AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
Dharmadeva
Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude
language, but through the refined expression of subtle ideas. Suppose I see
something external, and I develop a loving or affectionate feeling for that
object or entity. When this loving feeling is expressed in sweet, charming
or subtle language, it comes within the scope of aesthetic science. For
instance, some sunflowers may be strewn on the floor, but when someone picks
up and carefully arranges them in an aesthetic manner, this comes within the
scope of
aesthetic science.
Now the question is, what is the primary factor that imparts joy and delight
to people? I love those flowers... I like their decorative arrangement... I
appreciate a particular style of expression... This is the basic psychology
of aesthetic science. This is how dramas and plays were first created; this
is how people developed the
art of recitation.
If the one who loves is the subject, the one who is loved is the object, and
in this process of loving a stage comes where the object becomes the
subject; that is, the process is reversed, until finally the concerned
individuals lose their individualties in their mutual love.
As long as I love something, my individuality is kept intact: only because I
exist can I love some thing else. However when I too am loved by that
entity, when I become an object of love, then my individual identity will
gradually be merged in that entity. The starting point of this process of
merger of one's individuality into the
Supreme Entity is termed Mohana Vijinana (in sanskrit) or supra-aesthetic
science, and the Entity into which my individuality is being merged is
Mohana (the Attractive One).
The Supreme Consciousness is Mohana because God has kept all created
entities completely enthralled: otherwise no one could remain in this world.
Imagine how many problems people have to face in their lives; afflicted with
such torments and difficulties, they would have left the world long ago.
They do not do so only because of the inextinguishable love for that Mohana.
They may not like this world but they love Parama Purus'a - the Supreme
Consciousness - so they cannot think of going away from the attraction of
the Divine.
Based on this innate and indissoluble love for Parama Purus'a (Cosmic
Consciousness), people developed Dharma (the universal spiritual creed): in
this way Dharma first originated in the human society.
December 1978, Calcutta (Ananda Vacana'mr'tam 8)
PR Sarkar
----
"The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements is that they
aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious liberation of humanity."
P R Sarkar
http://www.prout.org Home of the Progressive Utilization Theory
http://www.globaltimes.net Home of Global Times magazine.
Yann Clochec
<u96...@student.canberra.edu.au>, lost in all the noise, silently
whispered :
>in this way Dharma first originated in the human society.
And where is Greg?
---
The Lone Gunslinger - Mythologist-General, OP - Cdr, Whale Patrol, EE
"It's none of the government's business who comes to, in, on or from
my body" - Grace Slick
Yann Clochec
<u96...@student.canberra.edu.au>, lost in all the noise, silently
whispered :
> the Entity into which my individuality is being merged is
>Mohana (the Attractive One).
Really? I thought the Entity was Tina Turner ;-)
Not that Tina is unattractive, anyway....
Yann Clochec
<u96...@student.canberra.edu.au>, lost in all the noise, silently
whispered :
>Imagine how many problems people have to face in their lives
Yeah, like choosing between buying a bootleg or a legitimate release,
now *that* is tough ;-)
Relayer54
>
> AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
>
> Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude language,
You mean crude as in "SHIT! Your post doesn't even mention anything
about the fucking band"?
Chris Jemmett
Speaking of aesthetics, have you ever heard of a musical group called YES?
We talk about them all the time here.(well, almost all the time).
Would you like to participate? Or did I just read a piece of Spiritual Spam?
I look forward to your next appearance so that I may determine which.
Chris
Gamantyo Hendrantoro
If anyone knows Jon's address, please forward the original post to him. It could
be the material he's looking for for Tales Part 2.
Adam
Dude, you're in science at Carleton!!! Where are you living?
Adam
Adam
Asshole.
Adam
Chris Jemmett
"Adam" <daud...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:38837B1C...@sympatico.ca...
LOL! How would you know?
Seriously, how?
Chris
Relayer54
YES? We talk about them all the time here.(well, almost all the time).
Would you like to participate? Or did I just read a piece of Spiritual
Spam? I look forward to your next appearance so that I may determine
which.
Chris
Asshole.
Adam
> LOL! How would you know?
> Seriously, how?
>
> Chris
Chris, your comment was perfecto. Without a single trace of assholeyness
(these words I come up with........)
Relayer54
> >> >
> >> > AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
> >> >
> >> > Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary,
> crude language,
> >>
> >> You mean crude as in "SHIT! Your post doesn't even mention anything
> >> about the fucking band"?
> >
> >If anyone knows Jon's address, please forward the original post to him. It
> could
> >be the material he's looking for for Tales Part 2.
>
> that many is the Phenomenal effect. The fundamental entity on which other
(big-ass edit)
Are you friends with Carlos Castaneda?
Ron Z
You know the ones that run around with the "Victims of the Media" buttons.
Either Way,,,How strong was that acid?
Ron Z
Relayer54 wrote in message <3883DF...@worldnet.att.net>...
CountV
the Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> One must
> One must not
> So you
> should
And that seems to be what each preachy rant comes down to in the end.
--
JohnT/CountV
"Cunnilingus and psychiatry brought us to this." - Tony Soprano
Design by Coercion - New Years update, with image manipulation section;
http://www.m-ideas.com/coercion/index.htm
Action-Man RJ
Relayer54 wrote:
>
> Dharmadeva wrote:
> >
> > AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
> >
> > Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude language,
>
> You mean crude as in "SHIT! Your post doesn't even mention anything
> about the fucking band"?
Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> is posting from Canberra,
Australia. 'Big Generator' and 'Fish Out Of Water' are popular there
(which explains a lot, and not just the paucity of on topic, informative
AMY posts from 'oz, ya know?).
Put that bannana bender on the barbie. Kill the brown dog.
--
Action-Man RJ
Do you want to see ANIMATION released on CD?
Click below and sign the petition!
http://www.webcom.com/opio/animation.html
Dharmadeva
Gamantyo Hendrantoro wrote in message <388370AC...@sce.carleton.ca>...
>Relayer54 wrote:
>>
>> Dharmadeva wrote:
>> >
>> > AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
>> >
>> > Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary,
crude language,
>>
>> You mean crude as in "SHIT! Your post doesn't even mention anything
>> about the fucking band"?
>
could
>be the material he's looking for for Tales Part 2.
The cause of the many is the Noumenal cause. When many is created from One,
that many is the Phenomenal effect. The fundamental entity on which other
entities are based is the Noumenal entity. Whatever we see in the
observable world is 'Phenomenal', be it by hearing, sight, taste, touch or
smell - it all comes within the scope of the phenomenal. Behind the
phenomenal lies the Noumenal or rather Supreme Noumenal entity - God. God
is not something theoretical or abstract - but is our own bigger 'I', our
greater 'I', our Supreme Self - that is our nearest entity. We have,
therefore, to seek that Cosmic Centre.
In every action there is movement, a change of place. Whatever is seen in
this observable universe has some centre of action. But the Noumenal entity
is beyond the reach of time, space and person. There is no movement in this
ultimate Noumenality. It is fixed, and there is no other noumenal entity
beyond it.
When a person 'moves' toward that Noumenal cause, that movement can only be
extro-internal. This is the psycho-spiritual movement. If one is under the
impression, that the Supreme entity is a philosophical figure, or a figure
of science or a figure just like a deity or a god or other inanimate object,
then his/her mind may move, but his/her sentiment won't feel any stir in it.
To accelerate the speed of the spiritual movement a sentimental support, a
sentimental propulsion is an indispensable necessity. This sentimental
support must be based on rationality. Sentimentality based on rationality is
the strongest force in the universe. And sentimentality without rationality
takes the form of, or rather the distortion of, dogma. The rationality and
sentiment of the highest order is devotion or Love and practically this
finds its form also in human welfare.
The Supreme Noumenal entity is a singular One. Therefore, it is difficult
to say whether the centre of actions of the circumrotatory universe is
moving or non-moving, because both movement and non-movement fall within the
scope of time, place and person. But the Supreme Entity - hidden in
everything - the Universal Nucleus of all expressions - is beyond the scope
of the three fundamental relative factors (time, place and person). It may
be said either that there is absolute speed or that there is absolute pause,
but in this observable world, absolute speed or absolute pause is not
possible.
One's
relationship with the loving Father is that of love and
affection. There is no formality in it.
One must know that one
has come from that Supreme progenitor and one's culminating
point of all sorts of marches, all sorts of movements is
that Supreme Father. Everything cometh from Him, and the way
is back to Him. The relationship is that of love and
affection, and not of any fear complex.
One must not say,
"Oh God, I am a sinner." It is
superfluous to say like this because whatever you did is
known to Him. He knows everything; you need not remind Him.
And if you always think like
that, "I am a sinner, I am a sinner", then actually you will
become a sinner, if you are not a sinner. Because what a man
thinks, he becomes like that. If you always think, "I am a
sinner, I am a sinner", then actually you will become a
sinner.
So what are you to think? What are you to ideate
upon? That is: "Oh Father, I am your living son. I was a bit
misguided, now please help me, and I want to sit on your
lap, I want to remain with you, I want to be an ideal boy,
an ideal girl of yours, just help me. I am very weak and you
are the strongest personality".
And you may be in the social sphere, in the civic
sphere, in any other sphere of the society; you may be a bad
man, you may be a bad girl, but for your Father you are not
at all bad. He will always try to save you and always try to
rectify you. He has got immense grace for you.
So you
should remember that the noumenal cause, although it is the
Supreme entity in the entire universe, still He has got a
very close relationship with you. That Supreme noumenal
entity is your loving Father and He is not the judge of a
court. He is your loving Father, the relationship is purely
domestic.
But if there is no love for
the Supreme entity, then what will happen? Your work will be
fruitless, and you will suffer from different kinds of
psychic diseases, including frustration.
If there is no love for the Supreme entity, you are simply
misusing the time, abusing the time.
The Supreme noumenal entity
maintains the closest relationship with all other apparent
noumenal entities, so-called noumenal entities, and those
so-called noumenal entities maintain a link with each and
every expression of this universe. This indirect link of the
noumenal entity is called PROTA-YOGA in Sanskrit. That is,
whatever you are doing is indirectly known to Him through
your direct noumenal entity. And not only that, He keeps
direct relationship with you also
The link, you see, is an
indirect link with each and every entity, through so many
noumenal entities, and also a direct link with each and
every individual from mammoth to a blade of grass. So a
mammoth cannot move without His grace, and a blade of grass
also cannot move without His approval. And this shows that
He maintains a link with each and every entity. Nobody is
unimportant. Nobody is insignificant. Each and every
existence is valuable.
Nobody is unimportant, so you must not develop the
psychology of helplessness or hopelessness or defeatist
complex or fear complex, because the Supreme Father, the
Supreme noumenal entity is always with you. And that link
with the individual is known as OTA-YOGA.
In case of
collectivity it is PROTA-YOGA; in case of individual it is
OTA-YOGA.
You are never alone. And your only goal is that noumenal
entity, is that Supreme Entity
--
--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar
PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
http://www.globaltimes.net
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
http://www.ru.org
Dharmadeva
>Gamantyo Hendrantoro wrote in message
<388370AC...@sce.carleton.ca>...
>>Relayer54 wrote:
>>>
>>If anyone knows Jon's address, please forward the original post to him. It
>could
>>be the material he's looking for for Tales Part 2.
NB: Parama Purusa = God on sanskrit
Suppose, all those sounds are expressed at a time, then what will happen?
