[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: Impersonalism is Unintelligent - Bhagav
-
To: alt-hindu@sunet.se
-
Subject: Re: Impersonalism is Unintelligent - Bhagav
-
From: Mats Olausson <bbt-intl@algonet.se>
-
Date: 12 Feb 1995 11:55:19 GMT
-
From news@aristotle.algonet.se Sun Feb 12 06: 46:33 1995
-
Newsgroups: alt.hindu
-
Organization: AlgoNet Public Access Node, Stockholm
-
References: <3h94ch$2c9@ucunix.san.uc.edu>
cbwillis@netcom.com (C. B. Willis) wrote:
>
> I grew up with the idea of a personal God, then when I studied
> Vedanta I moved to the idea of an impersonal God very easily, then later
> my practice moved back to a personal God. Now I see the impersonal and
> the personal God as two sides to the same coin.
>
> Now if I can get really ecumenical here :), Hegel notes that
> phenomenologically (to our experience), Spirit "splits" into:
> 1) spiritual substance, and 2) the consciousness to perceive it.
> I would see the impersonal God as akin to spiritual substance,
> and the personal God as the consciousness that perceives (and emanates) it.
>
> - CBW
According to the Bhagwat, God the Absolute is designated by the sages as a "non-dual substance"
of three aspects:
1) the impersonal (Brahman) - containing the sat (eternal existence)
2) the localized or immanent (Paramatma) "Supersoul" - containing
sat as well as "cit" (complete consciousness)
3) the personal (Bhagwan, Krishna) - containing sat, cit and ananda (never-ending
spiritual happiness - personified (vigraha)
Obviously, since the personal aspect embodies all aspects of the Absolute,
it is Supreme, and the highest goal of every soul.
