Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: surrendering the ego

Expand Messages
  • maria luisa
    ... between ... in ... the ... constituting ... the ... may ... existence) ... illusory ... phenomenal ... may ... and ... the ... When it is said that Maya is
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 31, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "satkartar7"
      <mi_nok@y...> wrote:
      > Surrender of the ego...Bede Griffiths
      >
      >
      > Ramanuja says that in pure knowledge there is no distinction
      between
      > 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
      in
      > the state of ultimate release. The 'I' or ego is not merely an
      > attribute of the individual Self, but constitutes the nature of
      the
      > 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,
      constituting
      > the essential nature of the Self. Thus, the released Self knows
      the
      > 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
      may
      > 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
      existence)
      > 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
      illusory
      > and unreal. According to Ramanuja, the phenomenal world is not
      > unreal unless it is viewed as distinct from Brahman. The
      phenomenal
      > 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
      may
      > 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,
      and
      > 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
      the
      > 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).

      ml
    • satkartar7
      ... yes, so true 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
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 31, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > > Surrender of the ego...Bede Griffiths
        > >
        > >
        > > Ramanuja says that in pure knowledge there is no distinction
        > between
        > > 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
        > in
        > > the state of ultimate release. The 'I' or ego is not merely an
        > > attribute of the individual Self, but constitutes the nature of
        > the
        > > 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,
        > constituting
        > > the essential nature of the Self. Thus, the released Self knows
        > the
        > > 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
        > may
        > > 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
        > existence)
        > > 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
        > illusory
        > > and unreal. According to Ramanuja, the phenomenal world is not
        > > unreal unless it is viewed as distinct from Brahman. The
        > phenomenal
        > > 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
        > may
        > > 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,
        > and
        > > 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
        > the
        > > 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).
        >
        > ml


        yes, so true

        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
        Maria Luisa

        love Karta
      • maria luisa
        ... Self, ... the ... even ... of ... by ... consciousness of ... knows ... it ... identifies ... from ... released ... The ... is ... 2) ... tamas). ...
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 31, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "satkartar7"
          <mi_nok@y...> wrote:
          > > > Surrender of the ego...Bede Griffiths
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Ramanuja says that in pure knowledge there is no distinction
          > > between
          > > > 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
          > > in
          > > > the state of ultimate release. The 'I' or ego is not merely an
          > > > attribute of the individual Self, but constitutes the nature
          of
          > > the
          > > > 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,
          > > constituting
          > > > the essential nature of the Self. Thus, the released Self
          knows
          > > the
          > > > 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
          > > may
          > > > 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
          > > existence)
          > > > 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
          > > illusory
          > > > and unreal. According to Ramanuja, the phenomenal world is not
          > > > unreal unless it is viewed as distinct from Brahman. The
          > > phenomenal
          > > > 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
          > > may
          > > > 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,
          > > and
          > > > 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
          > > the
          > > > 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).
          > >
          > > ml
          >
          >
          > yes, so true
          >
          > 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
          > Maria Luisa
          >
          > love Karta

          You have just said it. Forgiveness. That is acceptance, a clear view
          of things as they are, an open mind, not bounded to preconceptions,
          to fear and doubt. Just things as they are. That's forgiveness. And
          not necessarily we need to put words on things, we don't need to
          understand via words. We can understand and see all as it is, just
          in silence, without naming and categoraizing. You have the word:
          forgiving light, very beautiful. Intelligence plays a little roll in
          this. The Heart knows better.

          Yours in the Heart,
          ml
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.