Suppose you went to a market, somebody will say, "What's the rate of
potato?", somebody will say, "What's the rate of brinjal (egg-plant)?",
"What's the rate of meat?", like this; and the customer will say, "I want
this much" and the shopkeeper says, "No, no, no, I won't give more than
that". Like this, so many sounds. But if you go, say, about 100 yards from
the market, what will be the sound? Something like "hawawawawa", like this.
All the sounds together will create a peculiar collective sound, is it not a
fact? Will you hear "potato" or "beans" or "cauliflower" from a distance?
No, you hear the collective sound, "hawawawawa", like this. Is it not a
fact? Aah. Similarly, all those sounds, innumerable sounds, brought under
the broad category of 50, will create a collective sound in the universe.
That collective sound is Aum. A-U-M. Now here are these three sounds,
Aum-A,U. Ma.
They represent the creation, the retention, and the destruction. The
first sound 'a' represents creation, second sound 'u' represents retention,
the third sound 'ma' represents destruction. So all those innumerable
sounds; all those 50 sounds are represented by these supreme soundsA,U, and
Ma-and collectively A-U-MA becomes Aum. For each and every action there is a
supporting sound in this universe. That supporting sound is called the
accoustic root of that action. You are moving. The sound cutcutcutcut" is
created. That sound "cutcutcut" is the accoustic root in the action of
moving. You are laughing. The sound "hahahaha" is created. The sound
"hahaha" is the accoustic root of the action of laughing. Each and every
action has got its accoustic root. The portion of the tree that remains
under the earth is root; the accoustic root, that is, the sound which may be
treated as the rudimental portion of that action. The Latin adjective of
"root" is rudimental. For each and every action of this world there is an
accoustic root. You see, Tantra . The root 'Tan' means to expand, and 'tra'
means liberator. The science that liberates you from all bondages; physical,
mental and spiritual is Tantra . Tan means expansion and tra means
liberator.
The science that expands your mind and spirit and thus liberates you is
Tantra The metamorphosed form of Tantra , about 7000 years ago became Taota,
The Sanskrit Dhya'na, became C'han (Chinese), C'han became Chen (Korean),
Chen became Zen (Japanese). It is a very interesting science, it is known as
the accoustic science. Now, Tantra became Taota . Taota after further
distortion, further metamorphosis, became Taoa; in modern language Tao
(Chinese). Taoism, don't you know? Its root is Tantra . Does it relish you!
Do you like what I'm saying? But you'll have to pay for it! (everybody
laughs). All expressions of the universe, the accoustic root is Aum -A-U-Ma.
It includes all the spheres of work also. It is the collective sound of all
work in the universe. The earth moves around the sun, certainly a sound is
created. It may or may not be audible to you, you may or may not hear it,
but certainly a sound is created. The moon moves around the sun, certainly
waves are created and certainly due to those waves, sounds are also created.
It may or may not be audible to you. Everywhere there is sound. If you move
stealthily, as the cat moves while catching a mouse, even in that case there
is sound. Everywhere there is wave ; everywhere there is light also.
That light may or may not be visible to you. In the night you cannot see,
but owls can see, moles can see. Moles, you know? Rat-like creatures of this
size ... mole... to make a mountain of a mole hill. Mole, they can see in
the night. Owl can see in the night, bat can see in the night. Bat, neither
bird nor animal, it is mammal. It lays no eggs, it is mammal. It can see in
the night, so there is light. Aum is the collection of all sounds and within
the scope of Aum come all the activities of the world. For each and every
work there is sound and Aum is the collection of all sounds. So within the
scope of Aum comes all the work of the world. Aum represents mundane
expression of ' ParamaPurus'a ; Aum represents worldly expression of Parama
Purus'a. In each and every human being there is Sleeping Divinity, divinity
in latent form, divinity in dormant form. When that Sleeping Divinity will
be roused, will be out of sleep, will be in a wakeful stage, then what will
happen? A man will acquire immense power. He may be omniscient, that is
all-knowing. He will know everything, without going through any book,
without going through any library. He will know everything of this universe
because he is one with Parama Purus'a. He is Parama Purus'a because the
Sleeping Divinity has been aroused. The Sleeping Divinity in the human body
lies in the lowermost portion of your backbone. That lowermost bone is
called Kula in Sanskrit. That Sleeping Divinity is called Kun'd'alinii.
Kun'd'alinii means ' in coiled form of Tantra.
Chris Jemmett
great explanation of why so many keep coming back to a.m.y.
Chris
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:4SCg4.4771$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
> AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
>
> Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude
> language, but through the refined expression of subtle ideas. Suppose I
see
> something external, and I develop a loving or affectionate feeling for
that
> object or entity. When this loving feeling is expressed in sweet, charming
> or subtle language, it comes within the scope of aesthetic science. For
> instance, some sunflowers may be strewn on the floor, but when someone
picks
> up and carefully arranges them in an aesthetic manner, this comes within
the
> scope of
> aesthetic science.
>
> Now the question is, what is the primary factor that imparts joy and
delight
> to people? I love those flowers... I like their decorative arrangement...
I
> appreciate a particular style of expression... This is the basic
psychology
> of aesthetic science. This is how dramas and plays were first created;
this
> is how people developed the
> art of recitation.
>
> If the one who loves is the subject, the one who is loved is the object,
and
> in this process of loving a stage comes where the object becomes the
> subject; that is, the process is reversed, until finally the concerned
> individuals lose their individualties in their mutual love.
>
> As long as I love something, my individuality is kept intact: only because
I
> exist can I love some thing else. However when I too am loved by that
> entity, when I become an object of love, then my individual identity will
> gradually be merged in that entity. The starting point of this process of
> merger of one's individuality into the
> Supreme Entity is termed Mohana Vijinana (in sanskrit) or supra-aesthetic
> science, and the Entity into which my individuality is being merged is
> Mohana (the Attractive One).
>
> The Supreme Consciousness is Mohana because God has kept all created
> entities completely enthralled: otherwise no one could remain in this
world.
> Imagine how many problems people have to face in their lives; afflicted
with
> such torments and difficulties, they would have left the world long ago.
> They do not do so only because of the inextinguishable love for that
Mohana.
> They may not like this world but they love Parama Purus'a - the Supreme
> Consciousness - so they cannot think of going away from the attraction of
> the Divine.
>
> Based on this innate and indissoluble love for Parama Purus'a (Cosmic
> Consciousness), people developed Dharma (the universal spiritual creed):
in
> this way Dharma first originated in the human society.
>
> December 1978, Calcutta (Ananda Vacana'mr'tam 8)
>
> PR Sarkar
>
> ----
> "The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements is that
they
> aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious liberation of humanity."
> P R Sarkar
CountV
uploaded to the Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> Relayer54 wrote:
>>
>> Dharmadeva wrote:
>>>
>>> AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
>>>
>>> Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude
>>> language,
>>
>> You mean crude as in "SHIT! Your post doesn't even mention anything
>> about the fucking band"?
>
> Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> is posting from Canberra,
> Australia.
Turn on the egg nishner (you know, the device that keeps you cool).
Chris Jemmett
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:R3Qg4.5215$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
> Yeah, I love Yes too
>
> >Gamantyo Hendrantoro wrote in message
> <388370AC...@sce.carleton.ca>...
Glad to hear it! Check out the Frequently Asked Questions Site. You can link
to it by going to www.yeshoo.com. I hope that is correct, if not, typing
yeshoo into most search engines will get you there.
Chris
Steven Sullivan
: AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
: Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude
: language, but through the refined expression of subtle ideas.
plonk
Chris Jemmett
"Relayer54" <rem...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3883CC...@worldnet.att.net...
considering the thread, your new word is very punny.
Chris
Chris Jemmett
"Steven Sullivan" <sull...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> wrote in message
news:MT1h4.1118$oR1....@grover.nit.gwu.edu...
You are right . I know. It's just that.........well, I guess I just haven't
been around here as long as you and still hope for another side of people to
surface.
Relayer54
>
Xponent
"Chris Jemmett" <ccjemmett@.idirect.com> wrote in message
news:cX2h4.50016$tT2.4...@quark.idirect.com...
cacophagous, fecalprobiscous, and analinguistic.
xponent
rob
gargling with listerene after using that kind of language.
Xponent
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:R3Qg4.5215$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
Did you know that doG is God spelled backwards? Deep.
xponent
rob
Xponent
"Rob Allen" <roba...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zD7h4.3574$eX.8...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...> news:s23h4.50353$tT2.4...@quark.idirect.com...
> another...
>
hmmmmm.......polygony and personality........hmmmmm........
xponent
rob
Dharmadeva
Marching ahead is life, crushing the pebbles of
hindrances and obstacles with a stroke of your feet,
disdaining the frowns of tornadoes, meteors and roaring
thunder, and rendering all superstitions to ashes without
any second thought, march on and on, the
Supreme Cosmic Consciousnes/God is with
you. Victory is yours.
Shrii Shrii Anandamurtiji
Ananda Purnima 1968.
--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar
PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
http://www.globaltimes.net
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
http://www.ru,org
Rob Allen
Chris Jemmett <ccjemmett@.idirect.com> wrote in message
news:s23h4.50353$tT2.4...@quark.idirect.com...
>
>
> "Steven Sullivan" <sull...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> wrote in message
> news:MT1h4.1118$oR1....@grover.nit.gwu.edu...
> > Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
> > : AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
> >
> > : Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary,
crude
> > : language, but through the refined expression of subtle ideas.
> >
> >
> > plonk
> >
>
> You are right . I know. It's just that.........well, I guess I just
haven't
> been around here as long as you and still hope for another side of people
to
> surface.
oh, don't worry...often another side does surface...and another, and
another...
Rob Allen
Steven Sullivan
: "Steven Sullivan" <sull...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> wrote in message
: news:MT1h4.1118$oR1....@grover.nit.gwu.edu...
:> Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
:> : AESTHETIC SCIENCE AND MUSIC
:>
:> : Aesthetic science is the expression of something, not in ordinary, crude
:> : language, but through the refined expression of subtle ideas.
:>
:>
:> plonk
:>
: You are right . I know. It's just that.........well, I guess I just haven't
: been around here as long as you and still hope for another side of people to
: surface.
AFAIC, the side that "Dharmadeva" displays can stay sunk.
--
-S.
________
Don't you wish *you* were quoted here?
CountV
Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
>> Turn on the egg nishner (you know, the device that keeps you cool).
>>
> Now THAT is funny!!! I've had a rough day, so it took a while to sink in
Do a web search for 'Strine Dictionary' to get more of those. The word
'Strine', incidentally, is taken from how Australians pronounce the word
'Australian'. The term was coined by Barry Whateverhisname is: the guy who
plays Dame Edna Everage.
Hey, I just checked, and I had a site book marked:
http://www-personal.monash.edu.au/~nate/australia/strine.html
Adam
> Speaking of aesthetics, have you ever heard of a musical group called
> YES? We talk about them all the time here.(well, almost all the time).
> Would you like to participate? Or did I just read a piece of Spiritual
> Spam? I look forward to your next appearance so that I may determine
> which.
>
> Chris
>
> Asshole.
>
> Adam
>
> > LOL! How would you know?
> > Seriously, how?
Umm I don't. But it was a mean thing to say.
Adam
Rob Allen
>
>Steven Sullivan wrote in message ...
