Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Meditation Society of America] 7 Chakras Crop Circle

Expand Messages
  • jodyrrr
    ... The Matrix was an exceedingly poor metaphor for advaita and nondual thinking in general, and it has only served to fill peoples heads with even more
    Message 1 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Pradheepkumar
      Chhalliyil <pradheep53556@y...> wrote:

      > what is kundalini...how does it help in our spiritual path.
      > what does activate kundalini. these questions are answered
      > at a very different level in this site, using the very popular
      > movies matrix.
      > www.matrixjourney.com

      The "Matrix" was an exceedingly poor metaphor for advaita and
      nondual thinking in general, and it has only served to fill
      peoples heads with even more ridiculous and unrealistic
      expectations about self-realization and what it means to an
      individual's life.

      1. There is nothing *at all* special about "the one" in
      the truth of vedanta.

      2. There is no real world beyond the "Matrix." This is
      it, right now. The world is the ashram. Samadhi is samsara.
      You're soaking in it, Madge.

      3. When one realizes themselves as "the one," nothing
      changes outside of one's self-understanding. No special
      powers are acquired, no special knowledge is had, everything
      is just as it was beforehand, outside of the presence of
      jnana, which tells us nothing beyond the truth of our own
      being.

      --jody.
    • Pradheepkumar Chhalliyil
      1. There is nothing *at all* special about the one in the truth of vedanta. The One is vedanta is the one consciousness (Brahman). 2. There is no real
      Message 2 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        1. There is nothing *at all* special about "the one" in
           the truth of vedanta.
         
        The "One" is vedanta is the "one" consciousness (Brahman).

        2. There is no real world beyond the "Matrix."  This is
           it, right now.  The world is the ashram. Samadhi is samsara.
           You're soaking in it, Madge.
         
        Matrix is not real, it is the projection of the mind. The consciousness is the real world, from which everything seemingly gets created, sustained and destroyed.

        3. When one realizes themselves as "the one," nothing
           changes outside of one's self-understanding.  No special
           powers are acquired, no special knowledge is had, everything
           is just as it was beforehand, outside of the presence of
           jnana, which tells us nothing beyond the truth of our own
           being.
         
        Yes , you re-iterated about "consciousness" or Brahan.  No powers are needed and nothing changes. it is like watching a movie, you were so engrossed watching a movie that you became the character. In an instance you are aware that you are watching the movie. To know that we are the movie audience does not need any power, no speical knowledge, everything was, is and will be the same as before.
         
        That moment when we forgot ourself, is the moments we are discussing about through the internet. To one who is fully aware that he is watching the movie, somtimes helps a near by audience who is crying seeing a tragic frame in the movie screen. The technique he uses, is to tap on the person's shoulder and say "hey its not real, you are watching a movie".

         
         


         Please buy this book from http://www.matrixjourney.com
         


        Do you Yahoo!?
        New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

      • jodyrrr
        ... Right. And one who knows himself as the One is not special, as the one was in the movie. In other words, we are all the One right now, whether or
        Message 3 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Pradheepkumar
          Chhalliyil <pradheep53556@y...> wrote:
          > 1. There is nothing *at all* special about "the one" in
          > the truth of vedanta.
          >
          > The "One" is vedanta is the "one" consciousness (Brahman).

          Right. And one who knows himself as the "One" is not
          special, as "the one" was in the movie. In other words,
          we are all the "One" right now, whether or not we are
          directly aware of it. Becoming directly aware of it
          doesn't make us any different than we were before.
          Those who know themselves as the "One" know this.
          Those who don't yet know themselves as the "One"
          prevent their own understanding from becoming apparent,
          as their heads of full of occluding expectations
          about what being the "One" will be like, thanks in
          part to the poor metaphors provided by movies such
          as the "Matrix."

          > 2. There is no real world beyond the "Matrix." This is
          > it, right now. The world is the ashram. Samadhi is samsara.
          > You're soaking in it, Madge.
          >
          > Matrix is not real, it is the projection of the mind. The
          > consciousness is the real world, from which everything seemingly
          > gets created, sustained and destroyed.

          No. Consciousness sustains *this* world. There is no
          other world. Your belief in such creates an incorrect
          assumption about reality, based on your *interpretation*
          of Vedanta.

