Guest guest Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Namaste All, To me Aurobindo needs interpretation, perhaps only hls closest devotees are capable of doing same. His work 'Integral Yoga' seems to explain what he was all about. I feel what we are talking about is Aurobindo's vocabulary and method of description. Whether one ascends or the Divine descends is all about interpretation. What does it matter if it is up or down if the end result is the same. Ultimately there is no up or down anyway, no separation of planes, only One. Aurobindo seems to refer to Krishna as another term for the Universal Mind. However we have to mind our apples and our oranges, relatives and absolutes. Just another path that is all. People talk of beyond Brahman, and this is perfectly understandable. For those that have a Samadhi/Savikalpa with Saguna, and even perhaps even temporary Nirvikalpas, are in Union with Brahman as Saguna, there is still the last stage to go. Perhaps it is description again, for some would say that a JivanMukta is in union with Brahman completely. However if one is referring to the body of a Mukta it is obviously in union with Saguna. On dropping the body all disappears as never having happened only NirGuna Brahman.....ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 Why is Aurobindo so difficult for 99% of us to understand? Isn't God/Truth simple? Why make it sound so complex? Sachin ---- Tony OClery 12/06/05 02:30:14 advaitajnana Aurobindo, Brahman and ParaBrahman. Namaste All,To me Aurobindo needs interpretation, perhaps only hls closest devotees are capable of doing same. His work 'Integral Yoga' seems to explain what he was all about. I feel what we are talking about is Aurobindo's vocabulary and method of description.Whether one ascends or the Divine descends is all about interpretation. What does it matter if it is up or down if the end result is the same. Ultimately there is no up or down anyway, no separation of planes, only One. Aurobindo seems to refer to Krishna as another term for the Universal Mind. However we have to mind our apples and our oranges, relatives and absolutes. Just another path that is all.People talk of beyond Brahman, and this is perfectly understandable. For those that have a Samadhi/Savikalpa with Saguna, and even perhaps even temporary Nirvikalpas, are in Union with Brahman as Saguna, there is still the last stage to go. Perhaps it is description again, for some would say that a JivanMukta is in union with Brahman completely. However if one is referring to the body of a Mukta it is obviously in union with Saguna. On dropping the body all disappears as never having happened only NirGuna Brahman.....ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 6, 2005 Report Share Posted December 6, 2005 advaitajnana , " Sachin Chavan " <chavansachin@h...> wrote: > > Why is Aurobindo so difficult for 99% of us to understand? Isn't God/Truth > simple? Why make it sound so complex? > > Sachin Namaste, The language he uses and the way he writes is quite complicate to many people.........Tony. 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.