Question: Relationship between Atma and Paramatma

[Guest guest]

Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

 

When we hear or read the mentioned verse of Gita (mamaivansho...Gita 15:7) that

Jeevas are Anshas-parts of Paramatma which is Supreme Consciousness, we take it

to mean individual body-mind organism we believe we are to be part of Paramatma.

This makes us ask the question raised by Raj Kumar Mongaji, I think.

 

This is not what is really conveyed here! From the vantage point of Jeevatma,

it is not true. However, from Lord's point, He can say that It is He as Supreme

Consciousness, Eternal Being appears to be all jeevatmas, even as waves(jeevas)

appear in Ocean(paramatman). Ocean is always the same, waves or no waves. A

wave who believes it to be real and independent entity apart from ocean can no

longer claim to be part of the ocean because he doesn't know he has no existence

apart from ocean. If he claims to be ansha and expects to be omnipresent etc,

then it is information only on his part!

 

Now such a Jeevatma when realizes he/she is Atman first, beyond a shadow of

doubt, through experience and not just as information, then claim would be true.

At this point, as Atman, and not as a body-mind based person, he/she may

consider a part for a while until there is a final realization that he is

Paramatman, not just a part or ansha, just as wave is Ocean all the way, not a

part. Wave is a concept, name/form(nama/rupa) only, not a reality! No one has

ever touched such a wave!

 

In the Upanishadas, this realization is proclaimed by four Mahavakyas: This

Atman is verily Brahman, Thou art That, Consciousness is Brahman, I

(Sat-Chit-Ananda) am Brahman!

 

When one lives as if one is Pure Consciousness, which is eternal Being, The Self

which is second to none, Undivided, Undifferentiated Awareness, the question of

part doesn't arise. Then Omnipresence, Omnipotence, Omniscience is realized in

the sense that all limitaions-separations are dissolved by Jeevatma!

 

At this point it may be mentioned that what is commomly talked about us being

" embodied soul " is not true, rather, we are in reality Consciousness which

embodies all apparant minds and bodies and all objects. As such all objects are

Consciousness shaped as those objects in our experience(Chit-Vrittis). I mean

the stuff-Vastu of all objects when experienced is conditioned

Consciousness-Brahman. See the truth of this! We never experience anything gross

out there, but only Consciousness-chaitanya! Everything is at zero distance from

Consciousness!

 

One more point, as I understand, God of a Bhakta is not different from Self of a

Gyani, or Karma-Yogi. There is no question of Gyani stoping at Self, and Bhakta

can go ahead to God. Such a Bhakta and Gyani are one just as Truth is one

without a second, and that is What I and You are! What separates us is our

conditioning(Aavaran) of Atman by identification with limitations of body-mind

believing to be embodied souls.

 

Namaskaras..Pratap

 

 

-------------------------------

Ram Ram Raj,

 

Will try to explain from what I have understood from books/Audios of

Shri Ramsukhdasji and other sources as well.

 

In general, at times some points look confusing, particularly in

spirituality. Because there are ways of looking things and there are

contexts in which things are explained. " Ansh " here is said to

confirm the person in front that though residing inside the

body and riding over it but you are not it. You are not part of it.

Nothing that comes and goes is you or whatever decays is not you. It

is said in that sense. You are not ansh of prakrit but of ME

(Parmatman).

 

There are not mathematical measures as such by saying " Ansh " , to

show that you are ansh and Parmatma is maha " ansh " . There is no

comparison as such in terms of size and quantity. Moreover emphasis

is on ekatma-bhav with the supreme consciousness and reminder for

oneself to detach from temporary forms or cause and effect world .

 

Another angle: From logic perspective if you see. If infinite says

that you are part of me, which means again infinite. If boundryless

says that you are part of me and you are not part of soemthign which

is limiting, which dies, which comes and goes, which is bound to

space and time. So in essence even giving label as " Ansh " does not

contradict the fact that everything is Vasudev, complete, sheer

presence, limit less . How God in place can be limited and unlimited

in another places.

 

So " I am that " and " Jeev mera santan ansh hai " ..both are correct

and taking to same GOAL…

 

Another angle: Upnishad says if you add anything to Poorna, it

remains poorna. If you take out poorna from something then also it

remains poorna. So ansh-anshee, it is good to explain but since God

is one and can not be present in parts, so should not be imagined

from separation and quantity point of view.

 

Moreover in scriptures it is also explained at times that same

consciousness on the basis of UPADHI is labeled as Atman, Parmatman.

Like space in small pitcher is called " Ghatakash " and in big hall is

called " Mathakash " and in open is called " Mahakash " …but space

remains the same…

 

Since all depends on from where you look. So at times it becomes

confusing and to arrive at any strong and one conclusion and mind

loves that and keeps hankering for one final statement which should

be tested from all angles, which doesn't happen generally. We have

to align with the perspective of the speaker and understand the

context and purpose. And stick to it and take its advantageous part

for dipping into silence.

 

Don't know whether this will remove some of the jargon from your

mind. If not, then please park your confusions and don't delay in

dipping into silence. These things will automatically get answered

in future by someone outside or answers will come from within.

 

Warm regards,

 

Prakash Kushwah

-------------------------------

-Shree Hari_

 

I read Paramatman, as Supreme Soul, (GOD, O THEOS),

But I am a not clear the meaning of Bhagwan , (Bhagavan), is it God

personified as in Krishna, if I am wrong in these assumptions, I

don't mind, one learns from corrections.

Finally in what context would one use each term in preference to the

other.

 

With Respect and Divine Love,

 

Mike

(Mike Keenor)

 

------------------------------

namasthe. As you may have known, below are the two schools of

vedanta: (there are other school of vedanta also....but here we can

look into these two below for ur question.).

1. advaita vedanta

2.dvaita vedanta

 

Advaitha vedanta explains in terms of " Everything is God..so " I am

THAT " .

Dvaita vedanta explains in terms of dualism..as " Everything happens

because of God "

 

Whatever it is, or how many ever schools of thoughts may there be,

it is alright. Wrong or incorrect knowledge comes in many forms but

the right or correct knowledge comes only in one form. It is ok to

get confused, only when u get confused, you will start thinking

which is correct and which is not correct. To understand that,

please see the chapter 6 ( meditation of Bhagavadgita) and do not

think much about advaita or dvaita but just observe all ur thoughts

that comes to ur mind and not worry of the end result but try to

focus on the methodology of attaining the end result. Because, end

result is relative to oneself. In that way, you will not be confused

whatever the views u may come across ( from dvaita or advaita).

 

Regards,

Bharathi

 

-------------------------------

Raj Monga; I am also novuce to this just like you I recently

watched and studied all about Mahabarat and Sri Krishana I also

have same question as you do and each and every one who visits and

give discoursess in our Temple

Bob Sathyanarayana

 

 

--------------------------------

, " sadhak_insight "

<sadhak_insight wrote:

>

> Ram Ram to all the dear ones,

>

> I am novice in this line and do not have good knowledge about the

> philosophy of Vedanta. When I read Gitaji I find Lord Krishna

being

> Paramatma (Supreme Soul, Supreme Consciousness) declaring the

Jeeva (embodied soul) as his Ansha (mamevansho jeev loke jeevabhuta

sanatana) and all the saints also give discourses on this

> subject.

>

> My question is that when we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme

Almighty, omnipotent and omnipresent God why we are also not

> almighty, omnipotent etc. like God ? If not, then why we declare

> ourself " I am that " . This is quiet confusing. I shall be highly

> grateful to you if this confusion is removed in brief words.

>

> Raj Kumar Monga

> Ram Ram

>

> ---------------------------

> GUIDELINES FOR POSTING A RESPONSE:

>

> 1. The group is focused on the Holy Gitaji, therefore, only

> responses which further clarify the understanding of Gitaji, will

be

> posted.

>

> 2. Making reference of Gitaji shloka is highly encouraged - at

least

> once in the response. Wherever possible, please quote Gitaji or

> other scriptures to substantiate your response.

>

> 3. Please be as concise and to the point as possible, respecting

> sadhaka's time. Under no circustance the answer should exceed say

> one (book) page at the most (500 words or so) 3-4 paragraphs.

>

> 4. Kindly limit personal feelings, opinions, beliefs etc. to the

> extent that they further help in understanding the Gita shlokas

>

> 5. Kindly focus your writing to the subject at hand only.

>

> 6. Please do not include links to the other sites or other

> organizations.

>

> 7. Complete reproduction of texts from any book is strongly

> discouraged, however references may be made of the book or author

> (but not links to other sites).

>

> 8. Kindly do not include your personal information such as phone

> number, address etc.

>

> 9. Please do not address the response to a particular individual

> since the message is going to the entire group.

>

> 10. Due to the large readership, only those responses will be

posted

> which are in line with the general philosophy of taking Shrimad

> Bhagavad Gita as the reference.

>

> 11. Moderator at his discretion, may modify the posting, if content

> is unclear for distribution or not directly related to the question

> being asked.

>

> 12. Please respond taking into consideration the novices, youth,

> westerners, non-sectarian audience. Kindly limit the use of only

> Sanskrit words, rather provide the English word with Sanskrit

> bracketed wherever possible.

>

> 13. Any personal remarks over the knowledge of any sadhak or about

> the

> stage at which any sadhak is standing in his quest / sadhna /

> spiritual journey - must not be included in your posting.''

>

> 14. There should not be any sarcasm towards fellow sadhaks in this

> spiritual learning and sharing.

>

>

> MODERATOR

> Ram Ram

>

[Guest guest]

Hari Om

 

The Question is that when we are part of Paramatma , then why we

are not as good as Him ? The answer is that we have super imposed an

artificial connection over a natural and permanent connection. We

are definitely as good as Paramatma even today. We are

" SATCHIDANAND " even today. We are part of Paramatma, we are

connected with Paramatma even today. There is no doubt on that.

Problem is that we are not able to experience that, because we have

started identifying ourselves with the body, ego, mind, intellect,

world – with those things of which we are not at all the part! We

have super imposed a wrong relationship over a correct relationship,

and hence ignorance/confusion.

 

I will explain it this way. There is a desire in you that – " I

should live for ever, I should never die " . Now this desire is

of " SAT " part of you. " SAT " means existence. There is a desire in

you that " I should know everything. I should not be ignorant of

anything " . Now this desire is of " CHIT " part of you. " CHIT " means

knowledge. There is a desire in you that – " I should always be

happy. I should never be sorrowful " . Now this desire is of " ANAND "

part of you. ANAND means bliss. These desires are in you and you are

in fact continuously striving even today to fulfil these desires.

But you are not able to do. Why ?

 

Reason is that you want to live for ever with reference to your

present body! You want to acquire knowledge by using your intellect.

You want to acquire happiness by acquiring worldly pleasures. Hence

none is successful in extinguishing these desires. You have deeply

super imposed your relationship with the world- which world does

nothing except changing. You are not changing. Hence you are

suffering/finding yourself empty handed. If you lift this artificial

relationship of the world by disconnecting yourself with the world,

immediately you will REALISE your eternal and permanent connection

with Paramatma. Immediately you, yourself will become "

SATCHIDANAND " ( Existence-Knowledge- Bliss). In fact you are that

only, but because of super imposition discussed herein above of the

world, and because of your identifying yourself always with

reference to the world only , you are not able to REALISE/EXPERIENCE

the fact that you are as good as Paramatma.

 

So what should you do ? You should " disconnect with the world "

by any means, say by Bhakti Yoga or by Jnana Yoga or by Karma Yoga

or by Raja Yoga ( Dhyaan Yoga) and then realise/experience the

fact that you yourself are indeed , rightfully, undoubtedly as

good as Paramatma Himself ! In fact you have got human life only

for that purpose. In fact in you the desires of SAT, CHIT, and

ANANDA are existing permanently even today only to drive you towards

disconnection with the world !

 

As Simple As That ! !

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

Vyas N B

 

---

namaste....

 

with deepest sense that I am unable to truly grasp what it is that

is truth, still I pray that I may offer something for this

discussion. In the Bhagavatam (1.2.2)is one very famous verse, " yam

pravajantam anupetyam apeta-krtyam dvaipayano viraha-katara ajuhava,

putreti tan mayataya taravo bhinedus, tam sarva bhuta hrdayman munim

anato smi...... " I offer pranam to Sri Sukadeva Gosvami, who can

enter the hearts of all living beings. When he left home without

undergoing the purificatory processes, such as accepting the sacred

thread, his father Vyasa cried out, " O my son " . As if they were

absorbed in the same mood of separation, only the trees answered in

reply. " (Sukadeva is the 16 yr. old saint who spoke the Srimad

Bhagavatam) It is my understanding, that as it is said in this

verse, one who is pure can " enter the hearts of all " .....this is not

merely a figurative statement. I have had astounding experiences to

strengthen my faith that a truly pure person, who is living a life

free from sin, absorbed in the Absolute, has a certain measure of

all cognizance. Someone might say, " mmmm....impossible....tell

me " ....so in extreme brief I will tell you something that never

fails to amaze me when I recall. Three or four years ago, I was so

angry.....a loved one would not stop using drugs. I wanted to put

this person in jail, I had reached the limits of my tolerance, and

foolishly had no understanding of my own inability to control

others. I wrote to Sri Guru, he never wrote a letter back, but

next night in a dream he stood before me.....first a line of

devotees all receiving achman (a few drops of water to sip as

purification) then a sacred mantra. When it came to my turn, Sri

Guru was suddenly standing next to me, looking at a photo album of

holy temples, deities, and Vaisnavas. He was turning the pages,

one by one. I never forget, every time I tell this story, that it

seemed as if an eternity had passed....my feet were hurting in the

dream, I was standing for so long of a time, as Sri guru turned the

pages of the album. Finally, Sri guru came to a picture of a

fallen sannyasi, who had been highly worshiped and respected....but

gave in to the allurement of maya. (in this case, sexual

relationship with a woman, which is forbidden for the order of

sannyas)....the wave of pain that shot from the heart of my Guru

into my heart was unimaginable. There were no words for him to

tell me his sadness for those who have lost their strength, given up

their vows, and reverted to activities beneath the vows of their

ashram in life ......then the dream concluded with his saying to

me, " You will have to wait until later for your mantra " .

 

My letter to Sri Guru was about my pain.....my anger, my

frustration.....how did he hear me and answer so perfectly? That

I was so unqualified because I did not understand the agony and

sadness a truly saintly person feels for those souls who cannot

control their senses, who give up the path of devotion for sensual

pleasure? How did he enter into my heart in a dream, and with no

reference to the actual situation, teach me? Because one who is

truly divine can enter into the hearts of all, especially into the

heart of the disciple who is crying out sincerely, " master, guide

me " .

 

Another thought.....how did the thousands of sages know to come

together and hear the sacred conversation of the Srimad Bhagavatam,

which was spoken by Srila Sukadeva Gosvami five thousand years

ago? There were no emails then, no letter carriers.....but the

consciousness was so high that the sages automatically knew.....it

is time to convene on the bank of the sacred river Ganges for a

great sacrifice, of hearing the holy scriptures.When we are in touch

with the Supreme Absolute, amazing things happen.

 

respectfully, Mahalaksmi Dasi

-------------------------------

 

Dear sadaks,

It is said in scripts and Bagavan has said that everything enters

into HIM during Maha Pralaya. Again everything manifests from HIM.

Everything that abides in HIM and everything that manifests from HIM

is PARAMATHUMA. Things that abide in HIM and manifests from HIM is

JEEVATHUMA. The known upanashids 108 could not describe PARAMATHUMA

fully and Vedas says that to describe Paramathuma is difficult.

Paramathuma is clearly said in Vedas as " Apprameyam " . Means THAT

which cannot be known by senses. So one has to know by knowledge

(Gyana) which Guru gives or that Paramathuma HIMSELF gives.

 

B.Sathyanarayan

--------------------------------

Jai Sri Krshna

 

In brief words as you requested, as per different exegetical school

of Vedaantic philosophy, we can declare ourselves as

 

1) seperate from the divine (dvaita or dualism),

2) existing as parts of the divine (vishishtadvaita or qualified non-

dualism), or

3) as the divine (advaita or non-dualism/monism).

 

It all depends at which level we are speaking. Mystics and Gnostics

all over the world declare from experience that their true Identity,

their essential nature is the Infinite, so they lean much more to

advaita at least when speaking from a jnaana (Knowledge) angle, and

dvaita when speaking from a bhakti (devotion) one (which

necessitates the duality of bhakta and Bhagavaan, or devotee and

divine respectively).

 

However, how and why we, as the one Infinite Being, see ourselves as

limited individuals is the matter of philosopher-exegetes of

Vedaanta which I will not enter into here, and it is certainly

valuable to study their ideas (such as those of Adi Shankara,

Ramanuja etc). Non-philosophical mystics do not really enter into

discussion about this (most likely because they have not the

philosophical tools to hand), but merely concern themselves with the

experience, and in fact are so much in that Bliss that I'd rather

conjecture that they're simply not interested in intellectual

discussions about it but prefer to dwell in the Euphoria of the

divine that their bhakti has given them. But for those whose

intellectual thirst also needs to be quenched, the study of

Shankara, Ramanuja etc. is vital and ineffably enriching. Even their

commentaries on the Gita would be useful to see comparatively how

they interpret certain verses.

 

Seeing as this is a Gita group, one version I like is the one

translated by Swami Chidbhavananda. It has a nice, simple, yet

meaningful commentary for the saadhaka. The reason I mention this is

because he gives a nice summary/introdution of the three exegetical

schools of uttara-mimaansaa¡ that I've mentioned above, and brings

their ideas in the commentary of certain verses.

Yours humbly

Rishi

(Rishi Handa)

 

-

, " sadhak_insight "

<sadhak_insight wrote:

>

> Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

>

> When we hear or read the mentioned verse of Gita

(mamaivansho...Gita 15:7) that Jeevas are Anshas-parts of Paramatma

which is Supreme Consciousness, we take it to mean individual body-

mind organism we believe we are to be part of Paramatma. This makes

us ask the question raised by Raj Kumar Mongaji, I think.

>

> This is not what is really conveyed here! From the vantage point

of Jeevatma, it is not true. However, from Lord's point, He can say

that It is He as Supreme Consciousness, Eternal Being appears to be

all jeevatmas, even as waves(jeevas) appear in Ocean(paramatman).

Ocean is always the same, waves or no waves. A wave who believes it

to be real and independent entity apart from ocean can no longer

claim to be part of the ocean because he doesn't know he has no

existence apart from ocean. If he claims to be ansha and expects to

be omnipresent etc, then it is information only on his part!

