|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 13, 2024 23:16:59 GMT -5
Did you write this? Interesting description. It relates to what I hear people saying about their perceptions of reality. The way I'd express the bottom-line conclusion is as follows: The common-state of mind is not to live in the moment, not to live directly, but rather, indirectly, as mitigated by abstractions and emotional reactions. Perceptions are filtered through these abstractions and emotional movements. ZD uses the term, "meta-reality". People can experience a sense of eeriness, or an uncanny feeling, based on dissonance between perception and the filter of their mind. One limiting and dramatic case is the horror-movie industry. The Zombie trope is based on this, the Matrix, for example, is quite overt about it. Of course, one might object to the duality of perception, and perception as filtered by the mind.  Yes, I wrote this last year I think. I get something to write like that when my muse is awake. I have several of them in Fig's Spiritual Gab but she obliterated them. I failed to get copies from her forum when she permanently banned me. The fact is she deleted them all. I got this article I wrote from my Facebook's memories that comes now and then. If I happen to see one, I will post them here, these musings. Are you saying there is outright censorship on gab now?
You can't make this stuff up!  |
|
|
|
Post by melvin on Nov 13, 2024 23:53:17 GMT -5
After going over and over Nisa's I AM quotes trying to interpret what they were all about, suddenly it occurred to me this question, " What if I place after I AM the word Krishna? " I said to myself, " Yeah, I get it. Krishna's name is inconceivable, transcendental. The name is beyond words. In fact, Krishna is everything. So, prior to my being born, I AM Krishna. " It says, in John 1:1, " In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. And the Word was God. " So, prior to arising, manifestation of the world, there was Krishna, the Word. Which branched into other words, Brahman, the Ultimate Reality, the Void, the Source, etc. My reasoning is that since everything is Krishna, I say I AM Krishna. Everyone is Krishna. That's also saying I AM Brahman. That's how I understood Nisa's 229 I AM quotes. A self- realized soul knows he is Krishna, he is Brahman. That's one of the basis for chanting, " Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare. " Not letting the word KRSNA dwell in my flesh and become the anagam KANSR. That only works in English but not in other languages. So obviously, this is nonsense. There's a saying that "truth is stranger than fiction" which means there are certain things in our lives, experiences, bizarre or otherwise improbable that defy explanation. |
|
|
|
Post by melvin on Nov 13, 2024 23:57:20 GMT -5
Yes, I wrote this last year I think. I get something to write like that when my muse is awake. I have several of them in Fig's Spiritual Gab but she obliterated them. I failed to get copies from her forum when she permanently banned me. The fact is she deleted them all. I got this article I wrote from my Facebook's memories that comes now and then. If I happen to see one, I will post them here, these musings. Are you saying there is outright censorship on gab now?
You can't make this stuff up! What I've written in the Poetry Section of SG are all gone. No chance of retrieving them back. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 14, 2024 1:11:52 GMT -5
That only works in English but not in other languages. So obviously, this is nonsense. There's a saying that "truth is stranger than fiction" which means there are certain things in our lives, experiences, bizarre or otherwise improbable that defy explanation. Well, if we want to be very strict, then it doesn't actually work in English (Krishna/Cancer). And it doesn't even seem to work in Malay or Tagalog (krishna/kanser). It doesn't even work phonetically. So you are taking great liberties with your theory in order to make it work. But it may still work for you, because you seem to fully believe in it. However, it's not likely going to work for others, because the only principle at work here is belief, not fortuitous linguistics. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 14, 2024 1:12:31 GMT -5
Are you saying there is outright censorship on gab now?
