Thank you very much Sandeep for another thought-stopping
and wonder-full sharing. Much more are offered on this
website: http://www.the-covenant.net/

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Sandeep <sandeep1960@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Who am I.......is  the starting point(and found to be the end point) on
> the path of Jnana(path of knowing)..
>
> ...aka Ramana's famous Self-Enquiry bromide.
>
> As always.....a sharing in the moment........gets captured.....via a
> conditioning and what arises is a scriptural doctrine...
>
> ...which starts getting worshiped.
>
> The thousand bows to the tea-pot, rather than drinking the tea.
>
> Once the transient hollowness of what hereto was assumed to be one's
> identity......aka in the form of a name, sex...
>
> ..... status......whether personal, societal, national....whether
> established via relationships..
>
> .... or as possessor of knowledge, successes,
> failures......experiences........et al...
>
> .....once the transient hollowness of all that is apparent.......it is
> only then that the question of Who am I.... is born.
>
>
> However this is not a quest of replacing identities.
>
> Not a replacement of the name of John Doe with Param Brahman.....or
> Jesus's Old Man....or Yahweh.....or whatever.
>
> Seeing the transience of everything within time........thought posits
> something as the timeless, something as the eternal...
>
> ...and its back to the same round and round ......a different mulberry bush.
>
>
> When the question of Who am I.......is born......the way forward(to use
> a term, as really there is nothing as backward..
> ....for something as a forward to be a direction)...
>
> .....what is to be seen.......is that the question of "Who am
> I".......is an arising and persisting thought of such a question.
>
> Rather than the content of the thought......the quest in quietude
> is......who is it that took delivery of this thought as the question?
>
> The thought as the question............got anchored where?
>
> For whom is the question "Who am I"........a relevant question?
>
> And what ever answer that arises.....irrespective of the content of the
> thought-as-the-answer....
>
> .....it is once again a thought-construction.
>
> Rather than the content of the thought-as-the-answer(which is only a
> confabulation of the known)...
>
> ....the quest in quietude.......remains the same.
>
> Who is it that took delivery of this thought-as-the-answer?
>
> For whom........is the answer.............an answer?
>
>
> And the assurance that this quest in quietude......is not an
> ad-infinitum regression.
>

Are you enlightened? Are any of the thousands of supposed "gurus" we watch on
YouTube today actually enlightened? One of the most important questions that can
be asked on the spiritual path is: How do we know with certainty if someone
actually is an enlightened being? In his now familiar and widely acclaimed style
of sharp honesty and impassioned eloquence, Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya
tackles this question head-on with deep philosophical clarity and inspirational
force like no one else before him ever has. Our most intensely fascinating video
produced so far beckons you to face the straightforward answer to the crucial
question: Are You Enlightened?

WATCH THIS FREE VIDEO HERE:

http://youtu.be/tSmRKCQaDDU

Please forward and share this information, and link to this video.

It is said that to have compassion for others,
we must first have compassion for ourselves. But
that has nothing to do with having an "I'm a victim,
poor me" attitude. The symptoms of this dis-ease are
thinking that others words , the way they look at
you, the way they treat you, and so on, justify
feeling angry, offended, sad, or any other similar
adjectives or adverbs. It's just one of the mind's
major ways to keep you its slave and keep you too
busy to realize that you need not carry any of those
negative feelings around. This reactivity is a taught
behavior and started with your parents and siblings,
your teachers and religious leaders, as well as your
friends and the influences of the culture you grew
up in. Witness each moment naked of any previous
influences and you'll be flowing compassionately with
your Self and everyone else in real time in a real way.
This too is a learned behavior and meditation is the
best possible tool to master this mind-control app.
A successful effortless "Witness to life as it takes
place" reaction to events happening moment to moment,
and the instillation of a permanent "I'm blessed"
attitude and experience may take many years occur or
happen in a second, but it will. Meditate! Witness!
And you will live happily ever after.

