Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Nobody can be that perfect

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Namaste,

 

I remember many many years ago my mother telling me that nobody

could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of God etc. I

wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as my Father in

Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his disciples to

purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is all about. Jesus was

obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps through all of the

Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.

I know this is hard but unless we are perfect there can by no

Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS....Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no hope for people like Ben. O well. At least I can play with the Friend.

Love,

Ben.

-

Tony OClery

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:36 PM

Nobody can be that perfect

Namaste,I remember many many years ago my mother telling me that

nobody could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of God etc. I

wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as my Father in

Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his disciples to purify

themeselves, this is exactly what it is all about. Jesus was obviously

a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps through all of the Gospels and

Sermon on the Mount.I know this is hard but unless we are perfect

there can by no Moksha. No short

cuts.............ONS....Tony/join

"Love itself is

the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam"

by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm perfect

 

 

--- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote:

> Namaste,

>

> I remember many many years ago my mother telling me

> that nobody

> could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of

> God etc. I

> wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as

> my Father in

> Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his

> disciples to

> purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is all

> about. Jesus was

> obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps

> through all of the

> Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.

> I know this is hard but unless we are perfect there

> can by no

> Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS....>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, Michael Bowes

<rmichaelbowes> wrote:

> I'm perfect

>

>

> --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote:

> > Namaste,

> >

> > I remember many many years ago my mother telling me

> > that nobody

> > could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of

> > God etc. I

> > wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as

> > my Father in

> > Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his

> > disciples to

> > purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is all

> > about. Jesus was

> > obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps

> > through all of the

> > Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.

> > I know this is hard but unless we are perfect there

> > can by no

> > Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS....> >

> >

 

Namaste,

 

I'm glad youre perfect so am I, but do we have individual thoughts?

To be or not to be, that is the question.........ONS..Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

Tony OClery

Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:36 PM

Nobody can be that perfect

Namaste,I remember many many years ago my mother telling me that

nobody could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of God etc. I

wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as my Father in

Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his disciples to purify

themeselves, this is exactly what it is all about. Jesus was obviously

a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps through all of the Gospels and

Sermon on the Mount.I know this is hard but unless we are perfect

there can by no Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS.... *************

Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned one knowing all

the names of all the levels, angels and archangels.

You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and are still suffering

the consequences of that destructive idea.

Just for fun I could ask you what you mean here by the word perfect.

A Zen master, can't remember who, maybe Bankei, was telling the

students that everything was perfect as it is. A hunchback stood up

and in protest showed his hunched back and asked: 'What about this

back of mine?'. The master answered: 'That is the most perfect

hunched back I have ever seen'. ,

What you write above is only the tyranny of the priests. Haven't you have enough of that?

No one can stop you from suffering the consequences of your own ideas,

but you insist on wanting to make them into universal laws, your very

own priestly mind.

All these years of searching for perfection. One wants to hold on to

something doesn't one? Something to show for it.

It's hard to be flat broke.

The innocent, perfect child you were before you absorbed all these

ideals, was, is and always will be already perfect.

Have you looked into a child's eyes lately?

Can there be more perfection?

Namaste, Sam

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, Sam <S.Pasiencier@p...> wrote:

>

> -

> Tony OClery

>

> Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:36 PM

> Nobody can be that perfect

>

>

> Namaste,

>

> I remember many many years ago my mother telling me that nobody

> could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of God etc. I

> wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as my Father in

> Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his disciples to

> purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is all about. Jesus

was

> obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps through all of the

> Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.

> I know this is hard but unless we are perfect there can by no

> Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS....> *************

>

> Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned one

knowing all the names of all the levels, angels and archangels.

> You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and are still

suffering the consequences of that destructive idea.

 

Namaste,

 

I think you are transposing your own ideas on to me. Original Sin is

a very complicated idea. It actually means the separation of the

sould from God. Or in Vedantic terms the formation of the Ego.

My belief in being perfected is the belief of the Vedantists and

Yogis that even one thought will bring you back and prevent

moksha.................ONS...Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, Sam <S.Pasiencier@p...> wrote:

>

> -

> Tony OClery

>

> Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:36 PM

> Nobody can be that perfect

>

>

> Namaste,

>

> I remember many many years ago my mother telling me that nobody

> could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of God etc. I

> wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as my Father in

> Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his disciples to

> purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is all about. Jesus

was

> obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps through all of the

> Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.

> I know this is hard but unless we are perfect there can by no

> Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS....> *************

>

> Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned one

knowing all the names of all the levels, angels and archangels.

> You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and are still

suffering the consequences of that destructive idea.

>

> Just for fun I could ask you what you mean here by the word

perfect.

>

> A Zen master, can't remember who, maybe Bankei, was telling the

students that everything was perfect as it is. A hunchback stood up

and in protest showed his hunched back and asked: 'What about this

back of mine?'. The master answered: 'That is the most perfect

hunched back I have ever seen'. ,

> What you write above is only the tyranny of the priests. Haven't

you have enough of that?

>

> No one can stop you from suffering the consequences of your own

ideas, but you insist on wanting to make them into universal laws,

your very own priestly mind.

>

> All these years of searching for perfection. One wants to hold

on to something doesn't one? Something to show for it.

>

> It's hard to be flat broke.

>

> The innocent, perfect child you were before you absorbed all

these ideals, was, is and always will be already perfect.

>

> Have you looked into a child's eyes lately?

>

> Can there be more perfection?

