommendation, of a friend?

Anecdotal-ly,

Janet Sussman is one who was here in Fairfield quietly doing her work
in the meditating community for decades.  She has 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Buck]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote:

 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  
  -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
  
  
  
  Curtis,
  Word of mouth can work.
  
  To spread misinformation as well as good information.  As social creatures 
  we are inordinately swayed in our beliefs by this.
  
  Acupuncture, network-chiropractic, cranial-sacral are three
  credentialed disciplines that deal with the subtle energies and might
  be helpful to meditators having troubles with their subtle systems.
  These disciplines certainly are about the subtle system and are progressed 
  from
  faith-healing to the point where they are offered in hospitals, get doctor's
  referral and some insurance coverage now.
  
  
  Interesting point about the growth of science.  How do we  test new ideas 
  and sort them out from ideas that are bad ones.  Not a clean process.
  
  
  Is work in process.
  It seems chakras are coming. Trivedi and John Douglas are both
  getting themselves studied to the end of showing people
  like you who are poor in experience with it and slow to accept that there 
  is a
  reality there which other people do experience.
  
  Are you aware that people can believe they are experiencing things that are 
  in fact imagined?  Do you take all faith healers at face value?  If you 
  don't buy someone's claim do you believe you are just poor in experience? 
   You are making these evaluations just as I am Doug.  You are deciding that 
  some ideas are better or more substantiated than others.  We may just be 
  coming from a different standard of what we leave in or what we take out.  
  The kind of experience you are talking about is highly overrated IMO.
  
  
  This evidently is work in progress within science.
  People certainly are using chakra energy work with good result.
  There is a reality to that. Word-of-mouth as, subtle energy work makes 
  for a
  consumer's report until there is accreditation.
  
  Yes anecdotal evidence is compelling to those uneducated to its 
  psycological sway over its epistemological validity.  Big problem in 
  advancing our knowledge.  We suck at evaluating claims and tend to 
  overestimate our ability to do so.  It is as big a problem for me as it is 
  for you.
  
  
  A couple years ago at an academic science research conference Janet Sussman
  http://www.timeportalpubs.com/about.htm gave a presentation on chakras. A
  brain researcher there measured and collected her while she did her energy 
  work
  and it pegged the meters. Academically this is the work this guy is doing ,
  measuring 'healers'. Evidently there is a reality there by experience. 
  Science
  is catching up. Credentials likely will come in time.
  
  Why give any value to the process of science if you are not going to 
  actually evaluate claims in light of the most obvious principles?  You seem 
  content to use it if it appears to support a belief, but unwilling to use 
  it if it reveals your actual lack of support of beliefs.
  
  dents in the energetic bodies  I'm gunna leave it at that.
  
  
   MUM does
  not have to endorse them. People can certainly check them out. However, by
  experience it could be very useful to some meditators. An affliction with
  meditators can be that while their mental fields are opened they are not
  necessarily open or connected at all in their body energy fields. It makes 
  for
  a tough dis-integrated receptacle to have spiritual experience in generally.
  There's a reality to that.

MUM is a lot about meditating.  Evidently beyond checking meditations they 
could stand to be helpful otherwise too. 

  
  Not by just asserting it as true as you are doing.  I get the appeal of 
  anecdotal evidence within a small community.  I am subject to this 
  influence too.  We need to study how it impedes our quest for truth if we 
  are sincere.  We need to be ready to be wrong a lot about things that FEEL 
  sooo right. 
  
  
  Some people can be very helpful (knowledgeable) with this kind of problem 
  and
  have a lot of experience with it in the different ways it manifests.
  
  
  We are obviously working from a different choice of proof systems.  While 
  you view me as poor in experience I view you as using science as a 
  convenience to add credibility to claims without really respecting its 
  methods.  Fair enough at least we are chatting about those differences.
 
 
 Curtis, that's nice.  Actually there are folks in life here who have
 apprenticed and done long time of experience in this very work.
 It's not just the maha-saints and healers coming around like
 Mother Meera, Ammachi, Karunamayi, John Douglas, Trivedi, others coming 
 through and such.
 In arguing against it, could you let your own (limited) epistemology hang 
 other people up
 from the experience of getting help with their own spiritual experience?
 Would there be a time to 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Mar 31, 2011, at 7:06 PM, emptybill wrote:

We've been over this before.  In Buddhism, samaadhi means dharana  
while dhyana-samaapatti is absorption in meditation.


Transcendence is a western concept. In Sanskrit, the term  
(taraatitaa) is not officially used also (in Buddhism). Sometimes  
transcendence is used by western educated people as a synonym for  
Nirvana.


It would be different translations of two different words which are  
descriptive of the same experience of settling down in the thinking  
process.


The Sanskrit word for transcendental is bhavatita.

There are hundreds of types of samadhi but according to Tsongkhapa  
they all fall under the dual classification of quiesence and insight.  
Furthermore you can divide quiesence into discursive meditation and  
stabilizing meditation. TM style meditation would fall under the  
classification of quiesence, of which there are hundreds of kinds.


The two are complementary, as relying on quiesence or transcendence  
alone, one tends to get addicted to the thought-free states and to  
bliss. That's why in the Dzogchen four yogas, transcendence is  
dropped after it's result is stable, after a couple of weeks or so.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@... wrote:

 
 
 I would try askjeeeves.com.  It is probably a very common occurance, and
 jeeves can likely offer some sound advice about it.  Dear Jeeves, my
 kundalini is on fire and I am writhing around like a snake here at 3:00
 am.  Can you please give some advice on what to do.


Jeeves, not having been introduced to Yoga, would perhaps advice the poor 
fellow to eat more fish :-)


 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@
 wrote:
 
 
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote:
  
   I hope she's doing okay now. If you're having intense kundalini the
 last thing you want to do are asanas! She needed to go out and have an
 emergency hamburger or two!
 
 
  If your kundalini is on fire the last thing you WANT to do is asanas,
 but that's excactly what you should do. Hamburgers, not so much.
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[PaliGap]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@... wrote:
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@ wrote:
 
  
  
  I would try askjeeeves.com.  It is probably a very common occurance, and
  jeeves can likely offer some sound advice about it.  Dear Jeeves, my
  kundalini is on fire and I am writhing around like a snake here at 3:00
  am.  Can you please give some advice on what to do.
 
 Jeeves, not having been introduced to Yoga, would perhaps advice the poor 
 fellow to eat more fish :-)
 

No, Jeeves would confront Bertie's unstressing with his magic
potion: raw egg, Worcester sauce, and red pepper. As Jeeves puts
it: It is the Worcester sauce that gives it its colour. The raw
egg makes it nutritious. The red pepper gives it its bite.
Gentlemen have told me they have found it extremely invigorating
after a kundalini rush down at the Drones Club in Mayfair

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@... wrote:

These points are interesting to me.  There are two places to start that end in 
the same conclusion for me.

1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real, valuable and can be 
distinguished from the possible mental disorders in a patient who has studied 
these concepts and describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from this 
belief system.

2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is a sign of valuable 
spiritual progress and is a manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for 
some people a benign experience that we do not yet understand. (Not accepting 
the often contradictory explanations found in scriptures.)

