Guest guest Posted December 10, 2004 Report Share Posted December 10, 2004 It would probably be more correct to say that God is BOTH male and female, and also that which is beyond any such designation. One may think of "Male" as being whatever "starts the ball rolling", but remains essentially unchanged thereby, "Female" is whatever it is that is thus impelled into action, and undergoes change resulting in further development. "Vimalananda" asserts, in his Aghora books, that it is better to start with devotion to God in Form, preferably that of the Feminine,as "Mother" and direct your love towards whichever aspect this Form takes for you. When you have achieved relationship with your particular chosen aspect of the Divine, THEN you can "ask" your Deity to show you the "Father"(the Unmanifest), if you wish to "go beyond". The aversion Westerners have for "God with Form" dates back to the Second Commandment not to worship "graven images". But to worship God without form is very difficult. Even Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gita states, "The path of the Transcendent is difficult for mortals to attain" (Ch.12, v. 2-5). It is much better to recall that the Hebrews hated and despised the Goddess, whose temples had many images, and hence this particular commandment, which people who want to get on with worshiping God, and who have more sense than to obey irrelevant and outdated spiritual injunctions from a religion whose history speaks for itself, can be safely ignored by those who wish to get on with the Great Work. It is recorded that after Ramakrishna Paramahansa attained to the Vision of the Divine Feminine, he wished to take it to the next level and made the request to the Mother. She responded by sending a Vedantic adept, Totapuri, to teach him. But Ramakrishna could not seem to raise his mind to the Formless Absolute, and said as much to his teacher. Totapuri frowned, looked about him and picked up a shard of glass, and stuck it right into Ramakrishna's forehead, between his eyes! "Concentrate the mind on this point!" he thundered, and Ramakrishna resumed his meditation with redoubled determination. This time, success! When the image of the Mother appeared in his mind, he took the mental sword of discrimination and clove Her image in two, and sailed up and away into the Unmanifest Absolute! Totapuri was stunned. "How has this one managed to achieve in three days what it took me forty years to accomplish?" he exclaimed in shock. And so it was... Lilith M. --- omprem <omprem a écrit : > > Primitive peoples seek to explain their world using > human > relationship and human behavioural models. This is > neither > new nor unexpected. However this tendency to > present a > philosophy anthrocentrically because of an > unsophisticated > ability to analyze, grasp and present ideas does not > mean that > the theory has any truth in it. > > Nor does it matter that several groups use a similar > > anthropocentric model lend any weight to the theory. > Given the > primitve level of these peoples it would be more > remarkable if > they do not use an anthropocentric model. > > It is useless to argue about whether God is a woman > or a man. > God is neither. The Vedantic term, Brahman, is more > useful > because not only does it not assume gender but it > goes well > beyond that by asserting no qualities whatsoever. > > Omprem > > > > , "Millennium > Twain" > <yonibluestar> wrote: > > > > "God Is A Woman", by I. Scott Chase. > > Greyden Press Publishers > > > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1570744092/ > > ref%3Dpd%5Fcp%5Fec%5Fbk%5Fa/104-6252050-1283147 > > > > "Egyptians said the primeval sea womb was the > Goddess > Nun, > > [or Nwt] who gave birth to the Sun and all the > gods. [in China > She > > was named NuWa.] In Sumeria, She was Nammu, who > created the > > sky and the earth. [For the Dogon, She was Nommu.] > In > Babylon, > > She was Tiamat, the Deep, who gave birth to all > the deities. In > > Greece She was the primal Goddess Gaea, who gave > birth > > to the sky, Uranus. Assyria told of the wise > Goddess Mami, > who > > made human beings out of the clay that was part of > her womb." > > > > "In 2100 BC, the ziggurat which dominated Ur > (Iraq) was built > > to honor the Goddess Nanna, Innana." > > > > "The oldest statuary found, dating from as early > as 250,000 > BC, > > is invariably female." > > > > "Yahweh was first depicted [as a woman] with Ram's > horns, > but > > later these horns were assigned to the devil." [Y, > of Yahweh, for > Yoni.] > > > > "In Arabia [she was signified by the V or vulva] > ... the three > Lunar > > Goddesses, under the names of Al-Uzza, Manat, and > Al-Lat > [Allah.]" > > > > Al-Lah meaning She was gives milk, the creator, > the nurturer. > > > > ALL (ALL-LAH) Divine ... > > > > Millennium > > > > Découvrez le nouveau Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! Créez votre Mail sur http://fr.mail./ Avec faites un don et soutenez le Téléthon en cliquant sur http://www.telethon.fr/030-Don/10-10_Don.