Adi Da Up Close Audio/Video Library


Adi Da




whole words only
(Check this if you want art to return listings for art gallery, but not for heart.)
68 matches for: Tribute
order by: title | poster | # views/listens | event year | date added
Displaying clips 16-30page:    previous    1     2    3  4  5     next
image description

Moce Dau Loloma - Alifereti Ledua and His Bandvideo
disc one, track 6 of May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts

poster: CDBaby
length: 06:04
date added: February 9, 2020
language: English
views: 1372; views this month: 23; views this week: 6
"Moce Dau Loloma" is by Alifereti Ledua and his Fijian band. It is track 6 from Disc One of the double CD, May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts.

May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts is a deeply moving, sacred, contemplative CD that celebrates Adi Da's Life of Love and Blessing. This tribute to Adi Da Samraj includes music from many different genres, ranging from Indian classical to jazz to world music and other contemporary styles.

With over two hours of devotional songs filling this double CD, you can listen to pieces composed and performed by many devotee artists, including Naamleela Free Jones, Tamarind Free Jones, Ray Lynch, John Wubbenhorst, John Mackay, Sally Howe, Crane Kirkbride, Antonina Randazzo, Katya Grineva and many others.

Some of the twenty-five pieces on May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts were written and offered in the days immediately following Adi Da's Passing on November 27, 2008, or in the year-long period of formal mourning that followed. Other songs were offered to Him in person during His Lifetime. This CD also contains new songs never released before by Naamleela, Tamarind, and other musicians.
tags:
music   CD  

Om Sri Turaga Dau Loloma Vunirarama - Felix Woldenbergvideo
disc one, track 5 of May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts

poster: CDBaby
length: 07:31
date added: February 9, 2020
language: English
views: 1788; views this month: 28; views this week: 2
"Om Sri Turaga Dau Loloma Vunirarama" is by Felix Woldenberg. It is track 5 from Disc One of the double CD, May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts.

"Turaga Dau Loloma Vunirarama" is a title given to Avatar Adi Da by the native Fijians of Naitauba: "The Great Lord [Turaga] Who Is The Divine Adept [Dau] Of The Divine Love [Loloma] and The Self-Radiant Divine Source and Substance [Vu] Of [ni] The Divine 'Brightness' [Rarama]".

May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts is a deeply moving, sacred, contemplative CD that celebrates Adi Da's Life of Love and Blessing. This tribute to Adi Da Samraj includes music from many different genres, ranging from Indian classical to jazz to world music and other contemporary styles.

With over two hours of devotional songs filling this double CD, you can listen to pieces composed and performed by many devotee artists, including Naamleela Free Jones, Tamarind Free Jones, Ray Lynch, John Wubbenhorst, John Mackay, Sally Howe, Crane Kirkbride, Antonina Randazzo, Katya Grineva and many others.

Some of the twenty-five pieces on May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts were written and offered in the days immediately following Adi Da's Passing on November 27, 2008, or in the year-long period of formal mourning that followed. Other songs were offered to Him in person during His Lifetime. This CD also contains new songs never released before by Naamleela, Tamarind, and other musicians.
tags:
music   CD  

Avadhoota Stotram - Alexandra Fryvideo
disc one, track 4 of May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts

poster: CDBaby
length: 08:53
date added: February 9, 2020
language: English
views: 1702; views this month: 43; views this week: 4
"Avadhoota Stotram" is by Alexandra Fry. It is track 4 from Disc One of the double CD, May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts.

"Avadhoota Stotram" ("Hymn Praising the Avadhoot") is a traditional hymn that Swami Muktananda adapted to praise his Guru, Bhagavan Nityananda. In this English version, Adi Da's devotees adapt the hymn to praise their Divine Avadhoot, Adi Da.

May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts is a deeply moving, sacred, contemplative CD that celebrates Adi Da's Life of Love and Blessing. This tribute to Adi Da Samraj includes music from many different genres, ranging from Indian classical to jazz to world music and other contemporary styles.

With over two hours of devotional songs filling this double CD, you can listen to pieces composed and performed by many devotee artists, including Naamleela Free Jones, Tamarind Free Jones, Ray Lynch, John Wubbenhorst, John Mackay, Sally Howe, Crane Kirkbride, Antonina Randazzo, Katya Grineva and many others.