>

> Namaste, Sam

Namaste S,

 

It takes purification of the mind from its vasanas and samskaras, to

realise everything is already perfect..........ONS..Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

Tony OClery

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 5:19 PM

Re: Nobody can be that perfect

, Sam <S.Pasiencier@p...> wrote:>

> - > Tony OClery > To:

> Tuesday, February 24, 2004

7:36 PM> Nobody can be that perfect> > >

Namaste,> > I remember many many years ago my mother telling me

that nobody > could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son of

God etc. I > wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect as my

Father in > Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to his

disciples to > purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is all

about. Jesus was > obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps

through all of the > Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.> I know

this is hard but unless we are perfect there can by no > Moksha. No

short cuts.............ONS....Tony> *************> > Seems you

are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned one knowing all the names

of all the levels, angels and archangels.> You seem still to believe

in 'original sin' and are still suffering the consequences of that

destructive idea. Namaste,I think you are transposing your own ideas

on to me. Original Sin is a very complicated idea. It actually means

the separation of the sould from God. Or in Vedantic terms the

formation of the Ego.My belief in being perfected is the belief of

the Vedantists and Yogis that even one thought will bring you back

and prevent moksha.................ONS...Nah... I was never an altar boy.. I knew even as a child that the

stuff that the orthodox religionists were perpetrating as the 'Nature

of God' was only the creation of a bigger adult in the sky who could

punish you if their efforts failed.

You can believe whatever you want, I only wanted to point out to you

that you write it all as if it is the ultimate law, etc.

Maybe others of us have had other just as valid experiences.

I still think you have a priestly mind. Big club those Vedas.

Bash, bash, bash. Sitting there trying very hard to have no thoughts

is, I think, very difficult if not impossible. There are gentler

descriptions of this process.

What is wrong with thought? It is also a gift of God. Mozart heard his melodies in his mind first.

When I was studying mathematics I was constantly amazed at the

creative capacities of my deeper mind.

Think and think, this way and that way about a problem. No result. Go

to sleep and in the morning you KNOW the answer. Amazing.

I believe that is the way enlightenment also happens. It is how

Nisargadatta describes his own coming to self-realization. That was

the purification.

You can call it purification if you like, but that word implies its opposite, impurity.

Now, maybe the Vedic meaning of impurity is the separation of the soul

(whatever that is) from God. But the way most of were taught to think

about it was to abhor impure thoughts.. (You know all that sex stuff

and bodily fluids, and juicy emotions like hate, and anger, and

jealousy that are so natural that they just don't seem to want to go

away).

Like many people you have misunderstood Osho's emphasis on the living

out of sexuality and repressed feelings in groups. It is all so

titillating and easy to laugh at from our repressions and mistaken

ideas about purity.

His emphasis was always on meditation. But, being a very practical

man, he knew that it is very difficult for repressed individuals, to

meditate while their minds are churning with unlived life.

Even in ordinary life, a good sexual experience with a partner leaves

one feeling, whole, and calm and meditative. And peace often returns

to the household after a good, honest emotional fight.

It is the common experience and just plain common sense. It is all about the meditation.

Meditation is the medication.

I much prefer the approach of living a natural life and creating the

distance that advaita encourages between the

'person' and the consciousness in which everything takes place. That

is the purity without an opposite.

You missed so much in the last letter I wrote to you, maybe you should

read it again. Me not interested in theology. Of any kind. You look

for signs of whether this one is a muktah or that one is a

bodhisattva when all that matters is your own consciousness. These

words are from my heart Tony.

Namaste, Sam

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> >

> > Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned one

> knowing all the names of all the levels, angels and archangels.

> > You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and are still

> suffering the consequences of that destructive idea.

>

> Namaste,

>

> I think you are transposing your own ideas on to me. Original

Sin is

> a very complicated idea. It actually means the separation of the

> sould from God. Or in Vedantic terms the formation of the Ego.

> My belief in being perfected is the belief of the Vedantists and

> Yogis that even one thought will bring you back and prevent

> moksha.................ONS...> Nah... I was never an altar boy.. I knew even as a child that

the stuff that the orthodox religionists were perpetrating as

the 'Nature of God' was only the creation of a bigger adult in the

sky who could punish you if their efforts failed.

>

> You can believe whatever you want, I only wanted to point out to

you that you write it all as if it is the ultimate law, etc.

>

> Maybe others of us have had other just as valid experiences.

>

> I still think you have a priestly mind. Big club those Vedas.

> Bash, bash, bash. Sitting there trying very hard to have no

thoughts is, I think, very difficult if not impossible. There are

gentler descriptions of this process.

>

> What is wrong with thought? It is also a gift of God. Mozart

heard his melodies in his mind first.

> When I was studying mathematics I was constantly amazed at the

creative capacities of my deeper mind.

> Think and think, this way and that way about a problem. No

result. Go to sleep and in the morning you KNOW the answer. Amazing.

>

> I believe that is the way enlightenment also happens. It is how

Nisargadatta describes his own coming to self-realization. That was

the purification.

>

> You can call it purification if you like, but that word implies

its opposite, impurity.

>

> Now, maybe the Vedic meaning of impurity is the separation of

the soul (whatever that is) from God. But the way most of were

taught to think about it was to abhor impure thoughts.. (You know

all that sex stuff and bodily fluids, and juicy emotions like hate,

and anger, and jealousy that are so natural that they just don't

seem to want to go away).

>

> Like many people you have misunderstood Osho's emphasis on the

living out of sexuality and repressed feelings in groups. It is all

so titillating and easy to laugh at from our repressions and

mistaken ideas about purity.

>

> His emphasis was always on meditation. But, being a very

practical man, he knew that it is very difficult for repressed

individuals, to meditate while their minds are churning with unlived

life.

>

> Even in ordinary life, a good sexual experience with a partner

leaves one feeling, whole, and calm and meditative. And peace often

returns to the household after a good, honest emotional fight.

> It is the common experience and just plain common sense. It is

all about the meditation.

>

> Meditation is the medication.

>

> I much prefer the approach of living a natural life and creating

the distance that advaita encourages between the

> 'person' and the consciousness in which everything takes place.

That is the purity without an opposite.

