Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Aavishkar Katti

Pages: [1]
1
I had posted this in General topics but didn't get a reply.I am new to this forum and so I hope this is the right place to post this.I have read Be as you are and after reading that and some posts on this forum,I got some questions which are :

I have noticed that there are many contradictions between the sayings of saints and their view regarding spirituality.
1)Sri Aurobindo disregarded Ramana Maharishi's path and said it was "partial realization".He did not allow anyone to go to Ramanaashram.But again,Aurobindo has also said Ramana to be "Hercules of spirituality".

After reading Ramana's philosophy of Advaita,I gather that every self realized person speaks the Lord's language as he does not have his sankalpa,then I would like to ask humbly that how does Aurobindo differ with Ramana if Aurobindo is also self realized?
2)Ramakrishna Paramhansa categorizes the people into jivakoti(ordinary mortals) and ishwarkoti(the ever-perfect).He says that jivakoti cannot come down once (kevala) Nirvikalpa Samadhi is reached.He gives up his body in 21 day.Only Ishwarkoti can come down for work for humans and their upliftments.
Whereas Ramana says that even repeated kevala  nirvikalpa samadhi cannot give mukti if sahaja samadhi is not reached and person has to come out of nirvikalpa samadhi due to his prarabdha until he is continuosly in the natural state of nirvikalpa samadhi even when doing world work.(sahaja).
How to reconcile these two opinions of both the great sages?

Why do two self realized people say things so varying in their meaning and who is right in both the points 1 and 2.

2
General topics / Apparent contradictions between saints
« on: January 04, 2014, 08:44:45 PM »
I have noticed that there are many contradictions between the sayings of saints and their view regarding spirituality.
1)Sri Aurobindo disregarded Ramana Maharishi's path and said it was "partial realization".He did not allow anyone to go to Ramanaashram.But again,Aurobindo has also said Ramana to be "Hercules of spirituality".

After reading Ramana's philosophy of Advaita,every self realized person speaks the Lord's language and does not have his sankalpa,then I would like to ask humbly that how does Aurobindo differ with Ramana if Aurobindo is also self realized?
2)Ramakrishna Paramhansa categorizes the people into jivakoti(ordinary mortals) and ishwarkoti(the ever-perfect).He says that jivakoti cannot come down once (kevala) Nirvikalpa Samadhi is reached.He gives up his body in 21 day.Only Ishwarkoti can come down for work for humans and their upliftments.
Whereas Ramana says that even repeated kevala  nirvikalpa samadhi cannot give mukti if sahaja samadhi is not reached and person has to come out of nirvikalpa samadhi due to his prarabdha until he is continuosly in the natural state of nirvikalpa samadhi even when doing world work.(sahaja).
How to reconcile these two opinions of both the great sages?

Why do two self realized people say things so varying in their meaning and who is right in both the points 1 and 2.

Pages: [1]