What does Kundalini Yoga have to say about Scientific Fact versus Theoretical and Hypothetical Speculations?
Ergo, what's the comparative distinctions between the sheaths of consciousness which are related to, and connected with, the fourth and fifth chakras: the Anahata and the Vishuddha? [A Disclaimer]
The path to God is governed by our devotion to the process, which is defined by Yukt, the root of Yoga, defined as being “union with Divinity”. Our English word for “yoke” is derived from this Sanskrit term. Not that we become gods while in our human form, but that we will gain that status upon the death of the body while having become (potentially) a God, while alive, since our human body limits the full expression of our divinity even if we are enlightened (unless we accelerate our vibratory consciousness beyond the mechanisms of our body).
And, in order to achieve that blessed state, correct discernment must be exercised without equivocation to ascertain what is truly a path to God versus what will lead us to despair and ruination of our zest for life.
To accomplish this discernment, we are given the fifth chakra (the Vishuddha chakra), attached to its corresponding vital sheath, the abstract mental. This is in contradistinction to the fourth chakra (the Anahata chakra) which is usually opened up (fully activated) among monks and nuns and recluses who seek seclusion from the world of activity often times taking vows of poverty, silence and chastity to procure this blessed state. The opening up of the fourth, Anahata, chakra bestows upon the aspirant the benefit of recognizing that we are all children of One Creator.
These wheels, or: flowering = blossoming, of new awarenesses within the realm of our consciousness are the literal translations of their Sanskrit term of “chakra”.
Furthermore, the Anahata chakra is what we could call the “concrete mind” which deals with the concrete world which can be quantized in scientific terms with rigor containing no doubts nor uncertainties. This is in direct opposition to the fifth chakra and its union with abstract mind which has merely God and Infinity as its pair of bounded limitations.
By the way, according to the rigorous logic of one’s compliment arithmetic — which is the basis for computer logic at the most fundamental level of computer operations, the negation (ergo, the inversion) of infinity yields zero while the negation of zero yields infinity. Thus, their magnitudes are equal. Zero equals Infinity if their unique sign differences are ignored.
But if we include their differences in sign, then Infinity is the diametric opposite of Zero. These are absolute magnitudes which cannot be counted (ie, measured). What we think we have measured, whenever we measure the total lack of something, is merely an approximation since we can never be certain with 100% accuracy that we are capable of measuring an absolute, asymptotic, zero or infinite limit whose boundaries are beyond the concrete world of relativity.
Do you see the disparity between the abstract realm of hypothesis and theory and belief versus the concrete realm of this physicality in which we live? They are about as different as are the night from the day. In fact, an ancient culture called the imaginary field of numbers which enumerates the imaginary power of electrical reactance the “the night-side of nature” while the real field of numbers which enumerates the physicality of real power, which exists under the auspices of the Conservation of Energy, they called “the day side of nature”. The day side can be sensed and measured while the night-side has to be inferred which always allows for doubt.
I have yet to build any overunity device. I am very good at simulating them, but as hypothetical entities whose existence within the realm of theoretical physics and imaginary (mathematical) engineering is purely speculative.
I’ve built a variation of Leon Ernest Eeman’s biocircuit married to Eric P. Dollard’s analog computer in LMD mode and tested it over a period of over a month inducing dreamless sleep and ultimately a two- and one-half-hour session of samadhi (transcendence).
And I’ve built rainmaking devices with one success.1 And I’ve sought a provisional patent for an enhancement to the modern phenomenon of “Earthing” in which people electrically connect themselves to the Earth (although I’ve noted, in recent times, that the ground is electrically polluted — which Eric P. Dollard has concurred 2 — making it impossible for those of us who are electrically hypersensitive to derive any positive benefit from the act of Earthing).
But these types of technologies occupy a very narrow niche which most of humanity will not come into awareness of for many years ‘ere they do.
So, the realm of the abstract possesses no limitations for its axioms to delineate to what extent we could take up analogous positions within the realm of our absolute existence as Gods who are capable of materializing our own universes within our consciousness. In fact, that’s what literally happened when an aspirant to yoga met with the yogi saint, known as: Tat Wale Babe,3 asking the yogi to perform a miracle. The yogi complied by putting his two hands together as if to make “namaste”, and then he separated them exhibiting an entire galaxy in miniature in the space between his two hands. The aspirant freaked out and ran away as fast his legs could carry him. Eric P. Dollard did something similar as a teenager with the help of two of his buddies in his parent’s garage by forming — if but for an instant — swirling galaxies inside of the bulbs discarded from street-lights.
Yet, any attempt we make to express theoretical or hypothetical axioms into our daily life will immediately meet numerous challenges not the least of which is “doubt”.