|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 2, 2020 18:35:11 GMT -5
Frankly, both are illusions. Both arising from consciousness. In reality they don't exist. They are just appearances, neither is old or new. Both are simultaneously one yet different According to Enigma, there's no contradiction. Similar to the story which came first, the egg or chicken. So, what appears in Consciousness is unreal. Romulus & Remus don't exist, so is Mowgli. Of course they don't exist. They are a myth to explain how Rome was built. This one is real arising in Consciousness. Balarama & Krsna with cows in Vrndavan. Wherever Krsna went all of which are , nature, the trees, birds and bees, etc. became spiritualized. Attachments:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 19:18:11 GMT -5
Of course they don't exist. They are a myth to explain how Rome was built. This one is real arising in Consciousness. Balarama & Krsna with cows in Vrndavan. Wherever Krsna went all of which are , nature, the trees, birds and bees, etc. became spiritualized. Can you prove that Nature wasn't already spiritualised before Krsna came by, or did people only notice because Krsna was there as well? |
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 2, 2020 20:06:14 GMT -5
This one is real arising in Consciousness. Balarama & Krsna with cows in Vrndavan. Wherever Krsna went all of which are , nature, the trees, birds and bees, etc. became spiritualized. Can you prove that Nature wasn't already spiritualised before Krsna came by, or did people only notice because Krsna was there as well? No proof needed. You take it as it is. Mother Nature is maya. An illusion. But when one realizes Krsna is behind it, maya or nature becomes real. Your body and mine is an illusion. One who is Krsna conscious the body, maya, nature NOW becomes real /spiritual. You just have to put Krsna in the equation to experience reality. In the Narada Pancaratra, it says, " All Vedic literatures, rituals and conclusions are summarized into only 8 words Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 9:19:22 GMT -5
The two are obviously true 1) form borrows its reality from the Absolute, 2) form is exactly the Absolute. How this can be so is why the truth is beyond logic. No need for further debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 3, 2020 17:30:46 GMT -5
This is how a non-dual work will arise once it gets infected with the 2019 nCoV.
Awareness of Krsna is bliss. Krsna consciousness is the natural state, the very storehouse of unalloyed happiness, this knowledge, I am.
Being Krsna is not becoming and that is what needs to be seen. The very simplicity of what is being pointed to here generally goes right over the head of anyone who might happen to hear this. When is this happening, isn’t it presently? Can anything happen outside of Krsna's presence, this space of knowing?
Can anyone negate their being Krsna conscious. Can anyone say, I am not Krsna ? Obviously not. What does this indicate? It indicates that I am that conscious Krsna being, Being Krsna conscious is not a thing or an object, it is no thing, suffused with Krsna awareness, a cognizing Krsna Being as the Buddha has indicated — form is not emptiness, emptiness is form, form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form. The same is true with feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and Krsna consciousness, so it is this fullness that is doing the cognizing, the naked non conceptual knowing and not the acquired entity or person So and So. This is the fully rounded, all-inclusive, 360 degree view that Krsna excludes nothing and no one.
( Mark West)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 17:41:54 GMT -5
Awareness is the natural state, the very storehouse of unalloyed happiness, this knowledge, I am. Being is not becoming and that is what needs to be seen. The very simplicity of what is being pointed to here generally goes right over the head of anyone who might happen to hear this. When is this happening, isn’t it presently? Can anything happen outside of this presence, this space of knowing? Can anyone negate their being? Can anyone say, I am not? Obviously not. What does this indicate? It indicates that I am. Being is not a thing or an object, it is no thing, suffused with awareness, a cognizing being as the Buddha has indicated — form is emptiness, emptiness is form, form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form. The same is true with feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness, so it is this fullness that is doing the cognizing, the naked non conceptual knowing and not the acquired entity or person So and So. This is the fully rounded, all-inclusive, 360 degree view that excludes nothing and no one. Fixed your post. |
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 3, 2020 18:19:30 GMT -5
Awareness is the natural state, the very storehouse of unalloyed happiness, this knowledge, I am. Being is not becoming and that is what needs to be seen. The very simplicity of what is being pointed to here generally goes right over the head of anyone who might happen to hear this. When is this happening, isn’t it presently? Can anything happen outside of this presence, this space of knowing? Can anyone negate their being? Can anyone say, I am not? Obviously not. What does this indicate? It indicates that I am. Being is not a thing or an object, it is no thing, suffused with awareness, a cognizing being as the Buddha has indicated — form is emptiness, emptiness is form, form does not differ from emptiness, emptiness does not differ from form. The same is true with feelings, perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness, so it is this fullness that is doing the cognizing, the naked non conceptual knowing and not the acquired entity or person So and So. This is the fully rounded, all-inclusive, 360 degree view that excludes nothing and no one. Fixed your post. Too late. Mark West's site has already been infected. |
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 3, 2020 18:57:03 GMT -5
I don't know if Krsna (username) possibly appeared in consciousness as the 2019 nCoV when I registered at Galaxy Bowling in the middle of December 2019. I was a beginner yet so I lost a lot of games. When I became adept, I participated in the tournament. I won a crown. Players came from China, Korea, USA, an international event.
