Guest guest Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 advaitin, Amitha Krishnamurthi <amitha@g...> wrote: > > In response... > > "Instead of mentally worshipping your > Ishtadevata/Guru, replace the image with an image of yourself. You > will find the same results, for you are imaging your own higher self > which has no image really." > > and subsequently > > "Only the Ego is holding the body > and mind constructs together. Once the Ego is gone and the body > drops with the exhaustion of prarabda karma--------there is no > common thread. No imprint not anything just the Self." > > Since the whole idea of spiritual evolution becomes ridding the Self > of Ego....how is it going to help me if I meditate upon myself > mentally??? I for one, find the thought unpalatable...& definitely > feel that it feeds the Ego rather than trying to get rid of it... .." > > It is obviously difficult to meditate on a Nirguna Brahman..which is > where forms come into play...they help in our quest for spiritual > evolution..Picking up a form does not indicate fear...it indicates > your readiness to move upwards in the process of "realization". > > What I was trying to say in my earlier mail is that the Nirguna > Brahman acts through the form that appeals to the Individual...the > form might be that of a Guru, a God, an Avatar...even a pious ancestor > in your family.. If Maharishi realized that he was/is the SELF...he > still exists..since the SELF doesn't perish..he can still manifest > himself in any "Form" he chooses to...to his Bhaktas he will appear as > he was...that does not mean he exists in the astral level...nor does > that mean he didn't realize Godhood. > > "We have to realise that we are Praneaswara or the Sakti, and at that > point we realise Nirguna/Moksha" > > The texts can help us only to a certain point...after which the > experience is what will lead us....the texts tell us that we are the > Self...but IMHO, any amount of outward analysis is not going to help > much in crossing that bridge between knowlede from the texts..and > realization for oneself...introspection is the need of the hour. > > In this context..it does become true that without Bhakti..the whole > thing is an exercise akin to mental gymnastics. > > Regards > Amitha Namaste A,IMHO, A couple of points here; I used 'the image of oneself' as an example. The Higher Self has no form and it is we who give it a form, any form. Nir-guna cannot act at all through anything, that is a contradiction in terms. 'Ramana' cannot manifest himself in any form to the devotee as he that body/mind doesn't exist. It has gone back to the elements. It is the devotee's subconscious that does the manifesting. Sure Ramana was the Self but the body was just carrying out its predetermined prarabda karma unitil it dropped. During this time it went through the appearance of Bhakti, actions etc. Bhakti is much misunderstood. To many it is the devotion and the emotion they call Bhakti, but it is more than that. Being devoted to the path of Jnana without any forms at all is still devotion. For it is the search for the Self, which is the aim of all yogas. Most Yogas are about concentration and one pointedness, suitable to the sahdhaka. All actions are predetermined by prarabda karma, there is no 'God' organising our lives, the energy is provided that's all. We have only the choice in attitude that is all, not in the result. To a follower of Bhakti Marga this may sound dry and unspiritual, but to an Advaitin on the Jnana Marga, it is the essence of Sadhana-- --lifting the veil. Religion for example is possibly a crutch, but to a one-legged man a crutch is most useful. I suppose when we realise we are just part of a dream, it ends.......ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 I am very happy to see ur reply plz read this also Thirumanthiram Enathu arimuha urai Thirumoolar 3000 padalgalai padiullar. Palarum atharkku urai eluthi ullanar. Nan 3 aandukalukku mun tharcheyalaka ethanai padikka nernthathu. Atharkku mun udal upathaiil erunthu neenguvatharkkaka nan thyanam katren. Thyanam pannumpothu sila aha katchikalai nan kana nernthathu. Antha katchikalukkum thirumanthira padalkalukkum oru sambantham eruppathaha enkku therinthathu. Enave nan kanda katchihalai padangalaha varainthen. Antha padangalukku keele thirumanthira paadalgalai eluthiullen. Entha padangalai silaridam kaatiullen. Piragu internet moolam oru group amaithhu palarum ariya thuninthulllen. Plz visit thirumoolar/ namasivayam ------------- The English translation of the whole book is at: http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/tirumantiram/TableOfContents.htm\ l List Moderators ===================================== >"adi_shakthi16" <adi_shakthi16 >advaitin >advaitin > Re: Advaita and Dvaita. >Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:26:22 -0000 > > >namasivayam writes... > >(i never believe in GIRIVALAM Giri Should valam myself whenever i >wish) > >This reminds me of that famous statement by Shri Thrumular, author of >Thirumantiram... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:43:57 -0000, Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: > > > advaitin, Amitha Krishnamurthi <amitha@g...