Hardly anyone, if anyone at all, would walk into a pub to tell the people they are delusive, if they think they have wits. The people in this movie have earthly living for an illusion, inclusive of human reasoning.
Every human being is god himself, but it does not understand its true self, and it is constantly engulfed by the influence of its mind, its intellect, which you call as a great illusion, says Vamsi Krishna.
I have never been Buddhist, Yogi, or Krishna, and I am not likely ever to become. In the light of the above, even if I wanted, I would be only delusive thinking I am, however Mr. Vamsi copes with the fact that unless completely thoughtless, his words are formed with the participation of exactly the structure he has for an illusion: his mind. The words would have to have at least some haze in them.
Really I think, I happen to wonder on psychology and language. Could we have philosophy, religion, or language and psychology ― without the self, ego, or personality? Good or bad, these always come with some minds, pretty much for the sake of own happiness: I do not believe anybody would care to exist as an unconscious being, and realization that one exists, lives, breathes — this is mind’s work.
People are pulled away by distractions. “Go to work”, “go to school”, “do this”, “do that”, says Santos Bonacci, an Australian astrologer, in the movie below.
I like my linguistic activity and works very, honestly very much. They could not be any interference to my person, having been also school and work. First of all, however, what learning should there be so much better, as for the human to give a go-by to the mind and what follows, language? We cannot have language without our minds.
“To children, a rainbow is something vivid and real; but the grown-ups know that it is merely an illusion caused by certain rays of light and drops of water“, we can read about a Buddhist belief on the soul.
Having rainbows for illusions, we would forget we perceive them. If we perceive, it has to be an existent thing. Illusions do not objectively exist. They are subjective impressions by individual minds.
Someone might say: but the Sun is not turning around the Earth. Perception drove the humanity to error. The answer, at least mine is, that thinking what there is to see is worthwhile. From the Earth, we can see movement. Some movement really does take place and perception never beguiled the humanity with this regard. It only turned out an intellectual question to establish, what movement it is.
Though the Sun is not turning around the Earth, we keep the movement of the Sun over the horizon for an effective metaphor: we continue to say it is the Sun to rise or set, not that the Earth has turned to the degree.
We can see rainbows also when we grow up. If to seek the real illusion, it would be in the mind of the person to think rainbows need to be tangible, to be real. Rainbows are physical, optical phenomena that result from real meteorological events. Obviously, rainbows do not prove there is life after life.
Let us please mind, the legend has it, entire collections of teachings were attributed to the Buddha, preserved in oral tradition and first committed to writing about 400 years after the Buddha’s death, notes Wikipedia. The copies as today are still younger, and the works cannot be considered autographs by the Buddha or his disciples. Even the Buddha’s language is uncertain, speculation pointing to Middle Indo-Aryan dialects and particularly Pali. When the writings really emerged, is not known, this means. It might have been the Middle Ages or later, as well.
It might be for errors in language nuance and translation that the Buddha teachings, as presented today, contradict one another. The Buddha admits his mind is dependent on his body and thus nutrition. He advises riddance of all desire, yet meditates without food, yielding to an evidently very strong want — or even desire — for the psychophysical condition he calls insight. Provoked or driven urges might better deserve discard, however, I could agree on that with a Buddhist as well as anyone, without trying for higher truths on human preferences.
Let us recur to perception and existence. Let us say, somewhere far away in outer space, there is a rare mineral you cannot find on the Earth. Nobody ever tested the mineral, as nobody ever has seen or researched it. Could we say, “this mineral exists”? In earthly terms, stating on existence requires existent, perceiving persons. Otherwise, there is no way to affirm, in which there also is good logic for the negative. There are no teachings without the affirmative, and the negative.
The Buddha looked for an “essence of a person”, and concluded there was no permanent self: there is no part of a person which is unchanging and essential for continuity, there is no individual “part of the person that accounts for the identity of that person over time”.
In terms for the affirmative and the negative, the teaching denies there is the perceivable human self, premised on an idea there should be “axis” qualities to human personality, which is not perceived. Humans have come to use the word “personality” also to tell that people differ as well as individually vary. On the other hand, there are no “personless” people.
Upanishadic concepts affirm on a reduced picture of human personality as five skandhas. Buddhist arguments would be worded as,
- All psycho-physical processes (skandhas) are impermanent.
- If there were a self it would be permanent.
The argument would be elaborated as follows,
- If the self existed it would be the part of the person that performs the executive function, the “controller”.
