|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
 Posted - Jan 10 2006 : 10:48:51 PM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~~
Hello All,
Seems alls well on the AYP front...so, I thought I would just post this. I think about these things a bit, and wondered if any of you sadhu's ponder things like this...you may say "this guy needs a hobby!" .
As one meditates, perception and contemplation changes and many say their view of the world is refined or improves. So, a great wonder to you 2-3 years ago, may be of little interest or surprise today with your new vision.
So, if I asked you, What is the greatest wonder you have of this world, this life? what would you say?
If I may, let me start off with one from a king, that reined several thousand years ago , a very enlightened king as the story goes, named Yudhiäthira (from yudhi, “in the battle”, and sthira, “calm, undisturbed”)
He is asked What is the greatest wonder of the world?
Yudhiäthira without hesitation answers, "Every day, men see creatures depart [die] from this world, yet those who live, live as though they live forever. This is the greatest wonder of the World"
Do you have one?
just a thought...
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Jan 11 2006 : 10:11:10 AM
|
For me the greatest wonder is that there actually is anything.
This is truly amazing.
|
 |
|
|
snake
United Kingdom
277 Posts |
Posted - Jan 11 2006 : 12:31:46 PM
|
| For me the greatest wonder is how much time we spend not present, so we end up having lived very little |
|
|
|
love
USA
34 Posts |
Posted - Jan 11 2006 : 1:17:24 PM
|
| The greatest wonder to me is me being here in my body realizing myself. |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 11 2006 : 8:23:38 PM
|
That people actually believe that intelligent life could spring forth from primordial ooze by chance, given enough time.
|
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 11 2006 : 8:36:03 PM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~
quote:
Originally posted by david_obsidian
For me the greatest wonder is that there actually is anything.
This is truly amazing.
Hello David, wondered if I can poke around on this one, cause I was think'n that myself... do you mean due to this universe and how really really volatile and violent it is ( meteors. gamma rays, black wholes, exploding nova, universes colliding , etc etc) yet we are serene on this little blue ball in the middle of this?
I am a big science channel viewer and watch all the astonomy stuff and its so interesting on just how 'intelligent' this whole system is, and so 'gentle' on this side of the cosmos.
Wondered what you think?
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 11 2006 : 8:38:58 PM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~~quote:
Originally posted by snake
For me the greatest wonder is how much time we spend not present, so we end up having lived very little
Hello Snake,
Can you help? I don't get 'not present'... you mean not in the 'now' and being aware of the environment around us or?
thanks
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Jan 12 2006 : 09:45:06 AM
|
Frank,
I mean that it is amazing that anything 'exists' at all. I mean, it would be so much easier, and in a way, so much more 'natural' if nothing existed -- in other words if there was just this great big void --- a vast expanse of nothingness and nothing else. That would seem to be the natural state of existence.
Indeed, in a sense it is true that there is only that, or, rather, only that is permanent and real. The rest is fleeting shadows, there while they are there, and, when and where they no longer exist, they never have been.
|
|
|
|
Manipura
USA
870 Posts |
Posted - Jan 12 2006 : 10:41:33 AM
|
| The 2 fundamental questions of metaphysics: Why is there something, rather than nothing? And, Why the 'why'? |
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 12 2006 : 9:28:22 PM
|
Haro Om
~~~~~~
quote:
Originally posted by david_obsidian
I mean that it is amazing that anything 'exists' at all. I mean, it would be so much easier, and in a way, so much more 'natural' if nothing existed --
Hello David,
thx for the explanation... yea, I see your point. Especially when you think about some of the laws of nature such as preservation of energy, the path of least resistance e.g. for water, electricity, lightening, people  that also extends to the cosmos. Yet when cosmologist now look deep in space that are surprised of what they they see/measure. You probably know it was conventional wisdom that the universe was slowing down, stop, then collapse back onto itself. Now they measurements show the universe continues to accelerate and expand more and more… oooops - stop the presses and re-write all the science text books, we goofed!
That said, the 'system' is designed around the preserving energy, yet its pumping it out to expand... so it seems that the easiest mega-path for preservation and of least resistance is nothing at all! Go figure, eh?
