An Interesting article - any response?

[egodust]

Ramachandra wrote:
> Shrisha Rao wrote:
> >Frank Maiello wrote:
> >
> >> Re this seemingly unresolvable ancient battle of ideologies:
> >>
> >> Contrary to what many believe, egoic release (Self-realization)
> >> doesn't have to involve a long, drawn out philosophical process.
> >> It doesn't have to be something that might arrive in some distant
> >> tomorrow.  It can very well happen spontaneously, here and now.
> >> Merely the right measure of insight could be enough to prompt
> >> it--*beyond* the exotic desires/preconceptions of the clever Mind.
> >>
> >> Therefore, contemplating the sahaja state of the jivanmuktha
> >> isn't without purpose--as the method of advaita purports to apply.
> >> In fact, it can loose the straightjacket from our otherwise bleak
> >> and cold system of relative logic, the nature of which tends
> >> to stay the course of a linear life-conception: the restrictive
> >> self/not-self continuum.  Yet, as the value of *any* means to an
> >> end is discardable (as both the dvaitamarga as well as advaitamarga
> >> are), the ultimate result is the lone reality--the rest is dependant
> >> on personal preference and therefore purely arbitrary.  As such:
> >>
> >> When the awareness is sunk into the Heart finally and completely,
> >> what debates are possible?  What concepts, precepts or tenets
> >> are left to settle upon in contrast to the raw, nir-guna Being?
> >> What can possibly stand alongside this satchidananda, to hold us
> >> captive for even a moment's challenge?
> >
> >If you would like to come off the gross digression and unrelated
> >declarations, and have a reasoned, step-by-step discussion, let me
> >know.  There is no meaningful way of discussing anything if you run
> >off the topic and make your own ad hoc postulations whenever
> >convenient.
> >
>
> When One has not experienced the so called "mukti", how can one describe it ?
>
>
> There is no need to fight or argue on this unless it has a good intention of
> getting to know more & later decide upon which is "mukti prada" ~jnana. If a
> person has prejudice on something always & perhaps always gets biased with
> one's own illicit thought of imagination about mukti, let him follow his own
> ideology & experience the fruits himself. Arguing with out any references is
> just not a vedantic way. Making ad hoc & unintented debates without quoting
> necessary verses to support is like some Baba or modern saints who preach
> stupidity.
>
> I beg your pardon  for making such a straight forward ans on this.
>
> So pls debate systematically or else stop beating the same old bush.
> debates should really make some sense.I stand on Shrisha's comment on this.
> Nevertheless, I am not baised with dvaita also.
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Rama
>

This isn't ad hoc stuff.  On the contrary, it's quite relevant.  The
criticism is that I'm debating without the support of sastras.  I agree
that this is the formal recognized method--valid for most; it's not
indispensible though.  Not every 'documented' word can be trusted anyway.
The only real barometer we have is our own gut that tells us what's what...
and its reliability can only be forged over time (can there be any other
way?).

Maybe the need is to throw away the books!  Some people are ready for this.
Go into solitary forest like the external sanyasin.  Pull out all the
security plugs and the break down the shields and barriers that keep us
protected from the ************ of the Atman.  This was my way for 7 years
on a virgin wild island in a river.  No need to elaborate.

namaste

_____________

Frank Maiello
"Who am I apart from Thee?"
http://digital.net/~egodust