Sat TAt Aum

[Dustin]

I've read little about Sat Tat and Aum but am interested in learning more; the key aspect which interest me is how it all relates to physics; I read once that Tat was the witness, the subtlest point in vibatory creation; Sat was beyond vibatory creation (which is the main thing which I would like to better understand); Aum, the state of being is something I've lived in for a period of months.

[Shivani Devi]

Namaste.

When a Hindu person says "Hari Aum Tat Sat" it generally means "that's all she wrote"...It signifies the end of the beginning, and the beginning of the end...The Alpha and the Omega...both occuring in simultaneous interdependence, as if to say that there is NO linear time, but everything exists in a single moment, the perception of which, can span an entire pralaya (universal epoch)...where the expansion stops, and the entropic crunch begins...One breath of Brahma.

If we are talking about God (Hari), we say that there is nothing beyond God or nothing more than what God is, because that would mean that God is limited and finite when the reverse is true, so we say that the total, unlimited nature of Consciousness (Chit/Chid) is Sat (Truth) as this is the only thing which exists beyond the limited human perception of any conditioned truth in relation to mithyavta (conditioned existence).

The word "Tat" simply means "that"...It is "is-ness" or "being-ness" or that which merely exists for the sake of existence and nothing more. It is not "made" and it generally has no purpose which could ever make sense to us...There is a Sanskrit word I love...My favorite Sanskrit word.."Swayambhu".
Swayambhu means "That".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swayambhu

Aum Namah Shivaya

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Namaste.

Hello Shivani Devi, thanks for the response I think it speaks to the direction of my thoughts in a way that relates to where I am at; I was wondering what Namaste meant or rather I suppose perhaps it's cultural usage as that can differ from a definition I might look up. A similar feeling sound of an introduction phrase to a conversation, one from the Muslin culture (not a religion I've looked into but have read some about parts of the middle eastern area), is As-salāmu ʿalaykum which means “peace be with you” which then the other person responds by saying ʿalaykumu s-salām which means “and also with you” [in Wikipedia the translation is a little different but the translation I wrote is one I like which was from the movie Trader].

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

When a Hindu person says "Hari Aum Tat Sat" it generally means "that's all she wrote"...It signifies the end of the beginning, and the beginning of the end...

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

The Alpha and the Omega...both occurring in simultaneous interdependence, as if to say that there is NO linear time, but everything exists in a single moment, the perception of which, can span an entire pralaya (universal epoch)...where the expansion stops, and the entropic crunch begins...One breath of Brahma.

In a model of reality (a grand theory based view of existence) that I was working on last Spring I took a different approach to the cause and process of the Big Bang which then resulted in understanding the set of dimensions that we experience on a daily basis in a different way and then the dimensional considerations extended to such a point as to matching what you stated in the quote; I had been considering nonlinear dimensions of spacetime wherein at a certain point all of what exist would exist throughout all time in all time – the feat is presumably accomplished via relativity in relation to grand scales of “infinite” quantities of fully expanded energy and fully contracted/congealed energy occupy the same space.

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

One breath of Brahma.

This quote was taken out of your previous one; I was wondering if you could help me better understand it. I'm trying to better understand Brahma. Does Brahma have a cycle of wake and sleep? Also is the manifestation of Brahma that we exist within is it the only manifestation of Brahma existing at the same time; or, is it the only possible one that can and well ever exist?

[Brahma always exits right? And Brahma is infinite? And this manifestation in which we live in is a creation of Brahma but is miniscule in comparison to Brahma? Could the manifestation we live in be finite and Brahma be infinite?]

Earlier I wrote that Brahma was beyond vibratory creation which is something I read in the Autobiography Of A Yogi; I was thinking that if Brahma exist beyond time then that would perceivably be beyond vibratory creation; though such a thought would raise concerns about weather or not thought can occur outside of time - perhaps it should be all clarified as being just the time of nonlinear time; is Brahma conscious?, I know consciousness is the basis of all but at the point of all that exists existing in all moments can conscious thought still exist in such an experience?

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

If we are talking about God (Hari), we say that there is nothing beyond God or nothing more than what God is, because that would mean that God is limited and finite when the reverse is true, so we say that the total, unlimited nature of Consciousness (Chit/Chid) is Sat (Truth) as this is the only thing which exists beyond the limited human perception of any conditioned truth in relation to mithyavta (conditioned existence).

