Thank you for that link, Recoverer,

That site looks very interesting.

I sensed a slight discrepancy, however , between your comments there and the situation you recalled here recently when you said all the females left the room and hid when you entered---? 

Also, Dearsoul, I hope the headguy there was correct when he inferred that enlightenment is a process of a multitude of partial enlightenments and not a state of accomplished perfection. I thought several recent threads here have shown that spiritual growth is stunted by having idols we cannot live up to, and that we can achieve wondrous spiritual strength but still be without perfection.

Your comments there about harnessing kudalini as energy for creative growth are something I need to know more about. I'll be going back often!

Thank you,
Bets

Betson:

Comments below in double quotes.

betson wrote on Sep 10^th, 2007 at 9:37pm:

Its not surprising to read of the attachment to the body form by writers of Buddhism, Islam, Christ Chronicles, etc. They were all written by the un-enlightened. All truely enlightened persons would know that we are "more than just our physical bodies". (thanks Bob) Not male nor female. When will these religions finaly get it and get over this sexist doctrine. This is one of the main reasons that I can not follow one or any of them. Discrimination. Whether hidden or open, they are all the same. Perhaps they should try Love. 
Joe

Dave:

Responses below"

dave_a_mbs wrote on Sep 11^th, 2007 at 6:36pm:

   I believe the different sexes are equal, yet i recognize differences.    This doesn't mean to me, that one is better than the other, they both have their strengths and weaknesses and on different levels and with different balances. 

   I've wondered in the past, about why so many of the most noted spiritual teachers decided to incarnate in male bodies?   I never assumed it was because the male body/flesh suit is any better ultimately speaking, but it did lead me to some interesting energy conclusions about the nature of Soul and Spirit vs, and intertwining with matter energies. 

   The simple answer is that most societies and cultures in our recorded history have been male dominated and chauvinistic, and that the masses (who being influenced more so by men) would listen more to a Soul using a male body.   And yet, this strikes me also as being the best reason for a nearing completion Soul to choose a female body, to help change and balance things.    I don't know about most guys, but if i met a woman who could walk across water and who seemed very balanced and loving, etc., then you bet your arse i would listen to her no matter what age and place i was in.   Nor would such a master Soul have anything to fear from any man--if in physical danger, they could just simply raise their vibrations enough to seemingly "disappear" much like both Yeshua, and even John the Baptist on occasion were said to have done.

   My energy conclusions or hypotheses are this:   What we know of as matter, and of Spirit, or the spiritual, are different in various ways, even from a higher physics viewpoint.  One of the main differences, beyond the vibratory differences (spiritual having a much faster rate), is that they have different charge and charge balance ratios. 

   Matter is made up of both positive and negative charges, but not completely equal or balanced, it seems that matter might have a slightly greater negative charge or rather a lesser positive charge relatively speaking. 

  Soul, and spiritual forces and energies, are perhaps more purely positively charged (expanding in nature--i got this info mostly from the Cayce readings dealing with a perpetual energy device was being designed though not completed to our knowledge). 

  Well, what is positive and negative, and what is masculine/yang and feminine/yin, and what are the differences between the two?     Most simply put, is that positive/masculine energy is active, electric, and expanding in nature.   Negative/feminine energy is passive, magnetic, and contractive in nature. 

  One of the main points or side affects of spiritual development, is an increasingly perfect balance and merging of these two different, but connected states of being.    Now if the female body tends generally towards a greater balance to the feminine energy and archetype, and if matter itself is slightly imbalanced towards that polarity to begin with, then there would seem to be a greater challenge inherently in reaching that perfect balance and merging.   

  Maybe complete ascension as Yeshua achieved where the body physical, the somewhat 'frozen' light energy of matter, releases its huge energy potential via merging with both Soul and Spirit forces (check out the Shroud of Turin on this aspect of complete enlightenment while in physical) is just simply somewhat easier to accomplish in a male body, because of its inherent balance or imbalance towards that of the active, positive pole (i.e. not morally better in any way)? 

  Particularly in space/time cycles of greater collective "denseness" and slower vibratory levels?   Meaning, the ages we have seen Yeshua, Buddha, Krishna, and others supposedly completely enlightened or nearly so (many of these i sense were not fully enlightened, otherwise they would not have aged or died). 

  Ultimately, i dunno, but something tells me there is something to this, when one holistically considers the important balances and ratios of physical, to Soul, and Spirit energies, especially as relating to that ultimate liberation or transcendence of physical while even still being connected to same.   The important thing to remember is that we are not bodies, and we transcend physical gender, and are meant to be completely balanced...but since the physical itself isn't completely balanced, then maybe there are certain "energy considerations" involved of which most folks don't normally think about, because they don't want to be perceived as sexist, biased, or what not.

  You have to step out of a lot of boxes to look at it this way.  I see it in a energy, physics type way, though i have no physics background to speak of.  Unfortunately, many people in our times, and in the past, might twist these "matter of fact" energy considerations, to somehow try to promote the idea that generally or universally men are superior to women, which i don't believe and i think would be a skewed, emotionally/ego attached, and overly moralistic way of interpreting that.   

  Or maybe i just don't know what i'm talking about in this subject.  I suppose if i was in a female body, and saying the same thing, it might sound more credible or less biased?