When I found my bearing. I opened my long dormant account on January 5, 2020 at ST and started a thread Krsna (God) appearing in Consciousness. Opened another one Secret of Action, another one I AM MUSIC.
on January 22, 2020 news was heard of a SARS like virus called corona has infected people in Wuhan City in the province of Hubei in China.
A few days later there was news of NBA star Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter crash due to a fog. I don't know if that also arose from ST's Pettifoggery.
|
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 4, 2020 11:25:39 GMT -5
Honestly, do adherents of non - duality support the concept of the state of atheism practiced by the People's Republic of China?
Lenin states:
" Religion is the opium of the people—this dictum by Marx is the corner-stone of the whole Marxist outlook on religion. Marxism has always regarded all modern religions and churches, and each and every religious organisation, as instruments of bourgeois reaction that serve to defend exploitation and to befuddle the working class."
|
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 4, 2020 12:58:28 GMT -5
Honestly, do adherents of non - duality support the concept of the state of atheism practiced by the People's Republic of China? Lenin states: " Religion is the opium of the people—this dictum by Marx is the corner-stone of the whole Marxist outlook on religion. Marxism has always regarded all modern religions and churches, and each and every religious organisation, as instruments of bourgeois reaction that serve to defend exploitation and to befuddle the working class." The answer is maybe. Here's why. there are passages from the Tripitaka that strongly indicate that the Buddha denied the existence of a creator god. Rather than classify him as an atheist or an agnostic, it would be more appropriate to use the term nontheist. An atheist believes only what he can see but, of course, the Buddha suggested that not all that you see is real. The term atheist as we use it today would not have been used in that way at the Buddha’s time. Nor, for that matter, would the concept nontheist. There are no equivalents for either in Pali or Sanskrit, though many Hindus today still regard the Buddha as a nastika, usually translated as nihilist but which means something like one who asserts there is nothing. Again, the Buddha would have rejected this since he warns against the two extremes of atthi [it is] and natthi [it is not] and seeks to establish his dharma in the middle (madhyama), which does not lapse into the extremes of eternalism or annihilationism. The Buddha simply did not define himself or his teaching in such ways. So trying to capture him in these terms is bound to misrepresent him. On the other hand, the only way we can talk about him and his vision is via the concepts of our own time and language, which has been the case throughout Buddhist history in the different countries in which it took root. I take nontheist to mean one who does not employ God as a necessary term in his or her teaching. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2020 14:55:32 GMT -5
Honestly, do adherents of non - duality support the concept of the state of atheism practiced by the People's Republic of China? Lenin states: " Religion is the opium of the people—this dictum by Marx is the corner-stone of the whole Marxist outlook on religion. Marxism has always regarded all modern religions and churches, and each and every religious organisation, as instruments of bourgeois reaction that serve to defend exploitation and to befuddle the working class." The answer is maybe. Here's why. there are passages from the Tripitaka that strongly indicate that the Buddha denied the existence of a creator god. Rather than classify him as an atheist or an agnostic, it would be more appropriate to use the term nontheist. An atheist believes only what he can see but, of course, the Buddha suggested that not all that you see is real. The term atheist as we use it today would not have been used in that way at the Buddha’s time. Nor, for that matter, would the concept nontheist. There are no equivalents for either in Pali or Sanskrit, though many Hindus today still regard the Buddha as a nastika, usually translated as nihilist but which means something like one who asserts there is nothing. Again, the Buddha would have rejected this since he warns against the two extremes of atthi [it is] and natthi [it is not] and seeks to establish his dharma in the middle (madhyama), which does not lapse into the extremes of eternalism or annihilationism. The Buddha simply did not define himself or his teaching in such ways. So trying to capture him in these terms is bound to misrepresent him. On the other hand, the only way we can talk about him and his vision is via the concepts of our own time and language, which has been the case throughout Buddhist history in the different countries in which it took root. I take nontheist to mean one who does not employ God as a necessary term in his or her teaching. So can you admit that you are a theist then? |
