Guest guest Posted October 1, 2005 Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 Radanatha, who are you insulting? Muni, D.B., or me? Is it possible for you to express disagreement without being nasty and sarcastic? -- Len/ Kalipadma --- mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha wrote: > Be careful while discussing with this self > proclaimend authority on > Hinduism, after awhile he will tell you an apple is > an egg and a cat > is a dog a buddhist is a hindu, Hatha Yoga is 8000 > yers old and kaula > tantra is vedic and westerners are all brahmins. > You know he is doing this because he is working on > the impossibilty > tantric hyper drive spaceship, This vehicle is able > to project faster > than light. Now to achieve this admirable feat he > starts posting all > these absurdities, until Heisenberg appears and > chants his > mantra: "The more precisely the POSITION is > determined,the less > precisely the MOMENTUM is known" this activates the > uncertainity > principle in all three brainend beings who dare to > listen,and as a > result space will begin to warp because of fear and > then wrap > around the time continuum. > While he is pushing the ignition button it is > possible that you > develop an irresistible urge to vomit. > > , "Mahamuni" > <mahamuni@c...> > wrote: > > Look my point was that in a forum such as this > one, discussing such > traditional and sacred topics, we should strive > towards more than > just the "status quo". Do you not agree? > > > > > > - > > Devi Bhakta > > > > Friday, September 30, 2005 6:02 PM > > Re: Are "Shaktism" and > "Santana Dharma" > the same thing? > > > > > > Thanks for the wise words, Len ... > > > > But you are quite right, I feel like a complete > dope. For all > this > > time I have been arguing the fine points of > Hindu (sorry, Muni, > > Sanatana Dharmic) doctrine with a very nice > person who -- > surprise, > > surprise! -- had no idea we were even talking > about Hinduism. > > > > So there you have it. Problem solved. But I > would hate to go back > > through the archives and count the thousands of > words I've > expended > > in discussion, wondering what on earth I was > failing to express, > > when I could have accomplished the whole job > with a four-word > > telegram: "READ THE GROUP INTRODUCTION." > > > > As someone who works with words, reveres them > really, and invests > > quite a bit of thought into each post I make > here, I allowed > myself > > to be naive enough to think that my responses > were being read > just > > as thoughtfully. Silly boy I am! Still, I am > sure that a few > people > > out there may have read them and maybe got > something out of them. > > > > The nice thing about this development is how > easy it makes things > in > > the last "Kumari" discussion. All of this stuff > about how people > > should open their minds and see that god is in > goddess and > goddess > > is in god. Hey presto, that's on the front page > too: "Devi is the > > Shakti (Supreme Energy) of Shiva (Supreme > Consciousness); both > > identical to and inseparable from Him." You see, > I thought that > was > > the starting point of the conversation; how much > time and energy > I > > could have saved if I realized that it was the > whole question. > > > > Bing! Next topic! Anyone want a snack? Need to > use the > bathroom? ... > > I am just kidding, of course. I feel punchy! > Laughing a lot, for > > some reason! > > > > Now, as to the categories that Muni so wisely > dismissed > as "Western" > > and "wrong" -- they are bloody intellectual aids > for the novice, > > nothing more and nothing less. Subramuniyaswami > designed them to > > help interested non-Hindus (sorry, Muni, > non-Sanatana-Dharmists) > get > > a broad general understanding of the the > system's complex > landscape. > > As for Muni's claim that "the West does this so > they can then > speak > > 'knowledgably' about these things," I hate to > disappoint, but if > any > > more than 0.001% of "the West" is even aware of > these categories > > (never mind conversant in them), I would be > shocked beyond belief. > > > > So of course, Len, you are right to note that > the "boxes" (to use > > Muni's and Mary Ann's words) were not intended > for complex > analysis. > > The Brahmin factor you mention isn't in there. > Tantra isn't in > > there. They "four schools" discussion is just a > broad starting > point > > for understanding. It gives newcomers and > outsiders an analytical > > framework through which to process the more > complex, detailed > > information that inevitably (or not, apparently) > comes with study > > and experience. > > > > You've gotta start somewhere, after all. And > this humble group is > > another small example of that process. In