Guest guest Posted October 23, 2004 Report Share Posted October 23, 2004 advaitin , Amitha Krishnamurthi <amitha@g...> wrote: On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:43:57 -0000, Tony OClery <aoclery> wrote: > > > advaitin , Amitha Krishnamurthi <amitha@g...> > wrote: > > > > In response... > > > > " Instead of mentally worshipping your > > Ishtadevata/Guru, replace the image with an image of yourself. You > > will find the same results, for you are imaging your own higher > self > > which has no image really. " > > > > and subsequently > > > > " Only the Ego is holding the body > > and mind constructs together. Once the Ego is gone and the body > > drops with the exhaustion of prarabda karma--------there is no > > common thread. No imprint not anything just the Self. " > > > > Since the whole idea of spiritual evolution becomes ridding the > Self > > of Ego....how is it going to help me if I meditate upon myself > > mentally??? I for one, find the thought unpalatable... & definitely > > feel that it feeds the Ego rather than trying to get rid of it... > . " > > > > It is obviously difficult to meditate on a Nirguna Brahman..which > is > > where forms come into play...they help in our quest for spiritual > > evolution..Picking up a form does not indicate fear...it indicates > > your readiness to move upwards in the process of " realization " . > > > > What I was trying to say in my earlier mail is that the Nirguna > > Brahman acts through the form that appeals to the Individual...the > > form might be that of a Guru, a God, an Avatar...even a pious > ancestor > > in your family.. If Maharishi realized that he was/is the SELF...he > > still exists..since the SELF doesn't perish..he can still manifest > > himself in any " Form " he chooses to...to his Bhaktas he will > appear as > > he was...that does not mean he exists in the astral level...nor > does > > that mean he didn't realize Godhood. > > > > " We have to realise that we are Praneaswara or the Sakti, and at > that > > point we realise Nirguna/Moksha " > > > > The texts can help us only to a certain point...after which the > > experience is what will lead us....the texts tell us that we are > the > > Self...but IMHO, any amount of outward analysis is not going to > help > > much in crossing that bridge between knowlede from the texts..and > > realization for oneself...introspection is the need of the hour. > > > > In this context..it does become true that without Bhakti..the whole > > thing is an exercise akin to mental gymnastics. > > > > Regards > > Amitha > > Namaste A,IMHO, > > A couple of points here; I used 'the image of oneself' as an > example. The Higher Self has no form and it is we who give it a > form, any form. Nir-guna cannot act at all through anything, that is > a contradiction in terms. > > 'Ramana' cannot manifest himself in any form to the devotee as he > that body/mind doesn't exist. It has gone back to the elements. It > is the devotee's subconscious that does the manifesting. Sure Ramana > was the Self but the body was just carrying out its predetermined > prarabda karma unitil it dropped. During this time it went through > the appearance of Bhakti, actions etc. > > Bhakti is much misunderstood. To many it is the devotion and the > emotion they call Bhakti, but it is more than that. Being devoted to > the path of Jnana without any forms at all is still devotion. For it > is the search for the Self, which is the aim of all yogas. Most > Yogas are about concentration and one pointedness, suitable to the > sahdhaka. > > All actions are predetermined by prarabda karma, there is no 'God' > organising our lives, the energy is provided that's all. We have > only the choice in attitude that is all, not in the result. > > To a follower of Bhakti Marga this may sound dry and unspiritual, > but to an Advaitin on the Jnana Marga, it is the essence of Sadhana-- > --lifting the veil. > > Religion for example is possibly a crutch, but to a one-legged man a > crutch is most useful. > > I suppose when we realise we are just part of a dream, it > ends.......ONS...Tony. > > In which case I suppose all the great pillars of the advaitin doctrine..all those who paved the way for others to follow... were one-legged.. so to speak. although I always thought there was a message for us in that these great souls had a judicious mix of bhakti in their quest for realization. besides..I seek to explain again that I didn't mean that Ramana would manifest himself..I said the Nirguna Brahman adopts the " form " of Ramana to those who find it appealing..just like other " forms " such as Shiva, Vishnu etc.. this would..going by the doctrine of advaita...indicate an evolvement spiritually...and would possibly eventually lead to realizing that one should move from " form " to " formless " before realizing that, that too is an illusion. regards Amitha --- End forwarded message --- 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.