Primary Hypotheses

1. All matter is energy in a constant state of change.
2. Energy attracts like energy. (The Law of Attraction)
3. As a manifestation of spirit (conscious, thought energy,) I am subject to the Law of Attraction, thus creating the material world in which I live.
4. By changing my energetic vibration (thoughts/intentions/consciousness) alone, I will affect material changes in the world around me.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

beyond boundaries..

so today arising after very little sleep, I began contemplating anahata nada & sanatana dharma, my favorite subjects. :)

interesting how in my life I happened upon, and was drawn to these principles.. I don't even know when it began. seems they have always been there, but the blessing of sanskrit has given them a name.. giving form to the formless..

anahata nada is soundless (or unstruck) sound.. the sound of the silence from which all sounds (forms) arise..

sanatana dharma is the eternal supporting principle of existence, or literally, eternal supporting mother (natural law).. it is often used in reference to hinduism and indeed hinduism falls into that definition, but sanatana dharma is even more inclusive than what is generally thought of as hinduism..

it is this very inclusiveness that make these principles so beautiful. to me they represent that from which everything emerges, that in which everything exists, and that to which all things return..

when, for brief moments, one allows one'e ego (attachment to form) to dissolve, these principles represent what remains..

it is blissful to return & return again to this boundless state before reincarnating into this thought-form, or that one. that is the dance of life from formlessness into form, and the music that plays is anahata nada..

so many people seem to think that one state is preferable over another. constantly chasing eternal bliss, one never catches it. we believe that formlessness is better than form, or vice-versa.. and it is the impossible moment between the two, the dance itself where joy abounds.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

on relating

so on this idea of relationships.. now I am focusing not on relationships as static concepts, but on relating as a dynamic.

I think this has been in the works for some time now, perhaps starting with ambc. I feel I learn a lot in relating to her. I think this approach could serve me well in relating to others too.. especially where there are challenges.

it's difficult not to conceptualize a relationship. just as it is to not conceptualize a human being, & instead to relate to what is presented in the moment without being mired in past formulations. this applies too in relating to self.

not a lot to think about. I suppose it is just a a matter of remembering to practice as the opportunites are presented.

how does one strike balance between remembering, and relating not based on the past, nor on hopes for the future (desire) for that matter?

I am not trying to abolish desire. desire is the thing that moves us forward, pushes the limits of existence. to reject desire is no more relevant than to become lost in it. it is the space between the two that is elusive.

I find that I am filled with desire even when in the moment, I want for nothing. it is like being balanced on an invisible thread, without fear of falling.. only feeling yourself there, suspended, timeless.

sometimes I don't know why I bother to write about these things. I guess there is an impetus for self-expression. that is enough of a reason. maybe no different from the reason we are here. :)

Sunday, November 23, 2008


so I woke up today thinking about impermanence.. and this put in my mind images evoked by a friend's mention of the aghories who frequent cremation grounds in india. I happened upon a couple of videos documenting the aghories incorporating human remains into their worship rituals..

I thought about the stark contrast of this open embrace of impermanence as compared with western culture's denial of death and the impermanent nature of all forms. In the west, death is mostly hidden from view, but in the world of the aghories it is accepted and incorporated into life.. even to the point of sometimes consuming the bodies of the dead, or adorning yourself with their remains. I suppose the closest we get in the west to an acknowledgement of impermanence is the mass bombardment of CSI-type tv dramas.

Not to romanticize this infatuation with holiness anymore than to glorify an infatuation with worldliness. both represent attachment of the ego to some ideal. both exist in time. any path that is separate from its destination may be just another obstacle to the always immediate realization truth.

At some point there is no desire to overcome fears nor habits; no desire for trinkets, nor to distinguish oneself with costume, nor colors, nor letters, nor words.. no desire to go beyond the present moment, nor to dwell within it.

I don't know what is the point of writing this other than perhaps to say I find the aghories comforting in that they provide a kind of counter-balance to the vast materialism that consumes us much the same as the aghories consume the bodies of the dead. perhaps oddly, i'm not offended by their consumption. I suppose in this world where I am still frustrated by desire, it's comforting to know that eventually, I & everything I covet will disintegrate into dust & fly away on the wind.

Monday, October 6, 2008


I have seen all the works which have been done under the sun, and behold, all is vanity and striving after wind. [Ecclesiastes 1:14 - New American Standard Bible (©1995)]

How do I feel about that quote? there are several different translations.. the Lamsa english translation of the Syriac Peshitta (which I usually prefer) says this:

I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit. [Ecclesiastes 1:14 - Lamsa English Peshitta Translation]

All the works which have been done under the sun.. Sometimes I feel as if I have seen all of them, but other times I realize that is not so, at least not on a personal level. All is vanity? Excessive pride.. egotism.. unreality.. I think perhaps most is vanity, not all.. No -- now that I consider that more carefully, not even most is vanity..

Most is comprised of what is found in nature, and nature is not vain, except to the extent that it cannot be separated from the consciousness that perceives it.. Therefore, if I see all as vanity, then it is I who is vain..

Vanity as the unreal.. Most is unreal? Hmm.. most is unreal, I suppose, if one considers the world of form as "unreal." What is reality? If reality is something that exits independently from the ideas concerning it, then only no-thing is real.. Thus, all is unreal and all is vanity after-all.

It only stands to follow that if all is unreal, then there is only striving after wind.. because any striving would be after some-thing and no-thing is real, only transient like the wind.. and all things exist as concepts in this dream of reality.

Is this a vexation of spirit? Both vexations and spirits, being things are unreal and only vanity; therefore, there is no vexation of spirit..

And so yes, I agree that "all is vanity and striving after wind." I do not necessarily concur that it is a "vexation of spirit." :-)

*whew! glad I got that figured out!*

For some reason the Narayana Mantra is what is evoked for me after this discourse.
"om namo narayanaya"