>

> You missed so much in the last letter I wrote to you, maybe you

should read it again. Me not interested in theology. Of any kind.

You look for signs of whether this one is a muktah or that one is a

bodhisattva when all that matters is your own consciousness. These

words are from my heart Tony.

>

> Namaste, Sam

 

Namaste S,

 

You are mistaking my direct nature and blunt manner for 'bashing'.

With regard to Osho, I disagree with his philosophy on sex for it is

like pouring oil on a fire, it doesn't put it out. It is a bodily

function like eating and defecating, but does involve emotional

attachments. That is the answer right there Attachment.

 

Perhaps you are misunderstanding my premise that Moksha isn't

possible with a mind.........ONS..Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

Tony OClery

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 7:13 PM

Re: Nobody can be that perfect

> > > > Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned

one > knowing all the names of all the levels, angels and

archangels.> > You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and

are still > suffering the consequences of that destructive idea. >

> Namaste,> > I think you are transposing your own ideas on to

me. Original Sin is > a very complicated idea. It actually means

the separation of the > sould from God. Or in Vedantic terms the

formation of the Ego.> My belief in being perfected is the belief

of the Vedantists and > Yogis that even one thought will bring you

back and prevent > moksha.................ONS...Tony

> Nah... I was never an altar boy.. I knew even as a child that the

stuff that the orthodox religionists were perpetrating as the 'Nature

of God' was only the creation of a bigger adult in the sky who could

punish you if their efforts failed. > > You can believe whatever

you want, I only wanted to point out to you that you write it all as

if it is the ultimate law, etc.> > Maybe others of us have had

other just as valid experiences.> > I still think you have a

priestly mind. Big club those Vedas.> Bash, bash, bash. Sitting

there trying very hard to have no thoughts is, I think, very

difficult if not impossible. There are gentler descriptions of this

process. > > What is wrong with thought? It is also a gift of God.

Mozart heard his melodies in his mind first. > When I was studying

mathematics I was constantly amazed at the creative capacities of my

deeper mind. > Think and think, this way and that way about a

problem. No result. Go to sleep and in the morning you KNOW the

answer. Amazing.> > I believe that is the way enlightenment also

happens. It is how Nisargadatta describes his own coming to

self-realization. That was the purification. > > You can call it

purification if you like, but that word implies its opposite,

impurity.> > Now, maybe the Vedic meaning of impurity is the

separation of the soul (whatever that is) from God. But the way most

of were taught to think about it was to abhor impure thoughts.. (You

know all that sex stuff and bodily fluids, and juicy emotions like

hate, and anger, and jealousy that are so natural that they just

don't seem to want to go away). > > Like many people you have

misunderstood Osho's emphasis on the living out of sexuality and

repressed feelings in groups. It is all so titillating and easy to

laugh at from our repressions and mistaken ideas about purity. > >

His emphasis was always on meditation. But, being a very practical

man, he knew that it is very difficult for repressed individuals, to

meditate while their minds are churning with unlived life. > > Even

in ordinary life, a good sexual experience with a partner leaves one

feeling, whole, and calm and meditative. And peace often returns to

the household after a good, honest emotional fight. > It is the

common experience and just plain common sense. It is all about the

meditation. > > Meditation is the medication. > > I much prefer

the approach of living a natural life and creating the distance that

advaita encourages between the > 'person' and the consciousness in

which everything takes place. That is the purity without an opposite.

> > You missed so much in the last letter I wrote to you, maybe you

should read it again. Me not interested in theology. Of any kind. You

look for signs of whether this one is a muktah or that one is a

bodhisattva when all that matters is your own consciousness. These

words are from my heart Tony. > > Namaste, SamNamaste S,You are

mistaking my direct nature and blunt manner for 'bashing'. With

regard to Osho, I disagree with his philosophy on sex for it is like

pouring oil on a fire, it doesn't put it out. It is a bodily function

like eating and defecating, but does involve emotional attachments.

That is the answer right there Attachment.Perhaps you are

misunderstanding my premise that Moksha isn't possible with a

mind.........ONS..++++++++++++++++++++++++++=

Is that your actual experience, that encouraging people to live out

their sexuality is like pouring oil on a fire?

This can only be the thought of a very repressed mind that cannot

imagine the calming effects of satisfaction. It seems to imply that

most humans are insatiable sex-maniacs.

Yes, perhaps in a few distorted and extreme cases, just as eating can become gluttony.

Don't quite understand what you mean when you say that Attachment is

the answer. Wanna say more about that please?

As to your direct nature and blunt manner, that's no problem. It is

your insistence that what you say is the 'only way' that I call

bashing.

I understand your premise. And again it all depends on what you mean by 'with a mind'.

What I have read and experienced is that the mind is a great servant but a lousy master.

What exactly do you want to be free of? Is it not identification with

your thinking processes? It cannot be the mind itself, conscious and

unconscious. You could not live for a single second, your heart would

forget to beat.

I love chess, hard to play it without a mind. I love music, nice to

listen in silence with the mind not disturbing.

If by attachment you mean the idea that 'you' are your mind, thinking

of it as yours, then I completely agree with you.

The mind itself is such marvelous instrument. Such a precious gift. To

me Moksha is liberation from the fixed idea that you are the mind.

Don't you remember the 'rush' that comes with understanding something?

Like seeing the light. The mind expanding with the new. Wonderful.

There is so much confusion and misunderstanding around this subject.

Schools almost force their students to identify with their minds by

grading, performance orientation, giving prizes and so on. I think

it is a very rare education that helps people to understand the

wonder of consciousness working in them, that everyone is a process

and not a thing that can be graded. Isn't that one of the reasons

that we started our search for wisdom?

Your search has brought you to the Vedas, mine wound around, like

everyone's from Natchez to Mobile, and eventually and with great joy

brought me to Osho and to advaita.

