i am only asking for an answer to what many SYs believe in their heart

From:  "jagbir singh" <www.adishakti.org@gmail.com>
Date:  Sat Dec 18, 2004  8:24 am
Subject:  Re: i am only asking for an answer to what many SYs believe in their heart

--- In
shriadishakti@yahoogroups.com, "jagbir singh"
<adishakti_org@y...> wrote:
>
> Dear Nitin,
>
> Can we have an end to all this uncalled for conditioning
> advertisments? i have already asked you questions which you have
> not the courtesy to reply:
>
> -----------
> Dear Nitin,
>
> Can i know in DETAIL why it is not possible to rid oneself of all
> the petty subtle system catches etc, by following this enlightened
> advise?:
>
> "the best solution to all the problems is to SURRENDER TEHM TO SHRI
> MATAJI & GET RID OF THEM.... let Shri Mataji do whatever she
> wishes. Believe me that all your problems will be over in No Time.
> LEAVE ALL THE QUESTIONS & PROBLEMS TO THE UNCONSCIOUS THAT'S
> FLOWING FROM THE LOTUS FEET OF SHRI MATAJI."
>
> i would really appreciate any SY who follows such cleansing
> techniques on a daily basis to speak up and provide some honest
> answers. All my years i have never been given an answer as to why
> the Mother Kundalini cannot heal, and we need external rituals.
> This is a forum where you can speak your mind. i am only asking
> for an answer to what many SYs believe in their heart is a daily
> necessity. Please just rid me of my ignorance in this matter.
>
> jagbir
> ----------
>
> Yet you continue to post these unnecessary reminders. Perhaps you
> do not understand what i am trying to say - Let SYs learn how to
> use the kundalini for ALL THEIR PROBLEMS! Why do you keep on
> giving wrong/false advise? If these treatments work for you fine
> and good. But please don't insist the rest of us must do so. Let
> us learn how to "SURRENDER THEM TO SHRI MATAJI & GET RID OF
> THEM.... let Shri Mataji do whatever she wishes. Believe me that
> all your problems will be over in No Time." (i think these are
> your words.)
>
> Unless you tell me how chillies and lemons are empowered to heal
> in contradiction of both our faith in Shri Mataji and the Mother
> Kundalini, or at least mine, please do not post these unnecessary
> conditioning reminders anymore. If you are a subtle system expert
> and a doctor at the same time you will provide answers.
>
> jagbir
>
>
> --- In
shriadishakti@yahoogroups.com, "SRIRAM" <sri204@y...> wrote:
> > || JAI SHRI MATAJI ||
> > Dear Shri Girish Bhai, JAI SHRI MATAJI !
> >
> > Though all these Ice-Pack, Lemon-n-Chilly & Shoe-Beating are
> > Sahaja Yogic methods to eliminate specific problems, you should
> > pay full attention of yours to Meditation. At regular basis
> > every Sahaja Yogi has to Meditate twice-a-day & has to do Foot-
> > Soaking atleast once a day before going to bed. Also, we've to
> > give Self Realization to as many seekers as possible & go out of
> > the way to work for Sahaja Yoga. Therefore it's a Protocol that
> > you MUST attend atleast one Public Programme a week.
> >
> > If you follow the above regulations, no doubt you'll have all
> > your problems solved effortlessly. As far as awareness of these
> > treatments is concerned, please contact Senior Sahaja Yogis in
> > your Collective for the same.
> >
> > Yours Sahaja Yogi Brother,
> >
> > Dr. Nitin Khandelwal, Ujjain Sahaja Yoga Yuva Shakti, UJJAIN,
> INDIA.

