Guest guest Posted September 13, 1999 Report Share Posted September 13, 1999 Hi. "f. maiello" wrote: > Miguel Angel Carrasco wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > So the subject of adyaasa must be Brahman: "I (Brahman) > > am a jiiva". This is confirmed by the fact that the > > correct statement is "I am Brahman", where I=Brahman, > > and also by the fact that there is nothing but Brahman. > > But the statement "I (Brahman) am a jiiva" is > > equivalent to "I, who am Brahman, do not know that I am > > Brahman, and think that I am a jiiva". Is this the > > case? If so, how is it possible that Brahman doesn't > > know Itself and falls prey to adyaasa? Isn't Brahman > > unchangeable? An error indicates a change: before and > > after the mistake. How can this happen to Brahman? In my opinion Brahman enjoys the mistake. It is intentional. How else is Brahman to taste It Self unless it differentiates & plays as unbeknownst to Self? (have you ever sat still in a warm bath for a time .. then moved subtly & felt the bliss of the warmth rippling against your form? Yes this movement of the personal forms manifested by still Self is the whole leela. The dance from forgotten to suffering, to seeking what is missing .. to coming back & finding Ones Self again as Bliss. The way out & back in is the dance of God. It's All God dancing. The contrast is needed for Oneness to experience any flavour at all. It tastes It's Self in this way. Yes It Is attributeless Being everything All at Once. Differentiating into attributes is sheer joy for the Being. It is how it tastes ItSelf! We are This experiencing .. we are also This One playing. Enjoy & love .. > hariH OM! > > sri miguel has touched a very sensitive > philosophical nerve with this question. > and, by omission, it really hasn't been > apprehended pragmatically in any sastra > or bhashya. conclusions can be drawn from > these sources, but because of the lack of > any clear explanation therein, the > consequence is confusion and misunderstanding. > > i've addressed this issue on a number of > occasions, as sri patrick has recently > mentioned, but i think the elucidation of > it [below] is much clearer. it's actually > a message recently written in response to > someone's inquiry re my website. it doesn't > directly respond to miguel's question, but > it can be readily adapted. > > ___________ > > the popular misconception re the nature of > manifestation prevails among even astute > and learned advaitins. the consensus being > that the world is intrinsically unreal and > something to be urgently(!) transcended. > > this is a grave mistake. why? because we > --as brahman--*desired* it; having projected > it thus into being! rig veda reveals this > to be incontrovertibly so. so why this > repulsive attitude toward the world? > > the fact is, if the world is referred to as > brahman's leela, should resonate within each > of us that [it] is integral to the existential > nature of brahman. > > the problem only arises under the very special > condition if/when the individual succumbs to > it [or any aspect within it] as being *apart* > from its source in brahman. otherwise, it is > very real. even its fleeting nature [of names > and forms], subject to birth and death...have > within it the real dynamic of the *process* > of change unfolding. the *process* is real. > the names and forms are only unreal in their > *static* sense. *not in their dynamic process*. > > the fact is, we're confronted with what comes > down to being the game of Life. and our charge, > even *after* Self-realization, is to continuously > adapt our understanding to it. and this is what > makes it so beautiful and fulfilling! of course > we have to stay alert and not allow it to snare > us in terms of inordinant attachments to any of > its Particulars. however, it's something we > metaphysically willed into being! if not, why > is it here at all? is God or brahman thus some > sadistic practical joker? causing 'the fall of > souls' for no other reason than to suffer through > aeons of time until they can be emancipated? > is God watching the universe of entified sentient > beings wrything in pain and horror because He > has nothing better to do? yet this is the only > possible conclusion that can be inferentially > drawn from the theory that we have no recourse > but to be eventually and through hellish suffering > be finally liberated from the wheel of samsara. > > no. we have to learn how to play the game of Life. > as sankara tells us, maya is beginningless and > endless. and although cyclical, it's nevertheless > a **permanent/eternal existential dynamic**. > > moreover, if/when an individual realizes his source > in brahman, who or what gets liberated?? brahman > is still projecting Its mayashakthi in the form of > countless souls in Its incomprehensibly vast leela. > therefore, again, our leela is an eternal archetype, > built into the core nature of brahman. > > OM ramanarpanamasthu! I might add Frank that this is how Brahman is evolving into ever wider & deeper expansions of Self awareness, for the Joy. The personal is the Beloved of Brahman. It is none other than Brahman (in disguise). Yes personal is individualised expression through which Being experiences & evolves. What new & fresh creations can Brahman taste of ItSelf? We are each the same in essence as This One, yet we are each unique at the same time. Yes we are here as the jewels carved from the Heart of This One.Through these jewels, Brahman LOVES. If we only knew how special we are. We are precious. On the one hand we are nothing other than This One. On the other, we are ever dawning creations at service for the sake of evolution. Love is One, & Love is the two! What a joy. Peace, Colette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 1999 Report Share Posted September 13, 1999 Hi Greg. I saw your pics at Harshasatsang. Gregory Goode wrote: > Oh NO!!!!!! > > Hi Colette, > > I'm beginning to think that you and Frank are conspiring to introduce a > joyously Tantrik outlook into these somber deliberations.... :-) If Tantra is a smile & self Love from Self .. then .. yes! We are The Beloved & the beloved. IMO :-) Col Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2000 Report Share Posted September 13, 2000 --- "f. maiello" <egodust wrote: > if the basis and foundation of virtually > *everything* is the inscrutably unfathomable > nirguna brahman, then how are we justified > to feel bad about anything at all?! > > put that in your pipe and smoke it, O Mind! > > ...yes, jivanmukthi is