[Advaita-l] On the forms of Guru

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Anbu sivam2 <anbesivam2 at gmail.com> wrote:

>  On the above quote if you had read
> what I have written before Viz.
>
> "Sir, when I say 'my mind' it is certainly an object for me, however it is
> no object for everyone.  You would know of my mind if I speak about it,
> otherwise you would not know.  You cannot even question the truth of what I
> speak of my mind.  Would you agree?"
>
> then you would not have to labour so hard with your posting.
>
>
>  <listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org>Dear Sir,
>

Just with a view to clarify some points for those who might be following
this thread, I wish to say the following:

 Speech is just one way by which we express what our mind contains.
Supposing a man does not speak, yet, his body language reveals quite a lot
of his mind.  Further supposing he sits quiet, without giving any room for
body language, then there are two options:

1.  He is presumed to be in deep meditation, samAdhi.  Then the onlooker
would conclude: He is now of controlled mind:  समाहितान्तःकरणः, निगृहीतमनाः
etc. (terms that Bhagavatpada has used)

2.  He might be pretending to be quiet, but his mind is working on this or
that project.  Then, Bhagavan Krishna gives him a name: मिथ्याचारः (Gita
3.6)

In any case, the word 'manas' is inalienable from a person, whether he is in
physical action, mere mental action or total inaction as in the case of
samadhi/sleep.

The onlooker might go wrong in assessing the (contents, working of) other
person's mind but that does not lead to the conclusion that the mind is not
there or that it cannot be an object of others.

Om Tat Sat