Some of the twenty-five pieces on May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts were written and offered in the days immediately following Adi Da's Passing on November 27, 2008, or in the year-long period of formal mourning that followed. Other songs were offered to Him in person during His Lifetime. This CD also contains new songs never released before by Naamleela, Tamarind, and other musicians.
tags:
music   CD  

Guru Bandana - Tamarind Free Jonesvideo
disc one, track 3 of May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts

poster: CDBaby
length: 06:05
date added: February 9, 2020
language: English
views: 1642; views this month: 29; views this week: 5
"Guru Bandana" is by Tamarind Free Jones. It is track 3 from Disc One of the double CD, May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts. It was originally released on her 2012 album, Hansa. It sets to music a traditional Indian prayer.

May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts is a deeply moving, sacred, contemplative CD that celebrates Adi Da's Life of Love and Blessing. This tribute to Adi Da Samraj includes music from many different genres, ranging from Indian classical to jazz to world music and other contemporary styles.

With over two hours of devotional songs filling this double CD, you can listen to pieces composed and performed by many devotee artists, including Naamleela Free Jones, Tamarind Free Jones, Ray Lynch, John Wubbenhorst, John Mackay, Sally Howe, Crane Kirkbride, Antonina Randazzo, Katya Grineva and many others.

Some of the twenty-five pieces on May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts were written and offered in the days immediately following Adi Da's Passing on November 27, 2008, or in the year-long period of formal mourning that followed. Other songs were offered to Him in person during His Lifetime. This CD also contains new songs never released before by Naamleela, Tamarind, and other musicians.
tags:
music   CD  

Facing Beloved / No One Like Me - John Wubbenhorstvideo
disc one, track 2 of May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts

poster: CDBaby
length: 06:50
date added: February 9, 2020
language: English
views: 1538; views this month: 30; views this week: 6
"Facing Beloved / No One Like Me" is by John Wubbenhorst. It is track 2 from Disc One of the double CD, May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts. John Wubbenhorst plays bansuri, drum master Subash Chandran plays ghatam and konnokol, and drum master Ganesh Kumar plays kanjira.

May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts is a deeply moving, sacred, contemplative CD that celebrates Adi Da's Life of Love and Blessing. This tribute to Adi Da Samraj includes music from many different genres, ranging from Indian classical to jazz to world music and other contemporary styles.

With over two hours of devotional songs filling this double CD, you can listen to pieces composed and performed by many devotee artists, including Naamleela Free Jones, Tamarind Free Jones, Ray Lynch, John Wubbenhorst, John Mackay, Sally Howe, Crane Kirkbride, Antonina Randazzo, Katya Grineva and many others.

Some of the twenty-five pieces on May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts were written and offered in the days immediately following Adi Da's Passing on November 27, 2008, or in the year-long period of formal mourning that followed. Other songs were offered to Him in person during His Lifetime. This CD also contains new songs never released before by Naamleela, Tamarind, and other musicians.
tags:
music   CD  

5:05 - Naamleela Free Jonesvideo
disc one, track 1 of May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts

poster: CDBaby
length: 01:08
date added: February 9, 2020
language: English
views: 1617; views this month: 45; views this week: 5
"5:05" is by Naamleela Free Jones. It is track 1 from Disc One of the double CD, May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts.

The title is a reference to the time of Avatar Adi Da's Divine Mahasamadhi at 5:05pm (Fiji time) on November 27, 2008.

May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts is a deeply moving, sacred, contemplative CD that celebrates Adi Da's Life of Love and Blessing. This tribute to Adi Da Samraj includes music from many different genres, ranging from Indian classical to jazz to world music and other contemporary styles.

With over two hours of devotional songs filling this double CD, you can listen to pieces composed and performed by many devotee artists, including Naamleela Free Jones, Tamarind Free Jones, Ray Lynch, John Wubbenhorst, John Mackay, Sally Howe, Crane Kirkbride, Antonina Randazzo, Katya Grineva and many others.

Some of the twenty-five pieces on May You Ever Dwell In Our Hearts were written and offered in the days immediately following Adi Da's Passing on November 27, 2008, or in the year-long period of formal mourning that followed. Other songs were offered to Him in person during His Lifetime. This CD also contains new songs never released before by Naamleela, Tamarind, and other musicians.
tags:
music   CD  

Czy mrówka to też ego?video
poster: Adi Da Video Polska
length: 18:44
date added: October 3, 2019
event date: October 20, 2004
language: Polish
views: 1467; views this month: 49; views this week: 9
[Contains Polish subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

W tym humorystycznym i głęboko wnikliwym dyskursie Adi Da rozważa różnicę między samoświadomością a egotyzmem, odnosząc się zarówno do ludzi, jak i do nie-ludzi (w tym psów, mrówek i drzew).

