IntentBlog
Previewing your Comment
Part 4: Continued from ''Perspectives on the King's New Dress ''.

The latest arguments offered by the author shows that he is running short of ideas to protect his theories by reshuffling what has been thrown in the previous posts. This inability to engage in dialogue with an alternative, if not much more advanced understanding of the given subject, is a sign of intellectual rigidity.

This line runs contradictory to what the author criticizes through his own writing.

A friendly suggestion, for the benefit of the readers, it would be best if the author ignored completely our comments and clearly presented his scientifically based idea, instead of beating about the bush post after post trying to cover up his theory from getting wet.

Because the last two paragraphs are neither quantum science, nor the science of consciousness, but more like confused statements which are badly in need of being presented properly.

Personally, I would encourage the honorable gentleman not to be afraid to expand his vision on the subject. After all we all are learning, sharing and exploring together here.

With Love and Bliss

Jai Guru Dev

Part 4: Continued from ''Perspectives on the King's New Dress ''.

The latest arguments offered by the author shows that he is running short of ideas to protect his theories by reshuffling
what has been thrown in the previous posts. This inability to engage in dialogue with an alternative, if not much more advanced understanding of the given subject, is a sign of intellectual rigidity. This line runs contradictory to what the author criticizes through his own writing.

A friendly suggestion, for the benefit of the readers, it would be best if the author ignored completely our comments and clearly presented his scientifically based idea, instead of beating about the bush post after post trying to cover up his theory from getting wet.

Because the last two paragraphs are neither quantum science, nor the science of consciousness, but more like confused statements which are badly in need of being presented properly.

Personally, I would encourage the honorable gentleman not to be afraid to expand his vision on the subject. After all we all are learning, sharing and exploring together here.

With Love and Bliss

Jai Guru Dev

Part 4: Continued from ''Perspectives on the King's New Dress ''.

The latest arguments offered by the author shows that he is running short of ideas to protect his theories by reshuffling
what has been thrown in the previous posts. This inability to engage in dialogue with an alternative, if not much more advanced understanding of the given subject, is a sign of intellectual rigidity. This line runs contradictory to what the author criticizes through his own writing.

A friendly suggestion, for the benefit of the readers, it would be best if the author ignored completely our comments and clearly presented his scientifically based idea, instead of beating about the bush post after post trying to cover up his theory from getting wet.

Because the last two paragraphs are neither quantum science, nor the science of consciousness, but more like confused statements which are badly in need of being presented properly.

Personally, I would encourage the honorable gentleman not to be afraid to expand his vision on the subject. After all we all are learning, sharing and exploring together here.

With Love and Bliss

Jai Guru Dev

Apologies for the multiple entry there was a problem with posting. Love. igor

Avtar: The universe is a cosmos not a chaos...

That is the planet earth :)

Chaos is only found in the parts ...not in the whole. Suffering is the result of being one with the part and not the whole.

In other words....the universe vibrates in harmony...and so does earth if we let it vibrate to it's own vibration.

[if we let it vibrate to it's own vibration.]

What an ego!

Excellent critiques in Parts by Igor Kufayev.

The main defect in the article (and tens of previous posts by Avatar Singh on this topic)-- apart from the questionable way theoretical physics, Quantum Mechanics, Cosmology, Entropy as related to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and Theory of Relativity are used to support his theory of HR, and the contradictions as pointed out by some responders, which apparently show fundamental flaws and glaring holes in his claims and arguments -- is that he never mentions "HOW", show a way out, a path a road; or it might not be a defect, because every man has his own way to follow, according to his own make up. All paths concern "HOW", if one does not accept the basic premise - the ego has to go, and the ego rests on Superiority and Separateness- and recognizes it as absolutely true fact, then all man's endeavors are futile and useless.

A healthy ego is needed to function well in society, it has an opposing function of what is labeled in 'spiritual' circles as ego. This is a basis of the confusion around the term imo, which John analyzed brilliantly in the previous thread of this series.

'A Man = No Mind' who used to write in Avtar's threads might say... is it because, beside being a pompous ego he is an Einstein follower and teaches sceintific "understanding" to achieve oneness and egolessness?

A willingness to learn and change, and to develope genuine humility and become an objective self-critic is important to get a "control" over the ego.

I for one like your posts lately and find them pretty solid, unable to find the glaring holes, otherwise I would’ve said something. I must admit that the sciences are not my forte, But the subject is about the duality of good and evil (science of consciousness) that is relative to the personal mind so it struggles to find harmony with it. The mind or ego will go to fictitious metaphysical and scientific lengths to qualify it by showing favoritism, which in the end only binds one more to the personal mind or identity. While consciousness has no identity of its own and it choicelessly flows irrespective of the egos that lay claim to it, and we should flow with the natural process instead of against it. Not to separate and divide which the ego does but to except the multi diversity of life without stamping labels that stagnate our progress. ~Kurt~

Hello Avtar and Everyone,

I agree that humans need to develop a healthy ego to function well in the world. We must develop a healthy ego and become consciously aware of our own individual ego, aware of the importance it has played in our development so that we may consciously be aware of the importance, also, of the ego's dominance, the ego's control of our attention, the ego's role and importance in distracting our attention from our true identity. We must know our ego role because if we do not we do not understand why the ego must be subsumed, or dissolved..

from...the perfection of nothing...by rick lewis....

we must face REality, the static Truth of the Universe, the yawning abyss of Creation. This is death. Exactly and none other than death. So how can this be done? It must be clear that ego never can and never will choose such a thing. One way to trick ego is to use the cooking-a-frog technique. Make the work and progress so incremental that it hardly registers the dissolution of itself. But still, there is that final moment. And there is no way that ego is not going to notice in that final moment, no matter what the approach. This is the greatest miracle in the universe; the miracle in which ego willingly allows itelf to expire to allow the possibility of God) in its place.

have a grand day, ruth

Hello Avtar and Everyone,

I think I would have to say that the miracle of the ego, our ego, finally, realizing, finally, allowing, finally, understanding the necessity of it's own demise is in fact the ONE true miracle each and every human BEING has the possibility of performing, of desiring.

