Guest guest Posted October 13, 2005 Report Share Posted October 13, 2005 Hello Utpal and Sourav, I am essentially an " outsider " - not a member of SJC or an attendee of any conferences and probably will never attend one. All I can say is that I am a true seeker, but I accept you cannot know that. So perhaps this post will get ignored like all my other ones, since it is natural human nature to treat unknown people as not having worthy or interesting views. That said, I have followed your discussion, and many such others on this and other forums (vedic astrology, ) as have as well read some SJC articles, and I am very very strongly attracted to the thoughts and views of the likes of Jiddu Krishnamurti (JK), Ramana Maharishi (RM) and Nisargadatta Maharaj (NM; of the Navanath Sampradaya). I have also tried to reconcile their views with those of the famous Western psychologist Carl Jung. There are many writings I feel that this discussion would benefit from. I will highlight some points to perhaps aid you in your discussions: 1) First of all, the term ego is rather loosely used in your discussions. Ego, as defined by Carl Jung, is the center of personal consciousness. It does NOT extend across lifetimes, for the simple reason that one does NOT have memory of previous lifetimes. Ego is only that which gives the unique (but perhaps false) feeling of " I " , i.e. a center, to the set of experiences that this body has had and will have in this lifetime. 2) Secondly, all three of JK, RM and NM have clearly stated, in their DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, that in their " highest state " there is no feeling of " I " at all. JK states (from my approximate memory): " For true meditation, the meditator has to go " . RM (from my approximate memory): " Dissolve the I-thought in the heart center " . NM (from my approximate memory): " The sum of all consciousness is God, and beyond that is beginningless, endless and blissful pure awareness " (and which is what " he " experiences: the " he " is in quotes because when " he " is experiencing it, " he " doesnt actually have an identity, and language isnt good enough to correctly state the experience). RM & NM: " Concentrate on the thought 'I am' until it dissolves " . I am not knowledgeable of scriptures, but if you find the above people as genuine, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK CANNOT describe whatever is the beginningless, endless, blissful awareness (which by its very definition MUST be impersonal and desireless and hence cannot be " chara " ). At the same time it is equally hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK CANNOT be ego, since chara AK is present at birth and different for different individuals. The only conclusion I can reach is that chara AK definitely does have identity since it is DISTINCT for distinct people. It definitely the carries the memory of past lifetimes in terms of karma, no? Otherwise, how can it be " chara " ? So I liken it to a sort of a personal wrapper around the pure impersonal and final truth. And its " reflection " in a human being at birth produces an ego, which assumes itself to be separate (from the chara AK) and in most cases never realizes the existence of that which seeded it. Chara AK vimsottari dasha probably signifies the time when the chara AK creates events in a person's life which force the ego to, happily or unhappily, face the chara AK's existence. Similarly, it is hard for me to see even the Ishta (as represented in an astrological chart) as the pure and final truth. I know most of you will recoil in horror at this suggestion, but bear with me for a while. Because if it were the final truth - and remember that as according to JK, RM, NM the final truth is identity-less so must be the same for all - then it must be exactly the same. But it isnt. Different graha's represent the ishta in different people's charts. People pray to all different kinds of deities to get enlightenment. My understanding (by logical elimination of possibilities) is that the Ishta is also a " personal wrapper " around the pure and final truth. But then, what distinguishes the AK from the Ishta? In my continued understanding, the Ishta carries that which is missing from the chara AK. As a soul (i.e. chara AK) moves towards enlightenment, the differences between the AK and Istha (i.e. their respective personal wrappers) get thinner and thinner. In the final moment, there are none - no differences, and AK and Ishta are one and they realize they were never different, since the personal wrappers have melted away. Only pure awareness (accompanied of course with identityless bliss) is left, exactly as JK, NM, RM have said. Jung would similarly call enlightenment " the transcendent