Guest guest Posted November 21, 2006 Report Share Posted November 21, 2006 Namaste Anandaji, An excellent article, that I forwarded to my group advaitajnana--thank you. Now how I arrived at Ajati Vada was very simple, although it did involve some belief. I knew that the Sages and Muktas had indicated that the whole of 'creation' disappears on realisation and dropping of the body. I also knew that Nirguna Brahman cannot be qualified. Therefore any qualification can only be an attribute, even if it is only 'appearance'. It therefore follows that 'nothing ever happened', not even the appearance. This is very hard to accept for Philosophers and Bhaktas, who need something to exist in 'some way' to justify their existence. It is only possible even because we are all the undivided unqualified Nirguna Brahman. So there are the three levels of Ramana, somebody created it-a God or Isvara, it arises as we perceive it--a kind of attribute of Saguna and finally the ultimate truth--Ajativada-nothing happened at all even appearance.--Nir Guna..............Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2006 Report Share Posted November 21, 2006 ---- Tony OClery <aoclery > wrote: > Namaste Anandaji, > > An excellent article, that I forwarded to my group advaitajnana--thank > you. Now how I arrived at Ajati Vada was very simple, although it did > involve some belief. > I knew that the Sages and Muktas had indicated that the whole > of 'creation' disappears on realisation and dropping of the body. > I also knew that Nirguna Brahman cannot be qualified. Therefore any > qualification can only be an attribute, even if it is only 'appearance'. > It therefore follows that 'nothing ever happened', not even the > appearance. > This is very hard to accept for Philosophers and Bhaktas, who need > something to exist in 'some way' to justify their existence. It is only > possible even because we are all the undivided unqualified Nirguna > Brahman. So there are the three levels of Ramana, somebody created it-a > God or Isvara, it arises as we perceive it--a kind of attribute of > Saguna and finally the ultimate truth--Ajativada-nothing happened at > all even appearance.--Nir Guna..............Tony. > Tony, Ajativada simply means "unborn". What it means is that the One was never born. And a person might also extrapolate that the One will never die. But ajativada means - "unborn". It doesn't even slightly resemble the your notion that "nothing ever existed", not even slightly. Warm regards, michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2006 Report Share Posted November 21, 2006 , <aumshanti wrote: > > ---- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: > > Namaste Anandaji, > > > > An excellent article, that I forwarded to my group advaitajnana-- thank > > you. Now how I arrived at Ajati Vada was very simple, although it did > > involve some belief. > > I knew that the Sages and Muktas had indicated that the whole > > of 'creation' disappears on realisation and dropping of the body. > > I also knew that Nirguna Brahman cannot be qualified. Therefore any > > qualification can only be an attribute, even if it is only 'appearance'. > > It therefore follows that 'nothing ever happened', not even the > > appearance. > > This is very hard to accept for Philosophers and Bhaktas, who need > > something to exist in 'some way' to justify their existence. It is only > > possible even because we are all the undivided unqualified Nirguna > > Brahman. So there are the three levels of Ramana, somebody created it-a > > God or Isvara, it arises as we perceive it--a kind of attribute of > > Saguna and finally the ultimate truth--Ajativada-nothing happened at > > all even appearance.--Nir Guna..............Tony. > > > > Tony, > > Ajativada simply means "unborn". What it means is that the One was never born. And a person might also extrapolate that the One will never die. > > But ajativada means - "unborn". It doesn't even slightly resemble the your notion that "nothing ever existed", not even slightly. > > Warm regards, > > michael > Namaste Michael, I beg to differ, for there has to be some description to convey the concepts of Nir Guna and Ajati Vada, hence the words. Nothing can ever have existed for an appearance needs a mind, and a mind indicates the concept of 'God' or Saguna Brahman. The scriptures indicate that a Jiva and Creation have no beginning but can have an end. There is no beginning because nothing ever happened in the first place. In the end I can only fall back on the wors of the Sages who say it all disappears on Dropping the body-Moksha........ There are three theories by Ramana for there are different levels of minds and opinions that's all.........Regards Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2006 Report Share Posted November 21, 2006 ---- Tony OClery <aoclery > wrote: > , <aumshanti wrote: > > > > ---- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: > > > Namaste Anandaji, > > > > > > An excellent article, that I forwarded to my group advaitajnana-- > thank > > > you. Now how I arrived at Ajati Vada was very simple, although it > did > > > involve some belief. > > > I knew that the Sages and Muktas had indicated that the whole > > > of 'creation' disappears on realisation and dropping of the body. > > > I also knew that Nirguna Brahman cannot be qualified. snip So there are the three levels of Ramana, somebody > created it-a > > > God or Isvara, it arises as we perceive it--a kind of attribute > of > > > Saguna and finally the ultimate truth--Ajativada-nothing happened > at > > > all even appearance.