It is only with this miracle that we get to.......

also, from rick lewis and his perfection of nothing.... the deepest and most subtle feeling sense in the body..the presence of God itself. We come to know this through the body, through being willing to love...that is, feel...the body in its current state and fall into an intimacy with it through the use of our attention. That will take us to a place we never dreamed of or imagined we might arrive at through this human vehicle.

ruth

That's exactly what I meant, the missing of ''HOW'', as rightly pointed out by Irvine Welsh.

Going back to John's comment on the origin of the jargon ''ego'', I'd like to share my own observations based on the usage of the word in different times throughout the history.

I agree with the idea of the etymological misrepresentation of the term. The story with the indian gurus coming to the west, among whom where few real ones and quiet a few real con-artists. The problem with translating the sanskrit terminology, into modern English, the expressions which have been in use for at least two thousand years in a written and spoken form, is that sanskrit have the ability to combine few terms into a very long word and the meaning varies in accord with the combination.

Unique words (which didn’t have close enough alternative) like prana, yoga, asana, Samadhi, chakra, guru, shakti, and many others became an integral part of western vocabulary (not just English) in and outside of the spiritual circles. However the quiet complex in its diverse meaning words as Aham, Ahamkara, Asmita have all been brushed under one term - ego, which I agree with John is more of a jargon, when spoken ever so slightly outside of its context.

The Sanskrit words have very subtle philosophical as well as metaphysical connotations. For your consideration, the following is based on Sanskrit terms defined in English:

AHAM - ‘’I’’; ‘’I-awareness’’; the individual soul; self-consciousness;
The notion of the ego; ‘’I’’-consciousness; the pure inner Self.
~ As one can see the meanings of the same term vary from the lower self or egotistical individual to the higher or pure Self.
~ All depends in which context that term is being used and to what level of awareness it is applied.

The term Aham is the root of many important Vedantic sayings, like - Aham Brahmasmi ( I am the Absolute ).

AHAMKARA (or ahankara) – literally = ‘’the ‘I’- maker’’; ‘I’-ness; egoism; the concept of individuality;
~ Ahamkara is evolved out of Intellect (Buddhi) and give evolution to the senses (indriyas) and the subtle essence of the elements in turn.
~ It is a principal of individuation of Universal Mind ( Mahat) which gives rise to diversity.

ASMITA - egoism; state of concentration; an impurity; ‘’I-am-ness’’
~ One of the five afflictions of the mind, according to one of the schools. The erroneous identification of the self with the body-mind complex.
~ According to Yoga school, it is a state of unifying concentration where the intellect concentrates on pure substance free of modifications.

It is the meaning of Asmita which poses the most difficulties in interpreting traditions based on oral teaching and the interpretation of the ancient as well as modern hindu texts, because of its apparent opposing meaning.

* * *

John was spot on to suggest that the word (ego) is a by-product of a new age, and in its current use denotes a very narrow scope of its original prototype born on the Indian subcontinent.

However if one can probe (deeply) the true meaning of that deliberately provocative term, one runs the risk in loosing its gripping quality altogether. For potentially there is something, (which one feels a bit reluctant to spill it all out), a kind of revelation, for in actuality there is no individual ego just as there is no individual mind… independent of the Source which is the only real justification for their existence.

Dare to embrace the Absolute as the only real ‘’I’’ ?
That is the true meaning of the Aham.

Aham Brahmasmi.

Jai Guru Deva

igor

Sorry Igor...but the true meaning of a ham is a pork cut from the thigh (usually smoked : )

( How funny, can I start laughing ? Sorry Vivian. )

After wasting so much time to understand what is ego, believers of science should concentrate on manufacturing sperm and ovum outside the living body with the help of machines.

We will understand ego only after human start manufacturing sperm and ovum and fertilizing them outside the human body.

All those who suffer from any kind of pain discuss about ego just to satisfy themselves.

Just discussing about ego without able to manufacture sperm and ovum with using living body and without being able to fertilize them is a total waste of time.

If you are free go on discussing.

I think Intentblog should contact some scientist doing research on sperm and ovum to write an article about ego. That scientist would be is the best position to define ego.

The Ego is a symbol which can have different meanings based on context in a world with infinity of multi-level perspectives.

There is One context where it dissolves automatically without effort as a result of an awareness and knowing that comes during the course of one's evolution which can be directed by many divine agents and may be considered the result of grace and searching, only to find the truth we are searching for is doing the searching.

In one sense the ego is just a unique frame of reference, one which can be based on our true nature or the fictions of the mind.

If it were not for a little bit of ego I wouldn’t even post here, why tell myself what we I already know, must be some sort of divine game fit for a God.

Discussion about ego, is really a clever distraction from the truth we pretend not to know.

To fathom that which would give rise to these words "For potentially there is something, (which one feels a bit reluctant to spill it all out), a kind of revelation” ~Igor; would indicate a knowing of the unspeakable depth of one's own existence.

now back to the movie.

as we say in the Ancient game of tag, Your It.

Please do Igor...I'll laugh with you LOL

Dear Avtar,

This was an interesting post, as well as the others in this series.

I have been pondering upon good and evil lately, as far as trying to understand it, so I was particularly interested in your following quote:

"Evil and good are only relativistic perceptions of the dualistic ego or mind. They have no existence of their own. Also, the two relatives/opposites - evil and good appear together; one cannot be eliminated without eliminating the other. Good cannot be perceived without the bad or evil."

I will respond from my understanding and point of view, as best as I can. In the Bible, God says, "Man will now know good and evil, as WE do," when man (male/female) ate of the tree that they were told not to eat from.

So in taking consideration of the above Bible quote, what you say must be true. However, as I think about it, I think evil is a darkness that causes pain, while we strive for the light that brings pleasure. Therefore, there is a purpose for good/evil and just maybe evil is what is needed so that we can see who we really are. And Deepak (I think?), as well as Jesus said that we really are the Light and that God is Love and is Good, so that is who we are at the highest level. I believe that this is the truth and it is real, as all the other things (evil) are illusions. I am just thinking out loud as I try to understand all of the pain and suffering that we have to deal with in a dual world. I haven't read any of the other comments above to this post yet, so I will soon, if I have time.

