Guest guest Posted June 21, 2000 Report Share Posted June 21, 2000 >From Ananta If the effect is the cause reproduced, the question is: "How is it that we find this material, dull, unintelligent universe produced from a God, who is not material, but who is eternal intelligence? How, if the cau.se is pure and perfect, can the effect be quite different?" What do these qualified non-dualists say ? Theirs is a very peculiar theory. They say that these three existences, God, nature, and the Soul, are one. from a lecture by Swami Vivekananda... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2000 Report Share Posted June 21, 2000 >>From Ananta > > >If the effect is the cause reproduced, the question is: "How is it >that we find this material, dull, unintelligent universe produced >from a God, who is not material, but who is eternal intelligence? >How, if the cau.se is pure and perfect, can the effect be quite >different?" What do these qualified non-dualists say ? Theirs is a >very peculiar theory. They say that these three existences, God, >nature, and the Soul, are one. > >from a lecture by Swami Vivekananda... > This is the fundamental question that is addressed by all aachaaryaa-s. There is a conscious entity and there is unconscious entity - the matter. and that is our direct experience. Once we conclude that this is a creation, and the creator obviously a 'conscious and intelligent entity' , naturally a question has to be addressed in terms of how an conscious intelligent entity creates unconscious inert entity. If the effect is nothing but cause itself in a different form then effect cannot be different from the cause - if it is appears to be different then it is only an appearance and the difference is not real, even if it appears to be real- Hence one has to go into details of what constitutes reality, experience and why unreal appears to be real, etc. If on the other hand one separates the factors for creation - the intelligent cause and the material cause as two distinctly separate entities and are primordial, then one need not violate the cause-effect relationships and dismiss the direct experience of the difference between the conscious entities and inert entities as only apparent and not real. Hence Ramanuja and Madva emphasized the fact that the differences - 1)difference between jiiva and jiiva, 2) differences between jiiva and prakriti, 3) differences between jiiva and iswara and 4) differences between prakriti and iswara and 5) difference in the prakriti - are real and universally experienced. Hence we have three satyam-s - Iswara, Jiiva-s and Prakriti which are eternal and not created. Hence there is no violation of the cause-effect relations. Then what is creation - Creation is the grossification of the subtler aspects. Prakriti and jiivas exist in subtler forms before creation. Out of compassion the Lord, Iswara who has the Lordship over these two factors as well as posses all the powers including the power to create through his maaya shakti - makes the grossification feasible. He being all powerful, with all auspicious qualities, pervades the other two factors Jiva-s and prakriti - yet is not affected by them. Iswara as SaguNa Brahman naturally comes out from this and plurality as reality is emphasized. Oneness in the VishishhTaadvaita or qualified monoism emphasizes the oneness in terms of the Universal person (as emphasized in Purusha suuktam)- with jiiva-s and prakriti forming his body, he being the soul which is different from the body yet one with the body - this is the vishishhTa adviata aspect as emphasized in the 11th chapter of B.Geeta - Just as space is different from the matter yet space pervades the matter accommodating the matter in itself. Jiiva can never be Brahman but he is part of the Brahman since he can never be away from Brahman. The logic is self-consistent with the axioms that the differences are real as we experience. Ramanuja emphasizes it is consistent with Vedas and Brahmasuutra-s and of course B. Geeta. Madva (Dvaita philosophy) goes little bit extreme to claim that there are eternally good souls as well as eternally bad souls (Rakshasaa-s) and their is a hierarchy in the souls and one can become sat chit ananda but fullness of one's ananda (quantity) is different from other jiiva, just as there are different size vessels. Even though each one is full their contents differ due to their intrinsic size differences. Some jiivas will end up with eternal damnation since that is their intrinsic nature. