Guest guest Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold">Thank you Sri Nairji. Your message along with other recent ones made me reflect the following and I will pass this on to a as well. "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold"> "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold">It seems that the Science of Self requires a different approach than the Science involved in discovering the complexities of the Universe. Both sciences rely on consciousness, attention, and awareness as instruments to attain some type of knowledge. "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold"> "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold">Sciences involving the discoveries of the Universe focus the attention outside to perceived objects (time, space, matter, laws of motion, gravity, mass, etc.). Science of Self, however, is a totally radical departure. Here the attention, consciousness, or awareness itself becomes the center of attention. It is not focused anywhere other than itself. "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold"> "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold">When attention and awareness are focused on objects of perceptions, the relationships between those objects according to universal laws become clear. But the relationship between the subject and the object cannot be determined due to the difficulty of separating the subject and object (even by some super subject - God). When attention/awareness become self-focused, that is called self-inquiry. When attention lights up attention, awareness lights up awareness, consciousness lights up consciousness, Self is Realized as Sat-Chit-Ananda, the Ultimate Subject that swallows up Space, Time, Universal Laws, and all the Universes. "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold"> "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold">Love to all "Courier New";color:blue;font-weight:bold">Harsha line-break"> -----Original Message----- madathilnair [madathilnair ] color:black">Dear Harshaji, "Courier New";color:black">I have added my two cents worth in parenthesis. It is not mine "Courier New";color:black">actually. It is everyone's as I am quoting Eesaavaasyopanishad (from "Courier New";color:black">memory and unintelligibly so): "Courier New";color:black">_ color:navy"> "Courier New";color:black">[Thadaijathi, thannaijathi, thaddoore, thadanthike, thadantharasya "Courier New";color:black"> "Courier New";color:black">sarvasya, thadusarvasyaasya baahyatha] "Courier New";color:black">(My translation: That comes, That goes, That is away, That is near, "Courier New";color:black">That is inside everything and That is also outside everything.) "Courier New";color:black"> "Courier New";color:black">(My comment: Space is negated. One can't help being at where one "Courier New";color:black">started from! One is afterall Everywhereness!). "Courier New";color:black"> color:navy"> "Courier New";color:black">Pranaams. "Courier New";color:black">Madathil Nair color:navy;mso-color-alt:windowtext"> "Courier New"">***************************************************************** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 Hi Harsha, Science of Self v. Science of the Universe What is singular to both? They are both: OneDuality - the Infinite and the Definite Love, James , "Harsha" wrote: > Thank you Sri Nairji. Your message along with other recent ones made me > reflect the following and I will pass this on to a as well. > > It seems that the Science of Self requires a different approach than the > Science involved in discovering the complexities of the Universe. Both > sciences rely on consciousness, attention, and awareness as instruments to > attain some type of knowledge. > > Sciences involving the discoveries of the Universe focus the attention > outside to perceived objects (time, space, matter, laws of motion, gravity, > mass, etc.). Science of Self, however, is a totally radical departure. Here > the attention, consciousness, or awareness itself becomes the center of > attention. It is not focused anywhere other than itself. > > When attention and awareness are focused on objects of perceptions, the > relationships between those objects according to universal laws become > clear. But the relationship between the subject and the object cannot be > determined due to the difficulty of separating the subject and object (even > by some super subject - God). When attention/awareness become self-focused, > that is called self-inquiry. When attention lights up attention, awareness > lights up awareness, consciousness lights up consciousness, Self is Realized > as Sat-Chit-Ananda, the Ultimate Subject that swallows up Space, Time, > Universal Laws, and all the Universes. > > Love to all > Harsha > > > > > madathilnair [madathilnair] > > > Dear Harshaji, > > I have added my two cents worth in parenthesis. It is not mine > actually. It is everyone's as I am quoting Eesaavaasyopanishad (from > memory and unintelligibly so): > _ > > > [Thadaijathi, thannaijathi, thaddoore, thadanthike, thadantharasya > sarvasya, thadusarvasyaasya baahyatha] > (My translation: That comes, That goes, That is away, That is near, > That is inside everything and That is also outside everything.) > (My comment: Space is negated. One can't help being at where one > started from! One is afterall Everywhereness!). > > > > Pranaams. > > Madathil Nair > ***************************************************************** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2002 Report Share Posted May 11, 2002 nisarga111 [nisarga] Saturday, May 11, 2002 1:43 PM Re: Science of Self v. Science of the Universe Hi Harsha, Science of Self v. Science of the Universe What is singular to both? They are both: OneDuality - the Infinite and the Definite Love, James ***************************************** Dear James: Perhaps you can elaborate more on this. What is OneDuality? Love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 12, 2002 Report Share Posted May 12, 2002 Hi again Harsha, OneDuality = UniVerse = Singularity with dual characteristics/qualities Every 'Single' thing is singular and its expression has a dualistic quality. The singularity plus its and its qualities make up the Triad that all wisdom traditions speak about. OneDuality or 'The One' is greater than the sum of the parts 'The Infinite' and 'The Definite'. Infinite and Definite is the way that 'The One' appears. To say that One is either Infinite or Definite is simultaneously 'Definite' and 'Infinite' because saying anything is a definition and then there has to be the qualification that words cannot contain that which is being spoken about. This process clearly reveals the limitation of words. It reveals the Definite and thus only one qulatity of the One which has two qualities. The other is there in the absence of words. It is commonly called 'Silence'. AND 'The One' is greater than the sum of the parts - it is 'The Way of Harmony' which can only be lived. AND in Living Truth reveals Itself to Itself - the revelation has a dualistic quality - Infinite and Definite. We are OneDuality, Infinite and Definite. Truth is paradoxical in nature and the resolution of the paradox is: 'To see the Paradox', Seeing/Consciousness is Singular and it has the dualistic qualities of Concentration-Focused-Localized-Definite-Masculine-Intellect... and Meditation-Open-Nonlocal-Infinite-Feminine-Intuition... Love, James ps: How to formulate that which cannot be formulated? In the formulation realize that it cannot be formulated and then see deeper - see the Truth that it has the dualistic qualities of 'that which can be formulated-Definite and 'that which cannot be formulated-Infinite' - Every 'single' thing is One and it has the qualities of Infinite and Definite. ~~~ To say that things are nondual is accurate and yet this limits the commentary to the Infinite that the word NonDual points to. Reality/Unreality are the characteristics of Oneness - to speak of only the unreal is True and limited. There has to be the reconciliation of the appearant opposites - the reconciliation is the 'Seeing' - when One is not defining things as 'this' or 'that' and sees that by choosing one the other is negated - the resolution is in the 'Seeing' of things as they are - All is One and it has the dualistic qualities of Infinite and Definite. , "Harsha" wrote: > > nisarga111 [nisarga@c...] > Saturday, May 11, 2002 1:43 PM > > Re: Science of Self v. Science of the Universe > > > Hi Harsha, > > Science of Self v. Science of the Universe > > What is singular to both? > > They are both: > > OneDuality - the Infinite and the Definite > > Love, > James > ***************************************** > Dear James: > Perhaps you can elaborate more on this. > What is OneDuality? > > Love to all > Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 12, 2002 Report Share Posted May 12, 2002 Thank you James for that explanation. Your P.S. note was profound as well. I have filed away what you said with Sahajman's theory of Primal Non-Centrality ("The whereness of the hereness and the muchness of suchness is the primal opposite of thereness of the squareness but only while eating nachos and cheese and the whole universe transforms with the bite of an organic apple grown in Washington). I will attempt a reconciliation of the divergence in the philosophical stem cells of liposuction in my spare time next week to attain a final understanding or at least an intermediate one. I love you James and I mean this in the most positive sense! A few minutes ago as I was making tea and the T.V. was on, Richard Simmons, the exercise guru, was speaking to Mindy. Mindy used to weigh 500 pounds and is now much thinner. As Richard Simmons interviewed Mindy for his infomercial, he started getting all choked up. These were tears of joy at seeing Mindy's success in becoming thinner watching and working out with Richard's exercise videos. After Richard got all choked up, it was Mindy's turn and she was crying. Then I was crying in my kitchen seeing how happy Richard and Mindy were. I really did feel happy for them because as David Bozzi will tell you, it is hard to get in shape and keep in shape for many people. So, I say, Go Richard! Go Mindy! Go Bobby! Which all brings me to the subject of Sangha volunteers for my exercise video. I need people who look good in exercise clothes and who can get emotional in front of a camera easily! Juuuuuuuuuuuuuust kidding! Here's Johnny! Love to all Harsha nisarga111 [nisarga] Sunday, May 12, 2002 5:25 AM Re: Science of Self v. Science of the Universe Hi again Harsha, OneDuality = UniVerse = Singularity with dual characteristics/qualities Every 'Single' thing is singular and its expression has a dualistic quality. The singularity plus its and its qualities make up the Triad that all wisdom traditions speak about. OneDuality or 'The One' is greater than the sum of the