Guest guest Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 GuruRatings , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: GuruRatings , Venugopal AK <akvenugopal@> wrote: > > Dear Anna, > In this part of the world, Adi Sankara, > who lived 1200 years back, is considered an > Enlightened soul. He has written a book called > " Aparokshanubhuthi " (Enlightenment. It is availble > here in English translation. : > http://www.sankaracharya.org/aparokshanubhuti.php > Regards > Venugopal Namaste,V, I would agree that Sankara was enlightened but whether he was a realised jivanmukta is another question. It is hard to tell the truth from fiction and myth, but if he he taught as he is reported to have done........I doubt he was a Mukta. However he may have kept his most secret teachings to an inner group as Jesus said he did also. If you go to the Advaitin group with all its philosophers it seems full of superstition.ie sankara as little siva etc etc. I parted company with them or was suspended, as a heretic, when I argued that the Brahman of Pralaya is Saguna not Nirguna as it contained potentiality. Apparently they believe that Sankara taught it was NirGuna. However that is impossible for there are two pralayas one subsumes the whole universe up to the causal-Mahapralaya and the lesser up the subtle planes only. As there is potentiality even in Mahapralaya it can only be a pralaya of the Saguna concept........If you check my contribution on wikipedia ..ajativada I cover this somewhat......... --- End forwarded message --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 10, 2007 Report Share Posted December 10, 2007 GuruRatings , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote: GuruRatings , " Eric Paroissien " <ericparoissien@> wrote: > > GuruRatings , " Tony OClery " <aoclery@> wrote: > > ... > > > Namaste,V, > > > > I would agree that Sankara was enlightened but whether he was a > > realised jivanmukta is another question. It is hard to tell the truth > > from fiction and myth, but if he he taught as he is reported to have > > done........I doubt he was a Mukta. However he may have kept his most > > secret teachings to an inner group as Jesus said he did also. > > If you go to the Advaitin group with all its philosophers it seems > > full of superstition.ie sankara as little siva etc etc. > > I parted company with them or was suspended, as a heretic, when I > > argued that the Brahman of Pralaya is Saguna not Nirguna as it > > contained potentiality. Apparently they believe that Sankara taught > > it was NirGuna. > > However that is impossible for there are two pralayas one subsumes > > the whole universe up to the causal-Mahapralaya and the lesser up the > > subtle planes only. > > As there is potentiality even in Mahapralaya it can only be a pralaya > > of the Saguna concept........If you check my contribution on > > wikipedia ..ajativada I cover this somewhat.........> > > > Shankara does not leave a doubt about it when he treats prarabdha from > verse 89 in the sashtra Venu offered: > http://www.sankaracharya.org/aparokshanubhuti.php > It states clearly the loss of all potentiality. Namaste, If there are more than one pralayas there can only be potentiality. I part company with his rope analogy for there is no rope in the first place........... --- 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.