"Czy mrówka to też ego?" ("Is an ant an ego?") is a video excerpt from a humorous and profoundly insightful Avataric Discourse (given by Adi Da on October 20, 2004 at Adi Da Samrajashram), Adi Da considers the difference between self-consciousness and egoity, referring to both humans and non-humans (including dogs, ants, and trees).

ADI DA: Na ogół egotyzm przypisujesz ludziom, ale zastanawiasz się nad wszystkim innym.

Na przykład, jak to jest nie tylko z czymś tak biernym jak dywan, czy choćby czymś co stoi i wydaje się, że nie ma zdolności szybkiego reagowania, jak drzewo.

Ale na przykład pies? Czy kiedy patrzysz na psa myślisz, że to ego równie szybko, jak o ludziach myślisz że są ego? I dlaczego wyznaczasz granicę? Kiedy przestajesz myśleć o żyjących istotach jako ego? Czy po prostu zakładasz, że wszystko co jest większe od świerszcza to ego? Albo, że wszystko co się rusza z perspektywy twoich doświadczeń, albo tego, co uważasz za naturalne założenie?

Jak daleko sięga sprawa egotyzmu w twoim przekonaniu?

Tak. „Ego” jest greckim słowem i oznacz "ja". Rozważam to z tobą i mówię o tym w znaczeniu samoograniczenia, a więc jest to rozszerzenie jego znaczenia. Ale słowo to znaczy po prostu "ja", co oznacza samo odniesienie, tak zwany zaimek zwrotny, autoreferencyjny. A zatem, czy mrówka jest do tego zdolna?

Widzisz, że się bronią i szamoczą z innymi. Nie mogłyby tego robić bez pewnego rodzaju samoświadomości.

A zatem zakładasz, że nawet coś takiego jak mrówka jest ego, świadoma siebie. Czy to coś musi się przemieszczać ze swojego miejsca? Czy musi być zdolne do pójścia na spacer, tak jak mrówka czy człowiek, czy może to być drzewo?

Czy drzewo jest siebie świadome? Już z racji definicji samoświadomość jest rodzajem egotyzmu A jak to jest z drzewami? Widoczna jest u nich pewnego rodzaju samo-świadomość. W tym sensie też są ego. Ale czy są egotyczne?

Czy funkcjonują egotycznie? Drzewa, ogólnie mówiąc, tak się nie zachowują.

Posiadają samo-świadomość jako organizmy, ale wydaje się, że nie są szczególnie zaniepokojone tym, że są drzewami. Charakteryzuje je raczej pewnego rodzaju kontemplacja, w której nie odczuwają niepokoju. To samo można czasem zauważyć obserwując różne istoty poza ludźmi. Jeżeli zaobserwujesz nie-ludzi, praktycznie u wszystkich widoczne są oznaki lokowania się w zacisznym miejscu by oddać się kontemplacjom, które przypominają rodzaj samadhi albo stany medytacji.

Jak myślisz dlaczego ludzie są niezrównoważeni? Dlaczego ludzki egotyz jest tym czy jest? Jeżeli zaobserwujesz jak się objawia u nie-ludzi, sugeruje to, że ludzie są takimi jakimi są, bo czują się zamknięci. I nie tylko zamknięcia za ścianami i kratami. Niektórzy są za kratami
i stają się bardzo niespokojni, chodzą tam i z powrotem stają się katatoniczni.

Zniewolenie jest twoim własnym aktem, podyktowanym również przez uwarunkowania.

Warunki mogą wzmocnić, a nawet, usprawiedliwić samo-ograniczenie. Ale ciągle tym powodem z którego cierpisz jest samo-ograniczenie.

Nie mniej jednak, jest coś co można zauważyć u ludzi o pewnej dojrzałości duchowej.

Następuje u nich rozluźnienie tendencji do samo-ograniczenia. Nie żyją oni w poczuciu zniewolenia tak dalece jak to robi przeciętny człowiek. A zatem ludzie są dosłownie zniewoleni, samo-zniewoleni,i żyją, odczuwając w różnym stopniu, ograniczenia warunkami życia. I w efekcie ludzie czują, że egzystencja w ciele fizycznym jest ograniczeniem.
Bo niezależnie od tego jak zdrowo teraz się czujesz, wiesz że umrzesz, i potencjalnie może cię spotkać wiele przykrości.

Zdajesz sobie sprawę, że to nieuniknione i wcześniej czy później, doświadczysz oczywistych trudności których wolałabyś uniknąć łącznie z chorobą i śmiercią. Wszystko co żyje życiem fizycznym umrze. Różnica polega na tym, czy doprowadza cię to do szału, prawia, że poszukujesz, albo czy jesteś spokojna, bo nie utraciłaś kontaktu z Tym co transcenduje taką możliwość?