Here are the problems I see.  First who has the training in both mental health 
and chakras to a level that there can be a definitive diagnosis of one or the 
other paradigm?  The Catholic church sends all exorcism cases to a psychiatrist 
first to rule out known mental disorders.  Is this how spiritual groups 
operate?  If not they are not in a knowledge position to distinguish the 
reported experiences from known mental conditions. As long as the experiences 
are not causing distress to the person this type of experience is usually just 
ignored by most mental health professionals anyway.

So we are left with a person trained in chakra knowledge to work with the 
person who is experiencing these things.  Due to the nature of the subjective 
detail and the downsides of bad advice (all within the belief system of the 
chakra experts) this kind of interaction is going to take some significant time.

So whether you believe these are valuable experiences or not, we have the 
bottom line problem.  The closest correlate to the time consuming interaction 
needed is the mental health field which is often paid for by insurance.  Who is 
going to finance the needed interaction with the experts of chakra 
knowldege?  I am assuming that there aren't a whole bunch of people who can 
step up and serve in this capacity so their time is extremely valuable.  Not to 
mention how we would actually sort out what makes someone qualified to offer 
this advice.

In any case the idea that TM teachers could offer this expertise in checking 
sessions is not realistic.  They are not trained in chakras or the ability to 
distinguish this class of experiences from mental problems.  Having checked the 
meditations of people who ended up with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, I can say 
that the checking procedure is not only insufficient for this class of person, 
it may be very dangerous and make the situation much worse.

So even if you are going to believe in this system of development, I can't see 
a realistic structure of professionals dealing with these people.  From my 
perspective I can only hope that TM or other practices are not plunging people 
into experiences for which there is no support structure or knowledge base to 
deal with them.






  






  




 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
 
  One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most
 interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about
 more guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM
 with this for people who would need help with that, besides meditating.
 It obviously was out of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by
 without touching it.
 
 
 Many of the world's great entrepreneurs begin by identifying an
 unserved, or underserved need and then addressing it.  So maybe this is
 your calling Dug.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Apr 1, 2011, at 12:10 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
Here are the problems I see.  First who has the training in both  
mental health and chakras to a level that there can be a definitive  
diagnosis of one or the other paradigm?  The Catholic church sends  
all exorcism cases to a psychiatrist first to rule out known mental  
disorders.  Is this how spiritual groups operate?  If not they are  
not in a knowledge position to distinguish the reported experiences  
from known mental conditions. As long as the experiences are not  
causing distress to the person this type of experience is usually  
just ignored by most mental health professionals anyway.


So we are left with a person trained in chakra knowledge to work  
with the person who is experiencing these things.  Due to the nature  
of the subjective detail and the downsides of bad advice (all within  
the belief system of the chakra experts) this kind of interaction is  
going to take some significant time.


So whether you believe these are valuable experiences or not, we have  
the bottom line problem.  The closest correlate to the time consuming  
interaction needed is the mental health field which is often paid for  
by insurance.  Who is going to finance the needed interaction with  
the experts of chakra knowldege?  I am assuming that there aren't  
a whole bunch of people who can step up and serve in this capacity so  
their time is extremely valuable.  Not to mention how we would  
actually sort out what makes someone qualified to offer this advice.


In any case the idea that TM teachers could offer this expertise in  
checking sessions is not realistic.  They are not trained in chakras  
or the ability to distinguish this class of experiences from mental  
problems.  Having checked the meditations of people who ended up with  
a diagnosis of schizophrenia, I can say that the checking procedure  
is not only insufficient for this class of person, it may be very  
dangerous and make the situation much worse.


So even if you are going to believe in this system of development, I  
can't see a realistic structure of professionals dealing with these  
people.  From my perspective I can only hope that TM or other  
practices are not plunging people into experiences for which there is  
no support structure or knowledge base to deal with them.


Basically the only people who are doing this do a lengthy  
psychological evaluation and profile, along with long questionnaire  
and interview of all the various developmental issues one dealt with  
in their lives. Then and only then do they engage in a two week  
retreat to evaluate what type of diversion (of kundalini) the person  
may have or where their spiritual path can best progress from.


Of course the best thing to prevent to do to prevent this from  
happening in the first place is to avoid disreputable teachers like  
the plague. This type of scenario is largely the by-product of faux  
kundalini yoga and meditation teachers IME. From the POV of these  
traditions, being trapped in such an energetic state can mean  
transmigration through the lower realms over many, many lives. I  
hope they enjoyed their hopping on foam a hell of a lot.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
 to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
 
 1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
 valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
 disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
 describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
 this belief system.
 
 2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
 a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
 manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
 people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
 (Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
 in scriptures.)

False dichotomy. There's a whole field of psychotherapy
in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
along with standard psychotherapy.

The two systems are seen as complementary, in other words.
The chakra experiences are assumed to be very real but can
be signs of mental disorders if they're causing distress,
but also of spiritual progress if they're not.

You might want to do a search: +yoga +psychotherapy.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:

 Basically the only people who are doing this do a lengthy  
 psychological evaluation and profile, along with long questionnaire  
 and interview of all the various developmental issues one dealt with  
 in their lives. Then and only then do they engage in a two week  
 retreat to evaluate what type of diversion (of kundalini) the person  
 may have or where their spiritual path can best progress from.

I was hoping you would respond Vaj because I know you have given a lot of 
thought to this issue.  I don't know if two weeks is the right amount of time, 
having spent much longer on TM courses it seems a bit short. But what do I know!

 
 Of course the best thing to prevent to do to prevent this from  
 happening in the first place is to avoid disreputable teachers like 
 the plague.

This is the problem isn't it?  by what criteria could a person judge this?  It 
seems that every system has their own criteria.  For Maharishi if you dug you 
experience of TM then you could go for more, dig that, here is more and on and 
on.  Personal experience is so compelling it is hard for a person to argue that 
even with these experiences I have made a mistake and need to seek someone else.


 This type of scenario is largely the by-product of faux  
 kundalini yoga and meditation teachers IME. From the POV of these  
 traditions, being trapped in such an energetic state can mean  
 transmigration through the lower realms over many, many lives. I  
 hope they enjoyed their hopping on foam a hell of a lot.

Ouch!  I sure did my share of foam hopping in my day.  I'm not sure any human 
could make this claim definitively (I understand you are quoting the tradition 
here.)  It seems to imply a knowledge of a lot of stuff I'm not sure people 
could demonstrate a knowledge of. (like everything that happens after death or 
whether TM actually does activate the faux kundlini. (phrase of the week IMO!)

But I'm sure you get the issue that even such teachers that you consider 
experts may not have the expertise necessary to deal with people with mental 
disorders who come to their courses.


But with an interest in the idea of choosing a reputable teacher, how would a 
person go about such a task.  Don't most seekers believe that they are sort of 
lead to THEIR teacher?  I remember corresponding to Shri Chinmoy's organization 
before I went with Maharishi about how to know if you have the right guru.  
They sent back some kind of subjective test that in retrospect seems kind of 
influenced by my beliefs.  In any case I'm not sure people have the open choice 
to evaluate such a teacher who is reputable.  Even if you believed that you 
found a super teacher, how would you know how to rank them since people seem 
perfectly happy with guys like Moon and others who even the most ardent 
believer in all things guru usually omit from a reputable list. 