--- In
shriadishakti@yahoogroups.com, "jagbir singh"
<adishakti_org@y...> wrote:
>
> Dear Madhurima,
>
> There are elements of truth in what you have written. Please give
> me a few days to respond. In the meantime can you elaborate on how
> the SYs nearly went out of Sahaja Yoga. i really need this
> information to understand why your post makes sense.
>
> jagbir
>
> --- In
shriadishakti@yahoogroups.com
, Madhurima M <marycheva@y...>
> wrote:
> :
> > Dear Jagbirji,
> > I will really bre thankful to you and to everyone concerned,
> > that if only learn to surrender everything to the kundalini.
> > Maybe we don't know to surrender. I too am looking for this kind
> > of a stage. But i feel scared to live without treatments, coz
> > some people in my collective tried to do exactly the same, they
> > said that they only meditated and didn't spend time in cleansing
> > themselves and one day they were almost out of Sahaja and they
> > came back only after taking Sahaj treatments. So please tell me
> > the proper way to surrender. I'm sure many will be thankful to
> > you.
> > Madhurima
> >
> >



Dear Madhurima,

My faith in Shri Mataji is grounded in Her message of the Last
Judgment and Resurrection. The faith of almost all SYs is rooted in
the subtle system. My guidance comes from the eternal Goddess
within. The guidance of almost all SYs comes from the human Shri
Mataji Nirmala Devi. My conviction in healing lies in the Mother
Kundalini. The curative belief of almost all SYs lies in footsoaks,
treatments and constant cleansing.

Those who are taking part in the promised, preordained Great Event,
seek guidance from the Shakti within and leave all their subtle
system problems to the Mother Kundalini, will never fall or resort to
ritualistic cleansings. That is the proper way to surrender.

Those taking part in cleansing the subtle system by seeking help
from Shri Mataji and still resorting to lemons and chillies will
always remain sick, waver and even fall.

i believe you are talking about a few Russian SYs who "only
meditated (on the external Shri Mataji) and didn't spend time in
cleansing themselves (instead of asking the Mother Kundalini to take
care of all subtle system problems) and one day they were almost out
of Sahaja (because they know so little about the Last Judgment and
Resurrection) and they came back only after taking Sahaj treatments
(because their faith is rooted in ritual cleansing)."

Yes, i did tell you that "there are elements of truth in what you
have written. Please give me a few days to respond. In the meantime
can you elaborate on how the SYs nearly went out of Sahaja Yoga. i
really need this information to understand why your post makes
sense." Though you did not give me that required information i still
have been able to understand why your post made sense, and the
answer lies in this quote of Shri Mataji:

"When the Kundalini rises one can feel easily the Cool Breeze
coming out of one's fontanel bone area on top of one's head. One can
feel it oneself, and one has to certify oneself. One can also feel
this Cool Breeze all around oneself. This Cool Breeze is the one
that is manifested by the All-Pervading Power of Divine Love. For
the first time in life one actualizes the experience of feeling this
subtle Divine Power.

Even after feeling this Power one has to understand that this
Kundalini is not fully established. In ordinary mechanical language
we can say that the connection is not established. One has to work
it out. Though sprouting in a seed is spontaneous, the gardener has
to now look after the tender sapling.

In the same way a seeker has to look after his Self-Realization in
the beginning. Some people achieve heights very easily, but some
have to work for six or seven months and are still not all right.
Under these circumstances it is important that one must know and
understand where the problem is by understanding the proper decoding
system and its practices in Sahaja Yoga." (Shri Mataji)

There you have it - cures and treatments are for people who still
have not established their kundalini after six months or so. That is
when they are encouraged to use various external treatments
and mentally focus their attention within. That is why lemons and
chillies treatments prove effective to these type of people.

But at the same time after getting healed such patients "feel scared
to live without treatments". This has been proven by the fact
that "some people in my collective tried to do exactly the same,
they said that they only meditated and didn't spend time in
cleansing themselves and one day they were almost out of Sahaja and
they came back only after taking Sahaj treatments."

To understand the wonderful curative powers of revered lemons and
chillies, whose only side-effects seem to be a life-long addiction
and morbid fear of withdrawal, it is necessary to fully comprehend
this controlled medical studies titled "The Placebo Effect":

"The placebo effect is the measurable, observable, or felt
improvement in health not attributable to treatment. This effect is
believed by many people to be due to the placebo itself in some
mysterious way. A placebo (Latin for "I shall please") is a
medication or treatment believed by the administrator of the
treatment to be inert or innocuous. Placebos may be sugar pills or
starch pills. Even "fake" surgery and "fake"
psychotherapy are considered placebos.

