kaisersose
Active Member
The "I" is my identity that recognizes myself apart from everything around me. Without this recognition, the body is either asleep or in a vegetative state or dead.Friend kaisersos,
What is the *I*?
Love & rgds
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The "I" is my identity that recognizes myself apart from everything around me. Without this recognition, the body is either asleep or in a vegetative state or dead.Friend kaisersos,
What is the *I*?
Love & rgds
Friend Kriya Yogi,
Now, respond to these:
Within consciousness, is there any high / low??
In consciousness is there any I / WE ???
Love & rgds
The "I" is my identity that recognizes myself apart from everything around me. Without this recognition, the body is either asleep or in a vegetative state or dead.
Friend kriya Yoga,
The question remains unresponded.
It was simply *within consciousness is there any I / WE or HIGH /LOW???*
yes / no ???
Love & rgds
Friend Kriya Yoga,
Is the understanding reached about the fact that whatever seen or do unseen are all manifestation of the same *God* you speak off??
If YES then where did this *I* come from, where or who creates that division??
Love & rgds
Friend kaisersose,
Here you are the perceiver; where did the perceiver come from??
Love & rgds
From nowhere.
Why do you think the perceiver should have come from somewhere? Please explain.
Friend KY,
The mind there is jumping.
Slow it down.
This whole maya / illusion is also created as otherwise there would be no enjoyment it would be too monotonous.
The point now is if one as a form [evolved] is also part of *God* then why do we call it *I*???
Who is this *I*??
Personal understanding and search for this *I* always left with the understanding that *am only a part of that *WHOLE* [god]in human form!
There is no difference between this individual form labelled *me* with any other form or no-forms except that illusions created by the minds when active and when made still it again unites. Duality is mind created and religion or paths all are ways to still the mind.
Love & rgds
Friend KY,
It needs to be understood firmly that this whole universe is only ONE which are in various forms including the MIND.
Love & rgds
Meh. All Gita translations have their biases, quirks and schools of thought. I remember purchasing a translation and commentary (by his disciple) by Paramahamsa Yogananda, and found the translation to be *completely* away from the Sanskrit, even moreso biased towards their practice of kriya yoga than anything else! Disappointed, I did send it to the local used bookstore the next day.
This little paragraph is from the introduction to 'Srimad Bhagavad-gita: The Hidden Treasure of the Sweet Absolute' by Srila Sridhar Maharaj, a very famous proponent and philosopher-saint in the Gaudiya Vaishnava community. I found it very inspiring!
Besides, just as I quoted above, "The devotees of the Lord (bhagavad-bhaktas) and persons on the paths of action, knowledge and yoga (karmis, jnanis and yogis) will each find the essence of their paths dealt with in a comprehensive and illuminating manner, and thus the book is highly esteemed by all." -- Srila Sridhar Maharaj
Sanskrit seems to have a way that it can be translated according to the school of thought of the translator. I have read Vaishnava translations of the Gita that emphasise one's love for Krishna or Vishnu and advocate bhakti-yoga as the purpose of the Gita, via Gita 18.66. Other Gitas I have read focus on karma-yoga, which is but philanthropic activity or humanitarian work. And of course, there are translations like that of the Self-Realization Fellowship, which focus on kriya-yoga.
They may not be wrong... but they may be useless to the person whose goal in life may not be the same as the philosophical school ey adheres to.
whenever I think of babajis, I think of bhajan in one's dottage like this [can anyone guess the mantra he's singing as he plays the harmonium?]:
Aindra dasa prabhu ki jaya!
Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna,
Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare,
Hare Rama, Hare Rama,
Rama Rama, Hare Hare!
satatam kirtayanto mam, yatantash cha drdha-vratah
namasyantash cha mam bhaktya, nitya-yukta upasate
"They continually chant My glories, strive to learn spiritual truths about Me and faithfully follow the devotional practices. Bowing to me and worshipping Me with devotion, they aspire for their eternal relationship with Me."
-- Srimad Bhagavad-gita: The Hidden Treasure of the Absolute, 9.14
Babaji is Krishna
A dog is not good dog because he is a good barker. A man is not a good man because he is a good talker [or writer] -Lord Buddha
Vaishnavas do not believe that Krishna is just an advanced soul... but that He is either a) God Himself or b) a pure and full incarnation of God and His qualities. The Gita continuously attests to Krishna as God Himself, especially sandwiched in the chapters 7-12.
Also, perhaps Kriya-yoga is the essence of all Yoga paths... to you... to me, Bhakti-yoga is the essence of Yoga-paths, found in the Gita. To others, all Yoga paths lead to God.
This is what I love about Hindu Dharma; it's full of discrepancies (at least at its external level); your head just might explode!
When did delusion or mind start? Was it a falling of our own God consciousness or are we placed in delusion at a lower level of consciousness forced to rise above our own mind and back with God?
Friend KY,
Since personally am yet to reach to such a state to know exactly when the mind developed that the *I* started appearing but surely it appears to be present with the evolution of humans besides as you can understand it is at the lower level of consciousness that harmony turns to disharmony and delusions [noise] created.
Love & rgds
This is not accepted by any bone fide Vaisnava tradition. :no:
There is no such thing as a "bonafide" tradition.
What makes one bonafide?
1) A Guru who was/is an avatar? Most Gurus in India are considered avatars by their followers. So that is not it.
2) A claim of an unbroken chain from Brahma or someone? Again, there is no dearth of such claims in India. Everyone claims an "unbroken" chain from higher up which has value only to the followers of that specific group.
From nowhere.
Why do you think the perceiver should have come from somewhere? Please explain.
There is no such thing as a "bonafide" tradition.
What makes one bonafide?
1) A Guru who was/is an avatar? Most Gurus in India are considered avatars by their followers. So that is not it.
2) A claim of an unbroken chain from Brahma or someone? Again, there is no dearth of such claims in India. Everyone claims an "unbroken" chain from higher up which has value only to the followers of that specific group.
That is why Vyasadeva compiled the Bhagavata-Purana ---so as to put all Vedic topics in perspective; showing the Historical relationship of all the tributaries that pour down from heights unknown, until they are imparted from above.there is no dearth of such claims in India.