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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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!
)))