verklingen

Wow, ziplock! Well let's get started. . .

According to the Vedas, the material sphere and the untold number of universes within it accounts for roughly 1/4 of all existence: so you can see what level of imortance the material is given in the Vedic literature. All existence is composed of Krishna's divine energy, there is nothing else. This energy is manifested in different ways, of which there are three principle divisions: the spiritual, the marginal, and the material. Krishna Himself, His expansions, His incarnations, and His abode are the spiritual energy. We, the living entities, regardless of the body through which we act (dog, cat, fish, tree, human, et cetera), have the same spiritual quality as Krishna, but we are called the marginal energy because we can associate with either Krishna's spiritual energy or His material energy. The material energy is anything which is non-living, including dead bodies.

As far as comparisons with the fire and spark go, consider your own body. It is (limitedly) self-sufficient of its own accord. But within every cell which composes your body is a DNA strand, which can only continue to function so long as your body is living. Now, this DNA strand has all the information which defines the qualities of your body. You are continually shedding DNA in the form of dead skin, hair, nails, et cetera, so in essence this DNA is a "spark" of your body. It has your body's potency, but due to its current position of being seperated from it, this potency is inadequately expressed. It is minute while your body is very large. In other words, like the spark to the fire, it is equal in quality to your body but inferior in quantity.

This is a very common misconception, that liberation means to re-enter the origin: such is not the case. I must admit that I am not very well versed on this matter, but I can tell you that individuality does not end with material liberation. In the Bhagavad-Gita, Krishna describes the individual spirit-soul thusly:


This translates as "This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, all-pervading, unchangeable, immovable and eternally the same." In his purport on this verse, Srila Prabhupada states:

"All these qualifications of the atomic soul definitely prove that the individual soul is eternally the atomic particle of the spirit whole, and he remains the same atom eternally, without change. The theory of monism is very difficult to apply in this case, because the individual soul is never expected to become one homogeneously. After liberation from material contamination, the atomic soul may prefer to remain as a spiritual spark in the effulgent rays of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the intelligent souls enter into the spiritual planets to associate with the Personality of Godhead."

I'm sorry to lump all your illuminating discourse on beliefs into this simple line, but, as I explained elsewhere, this is where one finds it hard to seperate my beliefs from blind dogma. The knowledge contained within the Vedas comes from God Himself, and the Vedas describe the original state of the spirit-soul as eternally associating with Krishna directly. Thus, it is our natural disposition to be rendering service to God, and any belief, concept, or theory which teaches this idea (and there is almost no religion which does not) is teaching the truth. But ultimately, the Vedas are the origin of all such thought and philosophy (as sanskrit is the origin of Eurasian languages), so it is only natural to accept them as the supreme fountain of this knowledge with other beliefs being small, bubbling springs.

I could not bring myself to scale down this wonderful paragraph. The material world is indeed very beautiful! I myself at times have trouble thinking that the material conditions which bear such beauty are imperfect and corruptible, but a quick look around the world and all its problems will remind me of the nature of our condition. The spiritual platform is very much alike this material one we inhabit, but within that sphere everyone is working for the benefit of the whole. No one is seeking mastery over any other, everyone accepts the mastery and authority of Lord Krishna and works for Him. In this way, every desire is constantly being fulfilled as every necessity for a tree's growth is provided by watering its root. This is why we aim for a place in the spiritual worlds, because there is all the beauty which is present here in the material realm, but none of the imperfections. Everyone is eternally satisfied: this is the meaning of the term "eternal bliss."

__________________

“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”

Waves

I dont understand the logic here.

All material conditions, things, objects, are somehow imperfect, you say, yet it is not a result of a cosmic imperfection which created all these problems that you see around you. it is a result of mans imperfect mind that these things happen, not the physical world he inhabits, right?

So how is the physical world imperfect at all?

People make stupid decisions, based on greed or lust or whatever. and thats why we do things like hurt and destroy and corrupt. not because the world is in any way imperfect, but because our view of the world is imperfect.

__________________
On this life that we call home
The years go fast and the days go so slow

verklingen

^
As always my friend, your semantics are impeccable!

You are, in no small way, correct. We are under the deluded belief that our personal satisfaction is all that matters, and this delusion is the origin of greed, lust, and hate; not the material condition itself. But still, it must be said that the material condition, due to its illusory nature, lends itself to the fomentation of such imperfections. Thanks for further clarifying my point!

__________________

“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”

Waves

Which is exactly why we created it in the first place!