function that unites the opposites " . The above conclusions I have reached by long analysis of the writings of several authors. I dont find any other way to make their experiences consonant with vedic astrology. But of course, you are free to be unaware or dismissive of them. They after all are not shruti, and perhaps you base your conclusions only on that. Hope this writeup was interesting to you and would love to hear your comments. I am not writing this to inflame anyone but due to genuine internal curiosity. Sundeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2005 Report Share Posted October 13, 2005 Om Gurave Namah Namaste Sundeep ji, Very interesting post. Please don't let the personal wrapper of SJC keep you away from the discussions, because Sanjay ji himself is very open minded and beyond branding. " Ego " is something related to Rahu and Maya and not to Atmakaraka. I would say that AK is the one who had witnessed you through many births and hence knows your lacunae better. He is a correcting mechanism and a rocky bridge to the Beyond, and Ishta is the first post There. Ishta is defined as personal God and as a manifestation of the Absolute, Formless God. It is said " Brahma jyoti swaroopamcha bhaktaanugraha vigraham " ...and as such, regardless of from whichever " angle " the " Jyoti " is seen/felt, one is bound to get consumed by It. There are a million ways to approach the Supreme, and whichever way we take, we all ultimately go to Him, give or take a few birth cycles:-)) Regards, Lakshmi --- vedicastrostudent <vedicastrostudent wrote: > Hello Utpal and Sourav, > I am essentially an " outsider " - not a member of > SJC or an attendee > of any conferences and probably will never attend > one. All I can say > is that I am a true seeker, but I accept you cannot > know that. So > perhaps this post will get ignored like all my other > ones, since it > is natural human nature to treat unknown people as > not having worthy > or interesting views. > > That said, I have followed your discussion, and > many such others on > this and other forums (vedic astrology, > ) as have as > well read some SJC articles, and I am very very > strongly attracted > to the thoughts and views of the likes of Jiddu > Krishnamurti (JK), > Ramana Maharishi (RM) and Nisargadatta Maharaj (NM; > of the Navanath > Sampradaya). I have also tried to reconcile their > views with those > of the famous Western psychologist Carl Jung. There > are many > writings I feel that this discussion would benefit > from. I will > highlight some points to perhaps aid you in your > discussions: > > 1) First of all, the term ego is rather loosely used > in your > discussions. Ego, as defined by Carl Jung, is the > center of personal > consciousness. It does NOT extend across lifetimes, > for the simple > reason that one does NOT have memory of previous > lifetimes. Ego is > only that which gives the unique (but perhaps false) > feeling of " I " , > i.e. a center, to the set of experiences that this > body has had and > will have in this lifetime. > > 2) Secondly, all three of JK, RM and NM have clearly > stated, in > their DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, that in their > " highest state " > there is no feeling of " I " at all. JK states (from > my approximate > memory): " For true meditation, the meditator has to > go " . RM (from my > approximate memory): " Dissolve the I-thought in the > heart center " . > NM (from my approximate memory): " The sum of all > consciousness is > God, and beyond that is beginningless, endless and > blissful pure > awareness " (and which is what " he " experiences: the > " he " is in > quotes because when " he " is experiencing it, " he " > doesnt actually > have an identity, and language isnt good enough to > correctly state > the experience). RM & NM: " Concentrate on the > thought 'I am' until > it dissolves " . > > I am not knowledgeable of scriptures, but if you > find the above > people as genuine, it is hard to avoid the > conclusion that chara AK > CANNOT describe whatever is the beginningless, > endless, blissful > awareness (which by its very definition MUST be > impersonal and > desireless and hence cannot be " chara " ). At the > same time it is > equally hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK > CANNOT be ego, > since chara AK is present at birth and different for > different > individuals. The only conclusion I can reach is that > chara AK > definitely does have identity since it is DISTINCT > for distinct > people. It definitely the carries the memory of past > lifetimes in > terms of karma, no? Otherwise, how can it be > " chara " ? So I liken it > to a sort of a personal wrapper around the pure > impersonal and final > truth. And its " reflection " in a human being at > birth produces an > ego, which assumes itself to be separate (from the > chara AK) and in > most cases never realizes the existence of that > which seeded it. > Chara AK vimsottari dasha probably signifies the > time when the chara > AK creates events in a person's life which force the > ego to, happily > or unhappily, face the chara AK's existence. > > Similarly, it is hard for me to see even the Ishta > (as represented > in an astrological chart) as the pure and final > truth. I know most > of you will recoil in horror at this suggestion, but > bear with me > for a while. Because if it were the final truth - > and remember that > as according to JK, RM, NM the final truth is > identity-less so must > be the same for all - then it must be exactly the > same. But it isnt. > Different graha's represent the ishta in different > people's charts. > People pray to all different kinds of deities to get > enlightenment. > My understanding (by logical elimination of > possibilities) is that > the Ishta is also a " personal wrapper " around the > pure and final > truth. But then, what distinguishes the AK from the > Ishta? In my > continued understanding, the Ishta carries that > which is missing > from the chara AK. As a soul (i.e. chara AK) moves > towards > enlightenment, the differences between the AK and > Istha (i.e. their > respective personal wrappers) get thinner and > thinner. In the final > moment, there are none - no differences, and AK and > Ishta are one > and they realize they were never different, since > the personal > wrappers have melted away. Only pure awareness > (accompanied of > course with identityless bliss) is left, exactly as > JK, NM, RM have > said. Jung would similarly call enlightenment " the > transcendent > function that unites the opposites " . > > The above conclusions I have reached by long > analysis of the > writings of several authors. I dont find any other > way to make their > experiences consonant with vedic astrology. But of > course, you are > free to be unaware or dismissive of them. They after > all are not > shruti, and perhaps you base your conclusions only > on that. > > Hope this writeup was interesting to you and would > love to hear > your comments. I am not writing this to inflame > anyone but due to > genuine internal curiosity. > > Sundeep > > > > Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2005 Report Share Posted October 13, 2005 || Hare Rama Krishna ||Dear Sundeep-ji, Namaskar. Thank you for taking time to particiate in the discussion. My comments below.Best regards,Sourav=====================================================sohamsa , "vedicastrostudent" <vedicastrostudent> wrote:>> Hello Utpal and Sourav,> I am essentially an "outsider" - not a member of SJC or an attendee > of any conferences and probably will never attend one. All I can say > is that I am a true seeker, but I accept you cannot know that. So > perhaps this post will get ignored like all my other ones, since it > is natural human nature to treat unknown people as not having worthy > or interesting views.> [sourav]: It doesnt matter who you are or are not. Your statements should stand by their own merit. This forum is open to all. Just maintaining decorum and having a keen interest in Vedic Jyotish is suffice.> That said, I have followed your discussion, and many such others on > this and other forums (vedic astrology, ) as have as > well read some SJC articles, and I am very very strongly attracted > to the thoughts and views of the likes of Jiddu Krishnamurti (JK), > Ramana Maharishi (RM) and Nisargadatta Maharaj (NM; of the Navanath > Sampradaya). I have also tried to reconcile their views with those > of the famous Western psychologist Carl Jung. There are many > writings I feel that this discussion would benefit from. I will > highlight some points to perhaps aid you in your discussions:> > 1) First of all, the term ego is rather loosely used in your > discussions. Ego, as defined by Carl Jung, is the center of personal > consciousness. It does NOT extend across lifetimes, for the simple > reason that one does NOT have memory of previous lifetimes.[sourav]: We haven't attempted at defining or understanding Ego. However, we have used a suitable and workable definition for our discussion. Ego is I-ness that is a state of separateness from the rest of the world. It is centrepetal. Are you talking about Ego or mind when you are talking about memory? Momory transcends boundaries of life times - this is taught by rishis and modern saints alike. We retain our impressions of the past. Some impressions are so deep that limited understanding of the self do not reveal them. We are a product of our past. Swami Vivekananda has specifically said that you can experience the who gamut of your past life memories if you attempt to. Ego is > only that which gives the unique (but perhaps false) feeling of "I", > i.e. a center, to the set of experiences that this body has had and > will have in this lifetime.