Shree Maa shares Knowledge

[Guest guest]

Namaste Everybody,

 

Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

Shankaracharya.

 

Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

that you may have. Thank you very much!

 

Jai Maa

 

When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a dream

and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is a

dream.

 

At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he saw a

lady with a dead body lying by her side.

 

He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

 

The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your way. "

 

When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

(energy). "

 

The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can move? "

 

Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is impossible.

This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

 

The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of creation,

can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

this to me. "

 

Shankaracharya was surprised.

 

He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire universe.

 

This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

 

The dead body and the lady disappeared.

 

It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

acted as the dead body.

 

Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

 

Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

(Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa, Maa,

Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

 

When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes away.

When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

 

Om

[Guest guest]

Jai Maa! Thank you Ramya-ji, for sharing this wonderful side story from Adi Shankaracharya's very short but most illustrious life, albeit for only 32 years. I am reminded about this very story many a time whenever our internal energies go on a slide down scale, and the only quick action response was to chant Shree Maa's songs, Chandi Path and Maha Mrituyamjaya mantrams, with couple of serious Gayatri Japa. Lo and behold, one gets the energies back and we swing back, with gusto. Despite the vast accumulation of internal shakthi, we all do possess, on latent state, it requires the enlightening lamp (s) to show us the internal light of consciousness. Most of us just prevail as jatam, on many occasions, which Shankaracharya denounces vehemently, as in Bhaja Govindam: "Punarapi Jananam Punarapi Maranam Punarapi Janani Jathare Shayanam Iha Samsare Bahudustaare Kripayaa Paare Pashi

Murarey.. Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam" We tend to fall deep into sleep, even when performing our nithya kartas and dwell in our routine karma bandhana chores. This is where the energies so graciously showered on us by Shree Maa will awaken and make us all sing Jago Jago Maa, Jagatha Janani Jago Maa. Namastes and Jai Maa Jai Swamiji. babu krishnan

[Guest guest]

Namaste, People!

 

It is my humble offering that this is a double lesson in humility and

Natural Law.

 

The energy of Nature or Creation doesn't question, it allows. The

woman pointed out that there is no more or less natural (Nature)

energy in a dead person than in one alive. It is equal, because the

lifeless physical body, as a product of Nature, now knows it's path

and won't fight it. It will eventually rot and return to dust.

 

The conflict was in the mind of Shankaracharya. Once he (self)

realized the Truth in this situation - that his body's physicality

wasn't actually worth much more than a decomposing body recycling

itself with Nature, the conflict of his mind (to move the body)

ceased and the woman and body therefore disappeared (whether

metaphorically or literally I do not know, I wasn't really

there...).

 

And the halogen lightbulb of humility went on with a cosmic flash...!

 

I wonder what a toddler might have thought of this situation.

Probably not much. He wouldn't have known the difference between a

dead body and one taking a nap. Nor would he have given it a second

thought (attachment). If the body was in his way, he simply would

have walked around it. End of story.

 

But it is a little disconcerting to come to the realization that in

the Laws of Nature, I really, actually, truly have no more worth

than - say - a woodtick or a leech or a steamy, pungent pile of

rotting goo, or any other myriad of things that makes one squeamish.

 

As an attachement, as long as we are still " alive " and consumers of

Nature, we have to be very, very aware of what we give back.

 

Plant a tree.

 

love and peace to all,

sal.

 

 

, " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108

wrote:

>

> Namaste Everybody,

>

> Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> Shankaracharya.

>

> Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> that you may have. Thank you very much!

>

> Jai Maa

>

> When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

dream

> and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

a

> dream.

>

> At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

saw a

> lady with a dead body lying by her side.

>

> He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

>

> The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

way. "

>

> When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> (energy). "

>

> The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

move? "

>

> Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

impossible.

> This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

>

> The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

creation,

> can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> this to me. "

>

> Shankaracharya was surprised.

>

> He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

universe.

>

> This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

>

> The dead body and the lady disappeared.

>

> It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> acted as the dead body.

>

> Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

>

> Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

Maa,

> Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

>

> When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

away.

> When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

>

> Om

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ramya,

Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the beautiful

story.

I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is realized

and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a Vedanta

Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both be

Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which comes

first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the question.

Regards

Papia

 

, " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108

wrote:

>

> Namaste Everybody,

>

> Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> Shankaracharya.

>

> Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> that you may have. Thank you very much!

>

> Jai Maa

>

> When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

dream

> and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

a

> dream.

>

> At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

saw a

> lady with a dead body lying by her side.

>

> He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

>

> The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

way. "

>

> When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> (energy). "

>

> The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

move? "

>

> Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

impossible.

> This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

>

> The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

creation,

> can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> this to me. "

>

> Shankaracharya was surprised.

>

> He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

universe.

>

> This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

>

> The dead body and the lady disappeared.

>

> It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> acted as the dead body.

>

> Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

>

> Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

Maa,

> Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

>

> When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

away.

> When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

>

> Om

>

[Guest guest]

That's a really good question, Papia. I can't wait to hear the answers

you get.

 

Jai Maa!

Chris

 

 

 

, " roy.papia " <roy.papia wrote:

>

> Namaste Ramya,

> Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the beautiful

> story.

> I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

> Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is realized

> and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a Vedanta

> Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both be

> Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which comes

> first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

> Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the question.

> Regards

> Papia

>

> , " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Everybody,

> >

> > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> > Shankaracharya.

> >

> > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> >

> > Jai Maa

> >

> > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

> dream

> > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

> a

> > dream.

> >

> > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

> saw a

> > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> >

> > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> >

> > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

> way. "

> >

> > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> > (energy). "

> >

> > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

> move? "

> >

> > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> impossible.

> > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

> >

> > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> creation,

> > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> > this to me. "

> >

> > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> >

> > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> universe.

> >

> > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> >

> > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> >

> > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> > acted as the dead body.

> >

> > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> >

> > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

> Maa,

> > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> >

> > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> away.

> > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> >

> > Om

> >

>

[Guest guest]

, " roy.papia " <roy.papia wrote:

>

> Namaste Ramya,

> Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the beautiful

> story.

> I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

> Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is realized

> and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a Vedanta

> Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both be

> Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which comes

> first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

> Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the question.

> Regards

> Papia

>

 

Some answers that come to my mind, one or more can apply.

 

1. God's Leela brings about this apparent clash to illustrate the

importance of Bhakti or Shakti vis-a-vis Jnana. This is more for other

devotees to be inspired.

 

2. On the other hand, there are several stories associated with Jnanis

which highlight improper or over-the-top Bhakti (fanatical devotion).

 

3. Bhakti is basic for all types of spiritual pursuit. Bhakti is

enough as a path, but people want to experience God in other ways.

hence jnana etc.

 

4. Bhakti and Jnana are like an infinite helix; no beginning, no end,

forever together. one feeds the other to higher highs (sic!).

 

Note: It is hard to think of Shakti without being associated with

Bhakti. so for all above, think Shakti also.

 

Jai Ma!

[Guest guest]

Peace to you, Papia!

 

Your questions are thought provoking and very kindly asked. What a

soft and gentle heart!

 

It is my understanding, visual learner that I be, that I liken levels

of realization to the peeling of an onion. We are here to re-member

who we are (soul energies having human experiences) which is the

ultimate Truth. Souls being one with All-That-Is.

 

When and if we begin this spiritual journey (for some never do),

whatever it is that causes us to begin our journey takes off that first

thin, papery, crunchy layer of onion skin. Consider this the

first " aha " moment of " whoa, it's not about me... " The skin is gone,

you now have to use the onion.

 

Challenged with our human-ness, our light being, our soul essence has

been covered with a lot of layers. Layer by layer, pride, arrogance,

ego, control, separation, duality - whether we possess those qualities

or not - when then are intellectually internalized for the fraud they

are, the layer comes off. We we now have knowledge, and we CHOOSE not

to (or at least try to) ever act that way again. The layers cannot go

back on because we have peeled them off with awareness.

 

It's sort of like the reverse of lotus blossum blooming. The flower

isn't really in full bloom until all the petals (compassion, kindness,

empathy, all those groovy ideals that would make this world a heaven on

earth) are there, a soul's journey isn't really realized until all the

layers of the onion are gone.

 

We are a work in progress. Even the saints continue to peel in the

search for Truth. Might as well get along since we're all here for a

spell...

 

(My most humble apologies to the well-serving onion for the

analogy...you are tasty, you feed me, and you bring me tears.)

 

with love to all,

sal.

 

 

, " roy.papia " <roy.papia wrote:

>

> Namaste Ramya,

> Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the beautiful

> story.

> I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

> Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is realized

> and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a Vedanta

> Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both be

> Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which comes

> first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

> Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the question.

> Regards

> Papia

[Guest guest]

Ramya,

I have been contemplating Maa's teaching. In my research, I found the

following text that seems to suggest that Shankaracharya had reached

one of the oceans of brillance that surround Paramatmam, one of the

places where one meets God, Brahma Gyaan, or pure knowledge; but He

had not yet reached the ocean of Nisbat or understanding of union

between the Lord and the souls. He was still in illusion with his

disbelief of the existance of Shakti.

 

I believe this is what Chinmayi Jagat Janani showed Shankaracharya

through Kripa (grace), that the union of Consciousness and Energy

(Shiva and Shakti) is one of the meeting places of jiva's and

Paramdham. This teaching, about the union of Shiva and Shakti also

seems central to what Shree Maa and Swamiji teach us.

 

Sending Love and Thanks,

Jai Maa

Sadhu Maa

----

Saagar (ocean) is a description of the eight oceans that surround the

eternal, ever brilliant Paramdham. In the Mool Milawa (place of

meeting) are the Supreme Lord, his bliss part Shyama and the divine

souls.

 

Ek Jyot Saagar Ho Ranya, Aur Upar Tale Sab Jot

Kai Soor Ude Aage Kankri, Tin Bhom Ki Jot Udot

(Saagar 1/35)

 

The entire Mool Milawa is so brilliant that even one particle has more

light than thousands of suns put together. Surrounding them, are

immense oceans (the word ocean is used to express size, depth,

vastness). There is one ocean in each direction - East, West, North,

South, Northeast, Southwest, etc. From Parmatma's divine brilliant

face arises Noor Sagar (Ocean of Light). From the beauty of all the

divine souls arises Neer Sagar (ocean of clear, pure water). The third

is created by the unity of all the souls (called Kshir or Doodh Saagar

- the Milky Way). The fourth Saagar is created by the beauty and

splendour of Shyam and Shyamaji. A very beautiful description of

Shyamaji can be found here. The fifth ocean is of Love. There are only

two things in Paramdham - brilliance and love - they are prevalent

everywhere. The way to see God's brilliance is only through love. The

sixth is an ocean of knowledge (Brahma Gyaan). Just a drop of this

ocean has created all the religious scriptures, the entire knowledge

that we have in the world today. All the written and spoken words are

due to this drop of Lord's knowledge. The seventh ocean represents the

supreme union (Nisbat) between the Lord and the souls. The eighth

ocean is God's immense grace (Kripa). Everywhere we see His grace, the

whole world was created due to His grace. We came here, got lost, that

is His grace. And it is His grace that will re-awaken us.

