Maharshi - creation - What is an object?

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

The answers provided by the Maharishi on the nature of

superimposition of the 'Object' with the Self is quite profound for

this month's discussion topic. The message is very subtle, those who

want to understand what is an 'object?' can't get the comprehension

until they understood fully about their 'True Nature.' The sages and

saints of the Upanishads understood the fallacy in

comprehending 'Brahman' through language and logic, neither of them

can provide a full description of 'noncomprehensible Brahman.'

 

Then the question arises - Does the sages forbid anyBODY to speculate

on the Nature of SELF? The answer is evidently, No! Maharishi says

that if we look for the answer beyond the universe surrounded by the

paradigm of 'body, mind and intellect' The instrument by which we can

look beyond 'body, mind and intellect' can't be the sense organs. The

sages call this instrument as the 'Spritual Eye' and the Shivites

call this as the 'third eye.' This spiritual eye (third eye) opens up

when the person does immerse 'tabus -intense meditation just like

what Ramana did.' The sages say that the spiritual eye can take one

beyond space and time and 'opening of the spiritual eye' is

synonymous with 'SELF Realization.' A careful contemplation on the

answers provided by the Maharishi contains the answer that we look

for!

 

Maharishi in another conversation states the reason for our inability

to visualize the 'light of enlightenment.' Once someone asked the

Rishi, 'Can you show me the God that you have seen?' Maharishi smiled

and said, "Even if I show you the God, you can't see Him!' This is

our problem and we enjoy indulging in speculations!

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "viorica w" <viorica@z...> wrote:

> Question: "Brahman is real. The world is illusion" is the stock

phrase

> of Sri Sankaracharya. Yet others say, "The world

is reality."

> Which is true?

> .........

>

> Sri Ramana Maharshi: Sankara was criticised for his views on Maya

without being understood. He said that

>

> Brahman is real,

>

> The universe is unreal, and

>

> The universe is Brahman.

>

> He did not stop at the second, because the third explains the other

two. It signifies that the universe is real if perceived as the Self,

and unreal if perceived apart from the Self. Hence Maya and reality

are one and the same.

> .......