ADI DA: [Laughs] You generally attribute egoity to human beings, but you wonder about everything else. For instance, what about not something relatively inert like a rug or even just standing there and not seeming to be particularly responsive, like a tree. But what about a dog? Is a dog, do you think dogs are egos when you see them, just as readily as you think of human beings as egos? But, why do you draw the line? I mean how far does it go? Where do you stop thinking of living entities, at least, as egos? Do you just presume everything bigger than a cricket is an ego? Or is everything that moves in your, from your perspective experientially or in your natural presumptions, how far do, does the fact of egoity extend in your presumption.

Well, is an ant an ego in your presumption?

The word “ego” is actually a Greek word which means “I”. I consider it with you and talk about it in terms of self-contraction and so forth, but, so that’s the elaboration on its meaning, but the word simply means “I” which means the reference, self-reference, the reflexive, reflexive pronoun as it’s called of self-reference. So, does an ant feel self-referential?

You observe them protecting themselves and struggling with others. Couldn’t do so without some kind of self-consciousness, could it? So, you naturally presume that even something like an ant is, is a self, an ego, self-aware. Does something have to move from its spatial location? Does it have to be able to take a walk or, such as an ant or a human being, or can a tree? Does a tree have self-consciousness, exhibit self-consciousness. . .

What about trees? They are entities with apparent self-consciousness of a kind. They are in that sense, egos. But are they egoic? Are they functioning egoically? Are they feeling that they are in bondage and moved to seek as human beings are and as you feel in your own case, you see? Trees don’t seem to behave, generally speaking, in quite that way. They are self-conscious as organisms, but they don’t seem to be particularly disturbed about being trees. They seem more characterized by some kind of contemplation in which they don’t feel disturbed.

But if you observe non-humans, virtually all of them show signs of setting themselves apart and entering into a contemplative state that resembles some kind of a samadhi or meditative condition.

Why do you think human beings are disturbed? You see, why is human egoity what it is? If you observe how it appears in evidence in non-humans, suggests that human beings are the way they are because they’re confined, and not just confined by walls and bars. Some people are, and they get very disturbed there, and walk back and forth or get catatonic.

Your bondage is your own activity, and it also extends from conditions. Conditions can reinforce or seem to justify self-contraction. But still what you’re suffering is self-contraction itself.

So, human beings are actually confined, and they are self-confined, and otherwise, also, living in various modes and degrees of confinement by conditions of life and in fact, human beings feel confined by bodily existence, because however healthy you may be at the moment, you know you’re going to die, and are potentially, potentially, you could suffer any number of great happenings. And you anticipate that inevitably, you will, sooner or later, experience some fundamental difficulties that you would prefer not to have to endure, including disease and death.

Well, everything that’s physically living is going to die. The trouble, the difference is does it drive you crazy, make you seek, or are you at ease, because you haven’t lost touch with what transcends that possibility?
tags:
Avataric Discourse   Polish  

Onko Muurahaisella Egoa?video
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 18:44
date added: August 31, 2019
event date: October 20, 2004
language: Finnish
views: 1587; views this month: 36; views this week: 9
[Contains Finnish subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

"Onko Muurahaisella Egoa?" ("Is an ant an ego?") is a video excerpt from a humorous and profoundly insightful Avataric Discourse (given by Adi Da on October 20, 2004 at Adi Da Samrajashram), Adi Da considers the difference between self-consciousness and egoity, referring to both humans and non-humans (including dogs, ants, and trees).

ADI DA: [Laughs] You generally attribute egoity to human beings, but you wonder about everything else. For instance, what about not something relatively inert like a rug or even just standing there and not seeming to be particularly responsive, like a tree. But what about a dog? Is a dog, do you think dogs are egos when you see them, just as readily as you think of human beings as egos? But, why do you draw the line? I mean how far does it go? Where do you stop thinking of living entities, at least, as egos? Do you just presume everything bigger than a cricket is an ego? Or is everything that moves in your, from your perspective experientially or in your natural presumptions, how far do, does the fact of egoity extend in your presumption.

Well, is an ant an ego in your presumption?

The word “ego” is actually a Greek word which means “I”. I consider it with you and talk about it in terms of self-contraction and so forth, but, so that’s the elaboration on its meaning, but the word simply means “I” which means the reference, self-reference, the reflexive, reflexive pronoun as it’s called of self-reference. So, does an ant feel self-referential?