 

http://www.pranami.org/saagar.shtml

[Guest guest]

Thanks for posting this Ramya!

 

There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and try to

understand...

 

When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches those of us who

are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my heart. I

know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been very

unhappy, with myself, and with God.

 

But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of God, of

God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own experience and

say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping me like I

need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to continue to love

God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of, despite all

the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

 

It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one feels

blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But unconditional

love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the beauty to kick

in]

 

Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and pieces of

his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't really say I

understand who and what he was.

 

Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India debating any

and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing against the

tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

realization of the formless divinity who could only be described as

sat, chit, ananda.

 

I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission of some

sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it generally

means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing, in the

current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

 

Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal puja, he is

said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed. For me this

illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story Shree Maa

tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books (perhaps Before

Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of Vedanta, who

lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the illusory

nature of material existence, and on our own true nature being one

with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and fly to his

next engagement.

 

Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion. Tantra

says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is therefore

real, because She is real.

 

Jai Maa!

Chris

 

 

 

, " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108 wrote:

>

> Namaste Everybody,

>

> Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> Shankaracharya.

>

> Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> that you may have. Thank you very much!

>

> Jai Maa

>

> When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a dream

> and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is a

> dream.

>

> At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he saw a

> lady with a dead body lying by her side.

>

> He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

>

> The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your way. "

>

> When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> (energy). "

>

> The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

move? "

>

> Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is impossible.

> This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

>

> The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of creation,

> can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> this to me. "

>

> Shankaracharya was surprised.

>

> He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire universe.

>

> This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

>

> The dead body and the lady disappeared.

>

> It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> acted as the dead body.

>

> Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

>

> Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa, Maa,

> Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

>

> When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes away.

> When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

>

> Om

>

[Guest guest]

Namastes and Jai Maa to Ms Papia for this thought provoking question, as we all pay our collective obeisance to Shree Maa for the apt and pointed side story. The following pointers to the path of our internal self realization could provide some feeble light , and could only be taken as a beginner's midterm answers. However, they would form the basis of more serious and profound further analysis and comments from others, if they so venture. We get indoctrinated by our parents, teachers, political heavies and general historians that we gather information and experiences over our life times, which we accumulate as muddy settlements in our cups of lives. These sediments from this janma and our previous ones form the karma bandhans, which we try to break away and move from ignorance to state of internal bliss, which we call realization, wherein together we feel the pangs of separation of the doer to the deed and

the resultant, thus causing series of opposing views and self criticism. We shudder to think of the contiuned pain pleasure, love/hatred, hope/despair, beauty/ugliness etc the maiilions of pairs of emotional, self induced analysis paralysis. Brahma Gyanis are no different in their daily routines, as they consciously negate the effects of these sedimentary muddles and stirrings which cause more confused state of obtaning Gyana at its zenith. If we imagine the effects of aeons of internal dogmas and self immolatory critiquing the existence of the Supreme Consciousness which we obviously cannot fathom or measure or even quantify or describe, then we could possibly 'feel' the traumas faced by those who venture into the realms of self-vicharan. Thus the beginning Gyani, whose path is strewn with massive obstacles of doubt, anguish, helplessness and utter chaos, faces immense internal and constant scrutiny of the nebulous pricniples, whihc we

now know, as being time tested steps to obtaining everlasting bliss or ananda. Then the question arisies, who is this "reaching" or trying to "reach" this gyana marg or gyana deepika. It is the story of our lives, as we know, since that fleeting sense of "reaching" some imaginary "goal" itself is absolutely illusory and we conveniently call it our manushya maya. The animals and birds and other living janthoos and organisms, do not bother about the existence or absence of internal ore external gyan, as their needs or internal vichar are limited or non existent. It is the human minds' rich and rather questioning emquiries and taxing the buddhi that prompts further looking into the nature and truth of things around us, at all times. Unless we are willing to have that unique EUREKA moment as it happened to Archimedes or the passionate unstinted belief shown about the truth of Narayana's existence within the folds of the series of sari pallus by

Draupadi as she was being ridiculed, stripped and abused by Shakuni , Duchasan and Duryodhan in the grand court of the Kauravas, we possibly cannot "feel" that unparalleled glow which emantes from our within. Thus even for Shankaracharya, these tests were supposedly needed to refine his thought process and sharpen his intellect, which he freely admits to be faulty, on more than one occasion. He is so scrupulously honest that he chasties himself first before commenting on others. So much so, when his won mother was about enter into a coma, prior to her departure from these earthly bonds, Shankaracharya travelled back from the Himalayas to offer final rites to his dear mother, despite the fact that he had taken sanyas at a very young age. His justifications are simple- His Mother gladly allowed him to go forth and venture into creating so many new peetams and advaita gyana for the benefit of this human race and his doing darpana

was the smallest thank you for a soul who was so selfless and demanded so little. How many mothers would encourage a 12 year to walk thousands of miles into the forests and hills in search of a truth which could not be fathomed or described. But our own paths of atma-bodhana could continue unabated and relentlessly, whether we want or not. These choices that we make now, to study the scriptures, and try and gather enough internal know-how are nothing but follow through of an ancient unending self examination from a differing view points. The lighthouse at the middle of the bay continues to shine day or night, rain or shine, guiiding ships far and close, with little thought whether the ships respond or not. Our lives are also similar, as we perform all our nithya karmas and samsara bandhans, with little or no concern of their impacts or otherwise. But of course, when we start attaching meaning to results of action or inactions, then we fall

prey to the maya-chakkar, an endless spiral of queries and doubts. Only Shree Maa and Swamijis' grace and love will allow us to proceed on these troubled waters, so as to clear the sedimentations of our accumulated negative thoughts . No body said ever that Gyan Path is easy, thus we feel fine we move to Bhakthi Marg!! Jai Maa With lots of love and namastes, Babu Krishnan

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ramya and all,

 

with gratitude to Shree Maa for tenderly sowing this seed of

contemplation in our hearts, and to all of you who shared their wisdom

in response, I offer this Gem from the Gospel of the Holy Mother,

which I found when searching for some understanding of the story:

 

" One day the Holy Mother said, " However much of Japa you do, however

much of work you perform all is for nothing. If Mahamaya does not open

the way, is anything possible for any one? Oh bound soul! Surrender,

surrender. Then alone will She take compasson on you and leave the

path open. "

 

 

with love,

Henny

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108

wrote:

>

> Namaste Everybody,

>

> Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> Shankaracharya.

>

> Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> that you may have. Thank you very much!

>

> Jai Maa

>

> When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

dream

> and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

a

> dream.

>

> At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he saw

a

> lady with a dead body lying by her side.

>

> He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

>

> The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

way. "

>

> When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> (energy). "

>

> The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

move? "

>

> Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

impossible.

> This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

>

> The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

creation,

> can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> this to me. "

>

> Shankaracharya was surprised.

>

> He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

universe.

>

> This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

>

> The dead body and the lady disappeared.

>

> It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> acted as the dead body.

>

> Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

>

> Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

Maa,

> Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

>

> When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

away.

> When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

>

> Om

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Papia

 

The testimony of the sages is that followers of karma yoga, bhakti

yoga, jnana yoga, and raja yoga can all attain to the realization of

nirvikalpha samadhi by the exercise of their respective

practices-though not all care to do so. Sri Ramakrishna would often

quote: Mother, I don't want to be sugar, I want to taste sugar.

 

The sages tell us also that there are two " degrees " of attainment of

nirvikalpha samadhi. The first is " conditional " nirvikalpha. This

means that, by the exercise of a well-trained and purified

(cooperative) ego-mind, the sadhaka can, for a time, completely

suppress the vrittis of the ego-mind itself, and " enter " nirvikalpha.

 

Both Tota Puri and Shankara had attained that blessed and

transcendental condition. That is why Tota Puri explained in answer to

a question of Sri Ramakrishna, that he continued the various

traditions of his dharma, such as polishing the kamandalu daily,

because, if he did not, it, like the mind, would become darkened, less

bright.

 

Sri Ramakrishna said in answer to this, " But, what if the kamandalu is

made of gold? " .

 

In this way, Sri Ramakrishna was alluding to the other " kind " of

nirvikalpha-the " state " of the sages as well as the avataras-the

natural (sahaja) nirvikalpha, in which the ego-mind is dead, never to

return with its duality, samskaras, and " all-to-human characteristics.

 

As Buddha said: " Gata, gata, gata " , " gone, gone, gone " .

 

This is Shiva's state, and, for that matter, who knows Shakti better

than Shiva?

 

 

With Love and Respect to yourself, and to all the saints, seers,

sages, and avataras,

 

Tanmaya

 

 

 

, " roy.papia " <roy.papia wrote:

>

> Namaste Ramya,

> Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the beautiful

> story.

> I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

> Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is realized

> and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a Vedanta

> Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both be

> Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which comes

> first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

> Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the question.

> Regards

> Papia

>

> , " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Everybody,

> >

> > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> > Shankaracharya.

> >

> > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> >

> > Jai Maa

> >

> > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

> dream

> > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

> a

> > dream.

> >

> > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

> saw a

> > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> >

> > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> >

> > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

> way. "

> >

> > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> > (energy). "

> >

> > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

> move? "

> >

> > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> impossible.

> > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

> >

> > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> creation,

> > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> > this to me. "

> >

> > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> >

> > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> universe.

> >

> > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> >

> > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> >

> > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> > acted as the dead body.

> >

> > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> >

> > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

> Maa,

> > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> >

> > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> away.

> > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> >

> > Om

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Family,

My deepest thanks to all who wrote in with their answers, ideas and

comments. Sal, Babu Krishnan, Chris, Manoj, and Sadhu Maa, you have

given me a lot of think about and understand and I am in your debt

for that.

 

Love

Papia

 

, " ty_maa " <dsjames wrote:

>

>

> Dear Papia

>

> The testimony of the sages is that followers of karma yoga, bhakti

> yoga, jnana yoga, and raja yoga can all attain to the realization of

> nirvikalpha samadhi by the exercise of their respective

> practices-though not all care to do so. Sri Ramakrishna would often

> quote: Mother, I don't want to be sugar, I want to taste sugar.

