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.)
72 matches for: cult
order by: title | poster | # views/listens | event year | date added
Displaying clips 1-15page:       1    2  3  4  5     next
image description

Je mravenec ego?video
poster: Adi Da Videa, čeština
length: 18:44
date added: March 16, 2022
event date: October 20, 2004
language: Czech
views: 792; views this month: 72; views this week: 5
[Contains Czech 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.]

"Je mravenec 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:
Czech   Avataric Discourse  

Tohle místo není utopievideo
poster: Adi Da Videa, čeština
length: 10:38
date added: September 20, 2021
event date: October 6, 2005
language: Czech
views: 659; views this month: 28; views this week: 3
[Contains Czech 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.]

"Tohle místo není utopie" ("This Place Is Not a Utopia") is an excerpt from an Avataric Discourse given by Adi Da Samraj on October 6, 2005, at the Mountain Of Attention Sanctuary.

ADI DA: "I find people's sorrows and losses to be heartbreaking and terrible and an immense burden and I am sympathetic and bless people in their trouble. However you must understand that is the nature of this place. This is not utopia, it is not paradise. It is a place of death, endings, suffering, brief amusements. It is not enough and merely to react to your difficulties for overlong and try to make an entire life out of it is fruitless. You do have to move on beyond that reaction to any moments suffering and loss. You must know the place you’re in and live in accordance with that knowledge instead of being sympathetic with some false view of the world or self or trying to idealize some aspect of potential experience, indulging in what amounts to addictions, repetitions of experiences, in order to avoid the knowledge of what is inherent in life, as well as all the hell that is coming on earth and is here. You will not be fulfilled.”
tags:
Czech   Avataric Discourse  

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: 1466; views this month: 48; views this week: 8
[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  

Czym jest kult?video
poster: Adi Da Video Polska
length: 19:00
date added: June 2, 2017
event date: December 16, 1978
language: Polish
views: 3404; views this month: 21; views this week: 3
[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.]

Adi Da krytyka kultu religijnego. Dyskurs ten, wydany w 1978 roku, jest jednym z jego podsumowań na ten temat.

Aby uzyskać więcej informacji o Adi Da Samraj i Drodze Serca proszę pisać na adres: adidavideo.pl@gmail.com.

Adi Da criticized religious cultism, long before the subject gained any popular attention. (For an audio clip of His earliest criticisms — in June, 1972 — click here.) This discourse, given in 1978 at The Mountain Of Attention, is one of His summary addresses on the subject. Adi Da observes that the primary characteristic of a cult member is shared enthusiasm (like enjoying the energy of the crowd at a football game). For example, in "the cult of the Spiritual Master", everybody is enjoying the enthusiasm (their own and each other's) associated with having "found" the great Master; but no one is actually engaged in significant deepening of the devotional and spiritual relationship with the Master, and practicing on that basis — hence no Spiritual growth or Realization occurs.

Adi Da: "My purpose in My Teaching is to make it possible for you to duplicate what I have done — not to be eternally separated from Me, but to be in Communion with Me — to be intimate with Me in Spiritual terms, so that you, yourself, may live this practice, and fulfill it in your own case."
tags:
cult   Polish  

Duchowy Proces w trudnych czasachvideo
poster: Adi Da Video Polska
length: 10:16
date added: September 20, 2020
event date: November 28, 1981
language: Polish
views: 1016; views this month: 33; views this week: 5
[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.]

Oto fragment rozmowy Adi Da, "Gdzie w ciele jest szczęście?", którą wygłosił 28 listopada 1981 roku. Poniżej publikujemy fragment tekstu z tego nagrania.

"Duchowy Proces w trudnych czasach" ("The Spiritual Process in Troubled Times") is a video excerpt from Adi Da's classic talk, "The Bodily Location of Happiness", which He gave on November 28, 1981. This talk was originally published in the book, The Bodily Location Of Happiness. The full talk is available on DVD and on CD, and as an online transcript.

ADI DA: Życie jest głupotą, ale to nie są czasy na tolerowanie głupoty. Świat jest szalony, to straszne czasy, a w nadchodzących latach wcale nie będzie łatwiej. Proces duchowy zawsze przeżywano w trudnych czasach. Dlatego proces duchowy nie toleruje głupca. Sam Proces Duchowy pokona cię. Nie jest to łatwe osiągnięcie, to nieprawdopodobnie trudna sprawa. Nawet to, czego dzisiaj słuchaliście, zostało wysłuchane tylko przez ułamek rodzaju ludzkiego w całej jego historii. Możliwość praktyki jest niezwykle rzadka, a spełnienie jej jest praktycznie nieznane.