          This is it, buddy. Get used to it, or don't. However,
          your waiting on another world which doesn't exist will
          only have you waiting for something that will not come.
          You are it, this is it, there isn't anywhere else or
          nothing else you need to be. It's here, it's now, it's
          real, and it's all there is. It's all right in front of
          you, right here, right now.

          > 3. When one realizes themselves as "the one," nothing
          > changes outside of one's self-understanding. No special
          > powers are acquired, no special knowledge is had, everything
          > is just as it was beforehand, outside of the presence of
          > jnana, which tells us nothing beyond the truth of our own
          > being.
          >
          > Yes , you re-iterated about "consciousness" or Brahan. No powers
          > are needed and nothing changes. it is like watching a movie, you
          > were so engrossed watching a movie that you became the character.

          It's more like this: all you've ever known of yourself is of
          your character. Your sense of identity formed in the context
          of your being an individual actor on the world stage. You
          don't know yourself as you really are, because you've only
          known yourself as you believe you are, and you've been led
          to believe such by the circumstances of your life, based on
          the *idea* that you are an individual having experiences.

          > In an instance you are aware that you are watching the movie.

          No. In an instant you become aware that you are 'this',
          devoid of any and all attributes and characteristics.
          Perfectly empty and not of this world at all. However,
          the world keeps turning, and you remain the individual
          you thought you were, even within the context of knowing
          yourself as utterly beyond and transcending everything.

          > To
          > know that we are the movie audience does not need any power, no
          > speical knowledge, everything was, is and will be the same as
          > before.

          Correct. It's right here, right now, closer than our
          own breath, in everyone. Murders and saints included.

          > That moment when we forgot ourself, is the moments we are
          > discussing about through the internet. To one who is fully aware
          > that he is watching the movie, somtimes helps a near by audience
          > who is crying seeing a tragic frame in the movie screen. The
          > technique he uses, is to tap on the person's shoulder and say "hey
          > its not real, you are watching a movie".

          It's not about forgetting, my friend. Not at all.
          It's about seeing the plainly obvious, which is also
          mysteriously subtle. The first time it is seen, it's
          astonishing to the seer how it was ever missed. It
          is instantly recognized to be something that was
          *always* there. Not found, or discovered, but revealed
          by the Mother of illusion Herself.

          --jody.
        • Pradheepkumar Chhalliyil
          And one who knows himself as the One is not special, as the one was in the movie. The movie is a metaphor and represents how the minds are. There isnt any
          Message 4 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
              And one who knows himself as the "One" is not
            special, as "the one" was in the movie.
             
            The movie is a metaphor and represents how the minds are. There isnt any one else , other than consciousness, which is clearly the take home message in revolutions. As the sufi saying goes "An idiot looks at the finger that points the moon". We should not look at the symbols in the movie but the intended meaning.
             

            No.  Consciousness sustains *this* world.  There is no
            other world.  Your belief in such creates an incorrect
            assumption about reality, based on your *interpretation*
            of Vedanta.
            I did not say there is a real and unreal world, I said the world is a projection of the mind and I did not say there is another world. There is only one thing that is real, that is Brahman (cosnciousness) alone. Where is the question of mis-interpretation.
             

              However,
            your waiting on another world which doesn't exist will
            only have you waiting for something that will not come.
            You are it, this is it, there isn't anywhere else or
            nothing else you need to be.  It's here, it's now, it's
            real, and it's all there is.  It's all right in front of
            you, right here, right now.
             
            Yes, there is no waiting for relaization or for another world. it is always there.

            It's not about forgetting, my friend.  Not at all.
            It's about seeing the plainly obvious, which is also
            mysteriously subtle.  The first time it is seen, it's
            astonishing to the seer how it was ever missed.  It
            is instantly recognized to be something that was
            *always* there.  Not found, or discovered, but revealed
            by the Mother of illusion Herself.
             
            "Forgetting" is the language of the mind...in reality there is nothing like that. Words, metaphors could be misleading if one does not get it, like looking at the branch of the tree instead of the bird that is pointed at.
             
            Consciousness" is always there, not found not discovered, not even revealed by mother of illusion. Illusion again is the language of the mind. Consciousness was, is will be never be masked by illusion. Infact there is no illusion from the absolute point and there is no even need for a discussion and explaination....all this at the relative level.