>

> The sages tell us also that there are two " degrees " of attainment of

> nirvikalpha samadhi. The first is " conditional " nirvikalpha. This

> means that, by the exercise of a well-trained and purified

> (cooperative) ego-mind, the sadhaka can, for a time, completely

> suppress the vrittis of the ego-mind itself, and " enter "

nirvikalpha.

>

> Both Tota Puri and Shankara had attained that blessed and

> transcendental condition. That is why Tota Puri explained in answer

to

> a question of Sri Ramakrishna, that he continued the various

> traditions of his dharma, such as polishing the kamandalu daily,

> because, if he did not, it, like the mind, would become darkened,

less

> bright.

>

> Sri Ramakrishna said in answer to this, " But, what if the kamandalu

is

> made of gold? " .

>

> In this way, Sri Ramakrishna was alluding to the other " kind " of

> nirvikalpha-the " state " of the sages as well as the avataras-the

> natural (sahaja) nirvikalpha, in which the ego-mind is dead, never

to

> return with its duality, samskaras, and " all-to-human

characteristics.

>

> As Buddha said: " Gata, gata, gata " , " gone, gone, gone " .

>

> This is Shiva's state, and, for that matter, who knows Shakti better

> than Shiva?

>

>

> With Love and Respect to yourself, and to all the saints, seers,

> sages, and avataras,

>

> Tanmaya

>

>

>

> , " roy.papia " <roy.papia@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Ramya,

> > Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the

beautiful

> > story.

> > I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

> > Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is

realized

> > and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a

Vedanta

> > Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both

be

> > Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which

comes

> > first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

> > Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the

question.

> > Regards

> > Papia

> >

> > , " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Namaste Everybody,

> > >

> > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story

about

> > > Shankaracharya.

> > >

> > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any

questions

> > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > >

> > > Jai Maa

> > >

> > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as

a

> > dream

> > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti

also is

> > a

> > > dream.

> > >

> > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a

holy

> > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga,

he

> > saw a

> > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > >

> > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> > >

> > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of

your

> > way. "

> > >

> > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no

shakti

> > > (energy). "

> > >

> > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one

can

> > move? "

> > >

> > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> > impossible.

> > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

himself. "

> > >

> > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> > creation,

> > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please

explain

> > > this to me. "

> > >

> > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > >

> > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> > universe.

> > >

> > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

Universal

> > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> > >

> > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > >

> > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to

this

> > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva

who

> > > acted as the dead body.

> > >

> > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional

love,

> > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step

towards

> > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it

not

> > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> > >

> > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa,

Maa,

> > Maa,

> > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long

time

> > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > >

> > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you

can

> > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> > away.

> > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This

does not

> > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all

together.

> > >

> > > Om

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Tanmaya,

Thank you so much for your response. You have this wonderful ability

to make the most difficutl things very simple and easily understood.

Love

Papia

 

, " ty_maa " <dsjames wrote:

>

>

> Dear Papia

>

> The testimony of the sages is that followers of karma yoga, bhakti

> yoga, jnana yoga, and raja yoga can all attain to the realization of

> nirvikalpha samadhi by the exercise of their respective

> practices-though not all care to do so. Sri Ramakrishna would often

> quote: Mother, I don't want to be sugar, I want to taste sugar.

>

> The sages tell us also that there are two " degrees " of attainment of

> nirvikalpha samadhi. The first is " conditional " nirvikalpha. This

> means that, by the exercise of a well-trained and purified

> (cooperative) ego-mind, the sadhaka can, for a time, completely

> suppress the vrittis of the ego-mind itself, and " enter "

nirvikalpha.

>

> Both Tota Puri and Shankara had attained that blessed and

> transcendental condition. That is why Tota Puri explained in answer

to

> a question of Sri Ramakrishna, that he continued the various

> traditions of his dharma, such as polishing the kamandalu daily,

> because, if he did not, it, like the mind, would become darkened,

less

> bright.

>

> Sri Ramakrishna said in answer to this, " But, what if the kamandalu

is

> made of gold? " .

>

> In this way, Sri Ramakrishna was alluding to the other " kind " of

> nirvikalpha-the " state " of the sages as well as the avataras-the

> natural (sahaja) nirvikalpha, in which the ego-mind is dead, never

to

> return with its duality, samskaras, and " all-to-human

characteristics.

>

> As Buddha said: " Gata, gata, gata " , " gone, gone, gone " .

>

> This is Shiva's state, and, for that matter, who knows Shakti better

> than Shiva?

>

>

> With Love and Respect to yourself, and to all the saints, seers,

> sages, and avataras,

>

> Tanmaya

>

>

>

> , " roy.papia " <roy.papia@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Ramya,

> > Please give my pranaam to Shree maa and thank her for the

beautiful

> > story.

> > I was wondering why realized people such as Shankaracharya and

> > Totapuri did not believe in the Divine Shakti. When one is

realized

> > and knows Truth, is it not one Truth? Is the realization of a

Vedanta

> > Gyani different from that of a Bhakta? If so, how can they both

be

> > Truth? Or, are there degrees of realization? And if so, which

comes

> > first, the realization of the bhakta or the brahma gyani?

> > Thank you so much for giving us the opportunity to ask the

question.

> > Regards

> > Papia

> >

> > , " n_ramya108 " <n_ramya108@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Namaste Everybody,

> > >

> > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story

about

> > > Shankaracharya.

> > >

> > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any

questions

> > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > >

> > > Jai Maa

> > >

> > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as

a

> > dream

> > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti

also is

> > a

> > > dream.

> > >

> > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a

holy

> > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga,

he

> > saw a

> > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > >

> > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> > >

> > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of

your

> > way. "

> > >

> > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no

shakti

> > > (energy). "

> > >

> > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one

can

> > move? "

> > >

> > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> > impossible.

> > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

himself. "

> > >

> > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> > creation,

> > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please

explain

> > > this to me. "

> > >

> > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > >

> > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> > universe.

> > >

> > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

Universal

> > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> > >

> > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > >

> > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to

this

> > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva

who

> > > acted as the dead body.

> > >

> > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional

love,

> > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step

towards

> > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it

not

> > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> > >

> > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa,

Maa,

> > Maa,

> > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long

time

> > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > >

> > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you

can

> > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> > away.

> > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This

does not

> > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all

together.

> > >

> > > Om

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Chris,

 

Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of India. The

other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

 

Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e. that God and

the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja founded the

philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul and God are

of the same substance but infinitely different in magnitude: God is

great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

 

Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or non-dualism, which

declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time, space, and

causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

 

Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on the three

great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and the

Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his doctrine.

From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text torturing " .

 

The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis, etc., all

spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of those they

were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures contain

statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

non-dualism.

 

I've always found the traditional iconography of the three acharyas

interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements in the

scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge man-like a

shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is because he had

to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita, Upanishads,

etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal, well

proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While Shankara, who

had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

 

Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize Hinduism

under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in different stages

of development, these philosophies (like the cast system), over time,

became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down through

the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This didn't allow

for growth.

 

And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their tradition,

or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was impractical, and

tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

realization.

 

In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian spirituality to

the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that these three

philosophies were three different stages of natural growth and

experience, on a single path to God which all must tread. And his source

of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose sadhana had

taken him through each level in turn.

 

These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them, have been a

stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda did was to

establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many of his sadhus

to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

 

Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come, members of that

Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or famine or

plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

 

....And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when too much

thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my Heart, I

remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a homeless

family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50 dollars you

can't afford " .

 

Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

 

 

Respectfully,

 

Tanmaya

 

, " Chris Kirner " <chriskirner1956

wrote:

>

> Thanks for posting this Ramya!

>

> There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and try to

> understand...

>

> When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches those of us who

> are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my heart. I

> know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been very

> unhappy, with myself, and with God.

>

> But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of God, of

> God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own experience and

> say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping me like I

> need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to continue to love

> God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of, despite all

> the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

>

> It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one feels

> blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But unconditional

> love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the beauty to kick

> in]

>

> Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and pieces of

> his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't really say I

> understand who and what he was.

>

> Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India debating any

> and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing against the

> tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> realization of the formless divinity who could only be described as

> sat, chit, ananda.

>

> I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission of some

> sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it generally

> means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing, in the

> current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

>

> Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal puja, he is

> said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed. For me this

> illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story Shree Maa

> tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books (perhaps Before

> Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of Vedanta, who

> lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the illusory

> nature of material existence, and on our own true nature being one

> with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and fly to his

> next engagement.

>

> Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion. Tantra

> says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is therefore

> real, because She is real.

>

> Jai Maa!

> Chris

>

>

>

> , " n_ramya108 " n_ramya108@ wrote:

> >

> > Namaste Everybody,

> >

> > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> > Shankaracharya.

> >

> > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> >

> > Jai Maa

> >

> > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

dream

> > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

a

> > dream.

> >

> > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he saw

a

> > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> >

> > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> >

> > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

way. "

> >

> > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> > (energy). "

> >

> > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

> move? "

> >

> > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

impossible.

> > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

> >

> > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

creation,

> > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> > this to me. "

> >

> > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> >

> > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

universe.

> >

> > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> >

> > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> >

> > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> > acted as the dead body.

> >

> > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> >

> > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

Maa,

> > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> >

> > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

away.

> > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> >

> > Om

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Tanmaya,

 

I'm afraid my education is very limited. I know a little about some

things, but about many I know next to nothing at all. Rather than

systematically studying I have tended toward those things I found

either spiritually uplifting or practical, and eschewed the rest. I am

slightly ashamed to admit, for instance, that even though I come from

a tradition that emphasized the teachings of the Yoga Sutras of

Patanjali, I have never read any scripture or commentary devoted to

the discussion of the philosophy of Sankya alone. Oh well.

 

Thanks so much for your interesting response. I only wish I had more

to say...I will add this, however, to your comments about debate and

the obstacles this creates. I think that debate can be healthy. In the

sphere of philosophy it can help to refine a structure to its finest

point of understanding, which is a good thing. Problems arise when

people attempt, as they always seem to do, to define (capture or bind)

the undefinable with words that can never convey the whole truth - and

they become very insistent about it, too.

