Guest guest Posted April 22, 2005 Report Share Posted April 22, 2005 , "Harsha" wrote: > _____ > > advaitin [advaitin] On Behalf > Of Tony OClery > Wednesday, April 20, 2005 4:55 PM > advaitin > Re: Fwd: Nirvikalpa > Samadhi and Yoga Nidra etc > > > > Namaste H, > > This is where I differ in opinion. Sat-Cit-Ananda are to > me 'qualities' as Ramana would say and does say. Qualities and > attributes are the same, so we are talking of something experiential > whether it seems to be universal or not. i.e. Saguna Brahman. > > > > ****************************************************************** > > These are all debates for scholars Tony. Saguna and Nirguna are the same > thing. The so called "Impersonal Brahman" turns out to be one's very own > being. One can't get anymore personal than that! > Sat-Chit-Ananda-Nityam-Poornum. One without a second, whose nature is that > of Existence, Consciousness, Ananda. That which is Whole, Complete, and > Eternal, that is our nature, not something to be observed by the mind as a > separate thing, but That which shines through the mind, that which is > Self-Existent in the absence of mind and the presence of mind. That which > Knows It Self, not as one knowing another but as One whose very nature is > that of Self-Knowing. That is our nature. Self is devoid and empty of all > things, thoughts, concepts, perceptions, experiences, possibilities. This is > indicated by the Ajatavada doctrine. Yet, the nature of the Self is that of > utter and complete fullness. That is indicated by the terms > Sat-Chit-Ananda-Nityam-Poornum. Because the mind cannot fully grasp it, > different perspectives are given in the scriptures. These perspectives have > meaning only in relationship to each other. Because Self truly has no frame > of reference, being One without a second, all doctrines are essentially > empty of meaning. > > > > Love to all > > Harsha Namste Harsha, I agree that Saguna and Nirguna are the same thing, for Nirguna is the truth. There is no Saguna or manifestation of mind or creation. There is no 'Being', for that is a modification, and there is no being that is our inner being. All this didn't happen, for where is it on bodiless moksha or deep sleep? Sat-Cit-Ananda is Saguna, which doesn't exist for they are descriptive attributes, as with purna. There is nothing to be full, full of what? There is,( a bad verb), only the Unbecoming/Unbeing Nirguna Brahman. I know to many this is unpalatable,to some, for many wish to hang on to attributes such as Love, God, Sat-Cit-Ananda etc. But in the end we have to let them go, along with such ideas as eternity etc. There is nobody helping us, there is nobody doing anything....ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2005 Report Share Posted April 23, 2005 Hi in my experience Saguna and Nirguna arise in the same time there is no Saguna without Nirguna, and Saguna is made of the stuff of Nirguna, that is nothing. But also Nirguna doesn't exist without Saguna. Who is there to say that it does exist? Saguna! So even though Nirguna seems to be prior to Saguna, as it is the infinite potential to manifest, so one could consider it more fundamental, yet Nirguna never exists alone, as far as we can tell, it always manifests together with the body of Saguna made of the stuff of Nirguna, one homogeneous medium all pervasive made of nothing with few bubbles here and there, the forms and their attributes. Is your experience different? Actually, to some Teachers, like Nisargadatta, beyond this apparent duality of emptiness and fullness there is something more that is not a something, that is not a nothing, it is just beyond something and nothing and that is what one really is. There is a void, that is Nirguna, and there is a void of void, that is beyond, that doesn't mean it is nothing, just any concept of existence or non existence doesn't apply. But who or what can tell this? It is a mystery! Yet to some it is known! marifa P.S. There is a story about Ramakrishna and his advaita teacher Totapuri. Totapuri didn't believe in the reality of Gods and Goddess, not even in Mother Kali. Ramakrishna after completing the training in advaita with Totapuri told him that he would have given him the gift of the knowledge and love of God. Totapuri couldn't believe it, but he fell sick and couldn't leave as for his program, (as a naked wandering monk he was not supposed to stay more than 3 days in one place) He was long time sick and couldn't recover until he accepted the reality of Mother Kali. - "Tony OClery" <aoclery <> Friday, April 22, 2005 5:54 PM Re: Fwd: Nirvikalpa Samadhi and Yoga Nidra etc > > > > , "Harsha" wrote: >> _____ >> >> advaitin [advaitin] > On Behalf >> Of Tony OClery >> Wednesday, April 20, 2005 4:55 PM >> advaitin >> Re: Fwd: > Nirvikalpa >> Samadhi and Yoga Nidra etc >> >> >> >> Namaste H, >> >> This is where I differ in opinion. Sat-Cit-Ananda are to >> me 'qualities' as Ramana would say and does say. Qualities and >> attributes are the same, so we are talking of something > experiential >> whether it seems to be universal or not. i.e. Saguna Brahman. >> >> >> >> ****************************************************************** >> >> These are all debates for scholars Tony. Saguna and Nirguna are > the same >> thing. The so called "Impersonal Brahman" turns out to be one's > very own >> being. One can't get anymore personal than that! >> Sat-Chit-Ananda-Nityam-Poornum. One without a second, whose nature > is that >> of Existence, Consciousness, Ananda. That which is Whole, > Complete, and >> Eternal, that is our nature, not something to be observed by the > mind as a >> separate thing, but That which shines through the mind, that which > is >> Self-Existent in the absence of mind and the presence of mind. > That which >> Knows It Self, not as one knowing another but as One whose very > nature is >> that of Self-Knowing. That is our nature. Self is devoid and empty > of all >> things, thoughts, concepts, perceptions, experiences, > possibilities. This is >> indicated by the Ajatavada doctrine. Yet, the nature of the Self > is that of >> utter and complete fullness. That is indicated by the terms >> Sat-Chit-Ananda-Nityam-Poornum. Because the mind cannot fully > grasp it, >> different perspectives are given in the scriptures. These > perspectives have >> meaning only in relationship to each other. Because Self truly has > no frame >> of reference, being One without a second, all doctrines are > essentially >> empty of meaning. >> >> >> >> Love to all >> >> Harsha > > > Namste Harsha, > > I agree that Saguna and Nirguna are the same thing, for Nirguna is > the truth. There is no Saguna or manifestation of mind or creation. > There is no 'Being', for that is a modification, and there is no > being that is our inner being. All this didn't happen, for where is > it on bodiless moksha or deep sleep? Sat-Cit-Ananda is Saguna, which > doesn't exist for they are descriptive attributes, as with purna. > There is nothing to be full, full of what? There is,( a bad verb), > only the Unbecoming/Unbeing Nirguna Brahman. > > I know to many this is unpalatable,to some, for many wish to hang on > to attributes such as Love, God, Sat-Cit-Ananda etc. But in the end > we have to let them go, along with such ideas as eternity etc. > > There is nobody helping us, there is nobody doing > anything....ONS...Tony. > > > /join > > > > > > "Love itself is the actual form of God." > > Sri Ramana > > In "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma > Links > > > > > > > > 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.