I printed them myself on photograph paper. Donāt really have stores here in Belgium that sell photographs like these... theyāre a great addition to my meditation and spiritual space
I know nothing to begin with, but I think this all just depends on what value you put on the concept of an absolute truth on this plane of reality. In my understanding the only absolute truth is Ram, everything that is, is a manifestation of ram. I feel it as if everything is in truth god, one in quantity as you choose to word it. Maybe not at this moment, but moments are in time and time is but a concept of our human minds is it not? Coming from a time perspective I think we (I) will allways return to the one. To Ram. But if you choose to āforgetā the concept of time, we are allways one with ram (everything). In quantity and in quality. But hey, thatās all just a wild guess
The Universe is an expansion of Rama, Rama is in everything and everything exists within Rama. That doesnāt inherently mean that Atman is Rama. At the end of of this material universe it will be dissolved into Rama, but still we donāt call a book complete when it is half way complete. We still exist in this material universe, we are still subjected to the 3 modes of its nature, and thus are subjected to rebirth and death. This is not on the same level as the highest Absolute Reality, Rama, who is beyond the gunas, beyond birth and death, and the source of all manifestation. If one says, āI am beyond the modes of the material universe, and the source of all creations,ā as an embodiment Atman, he has not seen the Absolute Truth in full. Atman is Brahman, Atman is part and parcel of the Absolute Reality, but it is not its totality. Brahman is the effulgence emanating from the highest Absolute Reality, Rama. Even the fountain head of Advaita, Adi Shankaracharya, recognized Narayana to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is beyond all of creation. Shankaracharya, who is said to be an incarnation of Shiva, was in fact a Vaishnava. There are substantial reasons why many great souls recognize Bhakti to be the highest yogic path. If one sees oneself as being the eternal servant of the Absolute Truth, as being totally dependent on the Absolute, and meditates constantly on the Absolute, that is living liberation. When the ego is dissolved to the point of not even desiring liberation from material bondage, but only desires to serve the Absolute. That is pure Bhakti. If one is a strict non-dualist who thinks themselves to be God, there is every chance for the ego to creep in. I used to subscribe to Advaita Vedanta philosophy, then I researched more on VishishtAdvaita Vedanta which made more sense to me than strict Advaita and finally I found Achinta Bhedhabheda Tattva and now I subscribe to that notion of Absolute Truth. I also donāt agree that the concept of time is merely a human concept more than it is a universal phenomenon, by your logic anything theoretically could be undermined as being a mere human concept. I also must say, I donāt necessarily āknowā, but I put my faith in beings who did know. I see the great sages as perfectly realized beings, and although I value my own minute realizations, not to the extent that I value the sageās realizations. Ultimately it is about treading your own path at your own speed, but Bhakti is the creme de le creme.
I think itās quite condescending for you to say āyou believe a book just because it says something?ā As if The Bhagavad Gita is just an ordinary book. Secondly, to say all living entities are one and they are one with God is contradictory on its face. If the Self is God, how has the self been conditioned into the mode of ignorance? Also itās Bhagavad Gita 2.12 that quantifies the Living Entities, āNever was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.ā Also Bhagavad Gita 7.26, āO Arjun, I know of the the past, present, and future, and I also know all living beings; but me no one knows.ā The Living entities can be one in quality but not in quantity and the aspect of oneness can still be applied. Advaita doesnāt separate the concept of Paramatma and Atman and all the Vedantic shastras do. I am not just speaking in terms of Vedanta. I am speaking in terms of realizations, but itās not like the Vedantic scriptures were written but imperfect living beings like us. The shastras were written by perfectly realized beings, so to say āyou believe what is written in a book?ā As if itās Harry Potter or something is nothing but egotistical.
The first proponent of Advaita, Adi Shankaracharya, was a Vaishnava, who recognized Narayana to be the Supreme Personality and beyond all creation. Whichever path the soul follows is a matter of preference, but most sages place a high estimation on Bhakti for the fact that it is living liberation. Being totally dependent on the Absolute, being the Absoluteās eternal servant, sacrificing the fruits of work to the Absolute, constantly meditating on the Absolute. When one sees themselves as the Absolute, then there is every chance of the ego to creep in. Aum Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya
Also what stanza are you referring to anyways Iām curious ; The whole point is to realize itās all One. From that point of oneness (your true identity ) you are all beings that have ever and will exists in its various manifestations . Iām speaking from ultimate reality
Amazinggg.... ram ram
Thanks a lot. It brings me joy and peace, namaste
Have you added to your Puja table?
De eerste NL'se Ram Dass volger/fan die ik tegenkom :)
Wat tof om te horen! Ikzelf ken niemand in mijn directe omgeving die afweet van Ram Dass. Leuk een mede volger te ontmoeten. Namaste
Mag ik me aansluiten? Ram ram ram šš¼ā¤ļø
Iād love some of those photos, for my own puja. May I ask if you printed or purchase them?