 

People who become too invested in their pride of philosophical

accomplishment, become embedded there, and like a bug caught in amber,

can no longer move beyond their particular point of view. Those whose

first allegiance is to God, and to their own direct experience, are

able to approach these various ideas with equanimity, recognize the

limitations of each, and use them for inspiration and understanding,

each in its proper place in the scheme of things. There is a point at

which only direct experience suffices, and words alone give no

satisfaction.

 

Thanks again.

 

Jai Maa!

Chris

 

 

 

 

 

 

, " ty_maa " <dsjames wrote:

>

> Dear Chris,

>

> Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of India. The

> other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

>

> Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e. that God and

> the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja founded the

> philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul and God are

> of the same substance but infinitely different in magnitude: God is

> great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

>

> Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or non-dualism, which

> declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time, space, and

> causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

>

> Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on the three

> great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and the

> Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his doctrine.

> From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text torturing " .

>

> The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis, etc., all

> spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of those they

> were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures contain

> statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

> non-dualism.

>

> I've always found the traditional iconography of the three acharyas

> interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements in the

> scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge man-like a

> shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is because he had

> to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita, Upanishads,

> etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal, well

> proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While Shankara, who

> had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

>

> Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize Hinduism

> under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in different stages

> of development, these philosophies (like the cast system), over time,

> became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down through

> the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This didn't allow

> for growth.

>

> And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their tradition,

> or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

> point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was impractical, and

> tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

> intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

> realization.

>

> In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian spirituality to

> the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that these three

> philosophies were three different stages of natural growth and

> experience, on a single path to God which all must tread. And his source

> of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose sadhana had

> taken him through each level in turn.

>

> These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them, have been a

> stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda did was to

> establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

> traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many of his sadhus

> to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

>

> Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come, members of that

> Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or famine or

> plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

>

> ...And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when too much

> thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my Heart, I

> remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a homeless

> family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50 dollars you

> can't afford " .

>

> Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

>

>

> Respectfully,

>

> Tanmaya

>

> , " Chris Kirner " <chriskirner1956@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Thanks for posting this Ramya!

> >

> > There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and try to

> > understand...

> >

> > When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches those of us who

> > are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my heart. I

> > know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been very

> > unhappy, with myself, and with God.

> >

> > But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of God, of

> > God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own experience and

> > say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping me like I

> > need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to continue to love

> > God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of, despite all

> > the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

> >

> > It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one feels

> > blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But unconditional

> > love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the beauty to kick

> > in]

> >

> > Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and pieces of

> > his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't really say I

> > understand who and what he was.

> >

> > Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India debating any

> > and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing against the

> > tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> > realization of the formless divinity who could only be described as

> > sat, chit, ananda.

> >

> > I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission of some

> > sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it generally

> > means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing, in the

> > current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

> >

> > Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal puja, he is

> > said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed. For me this

> > illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story Shree Maa

> > tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books (perhaps Before

> > Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of Vedanta, who

> > lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the illusory

> > nature of material existence, and on our own true nature being one

> > with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and fly to his

> > next engagement.

> >

> > Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion. Tantra

> > says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is therefore

> > real, because She is real.

> >

> > Jai Maa!

> > Chris

> >

> >

> >

> > , " n_ramya108 " n_ramya108@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Namaste Everybody,

> > >

> > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story about

> > > Shankaracharya.

> > >

> > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any questions

> > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > >

> > > Jai Maa

> > >

> > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

> dream

> > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also is

> a

> > > dream.

> > >

> > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a holy

> > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he saw

> a

> > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > >

> > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> > >

> > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of your

> way. "

> > >

> > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no shakti

> > > (energy). "

> > >

> > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one can

> > move? "

> > >

> > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> impossible.

> > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by himself. "

> > >

> > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> creation,

> > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please explain

> > > this to me. "

> > >

> > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > >

> > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> universe.

> > >

> > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the Universal

> > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> > >

> > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > >

> > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to this

> > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva who

> > > acted as the dead body.

> > >

> > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional love,

> > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step towards

> > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it not

> > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> > >

> > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa, Maa,

> Maa,

> > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long time

> > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > >

> > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you can

> > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> away.

> > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does not

> > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> > >

> > > Om

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Chris,

 

You had asked about Shankara; ( " ..an enigma..I can't say I really

understand who and what he was.. " ).

 

My reply was an attempt to put him more into context. A religious

teacher can't be fully understood outside of context, including what

went before, and when possible, what comes afterward.

 

Why should we try to understand? Because misunderstanding of the

greatest good can become the greatest danger, as has been shown clear to

the present.

 

Religion is not cut in stone. It evolves as the human life-stream

evolves. It is the eternal dialogue between God and Man, Nara and

Narayana.

 

And, it is important to remember that idolatry (collective religious

dryness) only comes when we make too much of the " words " , and not enough

of the living Relationship.

 

When the Great Teachers are with us, they keep us on track. When they

are gone, the responsibility becomes ours not to step into a minefield.

 

In any case, that's my take on it; not everyone will agree, nor is there

any need to .

 

 

T.

 

 

 

, " Chris Kirner " <chriskirner1956

wrote:

>

> Hi Tanmaya,

>

> I'm afraid my education is very limited. I know a little about some

> things, but about many I know next to nothing at all. Rather than

> systematically studying I have tended toward those things I found

> either spiritually uplifting or practical, and eschewed the rest. I am

> slightly ashamed to admit, for instance, that even though I come from

> a tradition that emphasized the teachings of the Yoga Sutras of

> Patanjali, I have never read any scripture or commentary devoted to

> the discussion of the philosophy of Sankya alone. Oh well.

>

> Thanks so much for your interesting response. I only wish I had more

> to say...I will add this, however, to your comments about debate and

> the obstacles this creates. I think that debate can be healthy. In the

> sphere of philosophy it can help to refine a structure to its finest

> point of understanding, which is a good thing. Problems arise when

> people attempt, as they always seem to do, to define (capture or bind)

> the undefinable with words that can never convey the whole truth - and

> they become very insistent about it, too.

>

> People who become too invested in their pride of philosophical

> accomplishment, become embedded there, and like a bug caught in amber,

> can no longer move beyond their particular point of view. Those whose

> first allegiance is to God, and to their own direct experience, are

> able to approach these various ideas with equanimity, recognize the

> limitations of each, and use them for inspiration and understanding,

> each in its proper place in the scheme of things. There is a point at

> which only direct experience suffices, and words alone give no

> satisfaction.

>

> Thanks again.

>

> Jai Maa!

> Chris

, " ty_maa " dsjames@ wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chris,

> >

> > Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of India.

The

> > other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

> >

> > Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e. that God

and

> > the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja founded the

> > philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul and God

are

> > of the same substance but infinitely different in magnitude: God is

> > great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

> >

> > Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or non-dualism, which

> > declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time, space,

and

> > causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

> >

> > Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on the three

> > great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and the

> > Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his

doctrine.

> > From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text

torturing " .

> >

> > The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis, etc., all

> > spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of those they

> > were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures contain

> > statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

> > non-dualism.

> >

> > I've always found the traditional iconography of the three acharyas

> > interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements in the

> > scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge man-like a

> > shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is because he

had

> > to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita, Upanishads,

> > etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal, well

> > proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While Shankara,

who

> > had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

> >

> > Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize Hinduism

> > under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in different

stages

> > of development, these philosophies (like the cast system), over

time,

> > became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down

through

> > the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This didn't

allow

> > for growth.

> >

> > And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their

tradition,

> > or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

> > point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was impractical,

and

> > tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

> > intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

> > realization.

> >

> > In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian spirituality

to

> > the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that these three

> > philosophies were three different stages of natural growth and

> > experience, on a single path to God which all must tread. And his

source

> > of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose sadhana

had

> > taken him through each level in turn.

> >

> > These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them, have been

a

> > stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda did was

to

> > establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

> > traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many of his

sadhus

> > to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

> >

> > Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come, members of

that

> > Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or famine or

> > plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

> >

> > ...And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when too much

> > thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my Heart, I

> > remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a

homeless

> > family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50 dollars you

> > can't afford " .

> >

> > Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

> >

> >

> > Respectfully,

> >

> > Tanmaya

> >

> > , " Chris Kirner "

<chriskirner1956@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Thanks for posting this Ramya!

> > >

> > > There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and try to

> > > understand...

> > >

> > > When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches those of us

who

> > > are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my heart.

I

> > > know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been very

> > > unhappy, with myself, and with God.

> > >

> > > But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of God,

of

> > > God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own experience

and

> > > say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping me like

I

> > > need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to continue to

love

> > > God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of, despite

all

> > > the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

> > >

> > > It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one feels

> > > blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But

unconditional

> > > love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the beauty to

kick

> > > in]

> > >

> > > Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and

pieces of

> > > his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't really

say I

> > > understand who and what he was.

> > >

> > > Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India debating

any

> > > and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing against

the

> > > tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> > > realization of the formless divinity who could only be described

as

> > > sat, chit, ananda.

> > >

> > > I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission of some

> > > sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it

generally

> > > means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing, in the

> > > current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

> > >

> > > Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal puja, he

is

> > > said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed. For me

this

> > > illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story Shree

Maa

> > > tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books (perhaps

Before

> > > Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of Vedanta,

who

> > > lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the illusory

> > > nature of material existence, and on our own true nature being one

> > > with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and fly to

his

> > > next engagement.

> > >

> > > Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion. Tantra

> > > says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is

therefore

> > > real, because She is real.

> > >

> > > Jai Maa!

> > > Chris

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " n_ramya108 " n_ramya108@

wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Namaste Everybody,

> > > >

> > > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story

about

> > > > Shankaracharya.

> > > >

> > > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any

questions

> > > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > > >

> > > > Jai Maa

> > > >

> > > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

> > dream

> > > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also

is

> > a

> > > > dream.

> > > >

> > > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a

holy

> > > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

saw

> > a

> > > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > > >

> > > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> > > >

> > > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of

your

> > way. "

> > > >

> > > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no

shakti

> > > > (energy). "

> > > >

> > > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one

can

> > > move? "

> > > >

> > > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> > impossible.

> > > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

himself. "

> > > >

> > > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> > creation,

> > > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please

explain

> > > > this to me. "

> > > >

> > > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > > >

> > > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> > universe.

> > > >

> > > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

Universal

> > > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> > > >

> > > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > > >

> > > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to

this

> > > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva

who

> > > > acted as the dead body.

> > > >

> > > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional

love,

> > > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step

towards

> > > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it

not

> > > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> > > >

> > > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa,

Maa,

> > Maa,

> > > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long

time

> > > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > > >

> > > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you

can

> > > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> > away.

> > > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does

not

> > > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> > > >

> > > > Om

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I agree completely, Tanmaya. It is important to understand spiritual

teachings and religious history from a variety of contexts.

 

Jai Maa!

Chris

 

 

 

, " ty_maa " <dsjames wrote:

>

>

> Chris,

>

> You had asked about Shankara; ( " ..an enigma..I can't say I really

> understand who and what he was.. " ).

>

> My reply was an attempt to put him more into context. A religious

> teacher can't be fully understood outside of context, including what

> went before, and when possible, what comes afterward.

>

> Why should we try to understand? Because misunderstanding of the

> greatest good can become the greatest danger, as has been shown clear to

> the present.

>

> Religion is not cut in stone. It evolves as the human life-stream

> evolves. It is the eternal dialogue between God and Man, Nara and

> Narayana.

>

> And, it is important to remember that idolatry (collective religious

> dryness) only comes when we make too much of the " words " , and not enough

> of the living Relationship.

>

> When the Great Teachers are with us, they keep us on track. When they

> are gone, the responsibility becomes ours not to step into a minefield.

>

> In any case, that's my take on it; not everyone will agree, nor is there

> any need to .

>

>

> T.

>

>

>

> , " Chris Kirner " <chriskirner1956@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Tanmaya,

> >

> > I'm afraid my education is very limited. I know a little about some

> > things, but about many I know next to nothing at all. Rather than

> > systematically studying I have tended toward those things I found

> > either spiritually uplifting or practical, and eschewed the rest. I am

> > slightly ashamed to admit, for instance, that even though I come from

> > a tradition that emphasized the teachings of the Yoga Sutras of

> > Patanjali, I have never read any scripture or commentary devoted to

> > the discussion of the philosophy of Sankya alone. Oh well.

> >

> > Thanks so much for your interesting response. I only wish I had more

> > to say...I will add this, however, to your comments about debate and

> > the obstacles this creates. I think that debate can be healthy. In the

> > sphere of philosophy it can help to refine a structure to its finest

> > point of understanding, which is a good thing. Problems arise when

> > people attempt, as they always seem to do, to define (capture or bind)

> > the undefinable with words that can never convey the whole truth - and

> > they become very insistent about it, too.

> >

> > People who become too invested in their pride of philosophical

> > accomplishment, become embedded there, and like a bug caught in amber,

> > can no longer move beyond their particular point of view. Those whose

> > first allegiance is to God, and to their own direct experience, are

> > able to approach these various ideas with equanimity, recognize the

> > limitations of each, and use them for inspiration and understanding,

> > each in its proper place in the scheme of things. There is a point at

> > which only direct experience suffices, and words alone give no

> > satisfaction.

> >

> > Thanks again.

> >

> > Jai Maa!

> > Chris

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > , " ty_maa " dsjames@ wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Chris,

> > >

> > > Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of India.

> The

> > > other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

> > >

> > > Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e. that God

> and

> > > the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja founded the

> > > philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul and God

> are

> > > of the same substance but infinitely different in magnitude: God is

> > > great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

> > >

> > > Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or non-dualism, which

> > > declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time, space,

> and

> > > causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

> > >

> > > Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on the three

> > > great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and the

> > > Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his

> doctrine.

> > > From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text

> torturing " .

> > >

> > > The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis, etc., all

> > > spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of those they

> > > were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures contain

> > > statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

> > > non-dualism.

> > >

> > > I've always found the traditional iconography of the three acharyas

> > > interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements in the

> > > scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge man-like a

> > > shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is because he

> had

> > > to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita, Upanishads,

> > > etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal, well

> > > proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While Shankara,

> who

> > > had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

> > >

> > > Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize Hinduism

> > > under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in different

> stages

> > > of development, these philosophies (like the cast system), over

> time,

> > > became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down

> through

> > > the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This didn't

> allow

> > > for growth.

> > >

> > > And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their

> tradition,

> > > or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

> > > point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was impractical,

> and

> > > tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

> > > intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

> > > realization.

> > >

> > > In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian spirituality

> to

> > > the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that these three

> > > philosophies were three different stages of natural growth and

> > > experience, on a single path to God which all must tread. And his

> source

> > > of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose sadhana

> had

> > > taken him through each level in turn.

> > >

> > > These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them, have been

> a

> > > stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda did was

> to

> > > establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

> > > traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many of his

> sadhus

> > > to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

> > >

> > > Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come, members of

> that

> > > Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or famine or

> > > plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

> > >

> > > ...And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when too much

> > > thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my Heart, I

> > > remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a

> homeless

> > > family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50 dollars you

> > > can't afford " .

> > >

> > > Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

> > >

> > >

> > > Respectfully,

> > >

> > > Tanmaya

> > >

> > > , " Chris Kirner "

> <chriskirner1956@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for posting this Ramya!

> > > >

> > > > There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and try to

> > > > understand...

> > > >

> > > > When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches those of us

> who

> > > > are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my heart.

> I

> > > > know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been very

> > > > unhappy, with myself, and with God.

> > > >

> > > > But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of God,

> of

> > > > God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own experience

> and

> > > > say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping me like

> I

> > > > need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to continue to

> love

> > > > God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of, despite

> all

> > > > the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

> > > >

> > > > It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one feels

> > > > blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But

> unconditional

> > > > love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the beauty to

> kick

> > > > in]

> > > >

> > > > Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and

> pieces of

> > > > his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't really

> say I

> > > > understand who and what he was.

> > > >

> > > > Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India debating

> any

> > > > and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing against

> the

> > > > tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> > > > realization of the formless divinity who could only be described

> as

> > > > sat, chit, ananda.

> > > >

> > > > I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission of some

> > > > sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it

> generally

> > > > means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing, in the

> > > > current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

> > > >

> > > > Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal puja, he

> is

> > > > said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed. For me

> this

> > > > illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story Shree

> Maa

> > > > tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books (perhaps

> Before

> > > > Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of Vedanta,

> who

> > > > lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the illusory

> > > > nature of material existence, and on our own true nature being one

> > > > with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and fly to

> his

> > > > next engagement.

> > > >

> > > > Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion. Tantra

> > > > says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is

> therefore

> > > > real, because She is real.

> > > >

> > > > Jai Maa!

> > > > Chris

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " n_ramya108 " n_ramya108@

> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Namaste Everybody,

> > > > >

> > > > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story

> about

> > > > > Shankaracharya.

> > > > >

> > > > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any

> questions

> > > > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > > > >

> > > > > Jai Maa

> > > > >

> > > > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

> > > dream

> > > > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also

> is

> > > a

> > > > > dream.

> > > > >

> > > > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a

> holy

> > > > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

> saw

> > > a

> > > > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > > > >

> > > > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> > > > >

> > > > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of

> your

> > > way. "

> > > > >

> > > > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no

> shakti

> > > > > (energy). "

> > > > >

> > > > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one

> can

> > > > move? "

> > > > >

> > > > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> > > impossible.

> > > > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

> himself. "

> > > > >

> > > > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> > > creation,

> > > > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > > > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please

> explain

> > > > > this to me. "

> > > > >

> > > > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > > > >

> > > > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> > > universe.

> > > > >

> > > > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

> Universal

> > > > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> > > > >

> > > > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > > > >

> > > > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to

> this

> > > > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva

> who

> > > > > acted as the dead body.

> > > > >

> > > > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional

> love,

> > > > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step

> towards

> > > > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it

> not

> > > > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> > > > >

> > > > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > > > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa,

> Maa,

> > > Maa,

> > > > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long

> time

> > > > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > > > >

> > > > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > > > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > > > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you

> can

> > > > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> > > away.

> > > > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does

> not

> > > > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> > > > >

> > > > > Om

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

On 8/3/07, Chris Kirner <chriskirner1956 wrote:

 

> I agree completely, Tanmaya. It is important to understand spiritual

> teachings and religious history from a variety of contexts.

 

I think that these seemingly different approaches of jnana and bhakti

of can be viewed as complementary in one's own sadhana. When one

grasps firmly at the objects of one's experience as external and real,

the 'neti neti' approach of rejecting as false all conceptual entities

is an effective antidote. After all, the Mother does appear as Error

and Confusion:

 

" ya devi sarvabhuteshu bhrantirupena samstitha... "

 

If at the point one has strong understanding of pure awareness through

this approach, one can then continue to " cut " at one's experience with

" not this, not this " and miss what is truly existent beyond falsehood.

This is the famous mistake that Adi Shankara made which Maa chided

him for. To correct this, a positive approach can be taken as in the

mahavakya: " sarvam khalvidam brahma " (All of this is Supreme

Consciousness).

 

One has to note that Adi Shankara was a great srividyopasika and to

this day the worship of Mahatripurasundari is a central feature of the

monastic institutions that he founded, so it seems that he himself

demonstrated this two-stage sadhana.

 

Sincerely,

 

Kalidas

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

> , " ty_maa " <dsjames wrote:

> >

> >

> > Chris,

> >

> > You had asked about Shankara; ( " ..an enigma..I can't say I really

> > understand who and what he was.. " ).

> >

> > My reply was an attempt to put him more into context. A religious

> > teacher can't be fully understood outside of context, including what

> > went before, and when possible, what comes afterward.

> >

> > Why should we try to understand? Because misunderstanding of the

> > greatest good can become the greatest danger, as has been shown clear to

> > the present.

> >

> > Religion is not cut in stone. It evolves as the human life-stream

> > evolves. It is the eternal dialogue between God and Man, Nara and

> > Narayana.

> >

> > And, it is important to remember that idolatry (collective religious

> > dryness) only comes when we make too much of the " words " , and not enough

> > of the living Relationship.

> >

> > When the Great Teachers are with us, they keep us on track. When they

> > are gone, the responsibility becomes ours not to step into a minefield.

> >

> > In any case, that's my take on it; not everyone will agree, nor is there

> > any need to .

> >

> >

> > T.

> >

> >

> >

> > , " Chris Kirner " <chriskirner1956@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Tanmaya,

> > >

> > > I'm afraid my education is very limited. I know a little about some

> > > things, but about many I know next to nothing at all. Rather than

> > > systematically studying I have tended toward those things I found

> > > either spiritually uplifting or practical, and eschewed the rest. I am

> > > slightly ashamed to admit, for instance, that even though I come from

> > > a tradition that emphasized the teachings of the Yoga Sutras of

> > > Patanjali, I have never read any scripture or commentary devoted to

> > > the discussion of the philosophy of Sankya alone. Oh well.