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 11, 2004 Report Share Posted December 11, 2004 " It would probably be more correct to say that God is BOTH male and female, and also that which is beyond any such designation." It is indeed difficult to focus the unmanifest. That is why Nirguna Mantras are used mainly by Jnanis. Saguna Mantras are used by the majority because of their need for something concrete on which to focus their spiritual yearning. Samadhi is of two types: the first, Savikalpa or Samprajnata Samadhi, is dualistic in that the aspirant identifies with an object (God or Goddess), but the second and higher type of Samadhi, Nirvikalpa or Asamprajnata Samadhi, has no content. As long as one's consciousness as any content in it the journey to Self-realization is not over. Omprem , Lili Masamura <sephirah5> wrote: > It would probably be more correct to say that God is > BOTH male and female, and also that which is beyond > any such designation. One may think of "Male" as being > whatever "starts the ball rolling", but remains > essentially unchanged thereby, "Female" is whatever it > is that is thus impelled into action, and undergoes > change resulting in further development. > > "Vimalananda" asserts, in his Aghora books, that it > is better to start with devotion to God in Form, > preferably that of the Feminine,as "Mother" and direct > your love towards whichever aspect this Form takes for > you. When you have achieved relationship with your > particular chosen aspect of the Divine, THEN you can > "ask" your Deity to show you the "Father"(the > Unmanifest), if you wish to "go beyond". The aversion > Westerners have for "God with Form" dates back to the > Second Commandment not to worship "graven images". But > to worship God without form is very difficult. Even > Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gita states, "The path of the > Transcendent is difficult for mortals to attain" > (Ch.12, v. 2-5). It is much better to recall that the > Hebrews hated and despised the Goddess, whose temples > had many images, and hence this particular > commandment, which people who want to get on with > worshiping God, and who have more sense than to obey > irrelevant and outdated spiritual injunctions from a > religion whose history speaks for itself, can be > safely ignored by those who wish to get on with the > Great Work. > > It is recorded that after Ramakrishna Paramahansa > attained to the Vision of the Divine Feminine, he > wished to take it to the next level and made the > request to the Mother. She responded by sending a > Vedantic adept, Totapuri, to teach him. But > Ramakrishna could not seem to raise his mind to the > Formless Absolute, and said as much to his teacher. > Totapuri frowned, looked about him and picked up a > shard of glass, and stuck it right into Ramakrishna's > forehead, between his eyes! > "Concentrate the mind on this point!" he thundered, > and Ramakrishna resumed his meditation with redoubled > determination. This time, success! When the image of > the Mother appeared in his mind, he took the mental > sword of discrimination and clove Her image in two, > and sailed up and away into the Unmanifest Absolute! > Totapuri was stunned. "How has this one managed to > achieve in three days what it took me forty years to > accomplish?" he exclaimed in shock. And so it was... > Lilith M. > > --- omprem <omprem> a écrit : > > > > Primitive peoples seek to explain their world using > > human > > relationship and human behavioural models. This is > > neither > > new nor unexpected. However this tendency to > > present a > > philosophy anthrocentrically because of an > > unsophisticated > > ability to analyze, grasp and present ideas does not > > mean that > > the theory has any truth in it. > > > > Nor does it matter that several groups use a similar > > > > anthropocentric model lend any weight to the theory. > > Given the > > primitve level of these peoples it would be more > > remarkable if > > they do not use an anthropocentric model. > > > > It is useless to argue about whether God is a woman > > or a man. > > God is neither. The Vedantic term, Brahman, is more > > useful > > because not only does it not assume gender but it > > goes well > > beyond that by asserting no qualities whatsoever. > > > > Omprem > > > > > > > > , "Millennium > > Twain" > > <yonibluestar> wrote: > > > > > > "God Is A Woman", by I. Scott Chase. > > > Greyden Press Publishers > > > > > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1570744092/ > > > ref%3Dpd%5Fcp%5Fec%5Fbk%5Fa/104-6252050-1283147 > > > > > > "Egyptians said the primeval sea womb was the > > Goddess > > Nun, > > > [or Nwt] who gave birth to the Sun and all the > > gods. [in China > > She > > > was named NuWa.] In Sumeria, She was Nammu, who > > created the > > > sky and the earth. [For the Dogon, She was Nommu.] > > In > > Babylon, > > > She was Tiamat, the Deep, who gave birth to all > > the deities. In > > > Greece She was the primal Goddess Gaea, who gave > > birth > > > to the sky, Uranus. Assyria told of the wise > > Goddess Mami, > > who > > > made human beings out of the clay that was part of > > her womb." > > > > > > "In 2100 BC, the ziggurat which dominated Ur > > (Iraq) was built > > > to honor the Goddess Nanna, Innana." > > > > > > "The oldest statuary found, dating from as early > > as 250,000 > > BC, > > > is invariably female." > > > > > > "Yahweh was first depicted [as a woman] with Ram's > > horns, > > but > > > later these horns were assigned to the devil." [Y, > > of Yahweh, for > > Yoni.] > > > > > > "In Arabia [she was signified by the V or vulva] > > ... the three > > Lunar > > > Goddesses, under the names of Al-Uzza, Manat, and > > Al-Lat > > [Allah.]" > > > > > > Al-Lah meaning She was gives milk, the creator, > > the nurturer. > > > > > > ALL (ALL-LAH) Divine ... > > > > > > Millennium > > > > > > > > Découvrez le nouveau Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! > Créez votre Mail sur http://fr.mail./ > > Avec faites un don et soutenez le Téléthon en cliquant sur http://www.telethon.fr/030-Don/10-10_Don.