There is a lot I don't really understand in this quote. I don't really understand what Hari is. I came across Hari while looking up what Sat Tat Aum look like when written in Sanskrit a short while ago; I was unable to rediscover the source I had read but my vague impression of what it was saying was that Hari was about, say, our experience within the greater experience, so to speak? What I mean is say: Brahma is beyond vibratory creation, Tat the subtlest thing in vibratory creation, Aum the unceasing “motor” the thing which up holds manifested creation via vibration; then is Hari a reference to consciousness dimensions, a way of existing at multiple different points of within wherein at the same time all of all is just Brahma.

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

The word "Tat" simply means "that"...It is "is-ness" or "being-ness" or that which merely exists for the sake of existence and nothing more. It is not "made" and it generally has no purpose which could ever make sense to us...There is a Sanskrit word I love...My favorite Sanskrit word.."Swayambhu".
Swayambhu means "That".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swayambhu

Aum Namah Shivaya

When you say that the word Tat simply means that it makes me wonder if it would translate to the following: there's a book I like called The Force of Symmetry; in it, it introduced to me the concept of “where is whatwhen” aka wherewhatwhen; where is space, what is particle/quanta, when is time; the concept of where is whatwhen is a statement of physics saying that when you move in time and space “what” is equally effected; I was wondering, in relation to your quote, if Tat would be the creation of “what” as: 1st the division of wholeness to a division of consciousness which makes it possible for the statement that there exists more than one point of observation; and 2nd in relation to all that exists, the Big Bang, us and everything “that” would just be “that which is felt to be other than oneself (though in actuality they would be the same) - the creation of the external”?

I found the meaning of Swayabhu to be meaningful [Svayambhu (स्वयम्भू) is a Sanskrit word that means "self-manifested", "self-existing", or "that is created by its own accord". In Tibetan, this word appears as "Rangjung" རང་བྱུང་ . ]. The way I took your inclusion of Swayabhu in relation to Tat was that …. Oh I actually misread what you wrote!-lol. You wrote “There is a Sanskrit word I love...[….]Swayambhu.” The way in which I misread what you wrote was: There is a Sanskrit word for love….Swayambhu; which then I followed the link which stated that it meant “"self-manifested", "self-existing", or "that is created by its own accord"” so the meaning was an error but what it was was an understanding that all that has been created within vibratory creation is Self created (of the Self and by the Self) out of love. Something I once read was that Yogananda asked God why the universe was created and the answer was so that God would have someone to (something like) share in his experience of eternal love and bliss with.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Hello Shivani Devi, thanks for the response I think it speaks to the direction of my thoughts in a way that relates to where I am at; I was wondering what Namaste meant or rather I suppose perhaps it's cultural usage as that can differ from a definition I might look up. A similar feeling sound of an introduction phrase to a conversation, one from the Muslin culture (not a religion I've looked into but have read some about parts of the middle eastern area), is As-salāmu ʿalaykum which means “peace be with you” which then the other person responds by saying ʿalaykumu s-salām which means “and also with you” [in Wikipedia the translation is a little different but the translation I wrote is one I like which was from the movie Trader].




In a model of reality (a grand theory based view of existence) that I was working on last Spring I took a different approach to the cause and process of the Big Bang which then resulted in understanding the set of dimensions that we experience on a daily basis in a different way and then the dimensional considerations extended to such a point as to matching what you stated in the quote; I had been considering nonlinear dimensions of spacetime wherein at a certain point all of what exist would exist throughout all time in all time – the feat is presumably accomplished via relativity in relation to grand scales of “infinite” quantities of fully expanded energy and fully contracted/congealed energy occupy the same space.


This quote was taken out of your previous one; I was wondering if you could help me better understand it. I'm trying to better understand Brahma. Does Brahma have a cycle of wake and sleep? Also is the manifestation of Brahma that we exist within is it the only manifestation of Brahma existing at the same time; or, is it the only possible one that can and well ever exist?

[Brahma always exits right? And Brahma is infinite? And this manifestation in which we live in is a creation of Brahma but is miniscule in comparison to Brahma? Could the manifestation we live in be finite and Brahma be infinite?]

Earlier I wrote that Brahma was beyond vibratory creation which is something I read in the Autobiography Of A Yogi; I was thinking that if Brahma exist beyond time then that would perceivably be beyond vibratory creation; though such a thought would raise concerns about weather or not thought can occur outside of time - perhaps it should be all clarified as being just the time of nonlinear time; is Brahma conscious?, I know consciousness is the basis of all but at the point of all that exists existing in all moments can conscious thought still exist in such an experience?