Love, Char

PS: Sorry, as I haven't had time to watch the video.

I don't think God has an ego.....

Hello everyone,

how does one feel when this piece of advice is given.....

"Leave greatness to others. Become so small that no one can see you. This conviction results from growing devotion to the supreme reality." Nisargadatta.

although, this advice could be detrimental to a growing personality, a growing individual who needs a healthy ego to develop a secure personal self image.

ruth

Jumping beans required
Leap frog--my philosophy
Bridge over boingers

You say you are not
I say you sure as Hell are
Frozen popsicles

Dear Avtar

Below is my understanding of what you're saying, in lay terms; I may have misunderstood some of it; I've tried to use simple terms whenever possible.

love, h

- - - - paraphrase - - - -

The universe is organized, not chaotic or accidental. Cosmos is a word I like to use, when I refer to the organization of the universe. In my view, the part of cosmos that includes our minds and consciousness is governed by laws, just like the rest of the universe.

Mind experiences that seem to be opposites (pain / pleasure, suffering / happiness, etc.) are governed by laws, too. Laws describe how these apparent opposites are interconnected, and how they can dissolve. We don't need to turn to quantum mysticism, metaphysics, or religion to explain them. We can turn to the laws of physics. We can use these laws to build a science of consciousness. While work is currently being done in this field, I believe there is more work to be done -- the science of consciousness goes far beyond both mainstream science's theories and scriptural metaphysics. (What is metaphysics? It means the ways in which we discover and describe how reality works.)

Both scientific theories and metaphysics still have many unresolved areas and paradoxes, that weaken current ideas about how the mind works. I believe these gray areas show that more robust theoretical approaches are needed to explain consciousness.

To give you some idea of what I mean: Science mostly talks about matter alone. Metaphysics (especially spirituality and mysticism) mostly talks about non-matter alone. But consciousness is, I believe, a blend of matter and non-matter. Unless both sides are brought together, something will always be missing when we are trying to find out how consciousness works.

I call the bringing together of both sides -- science and metaphysics, matter and non-matter -- the science of universal consciousness. I believe that an integrated approach, one that includes both modern science and spirituality, will be shown -- by the actual observations of the universe -- to be the only way to fully explain universal consciousness.

One-sided science, and isolated metaphysical, mystic, and/or pseudo-scientific interpretations of scriptures (tantras, tattvas, Maya, Shakti, kanchukas, yamas, chakras, gods, goddesses, hell, heaven, evil, miracles, paranormal, reincarnation etc. etc.) can only represent only a fragmented, incomplete approach. And incomplete approaches can never describe universal consciousness adequately.

I firmly believe that the science of universal consciousness is something that is attainable. It is, in my view, the very purpose of human understanding and experience.

I believe that Einstein's laws of general relativity can be applied as laws, to describe the inner workings of the mind.

When I say mind, I mean consciousness that is confined within the boundaries created by thought, emotions, beliefs, and convictions of a person -- this is the everyday meaning of consciousness.

The same boundaries can also represent the biological or body-mind limited (un)consciousness. [Avtar, I don't get this thought at all, so I couldn't paraphrase it properly.]

We can call this kind of consciousness the "ego". When we say ego, we can think of a kind of mass with boundaries, that confines our mind-related energies within the fixed space and time of our lives.

If ego is like a mass, it can have different aspects. Those aspects can be dualities. Some dualities we're familiar with are good / bad, moral / immoral, pain / pleasure etc. When we use the words good / bad (or good and evil), we're talking about our ideas of dualities found within the ego. These things are nothing more than ideas. They are not true realities.

Since dualities are the two faces of the same thing, they're interconnected. They can only appear together. One cannot be eliminated without eliminating the other. Good cannot be perceived without the bad or evil, etc.

One of the laws of physics, called the law of entropy (second law of thermodynamics), says that when two masses have an energy exchange (interaction), entropy increases. (What is entropy? It's how things change from an ordered state to a chaotic one.)

When two egos interact and exchange energy, they behave just as two masses would in classical physics. Entropy is the result -- in other words, things get chaotic for a while. This has nothing to do with someone's actions being good or bad, beneficent or evil. When egos interact and exchange energy, people experience disruption.

The resulting loss of order can be experienced as difficulties (physical or mental suffering). It can also be experienced as growth (joy, creativity or improved health). What causes the disruption is the breaking down of the boundaries between the egos that are interacting. It is the exchange of energy that causes the increase in disorder. Whether it's a temporary or permanent situation, the inter-ego disruption will be felt by all the egos involved. The disruption itself is not good or evil. It is just an exchange of energy, and a shift in the orderliness of the egos involved.

To restrict oneself in order to avoid shocks to the ego is a choice someone might make if they don't understand how the mind really works. Making such a choice has nothing to do with any particular religion or set of man-made rules. There is no reason to criticize a religion or way of thinking, on that basis.

It's only that most of us just don't know how the mind works. We may choose to avoid confrontations with others' egos, because we don't understand that egos can handle this kind of confrontation. Natural laws govern how egos behave in when challenged, and also how egos can recover from shocks. Egos can survive when they're challenged. There is no reason to be afraid or resistant. There is no reason to feel controlled or intimidated by false concepts of good and evil.

Once we understand that good and evil are words that we use to label our ideas about the two sides of one thing -- and that our egos are governed by laws similar to those of classical physics, and can withstand challenges -- we learn there's no need to remain very strongly connected this or that side of a duality. We no longer need to act as if we are addicted to good or evil -- or any other aspect of our minds' apparent dualties.

Are you curious? There is a good chance the answer is here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/outline.html

Hi keith,

Here is an addition to #27.

I say you sure as Hell are
Frozen popsicles in the infinite ski
But you say you are
Moving particles in the finite ski
I say are you sure you are
Lost particles that melt under the finite ski
Is that all you say you are
We are the frozen popsicles in the eternal ski
No matter what you say you are
~Kurt~

Dear Avtar

Your efforts to synthesize science and consciousness are indeed valiant.

