A few questions concerning TP

[dloheb]

First, I assume the "Palantius" (proper spelling 'palatinus'?)is the same thing people refer to as the Kundalini. Thoughts?

If my assumption is correct, then, how come the book states it is only 'relaxed' during certain sexual encounters? Are there not many people with awakened kundalini who come to this through many different means? Even tormented by the awakening and their lack of control over it. . .? Thoughts?

Perhaps the Palantius is something different and my knowledge of it too rudimentary - that's why I'm asking. Part of my reasoning was based on the fact it was speaking on chakras. page 166 of the newest version.

Second, if we choose our lives, why would we choose a life of corruption that causes much suffering to ourselves or others, or both, or spiritual regression in ourselves or others? We see the entire thing and agree to it beforehand. page 137 is one instance of how this works. Even to be a construction worker where loud noise damages your astral being. . . why would someone CHOOSE that? What. . . are these people excercising their freedom of choice in the afterlife? Tom Chalko, in his book the Freedom Of Choice, states that when reaching the higher self you know everything, so, assuming that's true for everyone, I don't understand how they would choose to damage themselves or others in physical reality? Maybe karma has something to do with all of this? Either way. . a decision? ANd how does one's freedom of choice fit into all of this? This subject is obviously too big for me but I'd like to know your thoughts and understandings on this matter.

There are some other questions--like the 10 000-year-old prehistoric caveman in the parallel dimension who's existance doesn't seem to align with the rest of the book's teachings--that aren't as heavy on my mind as the above two right now.


Thanks

[Vesko]

Hello, Dloheb,

First, I assume the "Palantius" (proper spelling 'palatinus'?)is the same thing people refer to as the Kundalini. Thoughts?

The editor note about Palantius says that the spelling is uncertain. There is practically no doubt this is actually Kundalini. Page 162 says "It is in the form of a coiled spring and only reaches the base of the spinal column when it is relaxed". Kundalini means "coiled". Another, very solid indication -- on the same page, it is written "Certain Tantrists on Earth have attained this point, but it isn't common among them, for still their religions, with ridiculous rituals and prohibitions, create a real obstacle to attaining this goal." Tantra deals with Kundalini awakening. Therefore, this Palantius ought to be Kundalini.

Regarding the phrase "certain Tatrists", it clearly says "certain" because Tantra consists of 3 so-called paths -- Kaula, Mishra and Samaya (left Tantra, mixed Tantra and right Tantra, respectively), and the Samaya path doesn't include any sexual practices.

If my assumption is correct, then, how come the book states it is only 'relaxed' during certain sexual encounters?

A minor note: I wouldn't say encounters. An encounter is a meeting that occurred by chance. Can you hope you'd have a Kundalini awakening by chance? I wouldn't say so.

Are there not many people with awakened kundalini who come to this through many different means? Even tormented by the awakening and their lack of control over it. . .? Thoughts?

Perhaps the Palantius is something different and my knowledge of it too rudimentary - that's why I'm asking. Part of my reasoning was based on the fact it was speaking on chakras. page 166 of the newest version.

I've read it's easy to mistake Kundalini awakening for another phenomenon -- Sushumna awakening. Quoting http://swamij.com/kundalini-awakening-3 ... ngsushumna, based on information taught by the yogi T. T. Swami Rama (someone I highly respect because I've found a great deal of truth in what I've been able to test from his teachings).

Mistaking Sushumna for Kundalini Awakening: Prana flowing in Sushumna is extremely peaceful, and can easily be confused with Kundalini Awakening. As you feel the tranquility, along with the warmth flowing through the levels of the spine, this calmness is very alluring, and when reading the books about Kundalini Awakening, it can seem as if, "This is it!" There is a difference between the flow of Prana through Sushumna and full Kundalini Awakening, with that Kundalini energy itself rising. Both Prana and Kundalini are forms of the universal energy of Shakti, though here, at this stage, it is still Prana that is flowing in Sushumna (To see the differences between these forms of Shakti, take a look at the article on Shakti, Kundalini, and the River). Full Kundalini Awakening is extremely powerful, as this full charge awakens and begins to move upwards.