 

Thank you very much Sandeep for another thought-stopping
and wonder-full sharing. Much more are offered on this
website: http://www.the-covenant.net/

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Sandeep <sandeep1960@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Who am I.......is the starting point(and found to be the end point) on
> the path of Jnana(path of knowing)..
>
> ...aka Ramana's famous Self-Enquiry bromide.
>
> As always.....a sharing in the moment........gets captured.....via a
> conditioning and what arises is a scriptural doctrine...
>
> ...which starts getting worshiped.
>
> The thousand bows to the tea-pot, rather than drinking the tea.
>
> Once the transient hollowness of what hereto was assumed to be one's
> identity......aka in the form of a name, sex...
>
> ..... status......whether personal, societal, national....whether
> established via relationships..
>
> .... or as possessor of knowledge, successes,
> failures......experiences........et al...
>
> .....once the transient hollowness of all that is apparent.......it is
> only then that the question of Who am I.... is born.
>
>
> However this is not a quest of replacing identities.
>
> Not a replacement of the name of John Doe with Param Brahman.....or
> Jesus's Old Man....or Yahweh.....or whatever.
>
> Seeing the transience of everything within time........thought posits
> something as the timeless, something as the eternal...
>
> ...and its back to the same round and round ......a different mulberry bush.
>
>
> When the question of Who am I.......is born......the way forward(to use
> a term, as really there is nothing as backward..
> ....for something as a forward to be a direction)...
>
> .....what is to be seen.......is that the question of "Who am
> I".......is an arising and persisting thought of such a question.
>
> Rather than the content of the thought......the quest in quietude
> is......who is it that took delivery of this thought as the question?
>
> The thought as the question............got anchored where?
>
> For whom is the question "Who am I"........a relevant question?
>
> And what ever answer that arises.....irrespective of the content of the
> thought-as-the-answer....
>
> .....it is once again a thought-construction.
>
> Rather than the content of the thought-as-the-answer(which is only a
> confabulation of the known)...
>
> ....the quest in quietude.......remains the same.
>
> Who is it that took delivery of this thought-as-the-answer?
>
> For whom........is the answer.............an answer?
>
>
> And the assurance that this quest in quietude......is not an
> ad-infinitum regression.
>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_J5rBxeTIk&feature=youtu.be

“Let go” is a big thing in the spiritual domain and very much the New
Age Mantra.

What is this Let-Go?

Is it a Let-go……..if the intention is to get something in return ……as
some quid-pro-quo?

Would not the very process of a “let-go”………need a pre-existing claim of
ownership ..….a claim over that……… which is sought to be let-gone.

Without this sense of ownership..... without this sense of claim…

…..whether it is about material thingies……. whether it is of
relationships… .. whether it is of thoughts..... or of great spiritual
understandings …

….without this sense of ownership……without this sense of claim or ownership…

…..all let-go is akin........ the let-go of the yonder blue moon in the
star-lit dark sky.


Was that moon yours in the first place, such that you can no let go of it?


Let-go…….has nothing to do with the usual connotation of let-go.

For, if there is a hoped for end-result of the letting-go.....letting go
has yet to happen.

Let-go……is primarily to do with the unraveling of the sense of
possession...... the sense of ownership, the sense of claim.

Seeing...... that at the very birth…..the hands were empty…….and at
death, the same hands will still remain empty…

..one turns to see... whether in this brief interlude between these two
events of “birth” and “death”....

....whether in that brief interlude.....anything got acquired.....
whether anything got owned..... whether anything got possessed.

Whether any held claim… stands the clarity of scrutiny.


It is fairly easy to see that while one might have societal documents to
show ownership about material stuff….

....none of those assets really matters …...as none of them carry a
warranty beyond the demise of the biological object....

... that has been held to be the owner-oneself.

The difficulty is to see this "non-ownership" in the domain of
relationships...... whether they are the very dear and loved ones or the
not so dear ..

...not so loved ones…The difficulty is to see this non-ownership....in
the realm of achievements, either mental or physical.


Where lies this difficulty?

It lies in the persisting conviction……….that it is this very claim of
ownership...... which defines oneself to oneself.

Without the teaching of Let-Go…(aka I teach, ergo I know how to let-go ,
ergo I am)...…..who is oneself?

Without being….. that wonderful mother........ that wonderful
partner......that success-story.... that environmental/political/social
activist....

...... that “supreme channeler” of messages from outer dimensions..…who
is oneself?

And then we have the usual possessions of identities of being a
Christian....... being a Hindu.... being a Buddhist.....a Jesuit....a
Merkabist...