I am reminded of the Tao of Physics, an old but nevertheless still relevant book. F. Capra says ".....quantum theory has made it clear that atomic phenomena can only be understood as links in a chain of processess, the end of which lies in the consciousness of the human observer......Eugene Wigner and other physicists argue that the explicit inclusion of human consciousness may be an essential aspect of future theories of matter."

Further "Such a development would open exciting possibilities for a direct interaction between physics and Eastern mysticism. The understanding of one's consciousness and of its relation to the rest of the universe is the starting point of all mystical experience."......One can imagine a network of future theories covering an ever-increasing range of natural phenomena with ever increasing accuracy; a network which will contain fewer and fewer unexplained features deriving more and more of its structure from the mutual consistency of its parts. Some day, then, a point will be reached where the only unexplained features of this network of theories will be the elements of the scientific framework. Beyond that point, the theory will no longer be able to express its results in words, or in rational concepts and thus go beyond science......a vision of nature, transcending the realms of thought and language; leading out of science and into the world of acintya, the unthinkable. The knowledge contained in such a vision will be complete, but cannot be communicated in words. It will be the knowledge which Lao Tzu had in mind, more than two thousand years ago, when he said:

He who knows does not speak,
He who speaks does not know."

Do you think we will reach that point in our lifetimes? If we do, whatever will we talk about?

Bonnie

Lovely commentaries from Heather # 28 & Bonnie # 31.

Indeed to be free from good and bad is a peaceful state, a balanced state. Anyone, who has had the experience of a sudden deep shock in life, on any level, from emotional to physical to mental, one knows that feeling of the after-effect... When one is free of judgement of any kind, for the nervous system shuts itself down, not completely but just enough to be the conduit... at that very moment everything seems clear unobstructed by the thoughts of any kind.

Needless to say there is no need in having to go through the tragic or extreme experiences in life to realize just how simple and beautiful life is... Yet, how knows what the Master had in His Mind when putting together this grand design. Perhaps at times going through a shock is a kind of inner cleansing, when the system shuts itself down to clear it of the virus of any kind...

In the science of Tantra the aspirant is advised to ''catch'' that moment of a sudden fear, or shock, or anything which gives that griping sensation in the Heart region. For it is the direct pointing to Reality at an instant.

I agree with Bonnie, Tao De Ching can teach us timeless wisdom at anytime. Moreover, like Lao Tzu we should learn to ride a hurricane instead of being wash away with it.

Glorious Day to you my dear Self ( in All )

Jai Guru Dev

igor

Misspelling: second paragraph, second sentence should read:

Yet, who knows what the Master had in His Mind when putting together this grand design.

(He who speaks does not know...)

Indeed! After what I call my first experience of oneness I for about eight years kind of forgot that their existed an entity by the name of knowledge. In other words, I was too busy in actual living so to say and this included in no less measure three Ws, though at the same time it was also as though I was standing still and living was happening on its own accord through me rather than by me.

In the fifth of sixth year I just saw a book by the name of Samadhi and picked it up wondering what the hell these spiritualists were talking about while for me there seemed to have been left nothing to explore, and nor what I have sort of explored myself seemed to be attachable to any of such or perhaps even opposite words.

The book was by one of the desciples of Ramana Maharshi and the most wonderful thing was that no sooner I read the name of Ramana Maharshi in the first page I was hooked. It took me ten years to get unhooked. But by that time I had known almost all the religious/spiritualistic vocabulary. Yet it was also clear to me that spiritualism was not
saying something out of this normal world. There was nothing supernatural or paranormal or the like for me. Which is why while writing my book I named three aspects of the game of life as Mosc - Matter of spiritual category, Movc - Matter of virtual category and Mopc - Matter of physical category. I have also given in the footnote that I have given the names as 'Matter of' this and that category just because most people understand more easily what is matter than what is spirit. Otherwise as the game of life is really the game of the One, these names could as well have been: Spirit of material category, Spirit of virtual category and Spirit of spiritual category. Meaning that I was not advocating the supermacy or either materialism over spiritualism or of spiritualism over materialism. Meaning you may begin from the side of Matter or you may begin from the side of spirit but both belong to the same One call it Nature, call it Universe, call it God..

Some time later I also wrote in an overly exalted state:

Man is capable of having the last laugh. Beyond good and evil, materialism and spiritualism, divine and undivine.... lies his fulfillment. A master is one who is neither an atheist, nor yet a theist...but himself.

Harb

PS: I know this much I do not know lol.

Has-beens answer ed
Baked beans be Heinz
Blowing in the wind

Dyla(ugh!i)n'

Someone should drop an idea to Shambala's editor or someone like that to do a 21st century answer to the
Tao-De-Ching... of course it would be

Ed-Ching-Tao

Harb, I have an idea, a theme for this blog, something like sharing an experiences right after the event. I'll elaborate in a short while.

Dear Igor

Please forgive my not being more clear -- my comment is my trying to understand Avtar's views by paraphrasing them.

love, h

Ed reminds me of EmpeDocles, the famous Greek philosopher. One of his pet lines of wisdom was "Dont eat beans." In his book 'The History of Western Philosophy; Bertrand Russel wonders what made him hate beans so much. Perhaps Es can explain.

Yes, Ed-Ching-Tao too is good. Hope with this he will win the winner rather than the runner up. Igor don't worry about my last line, it is from Ed-Ching-Tao, so Ed will understand.

And Igor, yes, I will wait for your idea. But I must say I will not be as inclined for intellectual discussions as may be you. Again, may be it is the age thing...

Old Folk saying from Tao of Beans:

Pinto Beans Good for your Heart
The more you Eat the more you F..t

Hi Avtar and Everyone,

I was watching a dvd last night titled "The Journey after Awakening" and one of the fellows was talking about cousciousness and he said...."when consciousness awakens from the mind"......and I was thinking that was a great way to describe awakening....consciousness awakens from.....being asleep in the mind/ego/personality/body..identity.......

