Mr. Vinay,

I think there is a confussion in elaborating Brahman in the other tread. Let me put to you as per the Upanisads about Brahman.

Brahman of the Upanisads, however is both personal and impersonal. The Mandukya Upanisad says 'He is the lord of all, omniscient, the internal Ruler. He is the cause of all; from Him indeed all beings proceed and in Him they merge.' So, He projects it, and disolves it at the end. He guides the destinies of the multitude beings that dwell in it. He is termed Isvara, whose body is the sum-total of all bodies in the universe, and whose mind is the aggregate of all minds. Through all hands He works, through all feet He walks, through all eyes He sees, through all ears He hears.'

But in His impersonal aspect, The Kena Upanisad says, 'Brahman is devoid of all attributes. He is the eternal witness, 'the ear of the ear, the mind of the mind, the vocal organ of the vocal organ, the vital force of the vital force, the eye of the eye.' He is Existence Absolute, Knowledge Absolute, Bliss Absolute. These are not His attributes, which sometimes may come and sometimes may go, but His very essence.

The Mundaka Upanisad says, 'There the sun shines not, nor the moon and stars, nor this lightning; of what account is this fire? He alone shining, everything shines after; through His lustre all this shines.' The impersonal God can only indicated by the negation of all attributes.

The Brhadaranyaka Upanisad says, 'It is neither gross nor minute, neither short nor long, neither redness nor moisture, neither shadow nor darkness, neither air nor ether, neither taste nor smell, unattached, non-luminous, without eyes or ears, without the vocal organ or mind, without the vital force or mouth, not a measure, and without interior or exterior. It does not eat anything, nor is it eaten by anybody.'

I think the Upanisad has made enough explanations about the Brahman for us to understand.

Thandabani

Mr. Thandabani,

I have no disagreement with any of the scriptural references that you have presented. My understanding of Brahman does not exclude any of them.

Brahman unmanifested is impersonal and nirguna.

Brahman manifested is personal and saguna.

Atman is Brahman manifested. There is no limit to how many different ways Brahman manifests Itself.

Atman can range in its attributes from Parmatman at the top of the scale to Jivatman near the bottom of that scale.

The position on this scale depends on attachment (identification of oneself with what one has created).

At the top of this scale there is no attachment. As the attachment increases one descends on this scale.

You can take the viewpoint that comes from an identification with the mind and body (ATTACHMENT).

Or, you can take the viewpoint that comes from your recognition of yourself as the spirit (LESS ATTACHMENT), and then work on recognizing the rest of the attachments to free yourself from them.

You put before you the ideal of Parmatman which you want to reach ultimately.

Beyond that it is becoming unmanifested again.

The recognition of yourself as the spirit does not mean that you consider yourself to be the "Lord of the universe" and "have a desire to be worshipped by others." That is a trap. If one is thinking that way he is still identifying himself with the mind and the body.

The trouble with people like Murali is that they are identifying themselves mainly with their mind.

They have some inkling of the creative spirit but they have no understanding of it. They look at the spirit from the viewpoint of a "mind."

Ego is simply an identification of oneself with the mind.

Thus, people like Murali find ego in themselves, because, they think that their mind is what they are.

But, then, they project the same thinking on others indiscriminately, attributing ego to everybody else.

They try to get rid of their ego by suppressing and denying it. But that is NOT the way to get rid of the ego. You can get rid of the ego only be facing it squarely.

So, they are frustrated because they cannot get rid of their ego. They want to remain attached to their mind while denying it. They refuse to examine and understand the scripture in its purity. They criticize those who extend a helpful hand toward them.

And all this is because they do not want to confront themselves. That is the great tragedy.

Vinaire said:

The recognition of yourself as the spirit does not mean that you consider yourself to be the "Lord of the universe" and "have a desire to be worshipped by others." That is a trap. If one is thinking that way he is still identifying himself with the mind and the body.

Vinaire is doing and desiring just that. BTW, Vinaire you don't have to charge me with things I did not say nor I meant. Do not twist things by resorting to lies when you are cornered.

Mr. Vinay,

I got your points and is almost identical with the Upanisads. Let's see the unity between the Atman and Brahman.