Peace
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 21 2006 : 12:34:23 AM
|
There might be a million other universes where nothing exists. but only
in this one is anyone here to speculate. |
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 21 2006 : 2:45:36 PM
|
Hari OM
~~~~~~~
quote:
Originally posted by Etherfish
There might be a million other universes where nothing exists. but only in this one is anyone here to speculate.
Hello Etherfish - I have heard this before i.e. multiple universes. Care to help? - I have a bit of a brain cramp here, and not heard of a good ( digestible) explanation.
When I think of the universe ( "uni" unity in the mist of "verse" diversity) I think of its completeness - every possible permutation of every thing seen and un-seen in this total space ( akasha) is contained in 'universe'. If there are multiple universes, is it out side of this one? If so it does not meet the initial defintion of every thing. I cannot conceive of even one more universe let alone 100's or 1,000's outside of this one. This does not mean it is not so!
The Brain cramp comes from IF there are multiple universes then the MACRO-universe is the the compliation of all of them, and is sill called the universe!
If one says there are various layers and strata of this universe ( the sages of yore think there are 14 levels) , even those all fit 'above and below' into this nice word of universe.
What's your thoughts on this???
Ekam Sad Viprah Bahudha Vadanti - Truth is ONE, Sages call it variously
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
Richard
United Kingdom
857 Posts |
Posted - Jan 21 2006 : 3:22:46 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Etherfish
There might be a million other universes where nothing exists. but only
in this one is anyone here to speculate.
I can only think of the universe as one. But I can conceive of multiple realities within it. A bit like the chaos theory all those butterflies flapping their wings ...or not!!!
RICHARD |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 22 2006 : 10:55:14 AM
|
I wasn't quoting anybody about other universes; only tongue-in-cheek speculating. Actually I believe a universe without the perceiver cannot exist. Universes are made of God energy; points of perception are made of God energy; a "universe" with nobody in it to discuss it is just word play.
Astrophysicists have speculated that the universe could be curved back in on itself like a circle. So that would imply an outer border, and the possibility of another universe.
I think of the universe as being all places that could be reached physically from here, given enough time and transportation.
So if there is another one, it just can't be physically reached from this one.
For instance, the astral plane. it's probably semantics. You probably don't call a plane a universe, but nevertheless, you can't get there from here. |
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 22 2006 : 10:48:21 PM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~
quote:
Originally posted by Etherfish
Astrophysicists have speculated that the universe could be curved back in on itself like a circle. So that would imply an outer border, and the possibility of another universe.
Hello Etherfish,
I love the choice of words you selected... In some of the Vedas/Purana's Krsna says " curving back onto my Self I create again and again" Perhaps you know more 'bout this then all of us!! ((( )))
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Jan 23 2006 : 10:52:24 AM
|
Frank said
Hello Etherfish - I have heard this before i.e. multiple universes.
Frank,
I'll clear that up. People do speak of 'multiple universes' in a sensible way, meaning that those 'universes' have no effect on each other, and are not part of the same space-time or anything.
Yes, it is true that if there is more than one, then a single 'universe' is not THE ALL. It might jar with your notion of what the world 'universe' should mean (or what it means to you, which is more like THE ALL) but that is only language.
Note, by the way that, from the point of view of THE ALL, if there are multiple universes, it is probably not true that one of them happened before or after the othere. Time sequence is probably within the universes only.
|
|
|
|
Guy_51
USA
170 Posts |
Posted - Jan 23 2006 : 12:43:14 PM
|
| Hi Frank, My greatest wonder in this world is my 9 year old son Robert. Simple but true. Guy |
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 23 2006 : 9:23:02 PM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~~
quote:
Originally posted by david_obsidian
Yes, it is true that if there is more than one, then a single 'universe' is not THE ALL.
Note, by the way that, from the point of view of THE ALL, if there are multiple universes, it is probably not true that one of them happened before or after the othere. Time sequence is probably within the universes only.
David, thx for taking a stab at this... I find it interesting. My 'brain cramp' is not so much that it is or isn't possible, but as you say, one of words. Even if other universes are of a different time-sequence, I can say 'yep', sure some more diversity and a different set of rules work there.