parts 'The Infinite' and 'The Definite'. Infinite and Definite is the way that 'The One' appears. To say that One is either Infinite or Definite is simultaneously 'Definite' and 'Infinite' because saying anything is a definition and then there has to be the qualification that words cannot contain that which is being spoken about. This process clearly reveals the limitation of words. It reveals the Definite and thus only one qulatity of the One which has two qualities. The other is there in the absence of words. It is commonly called 'Silence'. AND 'The One' is greater than the sum of the parts - it is 'The Way of Harmony' which can only be lived. AND in Living Truth reveals Itself to Itself - the revelation has a dualistic quality - Infinite and Definite. We are OneDuality, Infinite and Definite. Truth is paradoxical in nature and the resolution of the paradox is: 'To see the Paradox', Seeing/Consciousness is Singular and it has the dualistic qualities of Concentration-Focused-Localized-Definite-Masculine-Intellect... and Meditation-Open-Nonlocal-Infinite-Feminine-Intuition... Love, James ps: How to formulate that which cannot be formulated? In the formulation realize that it cannot be formulated and then see deeper - see the Truth that it has the dualistic qualities of 'that which can be formulated-Definite and 'that which cannot be formulated-Infinite' - Every 'single' thing is One and it has the qualities of Infinite and Definite. ~~~ To say that things are nondual is accurate and yet this limits the commentary to the Infinite that the word NonDual points to. Reality/Unreality are the characteristics of Oneness - to speak of only the unreal is True and limited. There has to be the reconciliation of the appearant opposites - the reconciliation is the 'Seeing' - when One is not defining things as 'this' or 'that' and sees that by choosing one the other is negated - the resolution is in the 'Seeing' of things as they are - All is One and it has the dualistic qualities of Infinite and Definite. , "Harsha" wrote: > > nisarga111 [nisarga@c...] > Saturday, May 11, 2002 1:43 PM > > Re: Science of Self v. Science of the Universe > > > Hi Harsha, > > Science of Self v. Science of the Universe > > What is singular to both? > > They are both: > > OneDuality - the Infinite and the Definite > > Love, > James > ***************************************** > Dear James: > Perhaps you can elaborate more on this. > What is OneDuality? > > Love to all > Harsha /join All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. Your use of is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 13, 2002 Report Share Posted May 13, 2002 > So, I say, Go Richard! Go Mindy! Go Bobby! > > Which all brings me to the subject of Sangha volunteers for my exercise > video. I need people who look good in exercise clothes and who can get > emotional in front of a camera easily! Dear Harsha: I am glad to see you are still gung ho on the hatha yoga video. I am personally stiff as a board but I would be glad to draw on a tablet any postures that no one can squeeze into. I will be glad to emote while doing this. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 13, 2002 Report Share Posted May 13, 2002 texasbg2000 [bigbobgraham] Sunday, May 12, 2002 11:07 PM Re: Science of Self v. Science of the Universe * So, I say, Go Richard! Go Mindy! Go Bobby! > > Which all brings me to the subject of Sangha volunteers for my exercise > video. I need people who look good in exercise clothes and who can get > emotional in front of a camera easily! Dear Harsha: I am glad to see you are still gung ho on the hatha yoga video. I am personally stiff as a board but I would be glad to draw on a tablet any postures that no one can squeeze into. I will be glad to emote while doing this. Love Bobby G. ************************************************* That's fantastic Bobby! I may actually take you up on that in a few months! Go Bobby! The artist extraordinaire. New members, please go to the HS Website. You will be totally dazzled by Bobby's art! Bobby is unique. He paints poetry! Love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2002 Report Share Posted May 14, 2002 Thank You Harsha, Oneness has no opposite. It is a simple realization. Love, James , "Harsha" wrote: > Thank you James for that explanation. Your P.S. note was profound as well. > I have filed away what you said with Sahajman's theory of Primal > Non-Centrality ("The whereness of the hereness and the muchness of suchness > is the primal opposite of thereness of the squareness but only while eating > nachos and cheese and the whole universe transforms with the bite of an > organic apple grown in Washington). > > I will attempt a reconciliation of the divergence in the philosophical stem > cells of liposuction in my spare time next week to attain a final > understanding or at least an intermediate one. I love you James and I mean > this in the most positive sense! > > A few minutes ago as I was making tea and the T.V. was on, Richard Simmons, > the exercise guru, was speaking to Mindy. Mindy used to weigh 500 pounds > and is now much thinner. As Richard Simmons interviewed Mindy for his > infomercial, he started getting all choked up. These were tears of joy at > seeing Mindy's success in becoming thinner watching and working out with > Richard's exercise videos. After Richard got all choked up, it was Mindy's > turn and she was crying. Then I was crying in my kitchen seeing how happy > Richard and Mindy were. I really did feel happy for them because as David > Bozzi will tell you, it is hard to get in shape and keep in shape for many > people. > > So, I say, Go Richard! Go Mindy! Go Bobby! > > Which all brings me to the subject of Sangha volunteers for my exercise > video. I need people who look good in exercise clothes and who can get > emotional in front of a camera easily! > > Juuuuuuuuuuuuuust kidding! > > Here's Johnny! > > > Love to all > Harsha > > > > nisarga111 [nisarga@c...] > Sunday, May 12, 2002 5:25 AM > > Re: Science of Self v. Science of the Universe > > > Hi again Harsha, > > OneDuality = UniVerse = Singularity with dual > characteristics/qualities > > Every 'Single' thing is singular and its expression has a > dualistic quality. > > The singularity plus its and its qualities make up the Triad > that all wisdom traditions speak about. > > OneDuality or 'The One' is greater than the sum of the parts > 'The Infinite' and 'The Definite'. Infinite and Definite is the way > that 'The One' appears. > > To say that One is either Infinite or Definite is simultaneously > 'Definite' and 'Infinite' because saying anything is a definition and > then there has to be the qualification that words cannot contain that > which is being spoken about. > > This process clearly reveals the limitation of words. It reveals > the Definite and thus only one qulatity of the One which has two > qualities. > > The other is there in the absence of words. It is commonly > called 'Silence'. > > AND 'The One' is greater than the sum of the parts - it is 'The > Way of Harmony' which can only be lived. > > AND in Living Truth reveals Itself to Itself - the revelation > has a dualistic quality - Infinite and Definite. > > We are OneDuality, Infinite and Definite. Truth is paradoxical > in nature and the resolution of the paradox is: 'To see the Paradox', > > Seeing/Consciousness is Singular and it has the dualistic qualities > of Concentration-Focused-Localized-Definite-Masculine-Intellect... > and Meditation-Open-Nonlocal-Infinite-Feminine-Intuition... > > Love, > James > > ps: How to formulate that which cannot be formulated? > In the formulation realize that it cannot be formulated and then > see deeper - see the Truth that it has the dualistic qualities of > 'that which can be formulated-Definite and 'that which cannot be > formulated-Infinite' > > - Every 'single' thing is One and it has the qualities of Infinite and > Definite. > > ~~~ > To say that things are nondual is accurate and yet this limits the > commentary to the Infinite that the word NonDual points to. > Reality/Unreality are the characteristics of Oneness - to speak of > only the unreal is True and limited. > > There has to be the reconciliation of the appearant opposites - the > reconciliation is the 'Seeing' - when One is not defining things as > 'this' or 'that' and sees that by choosing one the other is negated - > the resolution is in the 'Seeing' of things as they are - All is One > and it has the dualistic qualities of Infinite and Definite. > > > > , "Harsha" wrote: > > > > nisarga111 [nisarga@c...] > > Saturday, May 11, 2002 1:43 PM > > > > Re: Science of Self v. Science of the > Universe > > > > > > Hi Harsha, > > > > Science of Self v. Science of the Universe > > > > What is singular to both? > > > > They are both: > > > > OneDuality - the Infinite and the Definite > > > > Love, > > James > > ***************************************** > > Dear James: > > Perhaps you can elaborate more on this. > > What is OneDuality? > > > > Love to all > > Harsha > > > > /join > > > > > > All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, > perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside > back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than > the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. > Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is > where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal > Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously > arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. > > > > Your use of is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2002 Report Share Posted May 14, 2002 , "Harsha" wrote: > As Richard Simmons interviewed Mindy for his > infomercial, he started getting all choked up. These were tears of > joy at seeing Mindy's success in becoming thinner watching and > working out with > Richard's exercise videos. After Richard got all choked up, it was > Mindy's turn and she was crying. Mindy has to cry. If she doesn't, she won't get paid. While Richard Simmons has probably been a key motivating force for some people, he has annoyed many times more. So I guess it all balances out in the end. According to the all wise and knowing Pat Robertson (from the 700 Club) we are not look at our fellow gay brothers and sisters as homosexuals. We are to view them as a child of God with a 'homosexual problem.' Using that wisdom, I choose to view Richard Simmons as a child of God with a 'glitter problem.' David (not so easily impressed with shiny things) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2002 Report Share Posted May 15, 2002 On Tue, 14 May 2002, david bozzi wrote: > > Using that wisdom, I choose to view Richard Simmons > as a child of God with a 'glitter problem.' > na, not Richard, that was more Liberace and Elvis. and Elvis was cool. How 'bout GlitterBuddha? maitri, --janpa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.