Guest guest Posted March 1, 2001 Report Share Posted March 1, 2001 universal koan until the substratum of Mind is known, thoughts act like mosquitoes.. yet whatever they do, wherever they go, know *That* to be brahman! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2001 Report Share Posted March 2, 2001 advaitin, f maiello <egodust@d...> wrote: > universal koan > > until the substratum of > Mind is known, thoughts act > like mosquitoes.. > > yet whatever they do, > wherever they go, > know *That* > to be brahman! Are you saying thoughts are too? Wondering ... :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 2001 Report Share Posted March 8, 2001 Colette Ji, :-) They cannot be ! Shankara:Neither the mind, nor the intellect am I,... Regards, Raghava colette (view other messages by this author) Fri, 2 Mar 2001 19:36:17 --------------------- advaitin, f maiello <egodust@d...> wrote: > universal koan > > until the substratum of > Mind is known, thoughts act > like mosquitoes.. > > yet whatever they do, > wherever they go, > know *That* > to be brahman! Are you saying thoughts are too? Wondering ... :-) Get email at your own domain with Mail. http://personal.mail./ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 2001 Report Share Posted March 8, 2001 hariH OM! Raghava- namaste. i respectfully disagree. if it can be stated that there is something in existence apart from brahman, we'd readily agree that thoughts would fall into that category. however, is there? this of course depends on whether thoughts can be said to exist or not to begin with. if they really *are* mere illusion, then where does the need to name it as 'illusion' arise? the act of pointing toward something that in turn compels one to give it a name--be it a 'dream,' 'an apparition,' an 'illusion'-- indicates there must be a real component within or behind it, somewhere somehow [for the need to arise to allude to it as 'such and such,' or 'so and so']. it becomes clear that this is precisely how sankara came to 'understand' that the nature of maya is anirvachaniya (indescribable and *incomprehensible*), presenting itself as a blend of the real and unreal. when advaitins call a thing unreal, the inference, ramana tells us, is that "They are unreal *as such*! Otherwise they are naught but brahman itself." [paraphrased] thus all thoughts, *as such* (taken as things *unto themselves*) are unreal. otherwise they indeed *are* the essence of THAT (the Absolute brahman Self-Being). the leela itself is crystallized thought: shards of infinite expression emanating the universal mahamahat (brahman's projected or first-breath manifestation of the 'Mind of God' [isvara's seed form as hiranyagharba or prajapati]).. "all there is is brahman." maya, leela, lokas, koshas, sariras, sankalpas, vrittis, manvantaras, pralayas, karmas, svadharmas, devas, asuryas.. all one brahman. no *real* distinctions. this is [the ultimate fusion of] advaita as the vedic perennial wisdom-philosophy of all ages, cultures and literally intergalactic events: black holes, quasars, pulsars to quantum theoretical superstring sub and macro-atomic mind adventures and spontaneous creation theories.. all brahman.. what or when or where is brahman not? the jiva is not brahman? you are *merely* a jiva? **these** are the illusions, because the implication is that you [jiva] exist *unto yourself* and *apart* from brahman! seeing this distinction is viveka. (viveka is not the discrimination associated with separating the real from the unreal *in terms of* the jagat from brahman, for example; but specifically as jagat *isolated* and *separated* from brahman.) this viveka speaks to the classic snake in the rope, barren woman's son or the horn on a hare.. if it can be named or placed or timed, *as such*, it's [the mistake of believing in the lone truth of] dvaita *on it's own terms*! how many ways can it be written or described? it's simply the act of regarding something as apart from its substratum source in the ONE (the unified field of sat-chit-ananda). within the framework of he overview of the above, we should realize that yes in fact madhava's dvaita *is* real and true, but **not real and true apart** from its mother source in parabrahmam! it isn't uncommon in the study of vedanta, that the two apparently opposing systems get mixed-up in the course of our attempt at understanding them. my wife's guru, swami sivanada said this (taken from his LECTURES ON YOGA AND VEDANTA, p.291): "The sage who is realized knows there is no other reality in the universe than brahman. That he is brahman Himself. And that everything is brahman." if we're told that this is the realization of the sage, how do we stubbornly philosophically rebel, supporting the notion that something can exist other than brahman? OM ramanarpanamasthu! OM namah sivaya! OM svaha! ____________________ Raghavarao Kaluri wrote: > > Colette Ji, > :-) They cannot be ! > Shankara:Neither the mind, nor the intellect am I,... > > Regards, > Raghava > > colette (view other messages by this author) > Fri, 2 Mar 2001 19:36:17 > > --------------------- > > advaitin, f maiello <egodust@d...> wrote: > > universal koan > > > > until the substratum of > > Mind is known, thoughts act > > like mosquitoes.. > > > > yet whatever they do, > > wherever they go, > > know *That* > > to be brahman! > > Are you saying thoughts are too? > > Wondering ... > > :-) > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2001 Report Share Posted March 9, 2001 Dear Frank Ji, Thank you for the wonderful analysis. Various objects which one may perceive in a dream disappear in wake-up state. One may say they all are monolithic to oneself; one may say that they do not exist at all. Perhaps there are more possibilities. We can only guess as much based on our experience on dreams and from the statement, "Samsaram Svapna Tulyam (Samsaram is equivalent to a dream)". There is no philosophical rebellion here, none other than Brahman remains true in however manner we try to comprehend it. With Love, Raghava Get email at your own domain with Mail. http://personal.mail./ 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.