tamas, rajas, satvic (important distinctions/questions)

[Guest guest]

Hi Omprem,

I had to think some more about this and come to the following

conclusions below (i.e. I feel a need to make some distinctions, respectfully):

 

In a message dated 10/24/2004 8:51:57 PM Mountain Daylight Time,

omprem writes:

> 1.There are tamasic aspirants who misinterpret spiritual

> teachings and will argue for the sake of argument. They rely on

> instinct rather than intellect and has no discrimination or

> discipline.

 

In some ways I am tamasic and I feel instinct is important to follow.

Instinct is good. Such as Instinct for Survival and Instinct for the Divine (

what

leads people to seek for Divinity, to seek for understanding ) is instinct for

suvival --

 

Still, there is one's true nature, and the "second nature" that the Gospel of

Mary talked about, and I would argue the same could be said of instinct. Our

instincts have become corrupted, often by conditioning.

> 2. There are rajasic aspirants who preach but do not practice

> and while ready to convert do not have an experience. They are

> followers with only passionate discrimination. They do not see

> the Truth, the Oneness behing the teachings. They have an

> emotional attachment to the teacher.

 

I think emotional attachment can be healthy and in descriptions of guru-

student relationship I have read descriptions of the bond sounds almost familial

like a close mama or papi or a beloved aunt or even a beloved, so the idea of

emotional attachment to the teacher, can be healthy just so long as it is not

over-dependence.

 

I feel in some ways I am rajasic and do not feel this to be a negative. At

times in the past I have been overly so, and inappropriately with a bad teacher

who didn't have my best interests at heart, and I got hurt.

 

So, a certain amount of emotional detachment, sure, but Love? Isn't love a

passionate discrimination?

> 3. There are the sattvic aspirants who are already highly evolved,

> who endowed early with discrimination and dispassion They

> know discipline is necessary for spiritual attainment. They ask

> questions but are not dependant on the teacher.

 

I'm taking a stab in the dark here, but would venture that any of each of

these attributes taken alone could be seen as imature or incomplete. Even you

would say for instance that book learning is not enough. Discipline is of the

Mind. And three elements cannot be integrated when one is put above the other.

 

I would VENTURE on gut instinct based on mental information I've been picking

up here and there combined with my passion to know more, and maybe somebody

ahs said this already and if I'm wrong, anyone is free to correct me, but isn't

tamas parallel to bodily, rajas to heart, and sattvic to mind?

 

Blessings and Peace,

Cathie

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

We all have moments of tamas, rajas and sattva. But we also

are predominately one of these gunas most of the time. It is

better to be rajasic than tamasic and better to be sattvic than

rajasic in terms of spiritual aspiration. The idea is not to

integrate these three gunas but rather to overcome them. In the

end, even sattva must be overcome.

 

I don't think that one can equate tamas with the body, rajas with

heart and sattva with mind. I was to think in those terms I could

equate sattva with heart, rajas with mind but would have to have

a more abstract view of tamas, perhaps fear or dullness.

 

There is a difference between instinct and intuition. There is the

instinct for survival and one has a duty to survive in order to

workd out their karma and to move closer to an apprehension of

the Divine within them. But when all is said and done an

attachment to life is must also be overcome or else we remain

locked in Maya and veiled from the Divine.

 

The problem with emotions is that they too bind us to Maya.

Emotions are ego desires. Love is a different category and not

necessarily an emotion. The love that most are familiar with is

ego-based even at the best of times. However, along with

spiritual attainment comes a feeling of Bliss and Compassion

which directed into the mundane world will be viewed as Love.

 

Love directed toward the Guru can (1) ego-based because of

what you expect the Guru to provide, (2) co-dependency that

results from the ego-based love, and (3) Love shared between

the Guru and the disciple as both radiate their Divinity.

 

I would not define love as 'passionate discrimination' because

those are contradictory concepts. Passion always obscures

discrimination. Even love of God/dess obscures discrimination.

One only has to look at all the religious strife in the world today

so see that process at work.

 

 

Omprem

 

, SophiasHeaven@a...

wrote:

> Hi Omprem,

> I had to think some more about this and come to the

following

> conclusions below (i.e. I feel a need to make some

distinctions, respectfully):

>

> In a message dated 10/24/2004 8:51:57 PM Mountain Daylight

Time,

> omprem writes:

>

> > 1.There are tamasic aspirants who misinterpret spiritual

> > teachings and will argue for the sake of argument. They rely

on

> > instinct rather than intellect and has no discrimination or

> > discipline.

>

> In some ways I am tamasic and I feel instinct is important to

follow.

> Instinct is good. Such as Instinct for Survival and Instinct for

the Divine ( what

> leads people to seek for Divinity, to seek for understanding ) is

instinct for

> suvival --

>

> Still, there is one's true nature, and the "second nature" that the

Gospel of

> Mary talked about, and I would argue the same could be said

of instinct. Our

> instincts have become corrupted, often by conditioning.

>

> > 2. There are rajasic aspirants who preach but do not practice

> > and while ready to convert do not have an experience. They

are

> > followers with only passionate discrimination. They do not

see

> > the Truth, the Oneness behing the teachings. They have an

> > emotional attachment to the teacher.

>

> I think emotional attachment can be healthy and in

descriptions of guru-

> student relationship I have read descriptions of the bond

sounds almost familial

> like a close mama or papi or a beloved aunt or even a beloved,

so the idea of

> emotional attachment to the teacher, can be healthy just so

long as it is not

> over-dependence.

>

> I feel in some ways I am rajasic and do not feel this to be a

negative. At

> times in the past I have been overly so, and inappropriately

with a bad teacher

> who didn't have my best interests at heart, and I got hurt.

>

> So, a certain amount of emotional detachment, sure, but Love?

Isn't love a

> passionate discrimination?

> > 3. There are the sattvic aspirants who are already highly

evolved,

> > who endowed early with discrimination and dispassion They

> > know discipline is necessary for spiritual attainment. They

ask

> > questions but are not dependant on the teacher.

>

> I'm taking a stab in the dark here, but would venture that any of

each of

> these attributes taken alone could be seen as imature or

incomplete. Even you

> would say for instance that book learning is not enough.

Discipline is of the

> Mind. And three elements cannot be integrated when one is

put above the other.

>

> I would VENTURE on gut instinct based on mental information

I've been picking

> up here and there combined with my passion to know more,

and maybe somebody

> ahs said this already and if I'm wrong, anyone is free to correct

me, but isn't

> tamas parallel to bodily, rajas to heart, and sattvic to mind?

>

> Blessings and Peace,

> Cathie

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

tamas, rajas and sattva.

who classified this?

Gunas are multi dimentional and multi directional.

It reflect the various universe

namasivayam

 

-

omprem

 

We all have moments of tamas, rajas and sattva. But we also

are predominately one of these gunas most of the time.