<guf...*faw*>
Rob Allen
Yann Clochec
<u96...@student.canberra.edu.au>, lost in all the noise, silently
whispered :
>I don't think you understand Yes lyrics
Feel free to explain, then ;-)
---
The Lone Gunslinger - Mythologist-General, OP - Cdr, Whale Patrol, EE
"It's none of the government's business who comes to, in, on or from
my body" - Grace Slick
CountV
the Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> I don't think you understand Yes lyrics
Oh, gawd. Not *ANOTHER* one.
Where do they come from? And, please, don't answer Oz.
dennis
Go for it. In your *own* words please.
dennis
Dharmadeva
Dharmadeva
Yann Clochec wrote in message <3887d697....@news.club-internet.fr>...
understand Yes lyrics
>Feel free to explain, then ;-)
God embraces everything there can ever be. There is no single
thing in existence which is not part of the Infinite (God).
To embrace everything it must be in everything, whether known or unknown.
It must 'flow' through everything or rather be instilled in everything.
Nothing can be outside of it. It must be in every action, every motion and
every thought and every feeling. Everything must therefore be an
expression of the Infinite. Matter is but compressed energy and so the
infinite must also be in energy. In this regard matter is compressed
Infinite Consciousness. And energy is but compressed consciousness and the
Infinite must be in all consciousness.
All relativity is subject to finiteness and decay,
destruction and death is a figment of that finiteness. The Infinite can
never die, else it would not be infinite. The passing charade of death and
decay is but a representation of finiteness within time. The passing
charade of birth, operation/mutation and decay/death is merely a
confubulation of so many finite things passing by. That entire collection
of finite things does not constitute the whole Infinite. This is because
they are the relative manifestation of the qualification of the Absolute
Consciousness, and the non-attributional, unqualifed Infinite Consciousness
is greater than its attributional relativity.
All these things are merely objects of one form or another whether they be
matter or energy or thought. The Infinite must by definition be beyond the
object and subject duality. It must be immutable, original consciousness
and this expression of finite movements is but its attributional form
contained within its non-attributional stance.
So long as the non-attributional consciousness maintains itself in its
original state, there is no question of a subject or an object, nor of
knowledge and the knower. But when a part of the it comes under the sway of
attributionality, then appears the knowledge of existence of the
`I'feeling. This very `I'-feeling appears at that time as the object of of
the Infinite Consciousness. This pervading effect of the `I'-feeling is
called mind.
Our minds never enjoy an actual object. A unit mind enjoys but the
reflected shadows of the objects. Catching the shadows compiled from the
physical world, people mistake this to be a suitable object for the mind.
If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the opposite
course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of the physical
world which has been created as a result of the crudest manifestation of
the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness -> energy -> matter), and
it shall have to adopt as its object the Universal Infinite Consciousness -
the original constituent of the Cosmic Attributional mindstuff which we see
as energy or matter.
Without this understanding, any analysis is incomplete.
Children of the revolution need it. Footprints left behind should speak of
it
Yann Clochec
>Yann Clochec wrote in message <3887d697....@news.club-internet.fr>...
>understand Yes lyrics
>>Feel free to explain, then ;-)
Funny, but I *knew* I shouldn't have said that ;-)
>God embraces everything there can ever be. There is no single
>thing in existence which is not part of the Infinite (God).
Milosevic? Charles Manson? Hitler?
>Children of the revolution need it. Footprints left behind should speak of
>it
Please don't bring Marc Bolan and Chris Squire into that discussion
Henry Potts
>If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the
>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of
>the physical world which has been created as a result of the crudest
>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness ->
It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical thinking
merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
--
Henry
Dharmadeva
>On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 18:27:37 +1100, from all of eternity, "Dharmadeva"
><u96...@student.canberra.edu.au>, lost in all the noise, silently
>whispered :
>>thing in existence which is not part of the Infinite (God).
>Milosevic? Charles Manson? Hitler?
Yes, but humans are making the choices (limited) so suffer the reactions.
Steven Sullivan
: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
There is no mind/body divide. Cartesian duality is a red herring.
Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
(I'm outta here).
--
-S.
________
"I don't think you understand Yes lyrics" -- Dharmadeva
Henry Potts
>Henry Potts wrote
>: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
>:>If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the
>:>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of
>:>the physical world which has been created as a result of the crudest
>:>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness ->
>:>energy -> matter), [...]
>:
>: It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical thinking
>: merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
>
>Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
>chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
--
Henry
NP: I r m i n S c h m i d t , _ G o r m e n g h a s t _
Xponent
"Henry Potts" <he...@bondegezou.demon.co.ukREMOVETOEMAIL> wrote in message
news:8fPO4QAD...@bondegezou.demon.co.uk...
Society". He says that a person can become addicted to looking down on
people. That feeling that you have the truth and the unwashed masses are
clueless, is in neurophisiological terms addicting. Of course Brin was
applying this idea to UFO fanatics, but I would think that it applies
equally here.
xponent
rob
Dharmadeva
>Steven Sullivan <sull...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> wrote
>>Henry Potts wrote
>>: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
>>:>If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the
>>:>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of
>>:>the physical world which has been created as a result of the crudest
>>:>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness ->
>>:>energy -> matter), [...]
>>:
>>: It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical thinking
>>: merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
>>
>>There is no mind/body divide. Cartesian duality is a red herring.
>>Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
>>chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
>
>Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
>discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
>attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
>of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
Corporeal is only compressed energy - Einstein told you that a long time
ago.
There is much to discuss
Dharmadeva
>>discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
>>attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
>>of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
>
>Corporeal is only compressed energy - Einstein told you that a long time
>ago.
>
>There is much to discuss
>
object (it the done I of the mind forms an impression). When you by your
interial force recreate that thing after some time within your mind
without the help of any external object then this process of recreation is
known as memory.
So just what does one mean by the ectoplasmic structure of the mind,
ectoplasm is supposed to be the stuff that mediums exude from their skins
while in a trance state, very rational (not!). ` It doesn't exist as a
biological term.
I'm not referring to it in what 'mediums' may mean Its certainly not
biological - everything is not biological is it?
It goes back to the wave theory. AND THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT. It
seems to me that science has clearly reached the stage of saying that
everything comprises wave frequencies of some type. I don't see why mind
cannot constitute wave patterns. I mean matter is only waves of a very
condensed kind, energy is waves and therefore also vibration. Mind is a
vibration of patterns. You can't say that mind is physical because
physical
things are only wave patterns also. I see nothing illogical about saying
that mind in terms of patterns are influencing other waves in the form of
physicality (ie more subtle waves are affecting more cruder waves). IT
SEEMS
TO BE A RATIONAL CONCLUSION GIVEN QUANTUM TYPE ANALYSIS. I'm not trying to
put any religous or occult connotations on all this - just looking at it in
terms of progressive thought.
Those waves or patterns of the mind that have a pyschic structure (ie
mental
or ultra 'physical' structure) which conglomerate together form a unit mind
of a certain evolutionary consciousness/mental development. That is what is
ectoplasm.
Mind is a flowing entity which wants to surround or engulf any object. Is
that what one does with an object or a person whom we love so much? You
want to
control or facilitate the development of that object or that person
according
to your mental will. When you develop a fascination for a particular object
or person your mind encircles it. In this process of expansion your mind
develops a special liking for the object or person it comes in contact
with.
This occurs when the internal psychic/mental propensities of the person or
the object is in perfect adjustment with your own. You notice that the
rhythmic vibration of that entity and your own psychic rhythm are parallel
(there is no imposition from anywhere) and you develop a love for it or
rather fascination.
That pattern of rhythmic vibrations (and all the other patterns in the
mind)
are its own psychic structure and is the ectoplasm. It is the unit
existential faculty and the knowing faculty. Does the sense of I exist come
from the body or from the mind? In my view from the highest faculties of
mind
because we say "I exist in this body" as a norm, we don't say "this body
exists in my mind". Therefore, this vibration of 'I exist' means that
ectoplasm gives mental faculty. .
How do you 'feel' something in your mind the brain tissue has no feeling!
Actually, nerve fibres and nerve cells convey the feeling to the brain.
But doesn't this get back to the original proposition that any feeling from
an
object is a vibration anyway and the mind identifies with the inferential
waves of an object to give it a mental structure. Clearly, if brain tissue
has no feeling then what makes the mind identify with the feeling or
propensity created in it.
One can also feel something in the mind through desire or longing, don't
you?
Those desires impact on the physical structure to make the motor organs
work. Physical desire when becoming actions is through the motor organs, ie
vocal chord, hands, feet, excretory and genital organs. These I understand
are the 5 motor organs. The five sensory organs being: eyes, ears, nose,
tongue and skin.
How does one feel that there is an Infinity? Through ideatory experience,
ie
ideas and vibrations.
Trophines, amino acids enzymes and neuro-transmitters and their interaction
with and modulation of the neurons and their synapses are all part of
theory of brain.
All those things but mechanisms to enable the mind to
express itself and to express its propensity for memory. When you want to
remember something what decides that you want to recall the memory - surely
not some litle amino acid or enzyme?
The recreation of things already perceived by the mind is "memory" - the
recreation of the same mental formation that was once created in the
objectivated mind. It requires some will power to do that.
All those bio phenomenon are merely mechanism to internalize and
externalize ideas through the medium of various nerves, which act according
to the way they are guided. These nerves carry information from the
external
world to the mind, and from the mind to the external world. Ie they convey
inferential waves to the mind and also help the body create waves in the
external world. You must have experienced that while walking it is very
difficult to enjoy the taste of good food. That is why people say, `Sit
down
and eat your food calmly.' Also, on some occasions, you don't hear what a
person standing beside you is saying because your mind is engaged somewhere
else. You don't pick up the inferential waves related to sound because
your
mind does not want to, despite the physical phenomenon occurring around
you.
So what then of a patient suffering Alzheimers disease where the part of
the brain containing the function or memory is effectivley dead. Most
cognitive and long term memory can be lost before the patient dies, what
bits are transmitted subtly to the next life then. Are these parts of
mental function all waiting to be re-united on the "other side?"
Transmission of patterns or propensites. There is no physical shape or
matter floating around called mind. Mind is a psychic construct or
vibratory
pattern - just like anything is a vibration in this universe. Through the
psychic structure which are the psychic patterns created in the person's
lifetime (or previous ones even) transmission into new forms occurs. As
mentioned above, quantum theory can advance to the proposition that one set
of vibrations being mind patterns can influence or control of work with
another set of vibrations call the physical body.
Regarding loss of memory, sure a person who reads thousands of books will
be
unable to remember everything which was read. It is natural for the reader
to
forget most of the contents as human memory is short. The nerve cells of
the
human brain don't possess the capacity to retain everything within their
memory for long. But I'm not talking about remembering everything exactly,
I'm refering to the survival of mental patterns and vibrations.
What is anything that you see?
What is a flower? You say that is a flower because particular light-waves
come and touch your eyes and a similar flower is created in your mind.
Actually, you are not seeing this flower you are seeing the mental image of
the flower within. You never see anything, you never hear anything, you
never
even touch anything. When you see something or touch something, the
corresponding sympathetic vibration is created, which touches your mind
through the nerves, and a sympathetic vibration is created within your
mind.
That is all that happens.
At that time, you feel that you are seeing the flower, or you feel that you
are hearing some song, or you feel that you are touching something hot or
cold. Actually, you never come in physical contact with anything. Your
contact with everything is through your mind, through your nerve fibers,
through your nerve cells, and your entire objective mind. In all that time
you still only pick a part of anything external, but enough to create
something in your mind through the vibrations you have picked up.
