Re: Tattvas
Originally Posted by
Eastern Mind
Grames: Go ahead and begin, then. Reminds me a committee I sat on once where everyone believed that the last word was the best word so no one said anything. That was fun
Aum Namasivaya
However, I agree with devotee. I will relate two views. In Shankara Vijayam, Shankara is seen debating with Vishistaadvaita advocate of his time. The VA proponent insists that the final view (sheshatwa) is wherein one sees oneself as knowledge and a miniscule part of the infinite Lord, whose essential nature is also knowledge. Shankara simply said: then you would not see the Lord.
Guru Ramana, although known to be an advaitin, appeared to be offering a different perspective from the intellectual understanding of advaita darshana. But the difference is apparent only. He said one or two are words. The Self is the reality that no one can negate and Self is partless and not two.
IMO, the need remains to experience the Turya as it is -- as advaita shivo atman. And one situated stably in Turya is not bound. Guru Ramana is known to have commented that he occupied bodies in various lokas and he asked devotees as to how the happenings with these variety of bodies changed the Self, which is not two? In order to have such freedom, the one, impartible, Turya must be known as oneself. Lord kAla, Sarvesvara, is also pervaded by Turya, which, Guru Madhava calls Prabhu.
We simply would not understand the explanations of a Turya established Guru, without having our own experience of Turya, which scriptures indeed term as shivo advait atma.
Om Namah Shivaya
Last edited by atanu; 02 October 2009 at 07:49 AM.
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.
Bookmarks