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2000 Report Share Posted June 21, 2000 Sadanandaji, I don't understand, are you subscribing to the VishishTadvaita standpoint versus the Adwaita view of manifestation ? I agree each view has it's relative validity. As for me I don't really have any views, I'm lost in the Unknowable, utter Ignorance! I have realised there is no model for anything - just a dynamic Mystery unfolding moment to moment, in which all sorts of incredible and wonderful things happen. Regards ~dave - K. Sadananda advaitin Wednesday, June 21, 2000 12:20 PM Re: Qualified non-dualism >>From Ananta > > >If the effect is the cause reproduced, the question is: "How is it >that we find this material, dull, unintelligent universe produced >from a God, who is not material, but who is eternal intelligence? >How, if the cau.se is pure and perfect, can the effect be quite >different?" What do these qualified non-dualists say ? Theirs is a >very peculiar theory. They say that these three existences, God, >nature, and the Soul, are one. > >from a lecture by Swami Vivekananda... > This is the fundamental question that is addressed by all aachaaryaa-s. There is a conscious entity and there is unconscious entity - the matter. and that is our direct experience. Once we conclude that this is a creation, and the creator obviously a 'conscious and intelligent entity' , naturally a question has to be addressed in terms of how an conscious intelligent entity creates unconscious inert entity. If the effect is nothing but cause itself in a different form then effect cannot be different from the cause - if it is appears to be different then it is only an appearance and the difference is not real, even if it appears to be real- Hence one has to go into details of what constitutes reality, experience and why unreal appears to be real, etc. If on the other hand one separates the factors for creation - the intelligent cause and the material cause as two distinctly separate entities and are primordial, then one need not violate the cause-effect relationships and dismiss the direct experience of the difference between the conscious entities and inert entities as only apparent and not real. Hence Ramanuja and Madva emphasized the fact that the differences - 1)difference between jiiva and jiiva, 2) differences between jiiva and prakriti, 3) differences between jiiva and iswara and 4) differences between prakriti and iswara and 5) difference in the prakriti - are real and universally experienced. Hence we have three satyam-s - Iswara, Jiiva-s and Prakriti which are eternal and not created. Hence there is no violation of the cause-effect relations. Then what is creation - Creation is the grossification of the subtler aspects. Prakriti and jiivas exist in subtler forms before creation. Out of compassion the Lord, Iswara who has the Lordship over these two factors as well as posses all the powers including the power to create through his maaya shakti - makes the grossification feasible. He being all powerful, with all auspicious qualities, pervades the other two factors Jiva-s and prakriti - yet is not affected by them. Iswara as SaguNa Brahman naturally comes out from this and plurality as reality is emphasized. Oneness in the VishishhTaadvaita or qualified monoism emphasizes the oneness in terms of the Universal person (as emphasized in Purusha suuktam)- with jiiva-s and prakriti forming his body, he being the soul which is different from the body yet one with the body - this is the vishishhTa adviata aspect as emphasized in the 11th chapter of B.Geeta - Just as space is different from the matter yet space pervades the matter accommodating the matter in itself. Jiiva can never be Brahman but he is part of the Brahman since he can never be away from Brahman. The logic is self-consistent with the axioms that the differences are real as we experience. Ramanuja emphasizes it is consistent with Vedas and Brahmasuutra-s and of course B. Geeta. Madva (Dvaita philosophy) goes little bit extreme to claim that there are eternally good souls as well as eternally bad souls (Rakshasaa-s) and their is a hierarchy in the souls and one can become sat chit ananda but fullness of one's ananda (quantity) is different from other jiiva, just as there are different size vessels. Even though each one is full their contents differ due to their intrinsic size differences. Some jiivas will end up with eternal damnation since that is their intrinsic nature. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To from the list, send Email to <advaitin- > For other contact, Email to <advaitins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2000 Report Share Posted June 21, 2000 Namaste, I guess this is a very interesting topic, so I would appreciate if anyone could be kind enough to make comments or develop this last paragraph from K. Sadananda in more details. Thanks in advance to all. Hari Om Lalitha K. Sadananda advaitin Sent on: Quarta-feira, 21 de Junho de 2000 13:20 Re: Qualified non-dualism Madva (Dvaita philosophy) goes little bit extreme to claim that there are eternally good souls as well as eternally bad souls (Rakshasaa-s) and their is a hierarchy in the souls and one can become sat chit ananda but fullness of one's ananda (quantity) is different from other jiiva, just as there are different size vessels. Even though each one is full their contents differ due to their intrinsic size differences. Some jiivas will end up with eternal damnation since that is their intrinsic nature. Hari Om! Sadananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2000 Report Share Posted June 21, 2000 Namaste, Shiva's Tandava Dance or The Dancing Wu Li Masters or The Dance of the Dervishes ?! Regards, s. >f maiello <egodust >advaitin >advaitin >Re: Qualified non-dualism >Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:26:40 -0700 (PDT) > > > >--- Dave Sirjue <dsirju wrote: > > I agree each view has it's relative validity. > > > > As for me I don't really have any views, I'm lost > > in the Unknowable, utter Ignorance! > > I have realised there is no model for anything - > > just a dynamic > > Mystery unfolding moment to moment, in which all > > sorts of incredible and wonderful things happen. > > > >........gotta have some gaul tossin' a >random zen grenade of pure Light >in the midst of our List like that.. > >beautiful. > >we may as well all start livin' like >there's no tomorrow...... >what's stopping us??! >(especially since there isn't one anyway!) > >om svaha! > > > >Send instant messages with Messenger. >http://im./ ______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2000 Report Share Posted June 21, 2000 --- Dave Sirjue <dsirju wrote: > I agree each view has it's relative validity. > > As for me I don't really have any views, I'm lost > in the Unknowable, utter Ignorance! > I have realised there is no model for anything - > just a dynamic > Mystery unfolding moment to moment, in which all > sorts of incredible and wonderful things happen. > .........gotta have some gaul tossin' a random zen grenade of pure Light in the midst of our List like that.. beautiful. we may as well all start livin' like there's no tomorrow...... what's stopping us??! (especially since there isn't one anyway!) om svaha! Send instant messages with Messenger. http://im./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 > Sadanandaji, > > I don't understand, are you subscribing to the > VishishTadvaita standpoint versus the Adwaita > view of manifestation ? > I agree each view has it's relative validity. > > As for me I don't really have any views, I'm lost in > the Unknowable, utter Ignorance! > I have realised there is no model for anything - just a dynamic > Mystery unfolding moment to moment, in which all sorts > of incredible and wonderful things happen. > > Regards > ~dave Dave - my subscription to a particular philosophy is immaterial in examining the merits and short falls of a particular model. Actually in your statement above after 'there is no model for anything - just a dynamic .....' - your are in a way presenting a model that your intellect is satisfied with. A rational intellect cannot but question until it is satisfied so that faith can take it to the next step that is beyond the intellectual comprehension. Otherwise it can not pass the fist step. Advaita, VishishhTaadviata and Dvaita etc. are only descriptive models of the state which is beyond, using Vedas, Brahmasuutra and B.Geeta as the basis for PramaaNa. They provide logically self-consistent, and believably consistent with the scriptural declarations. What I discussed is essentially how the models explain the creation or existence of what we see and experience everyday - presence of conscious beings and unconscious matter. Who am I, Where did I come from and What is this world, and Why this vast overpowering world come to existence and why I am forced to deal with during my day to day transactions - from eating to breathing to sleeping etc. are questions an inquiry mind has to face in one form or the other. These question are relevant to the inquiry deep within of the nature of reality or of the nature of myself. Bhakti can take us to some extent if Bhakta can completely and unconditionally surrender at the alter of Bhakti where manifested duality merges into one - The same state is also reached by an honest inquiry into the reality of the life. Extensive analysis and hair-splitting arguments have been presented by aachaaryaas and they provide a means to inquire within, if one is not bogged down by the sectarian attitudes. Comments and criticisms of by Bhagavan Ramanuja's and Shree Vedanta Deshika and Shree Jayathiirtha etc. of Advaita philosophy, actually can help an adviatine to understand the Advaita philosophy better, provided on has a strong analytical mind to inquire into nature of the