When I first heard the story of the procrustean bed as a kid it made

me laugh a lot. It was funny. Little did I know then that it is a

parable for what people actually do to each other especially in the

realm of spirituality and religion.

namaste and a friendly wink from, Sam

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, Sam <S> attachments. That

is the answer right there Attachment.

>

> Perhaps you are misunderstanding my premise that Moksha isn't

> possible with a mind.........ONS..> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++=

>

> Is that your actual experience, that encouraging people to live

out their sexuality is like pouring oil on a fire?

>

> This can only be the thought of a very repressed mind that

cannot imagine the calming effects of satisfaction. It seems to

imply that most humans are insatiable sex-maniacs.

>

> Yes, perhaps in a few distorted and extreme cases, just as

eating can become gluttony.

>

> Don't quite understand what you mean when you say that

Attachment is the answer. Wanna say more about that please?

>

> As to your direct nature and blunt manner, that's no problem. It

is your insistence that what you say is the 'only way' that I call

bashing.

>

> I understand your premise. And again it all depends on what you

mean by 'with a mind'.

>

> What I have read and experienced is that the mind is a great

servant but a lousy master.

>

> What exactly do you want to be free of? Is it not identification

with your thinking processes? It cannot be the mind itself,

conscious and unconscious. You could not live for a single second,

your heart would forget to beat.

>

> I love chess, hard to play it without a mind. I love music,

nice to listen in silence with the mind not disturbing.

>

> If by attachment you mean the idea that 'you' are your mind,

thinking of it as yours, then I completely agree with you.

>

> The mind itself is such marvelous instrument. Such a precious

gift. To me Moksha is liberation from the fixed idea that you are

the mind.

>

> Don't you remember the 'rush' that comes with understanding

something? Like seeing the light. The mind expanding with the new.

Wonderful.

>

> There is so much confusion and misunderstanding around this

subject. Schools almost force their students to identify with their

minds by grading, performance orientation, giving prizes and so on.

I think it is a very rare education that helps people to understand

the wonder of consciousness working in them, that everyone is a

process and not a thing that can be graded. Isn't that one of the

reasons that we started our search for wisdom?

>

> Your search has brought you to the Vedas, mine wound around,

like everyone's from Natchez to Mobile, and eventually and with

great joy brought me to Osho and to advaita.

>

> When I first heard the story of the procrustean bed as a kid it

made me laugh a lot. It was funny. Little did I know then that it is

a parable for what people actually do to each other especially in

the realm of spirituality and religion.

>

>

>

> namaste and a friendly wink from, Sam

 

Namaste, this is from a different site perhaps you should read some

stuff there.

viorica weissman" <viorica@z...>

Wed Feb 25, 2004 2:18 pm

The Nature of The Self - [

 

 

 

Q: How then does ignorance of this one and only reality unhappily

arise in the case of the ajnani (one who has not realised the

Self)?

 

Sri Ramana Maharshi:

The ajnani sees only the mind, which is a mere reflection of the

light

of pure consciousness arising from the Heart. Of the Heart

itself he

is ignorant. Why? Because his mind is extroverted and he never

sought its source.

 

Q: What prevents the infinite, undifferentiated light of

consciousness

arising from the Heart from revealing itself to the ajnani?

 

A: Just as water in a pot reflects the enormous sun within the narrow

limits of the pot, even so the Vasanas or latent tendencies of

the

mind of the individual, acting as the reflecting medium, catch

the

all-pervading infinite light of consciousness arising from the

Heart.

The form of this reflection is the phenomenon called the mind.

Seeing only this reflection, the ajnani is deluded into the

belief that

he is a finite being, the jiva, the individual self.

 

Q: What are the obstacles, which hinder realisation of the Self?

 

A: They are habits of mind (vasanas).

 

Q: How to overcome the mental habits (vasanas)?

 

A: By realising the Self.

 

Q: This is a vicious circle.

 

A: It is the ego, which raises such difficulties, creating obstacles

and then

suffering from the perplexity of apparent paradoxes. Find out

who makes

the enquiries and the Self will be found.

 

Q: Why is this mental bondage so persistent?

 

A: The nature of bondage is merely the rising, ruinous thought `I am

different from the reality'.

Since one surely cannot remain separate from the reality,

reject that thought whenever it rises.

 

Q: Why do I never remember that I am the Self?

 

A: People speak of memory and oblivion of the fullness of the Self.

Oblivion and memory

are only thought-forms. They will alternate so long as there

are thoughts. But reality lies

beyond these. Memory and oblivion must be dependent on

something. That something

must be foreign to the Self as well, otherwise there would not

be oblivion. That upon which

memory and oblivion depend is the idea of the individual self.

When one looks for it,

this individual `I' is not found because it is not real.

 

Hence this 'I'` is synonymous with illusion or ignorance

(Maya, Avidya or Ajnana).

To know that there never was ignorance is the goal of all the

spiritual teachings.

Ignorance must be of one who is aware. Awareness is jnana

(knowledge).

Jnana is eternal and natural, ajnana is unnatural and unreal.

 

Q: having heard this truth, why does not one remain content?

 

A: Because Samskaras (innate mental tendencies) have not been

destroyed.

Unless the samskaras cease to exist, there will always be doubt

and confusion.

All efforts are directed to destroying doubt and confusion. To

do so their roots

must be cut. Their roots are the samskaras. These are rendered

ineffective by

practice as prescribed by the Guru. The Guru leaves it to the

seeker to do this

much so that he might himself find out that there is no

ignorance. Hearing the truth

(Sravana) is the first stage. If the understanding is not firm

one has to practise reflection

(Manana) and uninterrupted contemplation (Nididhyasana) on it.

These two processes

scorch the seeds of samskaras so that they are rendered

ineffective.

 

Some extraordinary people get unshakable jnana after hearing the

truth only once.