I agree that the individual soul is fundamentally identical. Their apparent difference, but essential unity , is admirably presented in the following quoted story or may be mantra in the Mundaka Upanisad.

'Two birds of beautiful plumage (the soul and God), who are friends and always joined together, cling to the same tree (body). One of them (the soul) eats sweet (and bitter) fruits (experiences the results of its past work), but the other only watches without eating. Buried in the selfsame tree (wholly identified with the body), the infinite Being (Purusa, the soul) is overwhelmed by his impotence and suffers. But when he beholds the other, the God, the adorable One, and the glory (the world) as His, he is free from grief.'

No contradiction is involved in this. The teachings of the Upanisads are relative to the conditions of the aspirant's mind, we shall find no difficulty in harmonozing these positions. So long as we consider ourselves embodied beings, we live in a world, and this world has its ruler. In other words, so long as we are persons, the personal God exists for us. But when we transcend the limitations of our personality, which the Upanisads assure us we can if we follow their directions, the personal God as well as the world vanishes for us, and only the impersonal God remains, and we are one with That. Then there is no more duality, but Existence Absolute. It is in this sence that the Jiva (soul) is one with Brahman, not that it, with all its limitations, is at any given moment identical with Brahman in all His aspects. The clay mouse is not the clay elephant, but dissolved in water, both become clay. Naturally therefore, all the power, knowledge and bliss of God exist potentially in the soul. If they were not there, they would never be manifested, as they do in the perfected stage. The moment its self-hypnotism is gone, the divinity that is always latent in it would manifest itself.

Thandabani

Vinaire, you humor me when you say that YOU do not possess an EGO. I admit I have an ego. To me an ego is a fiction, a phantom but not a Reality. Is that so with you? Viniare you are sure a thing belonging to the RIDICULOUS! No wonder you speak and talk of the Brahman!!!, all the time.

Vinaire Baba,

How could have I forgotten to thank you for lending your helping hand? Guruji, what a great loss Hindunet readers would have to suffer without your help. That indeed would be the greatest tragedy of all times, wouldn't it? If this kind of thought is not the workings of an overactive ego, then what is? How wonder struck am I to take note that you have attained the egoless state. Has the ego personality of Vinaire been honored with a royal suite at the absolute realm of Brahman? After all you can't live without your ego for a second judging from your posts, can you Mr.Almighty Creator? Had you posted messages like Sri Bani has done on Brahman and the Almighty Creator I would not have posted these kind of messages.

Sri Bani,

Hats off to you sir, for the wonderful humbling messages. You hit the nail right on its head! Thank you.

Dear all,

I can see that my approach to understand the workings of this universe has been upsetting to some.

Therefore, I do not intend to push it on anyone on this discussion board.

My subsequent postings would depend on if someone wants further clarification to what I have already posted.

Posting on this board has helped me understand Hinduism a lot more. Thanks to you all.

Vinaire

Namaskar,

I am glad to inform everyone that the new forums are in place now. You will be able to continue on this thread on this forum, but please start any new threads on the new forums.

I appreciate your using the forums, and I hope that you find the new forum software and set up useful.

thank you,

ajay

Vinaire,

Don't resort to your shenanigan sham as you are accustomed to do. If you post messages you should be prepared ro receive criticisms as well. Many of your postings on Brahmam were quite accurate. It was when you (as Vinay) equated yourself to the Infinite Creator that your postings betrayed semblance of a fruit cake.

Murali,

I equate myself with spirit (jivatman) and not with the mind or the body. The jivatman is Brahma manifested and which is somewhere on the scale of Atman.

Being spirit (jivatman) my basic nature is to create. Though I am limited in my creation to the degree I am attached to the creation.

My effort is to gradiently give up the attachments to move up the scale of Atman towards Partmatan and ultimately Brahman unmanifested.

This is what it is. I have never stated anything otherwise.