reality using these arguments and counter arguments. They can channel for the mind to see the truth in ones own way without getting tied up by a particular philosophical approaches. Ultimately the truth - does not depend on what Shankara says or Ramanuja says or Madhva says but what one discovers by oneself in oneself as oneself. These are all tools or channels for the mind to go beyond to discover the truth eachone in their own way. Your statement, the 'dynamic mystery unfolding moment to moment' is very poetic while being factual. Unfolding in front of me due to the powers unknown to me is mystification of the unfoldment with the mind sublimed at the source of that power that is beyond with admiration and wonder is Bhakti and understanding that power is not different from the witnessing consciousness with myself as the center of both folding and unfolding of this witnessing and witnessed is the true knowledge of the self. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 Hi Dave-ji and Sadananda-ji, If I know Sadananda-ji, he was not *subscribing* to qualified non-dualism, but rather simply *explaining certain points* about it. When someone explains a philosophy in a skillful, charitable, balanced manner, it can actually look like that person is advocating or subscribing to that philosophy. The purpose of a philosophy finally is not advocacy, but rather the cessation of ignorance and intellectual grasping. A philosophy is a ladder that is scaled, then falls away. Om! --Greg At 07:17 AM 6/22/00 -0400, K. Sadananda wrote: >> Sadanandaji, >> >> I don't understand, are you subscribing to the >> VishishTadvaita standpoint versus the Adwaita >> view of manifestation ? >> I agree each view has it's relative validity. >> >> As for me I don't really have any views, I'm lost in >> the Unknowable, utter Ignorance! >> I have realised there is no model for anything - just a dynamic >> Mystery unfolding moment to moment, in which all sorts >> of incredible and wonderful things happen. >> >> Regards >> ~dave > >Dave - my subscription to a particular philosophy is immaterial in >examining the merits and short falls of a particular model. Actually in >your statement above after 'there is no model for anything - just a dynamic >....' - your are in a way presenting a model that your intellect is >satisfied with. A rational intellect cannot but question until it is >satisfied so that faith can take it to the next step that is beyond the >intellectual comprehension. Otherwise it can not pass the fist step. >Advaita, VishishhTaadviata and Dvaita etc. are only descriptive models of >the state which is beyond, using Vedas, Brahmasuutra and B.Geeta as the >basis for PramaaNa. They provide logically self-consistent, and >believably consistent with the scriptural declarations. What I discussed >is essentially how the models explain the creation or existence of what we >see and experience everyday - presence of conscious beings and unconscious >matter. Who am I, Where did I come from and What is this world, and Why >this vast overpowering world come to existence and why I am forced to deal >with during my day to day transactions - from eating to breathing to >sleeping etc. are questions an inquiry mind has to face in one form or the >other. These question are relevant to the inquiry deep within of the >nature of reality or of the nature of myself. Bhakti can take us to some >extent if Bhakta can completely and unconditionally surrender at the alter >of Bhakti where manifested duality merges into one - The same state is also >reached by an honest inquiry into the reality of the life. Extensive >analysis and hair-splitting arguments have been presented by aachaaryaas >and they provide a means to inquire within, if one is not bogged down by >the sectarian attitudes. Comments and criticisms of by Bhagavan >Ramanuja's and Shree Vedanta Deshika and Shree Jayathiirtha etc. of Advaita >philosophy, actually can help an adviatine to understand the Advaita >philosophy better, provided on has a strong analytical mind to inquire into >nature of the reality using these arguments and counter arguments. They >can channel for the mind to see the truth in ones own way without getting >tied up by a particular philosophical approaches. Ultimately the truth - >does not depend on what Shankara says or Ramanuja says or Madhva says but >what one discovers by oneself in oneself as oneself. These are all tools >or channels for the mind to go beyond to discover the truth eachone in >their own way. > >Your statement, the 'dynamic mystery unfolding moment to moment' is very >poetic while being factual. Unfolding in front of me due to the powers >unknown to me is mystification of the unfoldment with the mind sublimed at >the source of that power that is beyond with admiration