W pewnym sensie można powiedzieć, że to życie jest piekłem. W naszym języku religijnym mówimy o tym, co może się z tobą stać po śmierci. Cóż, można iść do nieba, można iść do czyśćca żeby się oczyścić lub można iść do piekła. A potem być może udasz się do czyśćca czy tymczasowego piekła, i może będziesz miał szczęście urodzić się jako istota ludzka i poświęcić się duchowemu procesowi. Natura tego piekła polega na tym, że jesteśmy opętani sami sobą. Rodzimy się w nie-Szczęściu i nie przekraczamy go łatwo. Nieustannie dążymy do szczęścia poprzez wszelkiego rodzaju niezwykle złożone środki i nigdy go nie osiągamy.

Gdyby Urzeczywistnieni Adepci nie wracali by nauczać, to tutaj byłoby naprawdę piekło, a nie coś podobnego do piekła. Gdyby nie było możliwości Oświecenia, gdyby nie był Nauk, nie było Boskiego Prawa, Adeptów, Świętej Drogi, Świętej wspólnoty, ani możliwości samo-transcendencji, to tutaj byłoby naprawdę piekło.

ADI DA: Life is foolishness. This is no time, in any case, to be tolerant of foolishness. The world is mad, and these are dreadful times. Things are not going to be easier in the years ahead. The spiritual process has always been lived in difficult times. Therefore, the spiritual process tolerates no fool. The spiritual process itself will spit you out. It is not an easy attainment, but a profoundly difficult affair. Even what you have listened to today has been heard by only a fraction of the human race in all of history. The opportunity to practice is extremely rare, and the fulfillment of practice is practically unknown.

In some sense you could say this life is hell. . . The nature of this hell is that we are self-possessed. We are born in un-Happiness and we do not transcend it readily. We constantly pursue Happiness through all kinds of incredibly complex means, and we never attain It. . .

If Spiritual Realizers did not turn about and Teach, this would truly be a hell instead of being like a hell. It would truly be a hell if there were no possibility of Enlightenment, if there were no Teaching, no Spiritual Masters, no sacred Way, no sacred community, no capacity for understanding or self-transcendence.
tags:
Polish   DVD   CD  

To miejsce to nie Utopiavideo
poster: Adi Da Video Polska
length: 10:38
date added: August 18, 2019
event date: October 6, 2005
language: Polish
views: 1351; views this month: 19; views this week: 3
[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.]

ADI DA: „Ludzka rozpacz i straty są dla mnie wstrząsające i straszne, to ogromny ciężar. Nieuchronnie współczuję i błogosławię ludzi w ich kłopotach. Musisz jednak zrozumieć, że taki jest charakter tego miejsca. To nie jest Utopia. To nie raj. To miejsce śmierci, zakończeń, cierpienia, ulotnych rozrywek, to zbyt mało. Ale jedynie reagować przez lata na twoje problemy i próbować z tego zbudować twoje życie to bezowocny wysiłek. Musisz wznieść się ponad reagowanie na chwile cierpienia i straty bo twoja kolej nadchodzi. Pewnego dnia to będzie twoja śmierć. Wszyscy przeminą. Wszystko przepadnie. Wszystko się straci. Wszystko się zmieni. Każda możliwa separacja nastąpi. Musisz poznać to miejsce, w którym się znalazłeś i żyć zgodnie z tą wiedzą. A nie godzić się z przyjmowanym fałszywym obrazem bytu czy świata, i próbować idealizować jakiś aspekt potencjalnego doświadczenia, które sprowadza się do uzależnień i powtórzeń tego samego. A wszystko po to, aby uniknąć wiedzy o życiu i o całym piekle, które nadciąga nad Ziemię i jest tutaj, w tych strasznych, ciemnych, czasach niewiedzy, w tych złych, morderczych czasach. Bez względu na to, co tutaj jest twórcze, szlachetne czy interesujące musisz poważnie traktować rzeczywistość warunkowej egzystencji i zrozumieć, że nie spełnisz się tutaj”.

Adi Da następnie mówi o tym, że to zrozumienie w naturalny sposób doprowadzi osobę do wyrzeczenia się poszukiwania spełnienia na tym świecie i do otwarcia się na Prawdę i Rzeczywistości, które On i Jego Nauczanie oraz inne Dary Wyzwolenia oferują.

"To miejsce to nie Utopia" ("This Place Is Not a Utopia") is an excerpt from an Avataric Discourse given by Adi Da Samraj on October 6, 2005, at the Mountain Of Attention Sanctuary.

