3bob

A true master has no choice when the Spirit works but to work with It, in healing or otherwise. (along with Spirits wisdom that is beyond human reckoning in how the prices will be paid)

Have you gone to a counselor or an perhaps a group led by a counselor? People here can give you some good ideas and leads but person to person contact is very important! Thus I suggest making that happen in whatever way helps you, which could be partly done through lots of kinds of activities ranging from A-Z. Btw, all energy that gets routed into feeling depressed or in doubt could be re-routed into feeling fine and whole. We need to and should naturally enjoy very simple things like seeing spring time and all the plants coming to life for that is a clue from nature to get with it in our coming to life in whatever ways we can- and remember nature does not lie or play favorites and she never gives up no matter what! We can only do so much by our own wits but with the Spirit (or Holy Spirit if you prefer) we can live this day well and give thanks for so much that ranges from A-Z! Heads-up, and keep learning...

From browsing the web I see there is a school out there using the term "zero point", it also has some Mr. G. stuff, along with other mixes thrown in. (I only took a very brief look but saw several depressive, conspiracy type articles) If you are tuning into that or something similar it could be linked to some of what you described as feeling earlier. (?) Madness is only in the mind, along with other things. Spirit can not be taken over by such although it can more or less be veiled by same for an "x" amount of time. Btw, I wouldn't suggest newer students mentate on much of the "fragments" of the 4th way stuff since most of what is commonly being taught (imo) is not backed by realized teachers, thus it's often open to all sorts of corruption or de-volvement, (just as its Law of Seven describes) that is until one has a spiritual anchor that can not be broken and which will help one see the half-lies and half-truths on a coin (so to speak) for what they are and keep such in perspective to the greater Truth of Spirit. Extending ones thoughts to much or to often into the future (or past) can also bring about symptoms of madness since we have to stand up right now, with our feet firmly on the ground. Best wishes man...

bump, as a supplement to the, "or if you will" post

I suggest that at least a spiritual or wise type of hero be thought about and that could be almost anyone..., also a simple but strong prayer or mantra that you really believe in can be repeated and concentrated upon when strange thoughts seem to come to you uninvited.... If you're not doing all the little and or so called worldly things as if they matter then do so - since they do for you - thus not just for being nice to family, friends, etc. if that is happening?

Ran some upgrades and now Internet explorer does not work so well with Tao Bums, such as in cut and paste or with quoting among a topic, thus had to switch to using Chrome. Anyone know why?

quote from Swami Krishnananda: "...There are some people who think that, originally, Non-Being was, not Being, but Non-Being. Non-Being is sometimes regarded as an origin of things under peculiar conditions. How is it possible that Being can come from Non-Being? Has anyone seen such a phenomenon? Something can produce something; how can nothing produce something? We have never heard of such a possibility. So Uddalaka says: "My dear boy, though it is true that there are people who hold the doctrine that Non-Being was, originally, and Being proceeded out of Non-Being as an effect, this is not a practicability. It is inconceivable. Non-Being cannot be the cause of Being, nor can we say that Being is the cause of Being. It is a tautology of expression. ‘A is the cause of A’—you cannot say that. It is a meaningless way of speaking. If Being is not the cause of Being, then what is the cause of Being? Non-Being? Not possible! Non-Being cannot be the cause of Being. Being also is not the cause of Being. Then what is the cause of Being? No cause. There cannot be a cause for Being. So it must be a causeless Being. If it has a cause, we must explain what that cause could be, and the cause should be either Being or Non-Being. There cannot be a third thing. Being cannot be the cause of Being; Non-Being also cannot be the cause of Being, so there is no cause for Being. It is causeless existence. It is useless and pointless to say that Non-Being can be the origin, in any manner whatsoever, of Being. Kutas tu khalu, saumya, evam syat, iti hovaca: How is it possible? It is an aged doctrine, a humorous saying indeed, to hold that something can come out of nothing. Katham, asatah saj jayeteti: How can Being come from Non-Being? Sat tu eva, saumya, idam agra asid: Now please listen to my conclusion. I hold that Being alone was, and not Non-Being. Ekam evadvitiyam: So I repeat what I have told you already. Being alone was. Now, it is non-dual Being. It is not like my ‘being’ or your ‘being’ or ‘being’ of this or that. It is not an individual ‘being’. It is not a particularized ‘being’. It is not something connected with any object. It is Being as such, inconceivable, because it is not an object. The mind can think what is outside it. It cannot think anything else. But Being cannot be something outside the mind, because the mind also is rooted in Being. Therefore, it is not a subject for comprehension by the senses or conception by the mind. It is not an object of any kind, either physical or conceptual; that means to say, it cannot be investigated scientifically nor argued about philosophically. What sort of thing is it, then? Well, if it could be understood so easily, then you would be blessed. But it cannot be understood like that, because, who can understand That which is the preconception of even the very act of understanding itself. Even the mind cannot move unless Being is there at its background. So it is a presupposition of even the faculties of understanding and thinking. Thus, there is no such thing as understanding it, thinking it, sensing it, conceiving it, describing it, explaining it or arguing about it." Now This is, to put it plainly, the origin of everything. The commentators on this Upanishad go into vast details of the method of the effect coming from the cause and how creation was originally effected by this Supreme Being..." (highlights added by me)

Yes Gatito, the similarities are rather amazing! Thanks for your shared quote.

