---What's the Name of Ishvara?
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > New morn, > > Thanks for your reply and encouragement. > > There seems to be much support among later advaita teachers (ie. > after Shankara) for the idea of the sheer freedom of the fully > liberated being from any constrainsts whatsoever. They call this > state "videha mukti" or bodiless liberation. However there are also > historically major advaita teachers who followed the "Yogavasishta" > and another text called "Jivanmukti-viveka" in asserting that freedom > means not only transcendence of individuality but also freedom of > sheer universality. According to them, a liberated being can live > anywhere in the universe at will. From this POV karmic results simply > cease or dissolve away when there is no individual doer to create, > experience or receive them. Like the actions of Krishna, Shiva or > Deva Mata, such a universalized being plays at will throughout the > multiverses yet is never the doer - all is done by Ishvara, the > cosmic ruler. > > Having said this, I think we would be hard pressed to figure this one > out on our own. Better yet - maybe we should be among those > who "have" to ponder whether to retire or keep playing lila games > with the other surfers of divine grace. > > empty > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "emptybill" <emptybill@> > 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 > > > > > >
