Sunmaster

@Elad

https://nowdictation.com/q/Time/

40 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

sunmaster, check this dude out.

you might find this interesting.

he's apparently using "scientific methodology". lol

 

https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/who-we-are/history-of-dops/dr-ian-stevenson/

Dr. Ian Stevenson founded the Division of Perceptual Studies in 1967. 

Dr. Stevenson established the Division in order to conduct research in which scientific methodology is utilized to empirically investigate phenomena which cannot be explained by the currently accepted scientific assumptions and theories about the nature of mind or consciousness, and its relationship to matter. Examples of such phenomena, sometimes called paranormal, include various types of extrasensory perception (such as telepathy), apparitions and deathbed visions,  after-death communications or ADCs, poltergeists, experiences of persons who come close to death and survive (usually called near-death experiences or NDEs), out-of-body experiences (OBEs), and children’s memories of previous lives.

Yes, I read a book about him a long time ago. Good stuff.

4 hours ago, Elad said:

I'm a bit of a materialist ????

That's ok. Nobody is perfect. ????

2 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

They seem to say it can happen from taking drugs too. Hard to comment on something I haven't experienced. A bit suspicious of things that cause such a big reaction. It either means you are opening things up and it's a good thing or you are holding something back, akin to holding or limiting your breath, and causing the brain to react in an extreme way. 

That's correct.

Drugs as in "entheogenic substances" or "consciousness expanding plants" can help, but there is absolutely no guarantee that they will actually release the kundalini. 

In whichever way she is released, the essence of the K remains the same. 

5 hours ago, save the frogs said:

FYI: 

A girl once give me a book called "The Five Tibetans". 

It's yoga from Tibet designed to 'raise the Kundalini.' 

Never did the exercises.

But later I read that there are some 'dangers' with 'raising the kundalini'.

But I really never looked into it much.

Watch out with that stuff. Make sure you know what you're doing. 

Sounds like it could turn into a "bad acid trip". 

 

Yes, it's true that not everyone experiences it the way I did. I could have gone into panic mode and had a bad trip, but I surrendered to it and had the most amazing time of my life.

This was a one time thing for me though. Not that I didn't want it, but it has a mind of its own...or "her" own as she's female energy.

I don't believe in those who claim they can "activate the kundalini in 5 easy and fast steps". That's marketing BS to sell books or workshops. 

The negative effects are mostly due to the unwillingness of people to let go. For a full k awakening the "death" of the ego is a must. That is the scariest part of the experience. If you can't let go of the ego, you will block and fight the k from fully rising. That in turn creates a very frightening scenario...the fear of dying. 

But let's put it into perspective. 

Negative experiences can happen, but are quite rare. K doesn't create them. We create them by resisting its flow.

The positive experiences far outweigh the negative ones and to that I can attest personally. 

Aren't we all getting a bit lost in unimportant details here?

I offered my personal story (about the kundalini awakening, see Tummo Shaktipat below) to the materialists to see if they could come up with any kind of material explanation. But apart from Woof999's reply, nothing. What happened to me could happen to anyone of you at any time. How would you react to it? Would you still stick to science?

You've been asking for practical examples and evidence. Here it is. Are you just going to pretend not to see it?

Quick summary:
As an atheist, I had no knowledge of or even interest in spirituality. Even spiritual individuals rarely ever hear about the kundalini. So, zero chance to have fed my brain with any kind of subconscious suggestions. Yet there I was, fully blown away by that experience of cosmic unity, deep love and knowledge. No idea what just happened but so so deeply grateful and blessed that it did. 
AFTERWARDS, I learned what it was and that it had a name (kundalini) and amazingly, the stories from other people's experiences coincided with mine to a degree that categorically excludes mere coincidence. 

How, in scientific terms, is that possible? 
If the science is strong in you, young materialists, then you must surely be able to come up with a valid theory.

4 hours ago, save the frogs said:

the God peeps are a funny bunch.

They are mere amateurs compared to you. ????

17 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

If you read my post more carefully, I explained everything.

But I'll stop interfering.

Probably me posting here too much is preventing other people from posting.

 

Yes, channeling exists.

Chakras are real, too man!

I know because I had a Reiki practitioner mess with my solar plexus chakra.

Most painful experience ever!.

 

 No no please. Stay.

I'll reply properly once I recover from this laughing fit.

2 hours ago, save the frogs said:

can't really remember. it's been way too long.

decades.

Hold on. So you're telling me that after all your temper tantrums, you actually believe that channeling is real?

You're just pulling my leg, right? Right?

@Elad

Have you thought about the questions I asked? 

1 minute ago, Elad said:

Its just a common joke among scientists. Of course physics works, you only have to look at all the technology around you to know that.

I doubt he meant you..  ????

30 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Really now? ????

What were they channeling exactly? 

Come on @save the frogs, don't let me hanging. This is going to be good.

45 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

what are you planning to do with all these dimensions?

Well, world domination of course, across all possible dimensions. What else? 

43 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

i'd like to suggest that your view on "spirituality" is narrow-minded

And how exactly are you qualified to judge me on my view of spirituality. Prey tell. I'm all ears.