These are the advanced seekers. Beginners take longer to gain it.

 

from BE AS YOU ARE, David Godman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Namaskaram,

 

there seems to be a lot of confusion regarding the killing of the mind

or living without thoughts.

 

It does not mean that one turns into a senseless zomby. Stillness of

mind or the thoughtless state means that the mind does not go out and

react to outside stimulation of its own accord as in a normal person,

where thoughts go on in endless turns. The advanced seeker makes an

effort to think with a one pointed mind and as soon as the matter is

thought out, thoughts stop and the mind sinks back into its source.

 

warm regards

 

christina

 

 

 

On Feb 25, 2004, at 20:34, Tony OClery wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

<l.gif>

>

>

>

> •

>

>

> •

>

>

> •

>

>

Monsoonhouse Int.

Kovalam/Kerala

contact: christianecameron

Attachment: (text/enriched) [not stored]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two questions Tony.. How does one 'get rid of samskaras'? And the

second: What do you mean by attachement?

Cheers..

Tony OClery

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 8:34 PM

Re: Nobody can be that perfect

, Sam <S> attachments. That is

the answer right there Attachment.> > Perhaps you are

misunderstanding my premise that Moksha isn't > possible with a

mind.........ONS..Tony> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++=> > Is that

your actual experience, that encouraging people to live out their

sexuality is like pouring oil on a fire? > > This can only be the

thought of a very repressed mind that cannot imagine the calming

effects of satisfaction. It seems to imply that most humans are

insatiable sex-maniacs. > > Yes, perhaps in a few distorted and

extreme cases, just as eating can become gluttony. > > Don't quite

understand what you mean when you say that Attachment is the answer.

Wanna say more about that please?> > As to your direct nature and

blunt manner, that's no problem. It is your insistence that what you

say is the 'only way' that I call bashing. > > I understand your

premise. And again it all depends on what you mean by 'with a mind'.

> > What I have read and experienced is that the mind is a great

servant but a lousy master. > > What exactly do you want to be free

of? Is it not identification with your thinking processes? It cannot

be the mind itself, conscious and unconscious. You could not live for

a single second, your heart would forget to beat. > > I love chess,

hard to play it without a mind. I love music, nice to listen in

silence with the mind not disturbing. > > If by attachment you mean

the idea that 'you' are your mind, thinking of it as yours, then I

completely agree with you. > > The mind itself is such marvelous

instrument. Such a precious gift. To me Moksha is liberation from the

fixed idea that you are the mind. > > Don't you remember the 'rush'

that comes with understanding something? Like seeing the light. The

mind expanding with the new. Wonderful. > > There is so much

confusion and misunderstanding around this subject. Schools almost

force their students to identify with their minds by grading,

performance orientation, giving prizes and so on. I think it is a

very rare education that helps people to understand the wonder of

consciousness working in them, that everyone is a process and not a

thing that can be graded. Isn't that one of the reasons that we

started our search for wisdom? > > Your search has brought you

to the Vedas, mine wound around, like everyone's from Natchez to

Mobile, and eventually and with great joy brought me to Osho and to

advaita. > > When I first heard the story of the procrustean bed as

a kid it made me laugh a lot. It was funny. Little did I know then

that it is a parable for what people actually do to each other

especially in the realm of spirituality and religion. > > > >

namaste and a friendly wink from, SamNamaste, this is from a

different site perhaps you should read some stuff there.viorica

weissman" <viorica@z...> Wed Feb 25, 2004 2:18 pm

The Nature of The Self - [ Q: How then does ignorance of this

one and only reality unhappily arise in the case of the ajnani

(one who has not realised the Self)?Sri Ramana Maharshi: The

ajnani sees only the mind, which is a mere reflection of the light

of pure consciousness arising from the Heart. Of the Heart itself he

is ignorant. Why? Because his mind is extroverted and he never

sought its source.Q: What prevents the infinite, undifferentiated

light of consciousness arising from the Heart from revealing

itself to the ajnani?A: Just as water in a pot reflects the enormous

sun within the narrow limits of the pot, even so the Vasanas or

latent tendencies of the mind of the individual, acting as the

reflecting medium, catch the all-pervading infinite light of

consciousness arising from the Heart. The form of this

reflection is the phenomenon called the mind. Seeing only this

reflection, the ajnani is deluded into the belief that he is a

finite being, the jiva, the individual self.Q: What are the

obstacles, which hinder realisation of the Self?A: They are habits of

mind (vasanas).Q: How to overcome the mental habits (vasanas)?A: By

realising the Self.Q: This is a vicious circle.A: It is the ego,

which raises such difficulties, creating obstacles and then

suffering from the perplexity of apparent paradoxes. Find out who

makes the enquiries and the Self will be found.Q: Why is this

mental bondage so persistent?A: The nature of bondage is merely the

rising, ruinous thought `I am different from the reality'. Since

one surely cannot remain separate from the reality, reject that

thought whenever it rises.Q: Why do I never remember that I am the

Self?A: People speak of memory and oblivion of the fullness of the

Self. Oblivion and memory are only thought-forms. They will

alternate so long as there are thoughts. But reality lies beyond

these. Memory and oblivion must be dependent on something. That

something must be foreign to the Self as well, otherwise there

would not be oblivion. That upon which memory and oblivion depend

is the idea of the individual self. When one looks for it, this

individual `I' is not found because it is not real. Hence this

'I'` is synonymous with illusion or ignorance (Maya, Avidya or

Ajnana). To know that there never was ignorance is the goal of

all the spiritual teachings. Ignorance must be of one who is

aware. Awareness is jnana (knowledge). Jnana is eternal and

natural, ajnana is unnatural and unreal. Q: having heard this truth,

why does not one remain content?A: Because Samskaras (innate mental

tendencies) have not been destroyed. Unless the samskaras cease

to exist, there will always be doubt and confusion. All efforts

are directed to destroying doubt and confusion. To do so their roots

must be cut. Their roots are the samskaras. These are rendered

ineffective by practice as prescribed by the Guru. The Guru leaves

it to the seeker to do this much so that he might himself find out

that there is no ignorance. Hearing the truth (Sravana) is the

first stage. If the understanding is not firm one has to practise

reflection (Manana) and uninterrupted contemplation (Nididhyasana)

on it. These two processes scorch the seeds of samskaras so that

they are rendered ineffective.Some extraordinary people get

unshakable jnana after hearing the truth only once.These are the

advanced seekers. Beginners take longer to gain it.from BE AS YOU

ARE, David Godman

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, Sam <S.Pasiencier@p...> wrote:

>

> Two questions Tony.. How does one 'get rid of samskaras'? And the

second: What do you mean by attachement?