>

> Now such a Jeevatma when realizes he/she is Atman first, beyond a

shadow of doubt, through experience and not just as information,

then claim would be true. At this point, as Atman, and not as a body-

mind based person, he/she may consider a part for a while until

there is a final realization that he is Paramatman, not just a part

or ansha, just as wave is Ocean all the way, not a part. Wave is a

concept, name/form(nama/rupa) only, not a reality! No one has ever

touched such a wave!

>

> In the Upanishadas, this realization is proclaimed by four

Mahavakyas: This Atman is verily Brahman, Thou art That,

Consciousness is Brahman, I (Sat-Chit-Ananda) am Brahman!

>

> When one lives as if one is Pure Consciousness, which is eternal

Being, The Self which is second to none, Undivided, Undifferentiated

Awareness, the question of part doesn't arise. Then Omnipresence,

Omnipotence, Omniscience is realized in the sense that all

limitaions-separations are dissolved by Jeevatma!

>

> At this point it may be mentioned that what is commomly talked

about us being " embodied soul " is not true, rather, we are in

reality Consciousness which embodies all apparant minds and bodies

and all objects. As such all objects are Consciousness shaped as

those objects in our experience(Chit-Vrittis). I mean the stuff-

Vastu of all objects when experienced is conditioned Consciousness-

Brahman. See the truth of this! We never experience anything gross

out there, but only Consciousness-chaitanya! Everything is at zero

distance from Consciousness!

>

> One more point, as I understand, God of a Bhakta is not different

from Self of a Gyani, or Karma-Yogi. There is no question of Gyani

stoping at Self, and Bhakta can go ahead to God. Such a Bhakta and

Gyani are one just as Truth is one without a second, and that is

What I and You are! What separates us is our conditioning(Aavaran)

of Atman by identification with limitations of body-mind believing

to be embodied souls.

>

> Namaskaras..Pratap

>

>

> -------------------------------

> Ram Ram Raj,

>

> Will try to explain from what I have understood from books/Audios

of

> Shri Ramsukhdasji and other sources as well.

>

> In general, at times some points look confusing, particularly in

> spirituality. Because there are ways of looking things and there

are

> contexts in which things are explained. " Ansh " here is said to

> confirm the person in front that though residing inside the

> body and riding over it but you are not it. You are not part of it.

> Nothing that comes and goes is you or whatever decays is not you.

It

> is said in that sense. You are not ansh of prakrit but of ME

> (Parmatman).

>

> There are not mathematical measures as such by saying " Ansh " , to

> show that you are ansh and Parmatma is maha " ansh " . There is no

> comparison as such in terms of size and quantity. Moreover emphasis

> is on ekatma-bhav with the supreme consciousness and reminder for

> oneself to detach from temporary forms or cause and effect world .

>

> Another angle: From logic perspective if you see. If infinite says

> that you are part of me, which means again infinite. If boundryless

> says that you are part of me and you are not part of soemthign

which

> is limiting, which dies, which comes and goes, which is bound to

> space and time. So in essence even giving label as " Ansh " does not

> contradict the fact that everything is Vasudev, complete, sheer

> presence, limit less . How God in place can be limited and

unlimited

> in another places.

>

> So " I am that " and " Jeev mera santan ansh hai " ..both are correct

> and taking to same GOAL…

>

> Another angle: Upnishad says if you add anything to Poorna, it

> remains poorna. If you take out poorna from something then also it

> remains poorna. So ansh-anshee, it is good to explain but since God

> is one and can not be present in parts, so should not be imagined

> from separation and quantity point of view.

>

> Moreover in scriptures it is also explained at times that same

> consciousness on the basis of UPADHI is labeled as Atman,

Parmatman.

> Like space in small pitcher is called " Ghatakash " and in big hall

is

> called " Mathakash " and in open is called " Mahakash " …but space

> remains the same…

>

> Since all depends on from where you look. So at times it becomes

> confusing and to arrive at any strong and one conclusion and mind

> loves that and keeps hankering for one final statement which should

> be tested from all angles, which doesn't happen generally. We have

> to align with the perspective of the speaker and understand the

> context and purpose. And stick to it and take its advantageous part

> for dipping into silence.

>

> Don't know whether this will remove some of the jargon from your

> mind. If not, then please park your confusions and don't delay in

> dipping into silence. These things will automatically get answered

> in future by someone outside or answers will come from within.

>

> Warm regards,

>

> Prakash Kushwah

> -------------------------------

> -Shree Hari_

>

> I read Paramatman, as Supreme Soul, (GOD, O THEOS),

> But I am a not clear the meaning of Bhagwan , (Bhagavan), is it God

> personified as in Krishna, if I am wrong in these assumptions, I

> don't mind, one learns from corrections.

> Finally in what context would one use each term in preference to

the

> other.

>

> With Respect and Divine Love,

>

> Mike

> (Mike Keenor)

>

> ------------------------------

> namasthe. As you may have known, below are the two schools of

> vedanta: (there are other school of vedanta also....but here we can

> look into these two below for ur question.).

> 1. advaita vedanta

> 2.dvaita vedanta

>

> Advaitha vedanta explains in terms of " Everything is God..so " I am

> THAT " .

> Dvaita vedanta explains in terms of dualism..as " Everything happens

> because of God "

>

> Whatever it is, or how many ever schools of thoughts may there be,

> it is alright. Wrong or incorrect knowledge comes in many forms but

> the right or correct knowledge comes only in one form. It is ok to

> get confused, only when u get confused, you will start thinking

> which is correct and which is not correct. To understand that,

> please see the chapter 6 ( meditation of Bhagavadgita) and do not

> think much about advaita or dvaita but just observe all ur thoughts

> that comes to ur mind and not worry of the end result but try to

> focus on the methodology of attaining the end result. Because, end

> result is relative to oneself. In that way, you will not be

confused

> whatever the views u may come across ( from dvaita or advaita).

>

> Regards,

> Bharathi

>

> -------------------------------

> Raj Monga; I am also novuce to this just like you I recently

> watched and studied all about Mahabarat and Sri Krishana I also

> have same question as you do and each and every one who visits and

> give discoursess in our Temple

> Bob Sathyanarayana

>

>

> --------------------------------

> , " sadhak_insight "

> <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> >

> > Ram Ram to all the dear ones,

> >

> > I am novice in this line and do not have good knowledge about the

> > philosophy of Vedanta. When I read Gitaji I find Lord Krishna

> being

> > Paramatma (Supreme Soul, Supreme Consciousness) declaring the

> Jeeva (embodied soul) as his Ansha (mamevansho jeev loke jeevabhuta

> sanatana) and all the saints also give discourses on this

> > subject.

> >

> > My question is that when we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme

> Almighty, omnipotent and omnipresent God why we are also not

> > almighty, omnipotent etc. like God ? If not, then why we declare

> > ourself " I am that " . This is quiet confusing. I shall be highly

> > grateful to you if this confusion is removed in brief words.

> >

> > Raj Kumar Monga

> > Ram Ram

> >

> > ---------------------------

> > GUIDELINES FOR POSTING A RESPONSE:

> >

> > 1. The group is focused on the Holy Gitaji, therefore, only

> > responses which further clarify the understanding of Gitaji, will

> be

> > posted.

> >

> > 2. Making reference of Gitaji shloka is highly encouraged - at

> least

> > once in the response. Wherever possible, please quote Gitaji or

> > other scriptures to substantiate your response.

> >

> > 3. Please be as concise and to the point as possible, respecting

> > sadhaka's time. Under no circustance the answer should exceed say

> > one (book) page at the most (500 words or so) 3-4 paragraphs.

> >

> > 4. Kindly limit personal feelings, opinions, beliefs etc. to the

> > extent that they further help in understanding the Gita shlokas

> >

> > 5. Kindly focus your writing to the subject at hand only.

> >

> > 6. Please do not include links to the other sites or other

> > organizations.

> >

> > 7. Complete reproduction of texts from any book is strongly

> > discouraged, however references may be made of the book or

author

> > (but not links to other sites).

> >

> > 8. Kindly do not include your personal information such as phone

> > number, address etc.

> >

> > 9. Please do not address the response to a particular individual

> > since the message is going to the entire group.

> >

> > 10. Due to the large readership, only those responses will be

> posted

> > which are in line with the general philosophy of taking Shrimad

> > Bhagavad Gita as the reference.

> >

> > 11. Moderator at his discretion, may modify the posting, if

content

> > is unclear for distribution or not directly related to the

question

> > being asked.

> >

> > 12. Please respond taking into consideration the novices, youth,

> > westerners, non-sectarian audience. Kindly limit the use of only

> > Sanskrit words, rather provide the English word with Sanskrit

> > bracketed wherever possible.

> >

> > 13. Any personal remarks over the knowledge of any sadhak or

about

> > the

> > stage at which any sadhak is standing in his quest / sadhna /

> > spiritual journey - must not be included in your posting.''

> >

> > 14. There should not be any sarcasm towards fellow sadhaks in

this

> > spiritual learning and sharing.

> >

> >

> > MODERATOR

> > Ram Ram

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Jai Shri Krishna,

 

There is an owner for everything in the world, then how is it

possible that there is no owner of the man. Parmaatma, He who is the

owner of everyone and everything is our owner as well. " Mamaivansho

(Gita 15:7) actually says that we believe Parmaatma to be ours BUT

Parmaatma knows that we are His own. When we become surrendered to

Parmaatma then only we also know Him – `Mameva Ye Prapadhyante,

Mayametam Taranti Te' (Gita 7:14).

 

Atma (soul) is part of Parmaatma, but by assuming affinity with the

body and worldly things it becomes Jiva. This `Jiva'ness actually is

as artificial as an actor in a movie or drama. Parmaatma is so kind

to us that He not only believes us to be His part only but knows as

such. He only shares this secret fact with us in Gita 15:7, out of

his sheer desire of our liberation.

 

If a lion's child is brought up with the sheep's children from his

birth then he forgets his powers. But the moment a lion comes and

reminds him that look your body is similar to mine and therefore you

not a sheep, but a lion like me only, and you have all the powers

such as me, then he immediately gains all the powers of a lion.

Similarly, here Parmaatma is reminding us and we can become as

powerful as Him, if we firmly accept this.

 

By assuming affinity with perishable material things we cannot

become great, it is only a false assumption, which actually deprives

us of our real greatness (power to realize Parmaatma). The greatness

assumed based on perishable things will itself be perishable only.

By realizing the Almighty Parmaatma, whose part (Ansha) Jiva is, he

becomes great – so great that even demigods respect him and desire

that he visits their place. Not only this, even Parmaatma becomes

his Daas (`Mai to hoon Bhagatan ko Daas').

 

Body is a very small part of the world and jiva (soul) is part of

Parmaatma. What mistake man makes, is that he desires both (world

and Parmaatma) to act favourably for him. What needs to be done is

to offer the body to the world and Jiva to Parmaatma – this is

honesty. This honesty only is called liberation.

 

Actually, man cares only for few things, few houses, some wealth,

few people etc., which he considers as his own in the world.

Otherwise, there are millions of houses and people, unlimited wealth

etc. but he does not even think of them at all, merely because he

does not consider them of his own. This means that he is already

freed (liberated) as far as those uncountable things, with which he

does not attach mineness. Thus, substantial liberation has already

taken place. Now if he ponders, the few worldly things, with which

the so called mineness is considered, will not stay with man

forever, but their bondage will remain for infinite births. So a

spiritual aspirant (Sadhak) should offer the worldly things to the

world (and that is Karmayoga) and himself to Parmaatma (which is

Bhaktiyoga).

 

We are part of Parmaatma and to remember this eternal relation

(sambandh) with Him, we should accept three things –

 

(1) Parmaatma is ours

(2) We are of Parmaatma and

(3) Everything is of Parmaatma only.

Then we can get divine love (Bhagvat Prem), which is the SOLE

OBJECTIVE of human birth.

 

Narayana Narayana

 

Rajendra J. Bohra

 

-

There is no difference in atma and param atma. Param is an adjective

like Shri or Sriyut prefixed before naming a noble person i.e.,Sri

Ram vs. Ram.

Atma is not contained in forms with boundaries and thus differs with

an individual, species or object or energy or memory but what is

common to all. Atma is for example, similar like electricity in

grid and manifested in forms of activities of washing machines,

bulbs, cemeteries, railways, and millions of appliances run on

electricity. Each apparatus of lives of each one of us is designed

by techniques of jiiva (life sciences) and it has to perform unique

task i.e., washing machine cannot be converted to an electric engine

and should not be in competition.

 

In this way, Atma is content (electricity), and Lives in various

forms are conductors (cable). As and when cable (pvc or plastic, and

copper ) realizes that it is conducting something(electricity)

which is not its own property then the realization of electricity by

cable first starts. After that cable and electricity become together

and activate the universe by its various actions. Tulsi Das,

Einstein and Gandhi are examples of transformation.

 

With best regards

K G Misra

-

Dear Sadaks,

 

There is no relationship between Athma and Paramathuma. Athuma is

one with Paramathuma. If one starts contemplating on several

question related to Who I am, What is birth and death, what happens

after death Etc he will start realizing that everything around him

is Anithiya/Maya. Tecnically saying that science has proved one uses

a fraction of his brain. Remaining unused. The little usage also

relates to TV serial/ worldy attachments/ pleasures/ and emotions.

Never aware the end is coming. This 12 Vaishna saints, 63 Nayanmars,

host of Bakthas, Adi Sankara In Bhaja Govindam script, Buddha, have

given in detail about contemplation. Once one goes deep into

contemplation he will understand that everything around is appearing

and disappearing (being born and dead)

 

Almost all scripts, Vedas, Upanashids have very clearly said that

GOD is not object (Prameyam) but to be known by Gyana (Knowledge).

To get Gyana only so many people like Puranderdos (crorepathi),

Thrimagai Alwar King, Ramana Rishi etc left behind everything to

know Gyana. To attain that utmost stage of knowledge one needs leave

attachment of worldly things.

Brain Power: When there is a single pointed focus on only knowing

the Self, and desiring nothing else, then the enlightment takes

place. This enlightenment gives knowledge of ones previous births

and his future. Besides all the divine knowledge automatically

comes to his mind.

 

Human has been blessed with intellect to contemplate. In most

scripts it is said that even Indra, Ganderva, etc in 14 galaxies

have to come to earth to do penance to attain divinity.

So human has that abundant power that even 5 elements on earth

cannot disturb. That stage is called " THAT " . Means you are part of

GOD, but we are focusing our thoughts on everything other than GOD.

So once we understand that we have the power in us that makes us non-

distructable, you are " THAT " .

 

This is what Bagavan says in GEETHA that you Athuman are not the

body. Arjuna was only instrumental in destroying bodies in war. If

one person in war field was a realized one, then Arjuna could not

kill that body, which is " THAT " .

 

Buddha on enlightenment knew he was " THAT " there was radiance around

him for miles, because he was " THAT " .

 

Samartha Ramadoss great saint knew nothing other than Sree Rama Nam.

Badrachala Ramadoss great saint in Andra Pradesh knew only Sri Rama

and built temple on a hill. Once Sri Rama on Ram Navami day promised

to take part in celebreation. But Sri Ram never came. Distressed

Ramadoss shed tears. Sri Ram appeared and said that HE came as a cow

during celeberation but was chased away.

Ramadoss was enlightened that Sri Rama is in all. Means HE is in

you and me. That HE is THAT

B.Sathyanarayan

 

-

 

, " sadhak_insight "

<sadhak_insight wrote:

>

> Hari Om

>

> The Question is that when we are part of Paramatma , then why we

> are not as good as Him ? The answer is that we have super imposed

an

> artificial connection over a natural and permanent connection. We

> are definitely as good as Paramatma even today. We are

> " SATCHIDANAND " even today. We are part of Paramatma, we are

> connected with Paramatma even today. There is no doubt on that.

> Problem is that we are not able to experience that, because we

have

> started identifying ourselves with the body, ego, mind,

intellect,

> world – with those things of which we are not at all the part! We

> have super imposed a wrong relationship over a correct

relationship,

> and hence ignorance/confusion.

>

> I will explain it this way. There is a desire in you that – " I

> should live for ever, I should never die " . Now this desire is

> of " SAT " part of you. " SAT " means existence. There is a desire in

> you that " I should know everything. I should not be ignorant of

> anything " . Now this desire is of " CHIT " part of you. " CHIT " means

> knowledge. There is a desire in you that – " I should always be

> happy. I should never be sorrowful " . Now this desire is of "

ANAND "

> part of you. ANAND means bliss. These desires are in you and you

are

> in fact continuously striving even today to fulfil these desires.

> But you are not able to do. Why ?

>

> Reason is that you want to live for ever with reference to your

> present body! You want to acquire knowledge by using your

intellect.

> You want to acquire happiness by acquiring worldly pleasures.

Hence

> none is successful in extinguishing these desires. You have

deeply

> super imposed your relationship with the world- which world does

> nothing except changing. You are not changing. Hence you are

> suffering/finding yourself empty handed. If you lift this

artificial

> relationship of the world by disconnecting yourself with the

world,

> immediately you will REALISE your eternal and permanent connection

> with Paramatma. Immediately you, yourself will become "

> SATCHIDANAND " ( Existence-Knowledge- Bliss). In fact you are that

> only, but because of super imposition discussed herein above of

the

> world, and because of your identifying yourself always with

> reference to the world only , you are not able to

REALISE/EXPERIENCE

> the fact that you are as good as Paramatma.

>

> So what should you do ? You should " disconnect with the world "

> by any means, say by Bhakti Yoga or by Jnana Yoga or by Karma Yoga

> or by Raja Yoga ( Dhyaan Yoga) and then realise/experience the

> fact that you yourself are indeed , rightfully, undoubtedly as

> good as Paramatma Himself ! In fact you have got human life only

> for that purpose. In fact in you the desires of SAT, CHIT, and

> ANANDA are existing permanently even today only to drive you

towards

> disconnection with the world !

>

> As Simple As That ! !

>

> Jai Shree Krishna

>

> Vyas N B

>

> -

--

> namaste....