             Please buy this book from http://www.matrixjourney.com
             


            Do you Yahoo!?
            Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
          • jodyrrr
            ... But that meaning wasn t intended by the authors, it is projected by the viewers. If the authors did intend to imbue their movie with nondual truth, they
            Message 5 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Pradheepkumar
              Chhalliyil <pradheep53556@y...> wrote:
              > And one who knows himself as the "One" is not
              > special, as "the one" was in the movie.
              >
              > The movie is a metaphor and represents how the minds are.
              > There isnt any one else , other than consciousness, which
              > is clearly the take home message in revolutions. As the sufi
              > saying goes "An idiot looks at the finger that points the moon".
              > We should not look at the symbols in the movie but the intended
              > meaning.

              But that meaning wasn't intended by the authors, it is
              projected by the viewers. If the authors did intend to
              imbue their movie with nondual truth, they did so from
              the perspective of speculation about nondual truth, rather
              than from a true experiential understanding.

              IOW, if they were talking about nondual truth, they
              were talking out of their hats.

              > No. Consciousness sustains *this* world. There is no
              > other world. Your belief in such creates an incorrect
              > assumption about reality, based on your *interpretation*
              > of Vedanta.
              >
              > I did not say there is a real and unreal world, I said the
              > world is a projection of the mind and I did not say there
              > is another world. There is only one thing that is real, that
              > is Brahman (cosnciousness) alone. Where is the question of
              > mis-interpretation.

              This world is the receptacle of the mind's projections,
              but it is here whether or not we are realized. IOW, the
              world is just as real to the realized. If you are realized
              and decide to jump off a freeway overpass, a very real
              semi-truck is likely to flatten the body you appear to
              inhabit.

              Everything is Brahman, and yet those who know themselves
              as Brahman still acknowledge the world. Sankara loved
              the world as his own Mother. He came to this understanding
              late in his life, after existing in the world as a jnani.

              > However,
              > your waiting on another world which doesn't exist will
              > only have you waiting for something that will not come.
              > You are it, this is it, there isn't anywhere else or
              > nothing else you need to be. It's here, it's now, it's
              > real, and it's all there is. It's all right in front of
              > you, right here, right now.
              >
              > Yes, there is no waiting for relaization or for another
              > world. it is always there.

              Right on.

              > It's not about forgetting, my friend. Not at all.
              > It's about seeing the plainly obvious, which is also
              > mysteriously subtle. The first time it is seen, it's
              > astonishing to the seer how it was ever missed. It
              > is instantly recognized to be something that was
              > *always* there. Not found, or discovered, but revealed
              > by the Mother of illusion Herself.
              >
              > "Forgetting" is the language of the mind...in reality
              > there is nothing like that. Words, metaphors could be
              > misleading if one does not get it, like looking at the
              > branch of the tree instead of the bird that is pointed at.

              I'm just calling it as I (and others I know) have seen
              it. In my opinion, using the language of "forgetting" is
              likely to create the unrealistic expectation that we can
              and should attempt to forget ourselves. Trying to do this
              would be like trying to forget that we are air breathers
              while swimming. You are likely to drown doing so.

              > Consciousness" is always there, not found not discovered,
              > not even revealed by mother of illusion.

              But it is only by the Mother of Illusion (Maya) that we
              are revealed to ourselves as Brahman. So says Sankara.

              > Illusion again is the language of the mind. Consciousness
              > was, is will be never be masked by illusion. Infact there
              > is no illusion from the absolute point and there is no
              > even need for a discussion and explaination....all this
              > at the relative level.

              Nonetheless, people are running around trying to dispel
              illusion, using the "Matrix" metaphor as a platform. It's
              a waste of time, IYAM, and so I expressed myself in the
              context of your sales pitch.

              --jody.
            • Pradheepkumar Chhalliyil
              But that meaning wasn t intended by the authors, it is projected by the viewers. If the authors were not aware of it, they would not have used nine different
              Message 6 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                But that meaning wasn't intended by the authors, it is
                projected by the viewers.

                If the authors were not aware of it, they would not have used nine different upanishad chantings in the matrix revolutions. They would not have made the ending parallel to puranas.
                 so I expressed myself in the context of your sales pitch.
                 
