Guest guest Posted August 21, 2001 Report Share Posted August 21, 2001 , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote: [snip] > Liberation is no mind at all, just Nirguna Brahman, even if the > residual body is part of universal energy. You should leave the definitions of liberation to those who live there. All you've got is a head full of half-baked ideas, and these provide the thicket of illusion that keeps you deluded into thinking you understand. [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2001 Report Share Posted August 21, 2001 , jodyrrr@h... wrote: > , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote: > > [snip] > > > Liberation is no mind at all, just Nirguna Brahman, even if the > > residual body is part of universal energy. > > You should leave the definitions of liberation to those who > live there. All you've got is a head full of half-baked ideas, > and these provide the thicket of illusion that keeps you deluded > into thinking you understand. > > [snip] Namaste Jody, The definition isn't mine it is Vedanta's. I'm not sure what is in my mind, but I'm sure it is all in different stages of being baked. I'm aiming to have all my samskaras completely fried, like a seed that is fried and cannot sprout. Thankyou for the compliment and encouragement that I may be half way there. The thicket of illusion is in fact the samskaras that need baking, kind of an organised burn off........ONS......Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2001 Report Share Posted August 21, 2001 , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote: [snip] > Namaste Jody, > > The definition isn't mine it is Vedanta's. No, it is your poor interpretation of Vedanta. [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2001 Report Share Posted August 21, 2001 , jodyrrr@h... wrote: > , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote: > > [snip] > > > Namaste Jody, > > > > The definition isn't mine it is Vedanta's. > > No, it is your poor interpretation of Vedanta. > > [snip] Namaste Jody, Perhaps for the benefit of the list you could expand on your statement and tell us all what a jivanmukti is.......ONS......Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2001 Report Share Posted August 21, 2001 , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote: > , jodyrrr@h... wrote: > > , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > Namaste Jody, > > > > > > The definition isn't mine it is Vedanta's. > > > > No, it is your poor interpretation of Vedanta. > > > > [snip] > > Namaste Jody, > > Perhaps for the benefit of the list you could expand on your > statement and tell us all what a jivanmukti is.......ONS......Tony. There's not much reason to expand my statement, but I will offer Ramakrishna's definition of a jivanmukta. >From the Gospel of Ramakrishna: Jivanmukta: One liberated from Maya while living in the body. Ramakrisha said: "...after attaining Knowledge through the guru's grace, one can very well live in the world as a jivanmukta." He also tells us: "He who has attained this Knowledge of Brahman is a jivanmukta, liberated while living in a body. He rightly understands that the Atman and the body are two separate things. After realizing God one does not identify the Atman with the body. These two are separate, like the kernel and the shell of the coconut when it dries up. The Atman moves, as it were, within the Knowledge." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.