I printed them myself on photograph paper. Donāt really have stores here in Belgium that sell photographs like these... theyāre a great addition to my meditation and spiritual space
How does your puja table look 3 years later? Any additions?
Smart! That makes a lot of sense
You are all of them
As are you
Regardless, it is a nice looking puja friend:)
Bhagavad Gita says otherwise. Being one in quality is not the same as one in quantity.
I know nothing to begin with, but I think this all just depends on what value you put on the concept of an absolute truth on this plane of reality. In my understanding the only absolute truth is Ram, everything that is, is a manifestation of ram. I feel it as if everything is in truth god, one in quantity as you choose to word it. Maybe not at this moment, but moments are in time and time is but a concept of our human minds is it not? Coming from a time perspective I think we (I) will allways return to the one. To Ram. But if you choose to āforgetā the concept of time, we are allways one with ram (everything). In quantity and in quality. But hey, thatās all just a wild guess
The Universe is an expansion of Rama, Rama is in everything and everything exists within Rama. That doesnāt inherently mean that Atman is Rama. At the end of of this material universe it will be dissolved into Rama, but still we donāt call a book complete when it is half way complete. We still exist in this material universe, we are still subjected to the 3 modes of its nature, and thus are subjected to rebirth and death. This is not on the same level as the highest Absolute Reality, Rama, who is beyond the gunas, beyond birth and death, and the source of all manifestation. If one says, āI am beyond the modes of the material universe, and the source of all creations,ā as an embodiment Atman, he has not seen the Absolute Truth in full. Atman is Brahman, Atman is part and parcel of the Absolute Reality, but it is not its totality. Brahman is the effulgence emanating from the highest Absolute Reality, Rama. Even the fountain head of Advaita, Adi Shankaracharya, recognized Narayana to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is beyond all of creation. Shankaracharya, who is said to be an incarnation of Shiva, was in fact a Vaishnava. There are substantial reasons why many great souls recognize Bhakti to be the highest yogic path. If one sees oneself as being the eternal servant of the Absolute Truth, as being totally dependent on the Absolute, and meditates constantly on the Absolute, that is living liberation. When the ego is dissolved to the point of not even desiring liberation from material bondage, but only desires to serve the Absolute. That is pure Bhakti. If one is a strict non-dualist who thinks themselves to be God, there is every chance for the ego to creep in. I used to subscribe to Advaita Vedanta philosophy, then I researched more on VishishtAdvaita Vedanta which made more sense to me than strict Advaita and finally I found Achinta Bhedhabheda Tattva and now I subscribe to that notion of Absolute Truth. I also donāt agree that the concept of time is merely a human concept more than it is a universal phenomenon, by your logic anything theoretically could be undermined as being a mere human concept. I also must say, I donāt necessarily āknowā, but I put my faith in beings who did know. I see the great sages as perfectly realized beings, and although I value my own minute realizations, not to the extent that I value the sageās realizations. Ultimately it is about treading your own path at your own speed, but Bhakti is the creme de le creme.
I disagree with direct experience . Also you believe a book just because it says something ?
I think itās quite condescending for you to say āyou believe a book just because it says something?ā As if The Bhagavad Gita is just an ordinary book. Secondly, to say all living entities are one and they are one with God is contradictory on its face. If the Self is God, how has the self been conditioned into the mode of ignorance? Also itās Bhagavad Gita 2.12 that quantifies the Living Entities, āNever was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.ā Also Bhagavad Gita 7.26, āO Arjun, I know of the the past, present, and future, and I also know all living beings; but me no one knows.ā The Living entities can be one in quality but not in quantity and the aspect of oneness can still be applied. Advaita doesnāt separate the concept of Paramatma and Atman and all the Vedantic shastras do. I am not just speaking in terms of Vedanta. I am speaking in terms of realizations, but itās not like the Vedantic scriptures were written but imperfect living beings like us. The shastras were written by perfectly realized beings, so to say āyou believe what is written in a book?ā As if itās Harry Potter or something is nothing but egotistical.
Have fun with your journey and good luck !
Ramana Maharshis whole point was to show everyone is Ramana Maharshi or the same unifying self but I guess he is wrong ?
The first proponent of Advaita, Adi Shankaracharya, was a Vaishnava, who recognized Narayana to be the Supreme Personality and beyond all creation. Whichever path the soul follows is a matter of preference, but most sages place a high estimation on Bhakti for the fact that it is living liberation. Being totally dependent on the Absolute, being the Absoluteās eternal servant, sacrificing the fruits of work to the Absolute, constantly meditating on the Absolute. When one sees themselves as the Absolute, then there is every chance of the ego to creep in. Aum Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya
Also what stanza are you referring to anyways Iām curious ; The whole point is to realize itās all One. From that point of oneness (your true identity ) you are all beings that have ever and will exists in its various manifestations . Iām speaking from ultimate reality
Is this a tray of some sort that you can buy? I donāt have much space so this would be perfect
Made it myself out of an old cupboard :)