 |
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|
That is beautiful, and you are bang on target. One of the reason Indian
Philosophy strongly favours "self-realization" is because that alone is
"self-evident" - akin to our knowledge of our being alive. It is a
category of knowledge which is not derived either from sensory data or
from the use of logic (deduction et al.) Nor is it akin to faith (an
assumption taken to be factual.) It just is. In fact, the state of
"self-realization", though undefinable, is considered to be a state in
which the "KNOWER becomes known." The state (the result of
"self-enquiry") is considered essentially ACINTYA (unthinkable) and
ASPHUTA (uspeakable). Yet, the philosophy and the mystics assert it
exists.
This is how Buddha puts it :
"Atta hi attano natha, atta hi attano gati."
"The self is the lord of the self, the self is the goal of the self."
And this is what Krishna says in Bhagvat Gita "
"Atmaiv hi atmanur bandu, atmaiv ripur atmanah."
"The self alone is the friend of the self, the self alone is the enemy
of the self."
A great saint of India (Kabir) puts this whole business of
"self-enquiry" as follows (forgive me if my translation is a bit crude)
:
"Just like the musk-deer searches the forests to find the source of the
fragrance that actually emanates from within it, men go around searching
for TRUTH when it is within them."
> In what way do you define 'self-realization'? as I think that we
> have the same goal, but possibly state if in a different manner.
It is considered to be a state by itself, and is undefinable. Usually,
it is described in PARADOXES. It is like asking you to define your own
existence/life. It is considered SELF-EVIDENT, completely valid by
itself. It is a state considered to be free of DUALITY (the notion of I
and NOT-I) and of perfect bliss. But above all, it is considered
undefinable but attainable. Also, its attainent, to most of the Indian
philosophies, is SOLELY dependent on MAN. Some systems tend to emphasise
the devotion as the way to it, but others do not (especially the
MONISTIC and NON-THEISTIC ones.)
However, different Indian systems place different meaning to it
(philosophically). While they all agree as to its basic nature, they
differ about its meaning. To Non-theistic systems like Buddhism and
Jainism, and to Monistic systems like Advaita that is all there is (or
that is the ultimate thing.) However, monotheistic systems tend to
believe it is a state of being with/in God.
>
> If we can find the things we have in common, dosn't it make
> understanding those things that are differant between us that
> much easier?
Certainly. It is a pleasure to discuss and learn. BTW, is Wiccan faith
akin to Druidic faith ? I did read somewhere that Druidic beliefs were
similar to those of the ancient Indo-Aryans.
> Raven (Brit)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"That thou art." (Upanishads)
|
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|