When you feel that you see, it is an internaI projection with the help of
your nerves. What a mystery. It is a great mystery that whatever you
perceive or
whatever you conceive-everything is within you, nothing is outside of you.
That is why it is said that the entire Universe is within you in miniature
form. You are seeing the psychic projection of the material world. That is
why the human entity is more psychic than physical.
Here is a flower. The waves move from the external world to the eye, then
through the optic nerve to the nerve cells and finally to the brain. There,
a
similar flower is created in your mind according to the light waves that
are
outside your body. This movement is from external to internal. It is
something external, and its creation is in your mind, that is external to
internal. Extrointernal, created outside but going within.
Then how is memory of one life carried over to another life ? It is due to
extra-cerebral process - extra-cerebral memory.
The pituitary gland is actually the master-gland of the endocrine system. It
is
small about 1.3cm in diameter and It lies in the sella turcica of the
sphenoid bone and is positioned more or less centrally underneath the
brain. It releases a range of hormones that control mainly the activities
of growth and reproduction, such as the lactates, bone growth, skin
pigment, insulin, sperm and egg production.
The pituitary plexus is the controlling point of the mind. The above
refers to extra cerebral memory not cerebral memory. This psychic centre
affects the carrying over of mind vibrations/patterns after death. The
pituitary plexus controls the ability to acquire both relative and
spiritual
knowledge. The lower glands of the body are influenced by hormones from
the
pituitary glands, which ultimately brings about a great change in the
physical body. Imbalance in any glands below the navel means one does not
get full oportunity to experience the beneficial effects of the
hormones/secretions from the pituitary.
So can a baby remember its past life?. This is also extra-cerebral memory,
but
this memory gradually dies and is not recollectable after the sexual organs
start developing. Because as soon as the sex glands start functioning, one
develops a special attraction for this earth and wordly joys.
In this regard it is important to note that semen production and ova
production don't start until much later in life (males 12 - 13 properly)
and this is also what is meant by sexual development..
If the infant can remeber its past life, and it would be fair to say that
most peoples lives revolve around there earthly desires, how come the baby
dosen't remember these assuming the earthly desires stay with your physical
remains?
OIbviously young children don't intellectually think about these things in
terms of language. Memories and visions is more their field of thought.
As
a child of 3 to 4 years old (while ago now) I can still recall now that I
had
some feelings then that I had a previous life. When I ask children who are
of
an age before school years whether they thought they were alive before, the
general response is 'yes' - in fact readily they seem to think they were
alive before. But I note that this only applies to children of families
whose 'gene pool' seems to be fairly developed, ie there are talented
members
in the family as parents or older brothers and sisters. Families who are
more ordinary don't seem to be the same - although even there the
exceptions
can readily be found in a very different mental make up of kids compared to
parrents.
Sometimes memory functions during sleep - when one's sleep is transformed
into sentient sleep. Also memory can be both/either memory concerning a
material or crude object (which is painful memory) or memory concerning a
spiritual object which is dependent on two factors: assimilation and the
object of
assimilation (the object of assimilation being the Infinite Entity - God).
That's why Lord Buddha said: Samyak Smrti, that is, you must not forget,
you must never forget that it is your foremost duty to take the name of the
Lord and attain proper memory.
Just what is meant by a proper memory?
By this meant spiritual ideation. By dint of proper practice, eg meditation
one
can develop the feeling or memory that everything is Infinite Consciousness
or God. But really that Infinite God is inexplicable, indescribable. So
God
cannot be brought within the scope of language: God is beyond it. God
cannot
be spoken of; God is even beyond the mind. Nevertheless mind in its most
subtle state can contemplate God through meditative practices utilising
sound
through mantra and ideation etc.
The difference between intellect and memory is that memory is re-creation
of something already known and intellect is subjectivisation of an
objectivity. Intellect is not a propensity, memory is.
How come so many cultures develop many parallel versions of intelect. In
order that you may have an intelect you must first have a memory to
remember all the complex semantics and rules of engagement, that leaves the
two inextricably entwined.
Different relativities of place and geography, lots of differences, but
same nature of mind just caught up in different surroundings and events.
You remember things after the event or action. You can't remember
something
you haven't experienced in one way or another. The initial encounter with
something new is not really memory but its first impression in the mind (or
rather resultant part of mind - done I).
One often hears the catch cry 'My rationality says that you have absolutely
no evidence for this assertion, please could you provide some'.
As with most evidence it is all inferences. Most knowledge is inferential.
It has to be so because one only ever picks up waves from any observation.
One can observe one's thoughts and mental processes and also one's
spiritual
nature can be ideated upon and experienced as part of the Universal
Consciousness. That is what sages and spiritual aspirants have been doing
for thousands of years. These days it is incorrect to see the world as a
physicality only or to be matter oriented - matter simply is not permanent.
Like everything in this universe all we experience is waves of various
vibrations. One can carefully and subtely experience the cause of these
waves at varioius levels and the tool for that is the mind itself. Subtle
things have to be measured by subtle means and that is an introspective
exercise through use of mind as the laboratory. The evidence is in the
practice and realisations that one has in this process. It is the next
frontier in science.
----
"The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements is that they
aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious liberation of humanity."
P R Sarkar
http://www.prout.org Home of the Progressive Utilization Theory
http://www.globaltimes.net Home of Global Times magazine
dennis
>
> "Henry Potts" <he...@bondegezou.demon.co.ukREMOVETOEMAIL> wrote in message
> news:8fPO4QAD...@bondegezou.demon.co.uk...
> > >Henry Potts wrote
> > >: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
> > >:>If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the
> > >:>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of
> > >:>the physical world which has been created as a result of the crudest
> > >:>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness ->
> > >:>energy -> matter), [...]
> > >:
> > >: It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical thinking
> > >: merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
> > >
> > >There is no mind/body divide. Cartesian duality is a red herring.
> > >Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
> > >chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
> >
> > discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> > attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
> > of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
> Could be something that David Brin talks about in his book, "The Transparent
> Society". He says that a person can become addicted to looking down on
> people. That feeling that you have the truth and the unwashed masses are
> clueless, is in neurophisiological terms addicting. Of course Brin was
> applying this idea to UFO fanatics, but I would think that it applies
> equally here.
>
Since no one really has a way of providing tangible and transferable proof
of what the mind actually is, there easily could be those who actually *do*
understand what most are clueless about.
The idea of smugly looking down on people can also apply equally to those
who entertain the concept of mind being a property of the brain... not
exactly something the unwashed sit around and discuss.
dennis
dennis
>
> Yann Clochec wrote in message <3887d697....@news.club-internet.fr>...
> understand Yes lyrics
> >Feel free to explain, then ;-)
>
> If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the opposite
> course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of the physical
> world which has been created as a result of the crudest manifestation of
> it shall have to adopt as its object the Universal Infinite Consciousness -
> the original constituent of the Cosmic Attributional mindstuff which we see
> as energy or matter.
It's interesting that after 4 paragraphs of defining "the infinite" (which
seems a little oxymoronic), you then conclude that physicality is somehow
inferior to other levels of consciousness and return to the dualism which
you just rejected.
A more holistic perception would recognize the physical world as a unique
vibration within the "cosmic, infinite, consciousness"... not separate from,
but equal to, all other levels of experience.
This is the type of disempowering religious dogma that's been played on
humanity for millennia. Maybe there are those who have no special interest
in a hurried and urgent "return to the infinite" If there's any truth to the
evolutionary path that you're describing, it might be just as likely that
there are those who have come *from* the level of consciousness that seems
to be your goal, to intentionally manifest in the physical, for the
purpose of experiencing the wonderful *limitations* of it.
It seems to me that the superior challenge for those who think they're
enlightened, would be to learn to illuminate *this world* by expressing love
and divine compassion at a frequency that resists it...instead of spending
maximum energy in an attempt to be somewhere else. If "the infinite" is
really infinite, it'll be there when we get there.
dennis
Xponent
"dennis" <den...@disinfo.net> wrote in message
news:388B2965...@disinfo.net...
> Xponent wrote:
> >
> > "Henry Potts" <he...@bondegezou.demon.co.ukREMOVETOEMAIL> wrote in
message
> > news:8fPO4QAD...@bondegezou.demon.co.uk...
> > > Steven Sullivan <sull...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> wrote
> > > >Henry Potts wrote
> > > >: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
> > > >:>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction
of
> > > >:>the physical world which has been created as a result of the
crudest
> > > >:>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness
(consciousness ->
> > > >:
> > > >: It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical
thinking
> > > >: merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
> > > >
> > > >There is no mind/body divide. Cartesian duality is a red herring.
> > > >Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
> > > >chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
> > >
> > > Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
> > > discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> > > attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some
sort
> > > of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
> > > --
> > Could be something that David Brin talks about in his book, "The
Transparent
> > Society". He says that a person can become addicted to looking down on
> > people. That feeling that you have the truth and the unwashed masses are
> > clueless, is in neurophisiological terms addicting. Of course Brin was
> > applying this idea to UFO fanatics, but I would think that it applies
> > equally here.
> >
>
> Since no one really has a way of providing tangible and transferable proof
> of what the mind actually is, there easily could be those who actually
*do*
> understand what most are clueless about.
1 The first part of your sentence disagrees with the second part.
2 There is an extremely large body of knowledge concerning the workings of
the brain, which is what I was refering to if you will look again.
3 If you damage the brain the mind is impaired. If you take drugs (a purely
physical act) your mind can be altered. To say that there is not a definate
and complete connection between brain and mind is to ignore reality.
> The idea of smugly looking down on people can also apply equally to those
> who entertain the concept of mind being a property of the brain... not
> exactly something the unwashed sit around and discuss.
>
Being smug and being right are not neccessarily mutually exclusive.
xponent
rob
Xponent
> >>Henry Potts wrote
> >>: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
> >>:>If the mind really desires to enjoy anything, it should adopt the
> >>:>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of
> >>:>the physical world which has been created as a result of the crudest
> >>:>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness ->
> >>:>energy -> matter), [...]
> >>:
> >>: It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical thinking
> >>: merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
> >>
> >>There is no mind/body divide. Cartesian duality is a red herring.
> >>Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
> >>chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
> >
> >Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
> >discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> >attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
> >of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
>
> ago.
>
> There is much to discuss
>
stick your tongue out properly.
xponent
rob
Xponent
> Dharmadeva wrote:
> >
> > Yann Clochec wrote in message
<3887d697....@news.club-internet.fr>...
> > understand Yes lyrics
> > >Feel free to explain, then ;-)
> >
> ...edited:
opposite
> > course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of the
physical
> > world which has been created as a result of the crudest manifestation of
> > the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness -> energy -> matter),
Xponent
>
> dennis wrote in message <388B2905...@disinfo.net>...
>
> >you then conclude that physicality is somehow
> >>inferior to other levels of consciousness and return to the dualism
which
> >>you just rejected.
> >>
> >>A more holistic perception would recognize the physical world as a
unique
> >>vibration within the "cosmic, infinite, consciousness"... not separate
> >from,
> >>but equal to, all other levels of experience.
>
>
and
> the material or even the spiritual, mental/psychic and material/physcial.
>
> Rather the spiritual has priority but there has to be a proper adjustment
> with the objective physicala. Therefore, the preferrable approach is
> "subjective/spiritual approach with objective adjustment". This means
> keeping the spiritual in mind/soul always but knowing the need to live in
> the material as it is the material which give the mind the vehicle it
needs
> to advance and learn.