You observe them protecting themselves and struggling with others. Couldn’t do so without some kind of self-consciousness, could it? So, you naturally presume that even something like an ant is, is a self, an ego, self-aware. Does something have to move from its spatial location? Does it have to be able to take a walk or, such as an ant or a human being, or can a tree? Does a tree have self-consciousness, exhibit self-consciousness. . .

What about trees? They are entities with apparent self-consciousness of a kind. They are in that sense, egos. But are they egoic? Are they functioning egoically? Are they feeling that they are in bondage and moved to seek as human beings are and as you feel in your own case, you see? Trees don’t seem to behave, generally speaking, in quite that way. They are self-conscious as organisms, but they don’t seem to be particularly disturbed about being trees. They seem more characterized by some kind of contemplation in which they don’t feel disturbed.

But if you observe non-humans, virtually all of them show signs of setting themselves apart and entering into a contemplative state that resembles some kind of a samadhi or meditative condition.

Why do you think human beings are disturbed? You see, why is human egoity what it is? If you observe how it appears in evidence in non-humans, suggests that human beings are the way they are because they’re confined, and not just confined by walls and bars. Some people are, and they get very disturbed there, and walk back and forth or get catatonic.

Your bondage is your own activity, and it also extends from conditions. Conditions can reinforce or seem to justify self-contraction. But still what you’re suffering is self-contraction itself.

So, human beings are actually confined, and they are self-confined, and otherwise, also, living in various modes and degrees of confinement by conditions of life and in fact, human beings feel confined by bodily existence, because however healthy you may be at the moment, you know you’re going to die, and are potentially, potentially, you could suffer any number of great happenings. And you anticipate that inevitably, you will, sooner or later, experience some fundamental difficulties that you would prefer not to have to endure, including disease and death.

Well, everything that’s physically living is going to die. The trouble, the difference is does it drive you crazy, make you seek, or are you at ease, because you haven’t lost touch with what transcends that possibility?
tags:
Avataric Discourse   Finnish  

żEs una Hormiga un Ego?video
poster: Videos de Adi Da - Espańol
length: 18:44
date added: August 21, 2019
event date: October 20, 2004
language: Spanish
views: 1396; views this month: 21; views this week: 4
[Contains Spanish subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

"żEs una Hormiga un Ego?" ("Is an ant an ego?") is a video excerpt from a humorous and profoundly insightful Avataric Discourse (given by Adi Da on October 20, 2004 at Adi Da Samrajashram), Adi Da considers the difference between self-consciousness and egoity, referring to both humans and non-humans (including dogs, ants, and trees).

ADI DA: [Laughs] You generally attribute egoity to human beings, but you wonder about everything else. For instance, what about not something relatively inert like a rug or even just standing there and not seeming to be particularly responsive, like a tree. But what about a dog? Is a dog, do you think dogs are egos when you see them, just as readily as you think of human beings as egos? But, why do you draw the line? I mean how far does it go? Where do you stop thinking of living entities, at least, as egos? Do you just presume everything bigger than a cricket is an ego? Or is everything that moves in your, from your perspective experientially or in your natural presumptions, how far do, does the fact of egoity extend in your presumption.

Well, is an ant an ego in your presumption?

The word “ego” is actually a Greek word which means “I”. I consider it with you and talk about it in terms of self-contraction and so forth, but, so that’s the elaboration on its meaning, but the word simply means “I” which means the reference, self-reference, the reflexive, reflexive pronoun as it’s called of self-reference. So, does an ant feel self-referential?

You observe them protecting themselves and struggling with others. Couldn’t do so without some kind of self-consciousness, could it? So, you naturally presume that even something like an ant is, is a self, an ego, self-aware. Does something have to move from its spatial location? Does it have to be able to take a walk or, such as an ant or a human being, or can a tree? Does a tree have self-consciousness, exhibit self-consciousness. . .

What about trees? They are entities with apparent self-consciousness of a kind. They are in that sense, egos. But are they egoic? Are they functioning egoically? Are they feeling that they are in bondage and moved to seek as human beings are and as you feel in your own case, you see? Trees don’t seem to behave, generally speaking, in quite that way. They are self-conscious as organisms, but they don’t seem to be particularly disturbed about being trees. They seem more characterized by some kind of contemplation in which they don’t feel disturbed.

But if you observe non-humans, virtually all of them show signs of setting themselves apart and entering into a contemplative state that resembles some kind of a samadhi or meditative condition.

Why do you think human beings are disturbed? You see, why is human egoity what it is? If you observe how it appears in evidence in non-humans, suggests that human beings are the way they are because they’re confined, and not just confined by walls and bars. Some people are, and they get very disturbed there, and walk back and forth or get catatonic.

