X-Ftn-To: Gwailoh-9

Gwailoh-9 wrote:
>>... Soma is in fact a substance produced within the body as a side-effect
>>of higher consciousness. You can even smell it, because people who
>>have it within them radiate a wonderful scent, which is similar to
>>something floral, but not quite. My dirty clothes smell better than
>>the clean ones, because of it.
>
>One of my brother's friends Jody, she was a bicycle courier downtown
>Vancouver, often riding hard & sweating 9 hours a day. She'd also
>been a hardcore vegan for some years. Spiritual person too, though i
>don't know exactly what disciplines she followed. Brother said she
>never smelled 'off', it was always like strawberries or whatever.

Yes, that might be it, or something similar. I think that there is a
whole family of similar substances, and if one stops contaminating the
system they might just start surfacing. Spiritual life, life filled
with joy and fun, combined with a pure diet... sounds very likely.

>waited with a bowl to catch the urine of the initial-consumers. Then
>drink the pee, and get to the same place!

Yuck :FFF :)

> It is a pretty unusual characteristic, and unique for A.muscaria.
>Again, just another 'coincidence' that tantric theory says the same
>thing?

Yes, it's just a coincidence; I read the upanishads where this is
mentioned and I assure you that the context has nothing to do with
mushrooms. It has more to do with pranayamas, like kevala kumbhaka
that I already mentioned.

>>The analogy is wrong. In fact, I know exactly what kinds contain what
>>chemicals, and the ones that are unpredictable, like cortinarii or
>>clitocybe some amanitae, I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole, let
>>alone eat them.
>
>i think the analogy is just fine. All that is changed is the purpose
>you are putting the mushrooms to - either for nutrition or getting
>high. In both cases you can be perfectly fine if you learn about your
>subject, and beware confusing species. Perhaps it is just that you
>consider psychoactivity in a mushroom to equate with danger, whereas i
>do not.

Well, psychoactivity never comes alone, at least in the species that I
know of... overdose of the substance is frequently lethal, and the
risk of bodily damage (kidneys, liver, brain...) is unexplored. The
dosage varies from habitat to habitat, and betting your life on it can
be a very dangerous thing, as I mentioned in the example with the
Russians who poisoned themselves with the Croatian variety of AM.

>Take Psilocybe cubensis for instance - If you learn its
>characteristics, it is pretty hard to mess it up.

Unfortunately I'm unfamiliar with it.

>>But, even the good, kosher species contain substances that, if you
>>drink alcohol with them, can have interesting effects on you. :) Good
>>ol' macrolepiota procera can get you high as a kite laughing at
>>everything if you sip wine with it... not always of course, but it can
>>happen.
>
>i've heard of this before, from an English mycophile! It was a really
>funny story, coming from a very very 'straight' & conventional man. i
>lost my file on it ... i'll have to find it again you'd love it. ...
>is perhaps M.procera commonly known as the 'puffball'?

Well, it looks like a big umbrella, sort of, and its name in Croatian
is "suncanica", or, "sun mushroom". I don't know any English folk
names for mushrooms, so I'll have to stick with Latin. :)
I found the picture:
http://www.dipbot.unict.it/sistematica/Macrolep.html

>>Mushrooms are a very strange territory even if you know them
>>well.
>>
>>>no, you aren't. you are have educated yourself, you know what you
>>>need to look for, and what you need to beware of.
>>
>>Yes, I need to beware stuff that kills you, makes you sick or makes
>>you think your TV is God. :)
>
>heh heh, such as our 'modern civilization' :-)

Agreed. :))

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: RC

RC wrote:
> LOL :-) and right on target
>
> Danjiel reminds me of Rasputin with his "Look into my eyes.
> That's where my teaching is." statement and by Hades he's
> even sex obsessed like the old Russian. My guess he'll
> probably end up running a personality based group like
> Adi Da does in a few years and blowing out their
> mental & emotional fuses with his Kundalini raising
> exercises.

Oh yes, you're right, my person shold have nothing to do with my
teaching. That way I'd cozily fit the religious scene where everybody
teaches without being the embodiment of their teaching. So now you'll
have to just ridicule me, because the opposite approach would be to
think that _you_, and all the others that you admire, are merely
fakes. And that's something we cannot allow, eh?

Of course my teaching is in my eyes. Where should it be, in my bank
account maybe? Or only in my mouth?

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Foo Fighter

Foo Fighter wrote:
>Za ime pretpostavljam da ne smeta, ali ostale cinjenice su saka u oko...
>Zamisli, da iz Indije dodje netko tko nije guru? Brrrrrrrrr....

