On Aug 14, 2005, at 3:08 AM, sparaig wrote:
Should read the Scientific American online articles about
multiverses.The first level multiverse is described below. There are 4
theoretical levels:
I'll check that out, thanks!
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Interesting note also about the Krishna bubble
universes. Once in 1981? as I was walking up the road, away from the
TMO-Kansas City Capital building, it was early dawn on a Sunday I think, and
I saw Krishna with his flute in a subtle sight vision. I ascribed it at
the time to too many
Seems like a mixture of both to me. He's not bound by codes
of conduct, although he's very rigid regarding the purity of
the teaching. He works for the betterment of the world, but it could be
argued that his efforts are not entirely selfless.
My belief is that he's very
--- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
My belief is that he's very dualistic.
Gotta agree with Llundrub on this one. There's
always
someone to blame for either the state of the world
or for some failed plan. And it's never him.
That's just the hat he's wearing for
--- TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My belief is that he's very dualistic.
Gotta agree with Llundrub on this one. There's
always
someone to blame for either the state of the
world
or for some failed plan. And it's never him.
That's just the hat he's wearing
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dvaita Vs. Advaita - Epistimological Aspects - Which is Maharishi?
on 8/13/04 7:47 AM, Llundrub at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-There's no sense of original purity of which we partake, there's just a -we must purify the world- approach. That's not very advaita
--- jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
One apparently cannot determine the state of
consciousness of
another from their actions; probably given the
observer/observed
uncertainty one can never adequately
That's just the hat he's wearing for the party.-Peter
Do you know who is throwing the
party?
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit
snip
Kind of makes me wish I had gone to MIU; this
analogy just came to
me a few years ago when I was thinking about the
relationship
between Brahman and the classic seven states of
consciousness :-)
Akasha, you would have been right at home with all the
philosophy majors. It was
On Aug 13, 2005, at 4:31 PM, akasha_108 wrote:
Einstein and other relativity theorists, used a similar double cone to
explain the time/space continuum and called the negative space
Elsewhere. As most MIU core course students may remember from the
physics courses.
Itzhak Bentov also used
On Aug 13, 2005, at 4:39 PM, Rory Goff wrote:
Good question! I would say offhand that the double cone is actually
the central core of a torus (the Hiranyagarbha-field), which in turn
is one of the countless Krishna-bubbles or Universes, and so
on...:-)
Have you read the myth of Er in
--- akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Kind of makes me wish I had gone to MIU; this
analogy just came to
me a few years ago when I was thinking about the
relationship
between Brahman
Title: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dvaita Vs. Advaita - Epistimological Aspects - Which is Maharishi?
of original
purity of which we partake, there's just a -we must purify the world- approach.
That's not very advaita. Moreover, remaking the world is not very advaita
either. All of which leads
One apparently cannot determine the state of consciousness of
another from their actions; probably given the observer/observed
uncertainty one can never adequately determine the state of
consciousness of another, if one is not functioning at least from
Brahman and willing to completely
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:54 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dvaita Vs. Advaita - Epistimological
Aspects - Which is Maharishi?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
"Rory Goff" [EMAIL PROTECTED]...
wrote: One apparently cannot determine the state of
consciousness of an
Yes, you can "experience" Unity, but you cannot "experience"
Brahman -- Brahman experiences you :-)I spent many years doing Forest Academys where
Maharishi and his white pundits talked about the distinction between unity and
brahman, and the main point of difference was always having to do
On Aug 13, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Rory Goff wrote:
He used the double-cone analogy?
Oh yeah--took it to really the most experiential heights IMO. He also
describes the macrocosmic hiranyagarbha in some detail.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~--
Get fast
On Aug 13, 2005, at 5:41 PM, Rory Goff wrote:
Yes, I recall learning a lot of this stuff amongst the Pythagoreans
and Neoplatonists, but don't recall if I've read Plato's Republic.
Many thanks, Vaj; I will keep my eyes open for it :-)
Just do a web search for it plato myth of er. It's the
On Aug 13, 2005, at 6:11 PM, Rory Goff wrote:
Cool. Bentov lives! :-)
I just recently read parts of his daughters biography of Ben. Quite
the man.
There is also actually a quantum field theory based on the torus model
of consciousness.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
What is a "white pundit"?Is that
anything like a "white Russian"?His non Indic
pundits such as John Haeglen, Bevan Morris, etc etc etc...
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Perhaps we could say Unity ripens the intimate identity between
perceiver and the perceived, while allowing the essential I-thou
relationship to remain relatively intact at the subtlest levels, while
BC destroys all such relationships and indeed every opposite or duality into
utter
On Aug 13, 2004, at 6:39 PM, Llundrub wrote:
Perhaps we could say Unity ripens the intimate identity between
perceiver and the perceived, while allowing the essential I-thou
relationship to remain relatively intact at the subtlest levels,
while BC destroys all such relationships and indeed
--- akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- akasha_108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Kind of makes me wish I
It seems to me that all *anyone* does who speaks of the unspeakable,
is "reifying some errant conceptuality," and yet I enjoyed reading of
"reifications" like these when I thought myself on a path, and I enjoy
playing with these "reifications" now when there is evidently no path. No
On Aug 13, 2005, at 7:47 PM, Rory Goff wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Until any of us stop casting shadows and our very normal intentions
manifest as siddhis (which others will no doubt notice) we ain't
there yet. snip
Now *this* is what I would
Don't hold back, Llundrub -- tell me what you
*really* think :-)Seriously, did I inadvertently push some button when I
compared the various states of consciousness to conic sections? Are you
particularly attached to one of these states of consciousness, or
something?-Sorry, once I got
26 matches
Mail list logo