 

Namaste,

 

One had to use a Sadhana, for example meditation is raising one

thought that subsumes all others. As Krishna and many others have

said the problem is Desire. Desire creates attachments, this has to

be weakened.

 

http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/PurificationofBuddhi.htm

 

The senses are that which keep is in bondage, rise above these and

live in surrender or nishkarma karma is the way advised.

 

There are stages, and roles, of life of course, and saying don't

have sex too much to a newly married or young person, falls on deaf

ears, unless they are on a strong spiritual path already. One should

take a middle road like the Buddha advised and weaken

attachments. ...ONS..Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep

 

 

--- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote:

> , Sam

> <S.Pasiencier@p...> wrote:

> >

> > -

> > Tony OClery

> >

> > Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:36 PM

> > Nobody can be that

> perfect

> >

> >

> > Namaste,

> >

> > I remember many many years ago my mother

> telling me that nobody

> > could be as perfect as Jesus for he was the Son

> of God etc. I

> > wondered why not? As Jesus says, 'Be ye perfect

> as my Father in

> > Heaven is perfect.' This is an exhortation to

> his disciples to

> > purify themeselves, this is exactly what it is

> all about. Jesus

> was

> > obviously a Raja Yogi and Vedantist, it seeps

> through all of the

> > Gospels and Sermon on the Mount.

> > I know this is hard but unless we are perfect

> there can by no

> > Moksha. No short cuts.............ONS....> > *************

> >

> > Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very

> learned one

> knowing all the names of all the levels, angels and

> archangels.

> > You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and

> are still

> suffering the consequences of that destructive idea.

>

> >

> > Just for fun I could ask you what you mean here

> by the word

> perfect.

> >

> > A Zen master, can't remember who, maybe Bankei,

> was telling the

> students that everything was perfect as it is. A

> hunchback stood up

> and in protest showed his hunched back and asked:

> 'What about this

> back of mine?'. The master answered: 'That is the

> most perfect

> hunched back I have ever seen'. ,

> > What you write above is only the tyranny of the

> priests. Haven't

> you have enough of that?

> >

> > No one can stop you from suffering the

> consequences of your own

> ideas, but you insist on wanting to make them into

> universal laws,

> your very own priestly mind.

> >

> > All these years of searching for perfection. One

> wants to hold

> on to something doesn't one? Something to show for

> it.

> >

> > It's hard to be flat broke.

> >

> > The innocent, perfect child you were before you

> absorbed all

> these ideals, was, is and always will be already

> perfect.

> >

> > Have you looked into a child's eyes lately?

> >

> > Can there be more perfection?

> >

> > Namaste, Sam

> Namaste S,

>

> It takes purification of the mind from its vasanas

> and samskaras, to

> realise everything is already

> perfect..........ONS..>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote:

 

SNIP

> You are mistaking my direct nature and blunt manner

> for 'bashing'.

> With regard to Osho, I disagree with his philosophy

> on sex for it is

> like pouring oil on a fire, it doesn't put it out.

> It is a bodily

> function like eating and defecating, but does

> involve emotional

> attachments. That is the answer right there

> Attachment.

>

> Perhaps you are misunderstanding my premise that

> Moksha isn't

> possible with a mind.........ONS..>

>

>

Please consider the following quote from The

Panchadasi of Sri Vidyaranya Swami. For those

unacquainted with some of the more obscure Vedantic

texts, the Panchadasi is regarded to be one of the

foremost advaitic treatises.

 

Panchadasi, Chapter 7, verse 250:

 

As the tenth man cures his wounds by applying

medicines, so the knower wears out his fructifying

Karma by enjoyment and is ultimately liberated.

 

michael says: Be as you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, Michael Bowes

<rmichaelbowes> wrote:

>

> --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote:

>

> SNIP

>

> > You are mistaking my direct nature and blunt manner

> > for 'bashing'.

> > With regard to Osho, I disagree with his philosophy

> > on sex for it is

> > like pouring oil on a fire, it doesn't put it out.

> > It is a bodily

> > function like eating and defecating, but does

> > involve emotional

> > attachments. That is the answer right there

> > Attachment.

> >

> > Perhaps you are misunderstanding my premise that

> > Moksha isn't

> > possible with a mind.........ONS..> >

> >

> >

> Please consider the following quote from The

> Panchadasi of Sri Vidyaranya Swami. For those

> unacquainted with some of the more obscure Vedantic

> texts, the Panchadasi is regarded to be one of the

> foremost advaitic treatises.

>

> Panchadasi, Chapter 7, verse 250:

>

> As the tenth man cures his wounds by applying

> medicines, so the knower wears out his fructifying

> Karma by enjoyment and is ultimately liberated.

>

> michael says: Be as you are

 

Namaste,

 

I think that is a little deeper than it looks, well I hope so

anyway.The enjoyment is over many lifetimes but it is qualified by

grief as well. So like the Buddha said all is Dukkha, all enjoyment

carries with it the pain of it being lost.