and wonder is >Bhakti and understanding that power is not different from the witnessing >consciousness with myself as the center of both folding and unfolding of >this witnessing and witnessed is the true knowledge of the self. > >Hari Om! >Sadananda > > > > >K. Sadananda >Code 6323 >Naval Research Laboratory >Washington D.C. 20375 >Voice (202)767-2117 >Fax:(202)767-2623 > > > > >------ >**BELIEFNET SHOPPING** Save $20 at the Beliefnet store! Thousands of >religious and spiritual gifts and products. Now- get $20 off purchases >of $50 or more through July 10. >http://click./1/5591/6/_/489436/_/961672638/ >------ > >Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To from the list, send Email to <advaitin- > For other contact, Email to <advaitins > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 - Gregory Goode advaitin Thursday, June 22, 2000 10:07 AM Re: Qualified non-dualism Hi Dave-ji and Sadananda-ji, If I know Sadananda-ji, he was not *subscribing* to qualified non-dualism, but rather simply *explaining certain points* about it. When someone explains a philosophy in a skillful, charitable, balanced manner, it can actually look like that person is advocating or subscribing to that philosophy. The purpose of a philosophy finally is not advocacy, but rather the cessation of ignorance and intellectual grasping. A philosophy is a ladder that is scaled, then falls away. Om! --Greg Hi Gregji, Good to see you back on the list and thanks for your clarification of an apparent ambiguity with regards to Sadananda's post although he did elucidate on similar arguments in his previous response, and if I recall properly, he mentioned- "That models were tools to go beyond the mind". However, a major problem may arise at this stage. The probability of transcendence is slim;instead we remain stuck, fused to one of the rungs of the ladder. Let me explain. I've noticed many aspirants develop a type of "spiritual" pathology by passionately clinging and defending their intellectual "consolations" ..answers, concepts and models. When challenged about their basic bedrock presumptions, they usually become arrogrant, aggressive and hostile towards the other..just look back at the history of mankind and notice the amount of blood shed in the defence of religious beliefs and convictions. Where has the aspiration for Tolerance, Humility, Sincerity, Simplicity and so on.. gone ? Regards ~dave P.S. Thanks to Nanda's informative posting of Madhamaka philosophy,which I believe has shed tremendous amount of light on this same topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 Hi Dave, Thanks for the welcome! You know, I had set my advaitin option to "no mail" during a busy time at work. Then I forgot to set it back to the mail option. Then I remembered, and set it back to receive mail again. The problem you mention of clinging to a theory is very prevalent. From it comes the anger, the arrogance, the hostility and the separation. It's the old attachment to the intellect, vijnanamaya kosha. Where a view is thought to be *the* correct or true or best one. What you point to is very beautiful, and even as a sadhana is useful in weakining the attachment to the intellect - developing "Tolerance, Humility, Sincerity, Simplicity." Om! --Greg > Hi Gregji, > > Good to see you back on the list and thanks for your > clarification of an apparent ambiguity with > regards to Sadananda's post although he did > elucidate on similar arguments in his previous > response, and if I recall properly, he mentioned- > "That models were tools to go beyond the mind". > > However, a major problem may arise at this stage. > The probability of transcendence is slim;instead we > remain stuck, fused to one of the rungs of the ladder. > Let me explain. > > I've noticed many aspirants develop a type of > "spiritual" pathology by passionately clinging > and defending their intellectual "consolations" > ..answers, concepts and models. > When challenged about their basic bedrock presumptions, > they usually become arrogrant, aggressive and > hostile towards the other..just look back at the > history of mankind and notice the amount of blood > shed in the defence of religious beliefs and > convictions. > > Where has the aspiration for Tolerance, Humility, > Sincerity, Simplicity and so on.. gone ? > > Regards > ~dave > > P.S. Thanks to Nanda's informative posting of > Madhamaka philosophy,which I believe has shed > tremendous amount of light on this same topic. > > > > > > >------ >**BELIEFNET SHOPPING** Save $20 at the Beliefnet store! Thousands of >religious and spiritual gifts and products. Now- get $20 off purchases >of $50 or more through July 10. >http://click./1/5591/6/_/489436/_/961708810/ >------ > >Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To from the