>
> How does one compare side by side, revelation to doing dirty dishes.
>
> The solution is one of ideation. While one handles it as a dish one does
> not have to see it as a dish. A person can ideate of the Divine while
doing
> any
> work (even mental work because even when one thinks there are pauses -
> everything move in waves and even in sleep is it possible to instill in
the
> mind higher thoughts). This can be done by various means all of which
must
> create a FEELING that you are closer to the spiritual than the physical or
> that the manifestation of the physical is also an aspect of the Divine.
All
> all
> depends on how one wants to channelise the mind. Channelisation can be
> through mantra, chants, songs, etc.
>
> There is no need to think that these are dirty dishes - the task of
cleaning
> them can be done no matter what one thinks or ideates upon. It depends on
> where you want to lead the mind. Of course it takes some training and
what
> oneconsiders to be important while still have excellent adjustment with
the
> physical world.
>
> One the other hand, coincidentally is born the knowledge that the
Infinite
> is in the dirty dishes as well and that we are not yet 'there' enough to
> see it. Indeed, but we can train ourselves.
>
> In this paradox, we often find ourselves trapped. Ignorance
> and knowledge mingle in one Mind that is both incredibly physically hard
> wired while connected by a delicate thread to the experiece that reduces
> all of this to illusion. But the illusion theory is illogical. What we
> see is a relative truth not an illusion.
>
> No matter how much we deny the existence of the world we cannot make it
> non-existent. The world is a relative truth and so your physical body
which
> exists in this relative world is also a relative truth. For existence in
the
> this relative world, we need food, clothing, shelter, education, medical
> treatment and other amenities of life. We cannot completely ignore these
> basic necessities. The funny thing is this: that those exponents of
> philosophy who
> have declared that this world is mere illusion have constructed various
> temples and monasteries. If the world is nothing but illusion then where
is
> the
> necessity of all these temples and monasteries? The fundamental mistake is
> that the illusionists are mysteriously silent about the origin of their
own
> unit
> existence.
>
> --
Sully......is that you?
dennis
> > Xponent wrote:
> > >
> > > "Henry Potts" <he...@bondegezou.demon.co.ukREMOVETOEMAIL> wrote in
> message
> > > news:8fPO4QAD...@bondegezou.demon.co.uk...
> > > > >Henry Potts wrote
> > > > >: Dharmadeva <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote [...]
> > > > >:>opposite course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction
> of
> > > > >:>the physical world which has been created as a result of the
> crudest
> > > > >:>manifestation of the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness
> (consciousness ->
> > > > >:
> > > > >: It always seems to me that this sort of dualist metaphysical
> thinking
> > > > >: merely demonstrates a body image neurosis.
> > > > >
> > > > >There is no mind/body divide. Cartesian duality is a red herring.
> > > > >Mind is an emergent property of the complex architecture and
> > > > >chemistry of the brain. Discuss.
> > > >
> > > > Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
> > > > discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> > > > attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some
> sort
> > > > of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
> > > Could be something that David Brin talks about in his book, "The
> Transparent
> > > Society". He says that a person can become addicted to looking down on
> > > people. That feeling that you have the truth and the unwashed masses are
> > > clueless, is in neurophisiological terms addicting. Of course Brin was
> > > applying this idea to UFO fanatics, but I would think that it applies
> > > equally here.
> > >
> >
> > Since no one really has a way of providing tangible and transferable proof
> > of what the mind actually is, there easily could be those who actually
> *do*
> > understand what most are clueless about.
>
> 1 The first part of your sentence disagrees with the second part.
Not at all, I'm saying that it might be possible to actually *know* and yet
be unable to provide empirical proof.
>
> 2 There is an extremely large body of knowledge concerning the workings of
> the brain, which is what I was refering to if you will look again.
>
> 3 If you damage the brain the mind is impaired. If you take drugs (a purely
> physical act) your mind can be altered. To say that there is not a definate
> and complete connection between brain and mind is to ignore reality.
>
I believe the mind is a nonphysical phenomenon which uses the brain to
process the stimuli of the physical world. If the brain is damaged or
altered, the mind is still the mind, but its ability to process information
may be hindered (or enhanced), making it appear to an observer that it's
holistically affected. If you choose to believe that the mind must be the
sole result of neurological evolution, this is the only logical conclusion
that can be drawn. I certainly understand why you would have this PoV, but I
don't believe that it's necessarily a "fact".
Of course there is a real connection between mind and the brain (until death
do us part), but I think it's most likely that the brain (as well as
everything else) is a construct of mind rather than the inverse.
dennis
dennis
> > >>Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
> > >>discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> > >>attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
> > >>of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
> > >
> > >Corporeal is only compressed energy - Einstein told you that a long time
> > >ago.
> > >
> > >There is much to discuss
> > >
>
>
> Sure, ya can gusy it up all ya want, but simple fact remains : Us here
> spiritual entities is stuck ass deep in all this compressed energy and can't
> seem to get free of it. Hell, most are so stuck they don't even know what
> they are. Half the bright ones around us start chantin' Prove It, Prove It,
> Prove It if someone tells them they are a 'spirit' and are separate from all
> this 'stuff'. Don't know where they came from or how they got here, runnin'
> around lookin' for answers to mostly the wrong questions. Got any idears?
> Sumpin' simple perhaps, cause ya know the truth is ultimately, not clothed
> in academicals.
>
> Chris
Chris, you reveal yourself as Bodhisattva.
dennis
Dharmadeva
>Since no one really has a way of providing tangible and transferable proof
>of what the mind actually is,
Actually there is no tangible proof about most things. Everything in the
physical world is always passing and the so proof is gone in the next
instance. It is a matter of inference and rationality when proving things.
there easily could be those who actually *do*
>understand what most are clueless about.
>The idea of smugly looking down on people can also apply equally to those
>who entertain the concept of mind being a property of the brain
Is 'mind' is just an epiphenomenon of 'brain'?
Brain is the vehicle of mind. Mind can transmigrate at the time of death
because it can be independent of body, but body is dependent on mind for
its physical expression. It is part of the cruder expression of mind.
In this sense, there is nothing unusual in not being able to see mind with
sensory organs. It is no different to not being able to see energy through
sensory organs. One can, however, see the results of energy and indeed of
mind.
In terms of being able to see God, we can only form an idea of God with the
help of our ideation or flow of mind. Naturally, it seems that God is an
abstract entity and has to be appreciated by our mind. However, the depth
of that Entity is far, far beyond the comprehension of the analytical mind.
The qualifying principle of this abstract entity (whereby multiplicity
comes from Oneness) is also appreciated by the understanding of mind and
its higher faculties.
Energy, force or principle being the attributes of the crudest of things
cannot be seen. Its figure and shape cannot be described. Fire is a crude
object and its attribute -the burning principle is also a crude quality.
Yet even this attribute/quality cannot be seen. However crude the attribute
of a thing may be, it will always be subtle in form. Energy or principle
can never have a shape. It can never have an audio-visual existence. Only
its objective
resultant can be audially or visually seen.
God is also subtle and can be appreciated only in the final stage of
intellectual synthesis or intuitional insight. Intuition is not a wishy
washy concept but the highest expression of a pinnacled mind or synthetic
outlook of mind. God cannot, therefore, have any figure or shape. Any
figures or shapes in the universe are of course the expression of God but
not the Totality of God which is beyond all relativity of time, space/shape
or person/frequency. It is not possible to describe God or even to say
what It sounds like. God has to be shapeless or formless. It has really no
form. It is not nothingness as that is a limitation but instead is
abundant, omniscient, monotheistic Bliss far beyond and transcending
anything to do with pleasure or pain borne out of relativity and actions
(whether physical or mental/pyschic).
The formation of objective mind is dependent on the 'doer' I capability of
mind. If doer I ceases to exist, then the objective mind cannot be formed.
But absence of the objective mind does not mean absence of the doer I which
remains with the capability of thought and the potential of that thought to
find objective expression. Applying the same reasoning to doer I of the
mind it is seen that its existence depends on the pure 'I feeling' (I
exist) but that the feeling of I exist does not depend on the presence or
absence of the notion of a doer I. That is, I exist or pure I feeling is
independent of both doer I notions and objectivated mind (done I).
Similarly the existence of pure I feeling (I exist) depends on the
influence of subtle qualification from the creative process on unit
consciousness/'soul' (ie the pure I feeling is the 'sugar coating' over the
soul so that multiplicity and I feeling have this apparent latent
separateness (or qualification) from Supreme Soul). But the existence of
unit onsciousness/soul is independent of pure I feeling (or I exist). For
example, steel can be beaten to form a steel pan but that does not mean
that if the pan does not exist the steel also does not exist. The pan being
made of steel is dependent on steel but steel would exist even if there was
no pan. Steel is therefore independent of the pan for its existence.
Similarly unit consciousness/'soul' is independent of the feeling of I
exist (pure I feeling). But all the different forms from objectivated mind
to doer I to the feeling of I exist are dependent on unit consciousness as
the existence of each one of these is dependent on the other. But when we
come to consciousness/soul it is seen that its existence is not dependent
on any of these forms. In fact no such thing can be found on which the
existence of consciousness would depend. Consciousness is therefore
absolutely independent.
Consciousness is absolutely independent. It is not dependent on anything
and has no beginning or root. It has nothing as its origin or cause. It is
non-causal. The qualifying principle over consciousness/'soul' (ie to give
rise to the feeling of I) is a qualifying principle of God Itself and the
creative manifestation of God in the form of this universe springs from
such degrees (differing bondages) of qualification and is bound to be
present wherever consciousness exists. Eg the burning quality of fire is
its qualifying principle and always exists wherever
there is fire. Yet this quality has not been created by fire. Just as fire
cannot create its qualifying principle, consciousness also cannot create
qualifying principle which is also non-causal. The Cosmic Mind is like
this a Oneness where two sides of the piece of paper (consciousness and
qualification) can never be separated and is certainly non-causal.
--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~dambiec/
PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
http://www.ru.org
Dharmadeva
>> Yann Clochec wrote in message
<3887d697....@news.club-internet.fr>...
>> understand Yes lyrics
>> >Feel free to explain, then ;-)
>...edited:
opposite
>> course. The mind has to be extricated from the attraction of the physical
>> world which has been created as a result of the crudest manifestation of
>> the Cosmic Infinite Consciousness (consciousness -> energy -> matter),
>> it shall have to adopt as its object the Universal Infinite
Consciousness -
>> the original constituent of the Cosmic Attributional mindstuff which we
see
>> as energy or matter.
>
>inferior to other levels of consciousness and return to the dualism which
>you just rejected.
>
>A more holistic perception would recognize the physical world as a unique
>vibration within the "cosmic, infinite, consciousness"... not separate
from,
>but equal to, all other levels of experience.
Well there is question of relativity of the world and the infinite as
Absolute. Relativity is always changing so naturally it is inferior
compared to the "cosmic, infinite, consciousness" from which it derived as a
manifestation of the Consciousness. But that Consciousness still exists
irrespective of the relativity.
As Consciousness is infinite, it must be beyond relativity because
everything that is relative is finite either physcial, temporally or
spatially, ie physical delimitation, subject to death or bound by dimension.
Thus one's own consciousness to be infinite must equate with one's soul and
that soul is intimately part of the Supreme Soul or Supreme Consciousness,
there is no difference but for the feeling of I (ie I feeling) which is
simply a qualification on the Supreme Soul necessary to create multiplicity
from Divinity or Oneness.