37 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

however, there seems to be an unhealthy obsession by the regular posters on this thread to hate on science.

and to turn this into a spirituality vs science boxing match. 

No such thing. All of us here value science, but we don't believe science has the answers to our questions. We have said this many times already.

The boxing match only starts when people (like you) insist that science is the only judge of what is real and what is not.

34 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

channeling absolutely exists.

Really now? ????

What were they channeling exactly? 

6 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

Similar to yourself in many ways.

 

In our youth and childhood we are open to all sorts of ideas with proof no more than an elder or perhaps even a peer telling us it is so. I, like many, was forced to attend church in my youth. I disliked it for most of the reasons that others do. It was a chore. It was older people talking about things that meant little or nothing to me, singing ridiculous songs (some quite catchy) with words that were wishy washy and adoring of something that I felt shouldn't be adored without question, that contradicted much of what I saw in life. However, I was afraid of this God that was all powerful, was judgmental and would hold me to account and damn me forever if I did not accept him.

 

Only a little later in life I opened my eyes to the evil that was the religious god. How evil, bitter and spiteful that god must be. How sheeplike his followers were. How easy it was for them to fully embrace the god of the gaps. Some would be so stupid to speak trash such as "so if you do not believe in the bible, then how do you know not to kill?". Anybody that cannot see the hypocrisy of that statement and utter blinkered view, to think for one moment that the bible is the only point of reference that is able to tell me right from wrong, while at the same time telling fairy tales of god doing the exact opposite. The bible and religious gods are, in my view, perhaps the worst concoctions in human history.

 

However I believe that you and many others here are no more religious than me, so away with Noah, Adam, Eve, the resurrection and everything else related.

 

In my youth and throughout my 20s I experienced many things that others don't usually at such an age (certainly not to the extent in my life). The death of family, the death of others very close to me, the betrayal of those in a position of trust. I also experienced huge positives... doing wrong and coming clean to those that might have cast me aside, but believed in me, saw through the errors to someone with ability and potential, those that nudged me in the right direction and directed my energies to places that would really make a difference.

 

I also had 2 very near death experiences, 3 if I include cancer that could easily have ended me. These all occurred at an age where I was open to all sorts of possibilities. I saw that in my youth I and most others believed in our immortality, lived live only day by day, were happy in the rat race, doing the same things as everyone else in the hope of getting the same (lame) rewards as everyone else. I wanted more. I was old enough and wise enough to realise that there was much more to life, that I should look past what is only physical, should embrace the possibility of there being other ways to live a full life, to be open minded enough to consider almost anything.

 

That in turn created a huge shift in my own mindset. It didn't change everything I thought it might change... I actually work harder now than I ever did, but towards goals that I truly cherish and in a way that I enjoy and am motivated in doing. It also made me so much more empathetic to the view of others - even if it doesn't appear so in this thread. It made me truly believe that faith, even if it takes a much different form than my own (faith) can be truly powerful. That if someone else had faith in something totally contradictory to my own, and it helped them lead what they believe is a better life, then all power to them.

 

Right up until they tell me that their knowledge in life holds more value than my own and that I have not lived the fullest of lives without their experiences. I find that to be about as arrogant a viewpoint as can be.

 

Reading more of what you write, I don't think we're that dissimilar in many ways, you with total belief in the more supernatural side of spirituality and me being happy with unanswered questions. Maths and physics were always my strongest subjects. I use their frameworks every day, both in leisure and (totally) in my work. Both (and wider science in general) have never let me down, have never lied to me and have never pretended to be something that they are not: for example the answer to everything right here and now.

 

I am still human though. I still find it easy to laugh and make light of that which I don't have answers to... but I'm getting better, slowly.

 

The longest post you'll ever see me write.

 

Thank you for this honest and personal post. Much appreciated.
You're right...we are not that dissimilar. 

52 minutes ago, Woof999 said:

do you think it is at all possible that the spiritual world is just a state of mind, a figment of your imagination that you would love to be real because it allows you to answers questions that, without other means, cannot be answered?

I think I'm qualified enough to try to answer this question based on my own experience. 

I stated before that roughly 25 years ago I had this shift in perception. At that point I considered myself an atheist with zero trust in any religion and I had no idea what spirituality was all about. My life was all about girls, friends, music and parties.

This shift was so radical and transformative that it changed my whole worldview. It was only AFTER, that I started reading up on what had happened to me and try to make some sense of it. I found out that it was called kundalini awakening, and that it was some kind of energy that resides at the base of the spine. It is sometimes released during acute trauma, near death experiences or as a result of meditation, for example.

Now, if this experience would have been all a result of my imagination, how come it coincides so neatly with other people's stories? People throughout history and different places.

Remember, I had no idea about it beforehand. 

So, my dilemma was...could I have somehow tapped into some sort of mass hallucination, that affects random individuals in time and space? And how comes these hallucinations all point towards the same principles of unity, love, transcendence and interconnectedness? Science had absolutely no answers for me.

Or is it more plausible that the kundalini is indeed a real thing, just like it was described in certain old books and relived again and again by people around the world? These people, normal people like you and me, with no spiritual background whatsoever, described their own experience and it matched my own almost perfectly. How is that possible?