If all who knew did not speak....we would have no guides to help us on our journey.....:((((((but.....luckily.....they not only speak they author some reading material...:))))))

have a grand day, ruth

ruth, good observation! Consciosuness awakens from senses, emotions/feelings, intellect/reason/mind and finally even from intelligence/intuition/spirituality and is left to itself. It is Oneness/God realisation.

Harb, I wasn't suggesting an intellectual discussion, if we both understand the same thing under the word intellectual. What I had in mind was sharing the impact of the actual awakening, from the physical to psychic, from the so-called spiritual and divine and ''back'' to what could be called having human experiences again.

Yet, I had a second thought on that idea. Perhaps its not really possible to do it on this blog, simply because of the diversity of different opinions and different understandings of the theme. It is easier when there is a community which at least shares the practice, as it was in our case when I've corresponded to other sidhas, not just from TM-Sidha movement, but also from Siddha Yoga and others who have had the experience of being awakened and undergone the grace and the hardship of the process. At times not an easy one.

Otherwise, I agree there is no need in conceptualizing ''about it'', no matter what the age is. Aren't we ageless ? Just kidding.

Sharing of the spiritual experiences was encouraged during my sidhi program and in general when one undergoes any intense Sadhana, in order to support the ''good'' impressions beneficial for the practice. Basically when there is an emphasis on the importance of the integral approach rooted in meditation and selfless service.

From Uzbekistan with Love

igor

Dear Heather:

#28.

Excellent, beautiful, clear, and convincing paraphrasing by you of what is entailed in my posts here!!!

Thank you and congratulations for grasping the subtle, deep, and wholesome essence of the consciousness-integrated Holistic Relativity. I bow to your great intuition and vision.

The fact that even the doubtful critic Igor (#1) appreciates your description of what I am trying to convey is a proof of your exceptional communication and writing skills. The most important thing is that your paraphrasing has cleared doubts about the universality of the integrated genuine science-spirituality approach that transcends dogmatic religion, material-only science, quantum mysticism, and pseudo-science of metaphysics and paranormal.

Now, answers to some of your questions (your further paraphrasing is welcome):

1. “The same boundaries can also represent the biological or body-mind limited (un)consciousness. [Avtar, I don't get this thought at all, so I couldn't paraphrase it properly.]

The universal consciousness represents an absolute state of existence wherein all relative states of matter, energy, space, and time have transcended to the Zero-point energy, commonly referred to as the super consciousness. In this state there are no boundaries and no separation, all being One wholesome continuum. This could also be seen as the Eternity - existence of the eternal universal laws beyond matter-space-time.

Looking down from the reference point of this absolute state, the lower states of consciousness are represented by the relative states of manifested matter (body/mind), space, and time. The paraphrase of (un)consciousness refers to these lower states of less than super consciousness. The prefix “un” is to point out that the mind/body or biological consciousness is not universal or super consciousness but a miniscule fragment (4%) of it. In our everyday common terminology, this biological consciousness is simply defined as the “Consciousness”. These counter or varying definitions create the prevailing confusion we see in the scientific world. My paper – “The Universal Approach to Consciousness”, that I presented at the Consciousness conference in Tucson last month clarifies and resolves the issues related to mind and consciousness using the HR approach.

2. “(What is entropy? It's how things change from an ordered state to a chaotic one.)”

Entropy represents increasing and irreversible disorder, fragmentation, uncertainty, and the arrow of the flowing time/evolution. It represents key aspects of human suffering in terms of the universal laws of physics. Entropy also represents the fatal and irreversible destiny of time/evolution into death.

It also points to the fallacy of the popularly used concept of the so-called evolutionary consciousness, which in scientifically correct terms only means a fatal process leading to an ultimate state of infinite entropy or death. Hence, the evolutionary consciousness is an oxymoron irrespective of the fact that it is often stated as a goal by some well-known spiritual gurus. This is one example of the deeper insights of HR that uncovers non-universality of the popular but mistaken mainstream understanding of spiritual and scientific concepts.

The value of HR is in its revelation of the ultimate reality via rooting out the non-universal misunderstandings of science and spirituality. It brings the human understanding in tune with the simple, orderly, absolute, eternal, and elegant Cosmos eliminating the accidental, chaotic, and fragmented multiverse of “incomplete” quantum mechanics.

------------- --------------- -------------

Dear Bonnie:

#31:

Thanks for pointing out the observations of F. Capra, Eugene Wigner, and other physicists that the explicit inclusion of human consciousness may be an essential aspect of future theories of matter. And further "Such a development would open exciting possibilities for a direct interaction between physics and Eastern mysticism.”

HR is motivated to provide a tangible and peer-reviewed theory to achieve the above.

-------- -------------- --------------------

Love
Avtar

When one is unaware, one is prone to listen and take in strange beliefs and philosophies which can steer one in the wrong direction.

good and evil ..."one cannot be eliminated without eliminating the other. Good cannot be perceived without the bad or evil"
I disagree. Just observe an infant or a very old person.

Truth leads to healing and freedom from all distortions of every sort.

"HR is motivated to provide a tangible and peer-reviewed theory to achieve the above."

I thought Dr. singh already has a 'theory' in HR which is complete and sound as published in his book. Too bad, it couldn't attain a peer-reviewed validity.

Well said Phadrea, # 45

As a matter of fact the obvious positive versus obvious negative traits in a human being ( in a conscious being ) are being counteracted in proportion to which way the individual directs his/her thoughts and actions consciously.

That is, the further one moves away from the negative the closer one moves to the positive and vice versa. It becomes an inevitable process when one ''grows'' in awareness, one thinks, acts and inhibits the positive quiet spontaneously without thinking too much about it.

On the other hand, the being who has less awareness, in the same manner could easily become subjected the lower vibrations, sinking deeper and deeper into the lowest of the low. The dramatic falling in awareness is the only evil out there.

What is tragic is that on the way to the downfall, there is a demarcation line, below which there is no longer a self-reference left where the soul can ''adjust'' its entanglement in the negative, in any arbitrary fashion, instead it will only justify its obviously harmful actions as an objective for its existence.