                Not doing sales and killing is the book would be as good as your example of standign in the highway and killing yourselves and understanding the "reality". It is the mosconception that "realing the reality" would hamper life on earth. Infact one starts to actually "live" (relative) after knowign the reality, just like Adhi-sankara did. Otherwise he would not have written hymns and handed over to generations. Hope you are now "clar".


                 Please buy this book from http://www.matrixjourney.com
                 


                Do you Yahoo!?
                New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
              • jodyrrr
                ... Chanting the Upanishads and jnana are two *completely* different things. I will reiterate, if the writers did include their mental concepts of nonduality,
                Message 7 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Pradheepkumar
                  Chhalliyil <pradheep53556@y...> wrote:
                  > But that meaning wasn't intended by the authors, it is
                  > projected by the viewers.
                  >
                  > If the authors were not aware of it, they would not have used
                  > nine different upanishad chantings in the matrix revolutions.
                  > They would not have made the ending parallel to puranas.

                  Chanting the Upanishads and jnana are two *completely*
                  different things. I will reiterate, if the writers did
                  include their mental concepts of nonduality, they were talking
                  out of their hats. It was just more speculation based
                  on a conceptual analysis of the Upanishads, done so within
                  the alien context of Western thinking by the way. All
                  that has as much to do with jnana as my dog's ass.

                  IOW, nothing.

                  > so I expressed myself in the context of your sales pitch.
                  >
                  > Not doing sales and killing is the book would be as good
                  > as your example of standign in the highway and killing
                  > yourselves and understanding the "reality". It is the
                  > mosconception that "realing the reality" would hamper
                  > life on earth. Infact one starts to actually "live"
                  > (relative) after knowign the reality, just like
                  > Adhi-sankara did. Otherwise he would not have written
                  > hymns and handed over to generations. Hope you are now "clar".

                  I'm trying to be clear that the metaphors provided by
                  the "Matrix" movies are very poor in terms of helping
                  one to come to jnana, IMO. Reading the Upanishads and
                  jnana are two *very* different cases, and attempting
                  to glean authentic nondual understanding from the
                  "Matrix" moves is even further away than just sticking
                  with the shastras themselves.

                  --jody.
                • Pradheepkumar Chhalliyil
                  I m trying to be clear that the metaphors provided by the Matrix movies are very poor in terms of helping one to come to jnana, You may feel so, but for a
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I'm trying to be clear that the metaphors provided by
                    the "Matrix" movies are very poor in terms of helping
                    one to come to jnana,
                     
                    You may feel so, but for a person like me, Matrix is much for apt for this century than the snake and rope analogy, because these day no one has a direct expeirence of stepping on a rope because of not going out barefooted in a rainy dark night. But computers we step in and out in every walk of life.
                     
                    YOu might be biased about the nature of the movie and so try to resist to see the upanishad message in the movie. To tell the truth, for a "seer" any metaphor would make sense.


                     Please buy this book from http://www.matrixjourney.com
                     


                    Do you Yahoo!?
                    Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.
                  • Bruce Morgen
                    ... Substituting a fallacious (albeit modern) metaphor for an worn, anachronistic one above an oversized Please buy this book entreaty not only lacks
                    Message 9 of 11 , Jul 30, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Pradheepkumar Chhalliyil wrote:

                      > *I'm trying to be clear that the metaphors provided by
                      > the "Matrix" movies are very poor in terms of helping
                      > one to come to jnana, *
                      >
                      > You may feel so, but for a person like me, Matrix is much for apt for
                      > this century than the snake and rope analogy, because these day no one
                      > has a direct expeirence of stepping on a rope because of not going out
                      > barefooted in a rainy dark night. But computers we step in and out in
                      > every walk of life.
                      >
                      > YOu might be biased about the nature of the movie and so try to resist
                      > to see the upanishad message in the movie. To tell the truth, for a
                      > "seer" any metaphor would make sense.
                      >
                      Substituting a fallacious
                      (albeit modern) metaphor for an
                      worn, anachronistic one above
                      an oversized "Please buy this
                      book" entreaty not only lacks
                      credibility, it insults the
                      perceptiveness and intelligence
                      of ones potential customers,
                      er, I mean, fellow "seers."
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.