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 4, 2020 18:34:10 GMT -5
The answer is maybe. Here's why. there are passages from the Tripitaka that strongly indicate that the Buddha denied the existence of a creator god. Rather than classify him as an atheist or an agnostic, it would be more appropriate to use the term nontheist. An atheist believes only what he can see but, of course, the Buddha suggested that not all that you see is real. The term atheist as we use it today would not have been used in that way at the Buddha’s time. Nor, for that matter, would the concept nontheist. There are no equivalents for either in Pali or Sanskrit, though many Hindus today still regard the Buddha as a nastika, usually translated as nihilist but which means something like one who asserts there is nothing. Again, the Buddha would have rejected this since he warns against the two extremes of atthi [it is] and natthi [it is not] and seeks to establish his dharma in the middle (madhyama), which does not lapse into the extremes of eternalism or annihilationism. The Buddha simply did not define himself or his teaching in such ways. So trying to capture him in these terms is bound to misrepresent him. On the other hand, the only way we can talk about him and his vision is via the concepts of our own time and language, which has been the case throughout Buddhist history in the different countries in which it took root. I take nontheist to mean one who does not employ God as a necessary term in his or her teaching. So can you admit that you are a theist then? Krsnaraja doesn't admit to anything. He sees Krsna everywhere. All, the theists, the atheists, the nontheists are reflections of Krsna. |
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 5, 2020 23:12:16 GMT -5
Everyone seems to be looking for God in the shrines, mosque, churches IOW, God can be felt & seen inside houses of worship.
God is the Holy Spirit present in everyone's hearts and from without. But to one who doesn't know where exactly God lies, I say God is in the " Sino-Atrial " nodes of our hearts. God is that rhythmic electrical energy flowing from the SA nodes which makes our hearts beat.
The" Lub" is the sound of the tricuspid and mitral valves closing. The" Dub" is the sound of the aortic and pulmonary valves closing.
God's reflection is in these heart sounds "Lub - Dub."
Please do correct me if I'm wrong but the heart sounds coming from the stethoscope I'm using are actually to me heard this way, " Luv.. Gud.. Luv.. Gud... Luv...Gud. "
So, who says God isn't talking to us every moment of our lives?
|
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Feb 5, 2020 23:45:10 GMT -5
Everyone seems to be looking for God in the shrines, mosque, churches IOW, God can be felt & seen inside houses of worship. God is the Holy Spirit present in everyone's hearts and from without. But to one who doesn't know where exactly God lies, I say God is in the " Sino-Atrial " nodes of our hearts. God is that rhythmic electrical energy flowing from the SA nodes which makes our hearts beat. The" Lub" is the sound of the tricuspid and mitral valves closing. The" Dub" is the sound of the aortic and pulmonary valves closing. God's reflection is in these heart sounds "Lub - Dub." Please do correct me if I'm wrong but the heart sounds coming from the stethoscope I'm using are actually to me heard this way, " Luv.. Gud.. Luv.. Gud... Luv...Gud. " So, who says God isn't talking to us every moment of our lives? What I posted is based on my clinical experience. If your heart beats fast it means you're loving God hurriedly. If you're heart beats slow it means you're loving God slowly. If it's irregular heart beat it means you're love for God is not regular. Your love for God should be Sinus Rhythm. 😇 |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 6, 2020 7:46:57 GMT -5
A Course In Miracles is an example of a channeled book soaked in religious wordage. A bit heavy going, but beautiful, if there's one book I could perhaps find a slight remorse at having given away, it would be that one. It's the bible (or Jesus' teaching at least) as it 'should' have been. Of course, she is now in the political arena, and has taken some heavy flak for some of her spiritual views (particular ones that relate to LOA). Wasn't that supposed to be a book on non-duality? Believe it or not, there are people in politics right now who actually go to A-H workshops. So there is indeed some kind of great awakening happening. It's just not that apparent yet to the average Joe who only follows CNN and NYT. But the signs are there, and (from my perspective) rather hard to ignore, even in politics. Anyway, I remember one funny A-H workshop episode from years ago. Abe always used to make fun of Yuma. They had this analogy of Jerry and Esther being stuck in Yuma on their way from Phoenix to San Diego, refusing to use their GPS, and so going back and forth between Phoenix and Yuma and never reaching their destination. So 'Phoenix/Yuma' has become some kind of inside joke in Abe circles. And one day, at some workshop, the mayor of Yuma actually sat there in the hot seat. Fun!  |
|