Whereby the rising soul will steadily rid itself of the ties with which it is entangled, while at the same time reflecting more and more light. Until that being is but an embodiment of luminosity - the Light Itself. But even on the way to that state there is a place of peace, balance, contentment and joy, the traits which are direct reflection of the utmost goodness.

So the statements by Avtar are as inconsistent as they are untrue, the positive can perfectly exist without the negative, if we are talking about the human nature exemplified as human interactions/behavior. The bad news is that the darkness of the fallen human nature also has no limit (as History of Humanity shows), when it totally assumes its independence from Light.

Indeed, Phadrea is right, in most cases babies reflect the goodness and an absence of - what some insist calling - evil. Yes, perhaps elderly people also, not entirely though, yet it is true the older the person is the less involved he/she is in the world which makes the person less selfish, less crude, less ambitions, less judgmental. Still, I would be cautious to generalize, as there are plenty of examples when the being is full of unfulfilled desires, which inhibits the heart from freedom and bliss, even when the body laying on the deathbed.

I hope this makes sense.

With Love

igor

'' The fact that even the doubtful critic Igor (#1)... ''

Dear Avtar, english is not my mother tongue, yet it would be more correct to say:

''The fact that even the adamant critic Igor... ''

Simply because my critique of your opinions is based on the confidence on the given subject not the doubts. My only doubt is in your willingness to examine further the holes in your theories. That's fine I consider, but please don't make me doubt your ability to understand what has been offered so far for your consideration.

I've suggested previously to concentrate on what you really wish to say using the best language of your chosen profession, meaning leaving aside the constant references to this or that.
To tell you the truth you do not sound as an adept in the domain of the spiritual practice in the true sense of the word, so what's the point in addressing what you have little experience and perhaps even understanding.

I would be thrilled to hear if you were to speak like those scientists who worth their salt. Otherwise we are in danger in getting entangled in the amateurish dialogue here.

I have a tremendous respect and admiration to hear the expositions on the subject of Consciousness from the scientist like Dr John Hegelin, Dr Amrit Goswami, Dr Tony Nader, and some others mentioned here previously.

With Love and Joy

igor

Its not just those in the past who criticized Dr. Avatar Singh on the science front of his HR. Its not just those who criticized Dr. Singh on spiritual front. Its also those who believe in spiritual interpretations of science(of consciousness) like Igor K. who also criticize Dr. Singh.

[Bonnie mentioned Tao of Physics. Good. But Dr. Singh doesn't beleive in "Quantum mysticism" a spiritual intepretaion of quamntum mechanics(which is what the book is all about, the book was also basis for the popularity of New Age philosophies on the quantum front including Deepak Chopra's work to fame.) Unfortunetaly, Dr. Singh has nothng less han dsimissiveness if not scorn towards "quantum mysticism"(an attempt to unify science and spirituality) which he ironically considers to be pseudo science and pseudo spirituality. (Ref. his past bogs on HR and Quantum Mechanics. Including comments by Harbhajan Singh, Scott..)]

Dr. Singh can avoid criticism to which he may not have proper rebuttal, and concentrate on positive remarks to reiterate ad nauseam about his theory of HR (with scientific jargon) and his understanding of spirituality truths. He can bury his head in bliss of his certitude of his theory, which he and he alone believes to have all questions and paradoxes of science and mysticism.

One wonders, what he is doing here at IB. He should be concentrating on formulating his peer-reviewed theory. Not just come to a non-scientific forum at IB, and throw modern physics at us to claim false credibility to his theories. Well, let me be clear, no one is saying taht Avatr Singh is making some false conclusions about spirituality, its the way he fallaciously argues through HR that is basis of criticsm and critques from many from time to time.

Well, like many crtiics of Avtar Singh in te past, Igor K., might just leave him alone, and he can keep writing the same old same old with different headlines in his blog entires. I see little progress in Avtar's writings and his theories after all the time he spend at IB. Let me tell you, he is seeking confirmation of his claims from
you folks to keep his false sense of security (read: ego), he isn't here, like say DK Matai and some of you commenter to indulge in mutual growth and learning, which is what IB is all about.

Sorry for several typos above. #49 para three: read "...answers to all questions and paradoxes in science and mysticism."

Also misspelled the names of some scientists mentioned in # 48. ( please see the links )

Irvine’s corrective inference is welcome, ideally the Blog should be the place of mutual enrichment, not being afraid of rising the plank of intellectual enquiry and spiritual insight, providing it’s being supported by a valid discourse or an experience which can shed the light on the subject.

* * *

It would do justice to the current dialogue to visit the web-pages on the scientists who stand at the forth front of the term known As The Science of Consciousness.

Amit Goswami http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amit_Goswami

John Hagelin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagelin

Tony Nadar http://www.maharishitm.org/en/tonynaderen.htm

Also here is a link to the book I’ve mentioned various times on this blog, it is not so much of a book but an end to an era of investigation into the ‘’mysteries’’ of human nature and human potential, for it resolves the ancient riddle of the Sphinx. Anyone, open enough to consider the knowledge from that level, would put an end the struggle of what we call the human condition.

http://mumpress.com/p_e16.html

With Love and Bliss

Jai Guru Deva

igor

Dear Igor, and Phadrea

“So the statements by Avtar are as inconsistent as they are untrue, the positive can perfectly exist without the negative, if we are talking about the human nature exemplified as human interactions/behavior. The bad news is that the darkness of the fallen human nature also has no limit (as History of Humanity shows), when it totally assumes its independence from Light.”

You seem to be missing the point, which is the normal functioning of the whole universe. No matter where you are or what you are you can’t get away from opposites. Which I believe is the Avtars point. Sure you can be a peaceful human, but the bad elements of the super ego might and can intervene, which would destroy your peaceful life, forever altering it. You can’t get away from duality while living, its part of the process, and no one gets a free ride, sheltering them from the negative world. Hell, a lot folks have a constant stream of negativity running through their mind and bad desires. The mind can be always doubtful and counterproductive to positive growth, and the body will always oscillate between pain and good health. Like you said Igor you could be on your deathbed and still have uncontrollable bad thoughts (duality) rotating in your mind, which the ego started. There will always be senseless deaths, war and complete hatred that won’t leave the good people of the world alone, and we have to face the harsh realities of duality (life) head on.