Naravno, pa luzera imamo i ovdje, iz Indije bi nam dobro dosao netko
pametan.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

Da ne zaboravim, ima jos toga:

"U koji god grad ili selo u?ete, razvidite tko je u njemu dostojan:
ondje ostanite sve dok ne odete. Ulaze?i u ku?u, zaželite joj mir.
Bude li ku?a dostojna, neka mir vaš si?e na nju. Ne bude li dostojna,
neka se mir vaš k vama vrati. Gdje vas ne prime i ne poslušaju rije?i
vaših, izi?ite iz ku?e ili grada toga i prašinu otresite sa svojih
nogu. Zaista, kažem vam, lakše ?e biti zemlji sodomskoj i gomorskoj na
Dan sudnji negoli gradu tomu."
(Mt 10,11-15)

Cisto onako.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Damir Orlic

Damir Orlic wrote:
>On Sun, 13 May 2001 11:07:29 -0400, vriane
>wrote:
>>I ask this because that is what he told us on alt.yoga.
>>He said that in two years he brought peace, love and yoga
>>to you, who were uncivilized before he came.
>>Is that true ?
>
>Nooooooooo .... it is not true at all ....... unfortunly Danijel's
>followers are uncivilized still now. ;>

Cuj, ja i inace nisam imao previsoko misljenje o Tvojoj pameti, ali
ovo je vec fakat smijesno, naime daj malo razmisli o tome sto pises.
Ti u stvari kritiziras ljude koje poznajes i za koje _znas_ da im se
nista ne moze prigovoriti, kritiziras ih nekom kretenu kojemu su
zaboravili staviti mozak kad su ga pravili, a sve zato sto si
frustriran.
To je sve skupa tako jadno da bi se ja zrigao sam nad sobom na sam na
Tvojem mjestu. Odi u neku mracnu rupu i zakopaj se.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Scourge of God (tm)

"Scourge of God (tm)" wrote:
>>To je zapravo Isus i rekao. (Mt 22,14; Mt 7,13-14)
>
> A moze cijeli citat? Naime, nemam ni elektronsko izdanje Biblije ni
>obicno. A ne vjerujem da ima tog u onoj djecjoj .)

"Doista, mnogo je zvanih, malo izabranih."
(Mt 22,14)

"U?ite na uska vrata! Jer široka su vrata i prostran put koji vodi u
propast i mnogo ih je koji njime idu. O kako su uska vrata i tijesan
put koji vodi u Život i malo ih je koji ga nalaze!"
(Mt 7,13-14)

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

"Thedy" wrote:
>"Megaquad" wrote in message
>news:B724AB30.7BBC%megaquad@vip.hr...
>> vodo,reci mi kakve veze ima aparat za ciscenje vode sa umjetnoscu
>> i mogao si ovih 10 poruka strpat u jednu a ne ovako zivcirat ljude
>>
>Mogu ja?
>Nikakve:-)!!!

Nemojte vise replyati na ovo, i svi posaljite idiota na abuse, da
zavrsimo taj thread koji je netematski svuda. Kaj bas morate svi
odgovoriti na nesto sto je napisala neka spammerska budala?

Dakle nemojte odgovarati ni meni, ni njemu, ni nikome, eventualno na
abuse@hinet.hr

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: keval dass

"keval dass" wrote:
>ugliness is in the mind of the beholder.

Maybe, on the lower level of understanding. On the higher level,
there's only the truth and objectivity. If something is red, you say
it's red. If it's blue, you say it's blue. You have no bias one way or
the other. It's totally irrelevant to you whether it's red or blue, so
you just witness it. This applies to human qualities as well.

>So are you enlightened?

What does enlightenment mean to you? I ask because every now and then
somebody brings up some strange definition and I really don't know
what is meant by the term.

>I'm not
>trying to be rude or mean, I guess I just do that naturally but I am trying
>to change. I'm just interested. I'm kind of glad that you are here, I
>think they hate you more than they hate me, in fact I'd put money on that.

:)

>Honesty certainly isn't appreciated here. Checked out your web page. Again
>I don't want to be mean or anything but you come across like some sort of
>sex guru.

:))))
Yes, I teach sex with God. It helps your spiritual health and doesn't
put you in any AIDS risk group. ;)

>You know free love and all that.

Freedom is inherent to the definition of love. But, if you mean
promiscuous sex on the physical plane, I can only smile.