 
 On Apr 1, 2011, at 12:10 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
 Here are the problems I see.  First who has the training in both  
 mental health and chakras to a level that there can be a definitive  
 diagnosis of one or the other paradigm?  The Catholic church sends  
 all exorcism cases to a psychiatrist first to rule out known mental  
 disorders.  Is this how spiritual groups operate?  If not they are  
 not in a knowledge position to distinguish the reported experiences  
 from known mental conditions. As long as the experiences are not  
 causing distress to the person this type of experience is usually  
 just ignored by most mental health professionals anyway.
 
 So we are left with a person trained in chakra knowledge to work  
 with the person who is experiencing these things.  Due to the nature  
 of the subjective detail and the downsides of bad advice (all within  
 the belief system of the chakra experts) this kind of interaction is  
 going to take some significant time.
 
 So whether you believe these are valuable experiences or not, we have  
 the bottom line problem.  The closest correlate to the time consuming  
 interaction needed is the mental health field which is often paid for  
 by insurance.  Who is going to finance the needed interaction with  
 the experts of chakra knowldege?  I am assuming that there aren't  
 a whole bunch of people who can step up and serve in this capacity so  
 their time is extremely valuable.  Not to mention how we would  
 actually sort out what makes someone qualified to offer this advice.
 
 In any case the idea that TM teachers could offer this expertise in  
 checking sessions is not realistic.  They are not trained in chakras  
 or the ability to distinguish this class of experiences from mental  
 problems.  Having checked the meditations of people who ended up with  
 a diagnosis of schizophrenia, I can say that the checking procedure  
 is not only insufficient for this class of person, it may be very  
 dangerous and make the situation much worse.
 
 So even 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ 
 wrote:
 
  These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
  to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
  
  1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
  valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
  disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
  describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
  this belief system.
  
  2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
  a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
  manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
  people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
  (Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
  in scriptures.)
 
 False dichotomy.

I wasn't presenting them as a dichotomy but as a place to start the discussion.

 There's a whole field of psychotherapy
 in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
 various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
 se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
 seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
 as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
 along with standard psychotherapy.

So these are licensed mental health professionals who are using this model in 
their practice or spiritual people with psychotherapy training? I wonder about 
the ethics if the first and the training basis for the second.


 
 The two systems are seen as complementary, in other words.
 The chakra experiences are assumed to be very real but can
 be signs of mental disorders if they're causing distress,
 but also of spiritual progress if they're not.


I can understand that some people may believe this.  I am not sure they are 
speaking with the full authority of the people who license mental health 
professionals.  And how does a person know that they are dealing with an expert 
in the area of chakras?  There is no standard of knowledge to use as a 
reference.

So I don't see how this solves the issues I brought up.  We are still left 
winging it with an area that seems to have profound consequences in mental 
health.

Do you have a person who from your search seems to represent the needed 
knowledge in both areas that you think would inspire confidence?  I don't doubt 
that a search will lead to plenty of people making such claims. How could we 
evaluate such claims of this specialized knowledge?




 
 You might want to do a search: +yoga +psychotherapy.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[wayback71]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@ wrote:
 
 These points are interesting to me.  There are two places to start that end 
 in the same conclusion for me.
 
 1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real, valuable and can be 
 distinguished from the possible mental disorders in a patient who has studied 
 these concepts and describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from 
 this belief system.
 
 2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is a sign of valuable 
 spiritual progress and is a manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps 
 for some people a benign experience that we do not yet understand. (Not 
 accepting the often contradictory explanations found in scriptures.)
 
 Here are the problems I see.  First who has the training in both mental 
 health and chakras to a level that there can be a definitive diagnosis of one 
 or the other paradigm?  The Catholic church sends all exorcism cases to a 
 psychiatrist first to rule out known mental disorders.  Is this how spiritual 
 groups operate?  If not they are not in a knowledge position to distinguish 
 the reported experiences from known mental conditions. As long as the 
 experiences are not causing distress to the person this type of experience is 
 usually just ignored by most mental health professionals anyway.
 
 So we are left with a person trained in chakra knowledge to work with the 
 person who is experiencing these things.  Due to the nature of the subjective 
 detail and the downsides of bad advice (all within the belief system of the 
 chakra experts) this kind of interaction is going to take some significant 
 time.
 
 So whether you believe these are valuable experiences or not, we have the 
 bottom line problem.  The closest correlate to the time consuming interaction 
 needed is the mental health field which is often paid for by insurance.  Who 
 is going to finance the needed interaction with the experts of chakra 
 knowldege?  I am assuming that there aren't a whole bunch of people who can 
 step up and serve in this capacity so their time is extremely valuable.  Not 
 to mention how we would actually sort out what makes someone qualified to 
 offer this advice.
 
 In any case the idea that TM teachers could offer this expertise in checking 
 sessions is not realistic.  They are not trained in chakras or the ability to 
 distinguish this class of experiences from mental problems.  Having checked 
 the meditations of people who ended up with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, I 
 can say that the checking procedure is not only insufficient for this class 
 of person, it may be very dangerous and make the situation much worse.
 
 So even if you are going to believe in this system of development, I can't 
 see a realistic structure of professionals dealing with these people.  From 
 my perspective I can only hope that TM or other practices are not plunging 
 people into experiences for which there is no support structure or knowledge 
 base to deal with them.
 
 
Stanislov Grof, MD wrote a book called Spiritual Emergenicy (published in the 
early 80s I think) about how psychiatry treats spiritual growth as a form of 
psychosis and gives medication to suppress the symptoms.  He and others were 
trying to distinguish between the 2 and provide counseling and all sorts of 
help to people.  I believe they still have an organization to do just that to 
and further understanding of the whole kubndalini/spiritual growth process in 
the various forms it takes.
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
  
  
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@ wrote:
  
   One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most
  interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about
  more guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM
  with this for people who would need help with that, besides meditating.
  It obviously was out of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by
  without touching it.
  
  
  Many of the world's great entrepreneurs begin by identifying an
  unserved, or underserved need and then addressing it.  So maybe this is
  your calling Dug.
 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Apr 1, 2011, at 1:31 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:
 
 Basically the only people who are doing this do a lengthy  
 psychological evaluation and profile, along with long questionnaire  
 and interview of all the various developmental issues one dealt with  
 in their lives. Then and only then do they engage in a two week  
 retreat to evaluate what type of diversion (of kundalini) the person  
 may have or where their spiritual path can best progress from.
 
 I was hoping you would respond Vaj because I know you have given a lot of 
 thought to this issue.  I don't know if two weeks is the right amount of 
 time, having spent much longer on TM courses it seems a bit short. But what 
 do I know!

Understand they're looking for a known set of signs as to what has happened and 
what the student's experience is. Also, each of the two people I'm referring to 
possesses a degree of awakening where they're able to discern the students 
system at a subtle level. A full awakening of kundalini implies a level of 
awakening where you're able to enter and experience each petal, each channel 
wheel, at will. In other words, 'they've been there, did that' before they 
authorized to really even teach about it, let alone help someone.

 
 
 Of course the best thing to prevent to do to prevent this from  
 happening in the first place is to avoid disreputable teachers like 
 the plague.
 