Your bondage is your own activity, and it also extends from conditions. Conditions can reinforce or seem to justify self-contraction. But still what you’re suffering is self-contraction itself.

So, human beings are actually confined, and they are self-confined, and otherwise, also, living in various modes and degrees of confinement by conditions of life and in fact, human beings feel confined by bodily existence, because however healthy you may be at the moment, you know you’re going to die, and are potentially, potentially, you could suffer any number of great happenings. And you anticipate that inevitably, you will, sooner or later, experience some fundamental difficulties that you would prefer not to have to endure, including disease and death.

Well, everything that’s physically living is going to die. The trouble, the difference is does it drive you crazy, make you seek, or are you at ease, because you haven’t lost touch with what transcends that possibility?
tags:
Avataric Discourse   Spanish  

Le formiche hanno un egovideo
poster: Video di Adi Da, Canale italiano
length: 18:44
date added: July 10, 2019
event date: October 20, 2004
language: Italian
views: 1354; views this month: 19; views this week: 2
[Contains Italian subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

"Le formiche hanno un ego" ("Ants have an ego") is a video excerpt from a humorous and profoundly insightful Avataric Discourse (given by Adi Da on October 20, 2004 at Adi Da Samrajashram), Adi Da considers the difference between self-consciousness and egoity, referring to both humans and non-humans (including dogs, ants, and trees).

ADI DA: [Laughs] You generally attribute egoity to human beings, but you wonder about everything else. For instance, what about not something relatively inert like a rug or even just standing there and not seeming to be particularly responsive, like a tree. But what about a dog? Is a dog, do you think dogs are egos when you see them, just as readily as you think of human beings as egos? But, why do you draw the line? I mean how far does it go? Where do you stop thinking of living entities, at least, as egos? Do you just presume everything bigger than a cricket is an ego? Or is everything that moves in your, from your perspective experientially or in your natural presumptions, how far do, does the fact of egoity extend in your presumption.

Well, is an ant an ego in your presumption?

The word “ego” is actually a Greek word which means “I”. I consider it with you and talk about it in terms of self-contraction and so forth, but, so that’s the elaboration on its meaning, but the word simply means “I” which means the reference, self-reference, the reflexive, reflexive pronoun as it’s called of self-reference. So, does an ant feel self-referential?

You observe them protecting themselves and struggling with others. Couldn’t do so without some kind of self-consciousness, could it? So, you naturally presume that even something like an ant is, is a self, an ego, self-aware. Does something have to move from its spatial location? Does it have to be able to take a walk or, such as an ant or a human being, or can a tree? Does a tree have self-consciousness, exhibit self-consciousness. . .

What about trees? They are entities with apparent self-consciousness of a kind. They are in that sense, egos. But are they egoic? Are they functioning egoically? Are they feeling that they are in bondage and moved to seek as human beings are and as you feel in your own case, you see? Trees don’t seem to behave, generally speaking, in quite that way. They are self-conscious as organisms, but they don’t seem to be particularly disturbed about being trees. They seem more characterized by some kind of contemplation in which they don’t feel disturbed.

But if you observe non-humans, virtually all of them show signs of setting themselves apart and entering into a contemplative state that resembles some kind of a samadhi or meditative condition.

Why do you think human beings are disturbed? You see, why is human egoity what it is? If you observe how it appears in evidence in non-humans, suggests that human beings are the way they are because they’re confined, and not just confined by walls and bars. Some people are, and they get very disturbed there, and walk back and forth or get catatonic.

Your bondage is your own activity, and it also extends from conditions. Conditions can reinforce or seem to justify self-contraction. But still what you’re suffering is self-contraction itself.

So, human beings are actually confined, and they are self-confined, and otherwise, also, living in various modes and degrees of confinement by conditions of life and in fact, human beings feel confined by bodily existence, because however healthy you may be at the moment, you know you’re going to die, and are potentially, potentially, you could suffer any number of great happenings. And you anticipate that inevitably, you will, sooner or later, experience some fundamental difficulties that you would prefer not to have to endure, including disease and death.

Well, everything that’s physically living is going to die. The trouble, the difference is does it drive you crazy, make you seek, or are you at ease, because you haven’t lost touch with what transcends that possibility?
tags:
Avataric Discourse   Italian  

Historias de James Steinbergvideo
poster: Videos de Adi Da - Espańol
speaker: James Steinberg
length: 15:06
date added: November 20, 2018
language: Spanish
views: 1621; views this month: 15; views this week: 2
[Contains Spanish subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

Longtime devotee, James Steinberg, offers this testimonial to the life and work of Adi Da Samraj.

