Guest guest Posted April 8, 2003 Report Share Posted April 8, 2003 Beyond all the labels such Advaitin, Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, etc., there is only the Reality. One can call it by any name. It is only One's Own Name, that cannot be spoken in language. Sadhana is the critical link between speculation and Self Realization. Sri Ramana used to say that Satsang (company of truth) is important to the ripening and purification of our intellect. So we are fortunate to have the company of friends and the ancient teachings to move us along. As human beings, we are fragile, mentally and physically. But Upanishads state that Atman Is Brahman. The discrepancy between one's fragility as a human beings and one's perfect Self nature that is Sat-Chit-Ananda is due to identification with the body. Sri Ramana has said that, sadhana (spiritual practice) is meant to remove the mistaken notion, "I am the body". What then remains is pure consciousness without edges. Who can truly give it a name. The ancients called it Sat-Chit-Ananda that is Nityam (Eternal) and Poornum (Whole). These words describe the taste but are not themselves the taste. So meditation on one's own existence is needed. This is what the Upanishads teach. That is essentially the teaching behind Sri Ramana's method of inquiry of asking "Who am I?" Love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2003 Report Share Posted April 12, 2003 "... As human beings, we are fragile, mentally and physically. But Upanishads state that Atman Is Brahman. The discrepancy between one's fragility as a human beings and one's perfect Self nature that is Sat-Chit-Ananda is due to identification with the body". My question: If we are not our bodies, if we are not our mind; what are we doing here? Is there any evolution perspective? Best Wishes, marcus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 marcusbayard wrote: > "My question: If we are not our bodies, if we are not our mind; what > are we doing here? Is there any evolution perspective? > > Best Wishes, > marcus Yes, there is an evolution perspective. Most eastern religions like Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism view the soul to be evolving. Jainism for example believes that individual souls are covered up by karmic particles. As the heavy karmic particles drop, the soul becomes lighter and continues to rise up, until it is completely free from all karma and attains Moksha. Love to all Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Namaste all,> "My question: If we are not our bodies, if we are not our mind; what> are we doing here? Is there any evolution perspective?>Yes, there is an evolution perspective.Most eastern religions like Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism view the soul to be evolving.Jainism for example believes that individual souls are covered up by karmic particles. As the heavy karmic particles drop, the soul becomes lighter and continues to rise up, until it is completely free from all karma and attains Moksha.********************************************************************************* Here are my thoughts .... The buddhist answer if I understand right would be: The fire is already burning, so why worry about who started it. Instead just get the fire out and there is peace. The dualist view is : It is all God's Leela ( play ). Since he is the paramartha ( supreme ) , he does not have to account for his actions. The advaitic view seems to be that Prakriti ( nature, which is born and dies ) has no beginning and no end. So to question the origin , would be going in an infinite search for the beginning where there is no origin. Sri Ramana Maharishi says : first find who you are, then ask this question. ( if you have really understood that you are neither this body nor this mind, you would'nt be asking this question. ) Actually I haven't read anywhere where there is a logical explanation for the question. Swami Vivekananda proves that the question itself is illogical !! . ( But I have to admit I still don"t understand his explanation entirely ). Because we are limited by our senses, we want to bring the infinite into a finite. we look for a reason where there is no reason. In one of the Upanishads , a person asks for the origin of Brahman. He is given an answer to be careful and his head would roll off since he is asking a question that should not be asked. I think this is why Sri Sankaracharya has said : Maya is neither real nor is it unreal. The individual is limited by his own Upadhis ( limiting adjuncts ). He seeks the answers to his suffering and believes in the higher states where he does not have to endure this. From the standpoint of the real , the individual does not exist. He does not exist because it is a super-imposition on his true state. The true state is timeless and infinite. Since he himself is the infinite, all that he sees as this universe is the very person asking this question. He realises at some stage that he was never confined, never in bondage, confined to a body. Om Tat Sat G. Venkat Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Hello There is an insight called a middle way. The layering of mind is the layering of dualities, starting with I am the body vs. eternity, on to birth and death, good and evil, right and wrong, and on ad infinitum. At the center of each duality is the fulcrum, the I thought separate from the eternal I. If the I is removed by following its course upstream, then each duality is inherently empty, and harmless, for there is no fulcrum for judgements to balance on. So the basis for the judging mind is shattered, and nothing is left except awareness and empty thoughts. Perhaps this is that which you explain. All thoughts are inherently empty, and the I which is the fulcrum for judgements, creating the self nature, is a superimposed projection. Michael --- Guru Venkat <v_vedanti wrote: > Namaste all, > > > "My question: If we are not our bodies, if we are > not our mind; what > > are we doing here? Is there any evolution > perspective? > > > > Yes, there is an evolution perspective. > > Most eastern religions like Hinduism, Jainism, and > Buddhism view the > soul to be evolving. > > Jainism for example believes that individual souls > are covered up by > karmic particles. As the heavy karmic particles > drop, the soul becomes > lighter and continues to rise up, until it is > completely free from all > karma and attains Moksha. > ********************************************************************************\ *Here > are my thoughts .... The buddhist answer if I > understand right would be:The fire is already > burning, so why worry about who started it. Instead > just get the fire out and there is peace. The > dualist view is :It is all God's Leela ( play ). > Since he is the paramartha ( supreme ) , he does not > have to account for his actions. The advaitic view > seems to be that Prakriti ( nature, which is born > and dies ) has no beginning and no end. So to > question the origin , would be going in an infinite > search for the beginning where there is no origin. > Sri Ramana Maharishi says : first find who you are, > then ask this question. ( if you have really > understood that you are neither this body nor this > mind, you would'nt be asking this question. ) > Actually I haven't read anywhere where there is a > logical explanation for the question. Swami > Vivekananda proves that the question itself is > illogical !! . ( But I have to admit I still don"t > understand his explanation entirely ).Because we are > limited by our senses, we want to bring the infinite > into a finite. we look for a reason where there is > no reason. In one of the Upanishads , a person asks > for the origin of Brahman. He is given an answer to > be careful and his head would roll off since he is > asking a question that should not be asked. I think > this is why Sri Sankaracharya has said : Maya is > neither real nor is it unreal. The individual is > limited by his own Upadhis ( limiting adjuncts ). He > seeks the answers to his suffering and believes in > the higher states where he does not have to endure > this. From the standpoint of the real , the > individual does not exist. He does not exist because > it is a super-imposition on his true state. The true > state is timeless and infinite. Since he himself is > the infinite, all that he sees as this universe is > the very person asking this question. He realises at > some stage that he was never confined, never in > bondage, confined to a body. Om Tat SatG. Venkat > > > > > Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, > and more The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search. 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.