> > >

> > > Thanks so much for your interesting response. I only wish I had more

> > > to say...I will add this, however, to your comments about debate and

> > > the obstacles this creates. I think that debate can be healthy. In the

> > > sphere of philosophy it can help to refine a structure to its finest

> > > point of understanding, which is a good thing. Problems arise when

> > > people attempt, as they always seem to do, to define (capture or bind)

> > > the undefinable with words that can never convey the whole truth - and

> > > they become very insistent about it, too.

> > >

> > > People who become too invested in their pride of philosophical

> > > accomplishment, become embedded there, and like a bug caught in amber,

> > > can no longer move beyond their particular point of view. Those whose

> > > first allegiance is to God, and to their own direct experience, are

> > > able to approach these various ideas with equanimity, recognize the

> > > limitations of each, and use them for inspiration and understanding,

> > > each in its proper place in the scheme of things. There is a point at

> > > which only direct experience suffices, and words alone give no

> > > satisfaction.

> > >

> > > Thanks again.

> > >

> > > Jai Maa!

> > > Chris

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " ty_maa " dsjames@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Chris,

> > > >

> > > > Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of India.

> > The

> > > > other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

> > > >

> > > > Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e. that God

> > and

> > > > the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja founded the

> > > > philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul and God

> > are

> > > > of the same substance but infinitely different in magnitude: God is

> > > > great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

> > > >

> > > > Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or non-dualism, which

> > > > declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time, space,

> > and

> > > > causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

> > > >

> > > > Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on the three

> > > > great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and the

> > > > Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his

> > doctrine.

> > > > From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text

> > torturing " .

> > > >

> > > > The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis, etc., all

> > > > spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of those they

> > > > were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures contain

> > > > statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

> > > > non-dualism.

> > > >

> > > > I've always found the traditional iconography of the three acharyas

> > > > interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements in the

> > > > scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge man-like a

> > > > shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is because he

> > had

> > > > to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita, Upanishads,

> > > > etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal, well

> > > > proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While Shankara,

> > who

> > > > had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

> > > >

> > > > Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize Hinduism

> > > > under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in different

> > stages

> > > > of development, these philosophies (like the cast system), over

> > time,

> > > > became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down

> > through

> > > > the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This didn't

> > allow

> > > > for growth.

> > > >

> > > > And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their

> > tradition,

> > > > or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

> > > > point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was impractical,

> > and

> > > > tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

> > > > intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

> > > > realization.

> > > >

> > > > In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian spirituality

> > to

> > > > the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that these three

> > > > philosophies were three different stages of natural growth and

> > > > experience, on a single path to God which all must tread. And his

> > source

> > > > of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose sadhana

> > had

> > > > taken him through each level in turn.

> > > >

> > > > These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them, have been

> > a

> > > > stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda did was

> > to

> > > > establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

> > > > traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many of his

> > sadhus

> > > > to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

> > > >

> > > > Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come, members of

> > that

> > > > Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or famine or

> > > > plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

> > > >

> > > > ...And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when too much

> > > > thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my Heart, I

> > > > remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a

> > homeless

> > > > family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50 dollars you

> > > > can't afford " .

> > > >

> > > > Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Respectfully,

> > > >

> > > > Tanmaya

> > > >

> > > > , " Chris Kirner "

> > <chriskirner1956@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks for posting this Ramya!

> > > > >

> > > > > There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and try to

> > > > > understand...

> > > > >

> > > > > When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches those of us

> > who

> > > > > are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my heart.

> > I

> > > > > know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been very

> > > > > unhappy, with myself, and with God.

> > > > >

> > > > > But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of God,

> > of

> > > > > God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own experience

> > and

> > > > > say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping me like

> > I

> > > > > need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to continue to

> > love

> > > > > God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of, despite

> > all

> > > > > the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

> > > > >

> > > > > It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one feels

> > > > > blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But

> > unconditional

> > > > > love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the beauty to

> > kick

> > > > > in]

> > > > >

> > > > > Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and

> > pieces of

> > > > > his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't really

> > say I

> > > > > understand who and what he was.

> > > > >

> > > > > Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India debating

> > any

> > > > > and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing against

> > the

> > > > > tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> > > > > realization of the formless divinity who could only be described

> > as

> > > > > sat, chit, ananda.

> > > > >

> > > > > I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission of some

> > > > > sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it

> > generally

> > > > > means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing, in the

> > > > > current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

> > > > >

> > > > > Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal puja, he

> > is

> > > > > said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed. For me

> > this

> > > > > illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story Shree

> > Maa

> > > > > tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books (perhaps

> > Before

> > > > > Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of Vedanta,

> > who

> > > > > lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the illusory

> > > > > nature of material existence, and on our own true nature being one

> > > > > with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and fly to

> > his

> > > > > next engagement.

> > > > >

> > > > > Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion. Tantra

> > > > > says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is

> > therefore

> > > > > real, because She is real.

> > > > >

> > > > > Jai Maa!

> > > > > Chris

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > , " n_ramya108 " n_ramya108@

> > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste Everybody,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a story

> > about

> > > > > > Shankaracharya.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any

> > questions

> > > > > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Jai Maa

> > > > > >

> > > > > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole world as a

> > > > dream

> > > > > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real; Shakti also

> > is

> > > > a

> > > > > > dream.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to take a

> > holy

> > > > > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of Ganga, he

> > saw

> > > > a

> > > > > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my path. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get out of

> > your

> > > > way. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > > > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no

> > shakti

> > > > > > (energy). "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti no one

> > can

> > > > > move? "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> > > > impossible.

> > > > > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

> > himself. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> > > > creation,

> > > > > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness (chetana

> > > > > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move? Please

> > explain

> > > > > > this to me. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > > > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> > > > universe.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

> > Universal

> > > > > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable universe.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya to

> > this

> > > > > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord Shiva

> > who

> > > > > > acted as the dead body.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with unconditional

> > love,

> > > > > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step

> > towards

> > > > > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful? Is it

> > not

> > > > > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing way...ha,ha,ha...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in Shakti

> > > > > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa,

> > Maa,

> > > > Maa,

> > > > > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a long

> > time

> > > > > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one attains

> > > > > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness awakens, the

> > > > > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that you

> > can

> > > > > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the darkness goes

> > > > away.

> > > > > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This does

> > not

> > > > > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all together.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Om

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Friend,

 

Just to acknowledge your perceptive and truthful comments.

 

Looked at historically, acharyas are sequential, and can appear in

conflict. Seen individually, each is a hologram; each seed of the tree

containing the whole tree.

 

As are we as well...holograms: appearing variously, yet containing the

whole Tree.

 

And for now this hologram is shutting down.

 

Remembering that good speech is silver, but Silence is Golden.

 

T.

 

, " Thubten Namgyal "

<anandabhairav wrote:

>

> On 8/3/07, Chris Kirner chriskirner1956 wrote:

>

> > I agree completely, Tanmaya. It is important to understand spiritual

> > teachings and religious history from a variety of contexts.

>

> I think that these seemingly different approaches of jnana and bhakti

> of can be viewed as complementary in one's own sadhana. When one

> grasps firmly at the objects of one's experience as external and real,

> the 'neti neti' approach of rejecting as false all conceptual entities

> is an effective antidote. After all, the Mother does appear as Error

> and Confusion:

>

> " ya devi sarvabhuteshu bhrantirupena samstitha... "

>

> If at the point one has strong understanding of pure awareness through

> this approach, one can then continue to " cut " at one's experience with

> " not this, not this " and miss what is truly existent beyond falsehood.

> This is the famous mistake that Adi Shankara made which Maa chided

> him for. To correct this, a positive approach can be taken as in the

> mahavakya: " sarvam khalvidam brahma " (All of this is Supreme

> Consciousness).

>

> One has to note that Adi Shankara was a great srividyopasika and to

> this day the worship of Mahatripurasundari is a central feature of the

> monastic institutions that he founded, so it seems that he himself

> demonstrated this two-stage sadhana.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Kalidas

>

> , " ty_maa " dsjames@ wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Chris,

> > >

> > > You had asked about Shankara; ( " ..an enigma..I can't say I

really

> > > understand who and what he was.. " ).

> > >

> > > My reply was an attempt to put him more into context. A religious

> > > teacher can't be fully understood outside of context, including

what

> > > went before, and when possible, what comes afterward.

> > >

> > > Why should we try to understand? Because misunderstanding of the

> > > greatest good can become the greatest danger, as has been shown

clear to

> > > the present.

> > >

> > > Religion is not cut in stone. It evolves as the human life-stream

> > > evolves. It is the eternal dialogue between God and Man, Nara and

> > > Narayana.

> > >

> > > And, it is important to remember that idolatry (collective

religious

> > > dryness) only comes when we make too much of the " words " , and not

enough

> > > of the living Relationship.

> > >

> > > When the Great Teachers are with us, they keep us on track. When

they

> > > are gone, the responsibility becomes ours not to step into a

minefield.

> > >

> > > In any case, that's my take on it; not everyone will agree, nor

is there

> > > any need to .

> > >

> > >

> > > T.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " Chris Kirner "

<chriskirner1956@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Tanmaya,

> > > >

> > > > I'm afraid my education is very limited. I know a little about

some

> > > > things, but about many I know next to nothing at all. Rather

than

> > > > systematically studying I have tended toward those things I

found

> > > > either spiritually uplifting or practical, and eschewed the

rest. I am

> > > > slightly ashamed to admit, for instance, that even though I

come from

> > > > a tradition that emphasized the teachings of the Yoga Sutras of

> > > > Patanjali, I have never read any scripture or commentary

devoted to

> > > > the discussion of the philosophy of Sankya alone. Oh well.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks so much for your interesting response. I only wish I had

more

> > > > to say...I will add this, however, to your comments about

debate and

> > > > the obstacles this creates. I think that debate can be healthy.

In the

> > > > sphere of philosophy it can help to refine a structure to its

finest

> > > > point of understanding, which is a good thing. Problems arise

when

> > > > people attempt, as they always seem to do, to define (capture

or bind)

> > > > the undefinable with words that can never convey the whole

truth - and

> > > > they become very insistent about it, too.