Therefore, whatever the unit mind performs is known to unit consciousness
(soul) at once i.e. whatever your mind does is known to your soul and
according to Soul (God) at once.
External activity is the actual expression of whatever you think on your
psychic plane. Mind acts but consciousness witnesses. So, whatever your
mind is acquainted with, is done by your mind and hence your soul comes to
know it.
In this regard it is necessary to identify with the physical as an
expression of the Infinite, meaning the physical is within it and not beyond
it, accordingly it is of lesser 'stature' so to speak but within the same
Infinite Consciousness.
Furthermore, whatever action -- vice or virtue -- is performed by your mind
has its impression on unit consciousness (soul) and the impression of the
actions on unit consciousness is at once conveyed to Supreme Consciousness
as they are one and the same but for the I differentiation needed for
multiplicity in
Divinity.
However, whatever action the Cosmic Mind does, that is not really action
because everything is internal. But whatever the unit mind performs is both
internal as well as external. For instance, if a desire for stealing is
aroused in one's mind, that can be internal when you don't translate the
same into action, ie mental stealing can have external expression or it may
remain in the psychic plane itself.
But whatever the Cosmic Mind does is all internal, totally within the Cosmic
mental arena, there is nothing external for God--all is within God.
Accordingly, everything is an expression of Consciousness.
There is no double personality in Supreme Consciousness - otherwise It would
not be infinite. Everything is internal. The entire world is internal. That
which is external world for you is internal for Divinity.
The tree sitting outside my window is ages old. Its symetry is wonderful.
How does the middle branch know how long to grow in relation to the branch
below it and above it to form the shape of an up side down heart
The Cosmic Consciousness through it factor of Creation has discerned within
its own thought projection its own means of expression and diversity of
expression.
But this movement is still in the plane of inference of cosmic nature, that
is, cosmic arena. It is the thought of the Supreme Consciousness, the
inference of cosmic arena - a reflection of Divinity.
When an object comes within the scope of perception or conception, it is
called substance to us. Human intellect can actually rise far above the
range of perception, and that is why many wise persons recognize the mind as
an "eleventh organ" in addition to the five sensory organs and five motor
organs. That is, the nature of intellect, in the process of increasing
subtilization, is converting the unknown substance into a known or
half-known substance. Human beings can also become subtle enough in mind to
perceive/understand/intuit that the substance is consciousness itself. In
that regard it is more important to identify with the Infinite than the
physical.
Matter is compressed energy they say, but better to say that matter is the
compressed Known I of the Macrocosmic Mind. Then, what is the silver line
of demarcation between matter and idea? Of that
silver lining, the outside is matter and the other side, the inner side, is
idea. That is, this silver lining is made of the initial stage of matter and
the cruder stage of idea.
Just as atoms are not perceived by the naked eye, but only by experimental
results, similar is the case with consciousness and mind. You have to use
your internal laboratory.
--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar
PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
http://www.globaltimes.net http://www.proutworld.org
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
http://www.ru,org
Dharmadeva
dennis wrote in message <388B2905...@disinfo.net>...
>you then conclude that physicality is somehow
>>inferior to other levels of consciousness and return to the dualism which
>>you just rejected.
>>
>>A more holistic perception would recognize the physical world as a unique
>>vibration within the "cosmic, infinite, consciousness"... not separate
>from,
>>but equal to, all other levels of experience.
--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar
PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
http://www.globaltimes.net
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
Chris Jemmett
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:SdCi4.8930$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
> >>Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
> >>discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> >>attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some sort
> >>of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
> >
> >Corporeal is only compressed energy - Einstein told you that a long time
> >ago.
> >
> >There is much to discuss
> >
(biggest mf'n snip I ever did see)
paul rogers
Xponent wrote:
>
> "Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
> Sully......is that you?
Nah just the author of Steves recent sig. <VBG>
But seriously, very heavy reading in this thread and quite a pleasure
attempting to digest it.
Back to you 'guys'.
paul
Dharmadeva
>But seriously, very heavy reading in this thread and quite a pleasure
>attempting to digest it.
>Back to you 'guys'.
>paul
I'm amazed its got this far
Dharmadeva
>Sure, ya can gusy it up all ya want, but simple fact remains : Us here
>spiritual entities is stuck ass deep in all this compressed energy and
can't
>seem to get free of it.
Well do some spiritual practices!
Chris Jemmett
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:EIOi4.9206$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
Welcome to a.m.y.
Got a favorite album?
Chris Jemmett
Chris
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:8FOi4.9201$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
Steven Sullivan
: "Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
: news:hlNi4.9134$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
:> --
: Sully......is that you?
Hardly.. I'm truly staying out of this one. If I were to start pointing
out all the scientific errors and misinterpretations, tendentious
statements of 'fact', and just plain hoo-hah contained in the stuff I've
snipped of Dharma-lad's, I'd have no time or energy to perform the other
vital functions I serve on AMY.
Chris Jemmett
"dennis" <den...@disinfo.net> wrote in message
news:388BBBB2...@disinfo.net...
> Chris Jemmett wrote:
> >
> > "Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
> > news:SdCi4.8930$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
> > > >>Well, that's so blindingly obvious that it hardly seems worth
> > > >>discussing. What interests me is the continued attraction of this
> > > >>attitude in religious and spiritual belief. It speaks to me of some
sort
> > > >>of deep-seated fear and disgust of the corporeal.
> > > >
> > > >Corporeal is only compressed energy - Einstein told you that a long
time
> > > >ago.
> > > >
> > > >There is much to discuss
> > > >
> >
> > (biggest mf'n snip I ever did see)
> >
> > Sure, ya can gusy it up all ya want, but simple fact remains : Us here
> > spiritual entities is stuck ass deep in all this compressed energy and
can't
> > seem to get free of it. Hell, most are so stuck they don't even know
what
> > they are. Half the bright ones around us start chantin' Prove It, Prove
It,
> > Prove It if someone tells them they are a 'spirit' and are separate from
all
> > this 'stuff'. Don't know where they came from or how they got here,
runnin'
> > around lookin' for answers to mostly the wrong questions. Got any
idears?
> > Sumpin' simple perhaps, cause ya know the truth is ultimately, not
clothed
> > in academicals.
> >
> > Chris
>
> Chris, you reveal yourself as Bodhisattva.
>
> dennis
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
I generally just come here to yak about Yes. I like 'em a lot. I also like
people who like 'em, even though some of them are even bigger assholes than
me. No, not you and definitely not the ones that you might think that of at
first contact.
Chris
paul rogers
Dharmadeva wrote:
> I'm amazed its got this far
it often does on this ng.
Makes delurking fun every now and then.
On a side tangent (and ever so closely linked to this current topic) I
was discussing the mind-body link with my Father last night. He's in
hospital today for explorative stuff and we just got to discussing
spirit/body/soul/consiousness matters from both his perspective (COE and
Faith orientation practices) and mine (art/creativity/exploration of
myriad states with a dollop of leftist humanitarian concern) and I
realised that neither of us really wanted to 'hear' what the other was saying.
float your prejudices
paul
CountV
for all the world to see, the following:
> Being smug and being right are not neccessarily mutually exclusive.
Mr. Dharmadeva seems to excel in the first, though.
--
JohnT/CountV
"Cunnilingus and psychiatry brought us to this." - Tony Soprano
Design by Coercion - New Years update, with image manipulation section;
http://www.m-ideas.com/coercion/index.htm
Steven Sullivan
: On 00/01/23 20:21, Xponent <Dend...@email.msn.com> uploaded to the Usenet,
: for all the world to see, the following:
:> Being smug and being right are not neccessarily mutually exclusive.
: Mr. Dharmadeva seems to excel in the first, though.
Dharma has acheived a level of fame as a pseudoscientific babbler among
the ranks of talk.origins (the evolution discussion newsgroup). See the
hilarious example at:
http://home.eznet.net/~heiny/theories/dharmadeva.html
CountV
the Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> CountV <co...@REMOVETHISm-ideas.com> wrote:
> : On 00/01/23 20:21, Xponent <Dend...@email.msn.com> uploaded to the Usenet,
> : for all the world to see, the following:
>
> :> Being smug and being right are not neccessarily mutually exclusive.
>
> : Mr. Dharmadeva seems to excel in the first, though.
>
> Dharma has acheived a level of fame as a pseudoscientific babbler among
> the ranks of talk.origins (the evolution discussion newsgroup). See the
> hilarious example at:
>
> http://home.eznet.net/~heiny/theories/dharmadeva.html
Oh, lordy.
Rarely have I seen so many words used to such little effect.
Chris Jemmett
to hang around much longer.
"Steven Sullivan" <sull...@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu> wrote in message
news:VU0j4.1$Uy6...@grover.nit.gwu.edu...
> CountV <co...@REMOVETHISm-ideas.com> wrote:
> : On 00/01/23 20:21, Xponent <Dend...@email.msn.com> uploaded to the
Usenet,
> : for all the world to see, the following:
>
> :> Being smug and being right are not neccessarily mutually exclusive.
>
> : Mr. Dharmadeva seems to excel in the first, though.
>
>
> Dharma has acheived a level of fame as a pseudoscientific babbler among
> the ranks of talk.origins (the evolution discussion newsgroup). See the
> hilarious example at:
>
> http://home.eznet.net/~heiny/theories/dharmadeva.html
>
>
>
Steven Sullivan
: *Sigh..........* Mr. D is going to have to be pretty thick skinned himself
: to hang around much longer.
If Mr. D has already been throught the gantlet of talk.origins (not to
mention some of the other groups he crossposted his 1997 musings to) AMY
will seem warm and fuzzy in comparison.
Rob Dubnicka
> CountV <co...@REMOVETHISm-ideas.com> wrote:
> : On 00/01/23 20:21, Xponent <Dend...@email.msn.com> uploaded to the Usenet,
> : for all the world to see, the following:
>
> :> Being smug and being right are not neccessarily mutually exclusive.
>
> : Mr. Dharmadeva seems to excel in the first, though.
>
> Dharma has acheived a level of fame as a pseudoscientific babbler among
> the ranks of talk.origins (the evolution discussion newsgroup). See the
> hilarious example at:
>
> http://home.eznet.net/~heiny/theories/dharmadeva.html
>
Amazing.
I've recently started looking back in here - I wanted some time away from the more
"interesting" posts and posters that made reading the newsgroup tedious.
I see they have multiplied. What a shame.
> --
> -S.
> ________
> "I don't think you understand Yes lyrics" -- Dharmadeva
Even more amazing. This statement is the calling card of the yahoos and nitwits
that make this group tedious.
Xponent
> Xponent <Dend...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
> : "Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
> :> --
> : Sully......is that you?
>
>
> Hardly.. I'm truly staying out of this one. If I were to start pointing
> out all the scientific errors and misinterpretations, tendentious
> statements of 'fact', and just plain hoo-hah contained in the stuff I've
> snipped of Dharma-lad's, I'd have no time or energy to perform the other
> vital functions I serve on AMY.
>
>
>
albeit longwinded, person might be.
If this guy actually worked at something usefull, he/she might be a force to
be reckoned with, as opposed to someone easily ignored.
xponent
rob
paul rogers
Steven Sullivan wrote:
> Dharma has acheived a level of fame as a pseudoscientific babbler among
> the ranks of talk.origins (the evolution discussion newsgroup). See the
> hilarious example at:
>
> http://home.eznet.net/~heiny/theories/dharmadeva.html
mmmmm ectoplasmic. Hard to believe its the same person although it seems
from the date on that piece that the Dharmatic one has had nearly three
years to polish up his/her act.
btw what was that intermediary step between the Mammoth and the Elephant again?