it, > Nora, Kochu and I > have > > worked very hard to fulfill Amrita's excellent > working > goal: "Make > > information available. Let people take it or > leave it, think it > is > > true or false, judge you as they think fit. Tell > them: 'Come here > if > > you like. Don't come if you don't like. Only try > to see for > > yourself. Don't blindly accept what others > say.'" > > > > The role of the Munis of the world, on the other > hand, is to let > > foolish others do the ground work and then, when > it is done, look > > and say, "No, that is wrong." No messy > explanations or reasoning > > necessary. And you know what? I bow to him. He > already knew what > I > > just learned today: Send a four-word telegram, > and take the rest > of > > the day off. > > > > And sure enough, he immediately received this > small effort a > rather > > rich outpouring of praise for his pithy wisdom: > "I am glad to > read > > this. Thank you for posting. ... it's good to > read posts that > > accept, acknowledge and embrace the depth beyond > the limitation > of > > the boxes ...." > > > === message truncated === Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 , Len Rosenberg <kalipadma108> wrote: > > > Radanatha who are you insulting? Muni, D.B., or me? > > Is it possible for you to express disagreement without > being nasty and sarcastic? > > -- Len/ Kalipadma Dear Len It is a little while ago since you asked the Question. But in the light of the open Publication of the hitherto Secret knowledge of tantric Spaceships i may be understood better and i dare to answer. I was insulting nobody. I wasn´t even disagreeing. I have been misunderstood. I only expressed in my way what Guruji Amritanandanatha talked about explicitly on this current Seminar. Quote: "Ooru means grow beyond limit is. He takes it to the fourth state and absorbs them into himself. He puts them to sesha naga - the kundalini and then alienates them. The way to awaken from the sleep? Dreaming state negates the experience of the deep sleep state. The wakeful state negates the experience of the dream. Which is true and what is truth? There is a fourth state, the transcendental state, which goes beyond these three. When you wake up from the waking state, then you go into the fourth state. So, when you are in the fourth state, where you are spread out into infinity, then these whole-world-experiences that were seeing in the wakeful state appears like a dream. We have to realize that there are two states of your being, both simultaneously true. One state of your being, where you are localized and the other state where you are like a wave spread out. If you see the movie What the bleep do we know, the boy plays with one ball and there are so many balls existing and going on simultaneously. If the state of existence is described by a function, similar states of existences can be described by different functions. Which means, a single entity can exist simultaneously at different places. He was seeing all those balls. But which particular ball youre looking at is dependent on the subject. The subject is making the choice and the subject object relationship is explored in full in quantum mechanical descriptions. So previously, in the classical mode of our thinking, we used to think that only the object was existing. Then the problem was, how to create the subject out of the object. There is no seer. The quantum mechanics brought the necessity of including the seer and the seer interacts and influences the position of the object. What weve to understand is that one part of our being is localized in space and time and other part is completely delocalized and it spreads out everywhere all over infinity. So, anywhere in the world of space and time, God can know about your existence - which is localized; because the wave by definition, goes from minus infinity to plus infinity and is everywhere. There is no material as such. That is what the Upanishads say. || Brahma sathyam Jagath Mithya. || The Jagath - the thing that you see in the waking state is mithya , is kalpitham, created. Created by whom? Created by you. Youre the creator of this world and how many universes are there ? Infinite number of them. As many subjects are there, so many universes are there. Every one of our thought processes is manifesting somewhere in space and time and that is making up the reality. The universe that we live in, is not one but infinity of universes. Each one is creating a universe and is growing there and is reabsorbing it. In the reabsorbed state, we are all one. In individual state, were like waves coming out of ocean and were seeing the separate existence. The next chapter talks about what sustains the world. Maha Kali kills time and She can give birth