>

> with deepest sense that I am unable to truly grasp what it is that

> is truth, still I pray that I may offer something for this

> discussion. In the Bhagavatam (1.2.2)is one very famous

verse, " yam

> pravajantam anupetyam apeta-krtyam dvaipayano viraha-katara

ajuhava,

> putreti tan mayataya taravo bhinedus, tam sarva bhuta hrdayman

munim

> anato smi...... " I offer pranam to Sri Sukadeva Gosvami, who can

> enter the hearts of all living beings. When he left home without

> undergoing the purificatory processes, such as accepting the

sacred

> thread, his father Vyasa cried out, " O my son " . As if they were

> absorbed in the same mood of separation, only the trees answered

in

> reply. " (Sukadeva is the 16 yr. old saint who spoke the Srimad

> Bhagavatam) It is my understanding, that as it is said in this

> verse, one who is pure can " enter the hearts of all " .....this is

not

> merely a figurative statement. I have had astounding experiences

to

> strengthen my faith that a truly pure person, who is living a life

> free from sin, absorbed in the Absolute, has a certain measure of

> all cognizance. Someone might say, " mmmm....impossible....tell

> me " ....so in extreme brief I will tell you something that never

> fails to amaze me when I recall. Three or four years ago, I was

so

> angry.....a loved one would not stop using drugs. I wanted to

put

> this person in jail, I had reached the limits of my tolerance, and

> foolishly had no understanding of my own inability to control

> others. I wrote to Sri Guru, he never wrote a letter back, but

> next night in a dream he stood before me.....first a line of

> devotees all receiving achman (a few drops of water to sip as

> purification) then a sacred mantra. When it came to my turn, Sri

> Guru was suddenly standing next to me, looking at a photo album

of

> holy temples, deities, and Vaisnavas. He was turning the pages,

> one by one. I never forget, every time I tell this story, that it

> seemed as if an eternity had passed....my feet were hurting in the

> dream, I was standing for so long of a time, as Sri guru turned

the

> pages of the album. Finally, Sri guru came to a picture of a

> fallen sannyasi, who had been highly worshiped and

respected....but

> gave in to the allurement of maya. (in this case, sexual

> relationship with a woman, which is forbidden for the order of

> sannyas)....the wave of pain that shot from the heart of my Guru

> into my heart was unimaginable. There were no words for him to

> tell me his sadness for those who have lost their strength, given

up

> their vows, and reverted to activities beneath the vows of their

> ashram in life ......then the dream concluded with his saying to

> me, " You will have to wait until later for your mantra " .

>

> My letter to Sri Guru was about my pain.....my anger, my

> frustration.....how did he hear me and answer so perfectly?

That

> I was so unqualified because I did not understand the agony and

> sadness a truly saintly person feels for those souls who cannot

> control their senses, who give up the path of devotion for sensual

> pleasure? How did he enter into my heart in a dream, and with no

> reference to the actual situation, teach me? Because one who is

> truly divine can enter into the hearts of all, especially into the

> heart of the disciple who is crying out sincerely, " master, guide

> me " .

>

> Another thought.....how did the thousands of sages know to

come

> together and hear the sacred conversation of the Srimad

Bhagavatam,

> which was spoken by Srila Sukadeva Gosvami five thousand years

> ago? There were no emails then, no letter carriers.....but the

> consciousness was so high that the sages automatically knew.....it

> is time to convene on the bank of the sacred river Ganges for a

> great sacrifice, of hearing the holy scriptures.When we are in

touch

> with the Supreme Absolute, amazing things happen.

>

> respectfully, Mahalaksmi Dasi

> -------------------------------

>

> Dear sadaks,

> It is said in scripts and Bagavan has said that everything enters

> into HIM during Maha Pralaya. Again everything manifests from HIM.

> Everything that abides in HIM and everything that manifests from

HIM

> is PARAMATHUMA. Things that abide in HIM and manifests from HIM is

> JEEVATHUMA. The known upanashids 108 could not describe

PARAMATHUMA

> fully and Vedas says that to describe Paramathuma is difficult.

> Paramathuma is clearly said in Vedas as " Apprameyam " . Means THAT

> which cannot be known by senses. So one has to know by knowledge

> (Gyana) which Guru gives or that Paramathuma HIMSELF gives.

>

> B.Sathyanarayan

> --------------------------------

> Jai Sri Krshna

>

> In brief words as you requested, as per different exegetical

school

> of Vedaantic philosophy, we can declare ourselves as

>

> 1) seperate from the divine (dvaita or dualism),

> 2) existing as parts of the divine (vishishtadvaita or qualified

non-

> dualism), or

> 3) as the divine (advaita or non-dualism/monism).

>

> It all depends at which level we are speaking. Mystics and

Gnostics

> all over the world declare from experience that their true

Identity,

> their essential nature is the Infinite, so they lean much more to

> advaita at least when speaking from a jnaana (Knowledge) angle,

and

> dvaita when speaking from a bhakti (devotion) one (which

> necessitates the duality of bhakta and Bhagavaan, or devotee and

> divine respectively).

>

> However, how and why we, as the one Infinite Being, see ourselves

as

> limited individuals is the matter of philosopher-exegetes of

> Vedaanta which I will not enter into here, and it is certainly

> valuable to study their ideas (such as those of Adi Shankara,

> Ramanuja etc). Non-philosophical mystics do not really enter into

> discussion about this (most likely because they have not the

> philosophical tools to hand), but merely concern themselves with

the

> experience, and in fact are so much in that Bliss that I'd rather

> conjecture that they're simply not interested in intellectual

> discussions about it but prefer to dwell in the Euphoria of the

> divine that their bhakti has given them. But for those whose

> intellectual thirst also needs to be quenched, the study of

> Shankara, Ramanuja etc. is vital and ineffably enriching. Even

their

> commentaries on the Gita would be useful to see comparatively how

> they interpret certain verses.

>

> Seeing as this is a Gita group, one version I like is the one

> translated by Swami Chidbhavananda. It has a nice, simple, yet

> meaningful commentary for the saadhaka. The reason I mention this

is

> because he gives a nice summary/introdution of the three

exegetical

> schools of uttara-mimaansaa¡ that I've mentioned above, and brings

> their ideas in the commentary of certain verses.

> Yours humbly

> Rishi

> (Rishi Handa)

>

> -

> , " sadhak_insight "

> <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

> >

> > When we hear or read the mentioned verse of Gita

> (mamaivansho...Gita 15:7) that Jeevas are Anshas-parts of

Paramatma

> which is Supreme Consciousness, we take it to mean individual body-

> mind organism we believe we are to be part of Paramatma. This

makes

> us ask the question raised by Raj Kumar Mongaji, I think.

> >

> > This is not what is really conveyed here! From the vantage

point

> of Jeevatma, it is not true. However, from Lord's point, He can

say

> that It is He as Supreme Consciousness, Eternal Being appears to

be

> all jeevatmas, even as waves(jeevas) appear in Ocean(paramatman).

> Ocean is always the same, waves or no waves. A wave who believes

it

> to be real and independent entity apart from ocean can no longer

> claim to be part of the ocean because he doesn't know he has no

> existence apart from ocean. If he claims to be ansha and expects

to

> be omnipresent etc, then it is information only on his part!

> >

> > Now such a Jeevatma when realizes he/she is Atman first, beyond

a

> shadow of doubt, through experience and not just as information,

> then claim would be true. At this point, as Atman, and not as a

body-

> mind based person, he/she may consider a part for a while until

> there is a final realization that he is Paramatman, not just a

part

> or ansha, just as wave is Ocean all the way, not a part. Wave is a

> concept, name/form(nama/rupa) only, not a reality! No one has ever

> touched such a wave!

> >

> > In the Upanishadas, this realization is proclaimed by four

> Mahavakyas: This Atman is verily Brahman, Thou art That,

> Consciousness is Brahman, I (Sat-Chit-Ananda) am Brahman!

> >

> > When one lives as if one is Pure Consciousness, which is eternal

> Being, The Self which is second to none, Undivided,

Undifferentiated

> Awareness, the question of part doesn't arise. Then Omnipresence,

> Omnipotence, Omniscience is realized in the sense that all

> limitaions-separations are dissolved by Jeevatma!

> >

> > At this point it may be mentioned that what is commomly talked

> about us being " embodied soul " is not true, rather, we are in

> reality Consciousness which embodies all apparant minds and bodies

> and all objects. As such all objects are Consciousness shaped as

> those objects in our experience(Chit-Vrittis). I mean the stuff-

> Vastu of all objects when experienced is conditioned Consciousness-

> Brahman. See the truth of this! We never experience anything gross

> out there, but only Consciousness-chaitanya! Everything is at zero

> distance from Consciousness!

> >

> > One more point, as I understand, God of a Bhakta is not

different

> from Self of a Gyani, or Karma-Yogi. There is no question of Gyani

> stoping at Self, and Bhakta can go ahead to God. Such a Bhakta and

> Gyani are one just as Truth is one without a second, and that is

> What I and You are! What separates us is our conditioning(Aavaran)

> of Atman by identification with limitations of body-mind believing

> to be embodied souls.

> >

> > Namaskaras..Pratap

> >

> >

> > -------------------------------

> > Ram Ram Raj,

> >

> > Will try to explain from what I have understood from

books/Audios

> of

> > Shri Ramsukhdasji and other sources as well.

> >

> > In general, at times some points look confusing, particularly in

> > spirituality. Because there are ways of looking things and there

> are

> > contexts in which things are explained. " Ansh " here is said to

> > confirm the person in front that though residing inside the

> > body and riding over it but you are not it. You are not part of

it.

> > Nothing that comes and goes is you or whatever decays is not

you.

> It

> > is said in that sense. You are not ansh of prakrit but of ME

> > (Parmatman).

> >

> > There are not mathematical measures as such by saying " Ansh " , to

> > show that you are ansh and Parmatma is maha " ansh " . There is no

> > comparison as such in terms of size and quantity. Moreover

emphasis

> > is on ekatma-bhav with the supreme consciousness and reminder for

> > oneself to detach from temporary forms or cause and effect

world .

> >

> > Another angle: From logic perspective if you see. If infinite

says

> > that you are part of me, which means again infinite. If

boundryless

> > says that you are part of me and you are not part of soemthign

> which

> > is limiting, which dies, which comes and goes, which is bound to

> > space and time. So in essence even giving label as " Ansh " does

not

> > contradict the fact that everything is Vasudev, complete, sheer

> > presence, limit less . How God in place can be limited and

> unlimited

> > in another places.

> >

> > So " I am that " and " Jeev mera santan ansh hai " ..both are

correct

> > and taking to same GOAL…

> >

> > Another angle: Upnishad says if you add anything to Poorna, it

> > remains poorna. If you take out poorna from something then also

it

> > remains poorna. So ansh-anshee, it is good to explain but since

God

> > is one and can not be present in parts, so should not be imagined

> > from separation and quantity point of view.

> >

> > Moreover in scriptures it is also explained at times that same

> > consciousness on the basis of UPADHI is labeled as Atman,

> Parmatman.

> > Like space in small pitcher is called " Ghatakash " and in big

hall

> is

> > called " Mathakash " and in open is called " Mahakash " …but space

> > remains the same…

> >

> > Since all depends on from where you look. So at times it becomes

> > confusing and to arrive at any strong and one conclusion and mind

> > loves that and keeps hankering for one final statement which

should

> > be tested from all angles, which doesn't happen generally. We

have

> > to align with the perspective of the speaker and understand the

> > context and purpose. And stick to it and take its advantageous

part

> > for dipping into silence.

> >

> > Don't know whether this will remove some of the jargon from your

> > mind. If not, then please park your confusions and don't delay in

> > dipping into silence. These things will automatically get

answered

> > in future by someone outside or answers will come from within.

> >

> > Warm regards,

> >

> > Prakash Kushwah

> > -------------------------------

> > -Shree Hari_

> >

> > I read Paramatman, as Supreme Soul, (GOD, O THEOS),

> > But I am a not clear the meaning of Bhagwan , (Bhagavan), is it

God

> > personified as in Krishna, if I am wrong in these assumptions, I

> > don't mind, one learns from corrections.

> > Finally in what context would one use each term in preference to

> the

> > other.

> >

> > With Respect and Divine Love,

> >

> > Mike

> > (Mike Keenor)

> >

> > ------------------------------

> > namasthe. As you may have known, below are the two schools of

> > vedanta: (there are other school of vedanta also....but here we

can

> > look into these two below for ur question.).

> > 1. advaita vedanta

> > 2.dvaita vedanta

> >

> > Advaitha vedanta explains in terms of " Everything is God..so " I

am

> > THAT " .

> > Dvaita vedanta explains in terms of dualism..as " Everything

happens

> > because of God "

> >

> > Whatever it is, or how many ever schools of thoughts may there

be,

> > it is alright. Wrong or incorrect knowledge comes in many forms

but

> > the right or correct knowledge comes only in one form. It is ok

to

> > get confused, only when u get confused, you will start thinking

> > which is correct and which is not correct. To understand that,

> > please see the chapter 6 ( meditation of Bhagavadgita) and do not

> > think much about advaita or dvaita but just observe all ur

thoughts

> > that comes to ur mind and not worry of the end result but try to

> > focus on the methodology of attaining the end result. Because,

end

> > result is relative to oneself. In that way, you will not be

> confused

> > whatever the views u may come across ( from dvaita or advaita).

> >

> > Regards,

> > Bharathi

> >

> > -------------------------------

> > Raj Monga; I am also novuce to this just like you I recently

> > watched and studied all about Mahabarat and Sri Krishana I also

> > have same question as you do and each and every one who visits

and

> > give discoursess in our Temple

> > Bob Sathyanarayana

> >

> >

> > --------------------------------

> > , " sadhak_insight "

> > <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Ram Ram to all the dear ones,

> > >

> > > I am novice in this line and do not have good knowledge about

the

> > > philosophy of Vedanta. When I read Gitaji I find Lord Krishna

> > being

> > > Paramatma (Supreme Soul, Supreme Consciousness) declaring the

> > Jeeva (embodied soul) as his Ansha (mamevansho jeev loke

jeevabhuta

> > sanatana) and all the saints also give discourses on this

> > > subject.

> > >

> > > My question is that when we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme

> > Almighty, omnipotent and omnipresent God why we are also not

> > > almighty, omnipotent etc. like God ? If not, then why we

declare

> > > ourself " I am that " . This is quiet confusing. I shall be

highly

> > > grateful to you if this confusion is removed in brief words.

> > >

> > > Raj Kumar Monga

> > > Ram Ram

> > >

> > > ---------------------------

> > > GUIDELINES FOR POSTING A RESPONSE:

> > >

> > > 1. The group is focused on the Holy Gitaji, therefore, only

> > > responses which further clarify the understanding of Gitaji,

will

> > be

> > > posted.

> > >

> > > 2. Making reference of Gitaji shloka is highly encouraged - at

> > least

> > > once in the response. Wherever possible, please quote Gitaji

or

> > > other scriptures to substantiate your response.

> > >

> > > 3. Please be as concise and to the point as possible,

respecting

> > > sadhaka's time. Under no circustance the answer should exceed

say

> > > one (book) page at the most (500 words or so) 3-4 paragraphs.

> > >

> > > 4. Kindly limit personal feelings, opinions, beliefs etc. to

the

> > > extent that they further help in understanding the Gita shlokas

> > >

> > > 5. Kindly focus your writing to the subject at hand only.

> > >

> > > 6. Please do not include links to the other sites or other

> > > organizations.

> > >

> > > 7. Complete reproduction of texts from any book is strongly

> > > discouraged, however references may be made of the book or

> author

> > > (but not links to other sites).

> > >

> > > 8. Kindly do not include your personal information such as

phone

> > > number, address etc.

> > >

> > > 9. Please do not address the response to a particular

individual

> > > since the message is going to the entire group.

> > >

> > > 10. Due to the large readership, only those responses will be

> > posted

> > > which are in line with the general philosophy of taking Shrimad

> > > Bhagavad Gita as the reference.

> > >

> > > 11. Moderator at his discretion, may modify the posting, if

> content

> > > is unclear for distribution or not directly related to the

> question

> > > being asked.

> > >

> > > 12. Please respond taking into consideration the novices,

youth,

> > > westerners, non-sectarian audience. Kindly limit the use of

only

> > > Sanskrit words, rather provide the English word with Sanskrit

> > > bracketed wherever possible.

> > >

> > > 13. Any personal remarks over the knowledge of any sadhak or

> about

> > > the

> > > stage at which any sadhak is standing in his quest / sadhna /

> > > spiritual journey - must not be included in your posting.''

> > >

> > > 14. There should not be any sarcasm towards fellow sadhaks in

> this

> > > spiritual learning and sharing.

> > >

> > >

> > > MODERATOR

> > > Ram Ram

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Shree Hari

Ram Ram

 

Sadhaks, please re-read the original question before responding so

that the responses directly address the question being asked. In

light of increased enrollment and responses, we will be more closely

following the group's guidelines. Thank you all !

Gita Talk Moderator

Ram Ram

--------------------------------

Question 1:

When we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme Almighty, omnipotent and

omnipresent God why we are also not almighty, omnipotent etc. like

God ? If not, then why we declare ourself " I am that " . Please help

clarify this in brief words.

 

Raj Kumar Monga

Ram Ram

 

Question 2:

I am a not clear regarding the meaning of Bhagwan,(Bhagavan), is it God

personified as in Krishna? In what context would one use each term " Paramatma "

and " Bhagwan " in preference to the other.

With Respect and Divine Love,

Mike Keenor

 

-

Loving Divine,

Pranam.

In Gitaji two aspects are discussed - Prakriti (nature: Lord said it

is my lower aspect) and Parmatma (Soul, Super Consciousness,

Brahman: Lord said, I am in all but not attached to any).

Literally, we are ansh (atom) of both.

 

* Let's look at the nature first:

We are made up of an atom of earth (physical body, skeleton, etc),

water (all fluids in our body), fire (warmth in our body, e.g.,

vaishvaaner agni, etc.), air (gases, praans like apaan, etc.,

sky/space (scriptures say we have 5 types of sky within us -

chidaakaash, mahaakaash, paraakaash, etc.). Nature (Prakriti) is

constantly changing, things get created and destroyed, it is

chanchal (restless), so when we are focused on Nature (prakriti), we

display/reflect those gunas of it as we have inherited them all from

Prakriti.

 

* Now the other atom we have inherited is from higher realm - Soul

or Super Consciousness.

This is stable, always peaceful, always joyous, always present

regardless of time or space. Therefore it is all pervading -

omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent. So it is obvious when we are

focused on Soul, we display/reflect those characteristics (this word

is used for communication only) as we have inherited them from Soul.

 

It is like from a sack of salt if you pick a pinch, the pinch

inherits all saltiness, doesn't matter how small a pinch is, even

just a grain of salt has the same saltiness in it. So that's how we

are too but our focus is not where it should be, that's all.

Changing our attention will make us realize that we are almighty and

omnipotnet as God IS.

 

Hope this helps...

humble regards,

always at Thy Lotus Feet

 

Manjula Patel

-

 

Shri Krishnah Sharanam Mama

 

Mike, Here is another attempt at answering your question. The

Upanishads (and Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapurana) try to tell the

attributes of Brahma, Paramatma and Bhagwan in that order. Of

course, all the three names are these days used loosely and

interchangeably and are indeed the names for the same God, but there

is a difference in the level of manifestation of the attributes or

their powers in the three `forms' of God.