Excerpt from First Evening: Track 4 on the DVD, A Tribute to the Life and Work of His Divine Presence, Adi Da Samraj. More than 7 hours long, this Tribute DVD was filmed on the occasion of the first Anniversary of Adi Da's Divine Mahasamadhi, when devotees, family, and friends of Adi Da Samraj gathered at Adi Da Samrajashram, Fiji (Adi Da's principal Hermitage), to acknowledge Adi Da as the Divine in human form, to praise His Greatness, and to express their heart-felt gratitude for the Blessings they have received from Him.

A list of all the tracks on this DVD can be found here.



tags:
James Steinberg   Tribute   Mahasamadhi   DVD   Spanish  

Is an ant an ego?video
poster: AdiDaVideos
length: 18:44
date added: August 10, 2018
event date: October 20, 2004
language: English
views: 2350; views this month: 24; views this week: 6
In this humorous and profoundly insightful Avataric Discourse (given by Adi Da on October 20, 2004 at Adi Da Samrajashram), Adi Da considers the difference between self-consciousness and egoity, referring to both humans and non-humans (including dogs, ants, and trees).

ADI DA: [Laughs] You generally attribute egoity to human beings, but you wonder about everything else. For instance, what about not something relatively inert like a rug or even just standing there and not seeming to be particularly responsive, like a tree. But what about a dog? Is a dog, do you think dogs are egos when you see them, just as readily as you think of human beings as egos? But, why do you draw the line? I mean how far does it go? Where do you stop thinking of living entities, at least, as egos? Do you just presume everything bigger than a cricket is an ego? Or is everything that moves in your, from your perspective experientially or in your natural presumptions, how far do, does the fact of egoity extend in your presumption.

Well, is an ant an ego in your presumption?

The word “ego” is actually a Greek word which means “I”. I consider it with you and talk about it in terms of self-contraction and so forth, but, so that’s the elaboration on its meaning, but the word simply means “I” which means the reference, self-reference, the reflexive, reflexive pronoun as it’s called of self-reference. So, does an ant feel self-referential?

You observe them protecting themselves and struggling with others. Couldn’t do so without some kind of self-consciousness, could it? So, you naturally presume that even something like an ant is, is a self, an ego, self-aware. Does something have to move from its spatial location? Does it have to be able to take a walk or, such as an ant or a human being, or can a tree? Does a tree have self-consciousness, exhibit self-consciousness. . .

What about trees? They are entities with apparent self-consciousness of a kind. They are in that sense, egos. But are they egoic? Are they functioning egoically? Are they feeling that they are in bondage and moved to seek as human beings are and as you feel in your own case, you see? Trees don’t seem to behave, generally speaking, in quite that way. They are self-conscious as organisms, but they don’t seem to be particularly disturbed about being trees. They seem more characterized by some kind of contemplation in which they don’t feel disturbed.

But if you observe non-humans, virtually all of them show signs of setting themselves apart and entering into a contemplative state that resembles some kind of a samadhi or meditative condition.

Why do you think human beings are disturbed? You see, why is human egoity what it is? If you observe how it appears in evidence in non-humans, suggests that human beings are the way they are because they’re confined, and not just confined by walls and bars. Some people are, and they get very disturbed there, and walk back and forth or get catatonic.

Your bondage is your own activity, and it also extends from conditions. Conditions can reinforce or seem to justify self-contraction. But still what you’re suffering is self-contraction itself.

So, human beings are actually confined, and they are self-confined, and otherwise, also, living in various modes and degrees of confinement by conditions of life and in fact, human beings feel confined by bodily existence, because however healthy you may be at the moment, you know you’re going to die, and are potentially, potentially, you could suffer any number of great happenings. And you anticipate that inevitably, you will, sooner or later, experience some fundamental difficulties that you would prefer not to have to endure, including disease and death.

Well, everything that’s physically living is going to die. The trouble, the difference is does it drive you crazy, make you seek, or are you at ease, because you haven’t lost touch with what transcends that possibility?
tags:
Avataric Discourse  

Līlā de James Steinbergvideo
poster: Vidéos d'Adi Da
speaker: James Steinberg
length: 15:06
date added: July 14, 2018
event date: November 28, 2009
language: French
views: 1923; views this month: 17; views this week: 2
[Contains French subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

James Steinberg, un dévot de longue date d'Adi Da, raconte comment il est venu ŕ Lui.

