Guest guest Posted August 1, 1999 Report Share Posted August 1, 1999 At 02:00 AM 8/1/99 -0400, you wrote: >"f. maiello" <egodust > >if you're not brahman, who are you? the devil? >hahaha! seriously, who or what is your real nature? >if you do an honest investigation, you may be in >for a megashock! :-) > perhaps "a c" stands for anti-christ ? :-)) I tried to answer the same "who am I" question from Warren. Forgive me for cutting and pasting it here too... There is "no knowing" that (certainly not as an object). I'm not advocating dvaita. If the individual self inquires into itself it is seen not to be there because the gaze towards oneself can find nowhere to stop. The gaze itself is there however, just awareness unidentified with an object. This awareness may be intimately related to absolute awareness (ie. Brahman) it may even seem temporarily indistinguishable but the sense of individualized awareness returns (or appears to) in every case -- even though according to Advaita there is no Gaudapada and there is no world in which Gaudapada says there is no world. The very fact of Advaita's existence contradicts this tenet (or so it seems to me). >it's not a matter of doing Being >but simply Being >alloyed with nothing else! > hmm... OK, I'm with you here. The being of every thing shares the same being of Being itself -- fine, but only Brahman is ever "alloyed with nothing else". We are the alloying of something else in Brahman and we persist no matter how many interludes of unalloyed nondual Being occur -- we return (or appear to). The only way this can be denied is to deny we are writing or reading these words -- to deny the world exists, etc. etc. and THAT is absurd (according to me). >as per the sleep state: > >what i said earlier about stopping the Mind, >also encompasses the idea of not allowing >the Mind to manipulate one's awareness (which >is the superimposition on suddha chit or pure >consciousness). > >when this is achieved, the Self shines >unimpeded and flows steadily. thus the >phases of Mind (waking, dream, deep sleep) >are no longer disruptive to the flow of >awareness. this constant flow (which is >the 'stateless state' of pure Being) is >also the turiya sthithi or Fourth State. > If we presume it could only be the Self (ie. the 'stateless state' of pure Being, the turiya sthithi or Fourth State) which could be the unimpeded constant flow of awareness during the time the body is asleep -- then I *AM* that ! >to give you an idea of its power and, in >comparison to the relative plane, its >paradox, i can tell you that this body >is in constant and sometimes excruciating >pain from 8 herniated discs in the spine, >where there have been times that on the >verge of delerium, i've been tempted to >shed this mortal coil...while yet in >varying states of samadhi! the pain is >there in the physical body, while the >Self is sovereign and spherically exalted >in perfect freedom. > Well... I don't know whether to congratulate you or sympathize. I have a bad back too -- but my God man!!! 8 herniated disks -- now that's got to be major pain. A friend of mine knew a terminally ill woman who really enjoyed meditating in the sleep state because it was the only time she wasn't aware of the body. I felt she was very lucky to be able to do that. It must be maddening to be "chained to a dying animal" which has 8 hearniated disks! My sympathy *and* my heartiest congratulations Frank. It seems you are shedding major karmas here -- and maybe not returning? :-)) >this scenario causes the relative Mind >and its will to reasonably judge and >categorize, to utterly collapse. where >not only does it lack any explanations, >it can't even fathom *approaching* any >explanations. > You do a pretty good job of explaining nonetheless and I appreciate your effort and seemingly inexhaustible patience with my nattering. My respect for you grows apace... You must cut quite a psychic swath Frank. :-)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 1999 Report Share Posted August 1, 1999 a c wrote: > > There is "no knowing" that (certainly not as an object). I'm not > advocating dvaita. If the individual self inquires into itself it is seen > not to be there because the gaze towards oneself can find nowhere to stop. > The gaze itself is there however, just awareness unidentified with an > object. This awareness may be intimately related to absolute awareness > (ie. Brahman) it may even seem temporarily indistinguishable but the sense > of individualized awareness returns (or appears to) in every case -- even > though according to Advaita there is no Gaudapada and there is no world in > which Gaudapada says there is no world. The very fact of Advaita's > existence contradicts this tenet (or so it seems to me). > it is very much individualized...as the Self. the Self Being. *not* the Self, as being this way or that. but the *unalloyed* Self. this is the substratum paramatman, which is really equivalent to nirguna brahman. however, it doesn't stop here. (and this is where all the problems arise.) the outbreath or manifestation of the nirguna substratum is the brahman *with* attributes, saguna brahman (ordinarily thought of as strictly isvara--however, i think it should given this broader connotation--which is really in keeping with drishti-srishti vada) or more widely referred to as brahman's lila. the point is, each of the particulars in manifestation--although real--are *at once* simultaneously absorbed back into the Absolute. so that, the immanent is really *itself* the transcendent. thus, "all of this, verily, is brahman," transports everything as a continuum into sat-chit-ananda. the result is pure freedom. period. > >it's not a matter of doing Being > >but simply Being > >alloyed with nothing else! > > > hmm... OK, I'm with you here. The being of every thing shares the same > being of Being itself -- fine, but only Brahman is ever "alloyed with > nothing else". We are the alloying of something else in Brahman and we > persist no matter how many interludes of unalloyed nondual Being occur -- > we return (or appear to). The only way this can be denied is to deny we > are writing or reading these words -- to deny the world exists, etc. etc. > and THAT is absurd (according to me). it's really all there in the Upanishads. "In the beginning there was Existence alone (SAT)...the One without a Second...having projected out of himself (it's best to think of 'him' as 'it,' since it is neuter in gender--or, more accurately, both and neither) the universe, he entered into every being. All that is has its self in him alone. Of all things, he is the subtle essence. He is the truth. He is the Self. And that, Svetaketu, THAT ART THOU." --Chandogyopanishad how else can this be interpreted? and this was sanctioned by Sankara, as one of the 108 upanishads he recognized. this is advaita. peace is love is freedom in om! 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.