You will probably roll your eyes at this, but the whole thing was infinitely more real than the reality I'm in right now. It was therefore impossible to discard it as a mere figment of my imagination. And it was therefore impossible to deny the existence of this other, spiritual dimension of which we are part of, just like we are part of the physical world.

How would you explain it?

27 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I see what you are saying but I think science is science and to criticise it is like saying a human should have 3 legs. When you experience who you are, or the positive effects of kundulini, that is a form of evidence. But evidence of one subjective opinion has limited worth and I am sure you'll agree that is appropriate.

Even if you can't measure the individual effect you could statistically measure say the positive outcomes of yoga for the community. The point is science is not hindering you. If you think about it how could science say something is likely correct because a small number of  people say they had a subjective experience. If 10000 people trained in kundulini and experienced a god and this statistically had an effect different to the rest of the community then there it is - evidence. So you could gather like minded souls and build statistics or stay in your own silo and enjoy what you enjoy. If you do the latter don't criticise science is all. 

I don't criticize science because I have a grudge or agenda towards it. Far from that. I appreciate science just like you. The idea that if one is interested in spirituality he must reject science, is a fairytale. 

I know science is not hindering me and I'm not seeking for science to validate my subjective experiences. 

The problem is that whenever we talk about such experiences, the white knights of scientific inquiry here state quite unequivocally that these experiences are worthless/delusions/attempts at manipulating gullible people/ outright deceptions/lies/crazy-talk/mumbo jumbo....take your pick.

So, while you say that science as a discipline is not hindering me in my pursuit of knowledge (thank you science), it is also true that many science followers use it as a measuring tape to judge what is supposed to be real and what is not. Science itself doesn't make that claim.

Yes, Kundalini awakenings are not common, but they are also not so rare that they are statistically irrelevant. 
One may be able to facilitate its rising (I'm not sure about that), but it's not possible to predict it in any meaningful manner so that it can be researched it in a controlled environment. 

What to do?
At this point you can either forget about it, if you think there is no value in it and don't believe that's it's possible to start with.

Or, you can set your prejudice aside for a while and approach the subject with curiosity and a willingness to be surprised.
Learning opportunities often lie in the most unexpected places. Do you agree?

37 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

You complain about repetition, but I repeat science has no opinion about spirituality, atoms, dolphins or anything else in the universe. It simply says that a thing needs evidence to be acceptable as credible. Credible can sound emotional but this is in simply in terms of if evidence indicates it is likely to be correct. 

Seth could -

say something others couldn't know that is a real thing

come up with a theory that could be tested 

Seth followers could show, based on his theories, that they have a different statistical success in turning dreams into action due to what Seth taught them. Or that because they dream more they have more actual success than the average person. Or better health - longevity - whatever

If nothing to show that's fine - Science lets you do your thing. 

The evidence requested has to fit in their own framework to be accepted. If the evidence doesn't fit that framework, then it's not considered evidence. That's the problem. How can you take subjective data and expect to measure it with objective tools? 
Has sciences ever seriously researched the kundalini? Not that I know of. Yet, this phenomena has been described throughout history, by sources unrelated to each other, and I can personally attest to its validity. 

So, now you have this phenomena that is real (unless one is arrogant enough to say that people who experienced it are all delusional, liars or both), but can not be measured as you would measure the voltage of an electrical current. What does that mean? That it doesn't exist? Does it mean we should ignore it, until science may or may not catch up and validate it some time in the future? Even if you're a hardcore materialist, one would expect a healthy human curiosity as to why people claim to have had the same or very similar experiences. Even if it's only a physiological or psychological effect.

You've been here for a while now. Do you think I'm a liar? Do you think I'm incoherent and delusional? 

It must be said very clearly:
Science is great, but it is NOT the only source of knowledge.

Can science tell you who you are? Who can? 


PS: I do think Seth's teachings are valid, but I'm not qualified to defend them, nor am I interested in doing so. I prefer to speak from my own experience.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

I think at least one of the regular posters on here has been very critical of scientists as it pertains to anything spiritual.

But knock yourself out!

The official stance of science is that "spirituality" has no place in science, so yeah, one might be critical of scientists claiming anything about spirituality.

1 hour ago, Elad said:

Some cosmologists think that we live on the surface of a 3-sphere. A 2-sphere is like the Earth which is spherical, has a 2D surface, and has no beginning and no end. A 3-sphere, is a sphere with a 3 dimensional surface that has no beginning and no end, so if you traveled in a straight line for many billions of light years then you'd end up in the same place you started. Sounds plausible but I have problems visualizing it. And it solves the problem of where does the universe end, like the surface of the Earth it never ends.    

Tbh, I'm more interested to read your answers to the other questions. 

3 minutes ago, Elad said:

I don't really like to speculate but it wouldn't surprise me if there were extra dimensions.

Have you ever heard of a 3-sphere?

No,,never heard.

Why don't you like to speculate? Go on, speculate! ????

Do you think those extra dimensions are always present?

Do you think those extra dimensions are accessible in some way? 

How do you think it feels like being consciously aware in one of these extra dimensions?