 This is the problem isn't it?  by what criteria could a person judge this?  
 It seems that every system has their own criteria.  For Maharishi if you dug 
 you experience of TM then you could go for more, dig that, here is more and 
 on and on.  Personal experience is so compelling it is hard for a person to 
 argue that even with these experiences I have made a mistake and need to seek 
 someone else.

The limiting factor in my case was my family. They'd dealt with and known 
various yogis and lamas in the Himalayas for many decades before I was born. 
None of them, not one trusted Mahesh. ALL refused any instruction in TM.

And, of course, it turned out they were right.

My own investigation was pretty easy: I approached representatives of the order 
he claimed to come from and simply asked them. Around the same time, back in 
the 80's I found out from a former Shankaracharya that Mahesh was a leading 
suspect in the poisoning of SBS. Shortly thereafter the businessman in the 
Sexy Sadie files, who is a close friend, told me the details of Judith's story 
immediately after they met.

It was clear there were numerous others teaching in the same lineage who were 
legit. SO I dropped any association with the TM movement right then and there. 
But I was and always have been very, very fortunate: all I had to do was ask, 
and it was as if the answers fell into my lap.


 
 
  This type of scenario is largely the by-product of faux  
 kundalini yoga and meditation teachers IME. From the POV of these  
 traditions, being trapped in such an energetic state can mean  
 transmigration through the lower realms over many, many lives. I  
 hope they enjoyed their hopping on foam a hell of a lot.
 
 Ouch!  I sure did my share of foam hopping in my day.  I'm not sure any human 
 could make this claim definitively (I understand you are quoting the 
 tradition here.)  It seems to imply a knowledge of a lot of stuff I'm not 
 sure people could demonstrate a knowledge of. (like everything that happens 
 after death or whether TM actually does activate the faux kundlini. (phrase 
 of the week IMO!)

Well, I'm not necessarily referring to you or to sidhas in general, but those 
who were damaged by these practices. You may not be aware, but the tantric 
teachings on kundalini state that if your kundalini was awakened in a previous 
existence, you maintain that awakening across existences. IMO the people who 
seem to be effected negatively were all people whose initial awakening occurred 
as a result of TM or TM-sidhi practices. That's not to say that some people 
could not or do not have positive awakening experiences with TM. If the 
circumstances are just right, anything is possible -- but IMO, that kinda thing 
is rare.

 But I'm sure you get the issue that even such teachers that you consider 
 experts may not have the expertise necessary to deal with people with mental 
 disorders who come to their courses.

Some would, some would not. That is improving. It's relatively common to have a 
psychiatric question or two on course forms: do you currently or have you ever 
had any of the following...


 But with an interest in the idea of choosing a reputable teacher, how would a 
 person go about such a task.  Don't most seekers believe that they are sort 
 of lead to THEIR teacher?  I remember corresponding to Shri Chinmoy's 
 organization before I went with Maharishi about how to know if you have the 
 right guru.  They sent back some kind of subjective test that in retrospect 
 seems 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:

snip
 The limiting factor in my case was my family. They'd
 dealt with and known various yogis and lamas in the
 Himalayas for many decades before I was born. None of
 them, not one trusted Mahesh. ALL refused any
 instruction in TM.
 
 And, of course, it turned out they were right.

Interesting that you didn't trust your highly
experienced and knowledgeable family.

 My own investigation was pretty easy: I approached 
 representatives of the order he claimed to come from
 and simply asked them. Around the same time, back in
 the 80's I found out from a former Shankaracharya
 that Mahesh was a leading suspect in the poisoning
 of SBS. Shortly thereafter the businessman in the
 Sexy Sadie files, who is a close friend, told me the
 details of Judith's story immediately after they met.
 
 It was clear there were numerous others teaching in
 the same lineage who were legit. SO I dropped any
 association with the TM movement right then and there.
 But I was and always have been very, very fortunate:
 all I had to do was ask, and it was as if the answers
 fell into my lap.

But not quite fortunate enough to think to ask until
after you'd spent (according to you) at least a 
couple of years and quite a bit of money in the
movement becoming a TM teacher and doing the TM-Sidhis.
Right, Vaj?

You say your family was the limiting factor, but it
doesn't seem to have limited you enough to keep you
from going the whole nine yards with TM, eh?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
curtisdeltablues@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
   to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
   
   1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
   valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
   disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
   describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
   this belief system.
   
   2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
   a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
   manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
   people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
   (Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
   in scriptures.)
  
  False dichotomy.
 
 I wasn't presenting them as a dichotomy but as a place to
 start the discussion.

As a place to start the discussion, it's inadequate
because it leaves out a major perspective.

  There's a whole field of psychotherapy
  in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
  various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
  se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
  seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
  as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
  along with standard psychotherapy.
 
 So these are licensed mental health professionals who
 are using this model in their practice or spiritual
 people with psychotherapy training?

I haven't checked their credentials, Curtis. I got the
impression at least some of them were trained in
psychotherapy and licensed and have chosen to use this
approach in their practice.

 I wonder about the ethics if the first

OMG, that is hilarious.

 and the training basis for the second.
 
  The two systems are seen as complementary, in other words.
  The chakra experiences are assumed to be very real but can
  be signs of mental disorders if they're causing distress,
  but also of spiritual progress if they're not.
 
 I can understand that some people may believe this.  I am
 not sure they are speaking with the full authority of the
 people who license mental health professionals.

As is this.

  And how
 does a person know that they are dealing with an expert
 in the area of chakras?  There is no standard of
 knowledge to use as a reference.
 
 So I don't see how this solves the issues I brought up.

I don't believe I suggested that it solves anything.
Please don't put words in my mouth.




  We are still left winging it with an area that seems to have 
profound consequences in mental health.
 
 Do you have a person who from your search seems to represent the 
needed knowledge in both areas that you think would inspire 
confidence?  I don't doubt that a search will lead to plenty of 
people making such claims. How could we evaluate such claims of 
this specialized knowledge?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[tartbrain]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:

 
 On Apr 1, 2011, at 1:31 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
  
  Basically the only people who are doing this do a lengthy  
  psychological evaluation and profile, along with long questionnaire  
  and interview of all the various developmental issues one dealt with  
  in their lives. Then and only then do they engage in a two week  
  retreat to evaluate what type of diversion (of kundalini) the person  
  may have or where their spiritual path can best progress from.
  
  I was hoping you would respond Vaj because I know you have given a lot of 
  thought to this issue.  I don't know if two weeks is the right amount of 
  time, having spent much longer on TM courses it seems a bit short. But what 
  do I know!
 
 Understand they're looking for a known set of signs as to what has happened 
 and what the student's experience is. Also, each of the two people I'm 
 referring to possesses a degree of awakening where they're able to discern 
 the students system at a subtle level. A full awakening of kundalini implies 
 a level of awakening where you're able to enter and experience each petal, 
 each channel wheel, at will. In other words, 'they've been there, did that' 
 before they authorized to really even teach about it, let alone help someone.
 
  
  
  Of course the best thing to prevent to do to prevent this from  
  happening in the first place is to avoid disreputable teachers like 
  the plague.
  
  This is the problem isn't it?  by what criteria could a person judge this?  
  It seems that every system has their own criteria.  For Maharishi if you 
  dug you experience of TM then you could go for more, dig that, here is more 
  and on and on.  Personal experience is so compelling it is hard for a 
  person to argue that even with these experiences I have made a mistake and 
  need to seek someone else.
 
