Guest guest Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 Dear Dennis-ji, Thanks for your clarification. You have said:-- "But there is no question (in my mind at least) but that enlightenment is an event in time (from a vyAvahArika standpoint) and, prior to that event, we mistakenly believe in a dualistic creation. Subsequently, we no longer make that mistake but: b) we have the memory of our prior mistake even though we no longer make it". That is what I also said in my previous posts. But the following extracts from Prof VK's post seem to contradict the above view. "Once Ego vanishes, the JnAni does not feel " There was Bondage earlier; now it has gone " . He only thinks `I am free by nature'. He is nitya-mukta-svabhAvaH. Secondly he does not consider that he has been freed from bondage. Ramana Maharshi was once asked: " When did you get Enlightenment? " . He replied; " Nothing came to me. I am always what I am ! " . Enlightenment or Mukti does not come to one; it is always one's nature!". My remarks: brahman is my nature; I am brahman even when I do not know it. But I am enlightened only when I realize that I am brahman as an anubhUti (experience). Even mere intellectual knowledge is not enough. So it would not be correct to say that enlightenment is my nature. In the above extract, what Ramana Maharshi said was "I am always what I am". This only means that he was always brahman, which both you and I accept. The next sentence, "Enlightenment or mukti does not come to one; it is always one's nature". These do not seem to be Ramana Maharshi's own words. They are the interpretation put by the person who wrote the book from which the extract has been taken. He has identified 'enlightenment' with 'one's nature'. And that is where the problem arises. If enlightenment is an event in time, as you say, and as I also think, it cannot be one's nature. Prof VK's extract further says:-- "Thus the nature of mukti is not accessible to the mind or speech. That is why Vedanta refers to the nature of the Atman as `neti, neti'. Hence whatever you may say about the state of mukti is not the final true statement". That means that we cannot understand through the intellect what is beyond the intellect. Best wishes,S.N.Sastri -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 Dear Sastri-ji, I think the only problem here is confusion of terms. The word mokSha translated as ‘liberation’ implies that before enlightenment one is in bondage and after one is free. We both know that this is not true. In reality, we are always free because there is always only brahman. mokSha should really be translated as ‘the event in the mind subsequent to which it is known that we are, and always have been, free’. Therefore it is certainly true that, after enlightenment, we do not think ‘there was bondage earlier’. What I was saying was that, after enlightenment, we know that ‘I used to think before that I was in bondage’. Similarly, the j~nAnI does not think that the event has freed him from bondage. But he knows that there was an event, prior to which there was misunderstanding and subsequent to which there was clarity (in the mind) about the already existing truth. So I think that we do actually all agree about this (including Ramana!) but it is certainly true that the misuse of words causes confusion again and again on this topic so that it is very useful to clarify it for the benefit of any members still confused! Best wishes, Dennis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 Dear Sastri-ji: Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Albert Einstein once stated (I am paraphrasing) that a problem sometimes cannot be solved at the level at which it is created or appears. Paradoxically, the mind that has the question, itself has to subside for the answer to become clear. But the answer is not verbal or intellectual but simply Self-Revelation. Self is always Self-Revealing by its very nature. For Yogis, Nirvikalpa Samadhi forms the bridge between the purified mind/intellect and the Self. It allows the Self which is ever existent to be reflected and recognized in the intellect. All are having the same experience as the Self. Difference is in the mind only. Self is reflected clearly in and through some minds. The mystery of life and the inherent contradictions can be studied for a long time without resolve. It is only the mind playing. It is mind itself, that has to be introverted and drawn within and merged in the Self. Sri Ramana used to say that there are essentially only two methods or paths to Realization. One is to inquire, “to whom do these thoughts arise”. Any thoughts, thoughts about Realization, thoughts about the compatibility of Realization with the world, worldly thoughts, good thoughts, bad thoughts, etc. If one enquires with persistence and intensity, over a long period, the mind merges in its source. The second path is that of the surrender. Surrender everything to the Lord, including the mind with all its good, bad, and contradictory thoughts. This surrender also leads to the mind merging in the Self. What happens afterwards, who can really say? The neti neti methods hints at that. Whatever is said about Realization is going to be limited. Namaste and love to all Yours in Bhagavan Harsha advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of S.N. Sastri Saturday, August 23, 2008 1:21 AM advaitin Four kinds of Non-existence(abhAva) Prof VK's extract further says:-- " Thus the nature of mukti is not accessible to the mind or speech. That is why Vedanta refers to the nature of the Atman as `neti, neti'. Hence whatever you may say about the state of mukti is not the final true statement " . That means that we cannot understand through the intellect what is beyond the intellect. Best wishes, S.N.Sastri -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2008 Report Share Posted August 25, 2008 The next sentence, " Enlightenment or mukti does not come to one; it is always one's nature " . These do not seem to be Ramana Maharshi's own words. Humble praNAms Respected Sri Sastri prabhuji Hare Krishna It may or may not be ramaNa mahashi's words...but IMHO, it is the ultimate truth of all vEdAntic teachings....if Atman is not always one's nature, and if it is an achievement at some point of time through some sAdhana then it is temporary...This is what shankara exactly argues in the gIta bhAshya 13.2...and he concludes here that : *nityatvaM upapAdayitum shakyaM*....Same conclusion we can see in sUtra bhAshya also...*nityashuddha brahma svarUpAt mOkshasya...* Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2008 Report Share Posted August 25, 2008 You are atma (brahman) even today. But are you enlightened today? Are you a liberated person today? If atma is the same as enlightenment, you should be enlightened even today. You are brahman now, but until you actually realize it you are not a realized or enlightened person,. Do you think I am so ignorant of the fundamental proposition that we are all brahman even today that you have to teach me that? Is there no difference between being brahman and being enlightened? S.N.sastri On 8/25/08, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: The next sentence, " Enlightenment or mukti does not come to one; it is always one's nature " . These do not seem to be Ramana Maharshi's own words. Humble praNAms Respected Sri Sastri prabhuji Hare Krishna It may or may not be ramaNa mahashi's words...but IMHO, it is the ultimate truth of all vEdAntic teachings....if Atman is not always one's nature, and if it is an achievement at some point of time through some sAdhana then it is temporary...This is what shankara exactly argues in the gIta bhAshya 13.2...and he concludes here that : *nityatvaM upapAdayitum shakyaM*....Same conclusion we can see in sUtra bhAshya also...*nityashuddha brahma svarUpAt mOkshasya...* Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar -- Hara Hara Sankara Jaya Jaya Sankara S.N.Sastri 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.