Excerpt from First Evening: Track 4 on the DVD, A Tribute to the Life and Work of His Divine Presence, Adi Da Samraj. More than 7 hours long, this Tribute DVD was filmed on the occasion of the first Anniversary of Adi Da's Divine Mahasamadhi, when devotees, family, and friends of Adi Da Samraj gathered at Adi Da Samrajashram, Fiji (Adi Da's principal Hermitage), to acknowledge Adi Da as the Divine in human form, to praise His Greatness, and to express their heart-felt gratitude for the Blessings they have received from Him.

A list of all the tracks on this DVD can be found here.



tags:
French   James Steinberg   Tribute   Mahasamadhi   DVD  

Growing Up as a Devotee of Adi Da: Megan Andersonvideo
part 10 of A Tribute to the Life and Work of Adi Da Samraj

poster: AdiDaVideos
speaker: Megan Anderson
length: 06:39
date added: July 7, 2018
event date: November 29, 2009
language: English
views: 2303; views this month: 20; views this week: 4
Devotee Megan Anderson, who grew up in the Company of Adi Da, offers this testimonial to His life and work. She also describes how she was encouraged by Adi Da to take up her service to Him as one of the key editors of His Word, and how He personally guided her growth into human maturity.

Excerpt from Second Evening: Track 7 on the DVD, A Tribute to the Life and Work of His Divine Presence, Adi Da Samraj. More than 7 hours long, this Tribute DVD was filmed on the occasion of the first Anniversary of Adi Da's Divine Mahasamadhi, when devotees, family, and friends of Adi Da Samraj gathered at Adi Da Samrajashram, Fiji (Adi Da's principal Hermitage), to acknowledge Adi Da as the Divine in human form, to praise His Greatness, and to express their heart-felt gratitude for the Blessings they have received from Him.

A list of all the tracks on this DVD can be found here.
tags:
tribute   Megan Anderson   DVD   Tribute   Mahasamadhi  

El proceso de la creación del Arte de Adi Davideo
poster: Videos de Adi Da - Espańol
speaker: Ben Grisso
length: 08:30
date added: December 22, 2017
event date: November 29, 2009
language: Spanish
views: 2844; views this month: 35; views this week: 7
[Contains Spanish subtitles. If the CC icon ("Subtitles/closed captions") has a red line under it, the subtitles should appear. If you don't see them, just press the CC icon to turn them on.]

In this video excerpt, "El proceso de la creación del Arte de Adi Da" ("The process of creating the Art of Adi Da"), devotee Ben Grisso, who grew up in the Adidam community, and who worked with Adi Da on His Divine Image-Art, offers this testimonial to Adi Da's life and work.

Excerpt from Second Evening: Track 11 on the DVD, A Tribute to the Life and Work of His Divine Presence, Adi Da Samraj. More than 7 hours long, this Tribute DVD was filmed on the occasion of the first Anniversary of Adi Da's Divine Mahasamadhi, when devotees, family, and friends of Adi Da Samraj gathered at Adi Da Samrajashram, Fiji (Adi Da's principal Hermitage), to acknowledge Adi Da as the Divine in human form, to praise His Greatness, and to express their heart-felt gratitude for the Blessings they have received from Him.

A list of all the tracks on this DVD can be found here.
tags:
Spanish   DVD  
Displaying clips 16-30page:    previous    1     2    3  4  5     next
68 matches for: Tribute




 
Our multimedia library currently contains 1204 YouTube video clips and audio clips about (or related to) Adi Da and Adidam.[1] Enjoy! videoindicates a video, and audio an audio. Special categories of interest include:
   
   
Tribute to Adi Da's
Life and Work
(11)
Dawn Horse Press
DVDs (201) / CDs (256)
   
0 Multi-Part Series (80)
   
audios/videos
by year:

audios/videos
by poster:
non-English language audios/videos:

FOOTNOTES
[1]

Thanks to the many videographers who took the footage, to the many editors who created these videos and audios, and to the 131 people and organizations who posted these videos and audios on YouTube and other places on the Web. Special thanks to Lynne Thompson, who did a lot of the data entry for our audio/video database.


Quotations from and/or photographs of Avatar Adi Da Samraj used by permission of the copyright owner:
© Copyrighted materials used with the permission of The Avataric Samrajya of Adidam Pty Ltd, as trustee for The Avataric Samrajya of Adidam. All rights reserved. None of these materials may be disseminated or otherwise used for any non-personal purpose without the prior agreement of the copyright owner. ADIDAM is a trademark of The Avataric Samrajya of Adidam Pty Ltd, as Trustee for the Avataric Samrajya of Adidam.

Technical problems with our site? Let our webmaster know.