Guest guest Posted February 12, 2002 Report Share Posted February 12, 2002 Ah Orbitsville I understand you very well. I agree with you that something, no matter how right it sounds, doesn't really nourish you if you have to take it on someone else's authority. It doesn't begin to nourish you til you see it for yourself and you have it on your own authority. Good luck, friend Warwick - orbitsville advaitin Wednesday, February 13, 2002 8:39 AM Re: Back and forth All I want to thank you all for being kind enough to respond to my questions. I recognise several of your names, and compared to (probably all!) of you I am like a child on his, perhaps 3rd or 4th day at school. The thing is, I have read so much about all of this, and feel that I do have a real sense of it, but I just don't "get it". A little while ago, I just got fed up with it and wanted to chuck the whole thing. I wanted to give up on this paradoxical "bollocks" (pardon my language), and go back to easy religion (the kind where I am guaranteed Heaven after death, as long as I try and follow God's will now and then...) But I am afraid that this Advaita nonsense has me hooked :-) I know there is something in it, and I am sure it is offensive when an ignorant fool like me attempts to discard it with a single word. =========== orbitsville Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Your use of is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2002 Report Share Posted February 12, 2002 Trouble is Orbitsville, is that perversely, everything based on ignorance and the three gunas IS "bollocks". It's just God's dream, and we should pay it as much attention as we pay our own dreams. Trouble also is, that if you don't know that you're asleep, then dreams can be pretty realistic. They only become illusory after one has woken up. Even someone telling you in your dream, that it IS a dream, and that you will wake up, doesn't really help. Only waking up really does it. Trouble is that most of us wake up, after we've been asleep. Whereas most of us rarely glimpse Turiya, that state equivalent to waking from our "normal" awakeness. Letting go is, as I said before, against our instincts... Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2002 Report Share Posted February 13, 2002 Hi Orbitsville! Imagine a river of tumultous currents. You are watching it standing on the banks. As long as you are simply watching it, you are not affected, but, if you decide to get into the waters and swim, then you are subject to the vagaries of the currents. Advaita teaches you how not to get affected even if you are amidst the currents by telling you that your legitimate right is only to perform with legitimate desire, the actual result giver is the Lord (Consciousness). When you live this knowledge you accept whatever happens, desirable or undesirable, as a blessing (the Sanskrit word is Prasada) from the Lord. You also learn to accept what you can change and what you cannot and appreciate the difference between the two. Then, the actions that you perform do not "bind" you any more. The "realities" that surround you are your own projections determined by your "binding" actions so far. Performing actions in an "unbinding" manner helps you exhaust your projections and ultimately grants you freedom from the cycle of births and deaths. Now don't ask me what that "state" (It cannot be a state at all.) would be like! However, know that that is what everyone is after. Advaita has the best classification for creation. It does not go into one hundred and odd categories like Mendeleef (spelling?) did with his periodic table. The world is simply grouped into two: (a) I, and (b) the rest of the world. You look at (b) and try to figure out the truth. It is an unending game and you already intuitively know that you will never complete it. You focus attention on (a), then (b) is no more there. You realize that (b) exists because (a) is. Now you shift the focus to (b) again. All the problems rush in, the Osamas, Bushes, Euclid, Einstein, galaxies, black holes, such profound and bothering questions like what is the shape of this universe, when, where and how it originated and, at the end, madathilnair too. Know that this universe is very much inside you. Don't worry, you will not be weighed down, because then you are the whole universe and you are not apart from it carrying the globe like poor Atlas. You, therefore, include me and what I am writing now too. Your actions ordered me, Orbitsville, as it did Malcolm MacDowell and all the stuff you have read and assimilated. I hope this answers your doubt and you can get my point even without the help of Malcolm MacDowell situation. Now you decide whether your projections are deliberate or spontaneous. If you can be all this creation and move about performing unbindingly, do you really have to worry about that D-day when you will have exhausted your projections? No, not at all. The answer to that question has no time relevance. Better, therefore, that it be not attempted from within the tyranny of space and time! Sorry, if you don't mind, your questions remind me of a story. A guy happened to fall into a deep well. The well had poisonous snakes, scorpions and what not. He started yelling for help. To make his situation worse, I will say the well had an anaconda too (after a cerain movie that I watched recently). That creature had already set its eyes on this unfortunate guy and made up its mind on a very good breakfast. Passers by heard the cries from the well and immediately dropped a noose down into the well for this guy to fasten it around him and be pulled up. However, he refused to be rescued. The reason - he would not come out unless he was told and convinced of the reason why he was in the well at all! Pranams. Madathil Nair --- orbitsville <orbitsville wrote: I don't know if you have seen the > film > "Clockwork Orange", but there is a scene in there > where > Malcolm MacDowell is being forced to watch a film. > He has > no choice in observing, because his eyes are forced > open. > Is Consciousness like this? Assuming Consciousness > also > generates the film (to continue this analogy), does > it do > so with any purpose or plan in mind. Or is it > generated > purely spontaneously? > > Am I purely a passive observer of phenomenon? (and > what will > be will be ...) > > > > Send FREE Valentine eCards with Greetings! http://greetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2002 Report Share Posted February 14, 2002 --- Madathil Nair <madathilnair wrote: Namaste Madathil, I was just passing by your dialogue and your image reminds me of a Mullah Nasruddin story. You set this image: > Imagine a river of tumultous currents. You are > watching it standing on the banks. As long as you > are > simply watching it, you are not affected, but, if > you > decide to get into the waters and swim, then you are > subject to the vagaries of the currents. Advaita > teaches you how not to get affected even if you are > amidst the currents by telling you that your > legitimate right is only to perform with legitimate > desire, the actual result giver is the Lord > (Consciousness). When you live this knowledge you > accept whatever happens, desirable or undesirable, > as > a blessing (the Sanskrit word is Prasada) from the > Lord. You also learn to accept what you can change > and what you cannot and appreciate the difference > between the two. Then, the actions that you perform > do not "bind" you any more. "Come quickly Nasruddin," cried the villagers," your mother-in-law has fallen in the river." The river was fierce after rains so Nasruddin rushed up and dived in and started swimming upstream. "NO!NO! Nasruddin," they all shouted, "the river is flowing the other way." "You don't know my mother-in-law," called back Nasruddin. Peace and happiness Ken Knight Send FREE Valentine eCards with Greetings! http://greetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2002 Report Share Posted February 15, 2002 --- orbitsville <orbitsville wrote: ". A little while ago, I just got fed up with > it > and wanted to chuck the whole thing. ), > and > go back to easy religion > > But I am afraid that this Advaita nonsense has me > hooked :-) > I know there is something in it ------------------- Actually,dear Orbitsville,'You know there is something in it'. Yet,since you do not know 'what' is in it , it is worthwhile pursueing the subject to find out that 'What' which is none other than, according to our great gurus, 'You' in it!!! Now, working out in the same strain about the 'jaanaami' that has been pointed out rightly in this discussion earlier,we may ponder on the 'janaami' for some time. Now, when I say 'jaanaami',let us ask a simple question: 'know' implies three things. the knower, that which is known and the act of knowing.Where do 'I' stand in all these three ? 'I' am 'Kevala Dhruk',a WITNESS ,when the above process seems to go on,and at all times, I am Sat Chit Ananda i.e. Existance,knowledge,Bliss, which ,in Advaitic parlance,is none other than 'BRAHMAN'. Hari Om! Swaminarayan. Got something to say? Say it better with Video 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.