to time also. She kills shiva. Shiva is expression of time. Shiva is afraid of Maha Kali. He does not dare to go near her. Maha Kali is primordial power of the primordial energy, which is beyond the limit of Brahma. She is Mother in whose womb Brahma is growing; and what is Brahma? It is the whole of the universe. The womb measures the size of the child that is growing inside. What is the size of the universe that we are talking about? What is bramhanda? From the moment it was born, till today, there is certain amount of time that has elapsed. How far light can travel in that time ? It is c (speed of light) times t (time that has elapsed). That is the radius of the universe that we are in. There can be nothing existing outside that; because everything that is created, can at the most travel at the speed of light. What can travel at more than the speed of light ? There is a theorem, which talks about Phase velocity into group velocity. Phase velocity is the velocity of the wave and group velocity is the speed of the particle. The product is c to the power of two. If one of them is larger than c, the other has to be less than c. Since the physical particle can travel only slower than speed of light, the waves must travel faster than light. If something travels faster than speed of light, then the time reverses. Physicists have created particles which travel faster than light. How did they create the particle? There is one monochromatic wave and there is another monochromatic wave and they construct a wave packet and the wave packet moves faster than light. They made it enter one crystal and leave the other end of the crystal; it leaves the other end before it enters the crystal. Nobel Prize was awarded for this one. So, before it enters this end, it has left the other end. They also measured the simultaneous presence of one particle - one in UK and one in Australia. If you flip the polarity of one particle, the other one gets flipped. How does it know that it has flipped? Because, it travels faster than speed of light. It is traveling at infinite speed. It means covering the entire universe in zero time. So, the speed of light is not a barrier anymore for matter waves. But for matter, it is. For the matter waves, it is not. If we think, what is the algorithm or procedure to convert ourselves from matter to matter waves? The answer is very simple. There is no procedure; because you are this and that simultaneously. There is nothing needed to transform one to the other. If it is different, youve to transform. If it is not, you dont have to transform anything. These are the ideas behind the stories. The sages were not able to explain these in this modern language, but theyve seen the truth of these things - in transcendental state. Sometimes, in my meditation, I see color blindness test patterns, like discs and circles of light. In those circles of light, I see Buddhas sitting and meditating. I used to ask What are you and who are you. Once I had an idea that I should enter one of those. When I entered, I was in different space and time. You can go to the next galaxy and come back by overcoming the speed of light barrier in your matter wave pattern. Matter waves consist, in my opinion, which is not proved, but I think, that they constitute intelligence. Function of intelligence is to create order out of disorder. Matter always moves from order to disorder. > > --- mahahradanatha <mahahradanatha> wrote: > > > Be careful while discussing with this self > > proclaimend authority on > > Hinduism, after awhile he will tell you an apple is > > an egg and a cat > > is a dog a buddhist is a hindu, Hatha Yoga is 8000 > > yers old and kaula > > tantra is vedic and westerners are all brahmins. > > You know he is doing this because he is working on > > the impossibilty > > tantric hyper drive spaceship, This vehicle is able > > to project faster > > than light. Now to achieve this admirable feat he > > starts posting all > > these absurdities, until Heisenberg appears and > > chants his > > mantra: "The more precisely the POSITION is > > determined,the less > > precisely the MOMENTUM is known" this activates the > > uncertainity > > principle in all three brainend beings who dare to > > listen,and as a > > result space will begin to warp because of fear and > > then wrap > > around the time continuum. > > While he is pushing the ignition button it is > > possible that you > > develop an irresistible urge to vomit. > > > > , "Mahamuni" > > <mahamuni@c...