You cant learn if you know the lesson is fake. the illusion that you feel the need to break free from is a necessary thing in physical life! its why you choose to experience physical life

__________________
On this life that we call home
The years go fast and the days go so slow

Ego Tripping

How can something perfect grow anything imperfect when everything subsequent from perfection will be infused with such?

But I think we are saying the saying thing all around....all that exists is Perfection and the Illusion is Imperfection (Matter/Maya/Entropy).

Took you guys 4 pages to figure this out? Yikes.

__________________

Ego Tripping

Word, word, word again.

What good would a Drama/Movie/Play be if the Actors acted like it was obviously a Play?

The key is to Know its a Play but play your Part to the best of your abilities, knowing all along that eventually your role is complete and you will go backstage.

Until you do it all again.

__________________

verklingen

Well said, everyone!

As it stands, this is one of the most successful and fulfilling threads I've ever been a part of. Good goin' Rev.

__________________

“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”

reverie

Interesting responses guys. I'm less patient today so forgive me for not adressing the points made, but I promise I will, lol. Verklingen, I understand that your beliefs are important to you but perhaps you could answer questions outside your belief system? Answering direct questions with "According to the Vedas.." seems to stray a little off topic. I look at the replys to ziplock and they seem to be off on a tangent. Experience is relative.

__________________

dissolve popular detachment

verklingen

I fully understand your sentiment, but it would be hard to give answers without referencing a belief system. Science itself is a belief system, albeit a dynamic one. I could explain things through the eyes of science very well (I've studied science my entire life and went to university to become an astrophysicist), but what would it avail? As you say, it's a matter of experience, and I never try to shake someone's faith in their belief: whether it is science or something more esoteric.

The reason I so often reference the Vedas is to show you guys where I found my information, how simple and logical that information is, and how easily you all could find it too: if you so desired. All I can do is explain my point of view to you guys using my own experiences.

I may love you reverie, but I'm afraid there is not much I can do to change the way I handle questions. If it turns you off, I am very deeply sorry! I know my commentary and discourse can seem a little over-the-top at times, but I only try to be as complete and honest as I can. But you are right, I do find myself getting so excited about a subject that I delve into tangental points. I'll try to stay as direct as I can! Thanks for the constructive criticism.

__________________

“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”

Waves

Im saying that the imperfection is just as much an illusion as perfection. and the sentence im typing right now. its all just one thing.

only being exists, imo. everything else is like making sand castles on the beach, with sand put in different places to achieve different effects. but in the end its just a pile of sand. of course we cant even comprehend the sentence "only being exists" because we have put ourselves into the role of puny humans. its sort of like talking about infinity. we can understand the concept from an objective standpoint, but when it comes to application, we are fucked.

i cant even understand what i just typed for petes sake

__________________
On this life that we call home
The years go fast and the days go so slow

Ego Tripping

Question on your sig:

What does the Source follow?

__________________

Ego Tripping

I had a dream a few days ago that I took Acid with my roomates...I've never done acid before and it came in these fruit roll up type rolls of translucent paper. After ingesting, I started to 'trip.' My Dream World basically become lucid without my knowing it was a dream and it felt identical to a regular trip. I could observe "hallucinations" close and talk to my trip buddies. I remember in the dream I had to work in the morning (missed reality check) and needed to call my boss to call sick...I did so and then woke up.

Sand castles indeed. That dream was mine, but is only one on the beach, creating a city eventually. Dreaming is building it alone, waking life is the competition.

Until some drunk asshole kicks it over. bongsmilie

Edit - I've never done acid before.

__________________

reverie

I think that depends what you view a Source to be.

__________________

dissolve popular detachment

ziplock

Salam verklingen! Hope you are doing well and in good health. Thank you of course for the response, aided me greatly in determining your position. Hopefully I'll be able to do the same for you in regards to my own, as well as address what you have brought up. I'm going to approach this by submitting my understanding, and the steps I go through in relation to certain things. We'll see how it goes.I find this perspective in relation with many concepts where scripture is revered and seen as holy. That of course being that the knowledge held within them is from God himself. When I'm then presented with all these varying scriptures, all seeming to come from God, yet with many discrepencies and disagreements among them, I'm quite confused on which one is the valid one. It would seem then that I must seek out some means by which to measure their accuracy, to determine the correct account.

So now I must consider my options, and there are many of them... I could follow my heart, I could go back date of conception, I could go by what someone else has recommended, etc. I have more options of measure than I do scripture. Quite perplexing.

