Guest guest Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 The doubts arise in the mind. The mind is born of the ego. The ego rises from the Self. Search the source of the ego and the Self is revealed. That alone remains. The universe is only expanded Self. It is not different from the Self...- Bhagvan Sri Ramana MaharshiDear Poornimaji:As I stopped in this morning to check on oneof my favorite sanghas, I see the ongoing debateabout illusion and reality continues, with reference to Shri Ramana, his teachings on nonduality, and the assertions that everything which is manifest is delusion, illusion, so full of confusion :-)Just as I was about to leave to go elsewhere, I noticedyour post which contained the above langhuage. My interpretation of the last few lines of the quote you just posted? It definitively states that everything which is manifest is indeed the Self, theexpanded Self. What else could it be? That being so,then one cannot logically deny the *relative* reality ofit, can one? And to deny it is so is indeed duality,as such a proposition attempts to separate that whichis inseparable...neti neti is the teaching tool meant toassist us in understanding the relative realities, or orderof realities. Once that is understood, it is droppedsince it is no longer needed. It is then that one canembrace rather than shy away from the entire manifestion for what it is...the blessed Lord Himself.In His Service,Radhe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 , " Radhe " <shaantih wrote: > > The doubts arise in the mind. > The mind is born of the ego. > The ego rises from the Self. > Search the source of the ego > and the Self is revealed. > That alone remains. > The universe is only expanded Self. > It is not different from the Self... > > - Bhagvan Sri Ramana Maharshi > > Dear Poornimaji: > > As I stopped in this morning to check on one > of my favorite sanghas, I see the ongoing debate > about illusion and reality continues, with reference > to Shri Ramana, his teachings on nonduality, and > the assertions that everything which is manifest is > delusion, illusion, so full of confusion :-) > > Just as I was about to leave to go elsewhere, I noticed > your post which contained the above langhuage. > My interpretation of the last few lines of the > quote you just posted? It definitively states that > everything which is manifest is indeed the Self, the > expanded Self. What else could it be? That being so, > then one cannot logically deny the *relative* reality of > it, can one? And to deny it is so is indeed duality, > as such a proposition attempts to separate that which > is inseparable...neti neti is the teaching tool meant to > assist us in understanding the relative realities, or order > of realities. Once that is understood, it is dropped > since it is no longer needed. It is then that one can > embrace rather than shy away from the entire > manifestion for what it is...the blessed Lord Himself. > > In His Service, > > Radhe Namaste, I will just post this link to my entry on ajativada on wikipedia... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajativada Except for the excess verbiage in my original entry most of the editing is really just grammaritical correction and tinkering. Because how does one edit ajativada.......The real truth as Ramana indicated.............Cheers Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Do me a favor Tony, turn the paranthesis around. " ...words not NirGuna Brahman,(or ultimate transcendental, indescribable 'God', but still Saguna Brahman, ( or being or 'God' associated with... " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 , " Richard " <richarkar wrote: > > Do me a favor Tony, turn the paranthesis around. > > " ...words not NirGuna Brahman,(or ultimate transcendental, > indescribable 'God', but still Saguna Brahman, ( or being or 'God' > associated with... " Richard, That's fine but the reason a use it with 'God' is that there isn't any God just ideas about a human desire that's all. Like religion--we are told it is necessary for the young and ignorant. On that basis how do the apes and animals get by---Without believing in a non existant God. They are smarter than humans apparently.. We call 'Personal God' in creation Saguna Brahman but in fact neither Saguna or creation ever happened.......there is only or isn't the negative Nir Guna Brahman...The idea of God comes from insecurity, and the wish for somebody taking ultimate responsibility for us. That is why 99.9% of people who claim to seeking moksha, couldnt handle it, if it was presented. Kind of like St Augusine of Hippos saying that he wonted realisation but not right now........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.