On the Impersonal/Personally playing

[Guest guest]

advaitin , "jody " <jodyrrr@h...> wrote:

> advaitin , anand_natarajan@i... wrote:

> >

> > Namaste,

> > I would like to ask a question regarding spiritual transformation.

> > Let us suppose a spiritual aspirant starts his sadhana by

meditating

> > on a certain Ishta devata. He tries to take refuge in his Ishta

and

> > does his best regarding yama,niyama.

> >

> > It is certain that the Ishta he has in his mind or heart is

coloured

> > by his ego, his personality. Therefore as his sadhana progresses,

if

> > he has been sincere, his conception of his Ishta will also change.

> > It will now reflect his sublimated ego.

 

 

Hello Anand, this is an interesting question that you ask. I am no

expert (of course!) but I like to stretch myself by sharing in my way.

I am leaving Jody's comments here as they all add to this enquiry.

It's a fascinating deep question.

 

You are right in my opinion, " as his sadhana progresses, his

conception of his Ishta will also change. It will now reflect his

sublimated ego." but this may not mean that just impersonal will be

experienced.

 

Always change is occuring expanding further & further the impersonal

personal. That is evolution. Change & non change are in relationship

(in my opinion). It's the same one. It is relationship which is the

lila. It is the joy of Being to expand It's experience of Itself. This

It does personally while maintaining impersonality. IMO.

 

The impersonal is in form too. Forms carry personality. Waking to

impersonal, entails waking to you are not bound to a fixed persona.

This argument of whether enlightened beings carry any personal

preferences is an interesting question. I will share a link below

which spoke to me about impersonal awareness, personally expressing as

the lila.

 

It's called the Clarification of the Personality

 

http://www.ridhwan.org/clarpers.html

 

It is a very good link in my opinion for anyone who has had glimpses

of oneness yet come back to personal issues after such a beautiful

experience. Now back to your question.

 

Perhaps impersonal source has begun to Be personal, from the time it

begins to reverberate within Itself to manifest from Itself the sounds

& laws of Nature which structure all levels of creation. This is the

Veda. Silence to sound. Impersonal to personal. Isn't this Shiva &

Shakti? (I am not talking about the conditioned personality here. Sure

that gets conditioned into all sorts of misalignments yet is part of

the play too.) Are we just silent? Or are we sounds too? Is the Veda

just the source or is it also every level of creation?

>

> Not necessarily. A sublimated ego doesn't entail the absence of

> personality. One's Ishta may have the coloring of one's personality

> while one is blessed to have their idea of 'me' rendered impotent.

 

I would hazard a guess that they are all impersonal and personal (or

perceived that way at different times).

>

> > For example , Narendra who prefered the formless aspect of God for

a

> > time period said, "What Sri Ramkrishna called as Kali, I call as

> > Brahman."

>

> This was a convenient way for Vivekananda to fit Ramakrishna's

> teaching into his personal cosmological framework. At the end

> of his life--arguably when his realization was the most profound

> --Vivekananda said quite simply: "It is all Mother now."

>

> > So, though the bhaktha continues to refer to his experience by his

> > Bhakthi, the understanding of the entity to which he refers to

> > changes.

 

Yes that is the beauty called life. Constant expanding undrestandings

& awareness. IMO.

> >

> > At what point in time will his "personal" feelings to his Ishta

> > change to the impersonal?

 

When that 'person' is ready to become aware they are one. Perhaps it

could be said that impersonal is so full that personals cannot be

perceived in That. This is on the level of consciousness. Now

consciousness is in form too isn't it? This I argue maintains some

personal, (however subtle) for the continuing delight of the

impersonal.

> >

> > I will be glad if someone can clarify this.

 

I think of is as a dance between impersonal stillness & personal

movement as the vibrations of Nature (natural law). Shiva & Shakti are

in relationship as Love (impersonal stillness), moving into sound

(personal expressions including flowers, rocks, trees, birds,

caterpillars, babies, children & adults). Maybe even inanimate objects

have personality ;-) ?

> >

> > Sincerely,

> > Anand

>

> Why should it change at all? If one is living in the recognition

> that all is Brahman, but one also knows that Brahman is actionless,

 

Hello Jody. To me, Brahman may be actionless in action. The same

consciousness is inactive as well as active. If we develop a balanced

awareness we may harness peace :-)

> one must resort to some other explanation to describe the cause of

> all the action in the world. Brahman becomes all things via the

> agency of Shakti.

 

Isn't Shakti made from Shiva? (All consciousness).