- The self could never desire that it be changed (anti-reflexivity principle).
- Each of the five kinds of psycho-physical element is such that one can desire that it be changed.
The Upanishadic inference is ― There is no self.
Particularly love becomes unconvincing, and this is love Yogis invoke. David Icke, a British Yogi, proposes even unconditional love, whereas “loving” everyone and everything, we do not love anyone and anything really. Alfred van den Bosch yet attempts to argue:
Love is the glue of the universe, he says.
Let us analyze ideas, as in a set. We discard the human ego, yet we do not think how a feeling might exist, if there would be no one it could come from, and there would be no one to feel it: we can have love for a label. As Poxipol, and when we like someone very much, we think maybe BlueTac more.
Seriously: Love has to be harmonious. Love has to be a matter for my mind. Love has to be pleasure, for desirable lasting. Love is a long-term emotional and intellectual attachment to involve active interest of no aggressive aspect. Feel welcome to reckon:
If we think we are lucky to have the right people around, we are wrong, claims Mr. Icke. These people are, because we have sent out the right impulse. In fear, we attract reflections of fear. We all live as droplets in an ocean of consciousness.
And all it is, as everything else is, a choice. A choice between fear and love, says Mr. Icke.
Mr. Icke might be the first Briton to imply that Shakespeare would not make it even for a fish pond.
The fear is a lack of being all powerful. Being anything less than an infinite love, puts us into a state of fear, mówi George Neo.
An option as striving for omni-potence or living in constant phobia looks nonsense. Rationally, fear neither prevents nor solves problems. To a degree and with a reasonable expectation, it depends on the human if he or she develops a “fear attitude”.
Acintya Govinda Das, an Australian Vedic historian, explains how the Earth transitions Iron, Bronze, Silver, and Golden Ages. In the Silver time, evil lives over the ocean. In the Golden, evil goes to live on another planet, and people get a lot of that Gold. Only “seriously mystic” Yogis are to live that stage, but we need to mind who might meddle with our minds, says Mr. Das. In this context, the movie shows the American Great Seal.
We have to become aware of who’s meddling in our minds. Our mind is our biggest problem, when it is not under our control, says Mr. Das.
The story of metal times is reminiscent of The Edict of Expulsion, issued by an English king, Edward I. In the Iron time, evil lives in people, as in ethnically varied societies. In the Bronze, evil lives among people.
Mr. Bonacci also has the Great Seal for vexing. It is him to emphasize that death of the mortal body is a non-event. His grammar yet certainly is not trustworthy.
If we continued to teach our original, nature religion, and we didn’t stop with the advent of Christianity, we would know that death of our mortal body is a non-event, says Mr. Bonacci.
Interpretation of the United States Great Seal depends on consensus, to an extent. Author, Charles Thomson, did not leave any translation of the Latin phrases, or nothing is known about such a translation. I interpret the Novus Ordo Seclorum as A New People Come. “New Order of the Ages” does not appeal to me. It is enough I think about the Renaissance and Enlightenment.
Mr. Braden purports that television viewer spiritual powers produced an emanation that altered the Earth’s electromagnetic field. NASA measured that, but they are hiding it.
I never had access to any secret data, but I also never have seen a “NASA anonymous”, that is, an illustration or graph without a note on authors, or the agency generally.
Mr. Braden might have compared illustrations on NASA website. Here, the note is “Credit: UC Davis”.
It is hard for me to believe that public information would differ from classified, in this regard. Anonymity would give room to disinformation. Secret data would have some reference code at least. Mr. Braden’s graph does not have any credit note.
I also have no idea how to fit in a unit as nano-Tesla: as a measurement for human existence?
A unit as nano means one billionth. A truck of batteries might make more difference, dependent on the manner of measurement.
What is also important, most scientists allow for a possibility there are phenomena not researched, as with this mineral of ours, in a faraway location in the cosmos. Not everyone believes as to posit, but a possibility there are non-material phenomena is not ruled out completely. Matter or anti-matter are associated with finiteness. Nano-Tesla is a physical unit of measurement. I do not understand how a scientist would have it for a unit to measure the spirit or soul.
The Yogis in the movie speak in plain affirmative to say that consciousness is collective, depends on cosmic cycles, and they associate it with energy. Vamsi Krishna describes thought as something that comes from outside the body, even bombards.
Generally, a human being is bombarded with unwanted thoughts constantly, during the day, which depletes his mental energies. It causes a drain of physical energy, says Vamsi Krishna.