Let us say we choose a method, such as date of conception, and proclaim that, "This scripture came first, therefore it must be the origin of all others and the true account." Typically the first, or earliest account proves itself to not be the most accurate, failing to provide a full picture of the experience. Ie: The world is flat. Our conceptions of it go through an evolutionary process, attaining more and more information in order to gain a full perspective, a full understanding on the subject. We for instance could observe objects on the horizon and upon witnessing a ship's mast appear over the horizon before the ship we could deduce that the world is infact round. However, this can all be bypassed by the notion that this knowledge was directly given by a supreme, knowledgable authority.

If this is so, we then must consider how this initial account took place, the factors contributing to it. We consider that God gave the knowledge to a select person, who then conveyed it to others. We must then ask ourselves in what form did this information come in? Was it a word for word account, God telling them what to write? Or was it an abstract experience, one beyond words? If we consider it to be the latter, then we cannot assume the words to be a primary source. They're secondary, inspired by and deprived from the experience. If I were to watch a movie, and then be inspired to paint a picture, would my picture be a scene from the movie? Not necessarily so. Infact, it could be far different than the movie, but of course retain some similarity being deprived from that initial experience. If I were to then look at the picture inspired by the movie, am I gaining an adequate account of the movie? Unfortunately I would think not...

We must also consider the process of translating experience into language. This is a rather interesting process in itself, and can prove to be quite difficult given the subject matter. Many of us can be suddenly at a loss of words, or upon consulting our linguistic data bank find nothing that describes what we wish to. All of this creates for a very individual account, so when we go to apply this to other people there's going to be great difficulty, most of which would be caused by the semantics involved with the language used. This is complicated further as translations from language to language take place, cultural interpretations, etc. It's no surprise then that there's so much effort and time invested in interpretation of these scriptures in hopes of unearthing that initial meaning and experience captured by the author.

Upon considering these variables and factors, the uncertainty, the ease in which it can be distorted, it proves extremely difficult to submit oneself fully to any one particular account, let alone have it warrant the labelling of an absolute such as truth. Indeed, to apply an absolute upon it would be to close an open system, to deny the very nature of the abstract experience. If we seek to then submit ourselves to it, we must find another more sure footed approach.

In both this approach and the former one mentioned, that being God directly bestowing the knowledge in it's scriptural form to the author, we must also assume the infallibility of the author. To justify this, as well as why this particular author attained this and not others, it's typical for a belief system to ascribe superhuman attributes to the individual, raising them above others. Christianity for instance opts for the Father/Son relation, following a sort of blood right of rule that was a prominent governing system in the time of it's conception. A literal stance on these scriptures though often proves immensely difficult to defend, and one must lend themselves to metaphorical, analogical, or anagorical, approaches to the text in order for it to retain it's validity in todays modern conscious environment. This then implies a much more abstract primary source, that being of the experience, and the scripture is but signposts pointing in a direction. We also, unfortunately, have no way of confirming via first hand knowledge the infallible status of the author. It could just as easily be explained by an exaggeration, as an introduction of imagination.

It would seem then that we find ourselves amidst uncertainty, regardless of the approach taken. The reasoning behind one account's validity can easily be applied to another and vice versa. It's at this time that instead of submitting to one account, I opt to remain like water. Open, adaptive, fluid, ever changing, filling in each crevice, attempting to encompass an understanding. I witness the numerous religious accounts from numerous prophets, and the equally numerous interpretations that sprout from them like branches of a tree. I visualize these perspectives, and see them all looking in the same direction, only through different eyes, different individuals.

The similarities amongst the conceptions and accounts imply a similarity in experience, in base material. I see the similarities in the individuals that convey these messages. I deduce that these individuals are no different then any others, only that they lived a life that lead to a certain understanding. That through whatever methods, they experienced something that they had to express and to share, to offer a way for others to recreate the understanding, to experience that feeling. They interpret this experience through their own psychology, relating it in ways they're familiar with through a process of association to fit the mentality of the age, to reach the people.

I then seek the encompassment of all these perspectives. To see through all eyes as that'd provide a view of all presented angles. Through my interactions with individuals I enrich my conscious environment as well as my phsyical. I submit my concepts to a great number of environments, allowing them to evolve even more.

