Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Jivanmutas and prarabda etc

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

, christiane cameron

<christianecameron@m...> wrote:

> Dear Tony,

>

> yes yes yes

>

> but even Ramana Maharshi loved Arunachala better than any other

place

>

>

>

>

> OAS

> Chris

 

Namaste Chris,

 

One must distinguish between Ramana the body and its prarabda karma,

which may appear human, and the Jivanmukta. This confusion is what

causes further misunderstandings.

 

People talk of being Ramana devotees etc etc. What are they devotees

of? Ramana the body with its karma or The Universal Jivanmukta?

Ramana doesn't exist anymore than Jesus or Krishna. What does exist,

for arguments sake, is the Higher Consciousness, upon which we give

names like Jesus Buddha or Ramana. Ultimately this is also unreal

but that is another discussion altogether.

 

So worshipping pictures and images of Ramana is just putting a face

on our own Higher Self. It can be useful as a point of concentration

as Ramana has said..........ONS...Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Tony,

 

I cannot believe that you are lecturing me in this way. Either this is

not meant for me at all or you never read anything I wrote.

 

Again, we are aware of everything you say, but if we take all

interaction to the last consequence of Nirguna, then we might as well

stop posting here, as neither you nor I nor this Sangha exists.

 

There was a Jnani called Ramana Maharshi, my beloved Guruji, and he

loved Arunachala, that is all. Ramana is Arunachala and Arunachala is

Shiva and Shiva is Self. Has the red mountain called you?

 

Om Arunachala Shiva

Chris

 

 

 

 

On Jan 3, 2005, at 18:30, Tony OClery wrote:

 

>

> , christiane cameron

> <christianecameron@m...> wrote:

> > Dear Tony,

> >

> > yes yes yes

> >

> > but even Ramana Maharshi loved Arunachala better than any other

> place

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > OAS

> > Chris

>

> Namaste Chris,

>

> One must distinguish between Ramana the body and its prarabda karma,

> which may appear human, and the Jivanmukta. This confusion is what

> causes further misunderstandings.

>

> People talk of being Ramana devotees etc etc. What are they devotees

> of? Ramana the body with its karma or The Universal Jivanmukta?

> Ramana doesn't exist anymore than Jesus or Krishna. What does exist,

> for arguments sake, is the Higher Consciousness, upon which we give

> names like Jesus Buddha or Ramana. Ultimately this is also unreal

> but that is another discussion altogether.

>

> So worshipping pictures and images of Ramana is just putting a face

> on our own Higher Self. It can be useful as a point of concentration

> as Ramana has said..........ONS...Tony.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

advaitajnana , christiane cameron

<christianecameron@m...> wrote:

> Dear Tony,

>

> I cannot believe that you are lecturing me in this way. Either

this is

> not meant for me at all or you never read anything I wrote.

>

> Again, we are aware of everything you say, but if we take all

> interaction to the last consequence of Nirguna, then we might as

well

> stop posting here, as neither you nor I nor this Sangha exists.

>

> There was a Jnani called Ramana Maharshi, my beloved Guruji, and

he

> loved Arunachala, that is all. Ramana is Arunachala and

Arunachala is

> Shiva and Shiva is Self. Has the red mountain called you?

>

> Om Arunachala Shiva

> Chris

 

Namaste Chris et al,

 

No it isn't meant for you personally, it is meant for me and

anybody. No I haven't had any red mountains talking to me recently,

that I am aware of. Although a few rocks have been, thrown my way.

 

Just because one uses a form of devotion doesn't mean that is the

way of all. If one wishes to use pictures and mountains or even

bodily forms for a point of concentration that is fine, but it is

all external. Ramana's teaching was all internal 'Who am I?', I'm

sure he had to tolerate people worshipping him as did many other

Muktas, but that doesn't mean it was his teaching. One has to

distinguish between the body and its prarabda and the Mukta/Self.

Some people cannot easily go within due to mental capacity so they

worship things, as a representation. Ramana didn't come to start a

new religion, in fact he didn't get involved so.

 

There is no Ramana anyway but in people's imaginations, as the same

with Jesus, Buddha etc------they were probably all Muktas, most with

prarabda that gave them the illusion of being a person.

 

Many even have impressions of omniscience in Gurus etc etc. This is

also misunderstood IMO. A guru can only have the siddhis that were

decided for the body by prarabda and that's all. When the Ego is

gone it is the Universal Consciousness that motivates the 'shell'.

The UC is universal and so therefore doesn't have value judgments.

So a 100,000 people karmically killed in say a hurricane is no

different from a hundred thousand ants killed by someone poisoning

them in the garden. The Self doesn't ever interfere, in this

exchange and movement of illusory energy. So gurus cannot be

expected to display omniscience to the nth degree.

 

An Avatar may be slightly different from a Mukta in that they are

not fully realised, but held off to return and help. However they

usually become Muktas once in the lifetime anyway,IMO. They also

carry out the prescribed task they have set out for themeslves and

no more, including which siddhis etc etc.

 

In the end result pictures, mountains, idols, guru- humans and all

are for concentration only. This is because the lower mind loves

ritual and this behaviour. Go Within is the teaching.......Ramana

especially taught this and didn't come to found a new religion of

image worshippers. Who am I? Ko-Ham.

 

So yes I don't worship people, pictures, mountains, or any other

manifestation of illusion. I try to go within. Even praying achieves

nothing but a little peace of mind, it cannot change any karma. Only

meditation is really effective...........I am not saying stop

worshipping if at this state of one's mental capacity one needs it

for concentration.........but lets not forget what the concentration

is for...............ONS.............Tony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...