.... a Kabbalist..... a Scientologist...a Non-Dualist…..…being a Savior.

Without all these claims…….who am I?


A sense of claim…………needs the sense of the claimant.

The sense of claimant........ as a sense of an individuated ,
separative, volitional self… ….defined by the array of sense of
possessions/claims.

Why is such an entity only a notion………why is the very sense of a
claimant-self an ideation?(As prattled by Gurus galore)

In order to be.....i.e..not a notion....that which is to be......needs
to defined........hence isolated on a perch.

Separated out on a perch, now a defining is possible.....attributes can
be ascribed, avered, disclaimed, refuted, defended....the usual circus show.

Separated, isolated........thus definable...needs what has been
separated out and placed on a perch......to have a deinite start and a
definite end.

Without a start point and end point....separated in time.....nothing can
be distinguished.

Where is the start point of life?

Where is the end point of life?

Typically these are held as the birth and death of an object, biological
or othewise.

The opposite of death is not life.

The opposite of death is birth......and life.....contains both birth and
death......and yet remains ever unbounded by these two notional events.



If no aspect, no nuance of life can be isolated, separated out.......how
can even a sense of the claimant–entity…be isolated?

If a me-claimant-entity cannot be isolated.....how can things
.....relationships .....definings be isolated?

What “discrete-ness” …can be isolated .....and a beginning and an
ending.... be sketched?

If none......then…who can claim ……..about what?

And without any claim………..let-go …….of what claim?

Let-go of what stuff that is "owned"?

The empty hands remain completely empty... even in the brief interlude
between the events of “birth” and “death”…

…..birth/death events …which themselves cannot be discreted out…..
cannot be isolated as “events”.




Were you born……..or what was ....born….....(as-if).....a sense of
duration…in which you as an apparently discrete object…

…became seemingly visible?


So....... is this an advocacy of tearing up the title deeds of your
residential property..... or giving it away in charity…

....or...…emptying your Bank account… …or walking away from a
relationship.....… .as the necessary ingredients of being in let go?

Such “movements” may or may not occur ……as nuances of the flow of
totality…..but that is not necessarily being in let-go.


Being-in-let-go……….is when in the seemingly presence …of what is
conventionally defined as possessions....

..... of what is defined as identities……when the in the seemingly
presence OR in the seemingly absence of any of such……

…..one sees only one’s empty hands.


The seeing...... that ……neither…….the presence or absence …..of anything
which typifies Life…... defines oneself.


Let go ……..is existing in a state ( to use a term)…..when let-go is seen
to already be the case....

…because there is none to stake a claim …on anything on any aspect of
one's life…in the first place.


One is so lost in oneself…..that even “oneself”…….cannot be isolated and
referred to.....as "so lost"

So lost...so gone…….. and yet the full and complete engagement
.......…in and as ……this very moment...

….the unfolding engaging is neither diminished nor affected by the loss
of oneself.


The dropping of the "Let"...... in the Let-Go.......is the very so-gone.


Gatey........Gatey.......Gatey

Madzhub is a term used to refer to one who appears to be a
simpleton..... but really one who is one with oneness.

One day this madzhub was moving in the city... in the middle of the
night......happily singing and shuffling to the beat of Dooo Beee Doooo.

It so happened that curfew had been declared in that city...and so no
one was allowed to move about.

A policeman caught the madzhub asked, "Who are you?"

The Madzhub stopped his singing and shuffling.

He did not know how to answer that particular question in
words........within the conventions of language.

So he did not answer.

The policeman asked, "Are you a thief?"

"Yes," replied the madzhub, because when the self is not..

... any name that is given is accepted.

Now, a so-called Guru would be very offended to be called a thief.

They took him in the police station and he was there for the whole
night, quite happy and resuming his singing and shuffling..... as happy
as he was singing and shuffling on the road.

There was no feeling of insult, no lamentation as to where the madzhub
found himself....

... for even the question of acceptance or un-acceptance is not of any
relevance for an empty cup.

A title was offered and was accepted.

In the morning,... the station officer came, and he recognized the
madzhub for what he was.

He said, "I am surprised to find him here."

The policeman said, "He himself said that he was a thief."

"Did you call him a thief. "

The policeman said, "Yes."

The officer said, "I am not surprised.