My recollection is that Robert Bruce (of http://www.astraldynamics.com) also wrote that people confuse Kundalini with something else. Yet he, the abovementioned yogi and other yogis and Tantrists all talk of means of activating kundalini without sex. There is little doubt to me that some of them are activating something powerful without sexual means, but if "Thiaoouba Prophecy" is to be believed, then this must still not be Kundalini! Good confusion, isn't it?

I hope that helps thin the fog a little.

[Rezo]

Hi dloheb,

w/respect to choice of life that can cause spiritual regression, in the case where in the spirit world that 'sets you up'...if in that case a future life will definitely regress you spiritually in some way.... perhaps in a big picture sort of way a certain type of lesson is its reason - because lifes purpose is always to learn and our spiritual caretakers always want to be helpful - maybe like skepitcal children some of us, even in the spirit world, still dont believe certain things are as harmful as they really are, and need to experience that harm in some way.

So really, I'd say still that environments are provided that might cause us to be more tempted to regress, only if we insist on it ourselves to no end [!most likely due to past life experience we percieved as enjoyable/addicting...addiction can be powerful dont forget], or if it would provide a 'harder' lesson for us - based on previous incarnations where we failed our lesson and need + want a harder one that forces us to 'finally get it'. Yet, though understanding cannot be undone, noise and drugs can certainly make it harder to maintain or communicate. Unfortunately we earthlings no so little about these influences beyond a physiological level of action. Id sure like to research this [w/o immersing myself in its influences].

Personally I think the meaning of kundalini relaxation means that the base chakra releases its energy. When it releases its built-up energy and relaxes, it either dissipates [orgasm] or rises upward to either nourish/harmonize other chakras, or, rise up excessively to the head [too much kundalini, i.e. 'walking around dazed' type, when you cultivate too much of it and never allow drainage of excess Qi . The 5 [6] tibetan rites are one excellent way to transmute energy; the description above of course describes 'normal' sexual interaction, whereas I suppose tantric sex would do the same as transmuting to other chakras would do. Perhaps more powerfully, I dont know. Love can be pretty powerful stuff.

Ive never actually heard of 'palatinus' before. Where does this idea come from?

[Vesko]

Ive never actually heard of 'palatinus' before. Where does this idea come from?

Because of -ius suffix of the word, I conclude that "Palantius" or "Paltanius" is a Latin word. The latest edition of the book contains only "Palantius", but in previous ones there is also "Paltanius". My guess is, if the word is indeed Latin, that the correct spelling is "Palatinus", because the other variants do not seem to be valid Latin words or phrases (I could be wrong). Getting rid of the unnecessary capitalisation, the Latin word is then "palatinus". In Latin, "palat inus" means "an imperial official" (I have learnt that from the etymology of the English word "paladin", which I read in an English dictionary of mine while searching). Thinking, the aforementioned coil in the spine is said to serve a major force, so it certainly could be labelled a royal servant. What do you think about that? If the book actually uses a Latin term, then somebody must have used that to describe Kundalini or something like it before. But I couldn't find such a source on the Internet.

[Vesko]

To try to answer your other questions, Dloheb, and adding to what Rezo wrote:

Second, if we choose our lives, why would we choose a life of corruption that causes much suffering to ourselves or others, or both, or spiritual regression in ourselves or others? We see the entire thing and agree to it beforehand. page 137 is one instance of how this works. Even to be a construction worker where loud noise damages your astral being. . . why would someone CHOOSE that? What. . . are these people excercising their freedom of choice in the afterlife? Tom Chalko, in his book the Freedom Of Choice, states that when reaching the higher self you know everything, so, assuming that's true for everyone, I don't understand how they would choose to damage themselves or others in physical reality? Maybe karma has something to do with all of this? Either way. . a decision? ANd how does one's freedom of choice fit into all of this? This subject is obviously too big for me but I'd like to know your thoughts and understandings on this matter.

Freedom of choice doesn't mean that it necessarily involves an unlimited or even a large number of choices. It is logical to conclude that the current range of choices available to us is determined by all the previous choices that we have made. The worse choices we made in the past are, the worse (worse including fewer and smaller) our future range of choices is. So, when someone chooses to enter a life involving drugs or loud sound, it could be because one has no better alternative.