> > wrote: > > > > In response... > > > > "Instead of mentally worshipping your > > Ishtadevata/Guru, replace the image with an image of yourself. You > > will find the same results, for you are imaging your own higher > self > > which has no image really." > > > > and subsequently > > > > "Only the Ego is holding the body > > and mind constructs together. Once the Ego is gone and the body > > drops with the exhaustion of prarabda karma--------there is no > > common thread. No imprint not anything just the Self." > > > > Since the whole idea of spiritual evolution becomes ridding the > Self > > of Ego....how is it going to help me if I meditate upon myself > > mentally??? I for one, find the thought unpalatable...& definitely > > feel that it feeds the Ego rather than trying to get rid of it... > ." > > > > It is obviously difficult to meditate on a Nirguna Brahman..which > is > > where forms come into play...they help in our quest for spiritual > > evolution..Picking up a form does not indicate fear...it indicates > > your readiness to move upwards in the process of "realization". > > > > What I was trying to say in my earlier mail is that the Nirguna > > Brahman acts through the form that appeals to the Individual...the > > form might be that of a Guru, a God, an Avatar...even a pious > ancestor > > in your family.. If Maharishi realized that he was/is the SELF...he > > still exists..since the SELF doesn't perish..he can still manifest > > himself in any "Form" he chooses to...to his Bhaktas he will > appear as > > he was...that does not mean he exists in the astral level...nor > does > > that mean he didn't realize Godhood. > > > > "We have to realise that we are Praneaswara or the Sakti, and at > that > > point we realise Nirguna/Moksha" > > > > The texts can help us only to a certain point...after which the > > experience is what will lead us....the texts tell us that we are > the > > Self...but IMHO, any amount of outward analysis is not going to > help > > much in crossing that bridge between knowlede from the texts..and > > realization for oneself...introspection is the need of the hour. > > > > In this context..it does become true that without Bhakti..the whole > > thing is an exercise akin to mental gymnastics. > > > > Regards > > Amitha > > Namaste A,IMHO, > > A couple of points here; I used 'the image of oneself' as an > example. The Higher Self has no form and it is we who give it a > form, any form. Nir-guna cannot act at all through anything, that is > a contradiction in terms. > > 'Ramana' cannot manifest himself in any form to the devotee as he > that body/mind doesn't exist. It has gone back to the elements. It > is the devotee's subconscious that does the manifesting. Sure Ramana > was the Self but the body was just carrying out its predetermined > prarabda karma unitil it dropped. During this time it went through > the appearance of Bhakti, actions etc. > > Bhakti is much misunderstood. To many it is the devotion and the > emotion they call Bhakti, but it is more than that. Being devoted to > the path of Jnana without any forms at all is still devotion. For it > is the search for the Self, which is the aim of all yogas. Most > Yogas are about concentration and one pointedness, suitable to the > sahdhaka. > > All actions are predetermined by prarabda karma, there is no 'God' > organising our lives, the energy is provided that's all. We have > only the choice in attitude that is all, not in the result. > > To a follower of Bhakti Marga this may sound dry and unspiritual, > but to an Advaitin on the Jnana Marga, it is the essence of Sadhana-- > --lifting the veil. > > Religion for example is possibly a crutch, but to a one-legged man a > crutch is most useful. > > I suppose when we realise we are just part of a dream, it > ends.......ONS...Tony. > > In which case I suppose all the great pillars of the advaitin doctrine..all those who paved the way for others to follow... were one-legged.. so to speak. although I always thought there was a message for us in that these great souls had a judicious mix of bhakti in their quest for realization. besides..I seek to explain again that I didn't mean that Ramana would manifest himself..I said the Nirguna Brahman adopts the "form" of Ramana to those who find it appealing..just like other "forms" such as Shiva, Vishnu etc.. this would..going by the doctrine of advaita...indicate an evolvement spiritually...and would possibly eventually lead to realizing that one should move from "form" to "formless" before realizing that, that too is an illusion. regards Amitha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 advaitin, Amitha Krishnamurthi <amitha@g...> wrote: > On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:43:57 -0000, Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote: > realization. > > besides..I seek to explain again that I didn't mean that Ramana would > manifest himself..I said the Nirguna Brahman adopts the "form" of > Ramana to those who find it appealing..just like other "forms" such as > Shiva, Vishnu etc.. > this would..going by the doctrine of advaita...indicate an evolvement > spiritually...and would possibly eventually lead to realizing that one > should move from "form" to "formless" before realizing that, that too > is an illusion. > > regards > Amitha Namaste, Perhaps I could accept Saguna Brahman adopts the form, but Nirguna is impossible...ONS..Tony. I don't want to offend the Bhaktis on here or elsewhere so I have founded a group, not advertised, where this can be discussed unmoderated. /advaitajnana You are welcome to say what you wish there...........ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 HI Tony, I would also like to add here, that it is of course clear to me, that Maharshi has no separate existence apart from the self. Following the merged Bhakti/Jnana Marga is just a different way of approaching sadhana. I may not find the words to explain this from an intellectual level, I can only share my own experience. I do not know how you do it, Tony , I am getting my mind ready for the inward journey by remembering Bhagawan. This automatically brings up a wave of love which drowns all thoughts and takes me to place called hridayam where the veils are lifted. The same thing happens when realizing love for other beings in the universe, of course. But the ability to love others, as I realized that they are not different from me, came by first loving my Lord Shiva, dissolving in the pains of longing until he at last manifested for me in the form of Arunachala and Bhagawan Shri Ramana Maharshi. I hope this makes it a bit clearer. Bhakti shakes up your mind so that you find the next step easier. This is the Shiva Bhakti not Vaishnava Bhakti. Arunachalananda christina On Oct 23, 2004, at 18:58, Tony OClery wrote: > > > advaitin, Amitha Krishnamurthi <amitha@g...> > wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:43:57 -0000, Tony OClery <aoclery> > wrote: > > realization. > > > > besides..I seek to explain again that I didn't mean that Ramana > would > > manifest himself..I said the Nirguna Brahman adopts the "form" of > > Ramana to those who find it appealing..just like other "forms" > such as > > Shiva, Vishnu etc.. > > this would..going by the doctrine of advaita...indicate an > evolvement > > spiritually...and would possibly eventually lead to realizing that > one > > should move from "form" to "formless" before realizing that, that > too > > is an illusion. > > > > regards > > Amitha > > Namaste, > > Perhaps I could accept Saguna Brahman adopts the form, but Nirguna > is impossible...ONS..Tony. > I don't want to offend the Bhaktis on here or elsewhere so I have > founded a group, not advertised, where this can be discussed > unmoderated. > /advaitajnana > > You are welcome to say what you wish there...........ONS..> > > 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 Sponsor > > > > > > > Will you help a needy child? > > · > It only costs .60¢ a day · It's easier than you think. > > · > Click here to meet a waiting child you can sponsor now. > > <l.gif> > > Links > > • > advaitin/ > > • > advaitin > > • Terms of > Service. > > Monsoonhouse Int. Kovalam/Kerala contact: christianecameron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 24, 2004 Report Share Posted October 24, 2004 Namaste Sri Tony: Honestly, some of your explanations about Bhkati provides confirmation to your own statement that "Bhati is much misunderstood." First is an integral part of all of us whether one is an 'advaitin', a visitadvaitin and also a dwaitan. This is true even to those who questions the existence of god. I have noticed many times, what you really meant didn't come well with one-liners. Though you seem to be quite comfortable with your statments, they don't convey the advaita philosophy as spelled out by Sankara. For example,your last statement of the post, "I suppose when we realise we are just part of a dream, it ends.......ONS" is a good example. What you really wanted to say is that, "When we wake up from our dream and realize that that what we witnessed is just a dream, and truly we are unaffected by whatever happened during the dream then our illusionary life of attachment ends." It should be pointed out that we in the list want to learn and adopt Sankara's advaita philosophy and not necessarily our own self-created misinterpretations of Sri Sankara and Sri Ramana. Bhakti is an integral part of advaita and only the attitude of advaitin differs from the attitudes of dwaitin while worshiping God. The advaitin considers God as an integral part where as the dwaitin considers Him as a separate entity. Sitting and meditating is also a form of worship and meditation can be practiced while conducting daily karmas that includes all sorts of rituals, pujas and kirtans. Please note that 'saguna' and 'nirguna' are all our own creations and all such notions will disapper at the time of realization and our thoughts get superimposed with the Brahman (does it really matter whether the Brahman is sagna or nirguna!). Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery> wrote: > Namaste A,IMHO, > > Bhakti is much misunderstood. To many it is the devotion and the > emotion they call Bhakti, but it is more than that. Being devoted to > the path of Jnana without any forms at all is still devotion. For it > is the search for the Self, which is the aim of all yogas. Most > Yogas are about concentration and one pointedness, suitable to the > sahdhaka. > > All actions are predetermined by prarabda karma, there is no 'God' > organising our lives, the energy is provided that's all. We have > only the choice in attitude that is all, not in the result. > > To a follower of Bhakti Marga this may sound dry and unspiritual, > but to an Advaitin on the Jnana Marga, it is the essence of Sadhana- - > --lifting the veil. > > Religion for example is possibly a crutch, but to a one-legged man a > crutch is most useful. > > I suppose when we realise we are just part of a dream, it > ends.......ONS...Tony. 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.