Guest guest Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 --- Benjamin Root <orion777ben wrote: > I have no doubt > that there is some kind of infinite, cosmic Consciousness underlying > the whole process, i.e. Brahman or God. Materialism cannot explain > the universe, in my opinion, except in a superficial way. > Consciousness, in some sense, must be the fundamental principle. > > > The point of raising all this is that I feel it is very important for > modern, educated, thinking people not to place blind belief in myths > and legends which may be shattered some day by scholarship and > archaeological or historical research. When those myths are > shattered, a profound disillusionment can follow which may lead to > cynicism, skepticism, atheism, despair, etc. > > > And even in this list, there are those who are certain that the > Upanishads are some kind of direct communication from God, not unlike > the Bible. My view is somewhat different. I believe that various > seers throughout history rise to an unusually high level of > consciousness and intuit truths about our nature as consciousness > which they then relate to others. The Mahavakyas are prime examples > of such truths. This is different from Jehovah's or Ishwara's > intervention in and manipulation of human history. For example, I am > not so sure that an Avatar arises whenever things get bad enough. > This sounds more like the Bible. But I do accept the Mahavakyas, and > in fact, I find them rather 'scientific' in their own way. > > Something to think about. > > Om! > Benjamin Benjamin There is a line that distinguishes between belief vs. faith. Faith is supported by logic while belief is not. Avataara concept is logical. Therefore it comes under the category of faith rather than belief. If by using mahaavaakya-s and meditating on them if one can realize the jiivana mukata state as exemplified by Ramkrishna paramahamsa, Ramana maharshi, Nisargadatta maharaj etc. then it not illogical to assume that Jesus could have existed at those times and preached the knowledge that he has gained. If the birth is caused by the results of my actions - which we call vasanas one should be able to reach a vasana-less state by neutralizing the vasana-s. If there are vasana-s that are both individual and collective type, the collective vasana-s can precipitate action that satisfies collective vaasana-s. That is not illogical. Hence a jiivan mukta once he has realized, there is no more (his) vasana-s left for him to demand his continued existence. His continuation is now demanded by samashhTi vasana-s or collective vasana-s - that is ripe students who need a master of that type for their evolution. But jiivan mukta was born mostly because of his vaasana-s, but after realization kept alive due to the demand of samashhTi vasana-s. Going this argument further one can also conceive a case where in samashhti vasana-s by themselves demand birth of an individual who does not have individual vasanas as the cause for the birth. Thus totality taking a birth propelled by the collective vasana-s. That we call avataara - avataara means that who came down. In that sense avataara is an extension of jiivanmukta and concept is slightly deferent. If jiivanmukta is logical, Avataara concept is equally logical. Since both are equally logical, both concepts are driven by faith rather than beliefs. Hari OM! Sadananda ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook. http://calendar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda > vasana-s left for him to demand his continued existence. > > His continuation is now demanded by samashhTi vasana-s or collective > vasana-s - that is ripe students who need a master of that type for > their evolution. But jiivan mukta was born mostly because of his > vaasana-s, but after realization kept alive due to the demand of > samashhTi vasana-s. > > Going this argument further one can also conceive a case where in > samashhti vasana-s by themselves demand birth of an individual who does > not have individual vasanas as the cause for the birth. > > Thus totality taking a birth propelled by the collective vasana-s. That > we call avataara - avataara means that who came down. > > In that sense avataara is an extension of jiivanmukta and concept is > slightly deferent. If jiivanmukta is logical, Avataara concept is > equally logical. > > Since both are equally logical, both concepts are driven by faith rather > than beliefs. > > Hari OM! > Sadananda Namaste Sadaji, I have some difficulty with your avatar concept. For if the body is willed by people, collective vasanas, where does the Ahamkara come in? For surely there would be one to operate, as there are no previous karmas. If there is an Ego then the mind is not realised is it? In fact the entire concept is against the idea of realisation. As I have said before it makes no sense to create a Jivanmukta when there are some available. It also goes against the idea of karma and non interference of Saguna in her own dream so to speak. I know that is the basis of avataric belief though. How do we not know that all Avatars were not jivanmuktas at birth? Krishna talked about remembering his previous births. It is essentially a religious concept to fill a gap.........ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2003 Report Share Posted June 9, 2003 advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > My strong impression now is that Jesus is indeed mostly mythical. It > seems that there were indeed many similar myths preceding him in that > part of the world of dying and rising Gods who can forgive sins and > provide salvation, such as Osiris, Adonis, Mithras, etc. There are > so many similarities, e.g. eating bread and wine to symbolize the > body and blood of the savior, that I cannot but think that > Christianity must be largely a 'mythical' fabrication (as Genesis > surely is). > Schopenhauer has some interesting ideas about this in his (larger) work, "Parerga and Paralipomena", the second volume, some affordable selections of which can be found in "Essays and Aphorisms" Penguin Classics edition. Page 192, second paragraph. > I am certain that devotion to Jesus can lead to spiritual salvation, just > as devotion to Krishna can. What is spiritual salvation, why is it necessary, and what makes a path suitable for it? > > Om! > Benjamin Always nice to see your posts. 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.