The contemporary stuff is much more interesting.
Paul
(never sig.s on the bottom line)
Dharmadeva
expansion of mind.
Chris Jemmett wrote in message <9VOi4.81302$tT2.5...@quark.idirect.com>...
>What? ya mean just Any old ones?
>Chris
>"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
>news:8FOi4.9201$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
>> Chris Jemmett wrote in message
>> >Sure, ya can gusy it up all ya want, but simple fact remains : Us here
>> >spiritual entities is stuck ass deep in all this compressed energy and
>> can't seem to get free of it.
>> Well do some spiritual practices!
When the aesthetic sense, based on the subtle aesthetic science, comes to
touch a certain standard, it is what is called mysticism. And when this
mysticism reaches the pinnacle of human glory, or the excellence of human
glory, it is called spirituality.
What is mysticism? Mysticism is the never ending endeavour to find out the
link between the finite and the infinite. It is a never-ending endeavour to
find out a link between the self and the super self, khud and khudha'. This
is mysticism.
It is one of the human wants that human beings are never satisfied with
something finite. They are never satisfied with some thing limited. Human
thirst cannot be satisfied with something limited, Human hunger cannot be
satisfied by something finite.
That is, in the quest for the infinite, human beings first come in contact
with aesthetic science. Aesthetic science does not always mean to get
something pleasant; it may mean to get some thing troublesome, something
embarrassing -- it may or may not be something pleasant. Aesthetic science
is that which one can express in a subtler way, from subtle to subtler, and
when it reaches the subtlest point, that point is the pinnacle of human
glory.
When human beings started their movement towards
the Supreme Being, in quest of Supreme Bliss, they first came in contact
with spirituality. As spirituality is coming in contact with the infinite,
that is, the finite comes in contact with the infinite, it is called "Yoga".
Yoga is the unit moving in quest of the infinite, the finite moving towards
the infinite in a mystic style. In Sam'skrta (sanskrit), Yoga means
"addition". For instance, two plus two is equal to four. But for a mystic,
for an aspirant of the mystic goal or the mystic desideratum, Yoga is not
only addition; here Yoga means "unification".
What sort of unification? It is just like sugar and water. Say there are two
plus two apples. In the case of addition there will be one apple, then two,
then three and then four apples. Every apple will maintain its individuality
or its identity. The identity of the apples remains unchanged before and
after the addition. But in the case of unification, that is, in the example
of sugar and water, the sugar does not maintain its identity because it
becomes one with the water. This is unification. In the realm of mysticism,
Yoga means this type of unification. That is, it is unification like sugar
and water, and not simply addition like two plus two.
So the starting point is aesthetic taste or aesthetic science. The
culminating point, that is, from the culminating point, starts the movement
of Supreme Charm. In that movement with the goal of Supreme Charm, human
beings become unified with the Supreme Entity, whose seat is above the
pinnacle of existence.
Yoga is the most developed and most valuable expression of human
wants, so it is in the first phase of Yoga (unification) that one expresses
oneself through so many arts and sciences, in that quest. The final point of
all artistic movement and the final point of all branches of sciences is the
supreme source, the perennial source of all energies, the supreme seat of
all energies. It is the Supreme Entity, who is the Causal Matrix of all
created beings in this universe, both animate and inanimate. That is why for
all people, whether they are intelligent or illiterate, thin or fat,
educated or uneducated, the Supreme Entity must be the goal of life. That
is, the Supreme Entity is the culminating point, the desideratum of all
human expressions.
--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar
PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
http://www.globaltimes.net http://www.proutworld.org
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
http://www.ru,org
Dharmadeva
dennis wrote in message <388BBBA4...@disinfo.net>...
>I believe the mind is a nonphysical phenomenon which uses the brain to
>process the stimuli of the physical world. If the brain is damaged or
>altered, the mind is still the mind, but its ability to process information
>may be hindered (or enhanced), making it appear to an observer that it's
>holistically affected.
Yes, I agree with that.
If you choose to believe that the mind must be the
>sole result of neurological evolution, this is the only logical conclusion
>that can be drawn.
>Of course there is a real connection between mind and the brain (until
death
>do us part), but I think it's most likely that the brain (as well as
>everything else) is a construct of mind rather than the inverse.
the mind also is not an absolute entity but a transformed
state of consciousness.
For the performance of its actions mind depends on the motor or
sensory organs as its direct agents. Afferent and efferent nerves,
in their turn, act as direct agents of these organs. The nerves
convey inferences from the objects to the mind, or activate the
object with the force they acquire from the mental structure (mind)
and in this way link up the mind with the external objectivities.
Thus so nerves are the indirect agents of the mind.
The function of the mind is to act through the organs and nerves and
thereby either to receive or radiate inferences.
The portion of mind which deals with the sensory or motor organs is
the Conscious or Crude mind. This controls the physical longings of
the microcosm (unit mind). The Conscious or Crude mind is the
crudest stage of the objectivated 'I' feeling.
Next the Subconscious or Subtle mind is subtler than the Conscious or
Crude mind and it has got the capacity of recollection and
contemplation.
Beyond that there is Causal mind. In this regard, the psychological
nomenclature of conscious, sub-conscious and unconscious mind for the Crude,
Subtle and Causal minds is not correct. Further, the division of the
microcosm (unit mind) into a Causal portion(s) may be considered more a
theoretical
proposition. This is because there is no separate existence of the
unit Causal mind from Cosmic Causal Mind. Nevertheless, once can
conject as portions of the Causal mind the Supramental mind
(intuition and creative insight), Subliminal mind (able to grasp the
total existence of the objective world, divine attributes, eg
conscience, non-attachment), and Subtle Causal mind (latent 'I'
feeling).
In the case where the Crude and Subtle portions of the unit mind
suspend their work by the process of introspection, meditation or
spiritual practice or otherwise, the Causal portion of unit mind will
not be able to maintain its separate identity, only the seed of the
past action will remain just to differentiate the microcosm from the
Macrocosm.
By a process of correct spiritual practice/perspective/meditation, a
person can feel that there is one Causal Mind in the universe. There
is no causal difference between microcosm and Macrocosm.
By its very nature if the unit mind is to possess objectivity it must
also have a witnessing entity. The witnessing entity is the summum
bonum of the mind. Philosophy has give different names to the
Witnessing Entity. But this does not mean that the same Witnessing
Entity is not acting as the Witnessing Entity at different stages of
the mind.
As regards the Macrocosmic Mind of the Witnessing Entity (ie the
Attributional manifestation as a qualified stance of the
Non-attributional Absolutivity) it started at that stage where the
sense of subjectivity (I am), the subjectivated `I' (am doing) , and
the objectivated `I' (am done) are all (3) present. That is, in the
stage of objectivated 'I' there is also the sense of subjectivity (I
am) and the subjectivated 'I' (I am doing) as well.
This is the extroversal cosmological process of the subjectivated I
of the Supreme Witnessing Entity which gradually crudifies under the
influence of static binding factors, till the crude solid is created.
Hence matter is derives from the Infinite Consciousness (Macrocosmic
Mind). Matter is compressed Consciousness. Nothing is beyond the
scope of Macorcosmic Mind, ie every thing comes within that 'mental'
scope and so Macrocosmic Entity needs no nervous system and organs
for controlling these operations.
As unit mind is but a transformed state of the Consciousness, it
develops from crudity to subtlety and so the layers of mind referred
to above arise and the realisation (ie the introversal cosmological
process) is for the unit to attain of the Whole.
Unit consciousness is nothing but a transformation of Macrocosmic
Consciousness which is differentiated by the I-feeling and everything
that gives rise to.
Dharmadeva
>Welcome to a.m.y.
>Got a favorite album?
I don't see anything wrong with the whole of Keys to Ascension 1 and 2. It
got just about everything you need for a Yes fan.
Relayer I like - but Yes seem to have forgotten it. I'm still trying to
work out what the lyrics mean :) !!
Topographic Oceans is cool
Dharmadeva
Steven Sullivan wrote in message ...
>Dharma has acheived a level of fame as a pseudoscientific babbler among
>the ranks of talk.origins (the evolution discussion newsgroup). See the
>hilarious example at:
>http://home.eznet.net/~heiny/theories/dharmadeva.html
Well a lot of that is based on standard science and quite a few of the
hypothetications are being proved and accepted. Now they have found the
frozen mammoth in the USSR, the piece above is highly possible.
Dharmadeva
>btw what was that intermediary step between the Mammoth and the Elephant
again?
>The contemporary stuff is much more interesting.
Paul
Probably not much due to jumping evolution. You see this commonly.
Since the days of Australopithecine, a new kind of creature slowly evolved:
proto ape or ape man. At a certain stage in evolution, one of these
creatures became an exception to the norm of the community, resulting in
some evolving into chimpanzees, some into orangutans , some into gorillas,
and some into human beings. All of these creatures are tailless. These
diverging evolutionary branches occurred due to an exception somewhere along
the path of evolution.
Various fishes have evolved from the Sila'kantha, the original ancestors of
the fishes. One would think that, having all evolved from the same source,
all fishes would be of the same appearance - but this is not the case. Due
to many exceptions along the path of evolution, different species of fishes
emerged. If such exceptions had not occurred, all the fishes, all the
chimpanzees, gorillas, etc., would have been of the same type.
These exceptions were not accidental but were preplanned to bring about
certain changes in the process of evolution. Their occurrence led to
different evolutionary lines branching off the main established line. Had
there been no exceptions, there would have been no major evolutionary
changes.
One of the most important factors on the path of movement is the exception
or the jump.
Dharmadeva
Xponent wrote in message ...
>>If this guy actually worked at something usefull, he/she might be a force
to
>be reckoned with, as opposed to someone easily ignored.
Then why keep the thread going?
Steven Sullivan
: paul rogers wrote in message <388CA959...@ait.ac.nz>...
:>btw what was that intermediary step between the Mammoth and the Elephant
: again?
:>The contemporary stuff is much more interesting.
: Paul
: Probably not much due to jumping evolution. You see this commonly.
Elephants did not evolve from mammoths. Modern elephants and mammoths
evolved from a common ancestor.
: Since the days of Australopithecine, a new kind of creature slowly evolved:
: proto ape or ape man. At a certain stage in evolution, one of these
: creatures became an exception to the norm of the community, resulting in
: some evolving into chimpanzees, some into orangutans , some into gorillas,
: and some into human beings. All of these creatures are tailless. These
: diverging evolutionary branches occurred due to an exception somewhere along
: the path of evolution.
No, they occurred due to evolution proceeding as it always has.
Also, the divergence of ape and human lineages preceded the evolution of
Australopithecus, IIRC.
: Various fishes have evolved from the Sila'kantha, the original ancestors of
: the fishes.
Nonsensee. The coelacanth represents one branch of fish evolution, which
happens to have persisted almost unchanged (therefore a 'living fossil')
for millions of years. The ancestors of the fishes were much more
primitive and older than coelacanths.
: One would think that, having all evolved from the same source,
: all fishes would be of the same appearance - but this is not the case. Due
: to many exceptions along the path of evolution, different species of fishes
: emerged. If such exceptions had not occurred, all the fishes, all the
: chimpanzees, gorillas, etc., would have been of the same type.