 

When we refer to Brahma, He is understood to be nirguna (impersonal,

without `qualities'), nirakara (without form) and nirvishesha

(without attributes or particularities) and is worshipped by the

Yogis and Gyanis i.e. those who follow Yog or Gyan Marga, since

their ultimate object is to know the Jiva or Self (embodied soul)

and Brahma. They can thus at the most become Atma-gyanis (one who

knows Self/Soul). Since God in this `form' (without form) is

supposed to be without attributes etc. and although He still has all

the potential, He does not manifest them (i.e. does not do anything

else, except beholding His own entity).

 

The next `form is of Paramatma, who is omnipotent…etc. sat, chit,

ananda,.. etc. but is saguna (is not impersonal, has attributes),

saakaara (has form or forms), and savishesha (has particularities).

In this form He (Paramatma) has almost all the manifestations that

Bhagwan has, such as., rupa (form), naama (names), guna

(attributes/qualities), dhaama (abode), sant (saints, loved ones),

but does not perform Lila (divine play). Thus, in this form

(Paramatma), God bestows on His devotees all the benevolence,

including all that is aspired by the Gyan margis or yogis plus more.

But there still remains the highest bliss that the true bhaktas of

the supreme state of mind (like the Gopis) desired.

 

The devotees or Bhakti margis of the highest order who have

completely surrendered unto Him, their antahkarana (inner

conscience) is pure and have Him only in all their actions, mind,

soul and intellect only can achieve Him in His highest form and in

His total self, when He blesses them. This form is of Bhagwan in all

its glory. Bhagwan has His rupa, naama, guna, dhaam, sant and

additionally, Lila. The Bhakti margis are not attracted to moksha or

mukti (liberation, or freedom from bondage) as a pishachini (like

goblin, evil, ghostly) and never wish for it, since it can at best

liberate one from the cycle of birth and death, but it will confine

you in this state for ever and never enable you to strive for the

highest bliss, i.e. to realize God, Bhagwan. (Only in the human form

can you perform action, including Bhakti. All other species,

including gods, demigods only reap the result of their actions in

the past).

 

The real bliss or Ananda can only be felt and obtained at the feet

of God at all times and in participating in his divine plays. Ananda

is God (Anando Brahmeti Vyajaanaat – Taittariya Upanishad) or Raso

Vaisaha (He is indeed the Rasa, divine elixir – Taittariya

Upanishad). That is Bhagwan. But as I said earlier, we loosely use

all the words for any form of God. You are right when you say that

Bhagwan is God personified as in Krishna.

 

There are thousands of differences between us as Jiva and Bhagwan.

How can there ever be a comparison at all? For example, He is

Vibhuchit (all pervading, very big), we (as Atma) are Anuchit

(miniscule); He is Sarvashaktimaana (omnipotent, all powerful), we

are Alpashaktiman (with little power); He is Sarvagya (know-all), we

are Alpagya (know little), He is Anshi (the whole), we are Ansha (a

part), He is Gunaatita (beyond the Gunas), we are Gunabaddha (bound

by three gunas - sat, rajas, tama); He is Divya (divine), we are

Mayik or Mayabaddha (bonded by Maya) etc. etc. Only similarity is

that both of us are eternal (sat) and are chetana (Conscious). The

Jiva is called `ansha' or part for the above reason that the Jiva is

sat and chit, and derives its `power' to function or to be

enlightened from Bhagwan. But it will be naïve to think that we can

ever become as powerful as He is, even though we are a miniscule

part-a part even smaller than a molecule. We are alive by His

bahiranga shakti (externally manifested power) and are His

vibhinnansha (different or `external' part, rather power), just as

the Gods (Brahma, Shiva etc) are his Svaansha (part of self).

 

Regards.

 

K.N. Sharma

 

--

Dear All,

With my limited knowledge my understanding of Relationship between

Atma and Paramatma is as below.

 

Relationship of Soul to God

 

This relationship has been explained and interpreted differently by

various seers, sages and acharyas after studying the same Vedas. One

school considers soul as different from Brahma in the stage of

bondage i.e., when manifested in the human body. Audolini considers

that it becomes one with Him only when liberated and freed from the

effects of Karma of good or bad deeds, desires and thoughts. It is

just like the waters of different rivers, streams and rivulets which

otherwise are different owing to so many factors like the presence

of various salts, minerals, etc., become one with ocean after

merging in it. Combining finite manifested and unmanifested souls

covered with subtle atoms of human karma, with the infinite Brahma

is negation of religion as a spiritual science.

 

However, Amartya holds somewhat different view. Even in bondage, the

manifested soul is different and non-different from Brahma. He

compares to the rays of the sun light in relation to the Sun.

Bhagavad-Gita considers the manifested soul as controlled and Brahma

residing in the heart is the controller. Thus from the study of

Vedas different views emerge based on one's own degree of knowledge.

One can appreciate this relationship better when the differences and

similarities between God and Soul are understood.

 

While God is almighty, omniscient, all pervasive, infinite, self-

created, eternal, self-sustainable and having infinite attributes

making Him ineffable, Soul is not so. It has at best a relationship

of master and servant and that too in the state of shuniya sattava,

turiya, kaivalya or moksha. Otherwise, the soul cannot reach God

even as a servant to be at His eternal service. It is only a

particle of God and finite. It is not even omniscient having only

part of Brahma's knowledge and always yearns to acquire more

knowledge of God through Vedas and all other scriptures of the major

religions of the world. The predominance of tamasic gunas takes away

its shine. In this ignorance stage due to only material and

intellectual knowledge, it can not even convey its knowledge to

senses, mind and other instruments within the gross body. It is not

capable of fulfilling the noble desires of the human beings, if

senses become master of the gross body. The senses in that state

along with uncontrolled and turbulent mind under the effect of gunas

of activity and passivity create all kinds of hurdles and separate

them from the a-priori knowledge contained in the manifested soul.

While God is 'aja' unborn, the soul gets birth (manifestation) in

the gross body. Brahma can create, sustain and destroy the universe

and Prakrti at His Will; soul is too finite to possess such powers.

God is ineffable; soul has limited attributes and manifested soul

even still less owing to deeds, thoughts and desires of human

senses.

 

Dvait Vedantist Madhavacharya advises human beings not to compare

Soul with God and combining finite with infinite is negation of

religion, ethics and all rational logic. Many fake god men and cult

leaders still like to combine finite with the infinite and this

distorted knowledge has greatly helped them to make movable and

immovable properties worth billions of rupees. They use the concept

of meditation as balm to soothe the harassed followers and to still

their vritties- the turbulent waves and ripples in the sea of

matter. They give superlative epithets to their style of meditation

and make the followers repeat in their mind that soul has all the

attributes of God and it is jnan sarup, prem sarup, shiva sarup,

satya sarup, anand sarup etc. The most glaring contradiction which

they make by saying that the manifested soul of even the most

corrupt follower, bribe taker, adulterator of food etc., has also

the same attributes as God. Thus, such evil-minded persons do not

feel any thing wrong in their corrupt practices, which are cause of

disharmony, social strains and stresses in the families and society.

This kind of deliberate distortion of Vedic knowledge helps them

hefty flow of black money, filthy lucre as donations to their

trusts. In most of such cases, the knowledge of soul and God remains

unto their mouth and does not reach their hearts.

 

It is thus apparent that the soul has a number of differences in

attributes from its master and Creator. It is only a tiny particle

of God and at best, His agent to maintain record of our good or bad

deeds, virtuous and non- virtuous thoughts, selfish and selfless

desires. According to a qualified monist and Vedantist Ramanajum

(1017-1137), soul even on liberation when finally released

from 'karma' does not merge with God, only attains the status of

eternal servant (Sesa). God is the owner, master and controller of

all souls and spirits in the world for which he gives a spiritual

name 'Jiva Jagat'. Even the pure idealist and absolute monist

Sankracharya also agrees in the stage of avidya with only material

and intellectual knowledge the soul has hardly any attributes of God

being covered with subtle particles of mostly tamasic and rajasic

gunas. However, the soul always yearns for vidya covering complete

Brahma jnan.

 

So long as the cosmic illusion Maya is there, soul's attributes can

never be realised. Only when illusion goes with Vedic knowledge,

some of the divine attributes of manifested soul start emerging, its

shine reaches the entire body creating an 'aura' around the gross

body. Only then, the unity of soul and Brahma described as Mahavakya

is achieved. tat tvam asi (Thou art That), aham Brhma asi (I am

Brahma), ayam atma Brahma (my soul is Brahma) are all Mahavakya.

 

However, Rig-Veda (1-164-20, 22) gives differences between God, soul

and Prakrti. Some of the Greek philosophers and many western

metaphysicists of the science of soul had also come to similar

conclusion independently. Plotinus (203-262 BC) held though soul is

free, once enmeshed in the body, its freedom is lost but retains its

ability to rescue itself. Later even a wise savant of Islam, Sial ul

Din Yahia-al Suhrawardy (1153-1191) held the view that manifested

soul is only one part of the complete soul with partial attributes

and ever keen to join its other part in heaven to reach celestial

abode. Thus manifested soul can have only very limited attributes of

God. Plato also held that soul has a desire to move towards Summan

Genus-the supreme God by acquiring godly qualities when enmeshed in

human body. If less than godly qualities, to the extent and degree

of knowledge it acquires, it is enmeshed in gross bodies of nine

kinds ranging from philosopher kings to despots and evil-minded

persons. The highest life is that when you do not identify happiness

with indulgence. Though holy Bible puts it in other way,' Pray for

leading us not to temptations, evil and forgiveness for all our

debts'. (Mathew gospel 6-2, 6-10 to 17)

 

Madhvacharya had observed all souls are produced out of 'Trishta'

and are largely different from God. Soul of tamasic kind of person

(leading a greed based life without any social aim) is largely

ignorant and even of a sattavic kind of person leading need based

life is partly omniscient while Brahma is Omniscient. Both Atma and

Jivatma are incapable of fulfilling their own desires whereas Brahma

can create, sustain and destroy the whole world. He advises the

human beings avoid comparing soul with God. According to him most of

the human souls are of three kinds, Mukti yoga, Nitya sansarin and

Tamo yoga. Mukti yoga souls are fit for liberation and such a soul

is the rarest. Persons having such manifested souls take births

after centuries and leave behind the true knowledge of soul, spirit,

God, Prakrti etc., for the mankind and save them from utter

degeneration. Nitya samsarin are the souls, which travel endlessly

through the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Tamo yoga souls are

fit to be eternally in Hell.

 

The gross body containing such kind of soul has uncontrolled senses,

turbulent mind and indeterminate intellect. Such persons are their

own enemies. All three kinds of souls take birth on this earth

amongst all religions, caste and creed. Somewhat similar concept of

three kinds of souls was also observed by Plato about two thousands

years before Madhavacharya. Plato described three kinds of souls as

possessing three different vital powers in the society. These three

vital powers are the cause of different activities and even

professions of the individuals (A History of political Theory by

G.H.Sabine.p.58). He observed three predominant traits in the

individuals and each kind of soul has its own peculiar and special

excellence or virtue. Based on the quality of souls in each

individual, Plato developed the concept of three classes (not caste)

in society.

 

Vedic metaphysics and ethics do not find any cleft between the

interest of the individuals and ideal society or between desires and

duty in respect of a person whose body, spirit and soul are well

harmonized. Whenever any such conflict arises one should understand

his/her own nature and the 'real self' and act on the guidance of

the inner self and not to be led by senses and outward looking mind.

While the inner self or jivatma may not have all the attributes of

God but still it remains the light of our inner being (A.V.19-60,

Y.V 34-1 to 3 and R.V 6-9-6). It is also one of the triple bands in

the gross body along with spirit and matter.

 

With kind regards,

P.K.Sabhlok

 

 

--

, " sadhak_insight "

<sadhak_insight wrote:

>

> Jai Shri Krishna,

>

> There is an owner for everything in the world, then how is it

> possible that there is no owner of the man. Parmaatma, He who is

the

> owner of everyone and everything is our owner as

well. " Mamaivansho

> (Gita 15:7) actually says that we believe Parmaatma to be ours BUT

> Parmaatma knows that we are His own. When we become surrendered to

> Parmaatma then only we also know Him – `Mameva Ye Prapadhyante,

> Mayametam Taranti Te' (Gita 7:14).

>

> Atma (soul) is part of Parmaatma, but by assuming affinity with

the

> body and worldly things it becomes Jiva. This `Jiva'ness actually

is

> as artificial as an actor in a movie or drama. Parmaatma is so

kind

> to us that He not only believes us to be His part only but knows

as

> such. He only shares this secret fact with us in Gita 15:7, out of

> his sheer desire of our liberation.

>

> If a lion's child is brought up with the sheep's children from his

> birth then he forgets his powers. But the moment a lion comes and

> reminds him that look your body is similar to mine and therefore

you

> not a sheep, but a lion like me only, and you have all the powers

> such as me, then he immediately gains all the powers of a lion.

> Similarly, here Parmaatma is reminding us and we can become as

> powerful as Him, if we firmly accept this.

>

> By assuming affinity with perishable material things we cannot

> become great, it is only a false assumption, which actually

deprives

> us of our real greatness (power to realize Parmaatma). The

greatness

> assumed based on perishable things will itself be perishable only.

> By realizing the Almighty Parmaatma, whose part (Ansha) Jiva is,

he

> becomes great – so great that even demigods respect him and desire

> that he visits their place. Not only this, even Parmaatma becomes

> his Daas (`Mai to hoon Bhagatan ko Daas').

>

> Body is a very small part of the world and jiva (soul) is part of

> Parmaatma. What mistake man makes, is that he desires both (world

> and Parmaatma) to act favourably for him. What needs to be done is

> to offer the body to the world and Jiva to Parmaatma – this is

> honesty. This honesty only is called liberation.

>

> Actually, man cares only for few things, few houses, some wealth,

> few people etc., which he considers as his own in the world.

> Otherwise, there are millions of houses and people, unlimited

wealth

> etc. but he does not even think of them at all, merely because he

> does not consider them of his own. This means that he is already

> freed (liberated) as far as those uncountable things, with which

he

> does not attach mineness. Thus, substantial liberation has already

> taken place. Now if he ponders, the few worldly things, with which

> the so called mineness is considered, will not stay with man

> forever, but their bondage will remain for infinite births. So a

> spiritual aspirant (Sadhak) should offer the worldly things to the

> world (and that is Karmayoga) and himself to Parmaatma (which is

> Bhaktiyoga).

>

> We are part of Parmaatma and to remember this eternal relation

> (sambandh) with Him, we should accept three things –

>

> (1) Parmaatma is ours

> (2) We are of Parmaatma and

> (3) Everything is of Parmaatma only.

> Then we can get divine love (Bhagvat Prem), which is the SOLE

> OBJECTIVE of human birth.

>

> Narayana Narayana

>

> Rajendra J. Bohra

>

> -

> There is no difference in atma and param atma. Param is an

adjective

> like Shri or Sriyut prefixed before naming a noble person i.e.,Sri

> Ram vs. Ram.

> Atma is not contained in forms with boundaries and thus differs

with

> an individual, species or object or energy or memory but what is

> common to all. Atma is for example, similar like electricity in

> grid and manifested in forms of activities of washing machines,

> bulbs, cemeteries, railways, and millions of appliances run on

> electricity. Each apparatus of lives of each one of us is designed

> by techniques of jiiva (life sciences) and it has to perform

unique

> task i.e., washing machine cannot be converted to an electric

engine

> and should not be in competition.

>

> In this way, Atma is content (electricity), and Lives in various

> forms are conductors (cable). As and when cable (pvc or plastic,

and

> copper ) realizes that it is conducting something(electricity)

> which is not its own property then the realization of electricity

by

> cable first starts. After that cable and electricity become

together

> and activate the universe by its various actions. Tulsi Das,

> Einstein and Gandhi are examples of transformation.

>

> With best regards

> K G Misra

> -

> Dear Sadaks,

>

> There is no relationship between Athma and Paramathuma. Athuma is

> one with Paramathuma. If one starts contemplating on several

> question related to Who I am, What is birth and death, what

happens

> after death Etc he will start realizing that everything around him

> is Anithiya/Maya. Tecnically saying that science has proved one

uses

> a fraction of his brain. Remaining unused. The little usage also

> relates to TV serial/ worldy attachments/ pleasures/ and emotions.

> Never aware the end is coming. This 12 Vaishna saints, 63

Nayanmars,

> host of Bakthas, Adi Sankara In Bhaja Govindam script, Buddha,

have

> given in detail about contemplation. Once one goes deep into

> contemplation he will understand that everything around is

appearing

> and disappearing (being born and dead)

>

> Almost all scripts, Vedas, Upanashids have very clearly said that

> GOD is not object (Prameyam) but to be known by Gyana (Knowledge).

> To get Gyana only so many people like Puranderdos (crorepathi),

> Thrimagai Alwar King, Ramana Rishi etc left behind everything to

> know Gyana. To attain that utmost stage of knowledge one needs

leave

> attachment of worldly things.

> Brain Power: When there is a single pointed focus on only knowing

> the Self, and desiring nothing else, then the enlightment takes

> place. This enlightenment gives knowledge of ones previous births

> and his future. Besides all the divine knowledge automatically

> comes to his mind.

>

> Human has been blessed with intellect to contemplate. In most

> scripts it is said that even Indra, Ganderva, etc in 14 galaxies

> have to come to earth to do penance to attain divinity.

> So human has that abundant power that even 5 elements on earth

> cannot disturb. That stage is called " THAT " . Means you are part of

> GOD, but we are focusing our thoughts on everything other than

GOD.

> So once we understand that we have the power in us that makes us

non-

> distructable, you are " THAT " .

>

> This is what Bagavan says in GEETHA that you Athuman are not the

> body. Arjuna was only instrumental in destroying bodies in war. If

> one person in war field was a realized one, then Arjuna could not

> kill that body, which is " THAT " .

>

> Buddha on enlightenment knew he was " THAT " there was radiance

around

> him for miles, because he was " THAT " .

>

> Samartha Ramadoss great saint knew nothing other than Sree Rama

Nam.

> Badrachala Ramadoss great saint in Andra Pradesh knew only Sri

Rama

> and built temple on a hill. Once Sri Rama on Ram Navami day

promised

> to take part in celebreation. But Sri Ram never came. Distressed

> Ramadoss shed tears. Sri Ram appeared and said that HE came as a

cow

> during celeberation but was chased away.