ADI DA: "I find people's sorrows and losses to be heartbreaking and terrible and an immense burden and I am sympathetic and bless people in their trouble. However you must understand that is the nature of this place. This is not utopia, it is not paradise. It is a place of death, endings, suffering, brief amusements. It is not enough and merely to react to your difficulties for overlong and try to make an entire life out of it is fruitless. You do have to move on beyond that reaction to any moments suffering and loss. You must know the place you’re in and live in accordance with that knowledge instead of being sympathetic with some false view of the world or self or trying to idealize some aspect of potential experience, indulging in what amounts to addictions, repetitions of experiences, in order to avoid the knowledge of what is inherent in life, as well as all the hell that is coming on earth and is here. You will not be fulfilled.”
tags:
Polish  

Wolność jest jedynym prawemvideo
poster: Adi Da Video Polska
length: 04:13
date added: January 16, 2020
language: Polish
views: 1225; views this month: 34; views this week: 7
[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.]

To nagranie jest fragmentem eseju "Prawdziwie ludzka kultura nowego świata" (2001; aktualizacja 13 listopada 2019 r.). Tekst jest czytany przez studenta Adi Da Samraj. Jestem tu, by wyzwolić wszystkie istoty.

Darshan occasion of Avatar Adi Da at Adi Da Samrajashram.

The audio recording is an excerpt from a recitation of Adi Da's essay, "Freedom Is The Only Law and Happiness Is The Only Reality". This is the Epilogue from Adi Da's book, The Truly Human New World-Culture of Unbroken Real-God-Man, which was originally written in 2001, and updated on November 13, 2019. The essay is read by a student of Adi Da.

ADI DA: Jestem tu, by wyzwolić wszystkie istoty.

Jestem tu po to, by każdemu dać prawdziwą wolność.

"Wolność" jest jednym z głównych słów związanych z polityką tego "późnych czasów". Ogólny trend demokratyzacji całego świata niesie ze sobą wzmożone zainteresowanie koncepcją wolności i dążeniem do wolności. Jednak w kontekście i uwarunkowaniach tego "późnego czasu" słowo "wolność" jest używane w taki sposób, że prawdziwe znaczenie tego słowa zostaje utracone, a jego znaczenie zmienione, a nawet wulgaryzowane.

Ten sam proces wulgaryzowania ma miejsce również w przypadku innych słów, takich jak (na przykład) słowo "miłość". Słowo "miłość" reprezentuje głęboką ideę w realiach życia, ale samo słowo jest używane bardzo swobodnie. Ludzie często mówią, że "kochają" to czy tamto, mając na myśli coś zupełnie innego niż właściwie znaczenie słowa "miłość".

"Miłość" to słowo, które słusznie sugeruje powszechne poświęcenie ego-"ja". Prawdziwa miłość jest kwestią transcendencji "ja" (lub wykraczania poza twoje ograniczenia w stosunku do innych) - ale w realiach wulgaryzowanej kultury "późnych czasów" słowo "miłość" zaczęło być używane w odniesieniu do tego, co zaspokaja twoje skłonności, spełnia twoje pragnienia, albo w jakiś sposób rekompensuje ograniczenia w twoim życiu, zadowalając cię i (tym samym) wspierając twoje egoistyczne usposobienie. To nie ma nic wspólnego z prawdziwą miłością.

Tak samo jest ze słowem "wolność" i pojęciem wolności. Kultura światowa tych "późnych czasów" jest zasadniczo kulturą egoistyczną związaną z komplikacjami w pierwszych trzech etapach życia. Jest to kultura nastolatków. I to właśnie w kontekście tej kultury wielkie słowa takie jak "miłość" i "wolność" są wulgaryzowane. W usposobieniu nastolatków słowo "wolność", podobnie jak słowo "miłość", sprowadza się do znaczenia egoistycznego. Ludzie mówią, że chcą być "wolni", chcą mieć "swobodę" działamia, lub chcą być "wolni" do robienia tego czy owego, ale właściwie chodzi im o to, że chcą być w stanie spełniać swoje pragnienia bez ograniczeń. Młodzież reagująca na opiekę rodzicielską lub oczekiwania rodziców uważa, że każdy taki autorytet lub oczekiwania mają charakter represyjny lub ograniczający. Dlatego tacy nastolatkowie mówią, że chcą być "wolni" aby robić to, co im się podoba. I ogólnie rzecz biorąc, w tym "późnym czasie" takie jest znaczenie słowa "wolność". Nawet w szerszej sferze politycznej słowo "wolność" jest używane do wyrażenia (osobistego, a także zbiorowego) zamiaru, aby możliwości spełniania pragnień, a pragnienia te (z konieczności) są zasadniczo egoistyczne.

ADI DA: I Am here to Divinely Liberate all beings.

I Am here to Grant True Freedom to every one.

“Freedom” is one of the principal words associated with the politics of this “late-time”. The general trend toward the democratization of the entire world carries with it an intensified interest in the concept of freedom and in the pursuit of freedom. However, in the context and circumstance of this “late-time”, the word “freedom” is used in such a way that the true import of the word is lost, and its meaning is transformed, and even vulgarized.