There is a lot I don't really understand in this quote. I don't really understand what Hari is. I came across Hari while looking up what Sat Tat Aum look like when written in Sanskrit a short while ago; I was unable to rediscover the source I had read but my vague impression of what it was saying was that Hari was about, say, our experience within the greater experience, so to speak? What I mean is say: Brahma is beyond vibratory creation, Tat the subtlest thing in vibratory creation, Aum the unceasing “motor” the thing which up holds manifested creation via vibration; then is Hari a reference to consciousness dimensions, a way of existing at multiple different points of within wherein at the same time all of all is just Brahma.



When you say that the word Tat simply means that it makes me wonder if it would translate to the following: there's a book I like called The Force of Symmetry; in it, it introduced to me the concept of “where is whatwhen” aka wherewhatwhen; where is space, what is particle/quanta, when is time; the concept of where is whatwhen is a statement of physics saying that when you move in time and space “what” is equally effected; I was wondering, in relation to your quote, if Tat would be the creation of “what” as: 1st the division of wholeness to a division of consciousness which makes it possible for the statement that there exists more than one point of observation; and 2nd in relation to all that exists, the Big Bang, us and everything “that” would just be “that which is felt to be other than oneself (though in actuality they would be the same) - the creation of the external”?

I found the meaning of Swayabhu to be meaningful [Svayambhu (स्वयम्भू) is a Sanskrit word that means "self-manifested", "self-existing", or "that is created by its own accord". In Tibetan, this word appears as "Rangjung" རང་བྱུང་ . ]. The way I took your inclusion of Swayabhu in relation to Tat was that …. Oh I actually misread what you wrote!-lol. You wrote “There is a Sanskrit word I love...[….]Swayambhu.” The way in which I misread what you wrote was: There is a Sanskrit word for love….Swayambhu; which then I followed the link which stated that it meant “"self-manifested", "self-existing", or "that is created by its own accord"” so the meaning was an error but what it was was an understanding that all that has been created within vibratory creation is Self created (of the Self and by the Self) out of love. Something I once read was that Yogananda asked God why the universe was created and the answer was so that God would have someone to (something like) share in his experience of eternal love and bliss with.

Namaste.

There is a lot to get through here and I feel like I could go on forever explaining it and still not manage to be able to...which is how it just is regarding such things...we could discuss it for all of next year as well and still not even make a scratch upon the surface of this knowledge and awareness.

I know a bit about Quantum Physics, but not much...although that hasn't stopped me from trying to get into it.

I was going to explain a concept called Spanda, as it relates to Kashmir Shaivism and the Universal Quantum Field...but Maria Syldona does a much better job of doing this...and I am just too plastered with adult Egg Nog anyway...my family celebrates Christmas.

Quantum Physics and Shaivism - Maria Syldona

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wXO7oKtNWA

Spanda: The Pulse of Consciousness - Mark Dyczkowski (from the 2018 SAND Conference)

https://www.scienceandnonduality.com...consciousness/

Spanda of the Heart Vibration:

https://hridaya-yoga.com/hridaya-yog...-of-the-heart/

"Namaste" means "I pay homage to the Divinity within you" and "Namaskaram" and "Vannakam" means exactly the same thing, just from different areas and dialects of India. "Namaste" is like a "spiritual wink" saying..."hello and we both know the universal score here....WE BOTH ARE THAT!"



...but right now, my brain hurts trying to put all the Vedic Kalpas through the Higgs Field and then making it come out the other side in any way that a human brain could possibly understand it...least of all, my own.

However, if you want to know as much about this as I do...I will drop some names...and read/watch EVERYTHING ever written, said and made by them..I already have!

THESE ARE MY GURUS!!

1. Mark Dyczkowsky
2. Maria Syldona
3. Igor Kufayev
4. Stephen Wolinsky
5. Sally Kempton
6. Jaideva Singh
7. Alain Danielou

Or you can just sit back and watch every single Science and Non Duality Conference about Quantum Physics and Bija Mantras...and how Spanda created the first 50 syllables/sounds of the Sanskrit (Devanagari) alphabet...read the Spanda Karikas:

https://www.amazon.com/Spanda-Karika.../dp/8120808215

Also, Have a look through the videos made on Youtube by a user called "Shaktipatseer2".

There's an 'entry point' into my level of consciousness and thought processes anyway.

Aum Namah Shivaya

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Namaste.