That 'I' which holds everything to oneself is crushed and effaced and
thrown away.

That 'I' is no longer there, in him.

And therefore all names are his name, all forms are his form, and the
whole cosmos is his own being.

You cannot hold him behind any type of bars.....for there is no longer
any difference between behind and beyond for him.

Let him sing and dance in the open......so that maybe the multitude will
breathe in some of that beneficence".

"... it is interesting to study the state which,
according to the Zen masters, precedes satori
(enlightenment). At this moment the curb on the
imagination has become so strong that it holds
in check all the affective reactions to the stimuli
of the external world. All the illusory significances
which the subject used to attribute to things
(significances which depended on his affective
reactions) now disappear, and the subject is
permanently divided into actor and spectator –
but the actor has become unapparent. 'It is like
two flawless mirrors reflecting one another.'
No longer is there any distress (angoisse), and
the subject experiences a kind of pure and total
alleviation – which is not, however, the state of
positive blessedness. There is now a condition of
unstable equilibrium between the forces that delude
and stupefy and the forces that tend to awake us to
reality. The subject no longer has the old, false
consciousness; but he does not yet possess the new
consciousness. (In Zen, this state is called tai-i,
literally 'great doubt.') Hence the subject who is
in this state says of himself that he is 'like an idiot.'
The screen separating him from objective reality has
worn thin and lost its opacity. Finally, in response
to some sensory stimulus, satori breaks through. In the
past, stimuli from the outside world reached the subject
through this screen and had the effect of stupefying him;
now that they reach him directly they awaken and enlighten.
The screen is imagination, is associative and discursive
thinking. And it is this screen that separated the subject
from objective reality and prevented him from realizing
the absolute identity of the 'I' and the Not-I. ('The eye
with which I see God is the same,' says [Meister] Eckhart,
'as the eye with which God sees me.')"
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Use Notice: This document may contain
copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically
authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that
this not-for-profit, educational use on the Web
constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material
(as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes
of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.

"These, and all words, are simply pixels on a screen
or ink on paper. Please don't think they contain Truth,
Justice or the American Way. They're not Super, man!"

Kir Li Molari

Make the Best Use of the Breath

"In Yoga asanas or in yogic breathing, one should
never exert oneself. Let things come in their own time.
Remember: Slow and steady wins the race. Particularly
when retention during pranayama comes in, one must be
very, very careful. Many people think yogic breathing
means to take a deep breath in and hold it as long as
possible until the entire body becomes shaky, and that
they call yogic breathing. It's not that. Pranayama is
a controlled, rhythmic way of breathing. As you inhale,
you make the best use of the breath by holding just as
long as is comfortable and then exhaling, taking twice
the time to exhale as to inhale. That is how to approach
pranayama safely.

"God bless you. OM Shanti, Shanti, Shanti."

  Join Satchidananda Ashram's Satsang every Saturday evening

and share the archive with friends.

  7:30pm Eastern, with Livestream

new.livestream.com/yogaville

http://imgur.com/gallery/hsslJ

By Lloyd Glauberman, Ph.D.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lloyd-glauberman-phd/an-upside-down-look-at-heaven\
-and-near-death-experience_b_2289298.html?utm_hp_ref=religion

We've all read about near-death experience (NDE),
the traumatically induced sensory phenomenon that
many believe represents the gateway to heaven. The
imagery (white light, tunnel, dead relatives, etc.),
coupled with the intense feelings of bliss and oneness,
typically make the most ardent nonbelievers reevaluate
their beliefs after the experience. It is powerful
stuff and, arguably, the most interesting of all mystical
experiences.

With the publication of the book "Proof of Heaven" by
Dr. Eben Alexander, the issue of whether NDEs represent
evidence for the existence of heaven is, once again, part
of the cultural conversation. So let's join the discussion.

Because of his credibility as a neurosurgeon, Dr. Alexander's
NDE generated a great deal of attention. His case is
unusually strong, not simply because of his scientific
credentials, but because of what apparently happened to
his brain. Due to bacterial meningitis his entire neocortex,
the part of the brain that makes us human, presumably
became disabled. Without the neocortex functional, a
scientific explanation for his NDE becomes impossible.

