--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Empty, I have been catching up on your posts. I like them. This topic is intersting. Some cosideration: 1) Yogananda wrote of his teacher returning to earth plane, from his new role as teacher on causal planes helping other to gain liberation from casual rebirth. 2) liberation from the cycle of birth and death, and not going anywhere -- that is, being omnipresent -- could be on level of (near around) akasha -- and still subject to rebirth in astral and casual planes (which is another part of yoganandas story) 3) Some traditions -- including now TM, hold there are a number of states beyond BC (= Brahma-vid in your cosmo9logy?). This would imply a brahma vid could go on to some omni-present subtle body somewhere and continue to "work it out". 4) Indra and other gods are said to be titles, and various entities attain that title for some time, then relinquish it. And I know the dogma that even the gods are not fully realized, yada yada. But if Saraswati is a title, and some entity is currently holding that title, its seems odd that that entity would be less evolved than Brama-vids, and a whole order of swamis, who are devoted to and worship the Goddess. 5) While liberation from earthly, astral and casual bodies / planes is a function of getting beyond the BINDING influence of ones vast karma,it does not eliminate that karma. A brahma-vid still has tons of karma, its just that that karma does not necessitate rebirth on corresponding planes. But where does that karma go. It doesn't dissappear. There is no loss or creation of energy in the cosmos -- all is just transformed from one thing to another. And I can't deliver the "punchline" to this argument -- because it doesn't add up -- that is, I am not sure what appropriate conclusion follows. Other than the compelling point that it doesn't all add up. That karma goes some where, effects something. Could there still be an "entity" -- as omni-present and unstructured as can be -- associated with, but not bound by that karma? Like a jivan mukti letting the "last push of the cart" unfold? > Have you ever read Adi-Shankara's Brahma Sutra Bhasya? He concurs > that a brahma-vid doesn't go anywhere at death. This also means that > he/she does not stay anywhere. A brahma-vid is like space whether > inside or outside of a pot. Space as such is the same, only the > features of the pot give us a reason to distinguish space as inside > or outside. to are not findable after death. Not going, not staying > what is the alternative? It is not returning either. When questions > about this, I heard MMY definitively deny what he called > the "bodhisattva idea". He said that the wave merging into the ocean > and the wave emerging from of the ocean could not be defined as the > same wave. This is very old point in MMY's knowledge base, older than > the guru devotion story you are now repeating. > > And by the way, Maharishi's comment, could actually be a good example > of a Buddhist explanation of the karmic continuity of personhood > across multiple lifetimes. > > Adi-Shankara did state that Ishvara could grant adhikara > (authorization) to select jivas to return to manifestation even after > cosmic pralaya with the caveat that it was Ishvara who recollected > them (their sanskaras) thus recalling them into being just as they > were at the end of the previous mahakalpa. His point was that these > previous adhikara-jivas (like the four kumaras) were those very deva- > rishis who awakened at the dawn of the creation's new radiance (navya- > prabhasa). His point was not that Ishvara might really like jiva-joe > and thus keep joe's guru around hanging with the pretas while joe > huddles with the masses. > > Guru Dev appears to have been a brahma-vid. Maharishi appears to be a > brahma-vid. Why would we want to sentimentalize a teacher's devotion > in this manner, except to lord it over ordinary meditators or newbie > teachers? It's just like using slogans such as "First deserve, then > desire". > > empty again >
