[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Multiple Brahman?
Hello,
First off, Brahman is one, therefore the answer to your Subject line is "no".
:-)
On 25 Jun 1996 16:53:41 GMT, bpanks@mail2.sas.upenn.edu (Brian J Panks) wrote
in soc.religion.hindu:
>To anyone familiar with Hindu thought:
>
> It has been repeated ad infinitum that "there is no difference
>between the Atman and the Brahman". I was pondering samskara at one
>point and raised the question, "Is it possible to have simultaneous
>reincarnations." There are scriptures describing yogis who have
>transferred their soul to other bodies in order to learn something, so
>there is evidence that such a thing is theoretically possible. People
>have always held to the belief that a reincarnation must be limited to
>something further along linear time than their death. However, if one
>accepts either a circular nature of time, or that the soul is not bound
>by such forces, then this past assumption may not be true.
In both Tibetan Buddhist tradition and in Vaishnava tradition, this is
possible, but only for those who are fully self-realized who then incarnate
again. In the case of Vaishnavism, Krishna manifests sixteen thousand bodies
and marries sixteen thousand wives.
> Is it
>possible that the Brahman has merely made one huge game. We know this
>world to be 'reality', but only because that is one of the rules which
>the Brahman places upon itself before a birth in the game. It can then
>produce an infinite number of different limitations, each therefore
>having the appearance of a unique soul. Each Atman is therefore actually
>the Brahman, but with self imposed limits. This can be for
>entertainment, or because the universe is doing all things at once, but I
>prefer to think of it as the 1 breaking itself apart to know itself
>better as there is nothing else to know.
>Of course, I have nothing to base these thoughts upon aside from gut
>feelings, but something lead me to think them, and if you wish, led me to
>post them here.
Congratulations, your gut feelings are exactly correct.
This section of yours (ie starting with "Is it possible that the Brahman..."
is a quite accurate description of the nature of life, the universe and
everything.
Cheers,
Ken <*>
kstuart@mail.telis.org
"The ego arises from the mistaken notion that the light of consciousness
reflected in the intellect and coloured by objectively perceived phenomena
is the true nature of the Self. Thus, the personal ego falsely identifies
the Self with that which is not the Self and vice versa." - Mark Dyczkowski
