Hi dear Hari
I was thinking last week about some issue.
Each of us feel his I.
But I is part of God (Brahman,Bhagavan,Paramatma)
Can we say that when we feel our I then it means we feel God ,?
I
Re: I
Do you feel love within yourself? Are you able to feel love that comes from a source outside of you? If you cannot feel love within you, then feeling it when it is around you is difficult. If your energy does not resonate with the energy of love, feeling it can be troublesome. Many people have this problem and it forms the basis of many emotional and psychological disturbances. If you resonate with the energy of love, you have the potential to feel it when it is around you or directed at you. Even so, whether you want to feel it or not is entirely up to you because if you do not want to feel it, you will block it. For example, if you do not like the person who sends it to you or you do not like what they want in return.
God always wants that we feel the divine love God sends to us. Our capacity to resonate with this love depends on whether we can feel love within ourselves, and are not blocking it, and our desire to accept God's love and reciprocate with it. If you are asking if feeling your essence means you are feeling God, you are certainly feeling the energy of God because you are the same essence. The essence you are is part of God, so feeling you means feeling God. This might sound good, and it is true, but we need to examine if feeling the essence of self is equivalent to feeling God. Since we are energetically non-different, we are feeling God, but since God is so much more than our essence, we are only glimpsing at God. This glimpse gives us a taste that encourages our desire to make a stronger connection. When we feel essence, and do not block it with ideas like not being good enough, we open the potential to tune to God's love and return that love. We can immerse ourselves in this divine loving connection and even lose ourselves in it. When we experience this connection, we do not desire to label it in philosophical terms because doing so dissolves the sublime "us-ness."
God always wants that we feel the divine love God sends to us. Our capacity to resonate with this love depends on whether we can feel love within ourselves, and are not blocking it, and our desire to accept God's love and reciprocate with it. If you are asking if feeling your essence means you are feeling God, you are certainly feeling the energy of God because you are the same essence. The essence you are is part of God, so feeling you means feeling God. This might sound good, and it is true, but we need to examine if feeling the essence of self is equivalent to feeling God. Since we are energetically non-different, we are feeling God, but since God is so much more than our essence, we are only glimpsing at God. This glimpse gives us a taste that encourages our desire to make a stronger connection. When we feel essence, and do not block it with ideas like not being good enough, we open the potential to tune to God's love and return that love. We can immerse ourselves in this divine loving connection and even lose ourselves in it. When we experience this connection, we do not desire to label it in philosophical terms because doing so dissolves the sublime "us-ness."
-
kamalamala1
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 5:46 pm
Re: I
Thank you for your answer.
You actualy anticipated my next question.
But still another questions arrised.
If we feel divine energy why most of us dont feel infinity,and oposite we feel that we are quite limited in space in sence perceptions.
We feel a lot of ignorence intead of enlightenment and knowledge.
Why it is so?
You actualy anticipated my next question.
But still another questions arrised.
If we feel divine energy why most of us dont feel infinity,and oposite we feel that we are quite limited in space in sence perceptions.
We feel a lot of ignorence intead of enlightenment and knowledge.
Why it is so?
Re: I
We are not infinite, we are finite. This is an axiomatic truth. We can expand our and connection with divine energy to encompass more of it in increasing awareness, but there are limits to how far we can go.
Re: I
Hi dear Hari
But in this regard many other questions arrising
let say we all know that we have some suprim I(not paramatma) and the i we are now feeling is located in the box of the body and nothing more/
And then wath is the spurim I ?
Where it locate,?
And why we dont feel it,?
Actually in Micael Newtons book Journey of sould it is sad that one can have many bodies in the same time and most probably we have,
but why we dont feel them,/,?
Also in Upanishads it is said that I is as powerful and shining as a sun ,?
Is it so and if yes then why we dont feel it,?
thank you
But in this regard many other questions arrising
let say we all know that we have some suprim I(not paramatma) and the i we are now feeling is located in the box of the body and nothing more/
And then wath is the spurim I ?
Where it locate,?
And why we dont feel it,?
Actually in Micael Newtons book Journey of sould it is sad that one can have many bodies in the same time and most probably we have,
but why we dont feel them,/,?
Also in Upanishads it is said that I is as powerful and shining as a sun ,?
Is it so and if yes then why we dont feel it,?
thank you
Re: I
I am not sure what you mean by the "supreme I." Do you refer to the Supreme Lord or to the highest I that is yourself? If you refer to the Supreme God, then you really do not need me to answer this question. If you refer to the highest form of yourself, then I am not sure what you mean since you are already the highest form of yourself. You must be referring to something else. Please clarify.
If what Newton says is true and our higher self does indeed inhabit multiple bodies, then there certainly would be signs or symptoms of this shared connection in the form of feelings, ideas, dreams, visions, or people we seem to have knowledge of or interactions with, that are outside of the situation of our present lifetime. These perceptions probably would seem indirect and somewhat vague or mysterious, but as we expand our awareness, they would become clearer and more real. However, embracing this idea could encourage a multiple personality disorder or some other derangement.
As far as the shining sun idea, maybe we are all born with really strong sunglasses?
If what Newton says is true and our higher self does indeed inhabit multiple bodies, then there certainly would be signs or symptoms of this shared connection in the form of feelings, ideas, dreams, visions, or people we seem to have knowledge of or interactions with, that are outside of the situation of our present lifetime. These perceptions probably would seem indirect and somewhat vague or mysterious, but as we expand our awareness, they would become clearer and more real. However, embracing this idea could encourage a multiple personality disorder or some other derangement.
As far as the shining sun idea, maybe we are all born with really strong sunglasses?