The same process of vulgarization has also occurred in the case of other words, such as (for example) the word “love”. The word “love” represents a profound concept and reality, but the word itself tends to be used very casually. People commonly say that they “love” this or that, meaning something quite different from what the word “love” rightly and truly signifies.

“Love” is a word that rightly refers to the universal Sacrifice of ego-“self”. Real love is a matter of transcending “self” (or going beyond your limitations in relation to others)—but, in the “late-time” circumstance of vulgarized culture, the word “love” has come to be used in relation to whatever satisfies your inclinations, or fulfills your desires, or (otherwise) somehow compensates for limitations in your life by pleasing you and (thereby) supporting your egoic disposition. None of that has anything to do with real love.

So it also is with the word “freedom”, and the notion of freedom. The world-culture of this “late-time” is essentially an ego-culture associated with complications in the first three stages of life. It is essentially an adolescent culture. And it is in the context of that culture that great words like “love” and “freedom” become vulgarized. In the adolescent disposition, the word “freedom”, like the word “love”, is reduced to an egoic meaning. People say they want to be “free”, or want to act “freely”, or want to be “free” to do this or that—but what they actually mean is that they want to be able to fulfill their desires without limitation. An adolescent reacting to parental authority or parental expectations regards any such authority or expectations to be oppressive or limiting. Therefore, such adolescents say that they want to be “free” to do whatever they please. And that is, in general, what is meant in this “late-time” by the word “freedom”. Even in the larger political sphere, the word “freedom” is used to express the (personal, and also collective) intent to be able to fulfill desires—and those desires are (necessarily) fundamentally ego-based.

What does the fulfillment of desires have to do with true freedom? Rightly, the word “freedom” is synonymous with the word “liberation”. To “be free”, or to “be liberated”, means to “go beyond bondage”. The opposite of “freedom” is “bondage”. If one is truly moved to be truly free, one is moved to relinquish (and go beyond) bondage. Such is the true Wisdom-understanding of freedom.

Neither true freedom, nor real love, nor any other great concept is rightly understood via the words and concepts of adolescents. There must be human maturity (and, therefore, growth in Wisdom) for the great meanings underlying these concepts to be understood and actually lived.

Be moved toward real love, without limit. Be moved toward real happiness, without limit.

Be moved toward true freedom, without limit. You should (and, ultimately, must) be so moved. But to actually realize love (or real happiness, or true freedom) without limit, you must deal with yourself most profoundly. You cannot merely be reactive, like an adolescent or a worldly person.

If you want to be truly free, you must first understand that you are bound, and you must understand how you are bound, and then you must do something about that. If, on the other hand, you are merely reactively inclined to fulfill desires, and you want to be (so-called) “free” to do so, then you are not examining your bondage—what its roots are, what its signs are, what its characteristics are—and, if you are not examining your bondage with real discriminative intelligence, you are also not doing what you must do in order to be truly free.
tags:
Polish  

Der körperliche Sitz des Glücklichseinsvideo
poster: Adi Da Videos Deutschland
length: 11:56
date added: June 3, 2017
event date: November 28, 1981
language: German
views: 5070; views this month: 45; views this week: 4
[Contains German 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.]

This is a video excerpt from Adi Da's classic talk, "The Bodily Location of Happiness" (German: "Der körperliche Sitz des Glücklichseins"), which He gave on November 28, 1981. This talk was originally published in the book, The Bodily Location Of Happiness. The full talk is available on CD.

The talk communicates several core insights:

1. Everybody is intuitively familiar with happiness. You don't have to be a devotee of Adi Da! This was part of the reason Adi Da chose "happiness" as the focus of this Teaching period: because the subject was so accessible. Everyone knows what it's like to be happy (at least a little). It's just that most people are not aware that Perfect, Eternal Happiness is possible and Realizable. (And it certainly isn't, through ordinary human means.) Adi Da: "All beings are always already Happy. You always know, at this very moment you know exactly, what it would be to look and feel and be and act completely Happy." The esoteric reason everyone is familiar with happiness is because everyone is always, already happy. And the esoteric reason everyone yearns for complete happiness is because complete happiness is realizable — and everyone's heart knows that.

2. Adi Da's "Lesson of Life":"You can't become happy; you can only be (already) happy." People are always seeking for happiness. The "pursuit of happiness" (not happiness itself!) is even enshrined as an "unalienable right" (alongside life and liberty) in the preamble of the United States Declaration of Independence. Its author, Thomas Jefferson, knew better than to think a government could guarantee happiness itself — hence only the guarantee of "the pursuit of happiness". Only a Divine Incarnation can guarantee Happiness Itself.