Most of his colleagues could not offer explanations for
what he saw. A few, however, refute his claims, including
Dr. Martin Samuels, who said, "there is no way of knowing,
in fact, that his neocortex was shut down. It sounds
scientific, but it is an interpretation after the fact."
And therein lies the rub.

The operative word in near-death experience is "near."
Nobody actually dies and talks to us from heaven. Those
ho experience NDEs end up back here talking to Oprah. And
they all say very similar things.

NDEs tend to have certain universal characteristics,
according to Dr. Gregory Shushan, a religion scholar
with anthropological training and author of Conceptions
of the Afterlife in Early Civilizations: Universalism,
Constructivism and Near-Death Experience. In other words,
regardless of culture or time, the NDE themes consistently
appeared in the ancient civilizations that he researched.

Furthermore, Dr. Shushan noticed that the various
cultural beliefs about heaven are quite similar to
the core characteristics of NDEs. What's interesting
is that this cross-cultural thematic consistency about
heaven does not hold true for creation myths. In other
words, every culture has a different narrative describing
how things began, but the same narrative about how things end.

Ironically, this leads to the possibility that NDEs, as
opposed to providing evidence for the existence of heaven,
might very well be responsible for creating our belief in it.

It's not difficult to imagine how this paradoxical understanding
of the relationship between NDE and heaven could have evolved.
The NDEs that occurred during ancient history -- especially
if it involved a respected elder or priest -- would have been
so instantaneously transformative, so powerfully seductive,
that it would have been impossible for a culture not to
incorporate the experience into a model of heaven. Then, over
the centuries, all subsequent NDEs would serve to reinforce
the belief.

It doesn't get more upside-down than this.

Assuming for the moment that this explanation of how heaven came
into being is accurate, one question remains: does it matter?

On a very practical level, changing people's religious beliefs
is virtually impossible. Faced with incontrovertible scientific evidence about
evolution, some folks still cling to the belief
that the earth is 6,000 years old because the Bible says so.
Not all people of faith take every aspect of the Scriptures
literally but, in general, religious beliefs become hardwired
into the brain. With the exception of those who experience
NDEs, rarely are people changing their mind.

If the NDE is a transitional experience to make death easier
and not the gateway to heaven, do nonbelievers have to discard
the concept of heaven altogether? Or, can we turn everything upside-down again
and simply label our experience of self --
our tiny speck of consciousness -- heaven? In other words,
maybe heaven is ephemeral not eternal. And at the end, our
energy goes back into the energy pool.

At some point in time each of us will know the truth. However,
if you don't believe in heaven and you're right, you'll never
know it. If you're wrong, people will be waiting at the other
end of the tunnel saying, "We told you so."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Use Notice: This document may contain
copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically
authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that
this not-for-profit, educational use on the Web
constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material
(as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes
of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.

Physicists propose experiment to test hypothesis that
reality is just a computer simulation.
Originally published:
Dec 14 2012 - 5:00pm
By:
Joel N. Shurkin, ISNS Contributor
http://www.insidescience.org/content/what-if-reality-was-really-just-sim-univers\
e/871

(ISNS) -- What if everything -- all of us, the world,
the universe -- was not real? What if everything we are,
know and do was really just someone's computer simulation?

The notion that our reality was some kid on a couch in the
far future playing with a computer game like a gigantic Sim
City, or Civilization, and we are his characters, isn't new.
But a group of physicists now thinks they know of a way to
test the concept. Three of them propose to test reality by
simulating the simulators.

Martin Savage, professor of physics at the University of
Washington, Zohreh Davoudi, one of his graduate students,
and Silas Beane of the University of New Hampshire, would
like to see whether they can find traces of simulation in
cosmic rays. The work was uploaded in arXiv, an online
archive for drafts of academic research papers.

The notion that reality is something other than we think it
is goes far back in philosophy, including Plato and his
Parable of the Cave, which claimed reality was merely shadows
of real objects on a cave wall. Sixteenth-century philosopher-mathematician René
Descartes thought he proved reality with
his famous "I think, therefore, I am," which proposed that
he was real and his thoughts had a reality.

Then, in 2003, a British philosopher, Nick Bostrom of the
University of Oxford, published a paper that had the philosophy
and computer science departments buzzing.