> > 2) Secondly, all three of JK, RM and NM have clearly stated, in > their DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, that in their "highest state" > there is no feeling of "I" at all. JK states (from my approximate > memory): "For true meditation, the meditator has to go". RM (from my > approximate memory): "Dissolve the I-thought in the heart center". > NM (from my approximate memory): "The sum of all consciousness is > God, and beyond that is beginningless, endless and blissful pure > awareness" (and which is what "he" experiences: the "he" is in > quotes because when "he" is experiencing it, "he" doesnt actually > have an identity, and language isnt good enough to correctly state > the experience). RM & NM: "Concentrate on the thought 'I am' until > it dissolves".[sourav]: Yes, in sublime meditation, I as we know it to be doesn't exist. But such meditations are of two kinds - Svavikalpa and Nirvikalpa Samadhis. In the former Ego exists as a separation; in the latter it doesn't. Refer to Patanjali's Yoga Sutra (Trans. by I. K. Taimni or someone else).> > I am not knowledgeable of scriptures, but if you find the above > people as genuine, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK > CANNOT describe whatever is the beginningless, endless, blissful > awareness (which by its very definition MUST be impersonal and > desireless and hence cannot be "chara"). [sourav]: Atman is intangible through words and ideas. Hence Maharsi Parasara has used the term '-karaka' . Karaka is the significator. Chara refers to what is different for different persons. Everyone views the world in distinctly different ways. Hence chara-AK brings such eye-opening experience which is suited to our way of thinking. Hence Chara. It doesn't refer to the Atman but it represents the the experiences we will have in our present birth so that our eyes can be openend up. Chara is perfectly valid for that.At the same time it is > equally hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK CANNOT be ego, > since chara AK is present at birth and different for different > individuals. [sourav]: I have maintained that AK shows the type of experience and not the Atman or the Ego.The only conclusion I can reach is that chara AK > definitely does have identity since it is DISTINCT for distinct > people. It definitely the carries the memory of past lifetimes in > terms of karma, no? [sourav]: Memory is not Karma but personal impression of it.Otherwise, how can it be "chara"? So I liken it > to a sort of a personal wrapper around the pure impersonal and final > truth. And its "reflection" in a human being at birth produces an > ego, which assumes itself to be separate (from the chara AK) and in > most cases never realizes the existence of that which seeded it. > Chara AK vimsottari dasha probably signifies the time when the chara > AK creates events in a person's life which force the ego to, happily > or unhappily, face the chara AK's existence.[sourav]: It does bring in such experiences but it is to make us spiritually more strong so that we can realize the inner existance of Sachhidananda Atman.> > Similarly, it is hard for me to see even the Ishta (as represented > in an astrological chart) as the pure and final truth. [sourav]: Ishta is the form of God that, in all likelyhood, appeals to us so that we can hold on to that easily. I like to think God as my mother and myself her careless child. In my chart vargottama Mo is aspecting the 12-th from Karakamsa by Rasi drishti. It shows exactly that. The kind of form that appeals to you most. That way development is easier. God is one and undivided but we try to see one aspect in more focus.I know most > of you will recoil in horror at this suggestion, but bear with me > for a while. Because if it were the final truth - and remember that > as according to JK, RM, NM the final truth is identity-less so must > be the same for all - then it must be exactly the same. But it isnt. > Different graha's represent the ishta in different people's charts. > People pray to all different kinds of deities to get enlightenment. > My understanding (by logical elimination of possibilities) is that > the Ishta is also a "personal wrapper" around the pure and final > truth.