Adi Da reveals that happiness is the native state of beings. It is already the case. Every attempt to seek for it (mis-identifying the source of happiness as some object or other) in fact serves to dissociate one from it. Adi Da: "You think that you can seek Happiness and find it. Your search for Happiness is itself a confession of un-Happiness. You cannot realize Happiness by persisting in un-Happiness, persisting in the method of un-Happiness. All seeking is an expression of un-Happiness, all seeking is the method of un-Happiness, the practice of un-Happiness. This must be understood. It is not merely true — it must be understood."

Self-understanding allows one to get this point. Based on self-understanding, one can devote oneself to Happiness rather than to seeking for It and settling for the little bit of Infinite Happiness that "bleeds through" the clench of ego into conditions. This ultimately enables the Eternal Realization of Infinite, Perfect Happiness. Adi Da: "Understand your un-Happiness. Then you will be capable of locating Happiness, and, having located Happiness, you will be capable of practicing the Way of Adidam, which is nothing but the devotion of life to Happiness."

3. The Transmission of the Divine Guru is How One Locates Happiness. The subtitle of the book, The Bodily Location Of Happiness, is: "On the Incarnation of the Divine Person and the Transmission of Love-Bliss". In other words, you can't apply "The Lesson of Life" by somehow "locating" happiness directly, by yourself (or in yourself). Happiness is our native state, but that doesn't mean it can be located by an egoic, "do it yourself" process. We locate happiness directly as a Grace-given Gift, through devotion to the Transcendental Spiritual Transmission of Adi Da. Adi Da: "Happiness is presently the case. In this moment you are already Happy. Sitting with Me, locate this Happiness." We locate our "Native State" by recognizing and submitting to our "Native Person" — our Very Self appearing here in bodily (human) form.

4. It is a Process of Whole Bodily Location. "The bodily location of Happiness" is not primarily a reference to some place where Happiness resides in the body (although Adi Da teases His listeners with this idea: "Look for it in your toes, in your fingers, in your shirt, in your head"). It refers to a process ("the bodily location of Happiness" = "the locating of Happiness with the whole body-mind") that involves the surrender and transformation of every aspect of the body-mind, immersed in the Perfectly Happy State of the Divine Guru, through recognition of Him as the Divine in every moment. Then the secondary and supportive practices of the Way of Adidam become means for staying immersed in that Divine State in every moment: "Having located Happiness [having recognized Adi Da as the Divine], you will be capable of practicing the Way of Adidam, which is nothing but the devotion of life to Happiness [Adi Da, recognized as the Divine]. The practices of this Way are not methods for attaining Happiness, but they are the expressions of Happiness. The disciplines of money, food, and sex are not a way to become Happy. Discipline is difficult enough — why should we also burden it with the obligation to make us Happy!"
tags:
happiness   CD   German  

Hengellistä prosessia on aina eletty vaikeina aikoinavideo
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 10:16
date added: August 3, 2021
event date: November 28, 1981
language: Finnish
views: 767; views this month: 29; views this week: 5
[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.]

Tämä on ote Adi Dan puheesta "Ilon ruumiillinen sijainti", jonka Hän antoi 28. marraskuuta 1981.

This is a video excerpt from Adi Da's classic talk, "The Bodily Location of Happiness", which He gave on November 28, 1981. This talk was originally published in the book, The Bodily Location Of Happiness. The full talk is available on DVD and on CD, and as an online transcript.

ADI DA: Elämä on typeryyttä. Nyt ei ole muutenkaan aika suvaita typeryyttä. Maailma on hullu, ja nämä ovat karmeita aikoja. Asiat eivät helpotu tulevina vuosina. Hengellistä prosessia on aina eletty vaikeina aikoina. Hengellinen prosessi ei siis suvaitse typerystä. Hengellinen prosessi sylkäisee sinut ulos. Se ei ole helppo saavutus, vaan syvästi vaikea koettamus. Jopa se, mitä tänään kuulitte on vain ihmiskunnan murto-osan kuulemaa kautta historian. Mahdollisuus harjoittaa hengellistä prosessia on erittäin harvinainen, ja sen täyttymys on\Nkäytännössä tuntematon.

Jossain mielessä voisi sanoa, että tämä on elämä on helvettiä. Uskonnollisella kielellämme puhumme siitä, mitä voi tapahtua kuoleman jälkeen. Voit joko nousta taivaaseen tai joutua puhdistautumaan kiirastuleen, tai voit joutua helvettiin. Ja sitten ehkä joudut kiirastuleen tai tilapäiseen helvettiin, mutta ehkä sinulla on riittävästi hyvää onnea syntyä ihmiseksi, jotta voit omistautua hengelliselle prosessille. Tämän helvetin luonne on, että olemme itseemme käpertyneitä. Synnymme ilottomuudessa emmekä helposti pääse tämän ilottomuuden yli. Tavoittelemme iloa jatkuvasti kaikenlaisin uskomattoman monimutkaisin keinoin emmekä ikinä saavuta sitä.