> > > >

> > > > People who become too invested in their pride of philosophical

> > > > accomplishment, become embedded there, and like a bug caught in

amber,

> > > > can no longer move beyond their particular point of view. Those

whose

> > > > first allegiance is to God, and to their own direct experience,

are

> > > > able to approach these various ideas with equanimity, recognize

the

> > > > limitations of each, and use them for inspiration and

understanding,

> > > > each in its proper place in the scheme of things. There is a

point at

> > > > which only direct experience suffices, and words alone give no

> > > > satisfaction.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks again.

> > > >

> > > > Jai Maa!

> > > > Chris

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " ty_maa " dsjames@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Chris,

> > > > >

> > > > > Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of

India.

> > > The

> > > > > other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

> > > > >

> > > > > Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e.

that God

> > > and

> > > > > the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja

founded the

> > > > > philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul

and God

> > > are

> > > > > of the same substance but infinitely different in magnitude:

God is

> > > > > great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

> > > > >

> > > > > Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or non-dualism,

which

> > > > > declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time,

space,

> > > and

> > > > > causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

> > > > >

> > > > > Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on

the three

> > > > > great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and

the

> > > > > Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his

> > > doctrine.

> > > > > From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text

> > > torturing " .

> > > > >

> > > > > The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis,

etc., all

> > > > > spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of

those they

> > > > > were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures

contain

> > > > > statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

> > > > > non-dualism.

> > > > >

> > > > > I've always found the traditional iconography of the three

acharyas

> > > > > interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements in

the

> > > > > scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge

man-like a

> > > > > shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is

because he

> > > had

> > > > > to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita,

Upanishads,

> > > > > etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal,

well

> > > > > proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While

Shankara,

> > > who

> > > > > had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

> > > > >

> > > > > Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize

Hinduism

> > > > > under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in

different

> > > stages

> > > > > of development, these philosophies (like the cast system),

over

> > > time,

> > > > > became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down

> > > through

> > > > > the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This

didn't

> > > allow

> > > > > for growth.

> > > > >

> > > > > And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their

> > > tradition,

> > > > > or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

> > > > > point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was

impractical,

> > > and

> > > > > tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

> > > > > intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

> > > > > realization.

> > > > >

> > > > > In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian

spirituality

> > > to

> > > > > the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that

these three

> > > > > philosophies were three different stages of natural growth

and

> > > > > experience, on a single path to God which all must tread. And

his

> > > source

> > > > > of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose

sadhana

> > > had

> > > > > taken him through each level in turn.

> > > > >

> > > > > These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them,

have been

> > > a

> > > > > stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda

did was

> > > to

> > > > > establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

> > > > > traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many of

his

> > > sadhus

> > > > > to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come,

members of

> > > that

> > > > > Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or

famine or

> > > > > plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

> > > > >

> > > > > ...And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when too

much

> > > > > thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my

Heart, I

> > > > > remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a

> > > homeless

> > > > > family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50

dollars you

> > > > > can't afford " .

> > > > >

> > > > > Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Respectfully,

> > > > >

> > > > > Tanmaya

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Chris Kirner "

> > > <chriskirner1956@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks for posting this Ramya!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and

try to

> > > > > > understand...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches

those of us

> > > who

> > > > > > are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills my

heart.

> > > I

> > > > > > know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been

very

> > > > > > unhappy, with myself, and with God.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality of

God,

> > > of

> > > > > > God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own

experience

> > > and

> > > > > > say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping

me like

> > > I

> > > > > > need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to

continue to

> > > love

> > > > > > God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of,

despite

> > > all

> > > > > > the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when one

feels

> > > > > > blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But

> > > unconditional

> > > > > > love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the

beauty to

> > > kick

> > > > > > in]

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits

and

> > > pieces of

> > > > > > his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't

really

> > > say I

> > > > > > understand who and what he was.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India

debating

> > > any

> > > > > > and all comers (such was the tradition of the day) arguing

against

> > > the

> > > > > > tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> > > > > > realization of the formless divinity who could only be

described

> > > as

> > > > > > sat, chit, ananda.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission

of some

> > > > > > sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it

> > > generally

> > > > > > means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing,

in the

> > > > > > current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal

puja, he

> > > is

> > > > > > said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he passed.

For me

> > > this

> > > > > > illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this story

Shree

> > > Maa

> > > > > > tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books

(perhaps

> > > Before

> > > > > > Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of

Vedanta,

> > > who

> > > > > > lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the

illusory

> > > > > > nature of material existence, and on our own true nature

being one

> > > > > > with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane and

fly to

> > > his

> > > > > > next engagement.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere illusion.

Tantra

> > > > > > says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is

> > > therefore

> > > > > > real, because She is real.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Jai Maa!

> > > > > > Chris

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , " n_ramya108 "

n_ramya108@

> > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Namaste Everybody,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a

story

> > > about

> > > > > > > Shankaracharya.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also

any

> > > questions

> > > > > > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Jai Maa

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole

world as a

> > > > > dream

> > > > > > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real;

Shakti also

> > > is

> > > > > a

> > > > > > > dream.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to

take a

> > > holy

> > > > > > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of

Ganga, he

> > > saw

> > > > > a

> > > > > > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from my

path. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get

out of

> > > your

> > > > > way. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish

thing,

> > > > > > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is

no

> > > shakti

> > > > > > > (energy). "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti

no one

> > > can

> > > > > > move? "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying

is

> > > > > impossible.

> > > > > > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

> > > himself. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle

of

> > > > > creation,

> > > > > > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness

(chetana

> > > > > > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move?

Please

> > > explain

> > > > > > > this to me. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in

Pure

> > > > > > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the

entire

> > > > > universe.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

> > > Universal

> > > > > > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable

universe.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led Shankaracharya

to

> > > this

> > > > > > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was Lord

Shiva

> > > who

> > > > > > > acted as the dead body.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with

unconditional

> > > love,

> > > > > > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one

step

> > > towards

> > > > > > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not beautiful?

Is it

> > > not

> > > > > > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing

way...ha,ha,ha...

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in

Shakti

> > > > > > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said

" Maa,

> > > Maa,

> > > > > Maa,

> > > > > > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed a

long

> > > time

> > > > > > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one

attains

> > > > > > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness

awakens, the

> > > > > > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said that

you

> > > can

> > > > > > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the

darkness goes

> > > > > away.

> > > > > > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away. This

does

> > > not

> > > > > > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all

together.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Om

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Kalidas,

 

I'm sorry this is so late in coming...

 

Yes, I think you stated it very well. May we all be blessed with the

vision of all that is as pure divinity.

 

Jai Maa!

Chris

 

 

 

, " Thubten Namgyal "

<anandabhairav wrote:

>

> On 8/3/07, Chris Kirner <chriskirner1956 wrote:

>

> > I agree completely, Tanmaya. It is important to understand spiritual

> > teachings and religious history from a variety of contexts.

>

> I think that these seemingly different approaches of jnana and bhakti

> of can be viewed as complementary in one's own sadhana. When one

> grasps firmly at the objects of one's experience as external and real,

> the 'neti neti' approach of rejecting as false all conceptual entities

> is an effective antidote. After all, the Mother does appear as Error

> and Confusion:

>

> " ya devi sarvabhuteshu bhrantirupena samstitha... "

>

> If at the point one has strong understanding of pure awareness through

> this approach, one can then continue to " cut " at one's experience with

> " not this, not this " and miss what is truly existent beyond falsehood.

> This is the famous mistake that Adi Shankara made which Maa chided

> him for. To correct this, a positive approach can be taken as in the

> mahavakya: " sarvam khalvidam brahma " (All of this is Supreme

> Consciousness).

>

> One has to note that Adi Shankara was a great srividyopasika and to

> this day the worship of Mahatripurasundari is a central feature of the

> monastic institutions that he founded, so it seems that he himself

> demonstrated this two-stage sadhana.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Kalidas

>

> , " ty_maa " <dsjames@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Chris,

> > >

> > > You had asked about Shankara; ( " ..an enigma..I can't say I really

> > > understand who and what he was.. " ).

> > >

> > > My reply was an attempt to put him more into context. A religious

> > > teacher can't be fully understood outside of context, including

what

> > > went before, and when possible, what comes afterward.

> > >

> > > Why should we try to understand? Because misunderstanding of the

> > > greatest good can become the greatest danger, as has been shown

clear to

> > > the present.

> > >

> > > Religion is not cut in stone. It evolves as the human life-stream

> > > evolves. It is the eternal dialogue between God and Man, Nara and

> > > Narayana.

> > >

> > > And, it is important to remember that idolatry (collective

religious

> > > dryness) only comes when we make too much of the " words " , and

not enough

> > > of the living Relationship.

> > >

> > > When the Great Teachers are with us, they keep us on track.

When they

> > > are gone, the responsibility becomes ours not to step into a

minefield.

> > >

> > > In any case, that's my take on it; not everyone will agree, nor

is there

> > > any need to .

> > >

> > >

> > > T.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " Chris Kirner "

<chriskirner1956@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Tanmaya,

> > > >

> > > > I'm afraid my education is very limited. I know a little

about some

> > > > things, but about many I know next to nothing at all. Rather than

> > > > systematically studying I have tended toward those things I found

> > > > either spiritually uplifting or practical, and eschewed the

rest. I am

> > > > slightly ashamed to admit, for instance, that even though I

come from

> > > > a tradition that emphasized the teachings of the Yoga Sutras of

> > > > Patanjali, I have never read any scripture or commentary

devoted to

> > > > the discussion of the philosophy of Sankya alone. Oh well.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks so much for your interesting response. I only wish I

had more

> > > > to say...I will add this, however, to your comments about

debate and

> > > > the obstacles this creates. I think that debate can be

healthy. In the

> > > > sphere of philosophy it can help to refine a structure to its

finest

> > > > point of understanding, which is a good thing. Problems arise

when

> > > > people attempt, as they always seem to do, to define (capture

or bind)

> > > > the undefinable with words that can never convey the whole

truth - and

> > > > they become very insistent about it, too.

> > > >

> > > > People who become too invested in their pride of philosophical

> > > > accomplishment, become embedded there, and like a bug caught

in amber,

> > > > can no longer move beyond their particular point of view.

Those whose

> > > > first allegiance is to God, and to their own direct

experience, are

> > > > able to approach these various ideas with equanimity,

recognize the

> > > > limitations of each, and use them for inspiration and

understanding,

> > > > each in its proper place in the scheme of things. There is a

point at

> > > > which only direct experience suffices, and words alone give no

> > > > satisfaction.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks again.

> > > >

> > > > Jai Maa!

> > > > Chris

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > , " ty_maa " dsjames@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Chris,

> > > > >

> > > > > Shankara Acharya is only one of the three great Acharyas of

India.

