Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

So simple yet so difficult?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Namaste All,

 

There is Nirguna or Nirvana! Inexplicabley there is an appearance

caused by thought, which we call creation.

 

Stop thought and we stop creation.

 

We are left with Nirguna Nirvana.

 

I am at a place now where I mostly concentrate on 'Who am I?'. However

this is not an expession it is sourcing the emotions and vibrations.

That way one finds out that one is just composed of these rising

vibrations causing sensations and then feelings/actions. There is no

'I', there is no 'I, I'.

 

There is no difference between Ramana and Buddha at this system. The

Buddha taught one to observe the breath and then the rising sensations

and become detached from them. Ramana's system goes to the same place.

Finding we are just vibrations no ego, and then beyond.

 

Enjoyment relies on the senses and the senses are what keep us in

bondage, pleasant or unpleasant. We have to detach from the opposites

of joy and grief or the senses. Compassion is not sentiment! but a

realisation of another beings delusion and pain caused by ignorance.

 

Again I am not a nihilist or kill joy, I am trying to be aware of what

I really am or am not. If I wished to get involved in energy, I would

become a bhakti again. But bhakti is intense love and complete

detachment from everything but the' beloved', until there is no

separation no ego left. At this stage one then realises the same as

the jnani, different route that's all.

 

Om Namah Sivaya.....Tony.IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

, hamsayogini@a... wrote:

> Tony wrote [[There is no 'I', ..]]

> ** Hamsa .. I am That. Soham .. That is I.

>

> Om Santi ...

> Yogini Sakti

 

Namaste Yogini,

 

The 'I' you are mentioning is Saguna Brahman. That I is also

ultimately unreal for only Nirguna or Nirvana is truth....ONS...Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Tony & Hamsa,

In the expression of your particular beliefs, please remain aware that

this Satsangha welcomes people with a variety of beliefs. It is

important to respect this diversity. For the benefit of others here,

you might identify the particular religion with which you identify,

or perhaps be a bit less dogmatic in your means of expression. If you

personalize with stories of how or why any particular belief became

meaningful to you, that is fine. Just dueling belief systems is not

quite the intent of the spirit of the Sangha.

It is possible to share one's truth, even what may be considered an

ultimate truth, without doing so in an oppositional manner. Please

keep this in mind in future posts. Most of the list is already

familiar with a variety of religious perspectives, and has or can

read original sources.

Thank you,

Gloria

- Tony O'Clery

Tuesday, August 07, 2001 11:40 AM

Re: So simple yet so difficult?

, hamsayogini@a... wrote:> Tony wrote

[[There is no 'I', ..]]> ** Hamsa .. I am That. Soham .. That is

I.> > Om Santi ...> Yogini SaktiNamaste Yogini,The 'I' you are

mentioning is Saguna Brahman. That I is also ultimately unreal for

only Nirguna or Nirvana is truth....ONS...Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

, "Gloria Lee" <glee@i...> wrote:

> Dear Tony & Hamsa,

>

> In the expression of your particular beliefs, please remain aware

that this Satsangha welcomes people with a variety of beliefs. It is

important to respect this diversity. For the benefit of others here,

you might identify the particular religion with which you identify, or

perhaps be a bit less dogmatic in your means of expression. If you

personalize with stories of how or why any particular belief became

meaningful to you, that is fine. Just dueling belief systems is not

quite the intent of the spirit of the Sangha.

>

> It is possible to share one's truth, even what may be considered an

ultimate truth, without doing so in an oppositional manner. Please

keep this in mind in future posts. Most of the list is already

familiar with a variety of religious perspectives, and has or can read

original sources.

>

> Thank you,

> Gloria

 

 

Namaste Glo,?????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????!!

 

I see no duelling only an explanation of my previous statement, on

which 'I', i meant. The I of the ego or the I of the Saguna/Goddess,

both of which are unreal. It is a little paranoid of you to imagine

that there is duelling going on!!

 

I have no religion and never intend to have one. Religion is a crutch

but a crutch is handy if you need one. I have no belief systen

either!!

 

The only system I follow is finding the source of my own illusory ego.

 

Who am I? would describe my religion. My method of meditation is the

Buddha's vipassana.....

 

Does the operator of a particle accelerator have a religion, when he

reduces matter to particle/waves which in themselves are further

reduced. Kowing this by machine he realises that all forms are

unstable and forever changing, but as his mind didn't experience it he

still is in bondage.

 

...ONS......Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

, hamsayogini@a... wrote:

> Yes Tony .. I know the I.

>

> Om Santi ...

> Yogini Sakti

 

Namaste Yogini,

 

Fine then for you the Mahat is real.........ONS......Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

, "Gloria Lee" <glee@i...> wrote:

> Dear Tony & Hamsa,

>

> In the expression of your particular beliefs, please remain aware

that this Satsangha welcomes people with a variety of beliefs. It is

important to respect this diversity. For the benefit of others here,

you might identify the particular religion with which you identify, or

perhaps be a bit less dogmatic in your means of expression. If you

personalize with stories of how or why any particular belief became

meaningful to you, that is fine. Just dueling belief systems is not

quite the intent of the spirit of the Sangha.

>

> It is possible to share one's truth, even what may be considered an

ultimate truth, without doing so in an oppositional manner. Please

keep this in mind in future posts. Most of the list is already

familiar with a variety of religious perspectives, and has or can read

original sources.

>

> Thank you,

> Gloria

 

Namaste Glo,

 

On reflection I think you will see that Yogini was not disagreeing

with me at all......Although it is possible there was a

misunderstanding....ONS.......Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...