Jos Hengelliset Mestarit eivät olisi alkaneet opettamaan, tämä todellakin olisi helvetti eikä vain helvetin kaltainen. Tämä todellakin olisi helvetti jos täällä ei olisi Valaistuksen mahdollisuutta, jos täällä ei olisi Opetusta, ei Hengellisiä Mestareita, ei Pyhää Tietä, ei Pyhää yhteisöä, ei kykyä ymmärtää tai ylittää itseään.

ADI DA: Life is foolishness. This is no time, in any case, to be tolerant of foolishness. The world is mad, and these are dreadful times. Things are not going to be easier in the years ahead. The spiritual process has always been lived in difficult times. Therefore, the spiritual process tolerates no fool. The spiritual process itself will spit you out. It is not an easy attainment, but a profoundly difficult affair. Even what you have listened to today has been heard by only a fraction of the human race in all of history. The opportunity to practice is extremely rare, and the fulfillment of practice is practically unknown.

In some sense you could say this life is hell. . . The nature of this hell is that we are self-possessed. We are born in un-Happiness and we do not transcend it readily. We constantly pursue Happiness through all kinds of incredibly complex means, and we never attain It. . .

If Spiritual Realizers did not turn about and Teach, this would truly be a hell instead of being like a hell. It would truly be a hell if there were no possibility of Enlightenment, if there were no Teaching, no Spiritual Masters, no sacred Way, no sacred community, no capacity for understanding or self-transcendence.
tags:
Finnish   CD   DVD  

Ilon ruumiillinen sijaintivideo
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 12:23
date added: September 30, 2020
event date: November 28, 1981
language: Finnish
views: 1519; views this month: 49; views this week: 10
[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.]

Avatar Adi Dan antama puhe vuodelta 1981, joka käsittelee Aidon Ilon luonnetta ja sen Toteutusta hetkestä hetkeen, joka ei onnistu sitä etsimällä.

This is a video excerpt from Adi Da's classic talk, "The Bodily Location of Happiness", which He gave on November 28, 1981. This talk was originally published in the book, The Bodily Location Of Happiness. The full talk is available on CD and on a new DVD, The Location Of Happiness.

The talk communicates several core insights:

1. Everybody is intuitively familiar with happiness. You don't have to be a devotee of Adi Da! This was part of the reason Adi Da chose "happiness" as the focus of this Teaching period: because the subject was so accessible. Everyone knows what it's like to be happy (at least a little). It's just that most people are not aware that Perfect, Eternal Happiness is possible and Realizable. (And it certainly isn't, through ordinary human means.) Adi Da: "All beings are always already Happy. You always know, at this very moment you know exactly, what it would be to look and feel and be and act completely Happy." The esoteric reason everyone is familiar with happiness is because everyone is always, already happy. And the esoteric reason everyone yearns for complete happiness is because complete happiness is realizable — and everyone's heart knows that.

2. Adi Da's "Lesson of Life":"You can't become happy; you can only be (already) happy." People are always seeking for happiness. The "pursuit of happiness" (not happiness itself!) is even enshrined as an "unalienable right" (alongside life and liberty) in the preamble of the United States Declaration of Independence. Its author, Thomas Jefferson, knew better than to think a government could guarantee happiness itself — hence only the guarantee of "pursuing happiness". Only a Divine Incarnation can guarantee Happiness Itself.

Adi Da reveals that happiness is the native state of beings. It is already the case. Every attempt to seek for it (or mis-identify the source of happiness as some object or other) in fact serves to dissociate one from it. Adi Da: "You think that you can seek Happiness and find it. Your search for Happiness is itself a confession of un-Happiness. You cannot realize Happiness by persisting in un-Happiness, persisting in the method of un-Happiness. All seeking is an expression of un-Happiness, all seeking is the method of un-Happiness, the practice of un-Happiness. This must be understood. It is not merely true — it must be understood."

Self-understanding allows one to get this point. Based on self-understanding, one can devote oneself to Happiness rather than to seeking for It and settling for the little bit of Infinite Happiness that "bleeds through" the clench of ego into conditions. This ultimately enables the Eternal Realization of Infinite, Perfect Happiness. Adi Da: "Understand your un-Happiness. Then you will be capable of locating Happiness, and, having located Happiness, you will be capable of practicing the Way of Adidam, which is nothing but the devotion of life to Happiness."

3. The Transmission of the Divine Guru is How One Locates Happiness. The subtitle of the book, The Bodily Location Of Happiness, is: "On the Incarnation of the Divine Person and the Transmission of Love-Bliss". In other words, you can't apply "The Lesson of Life" by somehow "locating" happiness directly, by yourself (or in yourself). Happiness is our native state, but that doesn't mean it can be located by an egoic, "do it yourself" process. We locate happiness directly as a Grace-given Gift, through devotion to the Transcendental Spiritual Transmission of Adi Da. Adi Da: "Happiness is presently the case. In this moment you are already Happy. Sitting with Me, locate this Happiness." We locate our "Native State" by recognizing and submitting to our "Native Person" — our Very Self appearing here in bodily (human) form.

