[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Dishonesty (was Re: The Bhagavad-Geeta - Chapter 12)
-
Subject: Re: Dishonesty (was Re: The Bhagavad-Geeta - Chapter 12)
-
From: aq974@lafn.org (Bon Giovanni)
-
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 1995 21:10:22 GMT
-
Apparently-To: alt-hindu@relay1.uu.net
-
From news@lafn.org Sun Aug 6 17: 00:19 1995
-
Newsgroups: alt.hindu
-
Organization: The Los Angeles Free-Net
-
References: <3v9ak6$d0e@babbage.ece.uc.edu>
-
Reply-To: aq974@lafn.org (Bon Giovanni)
-
Sender: news@lafn.org
____ __ ___ ____ __ _ _
/ ___) / \ ( )| __ \ / \ | \ / |
\___ \ | <> | | | | _ / | <> | | \\// |
(____/ |_||_|(___)|_|\_\ |_||_| |_|\/|_|
God cannot be identified with one name and one form.
He is all names and all forms.
All names are His. All forms are His.
Your name too is His. You are His forms.
-Sathya Sai Baba
Pai notes those softly spoken words of Sai and, without mocking, opines
that the quote leads him to `some weird conclusions'. He asks, "If all
forms are His, and all names are His, then why pay so much attention to
the one form and one name?" That's a good question. It goes along the
lines of asking, `well, if science says that meat and vegetables both
supply nourishment, then why eat only vegetarian foods?'
One could address all such questions to a bawdy level, or to an
intellectual level, or to a spiritual level, or in a combination
thereof. Since Pai is a student, I conclude his is an intellectual
question, and so reply in that mode. Still, I could reply by quoting
scripture, or the commentary of a guru, sage, saint, or so on-- or I
could reply from my own experience. I prefer the latter to the former.
Those who prefer otherwise, need read no further.
See, it is a personal matter as to `why' one form or name is chosen
over all others- it is a matter of individual *preference*. Although
all sweetlovers love sweets, one may have a preference for one kind of
laddu, another person wants a different form or texture, even though
both consist of the same basic ingredients- sugar, milk, and flour. GOD
is like that, One Basic Being, yet devotees each want His sweetness in
their own preferential particular shape and texture.
That is a kind of sweet childishness, and I find Our Father is happy
to gift Himself, The Divine Sweet, in whatever way His sincere and
loving child asks.
>From the rapture of that realization, men sing
Hare Krishna
Om Namah Sivaya
In the Name of Jesus Christ
Allah Akbar
Guru Nanak ji ke jai jai kar
Shema Israel
Om Mani Padme Hum
Sangham Sharanam Gachami
All those sayings affirm the existence and experience of Reality. In all
those chants detailed above, there is not one iota of difference in
the Being addressed- and while that may not be quite apparent to the
chanter, it is so with Him who is addressed. That Divine Presence
Graciously manifests in human awareness exactly as the individual
allows,
depending on culture, personality, and time.
Should one experience that Presence directly, or even believe that
possible, one may then choose to afix one particular name or form, or
formless idea to that Presence. That does not limit Him to that name,
form or idea. Should His Grace, and one's effort coalesce, oft times
the awareness of His Presence begins to be intuited, and experienced
as truly more than One Name, or any name, but instead as all forms,
names, ideas, for He is the basis of all name, form, idea.
So, `why pay attention to one name or one form above all others?'
Depending on the time, and mood, would you like a dry laddu,
or a nice honey dipped gulab jamun as Prasad?
When one gladly accepts and cherishes * whatever* He gifts, then the
saying of Swami
He is all names and all forms
will no longer lead to weirdness, but to we're-ness.
Pranams
*+*
--
*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*
Whatever a fine person does, so will others do; people effect behaviour
by example. -Bhagavad Gita 3:21
*%*%*%*%*%*%*%**%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%**%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*%*