Through this, I find it extremely easy to relate to others, to understand their position, to remain open to their perspective (well, still have trouble with ones that call for a concrete approach to a concept). If I solidify my concepts and beliefs I find it restricts my ability to interact, to grow, to expand. By remaining fluid I feel as if I've allowed myself to break free of anchors that previously held me down, and now I may flow freely in the sublime currents of existence, regardless of where they may lead me. I am a traveller with no destination other than the journey. I seek to develope an integral, independant, individual perspective, a natural formation and reflection of my being that may be carried into every moment. To be honest to myself in experience and expression, to say plainly here I am. I exist.

I have no desire to suppose anothers authority and go by their dictation of experience, especially when I have such a difficult time justifying it. I do not wish to defend their position, to suppose and assume what was meant and felt. I wish to form my own. I wish to interact with and experience others, to appreciate their individuality, their relation relative to myself and the whole.

__________________
Insanity is the only sane reaction to an insane society.

ziplock

Existence to me is a celebration. I want to be drunk with it. I want to submerge myself within it and bask in the depth of it's profound beauty. I want to look through the astrolabe and become oceanic. To me this material world is a relative perception of an infinite possibility and experience. Minute particles all carrying on their own existence, their individuality a neccessity in the configuration of this panorama provided by my senses. Each experience relating to one another, interacting, communicating. System upon system compounding, creating intricate designs, patterns, all flowing from the same unified source, reflecting it, echoing it back at itself. Both religion and science desire it, they both crave it. That theory of everything, the ability to explain it all in an elegant expression. To reflect the experience of existence back at it through this expression. To percieve it fully within the mirror of our minds.

Our experience is relative to our awareness. The more we are aware of, the more our experience encompasses. This awareness is contained within the consciousness, it's the source and the motivator of all. To release the boundaries of the consciousness, to open it up and allow it to expand to the reaches of infinity, is to experience God. Is to be in every moment at every time. We then enjoy the freefall as this then cycles. The awareness has no other place to go, nothing to do but to contract. To oscillate between the fully aware and unaware. To breathe. To be alive.

__________________
Insanity is the only sane reaction to an insane society.

verklingen

Ziplock, I must confess how much joy reading your thoughtful words brings me! There is no fault to be assumed on your part by holding this position you have so elaborately explained. I do, however, see one assumption you are continually making which does not sit well with me, and I would like to address it.

I understand the worldview of the athiest (I'm not claiming you to be an athiest, I only recognize that you have a propensity to be skeptical of religion in general, and the positions are similar) and once thought along the same lines; so I can empathize with this very well. Within the last couple thousand years, religion in the west (namely Christianity) has caused untold misery for many, many people. Christianity burned germanic "heathens" and "witches," Christianity slaughtered thousands and thousands of Aztecs and Native Americans in the New World, Christianity helped spread imperialism and fooled imperialized populations into accepting a subordinate role in their own society and culture, Christianity sought to continue the societal and humanitarian stasis of the Dark Ages: the examples are legion. Christianity is the tangible embodiment of "religion" in the west, soo it is natural for a modern, intelligent thinker to move away from the abeyant mindset and circumstances "religion" implies.

While this may be the case with Christianity (and most New Age belief systems which are not very diffrent), the same arguments cannot be used to support a similar sentiment toward Vedic philosophy. The Vedic cosmology and understanding of reality is so detailed and complete that for every logical or scientific point one could bring up in objection to Christianity, one would be able to find a point in the Vedas to substantiate that objection. For example, European thinkers were prosecuted for believing that the world is round because such thinking went against the grain of Christian dogma. Over time, science has won that debate, but the Vedic texts claimed the world to be round thousands and thousands of years ago! Not only that, but the Vedas teach that the Moon orbits the Earth, the Earth orbits the Sun, as well as the other planets. There is even an ancient "map" called the Bhu-mandala which is a scaled model of our solar system and the orbits of Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn.

I have described this other point elsewhere, but it bears mentioning here. Rupa Gosvami, a disciple of Lord Caitanya (one of Krishna's incarnations), wrote a Vedic text named Bhakti rasamrita-sindhu which describes 64 distinct qualities of Krishna, stating that different combinations of which are the cause for the different forms of living beings. Modern scientists have discovered that the DNA code is comprised of four base "letters," namely adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine. These four "letters" are arranged into different combinations, or "words," the order of which dictates the various qualities of whatever living being they represent. There are precisely 64 different "words" these "letters" can form. It is indeed hard to turn around without finding a new correlation between Vedic philosophy and science!

So please, do not write off my beliefs as mindless, backward dogma, for they are anything but! You are very a very intelligent person, thank you for letting me consider your words!

