Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Namaste Brothers and Sisters, We have five sheaths and these are in the three bodies. So what does Astral mean? Does it mean the vital, associated with the body----a double, or are we talking about other sheaths and subsheaths as well? I think many people use the word Astral for both the vital and the entire subtle body. One is beneath the second death the other beyond it. The doppelganger vital not being the true vital and disintegrating after death rather quickly in many cases. Energy is everywhere it feeds down not up, does it not? Also is not the big I of Saguna Brahman an illusion also, it being the Universal Mahat? Only Nirguna Brahman is beyond illusion. Love Tony. === Keep on truckin-Chant the Gayatri! "God is formless. In order to merge in the formless God, you have to give up identification with the body." "There is only one Soul and that is God." Sai Baba. _______ Get your free @ address at Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 At 11:17 AM 6/17/99 -0700, Tony O'Clery wrote: >Tony O'Clery <aoclery > >Namaste Brothers and Sisters, > >We have five sheaths and these are in the three bodies. So what does >Astral mean? Does it mean the vital, associated with the body----a >double, or are we talking about other sheaths and subsheaths as well? Different traditions speak of different numbers of bodies or sheaths. I've heard models of 6, 7, 12, 49 (Max Heindel's Rosicrucianism) and even 172 levels (a Hindu-tantric teaching whose teacher-name I forget). Usually the traditions that speak of an "astral body" do not speak of sheaths or just 5 levels. In advaita vedanta, vital sheath (PRANAMAYAKOSA) is sometimes thought to be part of the subtle body is sometimes said to be inside the physical body. They are all part of the appearances/illusion stuff. Even in advaita vedanta it's taught that Saguna Brahman is part of Maya. Like you say, only that which has no features and no characteristics is not subject to illusion. Regards, Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Greg Goode wrote: > only that which has no features and no characteristics is not subject to > illusion. Yes. This is a worthwhile meditation. >From ACIM: 'Nothing that I see is real'. Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 > > only that which has no features and no characteristics is not subject to > > illusion. > Yes. This is a worthwhile meditation. > > >From ACIM: > 'Nothing that I see is real'. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Reuters]: Physicists have just announced the discovery of a particle with no features or characteristics whatsoever. They say they're everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Tony O'Clery wrote: > We have five sheaths and these are in the three bodies. So what does > Astral mean? Does it mean the vital, associated with the body----a > double, or are we talking about other sheaths and subsheaths as well? > I think many people use the word Astral for both the vital and the > entire subtle body. One is beneath the second death the other beyond > it. The doppelganger vital not being the true vital and disintegrating > after death rather quickly in many cases. Energy is everywhere it feeds > down not up, does it not? > > Also is not the big I of Saguna Brahman an illusion also, it being the > Universal Mahat? Only Nirguna Brahman is beyond illusion. Marcia: I don't know about sheaths and subsheaths. When I think of the astral body is something that we can grow and have but it is not a given. It is not the three centers that we are born with i.e. the physical, emotional, and mental. The astral body is a second body that can be formed but is not the physical body which is composed of an physical, emotional, and mental component. You might also be able to call the astral body a soul. Not sure. The astral body can exist after the death of the physical body but does have a life. A third body can be formed which is the mental body. This can survive after the death of the astral body but still has a limited life. Only if a man has developed a fourth body is he immortal. To me the biggest error or trap that a man can make is to think that he has a second body when in fact he is merely circulating around in the physical body gravitating from one center to another and dreaming he is awake. If a man has actually severed the connection between the arising of desire in the physical body and the acting out of it then he can begin to grow and feed an astral body. Now I have no idea if that is just all "head" stuff or if it relates to what Tony is saying. I have experienced what feels like the gestation of a second body which is of a finer more subtle substance and seems to be fed by somehow not discharging energy but keeping some of it inside. This goes against the natural flow of gravity or what I want to do. In other words resistance is evident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Jerry M. Katz wrote: > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Reuters]: Physicists have just announced the > discovery of a particle with no features or characteristics whatsoever. > They say they're everywhere. > Eureka, I've lost it! andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Jerry M. Katz wrote: > umbada (Jerry M. Katz) > > > only that which has no features and no characteristics is not subject to > > > illusion. > > Yes. This is a worthwhile meditation. > > >From ACIM: > > 'Nothing that I see is real'. > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Reuters]: Physicists have just announced the > discovery of a particle with no features or characteristics whatsoever. > They say they're everywhere. I guess it puts their old theory of the unique Photon down the drain Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 Antoine wrote: > Antoine <carrea > > Jerry M. Katz wrote: > > umbada (Jerry M. Katz) > > > > only that which has no features and no characteristics is not subject to > > > > illusion. > > > > Yes. This is a worthwhile meditation. > > > > >From ACIM: > > > 'Nothing that I see is real'. > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Reuters]: Physicists have just announced the > > discovery of a particle with no features or characteristics whatsoever. > > They say they're everywhere. Jerry, do you have the link for this? (BTW there's already 3 characteristics so far. 1. it's a particle. 2. has no features. 3. It's everywhere.) David (loves this kind of stuff/non-stuff) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 > umbada (Jerry M. Katz) > > > > only that which has no features and no characteristics is not > subject to > > > illusion. > > > > Yes. This is a worthwhile meditation. > > > > >From ACIM: > > 'Nothing that I see is real'. > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Reuters]: Physicists have just announced the > discovery of a particle with no features or characteristics whatsoever. > They say they're everywhere. But humans are strange beasts. So they will undoubtedly "define" that: mass = 0 velocity = 0 electrical charge = 0 And the particle will be called the "Nirguna". It is the only particle that is equal to its antiparticle which is a property after all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 1999 Report Share Posted June 17, 1999 David Bozzi wrote: > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [Reuters]: Physicists have just announced the > > > discovery of a particle with no features or characteristics whatsoever. > > > They say they're everywhere. > > Jerry, do you have the link for this? > > (BTW there's already 3 characteristics so far. 1. it's a particle. 2. has no features. 3. > It's everywhere.) > > David > (loves this kind of stuff/non-stuff) yeah, here's the link: http://www.you'renotserious.David/AreYou?/Imeancomeon/index.html And stop playing heavy neti-neti games with me. You want me to freak out? :-) ....and did you know that tuna smoothies can't be drunk with a straw? love, jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 1999 Report Share Posted June 18, 1999 "Jerry M. Katz" wrote: > > David > > (loves this kind of stuff/non-stuff) > > yeah, here's the link: > > http://www.you'renotserious.David/AreYou?/Imeancomeon/index.html : ) Thanx for the non-link. > And stop playing heavy neti-neti games with me. You want me to freak > out? :-) Yes, into oblivion. > ...and did you know that tuna smoothies can't be drunk with a straw? Gee, I wonder what else you're aware of that can't be drunk with a straw. David (never touched the stuff) for those that missed out... http://www.jps.net/cburnell/shake.htm (innovative tuna site) 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.