--Precisely!. Among the impersonalist viewpoints, one can merge 3 circles into an overlapping area: 1. Saivite Hinduism (TM fits in here), 2. Buddhism, and 3. Neo-Advaita. Then refer to the standard Advaita-Vedanta texts, such as that Yoga Vasistha, Patanjali, Shankara, Ramana Maharshi recorded messages, and countless Buddhist texts. Conjectures regarding the nature of the highest, or most powerful relative entities, such as Brahma, Vishnu, Krishna, Yahweh, etc; are speculative. IMO, the bottom line is what is the connection to such entities and PHYSICAL reality? If there's no connection, then discussions regarding such Personalities are academic. That is, unless individuals have a real, personal connection to Them on an inner plane level. But basically, unless Krishna can give me a good stock market prediction, I'm not interested in relating to Him.
- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "BillyG." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" > <willytex@> wrote: > > > > > > According to Patanjali, Ishvara is the inner controller, > > higher than even the subtlest relative. > > In some circles Ishvara represents Brahman and his consort Prakriti, > wherein is found his immanent nature Brahma, the son, the Creative > intelligence behind and controlling the Gunas/Prakriti. > > > God Brahm is the > > Transcendental Person in the Upanishads, the Purusha, who > > is beyond this creation, that is, transcendental to the > > contituents of nature. > > Thanks for recognizing that...that is, transcendental to the gunas or > the three worlds (physical, astral, casual) but still manifest! As a > 'person' he/she is limited to time and space in his/her manifest > condition. > > > What you have just described is a > > type of adwaitan illusionism which denies the 'personality' > > of God. You might consider this and avoid the error of > > thinking that God Brahm is just an illusion, a part and > > parcel of the relative. > > Brahm or Brahma is still subject to time and space, only Brahman is > Absolute...,his reflection (being Brahma, the second 'person' of the > trinity) in Prakriti is limited to the Manvantara. > > In Pralaya God's reflection Brahma dissolves back into the unmanifest > and Mother Nature, now called *mula-prakriti* rests in Pralaya as well > holding all the seeds of future incarnations. > > But in fact, God is the Transcendent > > Purusha in a Supreme Person - that's what 'God' means - > > a supreme person, the Ishvara of Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. > > As MMY says, God is both personal (immanent-all pervading *in* creation) > and impersonal beyond all creation-both. > > > The argument that God is the highest of the relative is > > not a convincing argument. > > He is both...when MMY talks about God consciousness this is what he is > talking about. This 'highest relative' can take any form but the state > of consciousness called God Consciousness is merging with the Solar > Deity who is all pervading in creation and is its animating power thru > the laws of nature or Prakriti. The trinity..... > > Badarayana, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, > > Madhva, and Vallabha all agree on this. Of all the > > Upanishadic thinkers, only Shankara places the Purusha > > among the relative illusions called Maya. > > He is both.... > > > snip> >
