 |
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|
The aforesaid meaning is the illegitimate offspring resulting from the
interaction of Indian mysticism with Christian dogma. Even Rajneesh is
more reliable (see item # 1 below.)
1) Rajneesh :
HARI OM TAT SAT -> That is the Truth.
Rajneesh gobbles up both HARI and OM in his interpretation, but even
then it is more correct than the mumbo jumbo of Mike Wolverton.
Here are some traditional meanings and their references :
2) Bhagvad Gita (17.23) (www.yoga.com/raw/yoga/info/Geeta/geeta17.html)
OM TAT SAT is said to be be the threefold name of Brahman...
TAT here is interpreted as the TAT in TAT TVAM ASI (Thou Art That). See
my notes at the end.
Therefore, OM is Brahman. TAT is Brahman. SAT is Brahman.
Also, try reading the Bhagwad Gita translated and commented upon by
S.Radhakrishnan, for the most commonly understood meaning is the one in
Bhagvad Gita.
3) (www.rsl.ukans.edu/~pkanagar/meditation/medguid.html)
OM - > The infinite spirit. All that there is. The primeval sound.
TAT - > That, as in TAT TVAM ASI (Thou Art That)
SAT - > Reality. Truth. That which is not evanescent or ephemeral. The
underlying basis. That which is most fundamental and
universal.
The infinite spirit - that is real.
Another version is HARI OM TAT SAT (Hari, the Lord, is infine spirit -
that is the truth)
NOTES :
Oftentimes, one has to study the meaning of these words in other
contexts or rely on commentaries. For example, SAT of OM TAT SAT is
similar to the SAT in :
ASATO MA SAT GAMAYA
From the unreal let me travel to the real, or,
from untruth let me travel to truth.
TAT of course means THAT when literally translated, but the word is more
often interpreted as a reference to all that is known or sensed or
perceived (as in TAT TVAM ASI). That is why the Bhagvad Gita calls it a
name of Brahman.
The best thing to do is to read a bit, for many phrases are interpreted
in different ways by different Indian schools of thoughts. Some schools
even deny that some of these 'Mahavakyas' (Great Words) are accurate.
For example, the tradition to which I belong by birth (not reason or
belief) says it is not TAT TVAM ASI but ATAT TVAM ASI (the former can
arguably lend credence to monism, while the latter can do so for duality
or any other school of thought which believes that the divine is a class
apart, and can never be one with the mundane categories of existence -
like you and me for instance, or this omputer). In case you want instant
answers, though at the cost of some reliability, search the Internet for
+aum +tat +sat using Alta Vista.
By the way, unless one is hallucinating, SAT cannot be bliss beyond
creation experienced in deep meditation. That is more like ANAND as in
SAT CHIT ANAND.
> Also they can be learned about and experienced by the Kriya Yogi; refer to Ananda > >Church of Self-Realization, Nevada City, California.
>Mike
Oh! There is a Church too. Now that we have both dogma and Church, is it
Hinduism any more ? But then, maybe it is - for after all, as some wise
Hindu sage of the yore put it:
EKAM SAT, VIPRA BAHUDA VADANTI.
(There is but one REALITY, though the wise speak of it in many
ways).
I only wish that Mike would would speak a bit more factually though. And
by the way, is there also a Pope of the Church of Self-Realization, and
of course, a King of the Holy Self-Realization Empire akin to that of
erstwhile Holy Roman Empire ? If there isn't any one of them, can I
volunteer my services ? I don't mind being either a King or a Pope, for
their functions do appear to be very similar for all practical purposes,
and I assure you I can be a perfectly sanctimonious despot if the job
calls for it.
Aum Shanti, Shanti, Shaantihi to you. I will be satisfied with SAT, if
it does exist.
____________________________________________________________________________________
I always doubt the honesty of those who are certain, but rarely of those
who are in
doubt.
Why does man prefer to be wrong than doubtful.
|
||
|
||
| Advertise with us! |
|
|