Re: I
Hi!
Let me interfere?
I think the answer of supreme self or I is a Sanskrit interpretation of word paramatma problem only. Since word atma has few different meanings such as soul, maid and body (in sense of ignorant state when one think he is this material body). So the word “supreme self” is addressed to the real self or the essence of us to emphasize its transcendence over of all other descriptions of the self such as mind or the body.
In this concern an interesting interpretation of verse 13.23 of BG I found in Ramanuja’s Gita Bhashya:
The embodied Self is called the witness, the sanctioner, supporter, experiencer, the great lord and also the supreme self.
Commentary:
This Self (Puruṣa) existing in the body becomes the one who observes and ‘sanctions’ — permits the physical activities in accordance with volition and other mind states. Likewise, It is the 'supporter' of the body. It becomes the 'experiencer' of the pleasure and pain resulting from its activities. Thus, by virtue of ruling and supporting the body and by making the body completely subservient to its own needs, the Self becomes 'the great lord' (maheśvara) of the body, the senses and the mind. (vide Gita 15.8 ). The embodied jivātman is said to be the 'supreme person' in relation to the body, the senses and the mind. The particle 'also' (api) indicates that the Self is the 'supreme lord' in relation to the body in the same way as it is the supreme person. The supremacy of the Self has already been described in the text beginning with 'It is the beginingless Brahman to which I am superior' (Gita 13.12). It is true that the Self [in its emancipated state] has limitless power and knowledge. But it becomes 'the great lord' and the 'supreme person' only in relation to the physical body. The term 'Self' (ātman) hereafter will be applied to both the body and the mind, for example:— 'Some perceive the Self by means of the self through meditation' (13.24).
Let me interfere?
I think the answer of supreme self or I is a Sanskrit interpretation of word paramatma problem only. Since word atma has few different meanings such as soul, maid and body (in sense of ignorant state when one think he is this material body). So the word “supreme self” is addressed to the real self or the essence of us to emphasize its transcendence over of all other descriptions of the self such as mind or the body.
In this concern an interesting interpretation of verse 13.23 of BG I found in Ramanuja’s Gita Bhashya:
The embodied Self is called the witness, the sanctioner, supporter, experiencer, the great lord and also the supreme self.
Commentary:
This Self (Puruṣa) existing in the body becomes the one who observes and ‘sanctions’ — permits the physical activities in accordance with volition and other mind states. Likewise, It is the 'supporter' of the body. It becomes the 'experiencer' of the pleasure and pain resulting from its activities. Thus, by virtue of ruling and supporting the body and by making the body completely subservient to its own needs, the Self becomes 'the great lord' (maheśvara) of the body, the senses and the mind. (vide Gita 15.8 ). The embodied jivātman is said to be the 'supreme person' in relation to the body, the senses and the mind. The particle 'also' (api) indicates that the Self is the 'supreme lord' in relation to the body in the same way as it is the supreme person. The supremacy of the Self has already been described in the text beginning with 'It is the beginingless Brahman to which I am superior' (Gita 13.12). It is true that the Self [in its emancipated state] has limitless power and knowledge. But it becomes 'the great lord' and the 'supreme person' only in relation to the physical body. The term 'Self' (ātman) hereafter will be applied to both the body and the mind, for example:— 'Some perceive the Self by means of the self through meditation' (13.24).
Re: I
then appearing the question why we cannot even control any prosseses in our body or hardly controling
mind.
Abviously for me this prosseses controled by other sourses or maybe i am wrong maybe by unknown part of ourself ?
But then again wath is this unknown parth and why is that unknown part if it is part of us?
Hari used the term higher self
Dear Hari please explain us what is Higher self wath you mean under this wards in your answer, and why we dont feel it and who is realy controling our body and mind ,,??
mind.
Abviously for me this prosseses controled by other sourses or maybe i am wrong maybe by unknown part of ourself ?
But then again wath is this unknown parth and why is that unknown part if it is part of us?
Hari used the term higher self
Dear Hari please explain us what is Higher self wath you mean under this wards in your answer, and why we dont feel it and who is realy controling our body and mind ,,??
Re: I
Most of the processes in the body are controlled by the autonomic nervous system. http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/brain, ... ous-system
That we have no control over most of these functions is a good thing! It keeps us alive under most conditions and challenges.
The mind is best controlled by discipline, and discipline is a function of the higher self controlling the lower self. The higher self relates to your capacity to do something or feel something compatible to the essence you are. The lower self refers to anything else. But both of these concepts are misnomers to a person aware of the natural integration of all aspects of life. Higher and lower "selves" do not exist, but we learn to create these distinctions by behavioral modification at an early age. We are born in an integrated state (mostly, but there are exceptions) and systematically de-integrate (do we fall apart?
) as we grow up and learn the ways of this world.
When we are not integrated, we pass off control of our functioning to other people, external situations, or our own biology. We have to unlearn this to re-integrate as the complete essence we are.
That we have no control over most of these functions is a good thing! It keeps us alive under most conditions and challenges.
The mind is best controlled by discipline, and discipline is a function of the higher self controlling the lower self. The higher self relates to your capacity to do something or feel something compatible to the essence you are. The lower self refers to anything else. But both of these concepts are misnomers to a person aware of the natural integration of all aspects of life. Higher and lower "selves" do not exist, but we learn to create these distinctions by behavioral modification at an early age. We are born in an integrated state (mostly, but there are exceptions) and systematically de-integrate (do we fall apart?
) as we grow up and learn the ways of this world.When we are not integrated, we pass off control of our functioning to other people, external situations, or our own biology. We have to unlearn this to re-integrate as the complete essence we are.