> Ramadoss was enlightened that Sri Rama is in all. Means HE is in

> you and me. That HE is THAT

> B.Sathyanarayan

>

> -

>

> , " sadhak_insight "

> <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> >

> > Hari Om

> >

> > The Question is that when we are part of Paramatma , then why

we

> > are not as good as Him ? The answer is that we have super

imposed

> an

> > artificial connection over a natural and permanent connection.

We

> > are definitely as good as Paramatma even today. We are

> > " SATCHIDANAND " even today. We are part of Paramatma, we are

> > connected with Paramatma even today. There is no doubt on that.

> > Problem is that we are not able to experience that, because we

> have

> > started identifying ourselves with the body, ego, mind,

> intellect,

> > world – with those things of which we are not at all the part!

We

> > have super imposed a wrong relationship over a correct

> relationship,

> > and hence ignorance/confusion.

> >

> > I will explain it this way. There is a desire in you that – " I

> > should live for ever, I should never die " . Now this desire is

> > of " SAT " part of you. " SAT " means existence. There is a desire

in

> > you that " I should know everything. I should not be ignorant of

> > anything " . Now this desire is of " CHIT " part of you. " CHIT "

means

> > knowledge. There is a desire in you that – " I should always be

> > happy. I should never be sorrowful " . Now this desire is of "

> ANAND "

> > part of you. ANAND means bliss. These desires are in you and you

> are

> > in fact continuously striving even today to fulfil these

desires.

> > But you are not able to do. Why ?

> >

> > Reason is that you want to live for ever with reference to your

> > present body! You want to acquire knowledge by using your

> intellect.

> > You want to acquire happiness by acquiring worldly pleasures.

> Hence

> > none is successful in extinguishing these desires. You have

> deeply

> > super imposed your relationship with the world- which world does

> > nothing except changing. You are not changing. Hence you are

> > suffering/finding yourself empty handed. If you lift this

> artificial

> > relationship of the world by disconnecting yourself with the

> world,

> > immediately you will REALISE your eternal and permanent

connection

> > with Paramatma. Immediately you, yourself will become "

> > SATCHIDANAND " ( Existence-Knowledge- Bliss). In fact you are

that

> > only, but because of super imposition discussed herein above of

> the

> > world, and because of your identifying yourself always with

> > reference to the world only , you are not able to

> REALISE/EXPERIENCE

> > the fact that you are as good as Paramatma.

> >

> > So what should you do ? You should " disconnect with the

world "

> > by any means, say by Bhakti Yoga or by Jnana Yoga or by Karma

Yoga

> > or by Raja Yoga ( Dhyaan Yoga) and then realise/experience

the

> > fact that you yourself are indeed , rightfully, undoubtedly

as

> > good as Paramatma Himself ! In fact you have got human life

only

> > for that purpose. In fact in you the desires of SAT, CHIT, and

> > ANANDA are existing permanently even today only to drive you

> towards

> > disconnection with the world !

> >

> > As Simple As That ! !

> >

> > Jai Shree Krishna

> >

> > Vyas N B

> >

> > --------------------------------

--

> --

> > namaste....

> >

> > with deepest sense that I am unable to truly grasp what it is

that

> > is truth, still I pray that I may offer something for this

> > discussion. In the Bhagavatam (1.2.2)is one very famous

> verse, " yam

> > pravajantam anupetyam apeta-krtyam dvaipayano viraha-katara

> ajuhava,

> > putreti tan mayataya taravo bhinedus, tam sarva bhuta hrdayman

> munim

> > anato smi...... " I offer pranam to Sri Sukadeva Gosvami, who

can

> > enter the hearts of all living beings. When he left home

without

> > undergoing the purificatory processes, such as accepting the

> sacred

> > thread, his father Vyasa cried out, " O my son " . As if they were

> > absorbed in the same mood of separation, only the trees answered

> in

> > reply. " (Sukadeva is the 16 yr. old saint who spoke the Srimad

> > Bhagavatam) It is my understanding, that as it is said in this

> > verse, one who is pure can " enter the hearts of all " .....this is

> not

> > merely a figurative statement. I have had astounding

experiences

> to

> > strengthen my faith that a truly pure person, who is living a

life

> > free from sin, absorbed in the Absolute, has a certain measure

of

> > all cognizance. Someone might say, " mmmm....impossible....tell

> > me " ....so in extreme brief I will tell you something that never

> > fails to amaze me when I recall. Three or four years ago, I

was

> so

> > angry.....a loved one would not stop using drugs. I wanted to

> put

> > this person in jail, I had reached the limits of my tolerance,

and

> > foolishly had no understanding of my own inability to control

> > others. I wrote to Sri Guru, he never wrote a letter back, but

> > next night in a dream he stood before me.....first a line of

> > devotees all receiving achman (a few drops of water to sip as

> > purification) then a sacred mantra. When it came to my turn,

Sri

> > Guru was suddenly standing next to me, looking at a photo album

> of

> > holy temples, deities, and Vaisnavas. He was turning the

pages,

> > one by one. I never forget, every time I tell this story, that

it

> > seemed as if an eternity had passed....my feet were hurting in

the

> > dream, I was standing for so long of a time, as Sri guru turned

> the

> > pages of the album. Finally, Sri guru came to a picture of a

> > fallen sannyasi, who had been highly worshiped and

> respected....but

> > gave in to the allurement of maya. (in this case, sexual

> > relationship with a woman, which is forbidden for the order of

> > sannyas)....the wave of pain that shot from the heart of my Guru

> > into my heart was unimaginable. There were no words for him to

> > tell me his sadness for those who have lost their strength,

given

> up

> > their vows, and reverted to activities beneath the vows of their

> > ashram in life ......then the dream concluded with his saying to

> > me, " You will have to wait until later for your mantra " .

> >

> > My letter to Sri Guru was about my pain.....my anger, my

> > frustration.....how did he hear me and answer so perfectly?

> That

> > I was so unqualified because I did not understand the agony and

> > sadness a truly saintly person feels for those souls who cannot

> > control their senses, who give up the path of devotion for

sensual

> > pleasure? How did he enter into my heart in a dream, and with

no

> > reference to the actual situation, teach me? Because one who is

> > truly divine can enter into the hearts of all, especially into

the

> > heart of the disciple who is crying out sincerely, " master,

guide

> > me " .

> >

> > Another thought.....how did the thousands of sages know to

> come

> > together and hear the sacred conversation of the Srimad

> Bhagavatam,

> > which was spoken by Srila Sukadeva Gosvami five thousand years

> > ago? There were no emails then, no letter carriers.....but

the

> > consciousness was so high that the sages automatically

knew.....it

> > is time to convene on the bank of the sacred river Ganges for a

> > great sacrifice, of hearing the holy scriptures.When we are in

> touch

> > with the Supreme Absolute, amazing things happen.

> >

> > respectfully, Mahalaksmi Dasi

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > Dear sadaks,

> > It is said in scripts and Bagavan has said that everything

enters

> > into HIM during Maha Pralaya. Again everything manifests from

HIM.

> > Everything that abides in HIM and everything that manifests from

> HIM

> > is PARAMATHUMA. Things that abide in HIM and manifests from HIM

is

> > JEEVATHUMA. The known upanashids 108 could not describe

> PARAMATHUMA

> > fully and Vedas says that to describe Paramathuma is difficult.

> > Paramathuma is clearly said in Vedas as " Apprameyam " . Means THAT

> > which cannot be known by senses. So one has to know by knowledge

> > (Gyana) which Guru gives or that Paramathuma HIMSELF gives.

> >

> > B.Sathyanarayan

> > --------------------------------

> > Jai Sri Krshna

> >

> > In brief words as you requested, as per different exegetical

> school

> > of Vedaantic philosophy, we can declare ourselves as

> >

> > 1) seperate from the divine (dvaita or dualism),

> > 2) existing as parts of the divine (vishishtadvaita or qualified

> non-

> > dualism), or

> > 3) as the divine (advaita or non-dualism/monism).

> >

> > It all depends at which level we are speaking. Mystics and

> Gnostics

> > all over the world declare from experience that their true

> Identity,

> > their essential nature is the Infinite, so they lean much more

to

> > advaita at least when speaking from a jnaana (Knowledge) angle,

> and

> > dvaita when speaking from a bhakti (devotion) one (which

> > necessitates the duality of bhakta and Bhagavaan, or devotee and

> > divine respectively).

> >

> > However, how and why we, as the one Infinite Being, see

ourselves

> as

> > limited individuals is the matter of philosopher-exegetes of

> > Vedaanta which I will not enter into here, and it is certainly

> > valuable to study their ideas (such as those of Adi Shankara,

> > Ramanuja etc). Non-philosophical mystics do not really enter

into

> > discussion about this (most likely because they have not the

> > philosophical tools to hand), but merely concern themselves with

> the

> > experience, and in fact are so much in that Bliss that I'd

rather

> > conjecture that they're simply not interested in intellectual

> > discussions about it but prefer to dwell in the Euphoria of the

> > divine that their bhakti has given them. But for those whose

> > intellectual thirst also needs to be quenched, the study of

> > Shankara, Ramanuja etc. is vital and ineffably enriching. Even

> their

> > commentaries on the Gita would be useful to see comparatively

how

> > they interpret certain verses.

> >

> > Seeing as this is a Gita group, one version I like is the one

> > translated by Swami Chidbhavananda. It has a nice, simple, yet

> > meaningful commentary for the saadhaka. The reason I mention

this

> is

> > because he gives a nice summary/introdution of the three

> exegetical

> > schools of uttara-mimaansaa¡ that I've mentioned above, and

brings

> > their ideas in the commentary of certain verses.

> > Yours humbly

> > Rishi

> > (Rishi Handa)

> >

> > --------------------------------

--

> > , " sadhak_insight "

> > <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

> > >

> > > When we hear or read the mentioned verse of Gita

> > (mamaivansho...Gita 15:7) that Jeevas are Anshas-parts of

> Paramatma

> > which is Supreme Consciousness, we take it to mean individual

body-

> > mind organism we believe we are to be part of Paramatma. This

> makes

> > us ask the question raised by Raj Kumar Mongaji, I think.

> > >

> > > This is not what is really conveyed here! From the vantage

> point

> > of Jeevatma, it is not true. However, from Lord's point, He can

> say

> > that It is He as Supreme Consciousness, Eternal Being appears to

> be

> > all jeevatmas, even as waves(jeevas) appear in Ocean

(paramatman).

> > Ocean is always the same, waves or no waves. A wave who

believes

> it

> > to be real and independent entity apart from ocean can no longer

> > claim to be part of the ocean because he doesn't know he has no

> > existence apart from ocean. If he claims to be ansha and expects

> to

> > be omnipresent etc, then it is information only on his part!

> > >

> > > Now such a Jeevatma when realizes he/she is Atman first,

beyond

> a

> > shadow of doubt, through experience and not just as information,

> > then claim would be true. At this point, as Atman, and not as a

> body-

> > mind based person, he/she may consider a part for a while until

> > there is a final realization that he is Paramatman, not just a

> part

> > or ansha, just as wave is Ocean all the way, not a part. Wave is

a

> > concept, name/form(nama/rupa) only, not a reality! No one has

ever

> > touched such a wave!

> > >

> > > In the Upanishadas, this realization is proclaimed by four

> > Mahavakyas: This Atman is verily Brahman, Thou art That,

> > Consciousness is Brahman, I (Sat-Chit-Ananda) am Brahman!

> > >

> > > When one lives as if one is Pure Consciousness, which is

eternal

> > Being, The Self which is second to none, Undivided,

> Undifferentiated

> > Awareness, the question of part doesn't arise. Then

Omnipresence,

> > Omnipotence, Omniscience is realized in the sense that all

> > limitaions-separations are dissolved by Jeevatma!

> > >

> > > At this point it may be mentioned that what is commomly talked

> > about us being " embodied soul " is not true, rather, we are in

> > reality Consciousness which embodies all apparant minds and

bodies

> > and all objects. As such all objects are Consciousness shaped as

> > those objects in our experience(Chit-Vrittis). I mean the stuff-

> > Vastu of all objects when experienced is conditioned

Consciousness-

> > Brahman. See the truth of this! We never experience anything

gross

> > out there, but only Consciousness-chaitanya! Everything is at

zero

> > distance from Consciousness!

> > >

> > > One more point, as I understand, God of a Bhakta is not

> different

> > from Self of a Gyani, or Karma-Yogi. There is no question of

Gyani

> > stoping at Self, and Bhakta can go ahead to God. Such a Bhakta

and

> > Gyani are one just as Truth is one without a second, and that is

> > What I and You are! What separates us is our conditioning

(Aavaran)

> > of Atman by identification with limitations of body-mind

believing

> > to be embodied souls.

> > >

> > > Namaskaras..Pratap

> > >

> > >

> > > ------------------------------

-

> > > Ram Ram Raj,

> > >

> > > Will try to explain from what I have understood from

> books/Audios

> > of

> > > Shri Ramsukhdasji and other sources as well.

> > >

> > > In general, at times some points look confusing, particularly

in

> > > spirituality. Because there are ways of looking things and

there

> > are

> > > contexts in which things are explained. " Ansh " here is said to

> > > confirm the person in front that though residing inside the

> > > body and riding over it but you are not it. You are not part

of

> it.

> > > Nothing that comes and goes is you or whatever decays is not

> you.

> > It

> > > is said in that sense. You are not ansh of prakrit but of ME

> > > (Parmatman).

> > >

> > > There are not mathematical measures as such by saying " Ansh " ,

to

> > > show that you are ansh and Parmatma is maha " ansh " . There is no

> > > comparison as such in terms of size and quantity. Moreover

> emphasis

> > > is on ekatma-bhav with the supreme consciousness and reminder

for

> > > oneself to detach from temporary forms or cause and effect

> world .

> > >

> > > Another angle: From logic perspective if you see. If infinite

> says

> > > that you are part of me, which means again infinite. If

> boundryless

> > > says that you are part of me and you are not part of soemthign

> > which

> > > is limiting, which dies, which comes and goes, which is bound

to

> > > space and time. So in essence even giving label as " Ansh " does

> not

> > > contradict the fact that everything is Vasudev, complete, sheer

> > > presence, limit less . How God in place can be limited and

> > unlimited

> > > in another places.

> > >

> > > So " I am that " and " Jeev mera santan ansh hai " ..both are

> correct

> > > and taking to same GOAL…

> > >

> > > Another angle: Upnishad says if you add anything to Poorna, it

> > > remains poorna. If you take out poorna from something then

also

> it

> > > remains poorna. So ansh-anshee, it is good to explain but

since

> God

> > > is one and can not be present in parts, so should not be

imagined

> > > from separation and quantity point of view.

> > >

> > > Moreover in scriptures it is also explained at times that same

> > > consciousness on the basis of UPADHI is labeled as Atman,

> > Parmatman.

> > > Like space in small pitcher is called " Ghatakash " and in big

> hall

> > is

> > > called " Mathakash " and in open is called " Mahakash " …but space

> > > remains the same…

> > >

> > > Since all depends on from where you look. So at times it

becomes

> > > confusing and to arrive at any strong and one conclusion and

mind

> > > loves that and keeps hankering for one final statement which

> should

> > > be tested from all angles, which doesn't happen generally. We

> have

> > > to align with the perspective of the speaker and understand the

> > > context and purpose. And stick to it and take its advantageous

> part

> > > for dipping into silence.

> > >

> > > Don't know whether this will remove some of the jargon from

your

> > > mind. If not, then please park your confusions and don't delay

in

> > > dipping into silence. These things will automatically get

> answered

> > > in future by someone outside or answers will come from within.

> > >

> > > Warm regards,

> > >

> > > Prakash Kushwah

> > > ------------------------------

-

> > > -Shree Hari_

> > >

> > > I read Paramatman, as Supreme Soul, (GOD, O THEOS),

> > > But I am a not clear the meaning of Bhagwan , (Bhagavan), is

it

> God

> > > personified as in Krishna, if I am wrong in these assumptions,

I

> > > don't mind, one learns from corrections.

> > > Finally in what context would one use each term in preference

to

> > the

> > > other.

> > >

> > > With Respect and Divine Love,

> > >

> > > Mike

> > > (Mike Keenor)

> > >

> > > ------------------------------

> > > namasthe. As you may have known, below are the two schools of

> > > vedanta: (there are other school of vedanta also....but here

we

> can

> > > look into these two below for ur question.).

> > > 1. advaita vedanta

> > > 2.dvaita vedanta

> > >

> > > Advaitha vedanta explains in terms of " Everything is

God..so " I

> am

> > > THAT " .

> > > Dvaita vedanta explains in terms of dualism..as " Everything

> happens

> > > because of God "

> > >

> > > Whatever it is, or how many ever schools of thoughts may there

> be,

> > > it is alright. Wrong or incorrect knowledge comes in many

forms

> but

> > > the right or correct knowledge comes only in one form. It is

ok

> to

> > > get confused, only when u get confused, you will start thinking

> > > which is correct and which is not correct. To understand that,

> > > please see the chapter 6 ( meditation of Bhagavadgita) and do

not

> > > think much about advaita or dvaita but just observe all ur

> thoughts

> > > that comes to ur mind and not worry of the end result but try

to

> > > focus on the methodology of attaining the end result. Because,

> end

> > > result is relative to oneself. In that way, you will not be

> > confused

> > > whatever the views u may come across ( from dvaita or advaita).

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > > Bharathi

> > >

> > > ------------------------------

-

> > > Raj Monga; I am also novuce to this just like you I recently

> > > watched and studied all about Mahabarat and Sri Krishana I

also

> > > have same question as you do and each and every one who visits

> and

> > > give discoursess in our Temple

> > > Bob Sathyanarayana

> > >

> > >

> > > ------------------------------

--

> > > , " sadhak_insight "

> > > <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Ram Ram to all the dear ones,

> > > >

> > > > I am novice in this line and do not have good knowledge

about

> the

> > > > philosophy of Vedanta. When I read Gitaji I find Lord

Krishna

> > > being

> > > > Paramatma (Supreme Soul, Supreme Consciousness) declaring the

> > > Jeeva (embodied soul) as his Ansha (mamevansho jeev loke

> jeevabhuta

> > > sanatana) and all the saints also give discourses on this

> > > > subject.

> > > >

> > > > My question is that when we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme

> > > Almighty, omnipotent and omnipresent God why we are also not

> > > > almighty, omnipotent etc. like God ? If not, then why we

> declare

> > > > ourself " I am that " . This is quiet confusing. I shall be

> highly

> > > > grateful to you if this confusion is removed in brief words.

> > > >

> > > > Raj Kumar Monga

> > > > Ram Ram

> > > >

> > > > ---------------------------

> > > > GUIDELINES FOR POSTING A RESPONSE:

> > > >

> > > > 1. The group is focused on the Holy Gitaji, therefore, only

> > > > responses which further clarify the understanding of Gitaji,

> will

> > > be

> > > > posted.

