Sharing my shock with you!

[Iyest]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

So a person need not be a brahmin to attain self realisation.

You are right. There have been cases of even animals attaining self realization.

He has to be a Human first and last. He shoud have love to his fellow beings as well as animals.
Let me ask how many of us are following the rituals correctly as designed by elders.

Even following rituals is not necessary for self realization.

Let us first learn to love our parents, family members, fellow humans neighbours. The rest will follow :gossip:

Indeed.:happy:

 

[sapthajihva]

So a person need not be a brahmin to attain self realisation. He has to be a Human first and last. He shoud have love to his fellow beings as well as animals.
.....
Let us first learn to love our parents, family members, fellow humans neighbours. The rest will follow

A brahmin is supposed to spend his entire life in the study, understanding and practice fo the vedas. When one lives as per the edicts of the vedas, moksham is assured, provided one has exhausted all karmas.

Self-realisation is different; it is only in advaitham that self-realisation is equated to moksham.

We should all have love and attachement in this world; that is implicit. But the actual requirement is to live as per the shasthras; whenever a conflict arises, one has to honour the dharmashasthras and not any other alternative.

You are right. There have been cases of even animals attaining self realization.

Even following rituals is not necessary for self realization.

Not so fast. If you are referring to Gajendra and Jatayu, they attained moksham i.e., vaikuntam, not self-realisation. Moksham is one step above self-realisation.

Rituals are necessary to cleanse the mind of the effects of rajas & thamas. Even if a person is enlightened, karmas have to be performed regularly, as they serve two purposes

-> As long as this 'shareera' exists, the three gunas will have their effect, and hence karmas must be done to negate them...

-> We are prone to take whatever suits us, fromt he lives of the enlightened. In this case, it would only be too easy to others to say that X has not performed karmas & so I do not need to do it.

Of course, advaitham has the exception as, on accepting sanyasam, they discard all outside attachments to the material world.

 

[Iyest]

Self-realisation is different; it is only in advaitham that self-realisation is equated to moksham. .

There is no "equating" in advaitam which means non duality. There is only oneness.

.

Not so fast. If you are referring to Gajendra and Jatayu, they attained moksham i.e., vaikuntam, not self-realisation. .

No. I am not talking about historical characters. More like the cow Lakshmi that attained self realization in Ramana Maharshi's ashram just a few decades back.

Moksham is one step above self-realisation. .

If by moksham you mean vaikuntam or kailasam, then the opposite would be true. There is no scope for different levels and stages after self realization.

.

Rituals are necessary to cleanse the mind of the effects of rajas & thamas. .

That is true to an extent but it is only an initial aid to make the mind saatvic. Attachment to those rituals can also create more bondage and strengthen the gunas. Ultimate Brahman is described as 'nirguna' which is beyond all the three gunas, satva included. Even living a satvic life and doing good karmas will result in rebirths to reap the fruits of those karmas.

.

Even if a person is enlightened, karmas have to be performed regularly, .

An enlightened person sees the oneness of the universe. To whom is he going to perform karmas when there is no sense of separation?


.

As long as this 'shareera' exists, the three gunas will have their effect, and hence karmas must be done to negate them....

If a person is attached to his body or identifies himself with his body, he is not enlightened. Gunas may or may not affect the body but the enlightened has realized he is not the body. The question of negating bodily effects does not arise.


.

We are prone to take whatever suits us, fromt he lives of the enlightened. In this case, it would only be too easy to others to say that X has not performed karmas & so I do not need to do it. .

I don't think anybody here has said that. Just that it is not a must for self realization.

 

[sapthajihva]

There is no "equating" in advaitam which means non duality. There is only oneness.

You see the way you want to see it...

If by moksham you mean vaikuntam or kailasam, then the opposite would be true. There is no scope for different levels and stages after self realization.

That is, according to the advaithic school of thought.

An enlightened person sees the oneness of the universe. To whom is he going to perform karmas when there is no sense of separation?

Again, you are placing your view based on one school of thought....

If a person is attached to his body or identifies himself with his body, he is not enlightened. Gunas may or may not affect the body but the enlightened has realized he is not the body. The question of negating bodily effects does not arise.

As long as the indriyas function, the atman cognizes only through them... and these indriyas, infused with the three gunas, are bound to transmit their nature... Whether you agree or not is not the issue.

 

[Iyest]

You see the way you want to see it...

That is, according to the advaithic school of thought.

Again, you are placing your view based on one school of thought....

I am not placing my personal views at all. Just pointing out that there are sufficient examples to show that rituals are not considered a must universally throughout Hinduism. Whether that is according to certain schools of thought and not others is not really relevant. One simply cannot say that rituals are a must for ALL.