How to reconcile advaitha and reincarnation (or transmigration)?-ego

[Guest guest]

Namesta all Advaitins

 

Is the ego a living "alive" entity?

 

BG 7.4 specifically mentions egoism (along with BMI) as the lower natue

and 7.5 describes the soul as the higher nature.

 

Also in BG 13.2 commentory Shankra proves that 2 entities

(subject/object) are required to comprehend any "object of knowledge"

like ignorence,happiness,sadness etc.

 

So is the ego a "living" entity. Maybe like a leech which gets attached

to us or maybe like a tick on a dog. I say this because BG 7.4

specifically mentions a "Lower Nature".

 

warm regards

Hersh

[Guest guest]

--Metapysically, no doubt, the ego is a non-entity,

Sankara in his introduction to his commentary on the

Brahmasutras, tenaciously pointing out this. But our

empirical life seems to be too full of this

phenoemenon. That is why, perhaps, Sankara called this

anirvachanya. Even though in deep sleep this ego

vanishes, this very much haunts us in our waking life,

even in our spiritual sadhana. So, we are in the horns

of a dilemma. It is not a question of whether the ego

is real, but the issue is how to unsettle it in our

life.

Sankarraman

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Let us not try to unsettle this fellow called ego.

 

Please don't misunderstand me. An advaitin knows that this guy is

another objectification in awareness. Let him (the ego) therefore

continue to remain and play around outside there in the courtyard at

the beck and call of his master - the advaitin - to run very

essential errands. We all need an errand-boy, don't we? And, here

we have a lovely, obedient boy in him!

 

Life would be much comfortable that way. Problems arise only when

the errand-boy becomes the boss. I am afraid I called the boy in to

write this mail. Let me send him out to play again!

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

 

_______________

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

> --Metapysically, no doubt, the ego is a non-entity,

> Sankara in his introduction to his commentary on the

> Brahmasutras, tenaciously pointing out this. But our

> empirical life seems to be too full of this

> phenoemenon. That is why, perhaps, Sankara called this

> anirvachanya. Even though in deep sleep this ego

> vanishes, this very much haunts us in our waking life,

> even in our spiritual sadhana. So, we are in the horns

> of a dilemma. It is not a question of whether the ego

> is real, but the issue is how to unsettle it in our

> life.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Well, he lost his way, and he wound up at my house, but he gained about

300 pounds, and, although he's a lot of fun, I wish that you could get

rid of him for me ;-)

 

Bob F.

 

Madathil Rajendran Nair wrote:

 

Problems arise only when

> the errand-boy becomes the boss. I am afraid I called the boy in to

> write this mail. Let me send him out to play again!

>

> PraNAms.

>

> Madathil Nair

>

> _______________

>

> advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

> wrote:

>

>

>>--Metapysically, no doubt, the ego is a non-entity,

>>Sankara in his introduction to his commentary on the

>>Brahmasutras, tenaciously pointing out this. But our

>>empirical life seems to be too full of this

>>phenoemenon. That is why, perhaps, Sankara called this

>>anirvachanya. Even though in deep sleep this ego

>>vanishes, this very much haunts us in our waking life,

>>even in our spiritual sadhana. So, we are in the horns

>>of a dilemma. It is not a question of whether the ego

>>is real, but the issue is how to unsettle it in our

>>life.

>

>

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

>

>

> Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Bobji.

 

Well, better do something about the 300 lbs. That calls for urgent

attention. The funny boy can remain. In fact, you need him by your

side to do the trimming.

 

Madathil Nair

 

_________________

 

advaitin, Bob Freedman <rlfreed@p...> wrote:

>

> Namaste,

>

> Well, he lost his way, and he wound up at my house, but he gained

about

> 300 pounds, and, although he's a lot of fun, I wish that you could

get

> rid of him for me ;-)

>

> Bob F.

>

> Madathil Rajendran Nair wrote:

>

> Problems arise only when

> > the errand-boy (ego) becomes the boss. I am afraid I called the

boy in to

> > write this mail. Let me send him out to play again!