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 11, 2004 Report Share Posted December 11, 2004 , Lili Masamura <sephirah5> wrote: > Totapuri was stunned. "How has this one managed to > achieve in three days what it took me forty years to > accomplish?" he exclaimed in shock. And so it was... > Lilith M. Hi Lili, The stories of Sri Ramakrishna are terrific; please keep them coming. (I have read most of them, but it's a joy to read them again here!). Thank you. I agree most folks need the "God with form" to achieve a level of spiritual equanimity. Then comes the formless (the concept of asking for the form's permission to go beyond is also beautiful); rare are the people who jumped into the "unmanifest" experience directly. Sri Ramana Maharishi was one of them. Yet he retained a love for devotional singing that would make a bhaktin envious. To my mind, that is true Vedanta - see both the form and the formless with equanimity. Jai Ma! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 11, 2004 Report Share Posted December 11, 2004 --- manoj_menon <ammasmon wrote: > Hi Lili, > > The stories of Sri Ramakrishna are terrific; please > keep them > coming. (I have read most of them, but it's a joy to > read them again > here!). Thank you. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Yes, I never get tired of hearing or reading Ramakrishna stories. If you have any to share please feel free..one story that never fails to make me cry is one that tells of a devotee who heard of Ramakrishna and set out ON FOOT to Dakshineswar, a journey of over 1000 miles! When he finally arrived, he found that the Master had died only three days earlier. He was inconsolable when he heard this terrible news, and went out and sat in the Pine Grove, weeping and refusing to eat. He was there three days, until someone saw him dancing about, laughing joyfully and waving something over his head. They rushed over to see what was the matter. The devotee told them that Ramakrishna himself had appeared, holding a bowl of porridge, and scolded the devotee for trying to starve himself to death, while tenderly feeding him the porridge. The object the devotee was waving about was the very bowl Ramakrishna had held. Apparently the bowl was kept for a long time, but eventually was lost. ############################################### > > I agree most folks need the "God with form" to > achieve a level of > spiritual equanimity. Then comes the formless (the > concept of asking > for the form's permission to go beyond is also > beautiful); rare are > the people who jumped into the "unmanifest" > experience directly. ################################################## Well, it is not so much a matter of "asking permission, but more like requesting its help in doing so! This would probably be best done with a Mother Goddess aspect. The Master Vimalananda, of "Aghora" fame must get the credit for coming up with such a sublime concept! Lilith M. ############################################# > > Sri Ramana Maharishi was one of them. Yet he > retained a love for > devotional singing that would make a bhaktin > envious. To my mind, > that is true Vedanta - see both the form and the > formless with > equanimity. > > Jai Ma! > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 13, 2004 Report Share Posted December 13, 2004 Hello Omprem, Good points those ... However, neither form of samadhi is absolute ... as sri adi sankaracharya asserts once a person comes out of samadhi dualistic tendencies come back ... hence to realise non dualistic tendencies of universe at all times is probably one high aim of all spirituality then ! The question that comes to my mind is .. How do we achieve this? --- omprem <omprem wrote: > > " It would probably be more correct to say that God > is BOTH male > and female, and also that which is beyond any such > designation." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 13, 2004 Report Share Posted December 13, 2004 We are here in this world to experience duality ... the reason for experiencing this duality is to love god as a bhakta would say ... Realising that duality is a relative perception and non duality is the truth behind all is wha a gyani would do ... Experiencing this truth in every moment of existance is the highest form of yogic truth !! As I see it until one reaches to that experiential state of yogic oneness .. it is not wrong to accept duality as a part of our own nature ... Thanks for the wonderful posts ! --- manoj_menon <ammasmon wrote: , Lili Masamura --- <sephirah5> wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 13, 2004 Report Share Posted December 13, 2004 There is a point at which Nirvikalpa Samadhi is absolute. The Yoga Vasishta outlines the seven bhoomikas or stages of knowledge. The first is Subecha or longing for the Truth. Through sadhana one progresses to the Pararthabhavani Bhoomika where the aspirant burns off Sanchita and Agami Karmas and almost all of the Prarbdha Karma. The final stage is the Turiya stage of perpetual Samadhi. After three days or so in this stage the sadhaka leaves the physical body behind forever (unless choosing to return to earth as an Avatar). Omprem , surya vishnubhotla <surya_prakashv> wrote: > > Hello Omprem, > > Good points those ... However, neither form of samadhi > is absolute ... as sri adi sankaracharya asserts once > a person comes out of samadhi dualistic tendencies > come back ... hence to realise non dualistic > tendencies of universe at all times is probably one > high aim of all spirituality then ! > > The question that comes to my mind is .. How do we > achieve this? > > --- omprem <omprem> wrote: > > > > > " It would probably be more correct to say that God > > is BOTH male > > and female, and also that which is beyond any such > > designation." 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.