Bostrom suggested three possibilities: "The chances that a
species at our current level of development can avoid going
extinct before becoming technologically mature is negligibly
small," "almost no technologically mature civilizations are interested in
running computer simulations of minds like ours,"
or we are "almost certainly" a simulation.

All three could be equally possible, he wrote, but if the
first two are false, the third must be true. "There will
be an astronomically huge number of simulated minds like ours," Bostrom wrote.

His suggestion was that our descendants, far in the future,
would have the computer capacity to run simulations that
complex, and that there might be millions of simulations,
and millions of virtual universes with billions of simulated
brains in them.

Bostrom's paper came out four years after the popular film,
"The Matrix," in which humans discover they were simulations
run by malevolent machines. The popularity of the film possibly contributed to
the attention to Bostrom's paper received at
the time, but nothing came of it.

"He put it together in clear terms and came out with probabilities
of what is likely and what is not," Savage said. "He crystallized
it, at least in my mind."

In the movie and in Savage's proposal, the discovery that
reality was virtual came when unexpected errors showed up
in life, demonstrating imperfections in the simulation.

Savage and his colleagues assume that any future simulators
would use some of the same techniques current scientists use
to run simulations, with the same constraints. The future
simulators, Savage indicated, would map their universe on a mathematical lattice
or grid, consisting of points and lines.
This would not be an everyday grid but a "hypercube" consisting
of four dimensions, three for space, and one to represent points
in time.

A present-day example is lattice quantum chromodynamics,
which explores the effects of the strong nuclear force, one
of the four fundamental forces in the universe, on tiny
elementary particles such as quarks and gluons. In this approach,
the particles jump from point to point on a grid, without
passing through the space between them. The simulations cause
time to pass in a similar way, like the frames of film passing through a movie
camera, so that the time that passed between
frames is not part of the simulation. This style of simulation requires less
computer power than treating space and time as a continuum.

Because Savage and his colleague assume that future simulators
will use a similar approach, he suggests looking at the behavior
of very high-energy cosmic ray particles to see whether there
is a grid in the energy as a start.

"You look at the very highest energy cosmic rays and look for distributions that
have symmetry problems, which are not
isotropic," or the same in every direction, he said.

"Everything looks like it is on a continuum," Savage said.
"There is no evidence to show that is not the case at the moment."

"We are looking for something to indicate you don't have a
space-time continuum."

That disturbance in the force might be a hint that something in reality is
amiss. If the cosmic ray energy levels travel along
the grid, like following streets in Manhattan or Salt Lake City,
it probably is unlikely to be a simulation; if they unexpectedly travel
diagonally, reality may be a computer program.

Jim Kakalios, a physics professor at the University of Minnesota
who was not involved in the paper, said a test such as the one
Savage suggests may not prove anything. If they don't find the signatures, it
doesn't mean we are not a simulation; our
descendants could have used a different grid. If they do
find something it also could mean "that's the way space-time
is and we never noticed before," he said.

Two other questions arise. One is whether it is conceivable
that computers powerful enough to simulate our hugely complex universe ever will
exist. If so, it likely will be very far in
the future.

The second question is linked: Will it ever be possible to
simulate human consciousness? After all, we run around thinking
and feeling.

"Ultimately, the paper glides over the most interesting point:
assume we have infinite computing power and we can create this hypercube,"
Kakalios said. "They assume [the simulators] would
know how to simulate human consciousness."

We are aware of ourselves, he said, aware of our bodies, aware
of what is outside of our bodies, he said. Human consciousness
is almost indescribably complex.

For generations, science fiction books -- and some science books -- have
hypothesized inserting our consciousness into computers so
that we essentially live forever. In Caprica, a prequel to the television
program Battlestar Galactica, a girl's consciousness
is preserved in a computer and it becomes the basis for the evil cyborgs.

"We don't understand consciousness," Kakalios said. "Neuroscience
is where physics was before quantum mechanics."

"It's a more interesting problem than whether you can simulate protons and
quarks."

Either way, however, Kakalios said the experiments on cosmic rays
are the kind scientists should be doing regardless of the
simulation issue.

________________________________________
Joel Shurkin is a freelance writer based in Baltimore.
He is the author of nine books on science and the history
of science, and has taught science journalism at Stanford
University, UC Santa Cruz and the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Use Notice: This document may contain
copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically
authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that
this not-for-profit, educational use on the Web
constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material
(as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes
of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.

