Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 hariH OM! "we are surrounded and immersed in pure Mystery; anything we think we know of it is sheer folly." - toltec shaman don juan matus. in light of this, and to my understanding, the intellectual "end game" shift into moksha is the ability to allow the ego-Mind to surrender to this unfathomable mystery. for, [the converse of] embracing any concept or ideology in the form of a hardline "understanding" re the nature of Reality (or whatever It is that appears before or within us) is a trap that in effect perpetuates the delimitation of one's experience, sustaining the ancient stubborn barrier to moksha. namaste, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 advaitin, "frank t maiello" <egodust wrote: > > hariH OM! > > "we are surrounded and immersed in pure Mystery; anything we think we > know of it is sheer folly." - toltec shaman don juan matus. > > in light of this, and to my understanding, the intellectual "end game" > shift into moksha is the ability to allow the ego-Mind to surrender to > this unfathomable mystery. for, [the converse of] embracing any > concept or ideology in the form of a hardline "understanding" re the > nature of Reality (or whatever It is that appears before or within us) > is a trap that in effect perpetuates the delimitation of one's > experience, sustaining the ancient stubborn barrier to moksha. > > namaste, > frank > Namaste,F, I'm guessing you mean Juan Matus the Yaqui Shaman mentioned in Castenada's books. This character as well as much else in the books may have very tenuous claims to truth or existence. Although what is said is the typical Bhakti surrender or Nishkarma Karma..............ONS..Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery wrote: > > Namaste,F, > > I'm guessing you mean Juan Matus the Yaqui Shaman mentioned in > Castenada's books. This character as well as much else in the books > may have very tenuous claims to truth or existence. > > Although what is said is the typical Bhakti surrender or Nishkarma > Karma..............ONS..Tony. > hariH OM! tonyji, yes, i'm aware the individual don juan may have been fabricated by castaneda. in which case castaneda himself must be enlightened as well as quite a unique and creative/imaginative teacher. and yes, what i wrote may be classified as parabhakthi; but i believe is more likened to essentially purushotamayog, which simultaneously embraces all three main approaches (jnana-, bhakthi- and karma/tyagi-yog).. namaste, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 advaitin, "frank t maiello" <egodust wrote: > > advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery@> wrote: > > > > Namaste,F, > > > > I'm guessing you mean Juan Matus the Yaqui Shaman mentioned in > > Castenada's books. This character as well as much else in the > books > > may have very tenuous claims to truth or existence. > > > > Although what is said is the typical Bhakti surrender or Nishkarma > > Karma..............ONS..Tony. > > > > hariH OM! tonyji, > > yes, i'm aware the individual don juan may have been fabricated by > castaneda. in which case castaneda himself must be enlightened as > well as quite a unique and creative/imaginative teacher. > > and yes, what i wrote may be classified as parabhakthi; but i > believe is more likened to essentially purushotamayog, which > simultaneously embraces all three main approaches (jnana-, bhakthi- > and karma/tyagi-yog).. > > namaste, > frank > Namaste, How can jnana be confused with Purushotamayogi?...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery wrote: > > advaitin, "frank t maiello" <egodust@> > wrote: > > > > advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery@> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste,F, > > > > > > I'm guessing you mean Juan Matus the Yaqui Shaman mentioned in > > > Castenada's books. This character as well as much else in the > > books > > > may have very tenuous claims to truth or existence. > > > > > > Although what is said is the typical Bhakti surrender or > Nishkarma > > > Karma..............ONS..Tony. > > > > > > > hariH OM! tonyji, > > > > yes, i'm aware the individual don juan may have been fabricated by > > castaneda. in which case castaneda himself must be enlightened as > > well as quite a unique and creative/imaginative teacher. > > > > and yes, what i wrote may be classified as parabhakthi; but i > > believe is more likened to essentially purushotamayog, which > > simultaneously embraces all three main approaches (jnana-, bhakthi- > > > and karma/tyagi-yog).. > > > > namaste, > > frank > > > Namaste, > > How can jnana be confused with Purushotamayogi?...Tony. > as stated above, they are seamlessly integrated. see bg: ch. xv; v. 1 - 20.. namaskaaram. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 advaitin, "frank t maiello" <egodust wrote: > > advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery@> wrote: > > > > advaitin, "frank t maiello" <egodust@> > > wrote: > > > > > > advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Namaste,F, > > > > > > > > I'm guessing you mean Juan Matus the Yaqui Shaman mentioned in > > > > Castenada's books. This character as well as much else in the > > > books > > > > may have very tenuous claims to truth or existence. > > > > > > > > Although what is said is the typical Bhakti surrender or > > Nishkarma > > > > Karma..............ONS..Tony. > > > > > > > > > > hariH OM! tonyji, > > > > > > yes, i'm aware the individual don juan may have been fabricated > by > > > castaneda. in which case castaneda himself must be enlightened > as > > > well as quite a unique and creative/imaginative teacher. > > > > > > and yes, what i wrote may be classified as parabhakthi; but i > > > believe is more likened to essentially purushotamayog, which > > > simultaneously embraces all three main approaches (jnana-, > bhakthi- > > > > > and karma/tyagi-yog).. > > > > > > namaste, > > > frank > > > > > Namaste, > > > > How can jnana be confused with Purushotamayogi?...Tony. > > > > as stated above, they are seamlessly integrated. see bg: ch. xv; v. > 1 - 20.. > > namaskaaram. > Namaste, Yes I read that in two versions of the Gita, but it really is still the Vaisnava vishistadvaita isn't it? That was my point that Jnana or Advaita would be regarded as Mayavid by those groups....ONS..Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery wrote: > Namaste, > > Yes I read that in two versions of the Gita, but it really is still > the Vaisnava vishistadvaita isn't it? That was my point that Jnana > or Advaita would be regarded as Mayavid by those groups....ONS..Tony. > hariH OM! tonyji, i got the information re purushottama yoga from ramana, but cannot find the reference. purushottama means supreme Self, and is therefore equivalent to paramatman or parabrahman (nirguna brahman), which in bg: ch. 15 is what is being surrendered to (and is thus considered parabhakthi and not merely bhakthi [which, as i'm sure you know, is the surrender to an ishta devata of saguna brahman]). therefore bg: ch. 15 has nothing to do with vishistadvaita. one of the more learned members of our community will correct me if i'm wrong. namaskaaram, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 advaitin, "frank t maiello" <egodust wrote: > > advaitin, "Tony OClery" <aoclery@> wrote: > > Namaste, > > > > Yes I read that in two versions of the Gita, but it really is > still > > the Vaisnava vishistadvaita isn't it? That was my point that Jnana > > or Advaita would be regarded as Mayavid by those > groups....ONS..Tony. > > > > hariH OM! tonyji, > > i got the information re purushottama yoga from ramana, but cannot > find the reference. > > purushottama means supreme Self, and is therefore equivalent to > paramatman or parabrahman (nirguna brahman), which in bg: ch. 15 is > what is being surrendered to (and is thus considered parabhakthi and > not merely bhakthi [which, as i'm sure you know, is the surrender to > an ishta devata of saguna brahman]). therefore bg: ch. 15 has > nothing to do with vishistadvaita. > > one of the more learned members of our community will correct me if > i'm wrong. > > namaskaaram, > frank > Namaste F-ji, Pardon me if give my opinion. Supreme Self is not Nirguna Brahman by description, it is the Saguna Brahman concept. Purusha is a man or a person, so Supreme Being, again Saguna not Nirguna. One cannot surrender to NirGuna by description, so this is where I get my description of partial advaita or visishtadvaita....ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 --- > > hariH OM! tonyji, > > > > i got the information re purushottama yoga from ramana, but cannot > > find the reference. > > > > purushottama means supreme Self, and is therefore equivalent to > > paramatman or parabrahman (nirguna brahman), which in bg: ch. 15 > is > > what is being surrendered to (and is thus considered parabhakthi > and > > not merely bhakthi [which, as i'm sure you know, is the surrender > to > > an ishta devata of saguna brahman]). therefore bg: ch. 15 has > > nothing to do with vishistadvaita. > > > > one of the more learned members of our community will correct me > if > > i'm wrong. > > > > namaskaaram, > > frank > > > Namaste F-ji, > > Pardon me if give my opinion. Supreme Self is not Nirguna Brahman by > description, it is the Saguna Brahman concept. Purusha is a man or a > person, so Supreme Being, again Saguna not Nirguna. One cannot > surrender to NirGuna by description, so this is where I get my > description of partial advaita or visishtadvaita....ONS...Tony. Sub: 'Purushottama' in the Scriptures Namaste Tony ji, Trust this will interest you. The most familiar place where we find this word 'Purushottama' is in the Gita Chapter XV. It would be beneficial to go through the four verses, 16, 17, 18 and 19 to get a complete and correct meaning of the word. This is what Acharya Shankara says about this word (in all these verses put together): Verse 16 :Within samsara, there are two categories: Kshara, the perishable and Akshara, the (relatively) imperishable. These are the two upadhis, adjuncts, of the One spirit called the Purusha. Being upadhis of that Supreme Being, Purusha, these two are also figuratively called purushas , says Anandagiri. The perishable, kshara, comprises the whole universe of changing forms. The (relatively) imperishable, akshara, is the Maya Shakti, the illusion power of the Lord. This akshara is the germ from which the perishable being takes its birth. (As an aside note, it would be helpful to bear in mind that the word 'Akshara', Imperishable, takes different meanings depending on the context. Here, in this chapter it means the Maya shakti, the higher upadhi of Brahman. This same word Akshara occurs in the eighth chapter, verse 3. There it is Brahman Itself. All this is as per Acharya Shankara's commentary.) Verse 17: Uttama Purusha: is the Highest Spirit, untainted by the evils of the two upadhis, higher and lower, spoken of above as akshara and kshara. This Uttama Purusha is eternal, pure, intelligent and free by nature. This Uttama Purusha is quite distinct from the two upadhis. He is the Paramaatma = Supreme Self. He is Parama, Supreme, as compared with the other embodied selves (jivas) set up by avidya. He is Atma, Self, that is, the Innermost unfailing Consciousness of all beings. Verse 18: He is well-known in the world and the Vedas as Purushottama because He transcends both the kshara, the perishable ( the tree of samsara spoken of in the beginning of this chapter) and the akshara, the (relatively) imperishable (the seed of the tree of samsara). The uttamatva, superiority, of the Purusha, the Self, is because of the transcending these two upadhis. Verse 19: He who knows Me , the Purushottama, he knowing all (Sarvavit), worships Me with his whole being. The Acharya, Bhagavatpada Shankara, says: Now, the fruit accruing to the one who knows the Atma as specified in the foregoing is set forth: He who knows Me thus, being undeluded, as 'I am He',…. Then the Acharya begins to delineate the 'grand finale' thus: A knowledge of the true nature of the Lord having been imparted in this discourse, a knowledge which leads to Moksha……The whole teaching of the Gita shastra has been summed up in this chapter. Not only of the Gita, the teaching of the whole of the Veda is here embodied. …. On knowing this science as taught above, but not otherwise, a man becomes wise, Buddhimaan. He has accomplished all duties, krta-krtyaH . Sri Madhusudana Saraswati in his commentary to the 18th verse above says that the Lord has been referred to as Purushottama in the Veda thus: 'sa UttamaH PurushaH', He is the Supreme Being, in the Chandogya Upanishad (viii. 12. 