--Nir Guna..............Tony. > > > > > > > Tony, > > > > Ajativada simply means "unborn". What it means is that the One was > never born. And a person might also extrapolate that the One will > never die. > > > > But ajativada means - "unborn". It doesn't even slightly resemble > the your notion that "nothing ever existed", not even slightly. > > > > Warm regards, > > > > michael > > > Namaste Michael, > > I beg to differ, for there has to be some description to convey the > concepts of Nir Guna and Ajati Vada, hence the words. > > Nothing can ever have existed for an appearance needs a mind, and a > mind indicates the concept of 'God' or Saguna Brahman. The scriptures > indicate that a Jiva and Creation have no beginning but can have an > end. There is no beginning because nothing ever happened in the first > place. > > In the end I can only fall back on the wors of the Sages who say it > all disappears on Dropping the body-Moksha........ > > There are three theories by Ramana for there are different levels of > minds and opinions that's all.........Regards Tony. > Dear Tony, You offer no quotations from the Sages you refer to. You cite no authorities other than your own rather odd intelectualiztions, you don't even offer any experiences of your own, and I don't agree with you at all; but for the sake of conversation, lets say that you are right when you postulate that.... "it never really happened". So for now, lets say your right, "It never really happened." What is the "it" that you say never happened? And then, if you don't mind let me ask one more question: What is the practical implication for human beings if "it" never really happened? In other words I am asking, "So what"? Warm regards, michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2006 Report Share Posted November 21, 2006 , <aumshanti wrote: > > > ---- Tony OClery <aoclery wrote: > > , <aumshanti@> wrote: > > > > > > ---- Tony OClery <aoclery@> wrote: > > > > Namaste Anandaji, > > > > > > > > An excellent article, that I forwarded to my group advaitajnana-- > > thank > > > > you. Now how I arrived at Ajati Vada was very simple, although it > > did > > > > involve some belief. > > > > I knew that the Sages and Muktas had indicated that the whole > > > > of 'creation' disappears on realisation and dropping of the body. > > > > I also knew that Nirguna Brahman cannot be qualified. > > snip > > So there are the three levels of Ramana, somebody > > created it-a > > > > God or Isvara, it arises as we perceive it--a kind of attribute > > of > > > > Saguna and finally the ultimate truth--Ajativada-nothing happened > > at > > > > all even appearance.--Nir Guna..............Tony. > > > > > > > > > > Tony, > > > > > > Ajativada simply means "unborn". What it means is that the One was > > never born. And a person might also extrapolate that the One will > > never die. > > > > > > But ajativada means - "unborn". It doesn't even slightly resemble > > the your notion that "nothing ever existed", not even slightly. > > > > > > Warm regards, > > > > > > michael > > > > > Namaste Michael, > > > > I beg to differ, for there has to be some description to convey the > > concepts of Nir Guna and Ajati Vada, hence the words. > > > > Nothing can ever have existed for an appearance needs a mind, and a > > mind indicates the concept of 'God' or Saguna Brahman. The scriptures > > indicate that a Jiva and Creation have no beginning but can have an > > end. There is no beginning because nothing ever happened in the first > > place. > > > > In the end I can only fall back on the wors of the Sages who say it > > all disappears on Dropping the body-Moksha........ > > > > There are three theories by Ramana for there are different levels of > > minds and opinions that's all.........Regards Tony. > > > > Dear Tony, > > You offer no quotations from the Sages you refer to. You cite no authorities other than your own rather odd intelectualiztions, you don't even offer any experiences of your own, and I don't agree with you at all; but for the sake of conversation, lets say that you are right when you postulate that.... "it never really happened". > > So for now, lets say your right, "It never really happened." What is the "it" that you say never happened? > > And then, if you don't mind let me ask one more question: What is the practical implication for human beings if "it" never really happened? In other words I am asking, "So what"? > > Warm regards, > > michael > Namaste Michael, The Advaitic Sages all say the same thing, pick anyone of them, even Ramana, Yogananda and Vivekananda etc etc. However if we just use a certain amount of deductive logic, we will find that appearance can only be mind, and is essentially a modification on Brahman. So it can not have happened for Saguna is just a concept on Nirguna. 'It' is manifestation and appearance, and the ramification are that we are already realised and never were anything but Nirguna Brahman..........Regards 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.