[sourav]: Yes definitely. The root cause of all religious haemorrage is that everyone fights to uphold their own Ishtam. It is one and the same. We are limited, so our understanding is limited and hence only one particular form appeals to us. But then, what distinguishes the AK from the Ishta? [sourav]: AK shows the light (by giving suitable experiences) so that we see the true Atman. Ishta Devata is that form of Godhood which appeals to us most so that we are attracted to it and consequently through worship of that form develop concentration and purity. Without that purity one cannot concentrate enough to understand the Atman. That is the function of Ishta Devata. You need not worry if different people have different Ishta Devatas. In my > continued understanding, the Ishta carries that which is missing > from the chara AK. [sourav]: No. Worship of Ishta Devata assists us to comprehend the experiences in life brought in by AK so that we know the Atman. Sri Rama Krishna used to say that if a steamship passes by a huge magnetic rock from a distance, even then the bolts and nails of the ship loosens in attraction. Attraction towards Ishtam is like that. Try to come close to your Ishtam and develop that personal relationship, automatically the bindings will loosen and fall away.As a soul (i.e. chara AK) moves towards > enlightenment, the differences between the AK and Istha (i.e. their > respective personal wrappers) get thinner and thinner. In the final > moment, there are none - no differences, and AK and Ishta are one > and they realize they were never different, since the personal > wrappers have melted away. Only pure awareness (accompanied of > course with identityless bliss) is left, exactly as JK, NM, RM have > said. Jung would similarly call enlightenment "the transcendent > function that unites the opposites".> > The above conclusions I have reached by long analysis of the > writings of several authors. I dont find any other way to make their > experiences consonant with vedic astrology. But of course, you are > free to be unaware or dismissive of them. They after all are not > shruti, and perhaps you base your conclusions only on that.> [sourav]: You are talking about differences of philosophy. Sri Rama Krishna says "Jata Mat Tata Path" (there are so many ways as there are opinions). Follow one opinion and you will reach the end. Does it matter if you and I approach the Deep from diametrically opposite directions. The closer we get to the Deep the more illumined we will be.> Hope this writeup was interesting to you and would love to hear > your comments. I am not writing this to inflame anyone but due to > genuine internal curiosity.> > Sundeep>[sourav]: Thank you for sharing your understandings. There is genuine-ness in it. Keep it up. It is n honor to share my view with you as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2005 Report Share Posted October 13, 2005 Hello Sundeep, >I am essentially an " outsider " - not a member of SJC or an attendee >of any conferences and probably will never attend one. All I can say >is that I am a true seeker, but I accept you cannot know that. So >perhaps this post will get ignored like all my other ones, since it >is natural human nature to treat unknown people as not having worthy >or interesting views. > experiences consonant with vedic astrology. But of course, you are > free to be unaware or dismissive of them. They after all are not > shruti, and perhaps you base your conclusions only on that. Dear Sir, you have digested views of Greats such as JK, RM, NM and you wrote the above lines.... I am also an 'outsider' to SJC in a sense of organisational structure but I haven't bothered about that while discussing with many of them. to their credit, i must say that they also haven't made me feel like an outsider. those people are sharing their great Parampara knowledge without any discrimination and i am sure you'll agree to that and hopefully remove that feeling from your mind. I thank you for your view point and it differs with the opinion which i carry for AK but no big deal as the famous quote goes.. 'Tunde Tunde Matir Bhinna'. Vedic Astrolgy is a ocean which has a space for every tought. best regards, utpal sohamsa , " vedicastrostudent " <vedicastrostudent> wrote: > > Hello Utpal and Sourav, > I am essentially an " outsider " - not a member of SJC or an attendee > of any conferences and probably will never attend one. All I can say > is that I am a true seeker, but I accept you cannot know that. So > perhaps this post will get ignored like all my other ones, since it > is natural human nature to treat unknown people as not having worthy > or interesting views. > > That said, I have followed your discussion, and many such others on > this and other forums (vedic astrology, ) as have as > well read some SJC articles, and I am very very strongly attracted > to the thoughts and views of the likes of Jiddu Krishnamurti (JK), > Ramana Maharishi (RM) and Nisargadatta Maharaj (NM; of the Navanath > Sampradaya). I have also tried to reconcile their views with those > of the famous Western psychologist Carl Jung. There are many > writings I feel that this discussion would benefit from. I will > highlight some points to perhaps aid you in your discussions: > > 1) First of all, the term ego is rather loosely used in your > discussions. Ego, as defined by Carl Jung, is the center of personal > consciousness. It does NOT extend across lifetimes, for the simple > reason that one does NOT have memory of previous lifetimes. Ego is > only that which gives the unique (but perhaps false) feeling of " I " , > i.e. a center, to the set of experiences that this body has had and > will have in this lifetime. > > 2) Secondly, all three of JK, RM and NM have clearly stated, in > their DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, that in their " highest state " > there is no feeling of " I " at all. JK states (from my approximate > memory): " For true meditation, the meditator has to go " . RM (from my > approximate memory): " Dissolve the I-thought in the heart center " . > NM (from my approximate memory): " The sum of all consciousness is > God, and beyond that is beginningless, endless and blissful pure > awareness " (and which is what " he " experiences: the " he " is in > quotes because when " he " is experiencing it, " he " doesnt actually > have an identity, and language isnt good enough to correctly state > the experience). RM & NM: " Concentrate on the thought 'I am' until > it dissolves " . > > I am not knowledgeable of scriptures, but if you find the above > people as genuine, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK > CANNOT describe whatever is the beginningless, endless, blissful > awareness (which by its very definition MUST be impersonal and > desireless and hence cannot be " chara " ). At the same time it is > equally hard to avoid the conclusion that chara AK CANNOT be ego, > since chara AK is present at birth and different for different > individuals. The only conclusion I can reach is that chara AK > definitely does have identity since it is DISTINCT for distinct > people. It definitely the carries the memory of past lifetimes in > terms of karma, no? Otherwise, how can it be " chara " ? So I liken it > to a sort of a personal wrapper around the pure impersonal and final > truth. And its " reflection " in a human being at birth produces an > ego, which assumes itself to be separate (from the chara AK) and in > most cases never realizes the existence of that which seeded it. > Chara AK vimsottari dasha probably signifies the time when the chara > AK creates events in a person's life which force the ego to, happily > or unhappily, face the chara AK's existence. > > Similarly, it is hard for me to see even the Ishta (as represented > in an astrological chart) as the pure and final truth. I know most > of you will recoil in horror at this suggestion, but bear with me > for a while. Because if it were the final truth - and remember that > as according to JK, RM, NM the final truth is identity-less so must > be the same for all - then it must be exactly the same. But it isnt. > Different graha's represent the ishta in different people's charts. > People pray to all different kinds of deities to get enlightenment. > My understanding (by logical elimination of possibilities) is that > the Ishta is also a " personal wrapper " around the pure and final > truth. But then, what distinguishes the AK from the Ishta? In my > continued understanding, the Ishta carries that which is missing > from the chara AK. As a soul (i.e. chara AK) moves towards > enlightenment, the differences between the AK and Istha (i.e. their > respective personal wrappers) get thinner and thinner. In the final > moment, there are none - no differences, and AK and Ishta are one > and they realize they were never different, since the personal > wrappers have melted away. Only pure awareness (accompanied of > course with identityless bliss) is left, exactly as JK, NM, RM have > said. Jung would similarly call enlightenment " the transcendent > function that unites the opposites " . > > The above conclusions I have reached by long analysis of the > writings of several authors. I dont find any other way to make their > experiences consonant with vedic astrology. But of course, you are > free to be unaware or dismissive of them. They after all are not > shruti, and perhaps you base your conclusions only on that. > > Hope this writeup was interesting to you and would love to hear > your comments. I am not writing this to inflame anyone but due to > genuine internal curiosity. > > Sundeep > 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.