This is the picture to accompany Mr. Vamsi’s words. As a reality, a situation as that might be even aggressive.
In the affirmative, Mr. van den Bosch claims that positive thoughts travel to the positive collective; negative thoughts do the opposite, which can have adverse effects on the planet.
In plain affirmative as well, Bud Barber says he is conscious of cosmic energies and perceives vibrations in his body.
The reason (for cosmic impulses) is the same a cell in your body puts out vibrations, within that cell, to make sure that the cell is a whole, is “operating on the same page”, he says.
They are either joking, or they have been under some influence. A thought process by the brain can be initiated only in that brain, by the person whose brain it is, and it stays in the brain unless changed, forgotten, or verbally expressed, means other than verbal to introduce ambiguity. Thinking does not cause exhaustion as by static electricity.
Bodily cells do not vibrate, and staying in vibration for longer periods of time might be unhealthy, just as in static electricity, suspected in chromosome aberrations and illness higher incidence, near high power lines.
In strict scientific conditions, for which you monitor any known parameters in the setting, there never have been effects of thought that has not been put to activity, inclusive of telekinesis. Finally, intellectual property rights are individual, even if group, not collective. Sciences and arts could only suffer with denial of personal merit.
As regards influence, electromagnetic analogies to sound propagation were considered already in the fifties, and by way of example, SIS got founded in 1909, and public conciliation was imposed on it as late as 1994. Who knows, what is going to be known in some 80 years? Twenty years ago it was madness to allow any possibility of MKULTRA. I would not take a bet it is impossible to transmit language formants, or other forms.
Finally, the Yogis might misuse words. Saying that thought comes from outside the body they think (?) about suggestion as in advertisement, or casual chat unexpectedly to bring information. We certainly cannot have illusion for thought. If someone gives a solemn or serious speech, it is anyway our thinking it over, for own thought to appear in our brains. Hearing something is not thinking it.
To sum up on the affirmative and negative, Western intellectual disciplines would give more room to possibility for another circumstance or thought. Let us compare a Wikipedia quote of Mark Siderits:
“What the Buddhist has in mind is that on one occasion one part of the person might perform the executive function, on another occasion another part might do so. This would make it possible for every part to be subject to control without there being any part that always fills the role of controller (and so is the self). On some occasions a given part might fall on the controller side, while on other occasions it might fall on the side of the controlled. This would explain how it’s possible for us to seek to change any of the skandhas while there is nothing more to us than just those skandhas.”.
Especially as regards the human condition, my preference remains with language styles in Western intellectualism, selectively. Certainty about ourselves cannot justify attempts to prescribe on other people. A Buddhist is free to perceive himself or herself as five skandhas. I would not mind a Buddhist saying “there is nothing more to us Buddhists than just those skandhas”. I would disagree with views to extend this idea on humanity entire, with saying “there is nothing more to a human being than just those skandhas”.
Let us mind that Buddha starved, to meditate. Accounts have it, he even fainted during such a practice. His observations might be early reasoning on stochastic and deterministic modes of human neural networks. Just as we do not have impeded speech telling what speech should be, there is no reason to have observations on starved dysfunction for exemplar indication on humans generally.
Neural network processes belong with standard human neurophysiology, and we can perceive them without hunger, or any stress. The perception can help grammar. I was not thinking about any religion, developing my exercises, and I do not see any rationale to try introducing religion into the context. The exercises just can help manage language.
If I might, I also would recommend my defended graduation work. Again, there is no rationale to imply spiritual correspondence.
Pattern constant practice is not necessary in humans. Neural networks can function in basically stochastic or deterministic manners. The random mode may be observed intrapersonally, with volitional fixation of gaze and motor as well as cognitive inactivity. Highly deterministic network behavior may be recognized in skilled and proficient language uses, taken the indispensably co-actuated cerebral specialization in human thought, memories, imagery, and linguistic performance.
Sustained in neural function, feedback has been noted to help verify patterns as well as to uphold their potential for change (Puppel, 1992). It would be the stochastic network mode to add to the readiness as observed by Edward Lee Thorndike, for learning generally. The deterministic mode would partake in exercise of neural command.
Human bodies are not indestructible. Just as we would not deny existence to tee balls based on possibility they get pierced or torn apart, conditions of limited consciousness do not prove that human personality does not exist, and the human mind is an illusion. Feel welcome to reckoning about near-death experiences.