> > > >

> > > > 2. Making reference of Gitaji shloka is highly encouraged -

at

> > > least

> > > > once in the response. Wherever possible, please quote

Gitaji

> or

> > > > other scriptures to substantiate your response.

> > > >

> > > > 3. Please be as concise and to the point as possible,

> respecting

> > > > sadhaka's time. Under no circustance the answer should

exceed

> say

> > > > one (book) page at the most (500 words or so) 3-4 paragraphs.

> > > >

> > > > 4. Kindly limit personal feelings, opinions, beliefs etc. to

> the

> > > > extent that they further help in understanding the Gita

shlokas

> > > >

> > > > 5. Kindly focus your writing to the subject at hand only.

> > > >

> > > > 6. Please do not include links to the other sites or other

> > > > organizations.

> > > >

> > > > 7. Complete reproduction of texts from any book is strongly

> > > > discouraged, however references may be made of the book or

> > author

> > > > (but not links to other sites).

> > > >

> > > > 8. Kindly do not include your personal information such as

> phone

> > > > number, address etc.

> > > >

> > > > 9. Please do not address the response to a particular

> individual

> > > > since the message is going to the entire group.

> > > >

> > > > 10. Due to the large readership, only those responses will be

> > > posted

> > > > which are in line with the general philosophy of taking

Shrimad

> > > > Bhagavad Gita as the reference.

> > > >

> > > > 11. Moderator at his discretion, may modify the posting, if

> > content

> > > > is unclear for distribution or not directly related to the

> > question

> > > > being asked.

> > > >

> > > > 12. Please respond taking into consideration the novices,

> youth,

> > > > westerners, non-sectarian audience. Kindly limit the use of

> only

> > > > Sanskrit words, rather provide the English word with Sanskrit

> > > > bracketed wherever possible.

> > > >

> > > > 13. Any personal remarks over the knowledge of any sadhak or

> > about

> > > > the

> > > > stage at which any sadhak is standing in his quest / sadhna /

> > > > spiritual journey - must not be included in your posting.''

> > > >

> > > > 14. There should not be any sarcasm towards fellow sadhaks

in

> > this

> > > > spiritual learning and sharing.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > MODERATOR

> > > > Ram Ram

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hari Om

 

This refers to Mike's Question on the subject.

 

There are 3 ways in which that Supreme Consciousness is explained in the

Scriptures. From Gita without the help of Saints and Sages , it will be

difficult to establish any particular addressing pattern.

 

One- NIRGUN NIRAKAAR ( without any attributes and without any form).

Here that element is described as " Paramatma " , " SAT-CHIT-ANANDA " , BRAHMA

etc.There are three essential ingredients here. SAT ( Existence), CHIT (

Knowledge) and ANAND ( Bliss)

 

Reference of " Brahma " in Gita 2:72, 4:25, 4:31, 5:6 ,5:19 to 21, 5:24 to 26

,6:27 to 28 etc denote that Nirgun Nirakaar element. ( Brahma has also been used

to denote Sagun Sakaar/ Sagun Nirakar also in Gita)

 

Then next is SAGUN NIRAKAR ( Without any form but with attributes).

The same SAT, CHIT and ANAND here take shape of ASTI ( Whatever is really

existing -SELF) , BHATI ( the reflection, the world,),and PRIYA ( Liking,

attachment). Here that element is referred as Ishwar , Adi Purushottam,

Parameshwar, Antaryaami, Mayapati etc also.

 

Reference of ATMA in Gita 2:45, 9:5, 13:24 denotes this Sagun

Nirakaar. Similarly " Parameshwar " used in Gita 13:27, and " Ishwar " referred in

Gita 13:28 and 18:61 denote SAGUN NIRAKAR element.

 

Then there is SAGUN SAKAAR ( with form and with attributes) - here the

incarnations are referred. Like Rama, Krishna, etc. When that element comes to

the earth viz adopts the form then He is called BHAGWAAN. Here the same three

elements viz SAT, CHIT and ANANDA or ASTI, BHATI and PRIYA, take the form of

VIGRAH ( the divine form of Rama, Krishna, their body) , PRAKASH (Light) and

PREM (divine love) respectively.

 

This element has been quite frequently described in Gita (naturally

because the speaker Himself was denoting that element itself). The same word

ATMA has been used in Gita 4:6,4:7,7:18,10:15/16/18/19, 11:3/4/47 etc to denote

SAGUN SAKAAR.

Same term BRAHMA has been used in Gita 5:10, 10:12 to denote this

element also.

 

Your interpretation therefore is perfect. Bhagwaan is God personified as in

Krishna. My congratulations to you.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

Vyas N B

-

 

Why I am not Almighty, Omnipresent etc. although I say I am That

 

Although hints to answer this question have been given in various

chapters of Gita, chapter 13 deals with it directly. It explains the

relationship between Kashetra and Kashetrajna which explains as why I am not

Omnipresent etc.

 

The Kashetrajna is the one, which makes Kashetra come to life. Lord

Krishna says in Chapter 9 Vs.4 " The whole universe is pervaded by

me, in my unmanifest aspect. All the beings exist in me, but I do not dwell in

them. Also in Vs. 15 ch.13 He says " It exist without and within all beings,

the unmoving and also the moving. Extremely subtle and incomprehensible, very

far away and yet near is That.

 

At the jiva level kashetrajna called Jivatma and the kashetra is

called gross and subtle body.

At cosmos level (Virat) Kashetrajna is called Pamatma and kashetra is called

Prakriti (Nature).

 

The nature of Atma when not in association with jiva or with

prakriti is defined as Sat Chit and Anananda. In that sense we call

our self as Ansh of the God as atma is the common factor between

Jiv+Atma and Param+Atma. Every Jivatma has the potential to

experience these attributes.

 

Attributes (Vibhutis - see chapter 7,8 and 10 for more) like

almighty, omnipotent etc are attributed when kashetrajna or Atma is

seen with association with kashetra, ie Prakriti at virat level and

gross body at jiva level.

Parmatma has unlimited Vibhutis due to the unlimited nature of

Prakriti, while Jivatma is limited in these vibhutis due to

limitation of his gross body. This is the reason although we can say I am that

at atma level due to common factor of Sat Chit Anand we cannot call ourselves as

Almighty. Omnipresent etc, due to our

limitation of our body- mind- intellect complex.

 

The following verses may help to understand it better.

(Chapter 13 vs. 19, 20, 21 ) Know that the Prakarti (Nature) and

Purusha (Atma ) are both beginning less and also understand that all

modifications and qualities are born out of nature. The Primordial

Nature is considered to be the cause and effect instrument and agent

while the embodied soul is said to be the cause in regard to the

experience of pleasure and pain. The soul while settled in

identification with Nature experiences the qualities born of nature,

it is the attachment to these qualities that becomes the cause of

birth in good or evil wombs.

 

It is interesting to note that although Jianis like Buddha, Mahavir,

Ramakrishna and so many other saints who have attained perfection and experience

Sat Chit Anand, have to ask the directions to go to a

different town or the address of the person whom they want to meet.

This is due to the limitation of gross body.

 

Sankhya Yoga of Kapil Muni explains in deapth the relationship

between Prakriti and Purusha and explains prakriti which is ever

changing and the Purusha which is changeless.

 

Manmohan Sehgal

--

Dear Sadak,

H2 O is water. H2 O is present in a drop of water and in ocean. Drop

of water cannot form ocean. But drops (innumerable) can form ocean.

Realized Man is drop of water. Saints as Human known till today had 8 Sidhies (8

Occult powers). But Sri Krishna had 108 occult powers.

B.Sathyanarayan

 

--

For Question 1: Even though we are part of Almighty, we have a mind

with freewill......it is our mind that acts in this world and

obscures the Almighty...

Question 2: When we say Bhagvan or Ishwara, it is the manifestation

of the Supreme or projection in our plane of human

consciousness....The Absolute is Brahman, without form or

attributes...the moment we assign a form or attribute to the Absolute or

Brahman, we have a personal God or ishwara---can be

Rama,Krishna,Jesus or your Guru even....When we say that Lord Vishnu

takes different avatars and is compassionate and protects devotees,

we have made the Absolute into a Bhagavan,that can be worshipped with human

consciousness....An anology can help...A nation is an abstract thing...but by

giving a constitution, a flag, a national bird, and having structures like

parliament/supreme court, we give a concrete entity to the nation...the

government may pervade everywhere in the nation, but there is the seat of the

govt in the capital...all these are required for us...the same with

Bhagavan,Ishwara,deities and so on....

----N K Srinivasan

 

 

In response to the question posed by Raj Kumar Monga.....why do

persons use the phrase " i am that " ....when we are different from that Supreme

Person....I have taken a first minutes to read over a section of the Srimad

Bhagavatam which directly answers this question (S.B2.6.22) ananda cinmaya rasa

patibhavitabhis, tabhir ya eva nija rupataya kalabhih, goloka eva nivasaty

akhilatma bhuto, govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami " The Supreme

Personality of Godhead, Govinda, the one who enlivens the senses of everyone by

His personal bodily rays, resides in His transcendental abode, called Goloka.

Yet He is present in every nook and corner of His creation by expansion of happy

spiritual rays, equal in power to His personal potency of bliss. " he is

therefore simultaneously personal and impersonal by His inconceivable potency,

or He is the one without a second, displaying complete unity in a diversity of

material and spiritual manifestations. He is separate rom everything, and still

nothing is different from Him. "

 

This philosophy as mentioned above is understand as " achintya

beda beda tattva " ....which means inconceivably one and different.

Krsna IS everything, yet simultaneously, He has a separate identity

all His own. That separate identity, ALL IS OWN, is the ONLY

identity which is simultaneously fully aware of every atomic particle within

existence....for this reason it is said that the jiva is qualitatively one with,

but NOT quantitatively one with the Lord. Again, oneness in quality, but not in

quantity.

 

In the realm of Vrndavan, where Bhagavan Sri Krsna appeared to

display humanlike pastimes......it was not always understood which

Krsna His eternal Srimati Radhika was spending time with.....this

topic is very very elevated topic, and without a sense of bhakti, of

which only an atomic drop has manifested in my heart, I do not feel

qualified to try to grasp....I can only repeat what I have heard from my

acaryas, and pray that one day I may understand a tiny drop of this nectar.

 

(second question...pertaining to Paramatma versus

Bhagavan....Paramatma does not manifest form with venu, rupa, lila,

and madhuri.....or flute, transcendental form, pastimes, and

unlimited sweetness.....as Bhagavan Sri Krsna does. Paramatma

remains in the heart guiding, but when bhakta comes to the level of

raganuga bhakti, spontaneous loving devotion, beyond all rules and

regulations, his connection with Paramatma is manifested as seeing,

speaking, conversing with Bhagavan Sri Krsna rather than

Paramatma.....Paramatma form is manifest in a different way)

 

Respectfully

Mahalaksi Dasi

 

--

, " sadhak_insight "

<sadhak_insight wrote:

>

> Shree Hari

> Ram Ram

>

> Sadhaks, please re-read the original question before responding so

> that the responses directly address the question being asked. In

> light of increased enrollment and responses, we will be more closely

> following the group's guidelines. Thank you all !

> Gita Talk Moderator

> Ram Ram

> --------------------------------

> Question 1:

> When we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme Almighty, omnipotent and

> omnipresent God why we are also not almighty, omnipotent etc. like

> God ? If not, then why we declare ourself " I am that " . Please help

> clarify this in brief words.

>

> Raj Kumar Monga

> Ram Ram

>

> Question 2:

> I am a not clear regarding the meaning of Bhagwan,(Bhagavan), is it

God personified as in Krishna? In what context would one use each

term " Paramatma " and " Bhagwan " in preference to the other.

> With Respect and Divine Love,

> Mike Keenor

>

> -

> Loving Divine,

> Pranam.

> In Gitaji two aspects are discussed - Prakriti (nature: Lord said it

> is my lower aspect) and Parmatma (Soul, Super Consciousness,

> Brahman: Lord said, I am in all but not attached to any).

> Literally, we are ansh (atom) of both.

>

> * Let's look at the nature first:

> We are made up of an atom of earth (physical body, skeleton, etc),

> water (all fluids in our body), fire (warmth in our body, e.g.,

> vaishvaaner agni, etc.), air (gases, praans like apaan, etc.,

> sky/space (scriptures say we have 5 types of sky within us -

> chidaakaash, mahaakaash, paraakaash, etc.). Nature (Prakriti) is

> constantly changing, things get created and destroyed, it is

> chanchal (restless), so when we are focused on Nature (prakriti), we

> display/reflect those gunas of it as we have inherited them all from

> Prakriti.

>

> * Now the other atom we have inherited is from higher realm - Soul

> or Super Consciousness.

> This is stable, always peaceful, always joyous, always present

> regardless of time or space. Therefore it is all pervading -

> omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent. So it is obvious when we are

> focused on Soul, we display/reflect those characteristics (this word

> is used for communication only) as we have inherited them from Soul.

>

> It is like from a sack of salt if you pick a pinch, the pinch

> inherits all saltiness, doesn't matter how small a pinch is, even

> just a grain of salt has the same saltiness in it. So that's how we

> are too but our focus is not where it should be, that's all.

> Changing our attention will make us realize that we are almighty and

> omnipotnet as God IS.

>

> Hope this helps...

> humble regards,

> always at Thy Lotus Feet

>

> Manjula Patel

> -

>

> Shri Krishnah Sharanam Mama

>

> Mike, Here is another attempt at answering your question. The

> Upanishads (and Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapurana) try to tell the

> attributes of Brahma, Paramatma and Bhagwan in that order. Of

> course, all the three names are these days used loosely and

> interchangeably and are indeed the names for the same God, but there

> is a difference in the level of manifestation of the attributes or

> their powers in the three `forms' of God.

>

> When we refer to Brahma, He is understood to be nirguna (impersonal,

> without `qualities'), nirakara (without form) and nirvishesha

> (without attributes or particularities) and is worshipped by the

> Yogis and Gyanis i.e. those who follow Yog or Gyan Marga, since

> their ultimate object is to know the Jiva or Self (embodied soul)

> and Brahma. They can thus at the most become Atma-gyanis (one who

> knows Self/Soul). Since God in this `form' (without form) is

> supposed to be without attributes etc. and although He still has all

> the potential, He does not manifest them (i.e. does not do anything

> else, except beholding His own entity).

>

> The next `form is of Paramatma, who is omnipotent…etc. sat, chit,

> ananda,.. etc. but is saguna (is not impersonal, has attributes),

> saakaara (has form or forms), and savishesha (has particularities).

> In this form He (Paramatma) has almost all the manifestations that

> Bhagwan has, such as., rupa (form), naama (names), guna

> (attributes/qualities), dhaama (abode), sant (saints, loved ones),

> but does not perform Lila (divine play). Thus, in this form

> (Paramatma), God bestows on His devotees all the benevolence,

> including all that is aspired by the Gyan margis or yogis plus more.

> But there still remains the highest bliss that the true bhaktas of

> the supreme state of mind (like the Gopis) desired.

>

> The devotees or Bhakti margis of the highest order who have

> completely surrendered unto Him, their antahkarana (inner

> conscience) is pure and have Him only in all their actions, mind,

> soul and intellect only can achieve Him in His highest form and in

> His total self, when He blesses them. This form is of Bhagwan in all

> its glory. Bhagwan has His rupa, naama, guna, dhaam, sant and

> additionally, Lila. The Bhakti margis are not attracted to moksha or

> mukti (liberation, or freedom from bondage) as a pishachini (like

> goblin, evil, ghostly) and never wish for it, since it can at best

> liberate one from the cycle of birth and death, but it will confine

> you in this state for ever and never enable you to strive for the

> highest bliss, i.e. to realize God, Bhagwan. (Only in the human form

> can you perform action, including Bhakti. All other species,

> including gods, demigods only reap the result of their actions in

> the past).

>

> The real bliss or Ananda can only be felt and obtained at the feet

> of God at all times and in participating in his divine plays. Ananda

> is God (Anando Brahmeti Vyajaanaat – Taittariya Upanishad) or Raso

> Vaisaha (He is indeed the Rasa, divine elixir – Taittariya

> Upanishad). That is Bhagwan. But as I said earlier, we loosely use

> all the words for any form of God. You are right when you say that

> Bhagwan is God personified as in Krishna.

>

> There are thousands of differences between us as Jiva and Bhagwan.

> How can there ever be a comparison at all? For example, He is

> Vibhuchit (all pervading, very big), we (as Atma) are Anuchit

> (miniscule); He is Sarvashaktimaana (omnipotent, all powerful), we

> are Alpashaktiman (with little power); He is Sarvagya (know-all), we

> are Alpagya (know little), He is Anshi (the whole), we are Ansha (a

> part), He is Gunaatita (beyond the Gunas), we are Gunabaddha (bound

> by three gunas - sat, rajas, tama); He is Divya (divine), we are

> Mayik or Mayabaddha (bonded by Maya) etc. etc. Only similarity is

> that both of us are eternal (sat) and are chetana (Conscious). The

> Jiva is called `ansha' or part for the above reason that the Jiva is

> sat and chit, and derives its `power' to function or to be

> enlightened from Bhagwan. But it will be naïve to think that we can

> ever become as powerful as He is, even though we are a miniscule

> part-a part even smaller than a molecule. We are alive by His

> bahiranga shakti (externally manifested power) and are His

> vibhinnansha (different or `external' part, rather power), just as

> the Gods (Brahma, Shiva etc) are his Svaansha (part of self).

>

> Regards.

>

> K.N. Sharma

>

> --

> Dear All,

> With my limited knowledge my understanding of Relationship between

> Atma and Paramatma is as below.

>

> Relationship of Soul to God

>

> This relationship has been explained and interpreted differently by

> various seers, sages and acharyas after studying the same Vedas. One

> school considers soul as different from Brahma in the stage of

> bondage i.e., when manifested in the human body. Audolini considers

> that it becomes one with Him only when liberated and freed from the

> effects of Karma of good or bad deeds, desires and thoughts. It is

> just like the waters of different rivers, streams and rivulets which

> otherwise are different owing to so many factors like the presence

> of various salts, minerals, etc., become one with ocean after

> merging in it. Combining finite manifested and unmanifested souls

> covered with subtle atoms of human karma, with the infinite Brahma

> is negation of religion as a spiritual science.

>

> However, Amartya holds somewhat different view. Even in bondage, the

> manifested soul is different and non-different from Brahma. He

> compares to the rays of the sun light in relation to the Sun.