What does not work for my cognition is to consider 'different space'. I cannot conceive of two different kinds of space.
[Again, I am not pushing back on possibilities here]. When I think of space, aksha, void, empty-ness. I cannot conceive of a different type of space. For me, it's like saying there are two different types of the Absolute, or Pure consciousness. If there's two , then it is not the Absolute - this is my conundrum.
Perhaps, when we say there are different layers of the universe, with different time zones, and completely different laws of nature, I can get that.
But if it exists, it exists in some kind of akasha. Even the 'mind akasha' in a great Being, I can appreciate that too, but at the end of the day my concept is in the 'Total' part of the universe. So every Being that has a Universe in their consciousness + the consciousness of the general universe, when added together = Total Universe for me... just one of 'em.
IN the Yoga-vasisthi (worth the read), Vasistha discusses multiple universes too, yet never describes the 'physics' or the differences, framework, etc behind it. So, I took it as multiple galaxies.
If you can come up with one of your great metaphors or allegories to assist me with a new 'jolt' of an idea , I'd love it.
Thanks!
Peace,
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
mystiq
India
62 Posts |
Posted - Jan 24 2006 : 02:03:04 AM
|
What is not a wonder? Everything is a wonder including myself, and everyday we come across new wonders which in no way diminish the old ones. No explanation is sufficient for anything. Nothing can be explained away.
mystiq |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 24 2006 : 08:41:17 AM
|
I think it's all a matter of semantics. Of course there is just one akasha because there is one god, and if nothingness has no attributes, there can't be two types of nothingness. It's just a matter of limited technology, and the concept of "you can't get there from here."
For instance, before they built ocean going ships, the americas might as well have been a different universe than the european continent.
and in that way, another galaxy is the same as another universe to us today,
because we can't get there from here. Whether the laws of physics there are different from here we don't know. We think we know, but we don't. Once we discover a way to travel millions of light years, we also will have broken a time barrier, so we may discover "universes" we don't know about here and now.
A lot of us have seen the astral world, and other planes, mostly not knowing where we were, but what is for sure is we can't get there from here using transportation we use here.
So it would also follow that it's near impoissible to comprehend what those universes are, using the reasoning we use here. i mean i've seen a little of the astral world, but I can't tell you anything scientific about it, only that it's real, and compelling and complete within itself.
Etherfish |
|
|
|
david_obsidian
USA
2602 Posts |
Posted - Jan 24 2006 : 10:18:15 AM
|
Frank,
human beings in general cannot visualize in dimensions more than three. A small fraction can, and apparently Stephen Hawking is one of them, which may be one reason why he is so good at what he does. So it is hard for us to get a 'picture' of multiple three-dimensional spaces.
But we can get a picture of it by analogy. You may have heard of this analogy before.
Imagine a two-dimensional space with two-dimensional creatures in it. If their space is infinite, they might look to us like flat creatures living right inside a flat and infinitely large, infinitely thin plate of glass. Got that picture? They are flat and **inside** the flat glass. They cannot look outside the glass. The lines of sight from their eyes trace lines inside the glass sheet.
Now instead of an infinitely large and flat plate of glass, imagine an enormous glass bubble. Again, the flat creatures live **inside the surface** of the enormous glass bubble. In the example, their space is not actually infinite, because it curves on itself.
Now, imagine lots of such bubbles in our space.
Things that happen within a particular glass bubble affect other things inside the same glass bubble, but have no affect on things that happen inside other glass bubbles.
These flat-creatures have no ability to visualize in three dimensions (though there is a Flat-Hawking who can visualize in three and more dimensions). So they have a difficulty visualizing the picture of their living in separate, closed three-dimensional universes.
They have a difficulty visualizing it, but they can conceptualize it.
Likewise we as three-dimensional creatures have a difficulty visualizing the possibility of separate three-dimensional spaces. But we can conceptualize it, and if we want to visualize it, we may be stuck with visualizing the two-dimensional analogy -- I certainly am.
Now regarding 'akasha', watch out for semantics. To those 2D creatures in the glass bubble, their 'space' is the 2D glass bubble and they may call their glass bubble space 'akasha'. Within that word-definition though, it would NOT be true that not all is accessible through 'akasha'.