> >

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

> --Metapysically, no doubt, the ego is a non-entity,

> Sankara in his introduction to his commentary on the

> Brahmasutras, tenaciously pointing out this. But our

> empirical life seems to be too full of this

> phenoemenon. That is why, perhaps, Sankara called this

> anirvachanya. Even though in deep sleep this ego

> vanishes, this very much haunts us in our waking life,

> even in our spiritual sadhana. So, we are in the horns

> of a dilemma. It is not a question of whether the ego

> is real, but the issue is how to unsettle it in our

> life.

 

 

 

I saw grief drinking a cup of sorrow and called out, "It

tastes sweet, does it not?You've caught me," grief

answered, "and you've ruined my business, how can I sell

sorrow when you know it's a blessing?"

 

--------- Jalaluddin Rumi

 

 

Regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

 

> It is not a question of whether the ego is real, but the

> issue is how to unsettle it in our life.

 

The problem is not the ego but avidya. Ego arises because of the avidya

which masks the infinitude of the Self. The ego is the shadow that is

forever looking for what has been lost, and because of the turbidity

caused by all the activity of looking for what has been lost, it loses

its innate happiness - because the turbidity of activity is a fever

that hides the innate happiness of Self. But the ego is a shadow and it

is blind because it has no light of its own, and it leads blindly in

all kinds of directions resulting in bringing more sorrow instead of

happiness. Being a shadow you cannot catch it - it is a great

trickster. In a bygone era, they had a method to still the pranks of

the ego - it was called tapasya. Today tapasya does not work because

the samskaras that have caused us to be born in Kali Yuga are such as

not to be conducive for undertaking tapasya. Therefore, there is

another method prescribed for this age - it is called bhakti. Bhakti is

the absolute devotedness whereby one is happy in whatever the Lord

brings to us. It is to see the Will of God in everything and to accept

that we shall play our parts willingly in the Lord's leela in whatever

way He may Will it. Bhakti is to be happy with both the pleasures and

the pains that the Lord gives to us. It is to transmute all of life

into sweetness in the nectar of bhakti. And then when sorrow itself

becomes sweet, where then shall the ego go to look for the happiness it

has lost. The happiness is already here.

 

Moksha is not escape from sorrow, it is the vairagya to be unaffected

by sorrow. Sorrow drops away from the soul when it has no power to

affect it.

 

Avidya is the primal defect, and ego is its child, and the activity

promoted by the ego is the fever of life. Moksha is the return from the

fever of life to the placid lake of original happiness.

 

Let us pray on this Deepavali that the Lord may give us the

unfluctuating Deepa of bhakti!

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

--- Chittaranjan Naik <chittaranjan_naik

wrote:

> Namaste,

>

> ---

>

> The problem is not the ego but avidya.

 

Is Bakthi so easy as you seem to suggest? It demands

the basic ardous task of accepting all existential

situations of life without choice. Our thought

mechanism is so oriented to the pleasure principle

that it muses on talks of vedanta whether jnana or

bakthi, or some way of life advocated by some modern

maverick philosophers, only when the ego is

threatened, or finds itself in a comfortable situation

to indulge in philosophizing the different merits of

the various paths. There is only one way, which is not

a way in actuality, but which demands in remaining

with, "What is", which does not admit of different

fragmentary situations, but aims at the very target.

It is not a question of talking about the tough period

of Kaliyuga, not admitting of jnana path; if one looks

at the

puranas, one can see the fact of worse situations

having existed. In fact, psychologically, the Now

alone seems to be the truth, and relevant to proceed

from, all other things being the bylanes of the

intellect.

with regards

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

> Is Bakthi so easy as you seem to suggest?.... There is only

> one way, which is not a way in actuality, but which demands

> in remaining with, "What is", which does not admit of different

> fragmentary situations, but aims at the very target.....In fact,

> psychologically, the Now alone seems to be the truth, and

> relevant to proceed from, all other things being the bylanes

> of the intellect.

 

 

The question you had asked was: 'how to unsettle the ego in our

lives?' I admit that Bhakti is not easy. If what you suggest is the

only way to 'usettle the ego', then you have the answer to the

question already! Grace operates in many ways.

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan