Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Supernatural powers: Yeah, not for me. If others believe, let them. What can I do about that?
Existence/ Belief: What came first? Existence or Beleif?
Pleease , I am not a 'sir' , I am AtmA. ameyAtmA. Tat tvam asi.
Well - matter of semantics. You were the one who brought in my Baala Mukunda on the vaTasya patra, not me.
What is Pure Consciousness? (Chaitanya - the only One that remains => is Sat, is Chit, is Ananda! -- is Baby Mukunda! )
It is Awareness. Of what? of BEING.
TurIya is not deep sleep. TuriyAteeta is certainly not deep sleep.
What is Yoga-nidrA of MahA-VishNu? He is not paying attention to the mAyic worldly happenings unless disturbed and woken up, but He is aware, and knows what's going on.
Why is it called Yoga-nidra and not just nidra (sleep) ?
Same happens @ pralay - Chaitanya remains, is aware. (Baby Mukunda on the banyan leaf is full of joy - Ananda. He is hardly sleeping!).
-----
*The question discussed : "Why does 'something' exist?" Because it IS! prem, Ananda, Sat, Chit.
There is no Why for Sat, because Sat is eternal unchanging existence.
Why does existence exist? Ananda, Joy is an inherent attribute, not a Why.
I don't believe 'I, Aup.' exists. It is Brahman that exists. The rest is 'maya' (Brahma satyam jagan-mithya ..).But, anything in this world or the other, cannot be said for sure, exists or not exists. All is bound to one's belief.
I don't believe 'I, Aup.' exists. It is Brahman that exists. The rest is 'maya' (Brahma satyam jagan-mithya ..).
Brahman does exist, because without Brahman there would not have been any 'maya'.
Okay Salix. sorry.
So, what if 'your experience' brings a strong belief of 'only experience of oneness is liberation' and so other one's belief as 'experience doesn't matter if one understood' is so strong to him??
All requirements, is based on one's belief. If Buddha belief's this is his way, and one wants to go that way, one chooses it. But one, see a different way, like Ramana/etc.., they adhere to his teachings. But, what if all are their own experiences, which became a strong belief of "This is the right way as a I experienced" and set out their own way of requirements, but there is no such thing as requirements as "Everyone is Brahman",. Simple??
The understanding is, "I AM not at all bondaged any moment, so no need of seeking liberation, I AM ALWAYS FREE". So, I understand this , so no need to seek liberation for any Experience/Moksha. Let the world be or not, I am not affected by it, so why to put an end for "life" by a practice/method??
In our discourse here, it appears to me that you are steadfast in your beliefs and are less interested in learning about another's views and more interested in projecting and validating yours.
You are certainly entitled to your perspective and beliefs. Thank you for sharing them here.
Existence of Brahman is a fact. Without Brahman, no 'maya', no brain, no mind, therefore, nothing. The mere fact that we are experiencing is the evidence of something does exists. We are trying to express Brahman in words. As I said the final answer may come only in future.
I am very much interested to learn any perspective Salix. Hinduism/Buddhism/anything, I am willing to learn anything.
But you too??
I have some knowledge of "Shankara view" on Brahman as "Existence always" to retake nation from Buddha's "Anatta". But, Upanishads and BG is far beyond Shankara's view too. Brahman, cannot be given any attribute, even existence and non-existence. Many words said in Upanishads, as "I am Sat-chit-Ananda", etc.. is a Manthra given by guru to disciple, to attain liberation by keep on doing Nidhidhyasana of the Manthra given and stay and go to "Bliss sheath".
The perception I shared is not my own but all words from Upanishads and Bhagavat Gita
Mandukya Upanishad says in verse 7 'na pragna na apragna adrishyam ...'
Bhagavat Gita and in many Upanishads said 'na sat na asat'.
So, they contradict themselves??
I use scripture to verify my experiences, not to form my worldview. If scripture stands in conflict with my experiences, my experiences take precedence.
While I find a great deal of truth in nearly all of the Upanishads, there have been verses that didn't quite align with my own experience. That doesn't invalidate them. It just means that my own experiences have led me to a slightly varied understanding.
This premise that BELIEF => SHAPES ideas and goals is not always true.
EXPERIENCE => SHAPES purpose and meaning TO existence is also true for some of us. By that I mean totally unexpected Divine experience, mystical experiences – whether ongoing or in spurts.
Who is any human to call that ignorance?
It is like this --
Before enlightenment? Chop wood, carry water
After enlightenment? Chop wood, carry water, but there is a parallel stream of Divine Leela alongside that goes on because you were unexpectedly involuntarily mystically GIVEN the experience to SHOW who THEY are, who you are, which keeps growing. Chopping wood and carrying water remains, but it is just something you do on the side.
Who defines liberation and what sets whom free?
You have no idea who I am. Neither did I up until a few years ago but I continue to discover more.
Many advaita-vedanta followers tell me the Gods are all fictitious and in my mind. Mostly they mean this local ordinary mind, in which case they are wrong!
They are completely unaware of my mystical experiences as actual happenings that they ignorantly call imaginations of the ordinary mind. Realer than the mundane real, clearer than the mundane clear.
Many people equate mystical experience to Oneness. Yes, ultimately it is One, but mysticism is also Brahman as Dev and Adi Shakti forms working, blessing and walking up to other forms, pulling you out of the quicksand to freedom and showing you things that were totally unexpected and unknown to the local mind. It does not stop there – they want to shower you with much more than just freedom imparted by a statement in an Upanishad.
Jnana that you talk about is actually the first step, not the last.
How are you sure people meditate to get liberated? Does this apply to Shankar in Kailash or Krishna in Dwarka waking up at Bramha muhurta? There is joy in it!
Can you stop a liberated person from worshiping their IshTa? No.
Even ParaBrahman does not insist that you just accept that “You are XYZ take My word for it”. They will make it so you SEE for yourself .
I never asked for Oneness or anything. Nobody can force “tat tvam asi” on me, not even VAsudev (KRshNa, my GuruDev). He was never interested in doing that. But They always SHOW, GIVE experience, give EVIDENCE so no room is left as you have no choice but to see for yourself. That is Their method. Very clever! Durga’s game to make the devotee realize they are Her?
So this gratitude for the beautiful One in one or more forms who pulled a “me” out of a quick-sand of a life surrounded by bullies into the real freedom, is possible with experience of the Divine, not an Upanishadic statement (which is good to confirm afterwards)
Homage to the sage who wrote Mandukya Upanishad. That is one of the Upanishads that I love and quote. That is the Upanishad on which Sankara's 'paramaguru', Sri Gaudapada, wrote his karika. But do you think Manduka Upanishad is the word of God?So, you think they were wrong??
Homage to the sage who wrote Mandukya Upanishad. That is one of the Upanishads that I love and quote. That is the Upanishad on which Sankara's 'paramaguru', Sri Gaudapada, wrote his karika. But do you think Manduka Upanishad is the word of God?
Vishwa
When did I say I am SEEKING mystical experiences? You hardly know me. Or Sayak, Salixendium, Aupmanyav for that matter. You just got here.
Shri KRshNa is my GuruDev. I also have been trying to follow His words, for years, especially in the Bhagavad Geeta and other geetas. Yes, i love the guNateet description from chapter 14 you have quoted. A few yrs ago I ridiculed one specific shloka on His face and told Him I cannot do this and I am not even going to try. He said you don't have to.
ll Om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ll
Talking so much about God! Give me just one proof of existence of God. Brahman for me, is not God. I am no God, neither I think you are.Why not?? .. blah blah .. blah blah .. one's seeking.
Talking so much about God! Give me just one proof of existence of God. Brahman for me, is not God. I am no God, neither I think you are.
Replace all with Brahman who is not involved (Udasina), eternal, changeless, formless. All other words have false associations, God, me, you, consciousness, etc.