You can't make this stuff up! What I've written in the Poetry Section of SG are all gone. No chance of retrieving them back. If you get back in the right mood, it should come back to memory. Then you can write it down again. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Nov 14, 2024 1:59:05 GMT -5
There's a saying that "truth is stranger than fiction" which means there are certain things in our lives, experiences, bizarre or otherwise improbable that defy explanation. Well, if we want to be very strict, then it doesn't actually work in English (Krishna/Cancer). And it doesn't even seem to work in Malay or Tagalog (krishna/kanser). It doesn't even work phonetically. So you are taking great liberties with your theory in order to make it work. But it may still work for you, because you seem to fully believe in it. However, it's not likely going to work for others, because the only principle at work here is belief, not fortuitous linguistics. It is a matter of transliteration: ṣ / sh 1) कृष्ण kṛṣṇa (p. 74) कृष्ण kṛṣṇa कृष्ण krish-ná n. black; dark; w. paksha, dark half of the month (from full to new moon); m. (kríshna) black antelope; N. of a god (incarnation of Vishnu): du. Krishna and Arguna; â, f. kind of leech; N. of several plants; ep. of Draupadî, and of Durgâ; n. blackness, darkness. Krishna (/ˈkrɪʃnə/;[12] Sanskrit: कृष्ण, IAST: Kṛṣṇa [ˈkr̩ʂɳɐ]) is a major deity in Hinduism. (wiki)  Also, a post from the same author, 12+ years ago: "Moderator Action : Moved to Random Ramblings. Please review the Rules and Tips on starting a debate topic." |
|
|
|
Post by melvin on Nov 14, 2024 2:34:01 GMT -5
Well, if we want to be very strict, then it doesn't actually work in English (Krishna/Cancer). And it doesn't even seem to work in Malay or Tagalog (krishna/kanser). It doesn't even work phonetically. So you are taking great liberties with your theory in order to make it work. But it may still work for you, because you seem to fully believe in it. However, it's not likely going to work for others, because the only principle at work here is belief, not fortuitous linguistics. It is a matter of transliteration: ṣ / sh 1) कृष्ण kṛṣṇa (p. 74) कृष्ण kṛṣṇa कृष्ण krish-ná n. black; dark; w. paksha, dark half of the month (from full to new moon); m. (kríshna) black antelope; N. of a god (incarnation of Vishnu): du. Krishna and Arguna; â, f. kind of leech; N. of several plants; ep. of Draupadî, and of Durgâ; n. blackness, darkness. Krishna (/ˈkrɪʃnə/;[12] Sanskrit: कृष्ण, IAST: Kṛṣṇa [ˈkr̩ʂɳɐ]) is a major deity in Hinduism. (wiki)
Also, a post from the same author, 12+ years ago: "Moderator Action
: Moved to Random Ramblings. Please review the Rules and Tips on starting a debate topic."
Honestly, I don't remember joining this Filipino forum. This rajakrsna must have copied this article from what I wrote in other English discussion forums. I am however flattered and impressed that this Krsna/Kansr theory has came to existence 12 years ago. And it's still going not gone. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 14, 2024 6:54:13 GMT -5
FWIW, there is no "merging" with the Absolute because there are not two of anything, and it takes two to "merge." The realization is that what one IS is already the Absolute, but this does not mean what most people imagine. It doesn't mean special powers or anything like that. It means that one's ordinary everyday life is how the Absolute manifests. It's like relaxing into a felt sense of "flow" without the need to reflect upon it.
The bolded could be a huge clue. |
|
|
|
Post by melvin on Nov 14, 2024 14:22:57 GMT -5
The Most Sought After
The greatest profession in the world is a doctor of medicine because people will always consult a physician if their bodies are ill.
From head to foot.
There is a psychiatrist who heals a sick mind. A brain surgeon that removes blood blots from patients suffering brain hemorrhage.
There is a neurologist that treats a stroke victim. A neck doctor that treats patients with thyroid tumor. An ENT doctor that fixes the patient's diseased ears, nose and throat.
There's an eye doctor that treats patients with cataracts. If you have diabetes, you seek treatment from an endocrinologist. If your heart is aching, you go to a cardiologist.
If you are suffering from respiratory diseases, pneumonia due to covid, a pulmonologist will treat you. If your digestive tract's not working well, you go see a gastroenterologist.
If your kidneys are not well, a nephrologist will heal you. If have prostate cancer, a urologist will remove your prostate. If your bones break, you seek treatment from an orthopedic surgeon.
Your child is sick, a pediatrician you seek. If your wife is about to deliver, an obstetrician will do a cesarean section if the baby won't come out. A woman who suffers from myoma, a gynecologist will remove it.
If you have a skin disease, you go to a dermatologist. If your blood is in disarray, you need a hematologist. For tissue diagnosis if it's cancer, you need a pathologist. A radiologist if you need a lung diagnosis.
A non-dualist, a priest, a spiritualist? Nah, they are only for entertainment.
