Karma and consciousness/ thanks

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " kim ja nyun " <kjn@h...> wrote:

> In response to karta's request,

> The following sentences (p67~p68) in 'Explorations into the External' by

Ramesh S. Balsekar

>

> " Nature does not start from scratch every time. This is no doubt the reason

why a Mozart could compose music when he was only twelve, and a Jnaneshwar could

produce the Jnaneshwari at the tender age of sixteen. But there is certainly no

need for a conceptual individual(that can not exist except as an appearance) to

identify himself with a series of bodies in the temporal manifestation.

>

> As the Buddha has put it: " As there is no Self, there is no transmigration of

Self; but there are deeds and continued effects of deeds. These are deeds being

done but there is no doer. There is no entity the migrates, no Self is

transferred from one place to another; but there is a voice uttered here and the

echo of it comes back. "

>

> And then of course the problem remains : what about the very first human

being? On what Karma was his existence based? The only answer to the maze of

many such questions and problems in what the sages have said : the entire

manifestation is a concept, and nothing is created and nothing is destroyed.

>

> It is rather interesting to note that a modern astronomer, as eminent as Sir

Fred Hoyle, says that the idea of time as an ever-rolling stream from past to

future is definitely wrong, that it is " a grotesque and absurd illusion " , and

that " we are the victims of confidence trick. " He might as well have said that

we are under the illusory influence of Maya. Then there are the Feynman's

diagrams(which got him the Novel Prize in 1965) in which particles are made to

move backwards in time through for a brief instant!.

>

> Everything becomes benignly clear in the true perspective of the totality of

manifestation as a conceptual creation by consciousness in consciousness,

perceived and cognized by consciousness through the millions of apparatuses

called sentient beings. The malignity of problems arises only when there is a

mistaken identification with the apparatus as a separate entity that he thinks

he is in control of. When one was born one had no choice, nor does one have a

choice when faced with imminent " death " . In between birth and death, however,

man considers himself the master of his destiny! "

>

> -

> satkartar7

> Nisargadatta

> Friday, June 20, 2003 4:38 PM

> Re: Karma and consciousness

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " kim ja nyun " <kjn@h...> wrote:

> > " The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a particular

function and not the other way round : it is not that a new function is created

just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded for his Karma in a

previous birth.

> > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and that

function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed individual

in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal manifestation.

> >

> > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The consciousness

within one individual apparatus merges with the universal consciousness when

that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is

subsequently 'born'.

> > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does not

differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same

consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all times. There

must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of continuity' between the

new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that the story may continue

and the show may go on. Evolution goes on. "

> > - from 'Explorations into the Eternal' by

Ramesh S. Balsekar-

> >

> > Notional though it be,

> > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal

consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).

> > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-ic

functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).

> >

> > Are you(Atman) agree?

>

>

> please post the folowing sentences

> from Ramesh

>

> Karta

 

great stuff, thanks kim ja nyun