Paul Rogers94 said:Scientific criteria? Please. Kundalini shakti is divine energy—it can't be measured by any gadget, nor is it subject to any scientific scrutiny. When you talk about kundalini, you have to step outside of science and scientific metalanguage entirely. Sure, you might eventually measure some physical side effects from the "shift" during a kundalini rise, but that energy isn't part of this energetic system the human body inhabits. That energy is OUT THERE, and it is so unimaginably powerful that your body would turn into a pile of ash the instant you tried to translate it into this limited energetic system we live in. We’re talking about the energy that creates the universe; it is the source of all other energies.
Just for comparison—if you've ever heard those internal sounds, they aren't things you hear with your physical ears. Those are sounds you hear OUT THERE, and they are far more articulated and powerful than anything your physical ears could pick up. You experience them directly (bells, drums, flutes... whatever else comes along; when they layer over one another, you get that initial thunderous sound that transitions into Om)—eventually, you might measure the bodily reactions when you somehow brush against that "energy."
Or take the third eye: it isn't an actual eye inside the body, nor is it located at the pineal gland. It simply corresponds to the pineal gland in or on the body. Just as the other glands correspond to the chakras, there are no actual chakras in the body, nor are there any nadis. Chakras refer to states of being.
That’s why I use the imagery of it being "OUT THERE" (in those celestial spheres beyond our sensory perception).
I'm just generalizing quickly here for the sake of analogy, so don't come after me for every single word...
Go check out that conversation with Ricki Archer about kundalini that I linked earlier.
Generally speaking, spirituality doesn't have much to do with science or the scientific method—that's exactly why it's called spirituality. This trendy push to shove spirituality into scientific frameworks (and vice versa) is an affront to both spirituality and science. It's like trying to measure the distance between point A and point B by checking your blood sugar levels.
Look, I get what people mean when they talk about Kundalini through that Hindu lens... but let's be real—the electrical component of that energy? That's actually provable stuff...
If kundalini energy is actually going to make an impact on this world, it’s gotta manifest in a way we can actually wrap our heads around... and honestly, electricity is pretty much the most subtle phenomenon we've got a handle on...
Look, I’ve been saying this from the jump—kundalini is a massive, complex concept... but it definitely has an electrical component to it—amongst all the other bits that are mostly just speculation...
Paul Rogers94 said:Scientific criteria? Please. Kundalini shakti is divine energy—it can't be measured by any gadget, nor is it subject to any scientific scrutiny. When you talk about kundalini, you have to step outside of science and scientific metalanguage entirely. Sure, you might eventually measure some physical side effects from the "shift" during a kundalini rise, but that energy isn't part of this energetic system the human body inhabits. That energy is OUT THERE, and it is so unimaginably powerful that your body would turn into a pile of ash the instant you tried to translate it into this limited energetic system we live in. We’re talking about the energy that creates the universe; it is the source of all other energies.
Just for comparison—if you've ever heard those internal sounds, they aren't things you hear with your physical ears. Those are sounds you hear OUT THERE, and they are far more articulated and powerful than anything your physical ears could pick up. You experience them directly (bells, drums, flutes... whatever else comes along; when they layer over one another, you get that initial thunderous sound that transitions into Om)—eventually, you might measure the bodily reactions when you somehow brush against that "energy."
Or take the third eye: it isn't an actual eye inside the body, nor is it located at the pineal gland. It simply corresponds to the pineal gland in or on the body. Just as the other glands correspond to the chakras, there are no actual chakras in the body, nor are there any nadis. Chakras refer to states of being.
That’s why I use the imagery of it being "OUT THERE" (in those celestial spheres beyond our sensory perception).
I'm just generalizing quickly here for the sake of analogy, so don't come after me for every single word...
Go check out that conversation with Ricki Archer about kundalini that I linked earlier.