4. It is a Process of Whole Bodily Location. "The bodily location of Happiness" is not primarily a reference to some place where Happiness resides in the body (although Adi Da teases His listeners with this idea: "Look for it in your toes, in your fingers, in your shirt, in your head"). It refers to a process ("the bodily location of Happiness" = "the locating of Happiness with the whole body-mind") that involves the surrender and transformation of every aspect of the body-mind, immersed in the Perfectly Happy State of the Divine Guru, through recognition of Him as the Divine in every moment. Then the secondary and supportive practices of the Way of Adidam become means for staying immersed in that Divine State in every moment: "Having located Happiness [having recognized Adi Da as the Divine], you will be capable of practicing the Way of Adidam, which is nothing but the devotion of life to Happiness [Adi Da, recognized as the Divine]. The practices of this Way are not methods for attaining Happiness, but they are the expressions of Happiness. The disciplines of money, food, and sex are not a way to become Happy. Discipline is difficult enough — why should we also burden it with the obligation to make us Happy!"
tags:
CD   DVD   Finnish  

Miksi Ihminen Tarvitsee Guruavideo
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 07:03
date added: September 21, 2017
event date: December 27, 1988
language: Finnish
views: 2545; views this month: 12; views this week: 4
[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.]

In this video clip from the 1988 talk, "What Is Your Intention?", Adi Da criticizes the "do-it-yourself" approach to spirituality that is popular in the world today, and speaks about why a teacher is necessary.

Adi Da reminds us that, historically, all the world's spiritual traditions have taught that Spiritual Realization requires the help of a Spiritual Realizer. This is actually built into the laws of how Spiritual Realization works, and can't be changed just because times and cultures change, just because we don't happen to like the way the laws work or what they require of us, etc. For this reason, Adi Da makes the point that, nowadays, our resistence to authority, and addiction to "do it yourself" approaches, represent unfortunate hindrances to our own Spiritual growth: if we simply go with the flow and let these culturally instilled programs dominate our life choices, they will keep us from Realizing our greatest destiny.

The full talk is available on the DVD, The Commitment To Real-God-Realization.

For more on this subject, read our article, Why Great Spiritual Realization Requires a Spiritual Transmission Master.
tags:
DVD   Finnish  

Mitä on kultismi?video
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 19:00
date added: June 29, 2020
event date: December 16, 1978
language: Finnish
views: 974; views this month: 18; views this week: 5
[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.]

Adi Da kritisoi uskonnollista kultismia. Hän kiteyttää sanomansa aiheesta tässä puheessa vuodelta 1978.

This discourse, "Mitä on kultismi?" ("What Is Cultism?"), was given at the Mountain Of Attention on December 16, 1978, three weeks after the Jonestown Massacre.

Adi Da criticized religious cultism long before the subject gained any popular attention. For an audio clip of His earliest criticisms — in June, 1972 — click here.

This 1978 talk is one of His summary addresses on the subject. Adi Da observes that the primary characteristic of a cult member is shared enthusiasm (like enjoying the energy of the crowd at a football game). For example, in "the cult of the Spiritual Master", everybody is enjoying the enthusiasm (their own and each other's) associated with having "found" the great Master; but no one is actually engaged in significant deepening of the devotional and spiritual relationship with the Master, and practicing on that basis — hence no Spiritual growth or Realization occurs.

Adi Da: "My purpose in My Teaching is to make it possible for you to duplicate what I have done — not to be eternally separated from Me, but to be in Communion with Me — to be intimate with Me in Spiritual terms, so that you, yourself, may live this practice, and fulfill it in your own case."
tags:
Finnish  

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: 1586; views this month: 35; views this week: 8
[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  

Tämä paikka ei ole utopiavideo
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 10:38
date added: February 6, 2020
event date: October 6, 2005
language: Finnish
views: 963; views this month: 18; views this week: 4
[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.]

"Tämä paikka ei ole utopia" ("This Place Is Not a Utopia") is an excerpt from an Avataric Discourse given by Adi Da Samraj on October 6, 2005, at the Mountain Of Attention Sanctuary.