list, send Email to <advaitin- > For other contact, Email to <advaitins > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2000 Report Share Posted June 23, 2000 >Namaste, > >I guess this is a very interesting topic, so I would appreciate >if anyone could be kind enough to make comments or >develop this last paragraph from K. Sadananda in more details. > >Thanks in advance to all. > >Hari Om > >Lalitha > K. Sadananda > advaitin > Sent on: Quarta-feira, 21 de Junho de 2000 13:20 > Re: Qualified non-dualism > > Madva (Dvaita philosophy) goes little bit extreme to claim that there are > eternally good souls as well as eternally bad souls (Rakshasaa-s) and their > is a hierarchy in the souls and one can become sat chit ananda but fullness > of one's ananda (quantity) is different from other jiiva, just as there are > different size vessels. Even though each one is full their contents differ > due to their intrinsic size differences. Some jiivas will end up with > eternal damnation since that is their intrinsic nature. > > Hari Om! > Sadananda > Lalithaji Pranamas I ended up studying Madhva Philosophy, when I was in India for an year, while helping my Foster Son, who was a very staunch Madhvaite and was a junior swami of Pejawar Matt, to translate a condensed version of Jayathirtha's book 'Nyaayasudha'. The book, in two volumes, is ready for publication. Since I am leaving to India today, I will be able answer your query soon once I return back and establish e-mail account there. Hari Om! Sadananda K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2000 Report Share Posted June 23, 2000 - Gregory Goode advaitin ; advaitin Friday, June 23, 2000 12:48 AM Re: Qualified non-dualism >It's the old attachment to the intellect, vijnanamaya kosha. > Om! >--Greg Gregji - Thanks again for your involvement. On a minor note, as you may be aware, there is a debate whether the vijnanamaya kosha is really the intellect - which some scholars say is the reasoning part of the manomaya kosha-the mental. The higher intuitive intelligence, the buddhi, the Vijnanamaya kosha is said to be synonomous. Over to the scholars.. ~dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2000 Report Share Posted June 23, 2000 Hi Dave, Interesting point you bring up. People debate about all kinds of things. When wholeness is sliced up conceptually in different systems (koshas on one hand vs. mind/emotions/intellect on the other hand) there's no reason to expect that the various systems map perfectly to each other. E.g., the Inuit people have more words for "white" than any other culture. I remember many years ago, I was searching for the "correct" division of the whole person into the various subtle and physical levels. Some systems had a division of 3 levels, some had a division of 4, some 5, 6, 7, 49, even 172. This kind of seeking was a misunderstanding on my part. How can any of these be "correct"? Koshas don't even point to "things" in the first place. They are words used to categorize families of experiences that are similar in some ways and different in other ways. For example, we distinguish thinking from feeling, and call them different koshas. But they aren't even things in the first place. They do not exist apart from experiences. They are conceptual categories or groups of experience. We group and distinguish experiences because of similaries and differences. Solving a math problem is more like learning a language than it is like experiencing pride or fear. Nothing within the experience of the math problem identifies it as intellectual or the function of a kosha. Nothing in the experience of fear tells us that it is "emotional." Those labels come later, as mere conceptual designations. See ya! --Greg At 08:00 AM 6/23/00 -0400, Dave Sirjue wrote: > > - > Gregory Goode > advaitin ; advaitin > Friday, June 23, 2000 12:48 AM > Re: Qualified non-dualism > > > >It's the old attachment to the intellect, vijnanamaya kosha. > > Om! > >--Greg > > Gregji - Thanks again for your involvement. > On a minor note, as you may be aware, there is a debate > whether the vijnanamaya kosha is really the intellect - > which some scholars say is the reasoning > part of the manomaya kosha-the mental. > The higher intuitive intelligence, the buddhi, the Vijnanamaya > kosha is said to be synonomous. > Over to the scholars.. > > ~dave > > > > > >------ >**BELIEFNET SHOPPING** Save $20 at the Beliefnet store! Thousands of >religious and spiritual gifts and products. Now- get $20 off purchases >of $50 or more through July 10. >http://click./1/5591/6/_/489436/_/961761453/ >------ > >Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To from the list, send Email to <advaitin- > For other contact, Email to <advaitins > > > > 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.