There is a lot to get through here and I feel like I could go on forever explaining it and still not manage to be able to...which is how it just is regarding such things...we could discuss it for all of next year as well and still not even make a scratch upon the surface of this knowledge and awareness.

I know a bit about Quantum Physics, but not much...although that hasn't stopped me from trying to get into it.

I was going to explain a concept called Spanda, as it relates to Kashmir Shaivism and the Universal Quantum Field...but Maria Syldona does a much better job of doing this...and I am just too plastered with adult Egg Nog anyway...my family celebrates Christmas.

Quantum Physics and Shaivism - Maria Syldona

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wXO7oKtNWA

Spanda: The Pulse of Consciousness - Mark Dyczkowski (from the 2018 SAND Conference)

https://www.scienceandnonduality.com...consciousness/

Spanda of the Heart Vibration:

https://hridaya-yoga.com/hridaya-yog...-of-the-heart/

"Namaste" means "I pay homage to the Divinity within you" and "Namaskaram" and "Vannakam" means exactly the same thing, just from different areas and dialects of India. "Namaste" is like a "spiritual wink" saying..."hello and we both know the universal score here....WE BOTH ARE THAT!"



...but right now, my brain hurts trying to put all the Vedic Kalpas through the Higgs Field and then making it come out the other side in any way that a human brain could possibly understand it...least of all, my own.

However, if you want to know as much about this as I do...I will drop some names...and read/watch EVERYTHING ever written, said and made by them..I already have!

THESE ARE MY GURUS!!

1. Mark Dyczkowsky
2. Maria Syldona
3. Igor Kufayev
4. Stephen Wolinsky
5. Sally Kempton
6. Jaideva Singh
7. Alain Danielou

Or you can just sit back and watch every single Science and Non Duality Conference about Quantum Physics and Bija Mantras...and how Spanda created the first 50 syllables/sounds of the Sanskrit (Devanagari) alphabet...read the Spanda Karikas:

https://www.amazon.com/Spanda-Karika.../dp/8120808215

Also, Have a look through the videos made on Youtube by a user called "Shaktipatseer2".

There's an 'entry point' into my level of consciousness and thought processes anyway.

Aum Namah Shivaya

Thanks for the links. I'm going to listen to them.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

Thanks for the links. I'm going to listen to them.

That's awesome! I hope you find something that resonates.

With all due respect and humility, I do know a lot about this, but just because I can understand it, doesn't mean that I can present it in such a way that others can 'get it' too...and trying to dumb it down from the way my own intellect processes it (which is VERY rationally abstract) into some form of 'common language' is enough to give me a migraine headache.

So, it is easier to provide the links from whence I learned all of this myself:

Panel Discussion - Igor Kufayev, Sally Kempton, Menas Kafatos - Buddha At The Gas Pump interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBQwuP43xRI

Fractals, DNA and the Golden Ratio - Dan Winter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rx35q-zJRk

Interview With Stephen Wolinsky from the SAND Anthology:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkIKXgiKvCM

Abhinavagupta's Paramarthasara - Swami Lakshmanjoo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzV-mY47g-8

Shabdabrahman: The Divine Vibration - Shaktipatseer2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0GXQlJMxNA

The Energetic Transformation Of Consciousness - Craig Holliday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8P1d4N408M

That should keep you all going for a while...and my laptop is totally FULL of this stuff...I watch it all very regularly.

Aum Namah Shivaya

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

I know a bit about Quantum Physics, but not much...although that hasn't stopped me from trying to get into it.

Yes me as well some but not much, it's interesting though; what I've recently figureout is that quantum physics is not comfusing but what is is the fact that physicists wont agree on results so they make up all kinds of crazy ways to rationalize such things. Sometimes the issue is just simply that our initial world view is imcomplete wherein when changed makes such things logical once again.

In relation to everything else that was posted in your long response which include the above quote, thanks for all the sources I well definitely check them out in that Sat Tat Aum is something that I need to fully understand before I publish the book I'm trying to complete.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Something I once read was that Yogananda asked God why the universe was
created and the answer was so that God would have someone to (something like) share in his
experience of eternal love and bliss with.

That's right! Being the Only One, alone ....forever...not fun!
Been there....there is Nothing else....just One Pure Awareness....One...(yes, there was no 'me'.... 'me'
was that One Awareness...n-o-t-h-i-n-g else...no up, no down...I left that place pretty fast...it's all inside.)

[peteyzen]

great explanation shivani - thank you

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by peteyzen

great explanation shivani - thank you

Thank you also for the reply.. and you're very welcome.