 The limiting factor in my case was my family. They'd dealt with and known 
 various yogis and lamas in the Himalayas for many decades before I was born. 
 None of them, not one trusted Mahesh. ALL refused any instruction in TM.
 
 And, of course, it turned out they were right.
 
 My own investigation was pretty easy: I approached representatives of the 
 order he claimed to come from and simply asked them. Around the same time, 
 back in the 80's I found out from a former Shankaracharya that Mahesh was a 
 leading suspect in the poisoning of SBS. Shortly thereafter the businessman 
 in the Sexy Sadie files, who is a close friend, told me the details of 
 Judith's story immediately after they met.
 
 It was clear there were numerous others teaching in the same lineage who were 
 legit. SO I dropped any association with the TM movement right then and 
 there. But I was and always have been very, very fortunate: all I had to do 
 was ask, and it was as if the answers fell into my lap.
 
 
  
  
   This type of scenario is largely the by-product of faux  
  kundalini yoga and meditation teachers IME. From the POV of these  
  traditions, being trapped in such an energetic state can mean  
  transmigration through the lower realms over many, many lives. I  
  hope they enjoyed their hopping on foam a hell of a lot.
  
  Ouch!  I sure did my share of foam hopping in my day.  I'm not sure any 
  human could make this claim definitively (I understand you are quoting the 
  tradition here.)  It seems to imply a knowledge of a lot of stuff I'm not 
  sure people could demonstrate a knowledge of. (like everything that happens 
  after death or whether TM actually does activate the faux kundlini. 
  (phrase of the week IMO!)
 
 Well, I'm not necessarily referring to you or to sidhas in general, but those 
 who were damaged by these practices. You may not be aware, but the tantric 
 teachings on kundalini state that if your kundalini was awakened in a 
 previous existence, you maintain that awakening across existences. IMO the 
 people who seem to be effected negatively were all people whose initial 
 awakening occurred as a result of TM or TM-sidhi practices. That's not to say 
 that some people could not or do not have positive awakening experiences with 
 TM. If the circumstances are just right, anything is possible -- but IMO, 
 that kinda thing is rare.
 
  But I'm sure you get the issue that even such teachers that you consider 
  experts may not have the expertise necessary to deal with people with 
  mental disorders who come to their courses.
 
 Some would, some would not. That is improving. It's relatively common to have 
 a psychiatric question or two on course forms: do you currently or have you 
 ever had any of the following...
 
 
  But with an interest in the idea of choosing a reputable teacher, how would 
  a person go about such a task.  Don't most seekers believe that they are 
  sort of lead to THEIR teacher?  I remember corresponding to Shri Chinmoy's 
  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
 wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
 curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
   
These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
to start that end in the same conclusion for me.

1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
this belief system.

2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
(Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
in scriptures.)
   
   False dichotomy.
  
  I wasn't presenting them as a dichotomy but as a place to
  start the discussion.
 
 As a place to start the discussion, it's inadequate
 because it leaves out a major perspective.

Thus the term start.

 
   There's a whole field of psychotherapy
   in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
   various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
   se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
   seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
   as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
   along with standard psychotherapy.
  

  So these are licensed mental health professionals who
  are using this model in their practice or spiritual
  people with psychotherapy training?
 
 I haven't checked their credentials, Curtis. I got the
 impression at least some of them were trained in
 psychotherapy and licensed and have chosen to use this
 approach in their practice.
 
  I wonder about the ethics if the first
 
 OMG, that is hilarious.

People whose trust by the public is based on their credentials certified by the 
state as a mental health authority adding in a field of speculation that has no 
oversight or even standard definitions is a violation of the ethical trust 
their position holds.  How you find this funny is beyond me.

 
  and the training basis for the second.
  
   The two systems are seen as complementary, in other words.
   The chakra experiences are assumed to be very real but can
   be signs of mental disorders if they're causing distress,
   but also of spiritual progress if they're not.
  
  I can understand that some people may believe this.  I am
  not sure they are speaking with the full authority of the
  people who license mental health professionals.
 
 As is this.
 
   And how
  does a person know that they are dealing with an expert
  in the area of chakras?  There is no standard of
  knowledge to use as a reference.
  
  So I don't see how this solves the issues I brought up.
 
 I don't believe I suggested that it solves anything.
 Please don't put words in my mouth.

Creating a combative perspective out of nothing.  

Well at least you got to use an OMG. That must have been satisfying for you.


 
 
 
 
   We are still left winging it with an area that seems to have 
 profound consequences in mental health.
  
  Do you have a person who from your search seems to represent the 
 needed knowledge in both areas that you think would inspire 
 confidence?  I don't doubt that a search will lead to plenty of 
 people making such claims. How could we evaluate such claims of 
 this specialized knowledge?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:

 That's a really good question, but I suspect my answer might seem a
lot simpler than you expected. Really the criteria should be no
different from any other professional you might want to hire. All of my
current teachers had a period of study, often in college, where they
learned (often memorized) the intellectual bases for what they were to
teach. Every initiation they received, was documented: who they received
it from, what their practice experience was and what the initiations
consisted of and then how much practical experience they had to realize
the teachings they received. For none of them is there some nebulous I
was the secretary of a famous yogi, but precise, verifiable
information.

Warning:  Grammatically Challenged Reply:


I kind of get the impression that you are describing a very linear
process.  And my experience on what I would call the spiritual journey
has been anything but.  And the one thing I don't, or won't do is doubt
my experience.  I don't care if I'm stuck in some pseudo/shallow samadhi
during meditation, or if I am stuck on some relative plane with little
chance of progressing in my outer life.  I am enjoying the ride, and I
try to live in the present.  I trust my experience, and it has been my
teacher.  Whether I have a formal teacher doesn't matter to me. 
Sometimes I get the impression that the credentials of your teachers
mean more than the experiences you might have.  What I would never do is
try to pick apart my experinece and determine if the faculty of
intuition that has been the foremost principle for me is based on the
highest teaching, or something lesser.  On the other hand, whatever you
are doing seems to work for you.

And I guess you must have taken a pretty big bite out of the TM apple
because if you would have just looked at it, and walked away, I don't 
think you would be such a heavy poster on this site.  Having said that,
I mostly enjoy your insights.  But you seem to take a more formal, or
academic approach which doesn't really appeal to me.


 And really, that's the way it should be. I want to see their resume
and see if they are actually qualified in theory and in practice. If
they're not, I may still be interested, but they'd have to possess
extraordinary characteristics. As a westerner, I demand this type of
documentation for my teachers. On top of that, their orgs should
preferably be non-hierarchical and totally, have 100% transparency.

 It would really be very difficult for me to be involved with anything
less.