> Bhagavad-Gita considers the manifested soul as controlled and Brahma

> residing in the heart is the controller. Thus from the study of

> Vedas different views emerge based on one's own degree of knowledge.

> One can appreciate this relationship better when the differences and

> similarities between God and Soul are understood.

>

> While God is almighty, omniscient, all pervasive, infinite, self-

> created, eternal, self-sustainable and having infinite attributes

> making Him ineffable, Soul is not so. It has at best a relationship

> of master and servant and that too in the state of shuniya sattava,

> turiya, kaivalya or moksha. Otherwise, the soul cannot reach God

> even as a servant to be at His eternal service. It is only a

> particle of God and finite. It is not even omniscient having only

> part of Brahma's knowledge and always yearns to acquire more

> knowledge of God through Vedas and all other scriptures of the major

> religions of the world. The predominance of tamasic gunas takes away

> its shine. In this ignorance stage due to only material and

> intellectual knowledge, it can not even convey its knowledge to

> senses, mind and other instruments within the gross body. It is not

> capable of fulfilling the noble desires of the human beings, if

> senses become master of the gross body. The senses in that state

> along with uncontrolled and turbulent mind under the effect of gunas

> of activity and passivity create all kinds of hurdles and separate

> them from the a-priori knowledge contained in the manifested soul.

> While God is 'aja' unborn, the soul gets birth (manifestation) in

> the gross body. Brahma can create, sustain and destroy the universe

> and Prakrti at His Will; soul is too finite to possess such powers.

> God is ineffable; soul has limited attributes and manifested soul

> even still less owing to deeds, thoughts and desires of human

> senses.

>

> Dvait Vedantist Madhavacharya advises human beings not to compare

> Soul with God and combining finite with infinite is negation of

> religion, ethics and all rational logic. Many fake god men and cult

> leaders still like to combine finite with the infinite and this

> distorted knowledge has greatly helped them to make movable and

> immovable properties worth billions of rupees. They use the concept

> of meditation as balm to soothe the harassed followers and to still

> their vritties- the turbulent waves and ripples in the sea of

> matter. They give superlative epithets to their style of meditation

> and make the followers repeat in their mind that soul has all the

> attributes of God and it is jnan sarup, prem sarup, shiva sarup,

> satya sarup, anand sarup etc. The most glaring contradiction which

> they make by saying that the manifested soul of even the most

> corrupt follower, bribe taker, adulterator of food etc., has also

> the same attributes as God. Thus, such evil-minded persons do not

> feel any thing wrong in their corrupt practices, which are cause of

> disharmony, social strains and stresses in the families and society.

> This kind of deliberate distortion of Vedic knowledge helps them

> hefty flow of black money, filthy lucre as donations to their

> trusts. In most of such cases, the knowledge of soul and God remains

> unto their mouth and does not reach their hearts.

>

> It is thus apparent that the soul has a number of differences in

> attributes from its master and Creator. It is only a tiny particle

> of God and at best, His agent to maintain record of our good or bad

> deeds, virtuous and non- virtuous thoughts, selfish and selfless

> desires. According to a qualified monist and Vedantist Ramanajum

> (1017-1137), soul even on liberation when finally released

> from 'karma' does not merge with God, only attains the status of

> eternal servant (Sesa). God is the owner, master and controller of

> all souls and spirits in the world for which he gives a spiritual

> name 'Jiva Jagat'. Even the pure idealist and absolute monist

> Sankracharya also agrees in the stage of avidya with only material

> and intellectual knowledge the soul has hardly any attributes of God

> being covered with subtle particles of mostly tamasic and rajasic

> gunas. However, the soul always yearns for vidya covering complete

> Brahma jnan.

>

> So long as the cosmic illusion Maya is there, soul's attributes can

> never be realised. Only when illusion goes with Vedic knowledge,

> some of the divine attributes of manifested soul start emerging, its

> shine reaches the entire body creating an 'aura' around the gross

> body. Only then, the unity of soul and Brahma described as Mahavakya

> is achieved. tat tvam asi (Thou art That), aham Brhma asi (I am

> Brahma), ayam atma Brahma (my soul is Brahma) are all Mahavakya.

>

> However, Rig-Veda (1-164-20, 22) gives differences between God, soul

> and Prakrti. Some of the Greek philosophers and many western

> metaphysicists of the science of soul had also come to similar

> conclusion independently. Plotinus (203-262 BC) held though soul is

> free, once enmeshed in the body, its freedom is lost but retains its

> ability to rescue itself. Later even a wise savant of Islam, Sial ul

> Din Yahia-al Suhrawardy (1153-1191) held the view that manifested

> soul is only one part of the complete soul with partial attributes

> and ever keen to join its other part in heaven to reach celestial

> abode. Thus manifested soul can have only very limited attributes of

> God. Plato also held that soul has a desire to move towards Summan

> Genus-the supreme God by acquiring godly qualities when enmeshed in

> human body. If less than godly qualities, to the extent and degree

> of knowledge it acquires, it is enmeshed in gross bodies of nine

> kinds ranging from philosopher kings to despots and evil-minded

> persons. The highest life is that when you do not identify happiness

> with indulgence. Though holy Bible puts it in other way,' Pray for

> leading us not to temptations, evil and forgiveness for all our

> debts'. (Mathew gospel 6-2, 6-10 to 17)

>

> Madhvacharya had observed all souls are produced out of 'Trishta'

> and are largely different from God. Soul of tamasic kind of person

> (leading a greed based life without any social aim) is largely

> ignorant and even of a sattavic kind of person leading need based

> life is partly omniscient while Brahma is Omniscient. Both Atma and

> Jivatma are incapable of fulfilling their own desires whereas Brahma

> can create, sustain and destroy the whole world. He advises the

> human beings avoid comparing soul with God. According to him most of

> the human souls are of three kinds, Mukti yoga, Nitya sansarin and

> Tamo yoga. Mukti yoga souls are fit for liberation and such a soul

> is the rarest. Persons having such manifested souls take births

> after centuries and leave behind the true knowledge of soul, spirit,

> God, Prakrti etc., for the mankind and save them from utter

> degeneration. Nitya samsarin are the souls, which travel endlessly

> through the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Tamo yoga souls are

> fit to be eternally in Hell.

>

> The gross body containing such kind of soul has uncontrolled senses,

> turbulent mind and indeterminate intellect. Such persons are their

> own enemies. All three kinds of souls take birth on this earth

> amongst all religions, caste and creed. Somewhat similar concept of

> three kinds of souls was also observed by Plato about two thousands

> years before Madhavacharya. Plato described three kinds of souls as

> possessing three different vital powers in the society. These three

> vital powers are the cause of different activities and even

> professions of the individuals (A History of political Theory by

> G.H.Sabine.p.58). He observed three predominant traits in the

> individuals and each kind of soul has its own peculiar and special

> excellence or virtue. Based on the quality of souls in each

> individual, Plato developed the concept of three classes (not caste)

> in society.

>

> Vedic metaphysics and ethics do not find any cleft between the

> interest of the individuals and ideal society or between desires and

> duty in respect of a person whose body, spirit and soul are well

> harmonized. Whenever any such conflict arises one should understand

> his/her own nature and the 'real self' and act on the guidance of

> the inner self and not to be led by senses and outward looking mind.

> While the inner self or jivatma may not have all the attributes of

> God but still it remains the light of our inner being (A.V.19-60,

> Y.V 34-1 to 3 and R.V 6-9-6). It is also one of the triple bands in

> the gross body along with spirit and matter.

>

> With kind regards,

> P.K.Sabhlok

>

>

> --

> , " sadhak_insight "

> <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> >

> > Jai Shri Krishna,

> >

> > There is an owner for everything in the world, then how is it

> > possible that there is no owner of the man. Parmaatma, He who is

> the

> > owner of everyone and everything is our owner as

> well. " Mamaivansho

> > (Gita 15:7) actually says that we believe Parmaatma to be ours BUT

> > Parmaatma knows that we are His own. When we become surrendered to

> > Parmaatma then only we also know Him – `Mameva Ye Prapadhyante,

> > Mayametam Taranti Te' (Gita 7:14).

> >

> > Atma (soul) is part of Parmaatma, but by assuming affinity with

> the

> > body and worldly things it becomes Jiva. This `Jiva'ness actually

> is

> > as artificial as an actor in a movie or drama. Parmaatma is so

> kind

> > to us that He not only believes us to be His part only but knows

> as

> > such. He only shares this secret fact with us in Gita 15:7, out of

> > his sheer desire of our liberation.

> >

> > If a lion's child is brought up with the sheep's children from his

> > birth then he forgets his powers. But the moment a lion comes and

> > reminds him that look your body is similar to mine and therefore

> you

> > not a sheep, but a lion like me only, and you have all the powers

> > such as me, then he immediately gains all the powers of a lion.

> > Similarly, here Parmaatma is reminding us and we can become as

> > powerful as Him, if we firmly accept this.

> >

> > By assuming affinity with perishable material things we cannot

> > become great, it is only a false assumption, which actually

> deprives

> > us of our real greatness (power to realize Parmaatma). The

> greatness

> > assumed based on perishable things will itself be perishable only.

> > By realizing the Almighty Parmaatma, whose part (Ansha) Jiva is,

> he

> > becomes great – so great that even demigods respect him and desire

> > that he visits their place. Not only this, even Parmaatma becomes

> > his Daas (`Mai to hoon Bhagatan ko Daas').

> >

> > Body is a very small part of the world and jiva (soul) is part of

> > Parmaatma. What mistake man makes, is that he desires both (world

> > and Parmaatma) to act favourably for him. What needs to be done is

> > to offer the body to the world and Jiva to Parmaatma – this is

> > honesty. This honesty only is called liberation.

> >

> > Actually, man cares only for few things, few houses, some wealth,

> > few people etc., which he considers as his own in the world.

> > Otherwise, there are millions of houses and people, unlimited

> wealth

> > etc. but he does not even think of them at all, merely because he

> > does not consider them of his own. This means that he is already

> > freed (liberated) as far as those uncountable things, with which

> he

> > does not attach mineness. Thus, substantial liberation has already

> > taken place. Now if he ponders, the few worldly things, with which

> > the so called mineness is considered, will not stay with man

> > forever, but their bondage will remain for infinite births. So a

> > spiritual aspirant (Sadhak) should offer the worldly things to the

> > world (and that is Karmayoga) and himself to Parmaatma (which is

> > Bhaktiyoga).

> >

> > We are part of Parmaatma and to remember this eternal relation

> > (sambandh) with Him, we should accept three things –

> >

> > (1) Parmaatma is ours

> > (2) We are of Parmaatma and

> > (3) Everything is of Parmaatma only.

> > Then we can get divine love (Bhagvat Prem), which is the SOLE

> > OBJECTIVE of human birth.

> >

> > Narayana Narayana

> >

> > Rajendra J. Bohra

> >

> >

-

> > There is no difference in atma and param atma. Param is an

> adjective

> > like Shri or Sriyut prefixed before naming a noble person i.e.,Sri

> > Ram vs. Ram.

> > Atma is not contained in forms with boundaries and thus differs

> with

> > an individual, species or object or energy or memory but what is

> > common to all. Atma is for example, similar like electricity in

> > grid and manifested in forms of activities of washing machines,

> > bulbs, cemeteries, railways, and millions of appliances run on

> > electricity. Each apparatus of lives of each one of us is designed

> > by techniques of jiiva (life sciences) and it has to perform

> unique

> > task i.e., washing machine cannot be converted to an electric

> engine

> > and should not be in competition.

> >

> > In this way, Atma is content (electricity), and Lives in various

> > forms are conductors (cable). As and when cable (pvc or plastic,

> and

> > copper ) realizes that it is conducting something(electricity)

> > which is not its own property then the realization of electricity

> by

> > cable first starts. After that cable and electricity become

> together

> > and activate the universe by its various actions. Tulsi Das,

> > Einstein and Gandhi are examples of transformation.

> >

> > With best regards

> > K G Misra

> >

-

> > Dear Sadaks,

> >

> > There is no relationship between Athma and Paramathuma. Athuma is

> > one with Paramathuma. If one starts contemplating on several

> > question related to Who I am, What is birth and death, what

> happens

> > after death Etc he will start realizing that everything around him

> > is Anithiya/Maya. Tecnically saying that science has proved one

> uses

> > a fraction of his brain. Remaining unused. The little usage also

> > relates to TV serial/ worldy attachments/ pleasures/ and emotions.

> > Never aware the end is coming. This 12 Vaishna saints, 63

> Nayanmars,

> > host of Bakthas, Adi Sankara In Bhaja Govindam script, Buddha,

> have

> > given in detail about contemplation. Once one goes deep into

> > contemplation he will understand that everything around is

> appearing

> > and disappearing (being born and dead)

> >

> > Almost all scripts, Vedas, Upanashids have very clearly said that

> > GOD is not object (Prameyam) but to be known by Gyana (Knowledge).

> > To get Gyana only so many people like Puranderdos (crorepathi),

> > Thrimagai Alwar King, Ramana Rishi etc left behind everything to

> > know Gyana. To attain that utmost stage of knowledge one needs

> leave

> > attachment of worldly things.

> > Brain Power: When there is a single pointed focus on only knowing

> > the Self, and desiring nothing else, then the enlightment takes

> > place. This enlightenment gives knowledge of ones previous births

> > and his future. Besides all the divine knowledge automatically

> > comes to his mind.

> >

> > Human has been blessed with intellect to contemplate. In most

> > scripts it is said that even Indra, Ganderva, etc in 14 galaxies

> > have to come to earth to do penance to attain divinity.

> > So human has that abundant power that even 5 elements on earth

> > cannot disturb. That stage is called " THAT " . Means you are part of

> > GOD, but we are focusing our thoughts on everything other than

> GOD.

> > So once we understand that we have the power in us that makes us

> non-

> > distructable, you are " THAT " .

> >

> > This is what Bagavan says in GEETHA that you Athuman are not the

> > body. Arjuna was only instrumental in destroying bodies in war. If

> > one person in war field was a realized one, then Arjuna could not

> > kill that body, which is " THAT " .

> >

> > Buddha on enlightenment knew he was " THAT " there was radiance

> around

> > him for miles, because he was " THAT " .

> >

> > Samartha Ramadoss great saint knew nothing other than Sree Rama

> Nam.

> > Badrachala Ramadoss great saint in Andra Pradesh knew only Sri

> Rama

> > and built temple on a hill. Once Sri Rama on Ram Navami day

> promised

> > to take part in celebreation. But Sri Ram never came. Distressed

> > Ramadoss shed tears. Sri Ram appeared and said that HE came as a

> cow

> > during celeberation but was chased away.

> > Ramadoss was enlightened that Sri Rama is in all. Means HE is in

> > you and me. That HE is THAT

> > B.Sathyanarayan

> >

> >

-

> >

> > , " sadhak_insight "

> > <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hari Om

> > >

> > > The Question is that when we are part of Paramatma , then why

> we

> > > are not as good as Him ? The answer is that we have super

> imposed

> > an

> > > artificial connection over a natural and permanent connection.

> We

> > > are definitely as good as Paramatma even today. We are

> > > " SATCHIDANAND " even today. We are part of Paramatma, we are

> > > connected with Paramatma even today. There is no doubt on that.

> > > Problem is that we are not able to experience that, because we

> > have

> > > started identifying ourselves with the body, ego, mind,

> > intellect,

> > > world – with those things of which we are not at all the part!

> We

> > > have super imposed a wrong relationship over a correct

> > relationship,

> > > and hence ignorance/confusion.

> > >

> > > I will explain it this way. There is a desire in you that – " I

> > > should live for ever, I should never die " . Now this desire is

> > > of " SAT " part of you. " SAT " means existence. There is a desire

> in

> > > you that " I should know everything. I should not be ignorant of

> > > anything " . Now this desire is of " CHIT " part of you. " CHIT "

> means

> > > knowledge. There is a desire in you that – " I should always be

> > > happy. I should never be sorrowful " . Now this desire is of "

> > ANAND "

> > > part of you. ANAND means bliss. These desires are in you and you

> > are

> > > in fact continuously striving even today to fulfil these

> desires.

> > > But you are not able to do. Why ?

> > >

> > > Reason is that you want to live for ever with reference to your

> > > present body! You want to acquire knowledge by using your

> > intellect.

> > > You want to acquire happiness by acquiring worldly pleasures.

> > Hence

> > > none is successful in extinguishing these desires. You have

> > deeply

> > > super imposed your relationship with the world- which world does

> > > nothing except changing. You are not changing. Hence you are

> > > suffering/finding yourself empty handed. If you lift this

> > artificial

> > > relationship of the world by disconnecting yourself with the

> > world,

> > > immediately you will REALISE your eternal and permanent

> connection

> > > with Paramatma. Immediately you, yourself will become "

> > > SATCHIDANAND " ( Existence-Knowledge- Bliss). In fact you are

> that

> > > only, but because of super imposition discussed herein above of

> > the

> > > world, and because of your identifying yourself always with

> > > reference to the world only , you are not able to

> > REALISE/EXPERIENCE

> > > the fact that you are as good as Paramatma.

> > >

> > > So what should you do ? You should " disconnect with the

> world "

> > > by any means, say by Bhakti Yoga or by Jnana Yoga or by Karma

> Yoga

> > > or by Raja Yoga ( Dhyaan Yoga) and then realise/experience

> the

> > > fact that you yourself are indeed , rightfully, undoubtedly

> as

> > > good as Paramatma Himself ! In fact you have got human life

> only

> > > for that purpose. In fact in you the desires of SAT, CHIT, and

> > > ANANDA are existing permanently even today only to drive you

> > towards

> > > disconnection with the world !

> > >

> > > As Simple As That ! !

> > >

> > > Jai Shree Krishna

> > >

> > > Vyas N B

> > >

> > > -------------------------------

-

> --

> > --

> > > namaste....

