Guest guest Posted April 6, 2001 Report Share Posted April 6, 2001 Tim " Omkara " <coresite@h...> wrote: > > Certainly... yet who's to judge anyone... there are those sneaking > around who are not at all what they appear ;-). Nisargadatta said so > himself in 'I Am That'... " Rarely will a realized one make himself > known to you, and then only for your abiding welfare " (very loosely > paraphrased). -------------- Tim, the Jnani's Worldly Life is the Total Functioning. Whether the name and shape goes public or not, or trips in and out of varrying situations, under various disguises, is not a choice... As I told Hur sometime back. The higher up you go, the clearer you see what Maharaj said and was pointing at, what he didn't say and wasn't pointing at........ what is a confused mix of both, due to translators etc., what is taken out of contenxt (by readers and listeners on the spot also) from the back and forth conversation he was having with someone at the time. And you also see how he was a Buddha who grew over his lifetime, rather than shrink. This is my experience with Maharaj. And by the way, I am not telling you anything you don't well already know. El , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2001 Report Share Posted April 6, 2001 Dear Elizabeth, Nisargadatta, elizabethwells2001 wrote: >the Jnani's Worldly Life >is the Total Functioning. > > Whether the name and > shape goes public or not, > or trips in and out of > varrying situations, > under various disguises, > is not a choice... Yes, but this applies to 'everyone' ... the Jnani is aware of this functioning as such, that's all. The total functioning is the total functioning -- again, not to be confused with 7 billion (human) " total functionings " walking and talking, all separate somehow. There is only the total functioning, and it is choiceless. Jnani or no Jnani, it makes no difference. If there were not a single " Jnani " (definition: a conceptual 'entity' assumed 'superior') the fact remains. > And you also see how he was > a Buddha who grew over his lifetime, > rather than shrink. I see him responding spontaneously to situations, and influenced also by the expectations of the culture he lived in. In India, a " Buddha " is expected to " grow, " thus the appearance is such. In the West, typically a " Buddha " is expected to " shrink, " thus this is the appearance. Admittedly this is a generalization -- it depends, also, if the " Buddha " is going to be doing any formal teaching :-). Nothing is really happening, but situations spinning apparent dream- universes out of nothing and nowhere. > And by the way, I am not telling you > anything you don't well already know. Namaste... thank you for telling me ;-). Love, Tim (Omkara) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.