[Advaita-l] Logic and shastra

Mahesh Ursekar mahesh.ursekar at gmail.com
Sat Oct 22 01:44:43 CDT 2005

 Many thanks for your explanations. So, in effect, if I understand it right,
the realized soul does not have as association with his/her BMI and sees it
as a "third person" entity, quite different from who s/he is really is. Or
in other words, there is no feeling of ego, no sense of doership of any
actions. The thoughts, feelings, actions, reactions of the BMI are taking
place but there is no feeling of them being done by the realized person on
his or her own. Is that correct?
 But there are times when realized souls feel sorrow or yearnings. For
example, Sri Ramakrishna after his realization was troubled emmensely at
being in the company of worldly people and yearned for true devotees to come
to him. He used to go on his rooftop looking out for his disciples to arrive
and cry to the mother asking her for deliverace from worldly company. Or
Swami Vivekananda, to take a small example, when he just became famous in
the West wrote that he was sick and tired of the lectures that he was
required to give and yearned for a break from this schedule.
 The above appears in stark contrast to the equanimity and "revelling only
in the Self" trait of realized soul. In the above case, why was there sorrow
and frustration? Are these too part of the BMI and have nothing to do with
the person himself? Should there not have been calm acceptance rather than a
yearning for change?
 Any thoughts would help me immensely,
 Humble pranams, Mahesh

 On 10/20/05, praveen.r.bhat at exgate.tek.com <praveen.r.bhat at exgate.tek.com>
> praNAm all,
> (Mahesh-ji, thanks for linking me to the poem that I used to love in my
> childhood, wishes, prayers and blessings. I can only hope to live up to
> those; thanks to the great personalities on this list and many who've
> helped
> me to this decision as a first step)
> Mahesh-ji wrote:
> If Brahman is all there is then one can never claim "I am a realized
> person"
> since the person and realization become different.
> praveen:
> I do not know if realized person claims so. If one did, it is only a
> phrase
> to convey the message so to the unrealized, who thinks so in his/her BMI
> complex under the veil of ignorance. Ramana, Nisargadatta, all said that
> realization is when this avidyaa is not left anymore, and one knows it to
> be
> not real, so that one knows that one is brahmaN and always was so. Thats
> where the time has no meaning either, to say that "I am realized *now*"
> and
> the multiplicity of individual souls/BMIs no longer exists.
> One a separate note...
> Mahesh-ji wrote:
> One can say that there is no ego of a realized person and s/he is using
> the
> word "I" merely to indicate his/her physical body as a reference. But I
> still find that rather curious since the person does, for example,
> experience pain. If there is no ego then why did Sri Ramakrishna tell the
> doctor that in his elevated states of consciousness, he felt more pain in
> his throat? Why did the doctor then advise him to refrain from going into
> samadhi? Who was feeling the pain? The BMI? But the realized person should
> be completely disassoicated from his/her BMI so why is there "feeling" at
> all? If there is only all pervading consciuosness with no other entity,
> why
> is there still some linking with the BMI?
> praveen:
> May I humbly point you to Nisargadatta Maharaj again? He was asked about a
> similar question regarding how he would react if he was attacked by
> someone.
> Maharaj said that he really wouldn't have anything to do there, but people
> around him may see him reacting in a manner appropriate then. The body may
> jump or even fight back, or something to that effect. This question you
> pose
> is quite similar to whether the prarabdhaa acts on a jivanmukta and
> Shankara's answer is that it does not, but only the bystanders see the
> jivanmukta in the body suffering/enjoying the prarabdhaa. In fact, your
> own
> question has the answer when you say: "But the realized person should be
> completely disassoicated from his/her BMI so why is there "feeling" at
> all?". The realized person doesn't have these feelings, the BMI as a part
> of
> prakriti seems acting for the unrealized.
> (Again, if you meant to say that paramhamsa shouldn't have complained to
> the
> doctor in the first place, then even a question prior to that should've
> been: why would a realized be hungry to eat also? In which case, the
> answer
> would still remain the same as what I mention earlier. I'm sure you've
> read
> that there were times in Ramakrishna's samaadhi when people (the temple
> manager if I remember right) even kicked and forcibly fed the master to
> get
> him to be in the body)
> shivam shaantam advaitam,
> --praveen
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list