 A great example of what I'm talking about would be current author,
meditation teacher and researcher Alan Wallace. Check out his list of
publications and teachings he received. IME this is typical. Legit
teachers do maintain a working CV.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Yifu]

Vetting by resume can be helpful, but the bottom line: direct experience. Vaj's 
family judged the book by the cover and thus missed out on something; a 
frequent happenstance among intellectual elites who fail to take the plunge.  
The Skeptic Michael Shermer is a typical example, although he did have some 
experience as an Evangelical Christian before becoming a athiest.
http://www.fantasygallery.net/bohbot/art_5_arx-fatalis.html



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seventhray1 steve.sundur@... wrote:

 
 
 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@ wrote:
 
  That's a really good question, but I suspect my answer might seem a
 lot simpler than you expected. Really the criteria should be no
 different from any other professional you might want to hire. All of my
 current teachers had a period of study, often in college, where they
 learned (often memorized) the intellectual bases for what they were to
 teach. Every initiation they received, was documented: who they received
 it from, what their practice experience was and what the initiations
 consisted of and then how much practical experience they had to realize
 the teachings they received. For none of them is there some nebulous I
 was the secretary of a famous yogi, but precise, verifiable
 information.
 
 Warning:  Grammatically Challenged Reply:
 
 
 I kind of get the impression that you are describing a very linear
 process.  And my experience on what I would call the spiritual journey
 has been anything but.  And the one thing I don't, or won't do is doubt
 my experience.  I don't care if I'm stuck in some pseudo/shallow samadhi
 during meditation, or if I am stuck on some relative plane with little
 chance of progressing in my outer life.  I am enjoying the ride, and I
 try to live in the present.  I trust my experience, and it has been my
 teacher.  Whether I have a formal teacher doesn't matter to me. 
 Sometimes I get the impression that the credentials of your teachers
 mean more than the experiences you might have.  What I would never do is
 try to pick apart my experinece and determine if the faculty of
 intuition that has been the foremost principle for me is based on the
 highest teaching, or something lesser.  On the other hand, whatever you
 are doing seems to work for you.
 
 And I guess you must have taken a pretty big bite out of the TM apple
 because if you would have just looked at it, and walked away, I don't 
 think you would be such a heavy poster on this site.  Having said that,
 I mostly enjoy your insights.  But you seem to take a more formal, or
 academic approach which doesn't really appeal to me.
 
 
  And really, that's the way it should be. I want to see their resume
 and see if they are actually qualified in theory and in practice. If
 they're not, I may still be interested, but they'd have to possess
 extraordinary characteristics. As a westerner, I demand this type of
 documentation for my teachers. On top of that, their orgs should
 preferably be non-hierarchical and totally, have 100% transparency.
 
  It would really be very difficult for me to be involved with anything
 less.
 
  A great example of what I'm talking about would be current author,
 meditation teacher and researcher Alan Wallace. Check out his list of
 publications and teachings he received. IME this is typical. Legit
 teachers do maintain a working CV.
 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@... 
wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ 
  wrote:
   
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues 
  curtisdeltablues@ wrote:

 These points are interesting to me.  There are two places
 to start that end in the same conclusion for me.
 
 1. You believe that chakra energy experiences are real,
 valuable and can be distinguished from the possible mental 
 disorders in a patient who has studied these concepts and
 describes his or her symptoms using the vocabulary from
 this belief system.
 
 2. You don't believe that this category of experiences is
 a sign of valuable spiritual progress and is a
 manifestation of a mental disorder or perhaps for some
 people a benign experience that we do not yet understand.
 (Not accepting the often contradictory explanations found
 in scriptures.)

False dichotomy.
   
   I wasn't presenting them as a dichotomy but as a place to
   start the discussion.
  
  As a place to start the discussion, it's inadequate
  because it leaves out a major perspective.
 
 Thus the term start.
 
  
There's a whole field of psychotherapy
in which chakra experiences are used to help diagnose
various disorders (not necessarily mental illness per
se, but the kinds of emotional problems that most people
seek psychotherapy for), and working with chakras is used
as a treatment modality for the disorders, typically 
along with standard psychotherapy.
   
 
   So these are licensed mental health professionals who
   are using this model in their practice or spiritual
   people with psychotherapy training?
  
  I haven't checked their credentials, Curtis. I got the
  impression at least some of them were trained in
  psychotherapy and licensed and have chosen to use this
  approach in their practice.
  
   I wonder about the ethics if the first
  
  OMG, that is hilarious.
 
 People whose trust by the public is based on their
 credentials certified by the state as a mental health
 authority adding in a field of speculation that has
 no oversight or even standard definitions is a
 violation of the ethical trust their position holds.
 How you find this funny is beyond me.

It's funny because you don't know what the hell you're
talking about.

From an article on the standard of care in psychotherapy
and counseling (be good to read the introduction too,
but the quoted paragraphs are specifically relevant here):

-
The standard of care is a particularly difficult
issue in psychotherapy, as there are hundreds of 
different orientations and approaches to treatment 
(Lambert, 1991). Each is based on a different 
theoretical orientation, a different methodology, 
philosophy, belief system and even worldview. Beyond 
the agreements of do not harm, and do not have sex 
with current clients, and always respect clients' 
dignity, autonomy and privacy, there is no consensus 
on how to intervene, help or heal. For example there 
is no one standard, or method or way for the 
treatment of anxiety. Psychoanalysis, cognitive-
behavioral, existential, biologically based 
psychiatry, Gestalt and pastoral counseling all 
define, explain and treat the anxiety in very 
different terms. Not one of them will follow the 
others' standards

The respected minority doctrine also applies to 
new techniques, which as yet do not have well 
established scientific or research support.  This 
provision allows for new or experimental 
psychotherapeutic techniques to be carefully, 
cautiously and ethically employed even though the 
theories and/or practices are still being developed 
and tested. Most successful and effective techniques 
started out as experimental or alternative 
techniques prior to being tested, validated, 
recognized, and employed on a broad scale
-

http://www.zurinstitute.com/standardofcaretherapy.html 

It's simply not the case that state mental health
authorities say you can do A, B, C, and D kinds of
therapy, but not W, X, Y, and Z. It's just not an
ethics issue which approach a therapist uses. As long
as the basics--do not harm, and do not have sex with
current clients, and always respect clients' dignity,
autonomy and privacy--are observed, you get to
choose your own approach; you aren't required to pick
from a list of state-approved therapies.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:

 According to HHDL, awareness of the subtle energy of the body, and  
 the ability to effect it, begins once one can transcend for about 
 4 hours.

The Frederick Lenz - Rama guy I worked with always said
(and interestingly, so did all of the Tibetan teachers
I've met) that Samadhi is just the *beginning* of the 
enlightenment process. My experience, limited and 
beginner-level though it may be, echoes the Dalai Lama's 
view on this. It's only after a few hours in completely
thoughtless samadhi that one begins to realize that it's 
not static, and that it continues opening to deeper and 
deeper levels of itself. Or its Self, if you tend to puns. :-)

The Rama guy refused to teach any of his students anything
he considered advanced until they could maintain the
completely thoughtless state for several hours. That was
what he considered the brown belt level of meditation.
Working on one's black belt proceeded from there.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:
 The Rama guy refused to teach any of his students anything
 he considered advanced until they could maintain the
 completely thoughtless state for several hours. That was
 what he considered the brown belt level of meditation.
 Working on one's black belt proceeded from there.


Right. And then he committed suicide. Very advanced stuff.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Buck]

One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most 
interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about more 
guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM with this for 
people who would need help with that, besides meditating.  It obviously was out 
of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by without touching it. 

