This is a good example of what you do. Because I see through you, you respond by saying “You’re not capable”. You assume an attitude of superiority, which is both presumptuous and pretentious, and therefore, highly offensive. You then presume to teach me. Why would I ever accept a teaching from someone who I believe is a self-righteous ass? No teacher who is worth his salt would attempt to force his teaching on somebody, but this is what you do all the time, so I have to conclude that you are a false teacher.
Asuri,
"Because I see through you, you respond by saying “You’re not capable”.
If you were not capable, it would have been very simple. But the problem is that you are capable.
“No teacher who is worth his salt would attempt to force his teaching on somebody”
That does not mean that one does not create an opportunity for one to come to your own insight either. If one has eyes to see, one will see. Even if you dislike something, it may be capable of sharpening ones understanding. What one likes may be a hindrance, what one dislikes may be stepping stone. If you have become disgusted and disturbed, then it is a great opportunity for you to become mindful. If every time something arises which is not according to your liking and you are becoming entangled, then one is creating endless sources for suffering.
I think I’m really getting tired of seeing the spats on here between Asuri and AmirMourad.
Please, take it private. you guys attack each other any chance you get. You denigrate the ability of others to enjoy a discourse and to present opposing points of view without fear of being insulted or mocked. Please.
AUM is the sound of God. You find it in the Bible (…in the beginning it was the Word,)
in Bhagavad Gita and probably in other holy texts.
Yes, everything is made of God’s vibrations, at different rates. It does not mean just
the physical sound, but vibrations.
The universe is God’s body.
We are all part of the same whole. We communicate actually directly through our DNA’s,
which explains miracles, auras, telepathy, and many other things. I posted about that before, at some length:
We are sound, light, and mass. And spirit, whatever that is.
Matter is not sound.
GAME.
SET.
MATCH.
[QUOTE=The Scales;52638]Matter is not sound.
GAME.
SET.
MATCH.
:-P[/QUOTE]
Er…waitaminute. I want to hear from the referee on this, not the spectator. 
We accrue knowledge in 2 ways. Ordinarily, through thoughts in the making of which we use our prior knowledge; so this becomes incremental knowledge. Very rarely, one comes along with direct knowledge, which is whole, total and devoid of ususl emotional baggage. Incremental knowledge is subjective and hence, deficient. But it creates a great comfort zone. From such a comfort zone to direct knowledge is a huge leap. It is traumatic, and not easy at all. That’s my take on the duel above (for those who care to know!)
The range of sound vibtrations we can ordinarily sustain in the physical world is called “vaikheri naad”. This has range and depth of vibrations of only 25% of “madhyama naad” in the astral world, which again is only 25% of “pashyanti naad” of the causal world.
AUM is the word/ sound of Ishvara, transcending the causal world which has only 25% vibrations of this fourth state, called “para naad”. At that level, the vibrations are extremely intense, appearing to be still but humongously potent. Sound is then a sparsh (touch). It is for this reason that the true AUM is heard in the meditation and any rendering on lower scales may neither bring its full vitality nor it is desired. That is also the reason why true AUM is taught only by our inner teacher.
FlexPenguin,
“And spirit, whatever that is”
Then find out. In fact, one will have to investigate as deeply as possible into one’s being to discover whether such a thing is there or not. As it is, it remains simply a an idea, a hypothesis that has entered into one’s mind which one has borrowed from the outside.
The Amen (Aum) is the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God …(Revelation 3:14)
By meditating upon Aum you can contact God (Patanjali)
[QUOTE=oak333;52730]The Amen (Aum) is the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God …(Revelation 3:14)
By meditating upon Aum you can contact God (Patanjali)[/QUOTE]
I am not sure whether Amen and aum are connected :rolleyes: …in the spiritual literature, there are lots of juxtapositions and I grew sorta weary of this ‘every concept or idea has to be connected’ drill…
…guess what? They are actually not connected, per se; those connexions are due to linguistic fallacies born out of anticipatory forms of learning, [I]not[/I] to consequential interpretation of direct forms of learning.
Much like the yogis figured out long ago modern science suggest everything has a vibration of its’ own
It’s worth mentioning that, while Patanjali says that Om is the symbol (vAcaka or sacred word) that represents Isvara, this text says that the creator[I] is[/I] Om. I’m not sure whether that’s just semantics or whether it represents a difference of belief.
“Om” is both symbolic and a direct expression of one’s own true nature. What is called “Om” is just an outward expression of something inner which is much more fundamental. That is why Patanjali has said that one should concentrate upon Om in order to understand it’s “meaning”. The mantra, when used as a symbol for the divine, is a gateway to something else entirely which cannot be transmitted through any sound or word. For that, any symbol will do if the association is strong enough in the mind - whether Om, it’s yantra, a chakra, or a mantra in any other language, an image of Shiva, Buddha, or Krishna, a Zen koan, or just about anything.
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;52798]“Om” is both symbolic and a direct expression of one’s own true nature. What is called “Om” is just an outward expression of something inner which is much more fundamental. That is why Patanjali has said that one should concentrate upon Om in order to understand it’s “meaning”. The mantra, when used as a symbol for the divine, is a gateway to something else entirely which cannot be transmitted through any sound or word. For that, any symbol will do if the association is strong enough in the mind - whether Om, it’s yantra, a chakra, or a mantra in any other language, an image of Shiva, Buddha, or Krishna, a Zen koan, or just about anything.[/QUOTE]
You shure do waste a lot of time typing out a bunch of stafff that says absolutely nothing, and very often that nothing dances with processed bologne.
[QUOTE=YogiDiva;50475]From an article by Sol Luckman: “One school of thought insists that humans are actually made of sound and that DNA itself may be a form of sound. After conducting meticulously documented research, Harvard-trained Leonard Horowitz expertly demonstrates that DNA emits and receives both phonons and photons, or electromagnetic waves of sound and light. In the 1990s, according to Dr. Horowitz, “three Nobel laureates in medicine advanced research that revealed the primary function of DNA lies not in protein synthesis … but in the realm of bioacoustic and bioelectric signaling.” In recent years a new artistic field called DNA music has even begun to flourish. It therefore seems appropriate, at the very least, to compare DNA to a keyboard with a number of keys that produce the music of life.”[/QUOTE]
Could you tell us which Nobel laureates research suggested that “primary function of DNA lies not in protein synthesis … but in the realm of bioacoustic and bioelectric signaling”? I did quick search but couldn’t find anything related.
Processed bologne indeed. There are a few billion Hindus and Buddhists who would disagree with Amir’s statement. You do not hear them chanting “Amir” or “Fred”. The syllable “Om” has been used for millenia because it is vācaka, a significant or sacred word. It signifies or symbolizes or expresses something very specific, and has a particular resonance. The yantras and tantric deities used for visualization also have specific meanings. They are not a substitute for “Om”. Likewise, the imaginations of our own mind are not a substitute for real knowledge.
[QUOTE=Asuri;52846] the imaginations of our own mind are not a substitute for real knowledge.[/QUOTE]
Nice line. Mind if I use it sometime? Reminds me of the time someone tried to tell me about kids without ever having any of his own.