Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Dear Friends While pondering on Sri Ramana's cinema show analogy, it crossed my mind the question of the sattvic mind and the ordinary mind. The Sattvic mind is the pure mind. According to Sri Ramana, the Sattvic mind is close to the Self. Sri Ramana equates the pure sattvic mind infront of the Self, to the lens infront of the lamp. Please, any one can explain this anology. Most appreciated. mourad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 mourad wrote: > Dear Friends > > While pondering on Sri Ramana's cinema show analogy, it crossed my mind > the question of the sattvic mind and the ordinary mind. The Sattvic > mind is the pure mind. According to Sri Ramana, the Sattvic mind is > close to the Self. Sri Ramana equates the pure sattvic mind infront of > the Self, to the lens infront of the lamp. > > Please, any one can explain this anology. Most appreciated. > > mourad > > The states of the mind have been categorized as rajasic (quality of passion, energetic activity), sattvic (quality of equanimity) and tamasic (quality of indolence, resisting activity). The ordinary mind is either rajasic or tamasic (one transforms into the other till refreshed, then the show repeats).The sattvic mind OTOH neither is involved in a flurry of action nor in indolence: it deals with a situation effectively and after that, isn't involved in anything. Whether that goes under the label of " witness meditation " or " being relaxed yet alert " doesn't matter, a sattvic mind won't dabble over that (and similar issues) either yet it isn't indifferent in the sense of " insensitive " . It is obvious that if the Self could be realized, such realization would be an experience only and limited. Hence it has to be seen the other way: what (seemingly but effectively) hides the Self, are the activities of mind and the least hiding is from the sattvic mind. Strictly speaking, when a sattvic mind gets under a threshold of (already little) activity, the Self will be known as an inevitable consequence of that, whatever your (religious / atheist / humanist etc.) cultural background. Hence the major importance of a sattvic mind. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Dear Jan Thank you for your explanation. According to what you said, so the sattvic mind is a mind of equanimity, a mind that levels all phenomena, a mind that is free from preferences, a very objective mind. Dear Jan, is this what you meant? thank you mourad , ecirada <ecirada wrote: > > mourad wrote: > > Dear Friends > > > > While pondering on Sri Ramana's cinema show analogy, it crossed my mind > > the question of the sattvic mind and the ordinary mind. The Sattvic > > mind is the pure mind. According to Sri Ramana, the Sattvic mind is > > close to the Self. Sri Ramana equates the pure sattvic mind infront of > > the Self, to the lens infront of the lamp. > > > > Please, any one can explain this anology. Most appreciated. > > > > mourad > > > > > The states of the mind have been categorized as rajasic (quality of passion, > energetic activity), sattvic (quality of equanimity) and tamasic > (quality of > indolence, resisting activity). The ordinary mind is either rajasic or > tamasic > (one transforms into the other till refreshed, then the show > repeats).The sattvic > mind OTOH neither is involved in a flurry of action nor in indolence: it > deals > with a situation effectively and after that, isn't involved in anything. > Whether > that goes under the label of " witness meditation " or " being relaxed yet > alert " > doesn't matter, a sattvic mind won't dabble over that (and similar issues) > either yet it isn't indifferent in the sense of " insensitive " . > > It is obvious that if the Self could be realized, such realization would > be an > experience only and limited. Hence it has to be seen the other way: what > (seemingly but effectively) hides the Self, are the activities of mind > and the > least hiding is from the sattvic mind. Strictly speaking, when a sattvic > mind > gets under a threshold of (already little) activity, the Self will be > known as > an inevitable consequence of that, whatever your (religious / atheist / > humanist > etc.) cultural background. Hence the major importance of a sattvic mind. > > Jan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 Dear Mourad, A sattvic mind is devoid of the issues that characterize rajasic and tamasic minds. Such a mind knows that all phenomena and the pleasures (and pains) derived from them are transient so it neither chases nor avoids nor denies them, nor does it enjoy relabeling them (a mango relabeled " oval apple " will still taste like a mango). IOW such a mind is silent, at peace (relaxed yet alert) most of the time. Onlookers will label a sattvic mind also as " practical " . Jan mourad wrote: > Dear Jan > Thank you for your explanation. > According to what you said, so the sattvic mind is a mind of > equanimity, a mind that levels all phenomena, a mind that is free > from preferences, a very objective mind. > Dear Jan, is this what you meant? > thank you > mourad > > > , ecirada <ecirada wrote: > >> mourad wrote: >> >>> Dear Friends >>> >>> While pondering on Sri Ramana's cinema show analogy, it crossed >>> > my mind > >>> the question of the sattvic mind and the ordinary mind. The >>> > Sattvic > >>> mind is the pure mind. According to Sri Ramana, the Sattvic mind >>> > is > >>> close to the Self. Sri Ramana equates the pure sattvic mind >>> > infront of > >>> the Self, to the lens infront of the lamp. >>> >>> Please, any one can explain this anology. Most appreciated. >>> >>> mourad >>> >>> >>> >> The states of the mind have been categorized as rajasic (quality >> > of passion, > >> energetic activity), sattvic (quality of equanimity) and tamasic >> (quality of >> indolence, resisting activity). The ordinary mind is either >> > rajasic or > >> tamasic >> (one transforms into the other till refreshed, then the show >> repeats).The sattvic >> mind OTOH neither is involved in a flurry of action nor in >> > indolence: it > >> deals >> with a situation effectively and after that, isn't involved in >> > anything. > >> Whether >> that goes under the label of " witness meditation " or " being >> > relaxed yet > >> alert " >> doesn't matter, a sattvic mind won't dabble over that (and similar >> > issues) > >> either yet it isn't indifferent in the sense of " insensitive " . >> >> It is obvious that if the Self could be realized, such realization >> > would > >> be an >> experience only and limited. Hence it has to be seen the other >> > way: what > >> (seemingly but effectively) hides the Self, are the activities of >> > mind > >> and the >> least hiding is from the sattvic mind. Strictly speaking, when a >> > sattvic > >> mind >> gets under a threshold of (already little) activity, the Self will >> > be > >> known as >> an inevitable consequence of that, whatever your (religious / >> > atheist / > >> humanist >> etc.) cultural background. Hence the major importance of a sattvic >> > mind. > >> Jan >> >> > > > > 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.