 

Ramakrishna said "Brahman and Shakti are like

> fire and its power to burn." Therefore, there is no need for an

> impersonal Ishta.

 

The impersonal is freedom. The personal is the joy of communion with

That.

 

One can be blessed with Self realization and

> observe directly that all is the Self, and still regard the

> apparently crazy going-ons as the work of Shakti, regarded by the

> devotee as Mother Kali.

 

Oh! I have a slightly different view on this. Mother is Love. Shakti

loves Shiva. To me this is where psychology & spirituality can benefit

each other. Archetypes play as the personal expressions of nature.

Moving through them into impersonal awareness can be aided by certain

psychological techniques as the psyche is a continuum of the absolute

manifesting into forms. IMO. In any case we play our part on the

continuum from impersonal to personal. Maybe this is the "I I" Ramana

spoke of? I don't know.

 

 

This is why Ramakrishna referred to Kali

> as a personal Being for his entire life. He never felt the need

> to make Her impersonal to fit any conceptions of comsmology.

 

I don't think anyone can make impersonal awareness come to them except

through love & devotion. I don't think Anand was asking how to make

self fit conceptions of That. Impersonal is none. The personal self

cannot 'do' That. When personal lover is ready to meet It's impersonal

source (Love) then it will happen. 'We' are not capable of making that

decision or jump imo. 'We' don't do That. I would think it happens

when the psyche & body are ready for That.

 

 

He

> lived in the full and complete realization of the Self, seeing the

> Self in all things, but still saw his Mother Kali as a living

Goddess

> that he could talk to and play with.

 

Sounds lovely.

> --jody.

 

Nice to share,

 

Col

[Guest guest]

advaitin , colette@b... wrote:

 

[snip]

> Oh! I have a slightly different view on this. Mother is Love.

 

True, but love comes in many forms. If Mother is Shakti, and

Shakti is responsible for all manifestation in the universe,

She is just as responsible for the bad as the good.

 

***************

Kali the Mother

 

by Swami Vivekananda

 

The stars are blotted out,

Clouds are covering clouds,

It is darkness, vibrant, sonant.

In the roaring whirling wind

Are the souls of a million lunatics,

Just loose from the prison house,

Wrenching trees by the roots,

Sweeping all from the path.

The sea has joined the fray,

And swirls up mountain waves,

To reach the pitchy sky.

The flash of lurid light

Reveals on every side

A thousand, thousand shades

Of Death begrimed and black -

Scattering plagues and sorrows,

Dancing mad with joy,

Come, Mother. Come!

 

For Terror is Thy name,

Death is in Thy breath,

And every shaking step

Destroys a world for e'er.

Thou 'Time', the All-Destroyer!

Come, O Mother, Come!

 

Who dares misery love,

And hug the form of Death,

Dance in destruction's dance,

To him the Mother comes.

[Guest guest]

advaitin , "jody " <jodyrrr@h...> wrote:

> advaitin , colette@b... wrote:

>

> [snip]

>

> > Oh! I have a slightly different view on this. Mother is Love.

>

> True, but love comes in many forms. If Mother is Shakti, and

> Shakti is responsible for all manifestation in the universe,

> She is just as responsible for the bad as the good.

>

 

Hello Jody. I relate that to Shiva perhaps. I think that for me it is

their feminine they must come to terms with & with women it is their

masculine.

 

At first it's a great battle but is seen through as Love

 

Thanks for sharing. I will read through this sharing from

you carefully. I do care to try to understand the male essence. I find

it fascinating.

 

Love,

 

Col

 

> ***************

> Kali the Mother

>

> by Swami Vivekananda

>

> The stars are blotted out,

> Clouds are covering clouds,

> It is darkness, vibrant, sonant.

> In the roaring whirling wind

> Are the souls of a million lunatics,

> Just loose from the prison house,

> Wrenching trees by the roots,

> Sweeping all from the path.

> The sea has joined the fray,

> And swirls up mountain waves,

> To reach the pitchy sky.

> The flash of lurid light

> Reveals on every side

> A thousand, thousand shades

> Of Death begrimed and black -

> Scattering plagues and sorrows,

> Dancing mad with joy,

> Come, Mother. Come!

>

> For Terror is Thy name,

> Death is in Thy breath,

> And every shaking step

> Destroys a world for e'er.

> Thou 'Time', the All-Destroyer!

> Come, O Mother, Come!

>

> Who dares misery love,

> And hug the form of Death,

> Dance in destruction's dance,

> To him the Mother comes.