 

However I would prefer to read this as enjoyment and not self

indulgence which is a different thing altogether. What is the

literal Sanskrit.............ONS...Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

of course

slowly but surely

desires drops

after realizing that they are the root of our conflicts

and after realizing that our senses as wonderful as they are and we

have to be grateful for them they still are "illusions"

in my long long troubling experiences I recognized the following

if I do not listen to the subtle subtle subtel inner voice I got astray

if I d o listen I am "home" no ups and downs no attachment no

desire just real happiness

LOVE

MICHAEL BINDEL

-

Tony OClery

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:47 PM

Re: Nobody can be that perfect

, Sam <S.Pasiencier@p...> wrote:>

> Two questions Tony.. How does one 'get rid of samskaras'? And the

second: What do you mean by attachement?Namaste,One had to use a

Sadhana, for example meditation is raising one thought that subsumes

all others. As Krishna and many others have said the problem is

Desire. Desire creates attachments, this has to be

weakened.http://www.geocities.com/aoclery/PurificationofBuddhi.htmThe

senses are that which keep is in bondage, rise above these and live in

surrender or nishkarma karma is the way advised.There are stages, and

roles, of life of course, and saying don't have sex too much to a

newly married or young person, falls on deaf ears, unless they are on

a strong spiritual path already. One should take a middle road like

the Buddha advised and weaken attachments.

....ONS..Tony/join

"Love itself is

the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam"

by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

christiane

and afterwards the wonderful blessing of BEING

MICHAEL BINDEL

-

christiane cameron

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 8:56 PM

Re: Re: Nobody can be that perfect

Namaskaram,there seems to be a lot of confusion regarding the killing

of the mind or living without thoughts.It does not mean that one

turns into a senseless zomby. Stillness of mind or the thoughtless

state means that the mind does not go out and react to outside

stimulation of its own accord as in a normal person, where thoughts

go on in endless turns. The advanced seeker makes an effort to think

with a one pointed mind and as soon as the matter is thought out,

thoughts stop and the mind sinks back into its source. warm

regardschristinaOn Feb 25, 2004, at 20:34, Tony OClery wrote:

color>color><l.gif>• • • color>Monsoonhouse Int.KovalamKeralacontact:

christianecameron (AT) mac (DOT) com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sam

thank you

great

michael bindel

-

Sam

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 8:26 PM

Re: Re: Nobody can be that perfect

-

Tony OClery

Wednesday, February 25, 2004 7:13 PM

Re: Nobody can be that perfect

> > > > Seems you are still an altar boy Tony. A very learned

one > knowing all the names of all the levels, angels and

archangels.> > You seem still to believe in 'original sin' and

are still > suffering the consequences of that destructive idea. >

> Namaste,> > I think you are transposing your own ideas on to

me. Original Sin is > a very complicated idea. It actually means

the separation of the > sould from God. Or in Vedantic terms the

formation of the Ego.> My belief in being perfected is the belief

of the Vedantists and > Yogis that even one thought will bring you

back and prevent > moksha.................ONS...Tony

> Nah... I was never an altar boy.. I knew even as a child that the

stuff that the orthodox religionists were perpetrating as the 'Nature

of God' was only the creation of a bigger adult in the sky who could

punish you if their efforts failed. > > You can believe whatever

you want, I only wanted to point out to you that you write it all as

if it is the ultimate law, etc.> > Maybe others of us have had

other just as valid experiences.> > I still think you have a

priestly mind. Big club those Vedas.> Bash, bash, bash. Sitting

there trying very hard to have no thoughts is, I think, very

difficult if not impossible. There are gentler descriptions of this

process. > > What is wrong with thought? It is also a gift of God.

Mozart heard his melodies in his mind first. > When I was studying

mathematics I was constantly amazed at the creative capacities of my

deeper mind. > Think and think, this way and that way about a

problem. No result. Go to sleep and in the morning you KNOW the

answer. Amazing.> > I believe that is the way enlightenment also

happens. It is how Nisargadatta describes his own coming to

self-realization. That was the purification. > > You can call it

purification if you like, but that word implies its opposite,

impurity.> > Now, maybe the Vedic meaning of impurity is the

separation of the soul (whatever that is) from God. But the way most

of were taught to think about it was to abhor impure thoughts.. (You

know all that sex stuff and bodily fluids, and juicy emotions like

hate, and anger, and jealousy that are so natural that they just

don't seem to want to go away). > > Like many people you have

misunderstood Osho's emphasis on the living out of sexuality and

repressed feelings in groups. It is all so titillating and easy to

laugh at from our repressions and mistaken ideas about purity. > >

His emphasis was always on meditation. But, being a very practical

man, he knew that it is very difficult for repressed individuals, to

meditate while their minds are churning with unlived life. > > Even

in ordinary life, a good sexual experience with a partner leaves one

feeling, whole, and calm and meditative. And peace often returns to

the household after a good, honest emotional fight. > It is the

common experience and just plain common sense. It is all about the

meditation. > > Meditation is the medication. > > I much prefer

the approach of living a natural life and creating the distance that

advaita encourages between the > 'person' and the consciousness in

which everything takes place. That is the purity without an opposite.

> > You missed so much in the last letter I wrote to you, maybe you

should read it again. Me not interested in theology. Of any kind. You

look for signs of whether this one is a muktah or that one is a

bodhisattva when all that matters is your own consciousness. These

words are from my heart Tony. > > Namaste, SamNamaste S,You are

mistaking my direct nature and blunt manner for 'bashing'. With

regard to Osho, I disagree with his philosophy on sex for it is like

pouring oil on a fire, it doesn't put it out. It is a bodily function

like eating and defecating, but does involve emotional attachments.

That is the answer right there Attachment.Perhaps you are

misunderstanding my premise that Moksha isn't possible with a

mind.........ONS..++++++++++++++++++++++++++=

Is that your actual experience, that encouraging people to live out

their sexuality is like pouring oil on a fire?