 
  According to HHDL, awareness of the subtle energy of the body, and  
  the ability to effect it, begins once one can transcend for about 4  
  hours:
  
 
 That's true.  It's also why spiritual folks/ teachers like to come to 
 Fairfield.  Old meditators often have the transcendent opened up and 
 spiritual teaching can could go from there.  There's been a lot of progress 
 that way here.  
 
 It's a lot different for teachers where transcendence is cultivated than just 
 being out in the world talking 'spiritual' with people.  The spiritual all 
 regard that about visiting Fairfield and comment about it as they come 
 through.  
 
 As HHDL is pointing out, it's from transcending that most of the spiritual 
 work comes.  There's more than transcending.  It's being pursued here and 
 that is the venue that Fairfield provides a lot for in experience.  That's 
 been the developing experience in the larger meditating community generally 
 in the last couple decades here.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Vaj]

On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Buck wrote:

One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was  
most interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico  
asking about more guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for  
services at MUM with this for people who would need help with that,  
besides meditating.  It obviously was out of Bobby's realm as he  
mostly let it slide by without touching it.



On the Ayurveda training course with Chopra in FF it was told that  
Mahesh had tried to buy out the families that preserved the  
traditions of Kalarippayattu, which contained all the secrets of the  
marmas and the nadis in an oral tradition, the written versions of  
which made no sense unless you'd received actual practical  
instruction. The families who held the teaching could not be bought,  
at any price. And thus the teachings were never given to the  
movement. Their main person, John Douiliard, found a master who  
taught the science and moved on. To this day that guru comes back to  
FF to help rescue the many damaged by the siddhis, pranic disease and  
unguided practice.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Peter L Sutphen]

Unguided practice. My biggest complaint about TM and the TM siddhis. As long 
as progress is slow and gentle, not a problem for the most part. But when 
experiences begin to move into self transcendence and all the cognitive and 
emotional uproar this will create, you need a guru. 

Peter


On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:

 
 
 
 On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Buck wrote:
 
 One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most 
 interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about 
 more guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM with 
 this for people who would need help with that, besides meditating.  It 
 obviously was out of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by without 
 touching it.
 
 
 On the Ayurveda training course with Chopra in FF it was told that Mahesh had 
 tried to buy out the families that preserved the traditions of 
 Kalarippayattu, which contained all the secrets of the marmas and the nadis 
 in an oral tradition, the written versions of which made no sense unless 
 you'd received actual practical instruction. The families who held the 
 teaching could not be bought, at any price. And thus the teachings were never 
 given to the movement. Their main person, John Douiliard, found a master who 
 taught the science and moved on. To this day that guru comes back to FF to 
 help rescue the many damaged by the siddhis, pranic disease and unguided 
 practice.
 
 
 

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of Peter L Sutphen
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:34 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

 

  

Unguided practice. My biggest complaint about TM and the TM siddhis. As long 
as progress is slow and gentle, not a problem for the most part. But when 
experiences begin to move into self transcendence and all the cognitive and 
emotional uproar this will create, you need a guru. 

 

I was just chatting with someone who had experienced this. She was writhing on 
the floor at 3am with her Kundalini on fire. Sidhi administrators told her to 
try a vata pacifying diet and more asanas.



Peter

 


On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:

 

On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Buck wrote:





One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most 
interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about more 
guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM with this for 
people who would need help with that, besides meditating.  It obviously was out 
of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by without touching it.

 

 

On the Ayurveda training course with Chopra in FF it was told that Mahesh had 
tried to buy out the families that preserved the traditions of Kalarippayattu, 
which contained all the secrets of the marmas and the nadis in an oral 
tradition, the written versions of which made no sense unless you'd received 
actual practical instruction. The families who held the teaching could not be 
bought, at any price. And thus the teachings were never given to the movement. 
Their main person, John Douiliard, found a master who taught the science and 
moved on. To this day that guru comes back to FF to help rescue the many 
damaged by the siddhis, pranic disease and unguided practice.

 

Who is that guru?

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Vaj
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:25 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep
Transcendence

 

  

On the Ayurveda training course with Chopra in FF it was told that Mahesh
had tried to buy out the families that preserved the traditions of
Kalarippayattu, which contained all the secrets of the marmas and the nadis
in an oral tradition, the written versions of which made no sense unless
you'd received actual practical instruction. The families who held the
teaching could not be bought, at any price. And thus the teachings were
never given to the movement. Their main person, John Douiliard, found a
master who taught the science and moved on. To this day that guru comes back
to FF to help rescue the many damaged by the siddhis, pranic disease and
unguided practice.

 

Who is that guru?

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote:

 From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
 Behalf Of Peter L Sutphen
 Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:34 PM
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep  
  
 
 I was just chatting with someone who had experienced this. She was writhing 
 on the floor at 3am with her Kundalini on fire. Sidhi administrators told her 
 to try a vata pacifying diet and more asanas.
 
 
 
 Peter


Sounds like a very good, commonsense advice.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Peter]

I hope she's doing okay now. If you're having intense kundalini the last thing 
you want to do are asanas! She needed to go out and have an emergency hamburger 
or two!

--- On Thu, 3/31/11, Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com wrote:

From: Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com
Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 31, 2011, 3:34 PM











 











From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com] On 
Behalf Of Peter L Sutphen
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:34 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence 
   Unguided practice. My biggest complaint about TM and the TM siddhis. As 
long as progress is slow and gentle, not a problem for the most part. But when 
experiences begin to move into self transcendence and all the cognitive and 
emotional uproar this will create, you need a guru.   I was just chatting with 
someone who had experienced this. She was writhing on the floor at 3am with her 
Kundalini on fire. Sidhi administrators told her to try a vata pacifying diet 
and more asanas.

Peter  
On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:  On Mar 31, 
2011, at 2:02 PM, Buck wrote:

One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most 
interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about more 
guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM with this for 
people who would need help with that, besides meditating.  It obviously was out 
of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by without touching it.        On 
the Ayurveda training course with Chopra in FF it was told that Mahesh had 
tried to buy out the families that preserved the traditions of Kalarippayattu, 
which contained all the secrets of the marmas and the nadis in an oral 
tradition, the written versions of which made no sense unless you'd received 
actual practical instruction. The families who held the teaching could not be 
bought, at any price. And thus the teachings were never given to the movement. 
Their main person, John Douiliard, found a master who taught the science and 
moved on. To this day that guru comes back
 to FF to help rescue the many damaged by the siddhis, pranic disease and 
unguided practice.  Who is that guru? 




















  

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@... wrote:

 I hope she's doing okay now. If you're having intense kundalini the last 
 thing you want to do are asanas! She needed to go out and have an emergency 
 hamburger or two!


If your kundalini is on fire the last thing you WANT to do is asanas, but 
that's excactly what you should do. Hamburgers, not so much.

RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[Rick Archer]

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Peter
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 4:14 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep
Transcendence

 

  


I hope she's doing okay now. If you're having intense kundalini the last
thing you want to do are asanas! She needed to go out and have an emergency
hamburger or two!

 

She's doing great now. Awakened after leaving the movement and sitting with
various satsang teachers.



--- On Thu, 3/31/11, Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com wrote:


From: Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com
Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep
Transcendence
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 31, 2011, 3:34 PM

 

From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Peter L Sutphen
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 1:34 PM
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep
Transcendence

 

  

Unguided practice. My biggest complaint about TM and the TM siddhis. As
long as progress is slow and gentle, not a problem for the most part. But
when experiences begin to move into self transcendence and all the cognitive
and emotional uproar this will create, you need a guru. 