But they may use the word 'akasha' to refer to THE ALL. This is, in our rough analogy, the 3D space which contains all of the glass bubbles. The 2D creatures can conceptualize this, but cannot visualize it. This is probably closer to the intended meaning of 'akasha'.
Likewise, I think that the intended meaning of 'akasha' is more than our four-dimensional space-time. It is the fabric in which all space-time universes exist. Our entire space-time is only a part of akasha.
Akasha = space of THE ALL
Contains : 'universes'
Universes contain galaxies
Galaxies contain solar systems
Solar systems contain planets
I hope that helps,
Regards,
-David
|
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 25 2006 : 05:54:34 AM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~
Hello David/etherfish
thx for your help on this...good analogies. Let me extend the conversation one more idea. This is just some thinking I have had for a while and thought to put it to paper.
When talking of a multi-dimensional universe, physicists are considering super-sting set theory e.g. 10 dimensions http://www.sukidog.com/jpierre/stri...extradim.htm if you care to take a look ( the Hawkins's world I believe).
From this multidimensional idea ( not super sting stuff) let me develop an idea I have been kicking around - you folks critique it and comment/kick it as you care to...it may have some entertainment value.
Setting the Stage
In our 'space' its considered in 5 dimensions:
X,Y,Z ( length, height, depth) + Time + Space ( with time, having past, present, future states) - so say the experts.
So, if we look at these 5 dimensions that are accepted: 'space' is X,Y,Z + Time: past+present+future = 6 components to Space + Time.
What are other components ? Cause, or an action that happens in Space+Time. Now there are 6 components: X,Y,Z + past+present+future + cause. What's next? effect from the cause. So, now there's (X,Y,Z) +(past+present+future) + (Cause+effect).
Why do I add Cause+Effect ? As far as I can tell this is a fundamental axiom of the universe we live in a universe that operates like this: IF this happens, THEN that happens, ELSE ___
(nice programming language statement eh?)
Delivering another 'Universe'
Now we have 8 components of SPACE+TIME+CAUSE + EFFECT universe ~ = to Akasa(space) + Kalpa or Kali (time) + Karma (cause+effect)
If we can add or alter one of the 8 components perhaps you may have a glimpse of another 'universe'.
What can be done by humans to alter this fabric of SPACE+TIME+CAUSE + EFFECT ? Its my contention that becoming enlightened alters this universe or adds another dimension.
How so? Its my understanding that when one becomes fully enlightened the fabric of cause and effect ( called the 3 gunas - rajas, tamas, sattva) gets retired , or becomes 'like a roasted seed' they bear no fruit. So, what happens to the individual? There is no more binding karmic actions - this is the notion of freedom or liberation in a Moksa state. It's not freedom of choice - we have that today ( choose the action you care to, but w/o perfect control over the fruit of ones actions ). In Moksha , ones actions are non-binding. Because of this, there is no boundary to space and time, because no one action locks the person into a particular space-time point. The person is now unbounded.
PERHAPs at this time the universe opens up to all the dimensions that are possible, all the permutations available. Now this person is working with the 'raw materials' of any universe possible - FULL consciousness w/o any boundary what so ever ...not constrained by any dimension.
Perhaps this person can (choose)to be in any universe that is possible? Because , as I believe and think it through, any universe of any permutation to be known or unknown to our level of perception or existence, must have a fundamental building block even subtler then my favorite, akasha, and that is consciousness.
So, this person being of the "Absolute Consciousness" type is like your person David, that lived in Flat land (2 dimensional space) and developed to this completely new dimension and can see all the other 'universes' throughout. Yet the people below in 2D and 3D land can only conceive of 5D,6D....8D land.
Just a thought.
Frank In San Diego
|
Edited by - Frank-in-SanDiego on Jan 25 2006 07:22:41 AM |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 25 2006 : 11:23:19 PM
|
just a note:
Yes, I think definitely a result of unbounded consciousness would be removal of the barriers between universes. After all, it's all God energy, and all boundaries are illusions.