Darkness is not a bad thing by its own nature, it is eternal as well as the light. It’s a symbol for evil or bad inertia which is also a representation of duality that one can’t avoid. Similarly, the word ego is just a symbol or word used to isolate the bad (if you will) components of the mind for the purpose of communicating spirituality. We should move away from discussing semantics and stick to crust of the matter, which is the heart of spirituality. ~Kurt~

#52 Hi Kurt, extracted from your view;-
"There will always be senseless deaths, war and complete hatred that won’t leave the good people of the world alone...."

Assuming there is life before and after 'death' there must be two (or maybe more) 'worlds.' I would, from that, question whether any specific 'deaths' are "sensless" in the wholeness of things. I would also wonder about your 'good' people of this material world, whether, indeed they would concur with the 'good people' of the both 'worlds.'
I'm suggesting that all deaths may be both senseless and sensible, and the only 'good' outcome may be in the grasping of that yardstick and sweeping up! (Ask any good witch worth her salt!!)
Seriously, I'm asking you to straddle 'death.' and see what that does to your 'consciousness.'

Hi Ed,

“I'm suggesting that all deaths may be both senseless and sensible, and the only 'good' outcome may be in the grasping of that yardstick and sweeping up! (Ask any good witch worth her salt!!)
Seriously, I'm asking you to straddle 'death.' and see what that does to your 'consciousness”

Well, In reality no one really dies because no one was really born, so it does depend on how you look at it, like you said. I am quite aware of everyone’s philosophical backgrounds and all should be commended, but we don’t want get caught up on words. Only the physical presence and consciousness (unconsciousness) is over for you at death, and the casual body or subtle dream body (and this is energy as well) continues to dream. I , like my two teachers before me (from India) don’t believe in reincarnation, but that topic would open up a new can of worms to debate about.

Grasping a yardstick is the right way to face it, because it insinuates detachment towards duality which is the way of the spiritualist, who does straddle death. ~Kurt~

So, thinking on deeply....meditating on what the spiritualist seems to be doing, Kurt, can we arrive at a point where our reality of physical 'death' is no longer relevant? We have given birth to our inherent Oneness by process of conscious energetic mingling?

At the same time, with a large leap, can we tie up all the seeming loose ends of Avtar's approach by actually fulfilling it, thus making theory irrelevant, too?
Ha, you thought I was going off topic! (Some may still think that is the case, but i reserve my rights :))

Excerpts from the Gospel of Mary
(not copy-writted)

"...will, then, matter be saved or not?"
The Savior said, "All natures, all formed things, all creatures exist in and with one another and will again be resolved into their own roots, because the nature of matter is dissolved into the roots of its nature alone. He who has ears to hear, let him hear." [cf. Matt. 11:15, etc.].
Peter said to him, "Since you have now explained all things to us, tell us this: what is the sin of the world?" [cf. John 1:29]. The Savior said, "Sin as such does not exist, but you make sin when you do what is of the nature of fornication, which is called 'sin.' For this reason the Good came into your midst, to the essence of each nature, to restore it to its root." He went on to say, "For this reason you come into existence and die [...] whoever knows may know [...] a suffering which has nothing like itself, which has arisen out of what is contrary to nature. Then there arises a disturbance in the whole body. For this reason I said to you, Be of good courage [cf. Matt. 28:9], and if you are discouraged, still take courage over against the various forms of nature. He who has ears to hear, let him hear." When the Blessed One said this, he greeted all of them, saying "Peace be with you [cf. John 14:27]. Receive my peace for yourselves. Take heed lest anyone lead you astray with the words, 'Lo, here!' or 'Lo, there!' [cf. Matt. 24:5, 23; Luke 17:21] for the Son of Man is within you [cf. Luke 17:21]. Follow him; those who seek him will find him [cf. Matt. 7:7]. Go, therefore, and preach the Gospel of the Kingdom [cf. Matt. 4:23; 9:15; Mark 16:15]. I have left no commandment but what I have commanded you, and I have given you no law, as the lawgiver did, lest you be bound by it."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/marym.htm

SON = SUN, i.e., the LIGHT.

LOVE

"My honor is My kingdom. My kingdom is LOVE."

Hey Ed,

“So, thinking on deeply....meditating on what the spiritualist seems to be doing, Kurt, can we arrive at a point where our reality of physical 'death' is no longer relevant?”

Yes, only after seeing the final product (self-realization) do you realize your divinity is deathless thus you become fearless of death. You can understand it intellectually before that, however it must be experienced first hand, beyond intelligence (theory, like you said) to totally know it.

“We have given birth to our inherent Oneness by process of conscious energetic mingling?”

We can have an energetic feeling of oneness with consciousness as in a spiritual experience, but it’s not a lasting peace or complete. Inherent oneness is always there just glossed over with the mingling of life, strip the gloss of duality by not identifying with the good or the bad. ~Kurt~

Life is smoking a bowl of consciousness

When the flame of consciousness is running low

And the last ambers are dieing out

Will you be ready

Will you be

At being

Or will you

Want

Dual Case

Love is a jewel so closely set,
Many have not seen it yet.
Forever seeking, their world about,
They know not what, can’t do without.

In pairs they go to complement,
Each failing sight of Heaven sent,
And death the uninvited part
Of Life, is where they start
To stop the inward glance
That leads unto the final dance
Of Life, complete, no recompense
To bring them back to Heaven sense,
Where Love’s fulfilled, no parts to fear,
Eternal Life is ever here.

A perfect jewel, so closely set,
It’s in our hearts, not opened yet……

Ed.

Thats' a sweet poem, sweet and tender.