3). The Acharya's commentary for this mantra is on these lines: There are four purushas: one each in the waking, dream and sleep states and the fourth is the Turiya. The Uttamatva, superiority is due to the transcendence of the Turiya over the other three. The Acharya says here that this has been explained by Himself in the Gitabhashya, what we saw above. A word about the word Prusha: This word is derived in Sanskrit in scriptural context thus: 1. Puri shayanaat purushaH = Because He is dwelling, as Consciousness, in the body-city. 2. Purnatvaat PurushaH = Because He is Purna, Ever Full (never wanting in anything). 3. In the Mahanarayanopanishat, (Taittiriya Aranyaka just before the famous mantra 'na karmanaa na prajayaa..' there occurs this portion: 'tenedam purnam Purushena sarvam…' meaning, 'by Him all this is filled'… Now, to sum up, the Gita calls the Ultimate Truth by the name Purushottama. If this word could mean Saguna Brahman, our Acharya would not have commented, 'by knowing Him as 'I am He', aham Brahmasmi. This realisation alone would lead to Moksha, liberation as the Acharya points out. It is impossible to have the realisation 'Aham Brahmasmi' in respect of Saguna Brahman. The knowledge of Saguna Brahman would not lead to Moksha, but here the Lord Himself says in the concluding verse that 'knowing Me thus one becomes wise…'. And the Chandogya bhashyam calls the Purushottama as the Turiya, the transcendental Truth. The etymological meaning also supports this. Thus Purushottama of the Fifteenth Chapter is undoubtedly the Nirguna Brahman dear to your heart. Om Tat Sat Pranams subbu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 advaitin, "subrahmanian_v" <subrahmanian_v wrote: > > --- > > hariH OM! tonyji, > > > > > > i got the information re purushottama yoga from ramana, but > cannot > > > find the reference. > > > > > > purushottama means supreme Self, and is therefore equivalent to > > > paramatman or parabrahman (nirguna brahman), which in bg: ch. 15 > > is > > > what is being surrendered to (and is thus considered parabhakthi > > and > > > not merely bhakthi [which, as i'm sure you know, is the > surrender > > to > > > an ishta devata of saguna brahman]). therefore bg: ch. 15 has > > > nothing to do with vishistadvaita. > > > > > > one of the more learned members of our community will correct me > > if > > > i'm wrong. > > > > > > namaskaaram, > > > frank > > > > > Namaste F-ji, > > > > Pardon me if give my opinion. Supreme Self is not Nirguna Brahman > by > > description, it is the Saguna Brahman concept. Purusha is a man or > a > > person, so Supreme Being, again Saguna not Nirguna. One cannot > > surrender to NirGuna by description, so this is where I get my > > description of partial advaita or visishtadvaita....ONS...Tony. > > > > Sub: 'Purushottama' in the Scriptures > > Namaste Tony ji, > > Trust this will interest you. The most familiar place where we find > this word 'Purushottama' is in the Gita Chapter XV. It would be > beneficial to go through the four verses, 16, 17, 18 and 19 to get a > complete and correct meaning of the word. This is what Acharya > Shankara says about this word (in all these verses put together): > > Verse 16 :Within samsara, there are two categories: Kshara, the > perishable and Akshara, the (relatively) imperishable. These are > the two upadhis, adjuncts, of the One spirit called the Purusha. > Being upadhis of that Supreme Being, Purusha, these two are also > figuratively called purushas , says Anandagiri. The perishable, > kshara, comprises the whole universe of changing forms. The > (relatively) imperishable, akshara, is the Maya Shakti, the illusion > power of the Lord. This akshara is the germ from which the > perishable being takes its birth. > > (As an aside note, it would be helpful to bear in mind that the > word 'Akshara', Imperishable, takes different meanings depending on > the context. Here, in this chapter it means the Maya shakti, the > higher upadhi of Brahman. This same word Akshara occurs in the > eighth chapter, verse 3. There it is Brahman Itself. All this is > as per Acharya Shankara's commentary.) > > Verse 17: Uttama Purusha: is the Highest Spirit, untainted by the > evils of the two upadhis, higher and lower, spoken of above as > akshara and kshara. This Uttama Purusha is eternal, pure, > intelligent and free by nature. This Uttama Purusha is quite > distinct from the two upadhis. He is the Paramaatma = Supreme Self. > He is Parama, Supreme, as compared with the other embodied selves > (jivas) set