There are some other questions--like the 10 000-year-old prehistoric caveman in the parallel dimension who's existance doesn't seem to align with the rest of the book's teachings

It aligns if you'd note that the parallel universe is an accident. In other words, the Creator, or God, has made some mistake resulting in it, as with the human appendix. Nevertheless, it is fit for a good use -- the aliens use it to visit Earth without a chance for detection by us.

I hope the above answers your questions. If not, please do ask again.

[survivor]

Having just re-read "The Third Eye" by T.Lobsang Rampa, there is an encounter with a YETi, it is mentioned that they are a throw back from the Human race who had taken a different path in evolution and who could only live in the most secluded places.

P.S. Much written in TP and TFOC, coincide with a lot that L.Rampa has published.

P.P.S. Rampa writes that through Kundalini yoga one can develop psychic powers, like telepathy, clairvoyance, etc.

[Vesko]

Having just re-read "The Third Eye" by T.Lobsang Rampa, there is an encounter with a YETi, it is mentioned that they are a throw back from the Human race who had taken a different path in evolution and who could only live in the most secluded places.

I think it is of value to share that the aforementioned T. T. Swami Rama has circulated around the Himalayas, including very hidden recesses, for 45 years, and studied with numerous developed yogis under the main guidance of a very accomplished one. He met various people looking for a yeti (abominable snowman). He writes that he had never seen such and that it is a myth. That grandmothers in Himalayan villages tell their grandchildren such stories. From his experience, in the deep snow, one's vision often clouds and one could think from afar that white bears, which are rarely met in those mountains and leave large footprints, are snow men.

There is another big myth, he writes -- Shambala or Shangri La. The myth comes from two ancient cave monasteries in the Himalayas, described in traditional sacred teachings and containing numerous documents for spiritual development. He had visited one of them personally and confirmed that it still functioned as a monastery. But it does not fit the wild fantasies of those who look for the mythical Shambala.

P.S Much written in TP and TFOC, coincide with a lot that L.Rampa has published.

Indeed, to the point that I've wondered if Michel hadn't used a lot of material from Rampa, claiming it is his own. But how do we know for sure except through our own development -- it could be just because they both talk about the same true things? For example, Rampa claims the human being is 1/10th of the overself, whereas it's 1/9th in TP. You may have also read the identical account from Similar case retold in both Michel's and L. Rampa's book in the "General Discussion" forum.

[Vesko]

Swami Rama also writes that the word yeti is wrongly used to mean "a snow man". It's a Sanscrit word, meaning a hermit, an ascetic, and is the name of a group of sadhus (holy men) from the order of Shankaracharya (or Sankaracharya).

He also writes that he once met a rich American, who spent large amounts of money in search to photograph a yeti. In the end, that person was dissapointed. Unfortunately, he published a photo of a Nepali sadhu, calling him a snowman.

The information from Swami Rama in this and the previous post is from the book "Living with the Himalayan Masters". I've recommended this book here before, and, in my opinion, it is an absolutely must-read book (also it's a must-reread book ) for those who are serious about spiritual development. I cannot recommend it highly enough!

[InfoSource]

For example, Rampa claims the human being is 1/10th of the overself, whereas it's 1/9th in TP. You may have also read the identical account from Similar case retold in both Michel's and L. Rampa's book in the "General Discussion" forum.

From shezmear's site [address available on request]:

When Michel says in his book it gives one ninth of itself to make an astral body, this does not make sense, which has been revised in his other comments and lectures. If you have a pie and you break it up into nine parts, and you give out each one of those parts, how much pie do you have left? The answer is zero. It simply does not make sense, so, anyway, the higher self actually gives half of itself and keeps the other as a power source. The other half of the higher self never incarnates in a physical body. It has a specific role to play and remains between us and the astral plan.

If I'm reading right, and this information is correct then there needs to be a new edited TP with this information about the higher self in it, shouldn’t Michel and Tom who worked on the latest version of TP made sure that this mistake was corrected?

[Vesko]

The information is correct, because it is also confirmed by Michel himself in the "Thiaoouba Truth" audio interviews. The actual part is 1/18th. (This has also been mentioned back in 2004 on the topic "Meeting the Higher Self" in the "General Spirituality and Healing" forum.)

Indeed, there should be an edit or a footnote added.

[InfoSource]

The information is correct, because it is also confirmed by Michel himself in the "Thiaoouba Truth" audio interviews. The actual part is 1/18th.

So the truth of the matter is each astral body connected to the overself (9 in total) is really 1/18th a part of it.

1/18th multiplied by 9 is 50% of the overself, and the other 50% is with the overself at all times as a power source, it makes sense now

[shezmear]

I raised it with Tom, and his reply was the universe is basically a processor of information?

In short did nothing about it, it is misleading especially if you want the book to have credibility.

[Yothu]

be a construction worker where loud noise damages your astral being. . . why would someone CHOOSE that? What. . . are these people excercising their freedom of choice in the afterlife? Tom Chalko, in his book the Freedom Of Choice, states that when reaching the higher self you know everything, so, assuming that's true for everyone, I don't understand how they would choose to damage themselves or others in physical reality? Maybe karma has something to do with all of this? Either way. . a decision?

Freedom of choice doesn't mean that it necessarily involves an unlimited or even a large number of choices. It is logical to conclude that the current range of choices available to us is determined by all the previous choices that we have made. The worse choices we made in the past are, the worse (worse including fewer and smaller) our future range of choices is. So, when someone chooses to enter a life involving drugs or loud sound, it could be because one has no better alternative.

I do not agree with you Vesko at this point. Do you remember the "déjà vu"-Discussion on Dr. Chalko's forum?

Let us imagine that the being who is a construction worker on Earth previewed his life, was washed in the river of oblivion and incarnated here on Earth. It is only a theory, but I think that him working as a construction worker might not have been included in the previewed film at all. Same goes with life of drug addicts. It does not necessarily mean that it is part of their lesson, though it could be. Life is not a predetermined thing, because, if it would then life on Earth would just be perfect. Without flaws, because no "bad" choices could have been made in the first place. But, as we all know, life is not perfect at all. The film can be changed by the actor who is at the same time directing it. We all make our decisions in various parts and episodes of our lives. And they can have little or great impact on ourselves and others. It might well be, that we know - or feel, or can imagine - the best choice, but we do not have to choose it at all. We are not forced to follow "the best way". We can, if we want to. So, I pretty much think you have answered your question yourself in your post - "either way... a decision".

My idea is that there is a plan that is likely to be the best plan on how decisions can be made here on Earth for everybody. And I think we can access these ideas. Just that we do not always act according to them, because we sort of block them out (by analyzing them too much, fear, negating them, pressure of society, conditioning, choice etc.)

This is why, in my opinion, the world is how it is. Because it is not run by god, it is run by humans which are free to make their own decisions. That is the true freedom that is granted to us.

[bomohwkl]

So the truth of the matter is each astral body connected to the overself (9 in total) is really 1/18th a part of it.

1/18th multiplied by 9 is 50% of the overself, and the other 50% is with the overself at all times as a power source, it makes sense now

I never know that.

[bomohwkl]

My idea is that there is a plan that is likely to be the best plan on how decisions can be made here on Earth for everybody. And I think we can access these ideas. Just that we do not always act according to them, because we sort of block them out (by analyzing them too much, fear, negating them, pressure of society, conditioning, choice etc.)

I think it is very difficult to know what is the 'best' scenerio when you acted upon a choice. A spiritualist who negates materialism will only cause pain.
The 'best' scenerio is usually based on certain assumptions you have made.
One could establih a base for the next human survival. This is assuming that

1.the place will not be hit by natural disaster.
2.Catastrophic disaster will occur in your lifetime.
3.Laws will not change that invalidate your right of the land
and etc.

We live in a dynamic world. What is best now might not be the best in future.
For example, one might study laws because it was a highly demanded in the job market.
He was assuming that the demand is still there when he graduated from the course. Suddenly at his final years, the economy turned into recession. He couldn't find a job in laws. At the end, after a few years of non-practising laws, his degree was useless.

The latter is a real life story.

Hence, consciously, what you deem as a 'best choice' now might not be a 'best choice' in future. I think some mistakes could have been made which might make preview irrelevant.