> > > wrote: > > > Look my point was that in a forum such as this > > one, discussing such > > traditional and sacred topics, we should strive > > towards more than > > just the "status quo". Do you not agree? > > > > > > > > > - > > > Devi Bhakta > > > > > > Friday, September 30, 2005 6:02 PM > > > Re: Are "Shaktism" and > > "Santana Dharma" > > the same thing? > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the wise words, Len ... > > > > > > But you are quite right, I feel like a complete > > dope. For all > > this > > > time I have been arguing the fine points of > > Hindu (sorry, Muni, > > > Sanatana Dharmic) doctrine with a very nice > > person who -- > > surprise, > > > surprise! -- had no idea we were even talking > > about Hinduism. > > > > > > So there you have it. Problem solved. But I > > would hate to go back > > > through the archives and count the thousands of > > words I've > > expended > > > in discussion, wondering what on earth I was > > failing to express, > > > when I could have accomplished the whole job > > with a four-word > > > telegram: "READ THE GROUP INTRODUCTION." > > > > > > As someone who works with words, reveres them > > really, and invests > > > quite a bit of thought into each post I make > > here, I allowed > > myself > > > to be naive enough to think that my responses > > were being read > > just > > > as thoughtfully. Silly boy I am! Still, I am > > sure that a few > > people > > > out there may have read them and maybe got > > something out of them. > > > > > > The nice thing about this development is how > > easy it makes things > > in > > > the last "Kumari" discussion. All of this stuff > > about how people > > > should open their minds and see that god is in > > goddess and > > goddess > > > is in god. Hey presto, that's on the front page > > too: "Devi is the > > > Shakti (Supreme Energy) of Shiva (Supreme > > Consciousness); both > > > identical to and inseparable from Him." You see, > > I thought that > > was > > > the starting point of the conversation; how much > > time and energy > > I > > > could have saved if I realized that it was the > > whole question. > > > > > > Bing! Next topic! Anyone want a snack? Need to > > use the > > bathroom? ... > > > I am just kidding, of course. I feel punchy! > > Laughing a lot, for > > > some reason! > > > > > > Now, as to the categories that Muni so wisely > > dismissed > > as "Western" > > > and "wrong" -- they are bloody intellectual aids > > for the novice, > > > nothing more and nothing less. Subramuniyaswami > > designed them to > > > help interested non-Hindus (sorry, Muni, > > non-Sanatana-Dharmists) > > get > > > a broad general understanding of the the > > system's complex > > landscape. > > > As for Muni's claim that "the West does this so > > they can then > > speak > > > 'knowledgably' about these things," I hate to > > disappoint, but if > > any > > > more than 0.001% of "the West" is even aware of > > these categories > > > (never mind conversant in them), I would be > > shocked beyond belief. > > > > > > So of course, Len, you are right to note that > > the "boxes" (to use > > > Muni's and Mary Ann's words) were not intended > > for complex > > analysis. > > > The Brahmin factor you mention isn't in there. > > Tantra isn't in > > > there. They "four schools" discussion is just a > > broad starting > > point > > > for understanding. It gives newcomers and > > outsiders an analytical > > > framework through which to process the more > > complex, detailed > > > information that inevitably (or not, apparently) > > comes with study > > > and experience. > > > > > > You've gotta start somewhere, after all. And > > this humble group is > > > another small example of that process. In it, > > Nora, Kochu and I > > have > > > worked very hard to fulfill Amrita's excellent > > working > > goal: "Make > > > information available. Let people take it or > > leave it, think it > > is > > > true or false, judge you as they think fit. Tell > > them: 'Come here > > if > > > you like. Don't come if you don't like. Only try > > to see for > > > yourself. Don't blindly accept what others > > say.'" > > > > > > The role of the Munis of the world, on the other > > hand, is to let > > > foolish others do the ground work and then, when > > it is done, look > > > and say, "No, that is wrong." No messy > > explanations or reasoning > > > necessary. And you know what? I bow to him. He > > already knew what > > I > > > just learned today: Send a four-word telegram, > > and take the rest > > of > > > the day off. > > > > > > And sure enough, he immediately received this > > small effort a > > rather > > > rich outpouring of praise for his pithy wisdom: > > "I am glad to > > read > > > this. Thank you for posting. ... it's good to > > read posts that > > > accept, acknowledge and embrace the depth beyond > > the limitation > > of > > > the boxes ...." > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 > > 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.