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 14, 2024 14:39:27 GMT -5
So we all have the capacity to be ~more than we now are~. There is no such thing. The only thing we truly have the capacity for is to be transparent...to Self. In that transparency lies the possibility for unique gifts, talents, and abilities to flow nthrough your character...naturally and without effort. The character of Jesus was fully transparent " Where you see me, you see the Father" That is why he could heal and perform miracles and such. He was showing that if you too become transparent to the Father, to Self, you could do mighty works as well. , Jesus was very clear on this. He said if you seek to save yourself, you lose yourself. The church is full of people who think they are saving their self. They don't have a clue as to how it all works. In at least three different places Paul writes about the old man (self) and the new man in Christ. (John the Baptist also understood, he said I must decrease, he must increase). Paul understood what Jesus was talking about. Jesus taught mainly in parables, which were designed to sneak past the self-old man, and reach the new man. So the way he taught confounded people who lived from self, like the Pharisees, and simple people could understand. When he met Simon, Simon was functioning through the self, the old man. But Jesus could see who Simon really was, his true self (the new man in Christ), so he only communicated to the hidden true self, who Simon actually was, Peter. And Simon eventually became Peter. Jesus told the Pharisees exactly who they were, as self, as the old man, "you are like a white-washed tombs, pretty on the outside, but on the inside you are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness". I know and have posted for 15 years here, self is a dead end, is nothing and is going nowhere. I agree with ZD that self is imaginary. But self is formed from memories, neural connections in the brain. self is just a complicated tangle of copies, and copies of copies, and copies of copies of copies. But this does not negate the influence and control of self, most people function through this imaginary self. I have said nothing otherwise in 15 years here. People function just like on autopilot from their small s self, their programming. And ZD has said nothing otherwise than, that's OK, that's just the way it is, it's just the Whole doing it's thing. This makes me want to puke. I see ZD has replied to me, haven't read it yet, but I probably answered him herein. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 14, 2024 14:50:54 GMT -5
I was about to post that this reeks of AI generation. But it looks like other users already beat me to it. Once the AI gets a little better at hiding its tracks, there will be no recourse other than to move to face-to-face communication, and maybe that's a good thing. My prediction is that when everyone and everything everywhere will be digital, analog will be the new luxury. There is a pretty good Bruce Willis film about this, the name escapes me, I'll have to look it up, Surrogates, 2009. But people did not live IRL. They "bought" a robot-avatar, who was invariably handsome or pretty, and they sat at home, for safety, and controlled the avatar in life. If I recall, he got tired of living through the avatar, and wanted to experience life himself. His wife was horrified at this. Good film, maybe about 15 years old. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 14, 2024 15:09:36 GMT -5
There is an error I can't get anyone here to see. I have never found any teacher that surpassed Jesus. About age 14 I began to see errors and discrepancies between what the church taught and what Jesus taught. He said a student can be like his teacher, but cannot supersede his teacher (basically speaking of himself). He said everything you see me do, you can do also, and even greater things. That blows the church out of the water, I saw something had gone wrong in the church. In the Bible you find the principle of the remnant. The remnant, about 10%, get it. They usually get kicked out of the church. In the old days they got burned at the stake, or confined to house arrest. So we all have the capacity to be ~more than we now are~. You find this everywhere. Some Zen teachers/Masters confidently demonstrated to students, or new students, na, you haven't...you're not done. You find it in Taoism, Sufism, in Kabbalah. When Jesus met certain people, maybe everyone, he didn't just see who they were, he saw ~them~, who they would become. He met Simon, and said, no, you're not Simon, I'm going to call you Peter. He didn't pick the disciples at random, he picked ~them~. And he tested people of the borderline. The rich young ruler really thought he wanted to follow Jesus. He asked Jesus, what must I do? Jesus said, keep the commandments. The guy said, I already do that. So Jesus gave him the next step. And Jesus said, if you want to follow me, you have to give up everything. He tested a woman once, a non-Jew. She asked to be taught. He said, why should I give to dogs (what belongs to the Jews). She answered, yes, but even dogs get to eat scraps off the Master's table. Jesus was impressed. The error I see in your line of argument is that you are comparing a mythical figure or a story (aka figment of your imagination) to your perception and beliefs about others or another story (aka another figment of your imagination). IOW, it's all just happening in your head - the