>Where does Brahmacharya fit in
>to all that love making?

Well, it fits somewhere between unconditional surrender to God's inner
nature and self-realization, which makes you so self-sufficient
(atma-arama) that you can't even think about physical sex because it
would disturb your inner bliss.
Come on, I hope you don't mean this stuff seriously, it makes you look
like a shallow, sexually frustrated character.

BTW, that pic is a moron-test. If you see a sexual object, you're
positive. Actually, it shows the energetic state of the system just
prior to full takeover of the elements by vajra. Anyone who even
_smelled_ energetic yoga can see that from a mile.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Frank Ettenbar

"Frank Ettenbar" wrote:
>After practicing for three years now I can feel the tip of
>my tongue touching the uvula. I had expected there to be an increase of
>saliva in my mouth, so called nectar drinking, or some special sensation.
>I had only noticed that I sometimes gape the moment my tongue touches
>the uvula. I now wonder whether I need to practice more in order to stretch
>my tongue much further.

I'm gonna drop in again...

First of all, you have to know that the instructions for kecari mudra
are encrypted, as all other tantric material. A literal understanding
won't do you any good, and attempting to find logical explanations
won't help either, because the guys who wrote the texts counted on
that, too. They wrote the texts in such a manner, that you'd _have_ to
get the accurate meaning from the guy who actually knows the practice.
In any other case, the texts will lead you astray.

Second, I must say that I, too, didn't understand those texts until I
experienced the kecari mudra phenomenon in practice. Before that, I
was pretty much bewildered regarding the meaning of it.

Now, the explanation.
Kecari mudra is a phenomenon that combines the upstream of red
Kundalini, located at the bottom of the spine, representing the
individual being's energy, with the downstream of white Kundalini, or
the Divine energy, pouring below from the crown chakra. Kecari mudra
seems to take place when you tune into the white Shakti, and "drink"
it, which is the meaning of the "nectar dripping from the moon". The
moon is the crown chakra, and "nectar" is the sublime energy, that
partially materializes in the body, producing a chemical called Soma.
If you read the Vedas, you'll know that Soma is in fact depicted as
the god of the Moon, which makes the thing even more apparent. So, the
tongue movement is spontaneous, and you can't reproduce the energetic
flow by just changing the position of your tongue; you'd have to bring
yourself into a blissful state, by awareness of some Divine attribute.
This would cause a burst of ecstasy, and if you start to "drink" this
ecstasy, your tongue will feel most comfortable in kecari mudra, and
by drinking bliss you will shift your breathing into a prolonged
inhalation, positioned from the crown downwards. This form of
cessation of breathing is called kevala kumbhaka, "liberating
retention", and is always a sign of connection of personal
consciousness with God's blissful presence. By breathing in,
"drinking" this "nectar", your body and soul become purified and you
will soon, extremely soon, attain liberation. But, it is unlikely that
you'll manage to sustain the experience for long - at least at first.
Gradually, as you become capable of "drinking" God more, as your
system becomes more divine, you'll be able to progress with this
practice.
However, since it is highly unlikely that a beginner would be able to
identify all the "pointers" that I mentioned, I would suggest starting
with more basic forms of practice, such as those formulated in the
techniques on my website. Gradually, as you get to know your system,
you'll become capable of performing this, and similar advanced
practices, such as "soma rasa" meditation for increasing the subtlety
of your system.
Much luck with your practice. :)

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Aco Momcilovic (a.k.a. Never)

"Aco Momcilovic (a.k.a. Never)" wrote:
>Ako ospijes dovesti do
>boga nekoga koga sada smatras budalom - e onda si pravi majstor.

Ma, ovisi o vrsti budale. Vrlo je malo mojih ucenika koji su poceli
kao pametni. Ipak, s odredjenim profilom ljudi se uopce ne zelim
zamarati.

>Meni se cini da se tebi da baviti samo sa onima koje smatras
>najperspektivnijima a za ostale nemas nikakvo pametno rjesenje.

Naravno. Ako je netko zainteresiran za baviti se yogom, onda cu ga
nesto moci i nauciti. Ako ide iz pozicije da Boga nema, yoga je sranje
a ja sam budala, sto cu mu ja, vuci ga za rukav. Malo sutra.

>Kako bi bilo da je Isus rekao : ja cu raditi s vama trojicom a vi
>ostali se gubite kuci jer ste blesavi! (osim sto ne bi postojala KC:))

To je zapravo Isus i rekao. (Mt 22,14; Mt 7,13-14)

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org