This can only be the thought of a very repressed mind that cannot

imagine the calming effects of satisfaction. It seems to imply that

most humans are insatiable sex-maniacs.

Yes, perhaps in a few distorted and extreme cases, just as eating can become gluttony.

Don't quite understand what you mean when you say that Attachment is

the answer. Wanna say more about that please?

As to your direct nature and blunt manner, that's no problem. It is

your insistence that what you say is the 'only way' that I call

bashing.

I understand your premise. And again it all depends on what you mean by 'with a mind'.

What I have read and experienced is that the mind is a great servant but a lousy master.

What exactly do you want to be free of? Is it not identification with

your thinking processes? It cannot be the mind itself, conscious and

unconscious. You could not live for a single second, your heart would

forget to beat.

I love chess, hard to play it without a mind. I love music, nice to

listen in silence with the mind not disturbing.

If by attachment you mean the idea that 'you' are your mind, thinking

of it as yours, then I completely agree with you.

The mind itself is such marvelous instrument. Such a precious gift. To

me Moksha is liberation from the fixed idea that you are the mind.

Don't you remember the 'rush' that comes with understanding something?

Like seeing the light. The mind expanding with the new. Wonderful.

There is so much confusion and misunderstanding around this subject.

Schools almost force their students to identify with their minds by

grading, performance orientation, giving prizes and so on. I think

it is a very rare education that helps people to understand the

wonder of consciousness working in them, that everyone is a process

and not a thing that can be graded. Isn't that one of the reasons

that we started our search for wisdom?

Your search has brought you to the Vedas, mine wound around, like

everyone's from Natchez to Mobile, and eventually and with great joy

brought me to Osho and to advaita.

When I first heard the story of the procrustean bed as a kid it made

me laugh a lot. It was funny. Little did I know then that it is a

parable for what people actually do to each other especially in the

realm of spirituality and religion.

namaste and a friendly wink from, Sam

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

Tony OClery

Thursday, February 26, 2004 1:03 AM

Re: Nobody can be that perfect

, Michael Bowes

<rmichaelbowes> wrote:> > --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote:>

> SNIP> > > You are mistaking my direct nature and blunt manner> >

for 'bashing'. > > With regard to Osho, I disagree with his

philosophy> > on sex for it is > > like pouring oil on a fire, it

doesn't put it out.> > It is a bodily > > function like eating and

defecating, but does> > involve emotional > > attachments. That is

the answer right there> > Attachment.> > > > Perhaps you are

misunderstanding my premise that> > Moksha isn't > > possible with a

mind.........ONS..Tony> > > > > > > Please consider the following

quote from The> Panchadasi of Sri Vidyaranya Swami. For those>

unacquainted with some of the more obscure Vedantic> texts, the

Panchadasi is regarded to be one of the> foremost advaitic

treatises.> > Panchadasi, Chapter 7, verse 250:> > As the tenth man

cures his wounds by applying> medicines, so the knower wears out his

fructifying> Karma by enjoyment and is ultimately liberated.> >

michael says: Be as you areNamaste,I think that is a little deeper

than it looks, well I hope so anyway.The enjoyment is over many

lifetimes but it is qualified by grief as well. So like the Buddha

said all is Dukkha, all enjoyment carries with it the pain of it

being lost.However I would prefer to read this as enjoyment and not

self indulgence which is a different thing altogether. What is the

literal Sanskrit.............ONS...

When the going gets tough... that's when the tough get going..

/join

"Love itself

is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri

Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote:

> , Michael Bowes

>

> <rmichaelbowes> wrote:

> >

> > --- Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote:

> >

> > SNIP

> >

> > > You are mistaking my direct nature and blunt

> manner

> > > for 'bashing'.

> > > With regard to Osho, I disagree with his

> philosophy

> > > on sex for it is

> > > like pouring oil on a fire, it doesn't put it

> out.

> > > It is a bodily

> > > function like eating and defecating, but does

> > > involve emotional

> > > attachments. That is the answer right there

> > > Attachment.

> > >

> > > Perhaps you are misunderstanding my premise that

> > > Moksha isn't

> > > possible with a mind.........ONS..> > >

> > >

> > >

> > Please consider the following quote from The

> > Panchadasi of Sri Vidyaranya Swami. For those

> > unacquainted with some of the more obscure

> Vedantic

> > texts, the Panchadasi is regarded to be one of the

> > foremost advaitic treatises.

> >

> > Panchadasi, Chapter 7, verse 250:

> >

> > As the tenth man cures his wounds by applying

> > medicines, so the knower wears out his fructifying

> > Karma by enjoyment and is ultimately liberated.

> >

> > michael says: Be as you are

>

> Namaste,

>

> I think that is a little deeper than it looks, well

> I hope so

> anyway.The enjoyment is over many lifetimes but it

> is qualified by

> grief as well. So like the Buddha said all is

> Dukkha, all enjoyment

> carries with it the pain of it being lost.

>

> However I would prefer to read this as enjoyment and

> not self

> indulgence which is a different thing altogether.

> What is the

> literal Sanskrit.............ONS...>

 

Panchadasi, Chapter 7, verse 252-254:

The satisfaction by external objects is limited, but

the satisfaction of liberation in life is unlimited.

The satisfaction of direct knowledge engenders the

feeling that all that was to be achieved has been

achieved, and all that was to be enjoyed has been

enjoyed.

Before realization one has many duties to perform in

order to acquire worldly and celestial advantages and

also as an aid to ultimate release; but with the rise

of knowledge of Brahman, they are as good as already

done, for nothing further remains to be done.

The Jivanmukta always feels supreme self-satisfaction

by constantly keeping in view his former state and

present state of freedom from wants and duties.

 

michael says: Relax

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...