/lit/ - Literature

>>18546556
>isn't there an allowable margin of variation when it comes to practices as long as they don't directly contradict canonical scripture?
Absolutely, and there is nothing wrong with Neoplatonic mystical practices, as long as they are done with the proper framing and keeping orthodoxy of the teachings of Christ in mind.
>that's quite the unorthodox interpretation as well
Yes, but as I am not affirming the existence of chakras, only using them as a useful heuristic map, I am well within the realm of strict orthodoxy.
> I'd be interested in reading more about if you don't mind
Sure, I can do a very brief summary, and can go more in depth for any point you'd like. This can be viewed as a progressive, step-by-step system of "balancing" different aspects of the self on the route to sanctity, ending in becoming a mystic. Obviously there are many different interpretations on what the chakra's "functions" are, but I believe from my studies this is a useful paraphrasing.

>Muladhara - Root Chakra - Relation of Self to Carnal Desires
Example: Matthew 6:25-34, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 10:21, Luke 5:35, Ephesians 5:5

>Svadhisthana - Sacral Chakra - Relation of Self to Other, Fears
Example: Matthew 7:12, Matthew 17:17-19, Matthew 19:11-12, Matthew 10:28-31

>Manipura - Solar Plexus Chakra - Relation of Self to Society
Example: Matthew 10:16-23, Mark 12:17, Romans 13:7, Matthew 6:24, Galations 1:10, Ephesians 6:10-13

>Anahata - Heart Chakra - Relation of Self to Love
Example: Mark 12:31, Matthew 5:38-48, John 13:3-17, John 13:34-35, John 15:13, 1 Thessalonians 2:8, 1 John 2:9, 1 John 3:16

>Vishuddha - Throat Chakra - Relation of Self to Expression
Example: Matthew 10:19-20, Mark 13:11, Luke 12:11-12, Matthew 5:34-37, Ephesians 4:15, Ephesians 4:25, Ephesians 6:14-20

>Ajna - Third Eye Chakra - Relation of Self to God and Divine Wisdom
Example: Mark 10:21, Matthew 13:44-46, Revelation 3:18, Luke 14:33, Philippians 3:7, Luke 14:26, Luke 5:11

>I'm still unsure as to how genuine belief is acquired, however.
I would say that while knowing a monotheistic, personal, benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God exists can be reasoned to rationally, the arguments that Jesus Christ was resurrected can bring you right to the edge of belief, by being (in my opinion) the most reasonable explanation of the events, but that one must take a leap of faith to actually say "I might not understand how it could be possible, but I choose to take that risk and believe that Jesus resurrected despite my lack of understanding of how it works naturalistically". From there, everything should flow easily, as then it leads to the acceptance of the Gospel accounts, and therefore belief in the sending of the Holy Spirit to the apostles, who laid hands to pass Him on to their successors, who are all a part of some institution called the church which exists in some form today, and is still guided by the Holy Spirit.