Researchers and medical doctors sometimes give placebos to patients.
Anecdotal evidence for the placebo effect is garnered in this way.
Those who believe there is scientific evidence for the placebo
effect point to clinical studies, many of which use a control group
treated with a placebo. Why an inert substance, or a fake surgery or
therapy, would be effective is not known.

The psychological theory: it's all in your mind

Some believe the placebo effect is psychological, due to a belief in
the treatment or to a subjective feeling of improvement. Irving
Kirsch, a psychologist at the University of Connecticut, believes
that the effectiveness of Prozac and similar drugs may be attributed
almost entirely to the placebo effect. He and Guy Sapirstein
analyzed 19 clinical trials of antidepressants and concluded that
the expectation of improvement, not adjustments in brain chemistry,
accounted for 75 percent of the drugs' effectiveness (Kirsch
1998).  "The critical factor," says Kirsch, "is our beliefs about
what's going to happen to us. You don't have to rely on drugs to see
profound transformation." In an earlier study, Sapirstein analyzed
39 studies, done between 1974 and 1995, of depressed patients
treated with drugs, psychotherapy, or a combination of both. He
found that 50 percent of the drug effect is due to the placebo
response.

A person's beliefs and hopes about a treatment, combined with their
suggestibility, may have a significant biochemical effect. Sensory
experience and thoughts can affect neurochemistry. The body's
neurochemical system affects and is affected by other biochemical
systems, including the hormonal and immune systems. Thus, it is
consistent with current knowledge that a person's hopeful attitude
and beliefs may be very important to their physical well-being and
recovery from injury or illness.

However, it may be that much of the placebo effect is not a matter
of mind over molecules, but of mind over behavior. A part of the
behavior of a "sick" person is learned. So is part of the behavior
of a person in pain. In short, there is a certain amount of role-
playing by ill or hurt people. Role-playing is not the same as
faking or malingering. The behavior of sick or injured persons is
socially and culturally based to some extent. The placebo effect may
be a measurement of changed behavior affected by a belief in the
treatment. The changed behavior includes a change in attitude, in
what one says about how one feels, and how one acts. It may also
affect one's body chemistry.

The psychological explanation seems to be the one most commonly
believed. Perhaps this is why many people are dismayed when they are
told that the effective drug they are taking is a placebo. This
makes them think that their problem is "all in their mind" and that
there is really nothing wrong with them. Yet, there are too many
studies which have found objective improvements in health from
placebos to support the notion that the placebo effect is entirely
psychological. 

Doctors in one study successfully eliminated warts by painting them
with a brightly colored, inert dye and promising patients the warts
would be gone when the color wore off. In a study of asthmatics,
researchers found that they could produce dilation of the airways by
simply telling people they were inhaling a bronchiodilator, even
when they weren't. Patients suffering pain after wisdom-tooth
extraction got just as much relief from a fake application of
ultrasound as from a real one, so long as both patient and therapist
thought the machine was on. Fifty-two percent of the colitis
patients treated with placebo in 11 different trials reported
feeling better -- and 50 percent of the inflamed intestines actually
looked better when assessed with a sigmoidoscope ("The Placebo
Prescription" by Margaret Talbot, New York Times Magazine, January
9, 2000).*

It is unlikely that such effects are purely psychological. But it is
not necessarily the case that the placebo is actually effective in
such cases.

The nature-taking-its-course theory

Some believe that at least part of the placebo effect is due to an
illness or injury taking its natural course. We often heal
spontaneously if we do nothing at all to treat an illness or injury.
Furthermore, many disorders, pains and illnesses, wax and wane. What
is measured as the placebo effect could be, in many cases, the
measurement of natural regression. In short, the placebo may be
given credit that is due to Nature.