These are not 'exceptions'. These are 'the rule'. Evolution occurs due
to the phenomena of mutation, genetic drift, and natural selection.
: These exceptions were not accidental but were preplanned to bring about
: certain changes in the process of evolution.
Really? Prove it.
: Their occurrence led to
: different evolutionary lines branching off the main established line. Had
: there been no exceptions, there would have been no major evolutionary
: changes.
What is the 'main established line'? All established lines were once
branches.
: One of the most important factors on the path of movement is the exception
: or the jump.
No need to be epigrammatic about this: it's simply a restatement of the
fact that evolution generates a diversity of species.
dennis
writing style and all the quasi-hindu terminology may hold meaning in
whatever subculture you represent, but here in amyrika I doubt that anyone
has much of clue (or a reason to care) about what you're trying to say. If
you're truly interested in communicating these complexities of your assumed
reality, you might want to consider the audience you're speaking to, and
edit your posts. Since there are much simpler ways to present these ideas, I
can only guess that you write like this so that there can *be* no direct
response to your infinite wisdom.
dennis
CountV
the Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> Xponent wrote in message ...
To toy with you.
CountV
all the world to see, the following about Mr. Dharmadeva:
> I
> can only guess that you write like this so that there can *be* no direct
> response to your infinite wisdom.
Bravo!
Chris Jemmett
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:JDdj4.10214$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
So, to trim some of the bull fat, you are saying 'do yoga'. Fine with me,
yet up top you say 'they have to be scientifically based......' In my own,
possibly misguided travels, I have failed to come across that scientific
basis re yoga. Can you fill the gap on that one?
Chris Jemmett
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:ODdj4.10216$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
Looks like we lean toward similar Yes works as preferences. Relayer
lyrics.......I've heard Gates is based on Tolstoys' War and Peace.
Seems that you are down under, have you had the chance to see the band live?
I can't recall hearing of them making the trip down.
paul rogers
Dharmadeva wrote:
> One of the most important factors on the path of movement is the exception
> or the jump.
randomness, environment and luck I'd call it. But then I'm not a science
theory sorta bloke.
paul
"flatter than a pancake, phatter than a rump steak" -bfm breakfast show host
Xponent
>
> Xponent wrote in message ...
> >>If this guy actually worked at something usefull, he/she might be a
force
> to
> >be reckoned with, as opposed to someone easily ignored.
>
>
> Then why keep the thread going?
>
inerstices of your dendritic interface would then reach a state of hyper
exitation in response to hormonal infusion directly related and directly
proportional to uncontrolled (By D unit) input via electronic network
access and inversely proportional to said units ability to digest and retain
factual information as stated. Then your head blows up real good! <G>
xponent
rob
Dharmadeva
And scientists have not agreed on what that is.
Dharmadeva
>Once again your reply is virtually impossible to respond to. If
>you're truly interested in communicating these complexities of your assumed
>reality, you might want to consider the audience you're speaking to
its hardly complex. Just consult a few good books on theology, psychology
(even basic ones) and its not much different
Dharmadeva
Nope. Hope they come.
>I can't recall hearing of them making the trip down.
If they did I was either too young or could not afford it
Dharmadeva
>> Then why keep the thread going?
>In order to conjugate with your proto-cephalic neuronal matrix. The
>inerstices of your dendritic interface would then reach a state of hyper
>exitation in response to hormonal infusion directly related and directly
>proportional to uncontrolled (By D unit) input via electronic network
>access and inversely proportional to said units ability to digest and
retain
>factual information as stated. Then your head blows up real good! <G>
>xponent
Now you are speaking real YES language. Hey, if the people on this group
can't understand the post on this topic, then are Yes lyrics all garble to
them, and if so why do they listen to them - that is more the relevant
question
CountV
the Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
Hook, line and sinker.
Reel him in, Rob!
Darkhop
> > No, not just any ones, they have to be scientifically based and lead to
> > expansion of mind.
We need breathing room!
> > When the aesthetic sense, based on the subtle aesthetic science, comes to
> > touch a certain standard, it is what is called mysticism.
Is it.
> And when this
> > mysticism reaches the pinnacle of human glory, or the excellence of human
> > glory, it is called spirituality.
Are you positive?
> > What is mysticism?
Polysyllabic feints.
> Mysticism is the never ending endeavour to find out the
> > link between the finite and the infinite.
Which explains its pointlessness.
> It is a never-ending endeavour to
> > find out a link between the self and the super self, khud and khudha'.
> > This is mysticism.
Here continueth the waving about in fog.
> > It is one of the human wants that human beings are never satisfied with
> > something finite. They are never satisfied with some thing limited. Human
> > thirst cannot be satisfied with something limited, Human hunger cannot be
> > satisfied by something finite.
Actually it can, if you decide that it can.
> > That is, in the quest for the infinite, human beings first come in contact
> > with aesthetic science. Aesthetic science does not always mean to get
> > something pleasant; it may mean to get some thing troublesome, something
> > embarrassing -- it may or may not be something pleasant. Aesthetic science
> > is that which one can express in a subtler way, from subtle to subtler,
> and
> > when it reaches the subtlest point, that point is the pinnacle of human
> > glory.
Remarkable how all mystic explanations wind up at a point where we have
to
take someone's word for it.
> > When human beings started their movement towards
> > the Supreme Being, in quest of Supreme Bliss, they first came in contact
> > with spirituality. As spirituality is coming in contact with the infinite,
> > that is, the finite comes in contact with the infinite, it is called
> "Yoga".
Ahhh, Yoga. You seek Yoga!
> > Yoga is the unit moving in quest of the infinite, the finite moving
> towards
> > the infinite in a mystic style. In Sam'skrta (sanskrit), Yoga means
> > "addition". For instance, two plus two is equal to four. But for a mystic,
> > for an aspirant of the mystic goal or the mystic desideratum, Yoga is not
> > only addition; here Yoga means "unification".
In, out, repeat. Makes its own sauce.
> > What sort of unification? It is just like sugar and water. Say there are
> two
> > plus two apples. In the case of addition there will be one apple, then
> two,
> > then three and then four apples. Every apple will maintain its
> individuality
> > or its identity. The identity of the apples remains unchanged before and
> > after the addition. But in the case of unification, that is, in the
> example
> > of sugar and water, the sugar does not maintain its identity because it
> > becomes one with the water. This is unification. In the realm of
> mysticism,
> > Yoga means this type of unification. That is, it is unification like sugar
> > and water, and not simply addition like two plus two.
Thank our mystic stars that's cleared up. Now all our coffee will be
tangible.
> > So the starting point is aesthetic taste or aesthetic science. The
> > culminating point, that is, from the culminating point, starts the
> movement
> > of Supreme Charm.
Leave George Hamilton out of this.
> > In that movement with the goal of Supreme Charm, human
> > beings become unified with the Supreme Entity, whose seat is above the
> > pinnacle of existence.
And whose plumbing we hope never has any problems.
> > Yoga is the most developed and most valuable expression of human
> > wants, so it is in the first phase of Yoga (unification) that one
> expresses
> > oneself through so many arts and sciences, in that quest. The final point
> of
> > all artistic movement and the final point of all branches of sciences is
> the
> > supreme source, the perennial source of all energies, the supreme seat of
> > all energies. It is the Supreme Entity, who is the Causal Matrix of all
> > created beings in this universe, both animate and inanimate. That is why
> for
> > all people, whether they are intelligent or illiterate, thin or fat,
> > educated or uneducated, the Supreme Entity must be the goal of life. That
> > is, the Supreme Entity is the culminating point, the desideratum of all
> > human expressions.
One viable alternative is to get laid. There are many others. This is
one-day-at-a-time-ism.
Stay out of trees,
/JSH
Kenneth Kalls
Xponent wrote in message <#dmGsw9Z$GA.255@cpmsnbbsa02>...
>
>>
>> Xponent wrote in message ...
>> >>If this guy actually worked at something usefull, he/she might be a
>force
>> to
>> >be reckoned with, as opposed to someone easily ignored.
>>
>>
>>
>In order to conjugate with your proto-cephalic neuronal matrix. The
>inerstices of your dendritic interface would then reach a state of hyper
>exitation in response to hormonal infusion directly related and directly
>proportional to uncontrolled (By D unit) input via electronic network
>access and inversely proportional to said units ability to digest and
retain
>factual information as stated. Then your head blows up real good! <G>
>
>xponent
>
Unless you can find and install a new set of dilithium crystals first.
Steven Sullivan
: Steven Sullivan wrote in message ...
:>No, they occurred due to evolution proceeding as it always has.
: And scientists have not agreed on what that is.
..which does not mean that any wacky theory you devise is valid.
franz kruhm
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
"There are moments when one feels free from one's own identification with
human limitations and inadequacies. At such moments one imagines that one
stands on some spot of a small planet, gazing in amazement at the cold yet
profoundly moving beauty of the eternal, the unfathomable; life and death
flow into one, and there is neither evolution nor destiny; only Being."
- Albert Einstein
Chris Jemmett <ccjemmett@.idirect.com> a écrit dans le message :
Zgnj4.91000$tT2.6...@quark.idirect.com...
>
>
> "Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
> news:JDdj4.10214$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
> So, to trim some of the bull fat, you are saying 'do yoga'. Fine with me,
> yet up top you say 'they have to be scientifically based......' In my own,
> possibly misguided travels, I have failed to come across that scientific
> basis re yoga. Can you fill the gap on that one?
>
>
Chris Jemmett
"franz kruhm" <za...@photoreal.com> wrote in message
news:86ndrp$83t$1...@wanadoo.fr...
> as it ever occured to you that there might be many kinds of sciences?
Your questions doesn't answer the question I put to another. The answer to
your question is Yes. Are you trying to say something? If so, please do.
Would it be rude of me to ask you to use your own words and watch the word
count if possible? Just a request.
Chris
Chris
Chris Jemmett
"Dharmadeva" <u96...@student.canberra.edu.au> wrote in message
news:i6Bj4.11069$3b6....@ozemail.com.au...
> Xponent wrote in message <#dmGsw9Z$GA.255@cpmsnbbsa02>...
> >> Then why keep the thread going?
>
> >In order to conjugate with your proto-cephalic neuronal matrix. The
> >inerstices of your dendritic interface would then reach a state of hyper
> >exitation in response to hormonal infusion directly related and directly
> >proportional to uncontrolled (By D unit) input via electronic network
> >access and inversely proportional to said units ability to digest and
> retain
> >factual information as stated. Then your head blows up real good! <G>
> >xponent
>
> Now you are speaking real YES language. Hey, if the people on this group
> can't understand the post on this topic, then are Yes lyrics all garble to
> them, and if so why do they listen to them - that is more the relevant
> question
>
I wouldn't have suspected that you didn't realize how *well* you *are* being
understood.
Chris
Rob Allen
>
>franz kruhm <za...@photoreal.com> wrote:
>: as it ever occured to you that there might be many kinds of sciences?
>
>Actually, the great utility of *science* as the term is normally meant
>today (as opposed to its more literal meaning as used by Jon Anderson in
>the title 'REvealing Science of God') is that there *aren't* more than one
>kind of it. Science strives to construct a unified body of knowledge that
>remains valid regardless of the country of origin, language, or faith of
>person engaging in it. Science is universal. Its statements of truth
>should, in theory at least, be verifiable by someone in another galaxy as
>well as someone in the lab.
my doctor told me that my nose wouldn't bleed so much if I'd keep my fingers
outta there.
Rob Allen
NP: Yes, _The Ladder_