What it means Jonathon is that the human mind creates the portal in a fashion in which it is comfortable with, and that as humans you can comprehend without confusion. If a law of nature appeared to you in its "unclothed" form you would be maybe terrified or confused. In other words, the universe really IS abstract laws of nature as physics describes, but the mistake modern science makes is, that it forgets that the human mind is completely intimate with the laws of nature. They are not alien to us. They ARE us, and the mind will generate that with which it can most easily accept. This is in the Gita, where Krishna shows his true terrifying form to Arjuna and then returns to his more amenable form as "the friend of all men"
OffWorld --- In [email protected], Jonathan Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I guess what I'm looking for is a straightforward account of the sources of where these practices come from. If "the gods" in Vedic literature are synonomous with "laws of nature," as Jon Shear (mid- 1970's) and Bevan Morris (8/88) indicated to me in conversation, then I feel a straighforward account is in order, e.g what does it mean to "see" and/or "talk to" a "law of nature?" > > Preeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: As an Indian I know about Yagya performance. I try to explain. > Yagya is performance by a group of highly evolved spiritual people. > This is a vedic procedure based on the ancient vedic wisdom. > First A sankalpa is taken for a person. This is very much like oath > taking of a Judge or politician. The group of highly evolved people > take oath that they are performing yagya for a person by taking the > name of the person, his purpose for the yagya and other astrological > data to make the effects reach the person. The evolved group do > chanting of specific vedic sound, which creates powerful vibration > and it is life nourishing. It is comparable to the telecom > technology. > Hope it explains and you find it helpful. > > --- In [email protected], off_world_beings > <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Jonathan Chadwick > > <jochadw1@> wrote: > > > > > > Lou, thank you for the heartfelt response. My formal > involvement > > in the movment ended before all of what you are talking about came > > into effect. I remember John during the time when he was still an > > undergrad. But I've always tried to be supportive/positive about > the > > TMO. All the organizations I've been involved with in my life > > (including some current ones) are disappointing. I'm glad I got > > involved with TM and the practice continues to benefit me greatly > > today. However I never could get Bevan Morris to answer my > questions > > about Yagyas. As I recall, in 1988 he said to me that the > movement > > wasn't really involved in them so the question of whether they > > are "religious" or not was in effect moot as far as the TMO was > > concerned.>> > > > > > > What is your specific question about yagyas? > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate > in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. >