I don't know about some of that since one could find enjoyment in doing "pure" math problems that were not being applied to anything at the time except in seeing and being inspired by the working out of mathematical laws...

"we just disagree"...

Yep, and I thought that was a good on and off topic song... hehe

MH, I have not studied the "singularity" concepts but from what you have brought up it sounds like I should. A little black pepper, ancient sea salt, onions, etc... should go well with that dinner thing to-night that came out of no-thing :-)

Thelerner, I didn't hear a question per-se although there were some rhetorical type questions included if that is what you mean?

Yes, as in a visit. Btw, I might use the words disappears, dissolves or stays behind instead of dissipates. As for normal dying that is tied to living - for it is when death dies that we are free from karma induced cycles of death and birth and that is a bliss not constrained or dependent on either.

Well I'd say that "all at the same time" would be under the "One" since the One contains all time(s) and all space(s) all at once...which would be removing perception limited to variations of linear time and related linear situations... yet and further none can return to the Tao without full payment to the One which has a "mystery" connection to Tao. and I'd frankly add that I think very, very few of us (including myself) are ready to make such a payment as alluded to in chapter 43 of the T.T.C. via the saying of, "only Nothing can enter into no space".

Hi Manitou, Well yes, the cycles of going "far" and "return" continue yet the manifest only does so in time(s) and space(s) which in that sense is not illusion but relative, while only the "eternal" or the Tao that can not be named stands "still" or forever right now and unchanging. (edit: last sentence filled out somewhat)

My take is different being that the T.T.C. more or less says The Tao "did" The One, The Two, The Three, and the Ten thousand, thus all cause/blame so to speak for such is on or of the Tao; - and since (if you will) there is no separate, independent root that is counter to yet also equal to the Tao as Source then its further permutations beyond those mentioned above are also tied to the cause/blame for the "fake" and "unreal" or the apparent non-Tao. (with such considered as not being an easy down to brass tacks type of realization to have)

Thanks for sharing and for giving some interesting material also amoyaan... Om

Lakota women sing: via youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObEVuCJ7QUQ

No worries also amoyaan, you are welcome concerning the original article and I hope you've had time to pull up the link. Btw, I believe the following view below could use some further research: "I don't believe this to be true at all. Vedanta is not in itself a religion, although it does form a kind of philosophical basis of Hinduism. Interestingly, I know a few Hindus, and largely find theirs to be a devotional religion -- I don't even know how many Hindus even know much about vedanta, much less use it as a means of self inquiry, self knowledge and liberation. It seems to me that much is based on the karma kanda section of the vedas rather than the Upanishads." by amoyaan ...being that the Vedas (which the Upanishads can not be broken off from) are meant to be far more than only a philosophical or debateble basis of Hinduism... For instance: (and I'm no expert either) "Astika" and "Nastika" As a further attempt to clearly distinguish between Hindu and non-Hindu, Hindu philosophers regularly used the Sanskrit terms astika and nastika. The two terms are synonymous with vaidika and avaidika, respectively. Astika refers to those who believe in the Vedas, nastika to those who reject the Vedas. Under the astika category Hinduism would include any Hindu path that accepts the Veda, such as Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism, Advaita, Yoga, Nyaya, Mimamsa, among others. The nastika religions would include any religious tradition that does not accept the Veda: Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i, etc. Thus when it came to the importance of unambiguously differentiating between the teachings of Hinduism and the teachings of non-Hindu religions, the most historically important sages of Hindu philosophical and theological thought are clear advocates of "Vaidika Dharma" - Hinduism - as a systematic, unitive tradition of spiritual expression. Dwai has shared some of his experiences along these lines before and has lived a Hindu-Indian philosophy-religion along with being in its related and diverse culture, thus he has seen many things first hand most of which I've only read about. I'm hoping that he would share some of his insights about same in this thread?

how dare anyone degrade a Siberian Husky, what is this world coming to? ;-)

"Haha", righto... And thanks also for the tons of well shared info!

...and I confess to being put off by your self-described attitude as seeing things from an "irksome, and plagued with this enigmatic, bizarre, and Herculean task" viewpoint which includes and rationalizes provoking people (or me) with some kind of quasi-"neo" warm and fuzzy variation of a nihilistic summary given by what to me is a pretentious sounding person along with your description of Vedanta being a comfortable "pigeon hole". (which was done after you must have read the title of the thread and the opening post) Of course you are free to pursue your line as you please by starting your own post to hash such out with others who are interested... this is a pretty wide open forum with lots of space and you will probably find some birds of a feather here to preen with.

"But my nature being what it is, I confess to being somewhat put off by two aspects of what you say. (or perhaps more accurately, the way you say it)." Thislife, We may not be on the same page? Anyway I was quoting amoyaan previously or before you put another ship in the water.

"...I think part of the power and efficacy of vedanta is it uses words with great clarity and precision; which is dualistic yes, a dualistic means of realising non-duality! but that's how it goes. There are a number of traditional vedanta teachers who now teach in English thankfully, but there is danger in completely de-contexualising this system...as seen in neo advaita. It's not really enough to do as the Neos do and just say 'you're awareness, all the rest is an illusion'...that doesn't explain a damn thing. It's not just the terminology they lack, but the actual logic behind the statements such as "You are That". Vedanta explains the workings and relationship of the apparent individual, awareness and maya...which is really necessary to grasp the 'mechanics' of non-duality, existence and identity..." by amoyaan Not a bad way to put it!