perceived problem, the proposed solution and the imagined result. None of that is actual or real. I just use Jesus, as most of you have knowledge of the scriptures. It doesn't really matter if he was real or not, if he isn't real, then the author was a very wise guy. When I started here I said I don't write about how-to-do practices (#1), I don't share personal experiences (#2), but I write from experience, and (book) knowledge, but I won't draw a line as to what's what. I've kept to #1 precisely, #2, mostly. But I had 25 years of "Jesus"-like direct ~in the flesh~ experience. So I know whereof I write. I don't care if anyone ~believes~ me. I just post. The path to the truth and knowing truth comes through the ~person-as-a-whole~ (the mind-absent conditioning, and the body). It doesn't come through the self (conditioning, the software), I agree on that. A aid, the self is a dead end, is nothing, and is going nowhere. And it's sad that, despite all this, people still continue to function through-their-self, their conditioning. All I've got to communicate with, here, are squiggles on the computer screen. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 14, 2024 15:32:01 GMT -5
There is an error I can't get anyone here to see.[
The bolded could be a huge clue. I basically replied to you in my reply to JLY above (you can read it, or not). This is not rocket science. I just don't buy your view that the actions of the person/body are a result of the Whole. Most people act and react from their own conditioning, the default mode most people operate in. Yes, I agree, the self is all a fiction, is imaginary. The self exists as the network of neural connections, the way ~they~ have been programmed, mostly from birth to age six (the false sense of self is mostly formed by then, and after that, most further change is just moving lawn chairs on the Titanic. We agree on so much. I think this is your blind spot, you don't see how our conditioning controls almost the whole of our lives. We are just mostly reaction-machines. Now, yes, you are different, I'd say you about 95% live through the true self (more or less), and I understand how/why. But most people live through their conditioning, about 97%. The SR do not have to keep living through their conditioning. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 14, 2024 17:34:18 GMT -5
The bolded could be a huge clue. I basically replied to you in my reply to JLY above (you can read it, or not). This is not rocket science. I just don't buy your view that the actions of the person/body are a result of the Whole. Most people act and react from their own conditioning, the default mode most people operate in. Yes, I agree, the self is all a fiction, is imaginary. The self exists as the network of neural connections, the way ~they~ have been programmed, mostly from birth to age six (the false sense of self is mostly formed by then, and after that, most further change is just moving lawn chairs on the Titanic. We agree on so much. I think this is your blind spot, you don't see how our conditioning controls almost the whole of our lives. We are just mostly reaction-machines. Now, yes, you are different, I'd say you about 95% live through the true self (more or less), and I understand how/why. But most people live through their conditioning, about 97%. The SR do not have to keep living through their conditioning. I would put it this way, "Most people live in their heads and think that reality is composed of separate things being seen by a separate volitional me." This is what we call "the consensus paradigm." Awakening from this paradigm is realizing that there is no actual separation of any kind except through imagination. There is no escape from conditioning for a human being. If a sage walks under a low doorway and hits his/her head two or three times, the body will be conditioned to spontaneously duck when it approaches that doorway. A sage only escapes the conditioning that created a belief in the consensus paradigm. There are also many other forms of conditioning created by thinking habits that can similarly be left behind. Examples are words like "if," "should," "ought," etc. A sage simply doesn't give hypotheticals any credence because the focus is upon what is actually happening in the present moment. I always get a laugh when an announcer at a football game says something like, "If the receiver had caught that pass.....such and such might have happened." My wife and I both laugh at such comments and will sometimes say to each other, "But he did not catch the pass!" |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Nov 14, 2024 20:19:36 GMT -5
The Most Sought After The greatest profession in the world is a doctor of medicine because people will always consult a physician if their bodies are ill. ... A non-dualist, a priest, a spiritualist? Nah, they are only for entertainment. Thoughts ... The purpose of any health condition is to draw the patient's attention to a psychic or psychological element; that element may be in the future, the present, or / and the past. Any attempt to address only a physical condition won't solve the psychic / psychological root cause, so that will manifest again in the same or different physical way (the late dr. Sarno had a glimpse of the connection between the physical and psychological, got results, and developed a theory, firstly for the back-pain). How do your comments go together with your hare krishna? To me they seem they don't. |
|