ADI DA: "I find people's sorrows and losses to be heartbreaking and terrible and an immense burden and I am sympathetic and bless people in their trouble. However you must understand that is the nature of this place. This is not utopia, it is not paradise. It is a place of death, endings, suffering, brief amusements. It is not enough and merely to react to your difficulties for overlong and try to make an entire life out of it is fruitless. You do have to move on beyond that reaction to any moments suffering and loss. You must know the place you’re in and live in accordance with that knowledge instead of being sympathetic with some false view of the world or self or trying to idealize some aspect of potential experience, indulging in what amounts to addictions, repetitions of experiences, in order to avoid the knowledge of what is inherent in life, as well as all the hell that is coming on earth and is here. You will not be fulfilled.”
tags:
Finnish   Avataric Discourse  

Vapaus on ainoa lakivideo
poster: Adi Da Videot Suomi
length: 04:13
date added: August 12, 2020
language: Finnish
views: 1193; views this month: 25; views this week: 7
[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.]

Sanat kuten "vapaus" ja "rakkaus" määritetään yleisesssä maallikkoympäristössä erittäin rajoitetusti. Tässä Adi Dan esseen lausunnassa hän avaa näiden sanojen aitoa merkitystä.

Slides from a Darshan occasion of Avatar Adi Da at Adi Da Samrajashram.

The audio recording is an excerpt from a recitation of Adi Da's essay, "Freedom Is The Only Law and Happiness Is The Only Reality". This is the Epilogue from Adi Da's book, The Truly Human New World-Culture of Unbroken Real-God-Man, which was originally written in 2001, and updated on November 13, 2019. The essay is read by a student of Adi Da. In the secular world, words like "freedom" and " love" are given a very limited definition. In this essay, Adi Da expands the true meaning of both of these words.

ADI DA: I Am here to Divinely Liberate all beings.

I Am here to Grant True Freedom to every one.

“Freedom” is one of the principal words associated with the politics of this “late-time”. The general trend toward the democratization of the entire world carries with it an intensified interest in the concept of freedom and in the pursuit of freedom. However, in the context and circumstance of this “late-time”, the word “freedom” is used in such a way that the true import of the word is lost, and its meaning is transformed, and even vulgarized.

The same process of vulgarization has also occurred in the case of other words, such as (for example) the word “love”. The word “love” represents a profound concept and reality, but the word itself tends to be used very casually. People commonly say that they “love” this or that, meaning something quite different from what the word “love” rightly and truly signifies.

“Love” is a word that rightly refers to the universal Sacrifice of ego-“self”. Real love is a matter of transcending “self” (or going beyond your limitations in relation to others)—but, in the “late-time” circumstance of vulgarized culture, the word “love” has come to be used in relation to whatever satisfies your inclinations, or fulfills your desires, or (otherwise) somehow compensates for limitations in your life by pleasing you and (thereby) supporting your egoic disposition. None of that has anything to do with real love.

So it also is with the word “freedom”, and the notion of freedom. The world-culture of this “late-time” is essentially an ego-culture associated with complications in the first three stages of life. It is essentially an adolescent culture. And it is in the context of that culture that great words like “love” and “freedom” become vulgarized. In the adolescent disposition, the word “freedom”, like the word “love”, is reduced to an egoic meaning. People say they want to be “free”, or want to act “freely”, or want to be “free” to do this or that—but what they actually mean is that they want to be able to fulfill their desires without limitation. An adolescent reacting to parental authority or parental expectations regards any such authority or expectations to be oppressive or limiting. Therefore, such adolescents say that they want to be “free” to do whatever they please. And that is, in general, what is meant in this “late-time” by the word “freedom”. Even in the larger political sphere, the word “freedom” is used to express the (personal, and also collective) intent to be able to fulfill desires—and those desires are (necessarily) fundamentally ego-based.

What does the fulfillment of desires have to do with true freedom? Rightly, the word “freedom” is synonymous with the word “liberation”. To “be free”, or to “be liberated”, means to “go beyond bondage”. The opposite of “freedom” is “bondage”. If one is truly moved to be truly free, one is moved to relinquish (and go beyond) bondage. Such is the true Wisdom-understanding of freedom.

Neither true freedom, nor real love, nor any other great concept is rightly understood via the words and concepts of adolescents. There must be human maturity (and, therefore, growth in Wisdom) for the great meanings underlying these concepts to be understood and actually lived.

Be moved toward real love, without limit. Be moved toward real happiness, without limit.

Be moved toward true freedom, without limit. You should (and, ultimately, must) be so moved. But to actually realize love (or real happiness, or true freedom) without limit, you must deal with yourself most profoundly. You cannot merely be reactive, like an adolescent or a worldly person.

If you want to be truly free, you must first understand that you are bound, and you must understand how you are bound, and then you must do something about that. If, on the other hand, you are merely reactively inclined to fulfill desires, and you want to be (so-called) “free” to do so, then you are not examining your bondage—what its roots are, what its signs are, what its characteristics are—and, if you are not examining your bondage with real discriminative intelligence, you are also not doing what you must do in order to be truly free.
tags:
Finnish  
Displaying clips 1-15page:       1    2  3  4  5     next
72 matches for: cult




 
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.