the only phenomenon > in existence where one can truly have their > cake and eat it too! > > TATTVAMASI! ---------------------- Daer,'feeling bad' one, Yes.Brahman is "nirguna".ie.without attributes. How come, you thrust such attributes like "basis" and "foundation" on THAT inscrutable and unfathomable ONE? Please do not ask the Mind to 'smoke' it.Instead, just ask the Mind to,"GET LOST"!! Where indeed is the necessity for a jeevanmukta to have a cake and then to eat it too? Haro Om! Swaminarayan Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2000 Report Share Posted September 13, 2000 Hi Colette, I'm beginning to think that you and Frank are conspiring to introduce a joyously Tantrik outlook into these somber deliberations.... :-) >In my opinion Brahman enjoys the mistake. It is intentional. How else is Brahman to taste It >Self unless it differentiates & plays as unbeknownst to Self? (have you ever sat still in a >warm bath for a time .. then moved subtly & felt the bliss of the warmth rippling against your >form? Yes this movement of the personal forms manifested by still Self is the whole leela. The >dance from forgotten to suffering, to seeking what is missing .. to coming back & finding Ones >Self again as Bliss. The way out & back in is the dance of God. It's All God dancing. The >contrast is needed for Oneness to experience any flavour at all. It tastes It's Self in this >way. Yes It Is attributeless Being everything All at Once. Differentiating into attributes is >sheer joy for the Being. It is how it >tastes ItSelf! We are This experiencing .. we are also This One playing. > > >Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. >Searchable List Archives are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ >Temporary holiday stoppage of Email, send a blank email to <advaitin-nomail > >To resume normal delivery of Email, send a blank email to <advaitin-normal > >To receive email digest (one per day, send a blank email to <advaitin-digest > >To to advaitin list, send a blank email to <advaitin-> > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2000 Report Share Posted September 13, 2000 Oh NO!!!!!! At 05:46 PM 9/13/00 -0500, Warren E. Donley wrote: >>>> </>eGroups </mygroups>My Groups | <advaitin>advaitin Main Page Hi Colette, I'm beginning to think that you and Frank are conspiring to introduce a joyously Tantrik outlook into these somber deliberations.... :-) <<<< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2000 Report Share Posted September 13, 2000 if the basis and foundation of virtually *everything* is the inscrutably unfathomable nirguna brahman, then how are we justified to feel bad about anything at all?! put that in your pipe and smoke it, O Mind! ....yes, jivanmukthi is the only phenomenon in existence where one can truly have their cake and eat it too! TATTVAMASI! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 13, 2000 Report Share Posted September 13, 2000 Swaminarayan T wrote: > > Daer,'feeling bad' one, > > Yes.Brahman is "nirguna".ie.without attributes. > How come, you thrust such attributes like "basis" and > "foundation" on THAT inscrutable and unfathomable ONE? > Please do not ask the Mind to 'smoke' it.Instead, just > ask the Mind to,"GET LOST"!! > > Where indeed is the necessity for a jeevanmukta to > have a cake and then to eat it too? > namaste. my wife also commented my post here sounded a bit forceful.. if it appeared so, it wasn't intended to.. sometimes cryptic messages can help dislodge misunderstandings. we all need to be capable of assessing eachother's underlying *intent*. OM shaanthi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2000 Report Share Posted September 15, 2000 colette wrote: > In my opinion Brahman enjoys the mistake. It is intentional. How else is Brahman to taste It > Self unless it differentiates & plays as unbeknownst to Self? (have you ever sat still in a > warm bath for a time .. then moved subtly & felt the bliss of the warmth rippling against your > form? Yes this movement of the personal forms manifested by still Self is the whole leela. The > dance from forgotten to suffering, to seeking what is missing .. to coming back & finding Ones > Self again as Bliss. The way out & back in is the dance of God. It's All God dancing. The > contrast is needed for Oneness to experience any flavour at all. It tastes It's Self in this > way. Yes It Is attributeless Being everything All at Once. Differentiating into attributes is > sheer joy for the Being. It is how it > tastes ItSelf! We are This experiencing .. we are also This One playing. > > Enjoy & love .. > > [...] > > I might add Frank that this is how Brahman is evolving into ever wider & deeper expansions of > Self awareness, for the Joy. The personal is the Beloved of Brahman. It is none other than > Brahman (in disguise). > > Yes personal is individualised expression through which Being experiences & evolves. What new > & fresh creations can Brahman taste of ItSelf? We are each the same in essence as This One, > yet we are each unique at the same time. Yes we are here as the jewels carved from the Heart > of This One.Through these jewels, Brahman LOVES. If we only knew how special we are. We are > precious. > > On the one hand we are nothing other than This One. On the other, we are ever dawning > creations at service for the sake of evolution. Love is One, & Love is the two! > > What a joy. > hi colette- beautifully expressed! you've taken it to a deeper poetic level......right to the Heart. i would only say, however, that matters concerning brahman (which word usage must implicate the nirguna aspect as Its primary source-essence) have to remain ineffable and inscrutable. therefore i wouldn't say that it's possible that brahman is subject to an evolutionary process, since this latter is strictly a relative attribute. it could be said that It retains such as an infinitesimal constituent within Itself, part and parcel of Its leela counterpart. but not that It, as such, undergoes change; or for that matter *doesn't* undergo change! Its [saguna] nature in leela possesses the relative aspects of change and changeless ....not Its hub and essence as nirguna, though. finally, It remains a mystery. as does, in fact, Its projection into Life (being, as you allude to, the dance of siva). yet we can and will forever discover Its infinite wonders and beauty--being our *own* true nature (*as* brahman, and thus made visible and expressable in Its equally incomprehensible leela). OM love, frank 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.