So being one with God would make consciousness of any point possible. unless there's another God in another system. but by then you would know that.
I hope i'm not making a fool of myself by not reading the link first, but is space a dimension?
I thought length, height, depth, and time defined space?
What's interesting about space is that the first three dimensions are defined by comparing them, either to themselves, or to a standard measurement. So length, width, and depth are the same type of measurement (distance) in different directions. But if you're travelling in space, there are no road markers, so the only way you can define the length of travel is by time and speed.
The only way you can define speed is by energy expended by your propulsion system, or triangulation to known celestial bodies. It's interesting to note that you are sort of quantifying nothing. Space travel is measured easier in time than distance.
Maybe I'm easily amused, but it seems mind boggling to me to think about this.
Let's say you're travelling between galaxies. Your engines are running, but there's no air, no water, no road between you and your destination. There's a vacuum. Nothing. So what are you doing? why does it take so long to traverse nothing? |
|
|
|
Frank-in-SanDiego
USA
363 Posts |
Posted - Jan 26 2006 : 11:29:08 PM
|
Hari Om
~~~~~~quote:
Originally posted by Etherfish
just a note:
I hope i'm not making a fool of myself by not reading the link first, but is space a dimension?
I thought length, height, depth, and time defined space?
Let's say you're traveling between galaxies. Your engines are running, but there's no air, no water, no road between you and your destination. There's a vacuum. Nothing. So what are you doing? why does it take so long to traverse nothing?
Hello Etherfish,
thcx for continuing this conversation...its kinda amusing and fun to kick 'round ideas like this - it stretches the imagination and doesn't really make a difference when it's all said and done .
re: Space - yes, height, width, depth ( or X,Y,Z coordinates)is one mathmatical way to define space... I don't think time is a factor , as it stands on its own e.g. past present and future.
re: Galaxy hopping - there is an interesting phenomenon as you approach the speed of light, the energy used to propel the craft increases the mass of the object you are propelling , so more energy is needed ( so says Mr. Einstein and how it was explained to me, Yet I no rocket scientist).
Now at speeds below that of light ' why does it take so long to get across space?' - its just a big place!
Even light take takes 100,000 years to go from one side of our galaxy to the other. Light from the sun to the earth ~ 7 min ( + or -. Light to Pluto ~ 5 hrs ( + or -).
We live in a big place and its mostly space ( aksaha) - that why I am so intrigued with it...even matter (stuff) is mostly space , even though it looks solid; much of every thing is akasha, nothing!
Go figure, eh?
Frank In San Diego
|
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Jan 27 2006 : 09:57:01 AM
|
Frank
I’m glad you excluded Time from the equation.
If you consider Time which comprises of Past, Present and Future.
The whole of evolution, the expansion of the universe, the growth of plants, the lives of animals are all totally dependant on time.
Without the passage of events from one instant to the next to the next to the next, none of it/us would exist in physical form.
It could be considered that Stillness is a state that takes a step out of this Time, not even to an instant but beyond an instant – and if we are in this state what do we experience – Pure Love (talking now from very very limited experience and from what others have said).
By going beyond Time then, we also go beyond the creation of the universe, beyond the Big Bang – what a journey, and its right in front of us.
(These are not facts, they are unproven insights  )
S
|
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Jan 27 2006 : 7:17:23 PM
|
I included time in the definition of space, because it's sort of integral;
two things can exist in the same space, but not at the same time. Time sort of connects our consciousness to space. The description of what exists in space is totally dependent on time. You can't keep anything the same in space for very long as time changes. Conversely, you can't hold the same time as you change things in space.
I do agree that inner silence helps us step outside time, also space by the way.
i know Frank, that this akasha is a big place; I should have said it was sort of a rhetorical question for pondering.
If you imagine being aboard one of the intergalactic transporation modes we have now, just think about what it would be like:
the engines running for years. The rest of your entire life you would be in the same metal box. When you look out the window, things would never seem to change. You would know you are travelling, but it wouldn't seem like it. I bet you would come to grips with what life is really about! I bet a lot of people wish they could be left alone forever to meditate all the time, but don't really realize what that would mean.
Etrfsh |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
A Great Wonder To You...