__________________

“Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”

Ego Tripping

Lame answer.

I suppose I would say

"Myself."

__________________

reverie

Ziplock, amazing post. Very poetic and inspirational - a great way to start the morning.

Verklingen, I appreciate you acknowledging my last post and providing the explaination you did (In regards to citing your beliefs in responses). I have been trying to understand where you're coming from, and I think I have gained a better understanding. I suppose it is pretty hard to mention anything without bringing forth a belief system in that context huh? When every word we speak radiates with associations and personal understandings. I think what I meant to emphasize was the importance in remaining as objective as one can when dealing with other people of various beliefs. Being careful to not suggest your answer to another persons question as concrete truth. Respecting the position of others and knowing that they too have personal truths. One cannot justify the experience of another through their own associations. Does that make sense? I suppose it comes down to approach and how we present our beliefs, so those around us know we respect their position. Starting responses with "I believe" or "I personally think" rather than "So and so is this... Because...". It allows for a whole different type of interaction imo. One of an understanding and progressive nature.
I dont think that ziplock was writing off your beliefs as mindless, the impression I recieved was quite the opposite. I believe his post to simply suggest more of an open accepting view on experience. These experiences including stories of the Krishna and the Vedas, even stories of the corrupt Christianity, to everyday experiences."I have no desire to suppose anothers authority and go by their dictation of experience, especially when I have such a difficult time justifying it. I do not wish to defend their position, to suppose and assume what was meant and felt. I wish to form my own. I wish to interact with and experience others, to appreciate their individuality, their relation relative to myself and the whole." I see this as viewing experience by creating it, consciously aligning thought with it. Thinking and viewing the experience of others through oneself. Feeling the thought patterns exterior to self and coming back and aligning them with self. Encompassing as many angles as capable. Accepting, understanding...keep ing possibility open. (I really hope that makes sense).
Ego, I'm sorry if you find my statement "lame", perhaps thats a product of your expectance of an answer.. an assumption you developed from reading my sig. It appears that you already founded your own answer prior to asking me what it meant. Knowing your question was of a pretty relative nature, I provided a relative response. Keeping options open. Now, if you genuinely wish to know my beliefs on the matter I would be glad to share, being aware they may differ from yours. Remember it all depends from which way you view the quote in my sig..

Why would you say yourself? Explain...

__________________

dissolve popular detachment

drowingfish

In my opinion (<---I think people fail to understand that it's all opinion and relative to your life and not necessarily anyone else's) we should stop trying to figure out the meaning of life and just BE. I know I always try to ease my mind when uncertainties exist but I am trying hard to just BE. People are always trying to change others opinions by arguments and counter-arguments and counter-counter-arguments and so on. Mr. know it all, I know you well. We all have are own personalized journey to find what WE are looking for, right?

Every now and then I have the so called "Samadhi experience" and its a beautiful thing... but I fool myself into thinking I've reached the top of the mountain only to realize I'm only on a hill at the base. So many ideas and concepts were so certain and real are no longer either in the context of my life. The real question for me is: Is there a summit or am I just fooling myself? Many days I feel that have fallen down the hill...only to have found a comfortable spot to rest in.

There are so many great brains in this community, but I get the feeling that some people believe that they have reached that summit and no longer let in new ideas (found a comfortable spot, eh - let me join ya! ). But what the hell do I know, right?

ziplock

My apologies for coming across that way, I promise you it was not my intent. It'd be extremely disrespectful and rash given our previous discourse to conclude that your beliefs are mindless, backward dogma. They’re well thought out to say the least and that’s reflected in your posts. It’s a matter of difference in perspective on a rather fundamental in my opinion.

To clarify this, the following are quotes of Bruce Lee’s. Consider this in a conscious, intellectual sense, regarding the formations of belief systems, thoughts, patterns of thought on an individual’s part. And then, consider the fight as the engagement, the interaction, and the relationship between the participants, in terms of a discussion for instance.You put it into a body, it becomes the body. We can place the water of our understanding into the cups of any religious scripture. Some may have a much more snug and fulfilling fit than others. However, the fact that we even relate the scripture to science, etc, shows how the water naturally splashes far outside of the cup. I find too many people attempt to lie to themselves, saying that we can fit ourselves fully into these societal or religious molds. It's known we can't, and as such each religion has some sort of forgiveness system, to forgive us for our "faults." Our inability to conform.

I think this is because we're not meant to conform. What about you?

__________________
Insanity is the only sane reaction to an insane society.