> > >

> > > with deepest sense that I am unable to truly grasp what it is

> that

> > > is truth, still I pray that I may offer something for this

> > > discussion. In the Bhagavatam (1.2.2)is one very famous

> > verse, " yam

> > > pravajantam anupetyam apeta-krtyam dvaipayano viraha-katara

> > ajuhava,

> > > putreti tan mayataya taravo bhinedus, tam sarva bhuta hrdayman

> > munim

> > > anato smi...... " I offer pranam to Sri Sukadeva Gosvami, who

> can

> > > enter the hearts of all living beings. When he left home

> without

> > > undergoing the purificatory processes, such as accepting the

> > sacred

> > > thread, his father Vyasa cried out, " O my son " . As if they were

> > > absorbed in the same mood of separation, only the trees answered

> > in

> > > reply. " (Sukadeva is the 16 yr. old saint who spoke the Srimad

> > > Bhagavatam) It is my understanding, that as it is said in this

> > > verse, one who is pure can " enter the hearts of all " .....this is

> > not

> > > merely a figurative statement. I have had astounding

> experiences

> > to

> > > strengthen my faith that a truly pure person, who is living a

> life

> > > free from sin, absorbed in the Absolute, has a certain measure

> of

> > > all cognizance. Someone might say, " mmmm....impossible....tell

> > > me " ....so in extreme brief I will tell you something that never

> > > fails to amaze me when I recall. Three or four years ago, I

> was

> > so

> > > angry.....a loved one would not stop using drugs. I wanted to

> > put

> > > this person in jail, I had reached the limits of my tolerance,

> and

> > > foolishly had no understanding of my own inability to control

> > > others. I wrote to Sri Guru, he never wrote a letter back, but

> > > next night in a dream he stood before me.....first a line of

> > > devotees all receiving achman (a few drops of water to sip as

> > > purification) then a sacred mantra. When it came to my turn,

> Sri

> > > Guru was suddenly standing next to me, looking at a photo album

> > of

> > > holy temples, deities, and Vaisnavas. He was turning the

> pages,

> > > one by one. I never forget, every time I tell this story, that

> it

> > > seemed as if an eternity had passed....my feet were hurting in

> the

> > > dream, I was standing for so long of a time, as Sri guru turned

> > the

> > > pages of the album. Finally, Sri guru came to a picture of a

> > > fallen sannyasi, who had been highly worshiped and

> > respected....but

> > > gave in to the allurement of maya. (in this case, sexual

> > > relationship with a woman, which is forbidden for the order of

> > > sannyas)....the wave of pain that shot from the heart of my Guru

> > > into my heart was unimaginable. There were no words for him to

> > > tell me his sadness for those who have lost their strength,

> given

> > up

> > > their vows, and reverted to activities beneath the vows of their

> > > ashram in life ......then the dream concluded with his saying to

> > > me, " You will have to wait until later for your mantra " .

> > >

> > > My letter to Sri Guru was about my pain.....my anger, my

> > > frustration.....how did he hear me and answer so perfectly?

> > That

> > > I was so unqualified because I did not understand the agony and

> > > sadness a truly saintly person feels for those souls who cannot

> > > control their senses, who give up the path of devotion for

> sensual

> > > pleasure? How did he enter into my heart in a dream, and with

> no

> > > reference to the actual situation, teach me? Because one who is

> > > truly divine can enter into the hearts of all, especially into

> the

> > > heart of the disciple who is crying out sincerely, " master,

> guide

> > > me " .

> > >

> > > Another thought.....how did the thousands of sages know to

> > come

> > > together and hear the sacred conversation of the Srimad

> > Bhagavatam,

> > > which was spoken by Srila Sukadeva Gosvami five thousand years

> > > ago? There were no emails then, no letter carriers.....but

> the

> > > consciousness was so high that the sages automatically

> knew.....it

> > > is time to convene on the bank of the sacred river Ganges for a

> > > great sacrifice, of hearing the holy scriptures.When we are in

> > touch

> > > with the Supreme Absolute, amazing things happen.

> > >

> > > respectfully, Mahalaksmi Dasi

> > > -------------------------------

> > >

> > > Dear sadaks,

> > > It is said in scripts and Bagavan has said that everything

> enters

> > > into HIM during Maha Pralaya. Again everything manifests from

> HIM.

> > > Everything that abides in HIM and everything that manifests from

> > HIM

> > > is PARAMATHUMA. Things that abide in HIM and manifests from HIM

> is

> > > JEEVATHUMA. The known upanashids 108 could not describe

> > PARAMATHUMA

> > > fully and Vedas says that to describe Paramathuma is difficult.

> > > Paramathuma is clearly said in Vedas as " Apprameyam " . Means THAT

> > > which cannot be known by senses. So one has to know by knowledge

> > > (Gyana) which Guru gives or that Paramathuma HIMSELF gives.

> > >

> > > B.Sathyanarayan

> > > -------------------------------

-

> > > Jai Sri Krshna

> > >

> > > In brief words as you requested, as per different exegetical

> > school

> > > of Vedaantic philosophy, we can declare ourselves as

> > >

> > > 1) seperate from the divine (dvaita or dualism),

> > > 2) existing as parts of the divine (vishishtadvaita or qualified

> > non-

> > > dualism), or

> > > 3) as the divine (advaita or non-dualism/monism).

> > >

> > > It all depends at which level we are speaking. Mystics and

> > Gnostics

> > > all over the world declare from experience that their true

> > Identity,

> > > their essential nature is the Infinite, so they lean much more

> to

> > > advaita at least when speaking from a jnaana (Knowledge) angle,

> > and

> > > dvaita when speaking from a bhakti (devotion) one (which

> > > necessitates the duality of bhakta and Bhagavaan, or devotee and

> > > divine respectively).

> > >

> > > However, how and why we, as the one Infinite Being, see

> ourselves

> > as

> > > limited individuals is the matter of philosopher-exegetes of

> > > Vedaanta which I will not enter into here, and it is certainly

> > > valuable to study their ideas (such as those of Adi Shankara,

> > > Ramanuja etc). Non-philosophical mystics do not really enter

> into

> > > discussion about this (most likely because they have not the

> > > philosophical tools to hand), but merely concern themselves with

> > the

> > > experience, and in fact are so much in that Bliss that I'd

> rather

> > > conjecture that they're simply not interested in intellectual

> > > discussions about it but prefer to dwell in the Euphoria of the

> > > divine that their bhakti has given them. But for those whose

> > > intellectual thirst also needs to be quenched, the study of

> > > Shankara, Ramanuja etc. is vital and ineffably enriching. Even

> > their

> > > commentaries on the Gita would be useful to see comparatively

> how

> > > they interpret certain verses.

> > >

> > > Seeing as this is a Gita group, one version I like is the one

> > > translated by Swami Chidbhavananda. It has a nice, simple, yet

> > > meaningful commentary for the saadhaka. The reason I mention

> this

> > is

> > > because he gives a nice summary/introdution of the three

> > exegetical

> > > schools of uttara-mimaansaa¡ that I've mentioned above, and

> brings

> > > their ideas in the commentary of certain verses.

> > > Yours humbly

> > > Rishi

> > > (Rishi Handa)

> > >

> > > -------------------------------

-

> --

> > > , " sadhak_insight "

> > > <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Sadhakas, Namaste!

> > > >

> > > > When we hear or read the mentioned verse of Gita

> > > (mamaivansho...Gita 15:7) that Jeevas are Anshas-parts of

> > Paramatma

> > > which is Supreme Consciousness, we take it to mean individual

> body-

> > > mind organism we believe we are to be part of Paramatma. This

> > makes

> > > us ask the question raised by Raj Kumar Mongaji, I think.

> > > >

> > > > This is not what is really conveyed here! From the vantage

> > point

> > > of Jeevatma, it is not true. However, from Lord's point, He can

> > say

> > > that It is He as Supreme Consciousness, Eternal Being appears to

> > be

> > > all jeevatmas, even as waves(jeevas) appear in Ocean

> (paramatman).

> > > Ocean is always the same, waves or no waves. A wave who

> believes

> > it

> > > to be real and independent entity apart from ocean can no longer

> > > claim to be part of the ocean because he doesn't know he has no

> > > existence apart from ocean. If he claims to be ansha and expects

> > to

> > > be omnipresent etc, then it is information only on his part!

> > > >

> > > > Now such a Jeevatma when realizes he/she is Atman first,

> beyond

> > a

> > > shadow of doubt, through experience and not just as information,

> > > then claim would be true. At this point, as Atman, and not as a

> > body-

> > > mind based person, he/she may consider a part for a while until

> > > there is a final realization that he is Paramatman, not just a

> > part

> > > or ansha, just as wave is Ocean all the way, not a part. Wave is

> a

> > > concept, name/form(nama/rupa) only, not a reality! No one has

> ever

> > > touched such a wave!

> > > >

> > > > In the Upanishadas, this realization is proclaimed by four

> > > Mahavakyas: This Atman is verily Brahman, Thou art That,

> > > Consciousness is Brahman, I (Sat-Chit-Ananda) am Brahman!

> > > >

> > > > When one lives as if one is Pure Consciousness, which is

> eternal

> > > Being, The Self which is second to none, Undivided,

> > Undifferentiated

> > > Awareness, the question of part doesn't arise. Then

> Omnipresence,

> > > Omnipotence, Omniscience is realized in the sense that all

> > > limitaions-separations are dissolved by Jeevatma!

> > > >

> > > > At this point it may be mentioned that what is commomly talked

> > > about us being " embodied soul " is not true, rather, we are in

> > > reality Consciousness which embodies all apparant minds and

> bodies

> > > and all objects. As such all objects are Consciousness shaped as

> > > those objects in our experience(Chit-Vrittis). I mean the stuff-

> > > Vastu of all objects when experienced is conditioned

> Consciousness-

> > > Brahman. See the truth of this! We never experience anything

> gross

> > > out there, but only Consciousness-chaitanya! Everything is at

> zero

> > > distance from Consciousness!

> > > >

> > > > One more point, as I understand, God of a Bhakta is not

> > different

> > > from Self of a Gyani, or Karma-Yogi. There is no question of

> Gyani

> > > stoping at Self, and Bhakta can go ahead to God. Such a Bhakta

> and

> > > Gyani are one just as Truth is one without a second, and that is

> > > What I and You are! What separates us is our conditioning

> (Aavaran)

> > > of Atman by identification with limitations of body-mind

> believing

> > > to be embodied souls.

> > > >

> > > > Namaskaras..Pratap

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -----------------------------

-

> -

> > > > Ram Ram Raj,

> > > >

> > > > Will try to explain from what I have understood from

> > books/Audios

> > > of

> > > > Shri Ramsukhdasji and other sources as well.

> > > >

> > > > In general, at times some points look confusing, particularly

> in

> > > > spirituality. Because there are ways of looking things and

> there

> > > are

> > > > contexts in which things are explained. " Ansh " here is said to

> > > > confirm the person in front that though residing inside the

> > > > body and riding over it but you are not it. You are not part

> of

> > it.

> > > > Nothing that comes and goes is you or whatever decays is not

> > you.

> > > It

> > > > is said in that sense. You are not ansh of prakrit but of ME

> > > > (Parmatman).

> > > >

> > > > There are not mathematical measures as such by saying " Ansh " ,

> to

> > > > show that you are ansh and Parmatma is maha " ansh " . There is

no

> > > > comparison as such in terms of size and quantity. Moreover

> > emphasis

> > > > is on ekatma-bhav with the supreme consciousness and reminder

> for

> > > > oneself to detach from temporary forms or cause and effect

> > world .

> > > >

> > > > Another angle: From logic perspective if you see. If infinite

> > says

> > > > that you are part of me, which means again infinite. If

> > boundryless

> > > > says that you are part of me and you are not part of soemthign

> > > which

> > > > is limiting, which dies, which comes and goes, which is bound

> to

> > > > space and time. So in essence even giving label as " Ansh " does

> > not

> > > > contradict the fact that everything is Vasudev, complete,

sheer

> > > > presence, limit less . How God in place can be limited and

> > > unlimited

> > > > in another places.

> > > >

> > > > So " I am that " and " Jeev mera santan ansh hai " ..both are

> > correct

> > > > and taking to same GOAL…

> > > >

> > > > Another angle: Upnishad says if you add anything to Poorna, it

> > > > remains poorna. If you take out poorna from something then

> also

> > it

> > > > remains poorna. So ansh-anshee, it is good to explain but

> since

> > God

> > > > is one and can not be present in parts, so should not be

> imagined

> > > > from separation and quantity point of view.

> > > >

> > > > Moreover in scriptures it is also explained at times that same

> > > > consciousness on the basis of UPADHI is labeled as Atman,

> > > Parmatman.

> > > > Like space in small pitcher is called " Ghatakash " and in big

> > hall

> > > is

> > > > called " Mathakash " and in open is called " Mahakash " …but space

> > > > remains the same…

> > > >

> > > > Since all depends on from where you look. So at times it

> becomes

> > > > confusing and to arrive at any strong and one conclusion and

> mind

> > > > loves that and keeps hankering for one final statement which

> > should

> > > > be tested from all angles, which doesn't happen generally. We

> > have

> > > > to align with the perspective of the speaker and understand

the

> > > > context and purpose. And stick to it and take its advantageous

> > part

> > > > for dipping into silence.

> > > >

> > > > Don't know whether this will remove some of the jargon from

> your

> > > > mind. If not, then please park your confusions and don't delay

> in

> > > > dipping into silence. These things will automatically get

> > answered

> > > > in future by someone outside or answers will come from within.

> > > >

> > > > Warm regards,

> > > >

> > > > Prakash Kushwah

> > > > -----------------------------

-

> -

> > > > -Shree Hari_

> > > >

> > > > I read Paramatman, as Supreme Soul, (GOD, O THEOS),

> > > > But I am a not clear the meaning of Bhagwan , (Bhagavan), is

> it

> > God

> > > > personified as in Krishna, if I am wrong in these assumptions,

> I

> > > > don't mind, one learns from corrections.

> > > > Finally in what context would one use each term in preference

> to

> > > the

> > > > other.

> > > >

> > > > With Respect and Divine Love,

> > > >

> > > > Mike

> > > > (Mike Keenor)

> > > >

> > > > -----------------------------

-

> > > > namasthe. As you may have known, below are the two schools

of

> > > > vedanta: (there are other school of vedanta also....but here

> we

> > can

> > > > look into these two below for ur question.).

> > > > 1. advaita vedanta

> > > > 2.dvaita vedanta

> > > >

> > > > Advaitha vedanta explains in terms of " Everything is

> God..so " I

> > am

> > > > THAT " .

> > > > Dvaita vedanta explains in terms of dualism..as " Everything

> > happens

> > > > because of God "

> > > >

> > > > Whatever it is, or how many ever schools of thoughts may there

> > be,

> > > > it is alright. Wrong or incorrect knowledge comes in many

> forms

> > but

> > > > the right or correct knowledge comes only in one form. It is

> ok

> > to

> > > > get confused, only when u get confused, you will start

thinking

> > > > which is correct and which is not correct. To understand that,

> > > > please see the chapter 6 ( meditation of Bhagavadgita) and do

> not

> > > > think much about advaita or dvaita but just observe all ur

> > thoughts

> > > > that comes to ur mind and not worry of the end result but try

> to

> > > > focus on the methodology of attaining the end result. Because,

> > end

> > > > result is relative to oneself. In that way, you will not be

> > > confused

> > > > whatever the views u may come across ( from dvaita or

advaita).

> > > >

> > > > Regards,

> > > > Bharathi

> > > >

> > > > -----------------------------

-

> -

> > > > Raj Monga; I am also novuce to this just like you I recently

> > > > watched and studied all about Mahabarat and Sri Krishana I

> also

> > > > have same question as you do and each and every one who visits

> > and

> > > > give discoursess in our Temple

> > > > Bob Sathyanarayana

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -----------------------------

-

> --

> > > > , " sadhak_insight "

> > > > <sadhak_insight@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Ram Ram to all the dear ones,

> > > > >

> > > > > I am novice in this line and do not have good knowledge

> about

> > the

> > > > > philosophy of Vedanta. When I read Gitaji I find Lord

> Krishna

> > > > being

> > > > > Paramatma (Supreme Soul, Supreme Consciousness) declaring

the

> > > > Jeeva (embodied soul) as his Ansha (mamevansho jeev loke

> > jeevabhuta

> > > > sanatana) and all the saints also give discourses on this

> > > > > subject.

> > > > >

> > > > > My question is that when we are the Ansha (part) of Supreme

> > > > Almighty, omnipotent and omnipresent God why we are also not

> > > > > almighty, omnipotent etc. like God ? If not, then why we

> > declare

> > > > > ourself " I am that " . This is quiet confusing. I shall be

> > highly

> > > > > grateful to you if this confusion is removed in brief words.

> > > > >

> > > > > Raj Kumar Monga

> > > > > Ram Ram

> > > > >

> > > > > ---------------------------

> > > > > GUIDELINES FOR POSTING A RESPONSE:

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. The group is focused on the Holy Gitaji, therefore, only

> > > > > responses which further clarify the understanding of Gitaji,

> > will

> > > > be

> > > > > posted.

> > > > >

> > > > > 2. Making reference of Gitaji shloka is highly encouraged -

> at

> > > > least

> > > > > once in the response. Wherever possible, please quote

> Gitaji

> > or

> > > > > other scriptures to substantiate your response.

> > > > >

> > > > > 3. Please be as concise and to the point as possible,

> > respecting

> > > > > sadhaka's time. Under no circustance the answer should

> exceed

> > say

> > > > > one (book) page at the most (500 words or so) 3-4

paragraphs.

> > > > >

> > > > > 4. Kindly limit personal feelings, opinions, beliefs etc. to

> > the

> > > > > extent that they further help in understanding the Gita

> shlokas

> > > > >

> > > > > 5. Kindly focus your writing to the subject at hand only.

> > > > >

> > > > > 6. Please do not include links to the other sites or other

> > > > > organizations.

> > > > >

> > > > > 7. Complete reproduction of texts from any book is strongly

> > > > > discouraged, however references may be made of the book or

> > > author

> > > > > (but not links to other sites).

> > > > >

> > > > > 8. Kindly do not include your personal information such as

> > phone

> > > > > number, address etc.

> > > > >

> > > > > 9. Please do not address the response to a particular

> > individual

> > > > > since the message is going to the entire group.

> > > > >

> > > > > 10. Due to the large readership, only those responses will

be

> > > > posted

> > > > > which are in line with the general philosophy of taking

> Shrimad

> > > > > Bhagavad Gita as the reference.

> > > > >

> > > > > 11. Moderator at his discretion, may modify the posting, if

> > > content

> > > > > is unclear for distribution or not directly related to the

> > > question

> > > > > being asked.

> > > > >

> > > > > 12. Please respond taking into consideration the novices,

> > youth,

> > > > > westerners, non-sectarian audience. Kindly limit the use of

> > only

> > > > > Sanskrit words, rather provide the English word with

Sanskrit

> > > > > bracketed wherever possible.

> > > > >

> > > > > 13. Any personal remarks over the knowledge of any sadhak or

> > > about

> > > > > the

> > > > > stage at which any sadhak is standing in his quest /

sadhna /

> > > > > spiritual journey - must not be included in your posting.''

> > > > >

> > > > > 14. There should not be any sarcasm towards fellow sadhaks

> in

> > > this

> > > > > spiritual learning and sharing.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > MODERATOR

> > > > > Ram Ram

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>