On New Year's Eve, we got Chinese take-out, and I opened my fortune cookie with
some trepidation.  When I read the message it seemed wonderfully important (not
the lucky numbers).

It said, "Everything must have a beginning."

That a crucial thought for me this year because my oldest child is applying for
college and will soon be leaving home...and I've been having a lot of trouble
dealing with that.

So my resolution for 2013 is to meditate on that fortune.



Oh--also to stop eating Jordan almonds.  Terrible for the teeth.

Happy New Year everyone.

W

A young and rather boastful champion challenged
a Zen master who was renowned for his skill as
an archer. The young man demonstrated remarkable
technical proficiency when he hit a distant bull's
eye on his first try, and then split that arrow with
his second shot. "There," he said to the old man,
"see if you can match that!" Undisturbed, the master
did not draw his bow, but rather motioned for the
young archer to follow him up the mountain.

Curious about the old fellow's intentions, the champion
followed him high into the mountain until they
reached a deep chasm spanned by a rather flimsy and
shaky log. Calmly stepping out onto the middle of
the unsteady and certainly perilous bridge, the old
master picked a far away tree as a target, drew his
bow, and fired a clean, direct hit. "Now it is your turn,"
he said as he gracefully stepped back onto the safe
ground. Staring with terror into the seemingly bottomless
and beckoning abyss, the young man could not force
himself to step out onto the log, no less shoot at
a target. "You have much skill with your bow," the
master said, sensing his challenger's predicament,
"but you have little skill with the mind that lets
loose the shot."

As has been shared before, it's traditional to "get"
teaching stories on 7 different levels. Here's a hint
about this one.......,
The tree that the Zen master hit is the mind! Meditating
on that perhaps will give you some steadiness in all and
every situation.
Peace and blessings,
Bob

medit8ionsociety  wrote:
>
> A young and rather boastful champion challenged
> a Zen master who was renowned for his skill as
> an archer. The young man demonstrated remarkable
> technical proficiency when he hit a distant bull's
> eye on his first try, and then split that arrow with
> his second shot. "There," he said to the old man,
> "see if you can match that!" Undisturbed, the master
> did not draw his bow, but rather motioned for the
> young archer to follow him up the mountain.
>
> Curious about the old fellow's intentions, the champion
> followed him high into the mountain until they
> reached a deep chasm spanned by a rather flimsy and
> shaky log. Calmly stepping out onto the middle of
> the unsteady and certainly perilous bridge, the old
> master picked a far away tree as a target, drew his
> bow, and fired a clean, direct hit. "Now it is your turn,"
> he said as he gracefully stepped back onto the safe
> ground. Staring with terror into the seemingly bottomless
> and beckoning abyss, the young man could not force
> himself to step out onto the log, no less shoot at
> a target. "You have much skill with your bow," the
> master said, sensing his challenger's predicament,
> "but you have little skill with the mind that lets
> loose the shot."
>

Spiritual Experience

"What is spiritual experience? I can try to describe it,
but it's something to be experienced. Imagine if I told you:
`Go to such and such shop, give so much money, ask for this
particular fruit. The shape will be like this, it will smell
something like this, remove the skin, remove the seed,
in between you have the fleshy part. Put it in the mouth,
then you will know how tasty it is.' That is all I can say.
If you tell me, `Oh, I can't just believe you unless you show
me how the taste is. I can't take the trouble of going to the
shop and buying it and cutting and everything. Unless you show
me the taste, I won't try that.' But, unless you try the fruit,
you won't understand the taste.

"God bless you. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti."

  Inspiration Line

Hear an inspiration message from Sri Swami Satchidananda
by calling 434-WOW-GURU. New and improved software brings
an even better sound quality and more reliable system.
New message the first of each month. Call and be inspired
any time and from anywhere you are.

Breathing always takes place in the exact and only moment that
Reality is present. When your mind is focusing on a past event,
or thinking about something that might happen in the future,
or just chattering about "whatever", the cliche "get real!" is
applicable and appropriate. Many traditions suggest that as
witnessing your breath is a reboot into experiencing your life
as it actually takes place, it is one of the most effective
meditation techniques you can easily, effectively and beneficially
do. There isn't even any $3000 charge to pay like there is when
some organizations charge you for a Mantra, and yet there will
never be a time when you are alive when the sound breathing makes
isn't right there in the moment for you to merge with.