> > > The

> > > > > other two are Madva and Ramanuja.

> > > > >

> > > > > Madva established the philosophy of dvaita or dualism, i.e.

that God

> > > and

> > > > > the soul are eternally different and separate. Ramanuja

founded the

> > > > > philosophy of vashishta advaita, or the doctrine that soul

and God

> > > are

> > > > > of the same substance but infinitely different in

magnitude: God is

> > > > > great, while the soul, like a spark from God, is minute.

> > > > >

> > > > > Shankara propounded the philosophy of adviata or

non-dualism, which

> > > > > declares that, from the highest point of view (beyond time,

space,

> > > and

> > > > > causation) soul and God are indistinguishable and the Same.

> > > > >

> > > > > Each acharya, to win his spurs, was required to comment on

the three

> > > > > great pillars of Hinduisn-the Gita, the Brahma Sutras, and the

> > > > > Upanisads-making each and every statement in each support his

> > > doctrine.

> > > > > From this attempt comes the very appropriate phrase, " text

> > > torturing " .

> > > > >

> > > > > The truth is that the great teachers, Krishna, the rishis,

etc., all

> > > > > spoke from every point of view, according to the needs of

those they

> > > > > were teaching at the time; thus the original scriptures contain

> > > > > statements supportive of dualism, qualified non-dualism, and

> > > > > non-dualism.

> > > > >

> > > > > I've always found the traditional iconography of the three

acharyas

> > > > > interesting. Since there are many more advaitic statements

in the

> > > > > scriptures than dualistic, Madva is portrayed as a huge

man-like a

> > > > > shaven-headed sumo wrestler. That (it might be said) is

because he

> > > had

> > > > > to work the hardest to bend every statement in the Gita,

Upanishads,

> > > > > etc, to support dualism. Ramanuja is portrayed as a normal,

well

> > > > > proportioned gentleman, because his job was easier. While

Shankara,

> > > who

> > > > > had to work the least, is shown as a wispy little boy.

> > > > >

> > > > > Although the efforts of the three acharyas did systematize

Hinduism

> > > > > under three philosophies, appropriate to aspirants in different

> > > stages

> > > > > of development, these philosophies (like the cast system), over

> > > time,

> > > > > became water-tight compartments. A family, for instance, down

> > > through

> > > > > the generations, would all be Madva dualists for life. This

didn't

> > > allow

> > > > > for growth.

> > > > >

> > > > > And, those who believed in Advaita were also bound by their

> > > tradition,

> > > > > or " Church " . All were expected to accept, from the start, a

> > > > > point-of-view of " Soham " , " I am He " . This this was

impractical,

> > > and

> > > > > tended to embroil the greatness of the advaita philosophy in

> > > > > intellectualism and argumentation rather than transcendental

> > > > > realization.

> > > > >

> > > > > In recent times, Swami Vivekananda, in bringing Indian

spirituality

> > > to

> > > > > the West, stated that it was left for him to reveal that

these three

> > > > > philosophies were three different stages of natural growth and

> > > > > experience, on a single path to God which all must tread.

And his

> > > source

> > > > > of authority was the realization of Sri Ramakrishna, whose

sadhana

> > > had

> > > > > taken him through each level in turn.

> > > > >

> > > > > These philosophies, and the unending arguments among them,

have been

> > > a

> > > > > stumbling block for many. So another thing that Vivekananda

did was

> > > to

> > > > > establish a tradition of selfless service, Karma Yoga. Sadhus

> > > > > traditionally did not do " work " . But Vivekananda put many

of his

> > > sadhus

> > > > > to serving the poor, the diseased, and the starving.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even now, when the inevitable periods of dryness come,

members of

> > > that

> > > > > Order are put to service. Some in hospitals, schools, or

famine or

> > > > > plague relief. It clears the air and opens the Heart.

> > > > >

> > > > > ...And even now, for simple individuals like myself, when

too much

> > > > > thinking has taken me too much into my head and out of my

Heart, I

> > > > > remember the teaching: " Get the flow going, go out and find a

> > > homeless

> > > > > family sitting on a sidewalk somewhere and give them $50

dollars you

> > > > > can't afford " .

> > > > >

> > > > > Or the sage advice of Sal, " plant a tree " .

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Respectfully,

> > > > >

> > > > > Tanmaya

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Chris Kirner "

> > > <chriskirner1956@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thanks for posting this Ramya!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There's just so much here to look at and contemplate, and

try to

> > > > > > understand...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > When Maa says how beautiful it is, the way God teaches

those of us

> > > who

> > > > > > are blessed with unconditional love for Her, it thrills

my heart.

> > > I

> > > > > > know just what she means. Yet for a while now I have been

very

> > > > > > unhappy, with myself, and with God.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But what can I do? Once you have experienced the reality

of God,

> > > of

> > > > > > God's grace and loving care, how can you deny your own

experience

> > > and

> > > > > > say to God, " I don't want you anymore. You're not helping

me like

> > > I

> > > > > > need you to! " You cannot. You have no choice but to

continue to

> > > love

> > > > > > God with whatever degree of intensity you are capable of,

despite

> > > all

> > > > > > the difficulties, and ambivalent feelings.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It's easy to feel possessed of unconditional love when

one feels

> > > > > > blessed. It is harder when discouragement sets in. But

> > > unconditional

> > > > > > love is unconditional, isn't it? [Just waiting for the

beauty to

> > > kick

> > > > > > in]

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Adi Shankara is a bit of an enigma to me. I've read bits and

> > > pieces of

> > > > > > his history, as well as bit of his writings, but I can't

really

> > > say I

> > > > > > understand who and what he was.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Described as the Father of Vedanta, he went across India

debating

> > > any

> > > > > > and all comers (such was the tradition of the day)

arguing against

> > > the

> > > > > > tradition of external worship of idols and for the internal

> > > > > > realization of the formless divinity who could only be

described

> > > as

> > > > > > sat, chit, ananda.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I don't know why he did this. Apparently he had a mission

of some

> > > > > > sort, and when great saints have a mission of some sort it

> > > generally

> > > > > > means there is something fundamentally wrong, or missing,

in the

> > > > > > current environment. What exactly that was, I'm not sure.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Interestingly, despite his one man crusade against formal

puja, he

> > > is

> > > > > > said to have stopped to do puja in every temple he

passed. For me

> > > this

> > > > > > illustrates perfectly the fundamental issues of this

story Shree

> > > Maa

> > > > > > tells. Swamiji illustrated it well in one of the books

(perhaps

> > > Before

> > > > > > Becoming This) when he talked about the great teacher of

Vedanta,

> > > who

> > > > > > lectures all over the world on the formless divinity, the

illusory

> > > > > > nature of material existence, and on our own true nature

being one

> > > > > > with Brahman, and who nevertheless has to board a plane

and fly to

> > > his

> > > > > > next engagement.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Vedanta says we are all God, and all this is mere

illusion. Tantra

> > > > > > says that She created all this, and abides in it, and it is

> > > therefore

> > > > > > real, because She is real.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Jai Maa!

> > > > > > Chris

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , " n_ramya108 " n_ramya108@

> > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Namaste Everybody,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shree Maa dictated from Bengali with Her own comments a

story

> > > about

> > > > > > > Shankaracharya.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Please read and share your thoughts, insights and also any

> > > questions

> > > > > > > that you may have. Thank you very much!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Jai Maa

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When Shankaracharya got Brahma Gyaan he saw the whole

world as a

> > > > > dream

> > > > > > > and unreal. At that time he felt energy is not real;

Shakti also

> > > is

> > > > > a

> > > > > > > dream.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > At this time he went to the banks of the River Ganga to

take a

> > > holy

> > > > > > > dip. As he was climbing up the stairs of the ghats of

Ganga, he

> > > saw

> > > > > a

> > > > > > > lady with a dead body lying by her side.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > He told the lady, " Please take the dead body away from

my path. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The lady replied, " Baba, you tell the dead body to get

out of

> > > your

> > > > > way. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When he heard this crazy woman saying such a foolish thing,

> > > > > > > Shakaracharya said, " Mother, inside this corpse there is no

> > > shakti

> > > > > > > (energy). "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The lady said, " Why Baba? Does that mean without shakti

no one

> > > can

> > > > > > move? "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shankaracharya got upset and said, " What you are saying is

> > > > > impossible.

> > > > > > > This man is dead - unless we move him, he cannot move by

> > > himself. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The lady answered, " Why is this impossible? In the cycle of

> > > > > creation,

> > > > > > > can Nature (prakriti) move without Pure Consciousness

(chetana

> > > > > > > shakti)? Why do you say that a dead body cannot move?

Please

> > > explain

> > > > > > > this to me. "

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shankaracharya was surprised.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > He felt that whoever has Nirvikalpa samadhi resides in Pure

> > > > > > > Consciousness (Shuddha Chetana). He is One with the entire

> > > > > universe.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > This is Shakti, energy. She is Chinmayi Jagat Janani (the

> > > Universal

> > > > > > > Mother of Creation) and creator of this perceivable

universe.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The dead body and the lady disappeared.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > It was Divine Mother Maa Annapurna who led

Shankaracharya to

> > > this

> > > > > > > intuitive understanding to break his ego and it was

Lord Shiva

> > > who

> > > > > > > acted as the dead body.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Shree Maa smiled and said, " If we love God with

unconditional

> > > love,

> > > > > > > God teaches us in such a beautiful way. If we take one step

> > > towards

> > > > > > > God, God takes 10 steps towards us. Is it not

beautiful? Is it

> > > not

> > > > > > > Truth? " Maa laughs in a gentle all knowing

way...ha,ha,ha...

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Ramakrishna's Sanyaas Guru Totapuri did not believe in

Shakti

> > > > > > > (Energy). When Ramakrishna clapped his hands and said " Maa,

> > > Maa,

> > > > > Maa,

> > > > > > > Maa, " Totapuri used to get very mad. But when he stayed

a long

> > > time

> > > > > > > with Ramakrishna, he felt a change within himself.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When the effect of illusion breaks asunder, then one

attains

> > > > > > > consciousness with wisdom. When True Consciousness

awakens, the

> > > > > > > effects of maya (illusion) go away. Ramakrishna said

that you

> > > can

> > > > > > > light a thousand lamps in a dark room and all the

darkness goes

> > > > > away.

> > > > > > > When Pure Consciousness awakens, illusion goes away.

This does

> > > not

> > > > > > > happen little by little, it happens in one moment, all

together.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Om

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>