Ed, it's funny you should ask Kurt to straddle death, myself I'd love him to dismount the elephant of the metal constructs (on what realization is suppose to be like) and simply walk the earth... the wet grass at dawn, the desert sand at dusk, the dusty road at a midday sun... barefooted is best if he wishes to know the purpose of creation.

I hope Kurt wouldn't take it personally, yet no matter how hard he tries the gap between the words betrays he haven't mended the two. For only the one for whom there is no difference between the shit and the Shiva is fit to talk about it.

To tell you the truth, when people start talking on how it should be in the state of self-realization I want to yawn. I've seen few cases, of this spiritual dis-ease, called ''nattura-non-existante'', and the only remedy is to give a patient a good slap, least they carry on dreaming thinking they've awakened when in fact they've fallen into another slumber, just much more subtle.

Anyway, baby just made green beans with rice, so after lunch I'm off for a good nap... and who knows I may even come up with the verse or two.

What about Self-realization ? Are there're any shadows on the Sun ? Does the Moon has the Light of its own ? Well, as far
as I am, I am not different from the Sun and from the Moon.
I am just AUM.

Love

igor

P. S. If Kurt want's to wake me up, please tell sing him a couple of lines:

Nothing's gonna change my Word,
Nothing's gonna change my Word

Jai Guru Deva
Jai Guru Deva
Jai Guru Deva

There are two layers of the experience of self-realisation. One sudden and the other long, step by step.

The first is like sudden nap in the afternoon, the second is like actually reaching sleep at night.

Many have the first but only very rare have the second, more so because the second is mostly a lifelong process.

Both Kan and Igor are true in saying that after the experience death loses its meaning and that shit and shiva, good and evil and all that are equal for such a person.

Though again I think it remains so convincingly only for a few years after the first sudden experience after which one tends to somewhat forget it and then one has to regain that state step by step in the second long experience.

I wouldn’t expect an unrealized person
To notice a realized one
For only the realized one can spot another
I can’t change the one
Who’s word is sharpened by the ego
No one can help the one
Who refuses to move away from what is learned
All will quarrel with the one
Who can’t control the sharpened word from escaping
The world is full of the one
Who we all have to tell to be more civil to another
~Kurt~

And everyone is on his/her own level of the 2 layers, doing as well as they are able too :)

I honour the divine in you, as I honour it in myself

Jai Guru Deva

Jai Guru Dev

Sat Sri Akal

Om Mani Padme Hum

Namaste

Etc. Etc.

We all form the beautiful mozaic of the Labyrinth of Life, the beautiful butterfly that, with patience, will fully develop itself in the course of a lifetime :)

Wish all a wonderful enlightened weekend,

Love and Light, from the heartphone,

Mieke

I have heard from some Masters that enlightenment came to them suddenly...so too with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj...but he said that even he still had old thoughts that arised which were easily and fast dismissed. They had lost their power over him.

From my own expereince I can say that enlightenment was not what I thought it was. If one can say that it was sudden...then what appeared to be sudden was the realization that I created everything in my imagination.

This realization did not "enlight" me in terms of making be feel good or joyful or blissfull. It was depressing...it was death. I died!

I died to everything I believed...I died to Vivian...I ceased to have "purpose"...knowledge...I lost everything.

But then something started to awaken/open/grow within me...without cause. I started to see a new light. A light I had never seen before. I saw perfection and felt bliss...but different then the feelings I had felt before I was bliss. It was I and it is I....I never left.

The canvas of the sky holds clouds, birds traveling across it in formation, airplanes heading towards their destinations, kites on a windy day, rain and storms, sunshine and darkness.
Still the canvas of the sky is there. Making no judgement, allowing for it all.
Freedom is not just a thought, a discussion, a nice possibility.
There is newness is every moment of life/breathe.

There is newness in every moment of life/breath.

When enlightenment happens, it is all of a sudden. How could it not be, when suddenly your in the middle of the Great Void, and the universe of images vanishes like a hallow dream. What could be more sudden? When all you knew is swept under the rug of an illusion and the formless space of silence and empty feelings turns out to be you. The process is gradual, step by step, but the outcome is sudden.

I doubt that there ever was a process....either you are or you are not. A process can only apply to time and space.

When your on the spiritual path, I call that a process because it takes a lot of earnest effort to ignore the minds habitual chatter, and all kind of things can happen during it. So, you are right it happens in space and time until one transcends it.

A very relevant poem by a Russian poet whose name I have forgotten:

The Event
Was accomplished
But reason
Had yet to absorb it entire.
It hadn't burst hot from the lips yet,
A tale like a swift spreading fire.
The moments were not yet near
To assess it dispassionately,
But nonetheless
All was clear
From the look of the earth and the sky....

****

The event is accomplished suddenly but the REASON HAS TO ABSORB IT STEP BY STEP.

Like light from a star that has exploded
millions of year ago
just now
visible to our eyes

I have a question: Why do so many focus on ego?
Is "ego" not just another word for devil/satan/lie/illusion/dream? I don't see ego anywhere, but why do people keep talking about? And why I am aware of it? I'm serious.

Why do I go through certain "words" like Consciousness, Energy and now Ego? Certain words show up at times and then disappear again into the nothingness.

Mieke,
Ed,
Harb,
Phadrea,
Vivian
and of course Kurt,

A shower of rose-petals for your understanding and sharing.

With Love and Joy

igor

Dear Igo, the rose petals could not be more real, thank you so very much.

Now that is the beauty of self-realisation: one can neither hurt nor remain hurt for more than a few minutes. One comes back to one's unalloyed state soon. That may well be the present test for most of us here.

Dear Igor...your posts are very dear to my heart....but I really don't understand anything. I am not only changeless, nameless, formless, but also clueless!?!?

I am clueless...please God fill me in. Aurora reminded me that there are no "others". And I agree in the concept of one being. But some of me/mine is asking questions...yet I am full. I have no questions other than why are some parts of me (others) still asking?

Isn't there a contradiction?

When I am by myself..with myself...I am myself.

I understand and truly see that there is no differences and that we are one being. I also see that this being differs only in the appearance and expression. Why are not all expression the same if I am the consciousness that expresses all?