It has been said that Enlightenment/God will come in a flash and
one should be empty, ready and open to fill with the divine gift
that eternally, infinitely and blissfully is our sorrow ending birthright. You
have to be present to receive this present, and
your breath can be the key that opens your door to let the holy
energy in. But this, and you, can only "Be" if you actually use
your breath to keep the door open.

Peace and blessing,
Bob

Heaven and hell

by Paulo Coelho on February 11, 2008


A violent samurai warrior with a reputation for p
rovoking fights for no reason arrived at the gates
of a Zen monastery and asked to speak to the master.

Without hesitating, Ryokan went to meet him.

`They say that intelligence is more powerful than brute force,'
said the samurai. `Can you explain to me what heaven and hell are?'

Ryokan said nothing.

`You see?' bellowed the samurai. `I could explain quite easily:
to show someone what hell is, you just have to punch them.
To show them what heaven is, you just have threaten them with terrible violence
and then let them go.'

`I don't talk to stupid people like you,' said the Zen master.

The blood rushed to the samurai's head. His brain became thick
with hatred.

`That is hell,' said Ryokan, smiling. `Allowing yourself to be
upset by silly remarks.'

Taken aback by the monk's courage, the samurai warrior softened.

`And that is heaven,' said Ryokan, inviting him in. `Not reacting
to foolish provocations.'

Dear Friends,

I hope you are all doing well. I wanted to inform you that I just
published a new article, Meditation for Beginners, which some of you may
find helpful. It may be of particular interest to those who are just
starting their practice, or who may still be unclear about how to
meditate.

This article discusses some of the basic techniques of mindfulness
meditation, so beginners can get off to a good start, and begin making
immediate progress. You can read the full article it at:
http://wp.me/p22v0Y-vN

I hope it helps you on your spiritual journey.

Warm regards,
Charles A. Francis
http://www.MindfulnessMeditationInstitute.org/

P.S. Please remember to share it with others. Thanks!

"To know what you are you must first investigate
and know what you are not. And to know what you
are not, you must watch yourself carefully, rejecting
all that does not necessarily go with basic fact
`I am'. The ideas: I am born at a given place, at a
given time, from my parents and now I am so-and-so,
living at, married to, father of, employed by, and
so on, are not inherent in the sense `I am'. Our usual
attitude is `I am this' or `that'. Separate consistently
and perseveringly the `I am' from `this' or `that' and
try to feel what it means to be, just to `be', without
being `this' or `that'. All our habits go against it
and the task of fighting them is long and hard sometimes,
but clear understanding helps a lot. The clearer you
understand that on the level of the mind you can be
described in negative terms only the quicker you will
come to the end of your search and realize your limitless being."

The Solar System Within

"We have a solar system within us. The body itself is
a solar system; we have the sun within us. The inner
sun is the sun of consciousness. With the inner consciousness,
which we call the Self, Atman or the Atmic Sun, we understand everything. And
just as the sun gives light and doesn't have
any partiality but gives equally to everybody, the inner spirit,
or Atman, just shines as pure consciousness itself. In the
world of ignorance, which is darkness, the mind, which is
our moon, receives the light of the consciousness (the Atma,
or the sun) and reflects it on the worldly ignorance, the
darkness. Once the real sunshine comes, the world will appear
to be different—you see the entire world in a different way.
That is the spiritual vision.

"God bless you. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti."

  Join Satchidananda Ashram's Satsang every Saturday evening

and share the archive with friends.

  7:30pm Eastern, with Livestream

new.livestream.com/yogaville

I when some peoplengo on fast they avoid food and drink juices. I was just
wondering is that really consider fasting because your giving and sor feeding of
sugar if u get were I going with this and fastingnis supose to be a bout
clensing and breaking bodies will

I never had fasted and my question is ist still consider that u fasting when
your drinking juice. M.the impression that I getting that it isnt because your
body is trying to detox and instead its filling up on sugar. But idk what is
your opinion on this

P.s im considering on going on a fast