up by avidya. He is Atma, Self, that is, the Innermost > unfailing Consciousness of all beings. > > Verse 18: He is well-known in the world and the Vedas as > Purushottama because He transcends both the kshara, the perishable > ( the tree of samsara spoken of in the beginning of this chapter) > and the akshara, the (relatively) imperishable (the seed of the tree > of samsara). The uttamatva, superiority, of the Purusha, the Self, > is because of the transcending these two upadhis. > > Verse 19: He who knows Me , the Purushottama, he knowing all > (Sarvavit), worships Me with his whole being. The Acharya, > Bhagavatpada Shankara, says: Now, the fruit accruing to the one who > knows the Atma as specified in the foregoing is set forth: He who > knows Me thus, being undeluded, as 'I am He',…. > > Then the Acharya begins to delineate the 'grand finale' thus: > A knowledge of the true nature of the Lord having been imparted in > this discourse, a knowledge which leads to Moksha……The whole > teaching of the Gita shastra has been summed up in this chapter. > Not only of the Gita, the teaching of the whole of the Veda is here > embodied. …. On knowing this science as taught above, but not > otherwise, a man becomes wise, Buddhimaan. He has accomplished all > duties, krta-krtyaH . > > Sri Madhusudana Saraswati in his commentary to the 18th verse above > says that the Lord has been referred to as Purushottama in the Veda > thus: 'sa UttamaH PurushaH', He is the Supreme Being, in the > Chandogya Upanishad (viii. 12. 3). The Acharya's commentary for this > mantra is on these lines: There are four purushas: one each in the > waking, dream and sleep states and the fourth is the Turiya. The > Uttamatva, superiority is due to the transcendence of the Turiya > over the other three. The Acharya says here that this has been > explained by Himself in the Gitabhashya, what we saw above. > > A word about the word Prusha: This word is derived in Sanskrit in > scriptural context thus: 1. Puri shayanaat purushaH = Because He is > dwelling, as Consciousness, in the body-city. 2. Purnatvaat PurushaH > = Because He is Purna, Ever Full (never wanting in anything). 3. In > the Mahanarayanopanishat, (Taittiriya Aranyaka just before the > famous mantra 'na karmanaa na prajayaa..' there occurs this > portion: 'tenedam purnam Purushena sarvam…' meaning, 'by Him all > this is filled'… > > Now, to sum up, the Gita calls the Ultimate Truth by the name > Purushottama. If this word could mean Saguna Brahman, our Acharya > would not have commented, 'by knowing Him as 'I am He', aham > Brahmasmi. This realisation alone would lead to Moksha, liberation > as the Acharya points out. It is impossible to have the > realisation 'Aham Brahmasmi' in respect of Saguna Brahman. The > knowledge of Saguna Brahman would not lead to Moksha, but here the > Lord Himself says in the concluding verse that 'knowing Me thus one > becomes wise…'. And the Chandogya bhashyam calls the Purushottama > as the Turiya, the transcendental Truth. The etymological meaning > also supports this. Thus Purushottama of the Fifteenth Chapter is > undoubtedly the Nirguna Brahman dear to your heart. > > Om Tat Sat > Pranams > subbu > Namaste Subbu-ji, I find this very interesting and some thought must be spent on what the Acharya said and even more important what he didn't say. 'I am He' leads to Moksha and indicating this refers only to Nirguna Brahman concept. Of course is is even logical to point out that one cannot have Moksha in Saguna Brahman alone, for Saguna is with atttributes. 'I Am' indicates 'being' therefore of course is Saguna Brahman, but Saguna is not bound and is aware if its identity with Nirguna. So my conclusion is that........yes if one were to remain with Saguna, (which is ultimately impossible), that is not liberation or Moksha, but unsaid is the fact that union with Saguna brings realisation of Nirguna instantaneously. This is no doubt whey there are different Samadhis, Savikalpa, Nirivkalpa, Kevala and finally Sahaja. And then there is the dropping of the residual body, and the final culmination in the destruction of the ego and its adjuncts in favour of Ajativada or destruction of illusion as well; considering the Ego is already destroyed...................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.