However, spontaneous healing and spontaneous remission of disease
cannot explain all the healing or improvement that takes place
because of placebos. People who are given no treatment at all often
do not do as well as those given placebos or real medicine and
treatment.

The process-of-treatment theory

Another theory gaining popularity is that a process of treatment
that involves showing attention, care, affection, etc., to the
patient/subject, a process that is encouraging and hopeful, may
itself trigger physical reactions in the body which promote healing.
According to Dr. Walter A. Brown, a psychiatrist at Brown
University, there is certainly data that suggest that just being in
the healing situation accomplishes something. Depressed patients who
are merely put on a waiting list for treatment do not do as well as
those given placebos. And -- this is very telling, I think -- when
placebos are given for pain management, the course of pain relief
follows what you would get with an active drug. The peak relief
comes about an hour after it's administered, as it does with the
real drug, and so on. If placebo analgesia was the equivalent of
giving nothing, you'd expect a more random pattern ("The Placebo
Prescription" by Margaret Talbot, New York Times Magazine, January
9, 2000).*

Dr. Brown and others believe that the placebo effect is mainly or
purely physical and due to physical changes which promote healing or
feeling better. It is assumed that the physical changes are not
caused by the placebo itself. So, what is the explanatory mechanism
for the placebo effect? Some think it is the process of
administering it. It is thought that the touching, the caring, the
attention, and other interpersonal communication that is part of the
controlled study process (or the therapeutic setting), along with
the hopefulness and encouragement provided by the
experimenter/healer, affect the mood of the subject, which in turn
triggers physical changes such as release of endorphins. The process
reduces stress by providing hope or reducing uncertainty about what
treatment to take or what the outcome will be. The reduction in
stress prevents or slows down further harmful physical changes from
occurring.

The process-of-treatment hypothesis would explain how inert
homeopathic remedies and the questionable therapies of
many "alternative" health practitioners are often effective or
thought to be effective. It would also explain why pills or
procedures used by conventional medicine work until they are shown
to be worthless.

Forty years ago, a young Seattle cardiologist named Leonard Cobb
conducted a unique trial of a procedure then commonly used for
angina, in which doctors made small incisions in the chest and tied
knots in two arteries to try to increase blood flow to the heart. It
was a popular technique -- 90 percent of patients reported that it
helped -- but when Cobb compared it with placebo surgery in which he
made incisions but did not tie off the arteries, the sham operations
proved just as successful. The procedure, known as internal mammary
ligation, was soon abandoned ("The Placebo Prescription" by Margaret
Talbot, New York Times Magazine, January 9, 2000).*
Of course, spontaneous healing or regression can also adequately
explain why homeopathic remedies might appear to be effective.
Whether the placebo effect is mainly psychological, misunderstood
spontaneous healing, due to showing care and attention, or due to
some combination of all three may not be known with complete
confidence.

The powerful placebo challenged

The powerful effect of the placebo is not in doubt. It should be,
however, according to Danish researchers Asbj°rn Hrˇbjartsson
and Peter C. G÷tzsche. Their meta-study of 114 studies involving
placebos found "little evidence in general that placebos had
powerful clinical effects...[and]...compared with no treatment,
placebo had no significant effect on binary outcomes, regardless of
whether these outcomes were subjective or objective. For the trials
with continuous outcomes, placebo had a beneficial effect, but the
effect decreased with increasing sample size, indicating a possible
bias related to the effects of small trials ("Is the Placebo
Powerless? An Analysis of Clinical Trials Comparing Placebo with No
Treatment," The New England Journal of Medicine, May 24, 2001 (Vol.
344, No. 21)."

According to Dr. Hrˇbjartsson, professor of medical philosophy and
research methodology at University of Copenhagen, "The high levels
of placebo effect which have been repeatedly reported in many
articles, in our mind are the result of flawed research
methodology."* This claim flies in the face of more than fifty years
of research. At the very least, we can expect to see more rigorously
designed research projects trying to disprove Hrˇbjartsson and
G÷tzsche.

The origin of the idea

The idea of the powerful placebo in modern times originated with H.
K. Beecher. He evaluated over two dozen studies and calculated that
about one-third of those in the studies improved due to the placebo
effect ("The Powerful Placebo," 1955). Other studies calculate the
placebo effect as being even greater than Beecher claimed. For
example, studies have shown that placebos are effective in 50 or 60
percent of subjects with certain conditions, e.g., "pain,
depression, some heart ailments, gastric ulcers and other stomach
complaints."* And, as effective as the new psychotropic drugs seem
to be in the treatment of various brain disorders, some researchers
maintain that there is not adequate evidence from studies to prove
that the new drugs are more effective than placebos.

Placebos have even been shown to cause unpleasant side effects.
Dermatitis medicamentosa and angioneurotic edema have resulted from
placebo therapy, according to Dodes. There are even reports of
people becoming addicted to placebos.

The ethical dilemma

The power of the placebo effect has led to an ethical dilemma. One
should not deceive other people, but one should relieve the pain and
suffering of one's patients. Should one use deception to benefit
one's patients? Is it unethical for a doctor to knowingly prescribe
a placebo without informing the patient? If informing the patient
reduces the effectiveness of the placebo, is some sort of deception
warranted in order to benefit the patient? Some doctors think it is
justified to use a placebo in those types of cases where a strong
placebo effect has been shown and where distress is an aggravating
factor.* 

Others think it is always wrong to deceive the patient and
that informed consent requires that the patient be told that a
treatment is a placebo treatment. Others, especially "alternative"
medicine practitioners, don't even want to know whether a treatment
is a placebo or not. Their attitude is that as long as the treatment
is effective, who cares if it a placebo? Of course, if the placebo
effect is an illusion, then another ethical dilemma arises: should
placebos be given if it is known that deception does not really
reduce pain or aid in the cure of anything?

Are placebos dangerous?

While skeptics may reject faith, prayer and "alternative" medical
practices such as bioharmonics, chiropractic and homeopathy, such
practices may not be without their salutary effects. Clearly, they
can't cure cancer or repair a punctured lung, and they might not
even prolong life by giving hope and relieving distress as is
sometimes thought. But administering useless therapies does involve
interacting with the patient in a caring, attentive way, and this
can provide some measure of comfort. However, to those who say "what
difference does it make why something works, as long as it seems to
work" I reply that it is likely that there is something which works
even better, something for the other two-thirds or one-half of
humanity who, for whatever reason, cannot be cured or helped by
placebos or spontaneous healing or natural regression of their pain.
Furthermore, placebos may not always be beneficial or harmless. In
addition to adverse side effects, mentioned above, John Dodes notes
that 

Patients can become dependent on nonscientific practitioners who
employ placebo therapies. Such patients may be led to believe
they're suffering from imagined "reactive" hypoglycemia, nonexistent
allergies and yeast infections, dental filling amalgam "toxicity,"
or that they're under the power of Qi or extraterrestrials. And
patients can be led to believe that diseases are only amenable to a
specific type of treatment from a specific practitioner (The
Mysterious Placebo by John E. Dodes, Skeptical Inquirer, Jan/Feb
1997).

---------------


Will SYs finally understand the difference between having faith in
chillies and Mother Kundalini? But i have to admit it works both
ways. The difference is that the Mother Kundalini does not make you
scared of living without treatments, induce fear of bhoots, spiders,
cats, bats or make you run and hide from this evil world so full of
scary entities and wicked characters ................... oh, i
forgot to mention this small petty fact - She also rids you of all
catches within minutes. Guess SYs do not need to take the placebo
after all. But those who need please don't pass your ignorance to
others, especially those seeking to join Sahaja Yoga. Is that too
much to ask?

jagbir


 


If this page was accessed during a web search you may wish to browse the websites listed below where this topic titled "i am only asking for an answer to what many SYs believe in their heart" or related issues are discussed, commented, criticized or researched in detail to promote peace and progress in religious harmony and spiritual development for all humanity:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adishakti_sahaja_yoga/message/2957

http://www.adishakti.org/forum/archives.htm
http://www.adishakti.org/