Generally speaking, spirituality doesn't have much to do with science or the scientific method—that's exactly why it's called spirituality. This trendy push to shove spirituality into scientific frameworks (and vice versa) is an affront to both spirituality and science. It's like trying to measure the distance between point A and point B by checking your blood sugar levels.
Looks like you got your wires crossed on who was saying what...
yeah... I wrote the exact same thing you did... basically saying that the "third eye" is identified with the pineal gland because—fictitiously speaking—that’s where it's physically located.
I've grabbed a bit of Hindu wisdom from "Seven Chakras"...
seven states of consciousness... Predrag Kezele... I mean, I get that it’s about states of being or consciousness, but man—that guy Guilman was really out there nitpicking over the whole concept in his own typical way...
Paul Rogers94 said:Scientific criteria? Please. Kundalini shakti is divine energy—it can't be measured by any gadget, nor is it subject to any scientific scrutiny. When you talk about kundalini, you have to step outside of science and scientific metalanguage entirely. Sure, you might eventually measure some physical side effects from the "shift" during a kundalini rise, but that energy isn't part of this energetic system the human body inhabits. That energy is OUT THERE, and it is so unimaginably powerful that your body would turn into a pile of ash the instant you tried to translate it into this limited energetic system we live in. We’re talking about the energy that creates the universe; it is the source of all other energies.
Just for comparison—if you've ever heard those internal sounds, they aren't things you hear with your physical ears. Those are sounds you hear OUT THERE, and they are far more articulated and powerful than anything your physical ears could pick up. You experience them directly (bells, drums, flutes... whatever else comes along; when they layer over one another, you get that initial thunderous sound that transitions into Om)—eventually, you might measure the bodily reactions when you somehow brush against that "energy."
Or take the third eye: it isn't an actual eye inside the body, nor is it located at the pineal gland. It simply corresponds to the pineal gland in or on the body. Just as the other glands correspond to the chakras, there are no actual chakras in the body, nor are there any nadis. Chakras refer to states of being.
That’s why I use the imagery of it being "OUT THERE" (in those celestial spheres beyond our sensory perception).
I'm just generalizing quickly here for the sake of analogy, so don't come after me for every single word...
Go check out that conversation with Ricki Archer about kundalini that I linked earlier.
Generally speaking, spirituality doesn't have much to do with science or the scientific method—that's exactly why it's called spirituality. This trendy push to shove spirituality into scientific frameworks (and vice versa) is an affront to both spirituality and science. It's like trying to measure the distance between point A and point B by checking your blood sugar levels.
That’s just not true... everything is connected—like, seriously. Take what people call "quieting the mind" in spiritual circles; you can actually measure that stuff. You could track it by counting thoughts per minute, or even looking at thought frequency... it's all right there.
So, you've got this specific spectrum of waves, right? And what you're actually doing when you meditate is basically just dialing down the frequency of those "thoughts over time." We're talking about measurable, comparable, data-crunchable electrical patterns here—real stuff... It’s all expressed in Hz—Hertz, if you want to get technical—which is just the number of times something repeats within a single second.
Gamma (40 - 100 Hz) — the fast lane (basically "maximum thoughts")
Beta (12 – 40 Hz)
Alpha (8 – 12 Hz)
Theta (4 – 8 Hz)
Delta (0 – 4 Hz) — the slow crawl ("minimum thoughts")
Practicing kundalini lifting triggers these massive voltage spikes in the theta and delta ranges—those deep subconscious waves... there was this guy I mentioned before, Ljubis Stojanovic, who actually spent his time developing techniques to tap into these lower frequencies and then went ahead and measured them in a lab setting
There are also ways to basically hack your brain waves to hit specific spectrums—say, dialing up alpha and beta if you're trying to study... or dropping down into those deep Theta/Delta levels right before bed to let your subconscious chew on info while you sleep
The OG pioneer in this field was this (maybe pseudo?) scientist named Silva—the guy who gave us the first "Silva Method" for mind control... though, honestly, things have moved way past his era and evolved into actual, legit science now