 

I was just chatting with someone who had experienced this. She was writhing
on the floor at 3am with her Kundalini on fire. Sidhi administrators told
her to try a vata pacifying diet and more asanas.



Peter

 


On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote:

 

On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:02 PM, Buck wrote:

 

One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most
interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about
more guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM with
this for people who would need help with that, besides meditating.  It
obviously was out of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by without
touching it.

 

 

On the Ayurveda training course with Chopra in FF it was told that Mahesh
had tried to buy out the families that preserved the traditions of
Kalarippayattu, which contained all the secrets of the marmas and the nadis
in an oral tradition, the written versions of which made no sense unless
you'd received actual practical instruction. The families who held the
teaching could not be bought, at any price. And thus the teachings were
never given to the movement. Their main person, John Douiliard, found a
master who taught the science and moved on. To this day that guru comes back
to FF to help rescue the many damaged by the siddhis, pranic disease and
unguided practice.

 

Who is that guru?

 

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote:

 From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com]
 On Behalf Of Peter

 
  
 
   
 
 Unguided practice. My biggest complaint about TM and the TM siddhis. As
 long as progress is slow and gentle, not a problem for the most part. But
 when experiences begin to move into self transcendence and all the cognitive
 and emotional uproar this will create, you need a guru. 


If they would follow the Programme without overdoing anything nothing would 
happen except enlightenment.
These people, without exception are doing more than they were instructed to.

According to Muktananda Maharishi's Path is the real thing. Stay in his ship 
and he will take you safe accross the ocean.

But then there are always those who think they can swim faster by themselves.

Later they blame Maharishi. 

Pathetic !

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[emptybill]

We've been over this before.  In Buddhism, samaadhi means dharana while
dhyana-samaapatti is absorption in meditation.

Transcendence is a western concept. In Sanskrit, the term
(taraatitaa) is not officially used also (in Buddhism). Sometimes
transcendence is used by western educated people as a synonym
for Nirvana.

This article conflates the two … the writer because he doesn't
recognized the different usages, and our very good friend Vaj, because
it is part of his polemic.

Shamataa is not transcendence and neither is dhyana-samaapatti
… even the eighth or ninth arupya-samaapatti.

**




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote:

 According to HHDL, awareness of the subtle energy of the body, and
 the ability to effect it, begins once one can transcend for about 4
 hours:

 Reflections on developments of Shamatha and distinction between
 concept and non-conceptual levels of mental experience
 APRIL 15, 2009 by DAVIDV

 During the development of Shamatha [Deep Transcendence], Alan Wallace
 describes 9 stages of development in which the quality and nature of
 mental activity changes. We are all familiar with the “monkey
 mind” and the sleepy mind that plague the meditator on the
cushion.
 The monkey in our mind is a metaphor for what our mind does when we
 sit with our eyes closed and our mind is flooded with thoughts that
 continually arise and we follow the thoughts like a monkey jumping
 from limb to limb, from concept to concept, from retrospective to
 prospective memory, to ruminative like behavior. We are also plagued
 with qualities of laxity when we sit on the cushion, such that we
 tire easily and fail to see things clearly, or the vastness of
 reality. The adept will cultivate a decrease in excitation (reduction
 of the monkey mind) and decrease in laxity as they progress through
 the stages of shamatha. By the 8th stage of shamatha, mental activity
 at the conceptual level is decreased significantly and refinement
 (sharpening) of perception is increased.

 For example, when there is an arising of a cognitive event, Buddhist
 science speaks of 5 mental factors that are present:

 1. Volition (direction to the object)

 2. Attention (selction/engagement of the object)

 3. Contact (perception and cognition fuse)

 4. Discrimination (cognitive event is distinguished from something
else)

 5. Feeling (sensory experience of pleasure/pain is converted to more
 abstract feeling)

 Alan also spoke of 4 different types of intelligence to deal with
 these 5 mental factors:

 1. Vast, 2. Clear (vivid), 3. Swift, and 4. Penetrating intelligence

 The discussion that ensued in response to the 5 mental factors anf 4
 types of intelligence appeared to suggest that as the practitioner
 moves through the stages of shamatha, attention becomes very vast in
 nature as is described in nirguna awareness or by some as turiya, a
 restful state of undistracted, nonspecific awareness that has no
 author. This cultivated state of awareness involves increased levels
 of clarity and vividness for each concept or arising cognitive
 event, a perceptual acuity that is fast to react and is able to be
 sharp in its integration of all available stimuli and becomes free of
 mnemonic bias and/or distortion. At the point in which mental
 activity is developed to a 8th stage of Shamatha, evaluative
 judgements disapear, there is no grasping of any particular concept,
 and perception is acute.

 Perceptual acuity happens to be something that the Shamatha project
 (with Cliff Saron) actually measured 5 months post-retreat.
 Preliminary results suggest that perceptual acuity may improve and be
 sustained as long as practice persists.

 HHDL pointed out that a well-trained mind at this stage may be able
 to begin to become aware of subtle forms of energy (from vajrayana/
 tantrayana), channel such energy with intention and create change/
 movement of such energy at a single point in one’s body. He
also
 said that it may take 4 hrs. of continued single-pointed
 concentration to reach this point. 
 HHDL also pointed out that even his own practice on Shunyata
 (emptiness) involves conceptual processing, before the non-conceptual
 vastness arises. He continued to break down conceptualization of an
 act into 3 components:

 1. an object of the action

 2. the act itself

 3. the Agent

 At a conceptual level, there is a distinction that needs to be made,
 but over time and in some contexts, all 3 components may be one and
 the same.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Buck dhamiltony2k5@... wrote:

 One of the Bobby Roth TM questioners last week that I thought was most
interesting was the young woman MUM student from New Mexico asking about
more guidance with chakra energy work and hoping for services at MUM
with this for people who would need help with that, besides meditating.
It obviously was out of Bobby's realm as he mostly let it slide by
without touching it.


Many of the world's great entrepreneurs begin by identifying an
unserved, or underserved need and then addressing it.  So maybe this is
your calling Dug.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[seventhray1]

I would try askjeeeves.com.  It is probably a very common occurance, and
jeeves can likely offer some sound advice about it.  Dear Jeeves, my
kundalini is on fire and I am writhing around like a snake here at 3:00
am.  Can you please give some advice on what to do.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@...
wrote:



 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote:
 
  I hope she's doing okay now. If you're having intense kundalini the
last thing you want to do are asanas! She needed to go out and have an
emergency hamburger or two!


 If your kundalini is on fire the last thing you WANT to do is asanas,
but that's excactly what you should do. Hamburgers, not so much.

[FairfieldLife] Re: Subtle energy awareness and Deep Transcendence

[seventhray1]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@... wrote:
 She's doing great now. Awakened after leaving the movement and sitting
with
 various satsang teachers.


Glad to hear it Rick.  Of course she couldn't get enlightened while in
the movment.  that wouldn't be kosher.  And with Passover coming up, for
sure it wouldn't be kosher for Passover.  But praise the lord that she
is now sitting with various satsang teachers. The true sign of
enlightenment.