10426Re: surrendering the ego
- Aug 31, 2003
> > Surrender of the ego...Bede Griffithsyes, so true
> > Ramanuja says that in pure knowledge there is no distinction
> > the knowing subject and the known object. For the universal Self,
> > there is no distinction between the knower and the known. For the
> > individual Self, however, the 'I' or ego cannot be obliterated
> > without obliterating the essential nature of the Self. The
> > individual Self must have an I-consciousness which persists even
> > the state of ultimate release. The 'I' or ego is not merely an
> > attribute of the individual Self, but constitutes the nature of
> > individual Self. Thus, the I-consciousness is not obliterated by
> > knowledge of Brahman.
> > The knowing subject is the 'I' or ego, which is a consciousness of
> > the inward Self. The 'I' or ego is a form of knowledge,
> > the essential nature of the Self. Thus, the released Self knows
> > essential nature of the inward Self.
> > Atman may take three forms: 1) it may be bound to the material
> > world, 2) it may be released from the material world, and 3) it
> > be eternal in its unity with Brahman. The bound Self identifies
> > itself with the material world. The released Self is freed from
> > attachment to the material world, and is aware of itself as a
> > spiritual reality. Release from samsara (cyclic, worldly
> > is a state of non-difference from the highest Self. The released
> > Self is aware of the unity of Brahman.
> > Ramanuja rejects the doctrine that the phenomenal world is
> > and unreal. According to Ramanuja, the phenomenal world is not
> > unreal unless it is viewed as distinct from Brahman. The
> > world is not simply a realm of false and illusory appearances. The
> > phenomenal world includes primordial matter (prakriti), which is
> > part of the body of Brahman.
> > Prakriti has three qualities (or gunas): 1) clarity (sattva), 2)
> > activity (passion, rajas), and 3) inactivity (darkness, tamas).
> > These gunas may interact to determine the nature of the material
> > world. Brahman is the inner Self or spirit (purusha) of prakriti.
> > Thus, reality is both material and spiritual. Spiritual reality
> > transform material reality. Plurality is not unreal unless it is
> > seen as replacing the unity of Brahman.
> > Ramanuja's Visishtadvaita Vedanta (or philosophy of qualified non-
> > dualism) has some important differences from Shankara's Advaita
> > Vedanta (or philosophy of non-dualism). For Shankara,
> > undifferentiated Brahman is ultimate realty. For Ramanuja,
> > differentiated Brahman is ultimate reality. For Shankara,
> > undifferentiated Brahman can be known and experienced intuitively.
> > For Ramanuja, Brahman can only be known through its attributes,
> > since Brahman has attributes which can be known and experienced
> > intuitively, it must be differentiated.
> > For Shankara, maya is an illusory appearance of reality, occurring
> > when the plurality of the phenomenal world is superimposed on the
> > unity of Brahman. For Ramanuja, however, maya is real and is the
> > plurality of attributes which are manifested by Brahman. Maya is
> > way in which Brahman is manifested in the phenomenal world.
> When it is said that Maya is illusion, it is reffered to its
> temporary and impermanent characteristic, while Brahman is that
> which is eternal, unmoving and permanent. So illusion really reffers
> to a non-permanent state. Only to understand and accept that all
> that is born must die, all that is created will be destroyed, all
> that implies evolution will have involution, that the yin needs the
> yang, black needs white. Brahman needs nothing. Since Brahman is
> permanent and eternal, it is said that it's Real. The real source
> and substratum of manifestation called maya or illusion. Nothing
> wrong nor right with illusion or maya or body or mind. Only the
> points of view may keep man bounded or not. So it'a a matter of
> point of view (for the thinking mind).
I wanted to post something within
our discussion about viewing the ego
in a forgiving light, since I can't
put into words what I know about
the subject as intelligent as you I
Cut & Pasted the Ramajuna interview..
I am not sure if it is from Ramana,
but this is not what I wanted to
highlight, so I'll come back dear
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>