Dear Vinaire,

Are you willing to give up your seperate identity as Vinaire in this life and somebody else in your next life and so on, completely to the degree that there is no trace of seperateness whatsoever from Brahmam that you truly are in reality? This is what is expected of a Jnani but not a Bhakta. But for this to happen, most participants feel that the aspirant requires the blessings of Guru. You do not have to respond if you are ticked off by my messages earlier. BTW, I hold no grudge towards you for what you said in your responses which I concede were much less provocative than mine.

Atman is Brahman manifested. That is what I am. I am somewhere on the SCALE OF ATMAN, based on the degree of my attachments. But I am nowhere near the state of Parmatman.

But I am Brahman manifested. I am limited in my creativity due to my attachments, but I am not separate from Brahman.

I have a mind, but I am not that mind.
I have a body but I am not that body.

The above two realizations I have obtained with a practical certainty. I have no doubts about those truths at all.

I am the spirit. The inherent nature of the spirit is the same as that of Brahman, which is to be creative and at cause.

Thus, my effort is to be more at cause than to be at an unwilling effect.

And thus, my effort is to see what I can do to handle a situation rather than to blame it on somebody else and do nothing about it.

The more you blame others, the more you are making them the cause and yourself the unwilling effect. In that case you are not being what the spirit naturally is (causative and creative). In that case you are identifying yourself with the mind.

There is nothing wrong with having an identity as long as you know it is an identity that you HAVE, and that it is not YOU.

Mr. Vinay,

Do my messages hurt you? If yes, than please clarify. I wrote based on the teachings of the Upanisad and with my own understanding of the unity between the Atman and Brahman.

Thandabani

Mr. Thandamani,

Nothing that I have ever posted has violated the precepts of Upanishads.

If someone has disagreements with what I write then he has misunderstanding of the Upanishads or of my posts, and has an unwillingness to examine.

I shall make myself available for any clarifications if someone asks for them.

The Authentic and Approved litreature (World over) On "Brahmam" is Brahma Sutram by sri Bhaadharaayana(or Vasampaayana/or Krishna Dwaipaayana)-which is the "Cream" of all Vedic and Upanishadic sayings on "Brahmam" -and 5 classical Gloss(commentaries) and ofcourse subsequent works like "Bhaamathi"- "Vivarana" etc on it.Where does Your"Brahmam" fits in here?-----
BRAHMA SUTRAM:-
1-1-1:-Athaattho Brahma Gjninjaasa----------------
1-1-2:-Janmaadhyasya Yathaha----------------------
1-1-3:-Shastra Yonitvaat-------------------------- 1-1-4:-Tattu Samanvayaath ------------------------
1-1-5:-I forgot-I have to refer(this not sutram)-
1-1-6:-Gounaas cen naathma sabhthaath------------- 1-1-7:-Tan Nishtasya Mokshopadesaath ------------- 1-1-8:-Heyatvaa Vachanaaccha----------------------
1-1-9:-Swaapyayaath------------------------------
1-1-10:-Gati Saamaanyaath-------------------------
(if it is necessary I am prepared to post the entire Brahma Sutram)
I am NOT a Qualified and Professional Chemical Engineer.If I am adament that I will design an "Atomic Reactor"-will not the "Professionals" suspect my I.Q.?-Is it not a sacrillege to mis-interpret a "sacret" terminology?---instead of using the Terminology "Brahmam"-one who knows nothing about it -may use some other terminlogy-something like "Katter-Mutter"

All you are saying is that you have a different reference point. You haven't shown any contradictions to what I have stated.

Professionals will examine the "Atomic Reactor" design and state contradictions. They wouldn't be prejudiced if they are professionals.

Only those who are prejudiced will "suspect the I.Q." without thorough examination. They are not worth being called professionals.

Just because somebody calls gulab a rose does not mean he doesn't understand what a gulab is.

Swami Vivekanand has a famous quote on this subject that goes something like "A rose will always smell like a rose no matter by what name you call it."

When Vinaire says that he is Brahman manifested it is nothing but lunacy, nonsense and arrogance. Even Bhagavan Ramana Maharishi did not say such foolish things, when he could have said so without any inhibitions. I cannot understand what people gain by making silly statements like that. They just make fools of themselves. They think that Brahmam can be bought in a remote fish market (scientology) by some foolish tricks they confuse for meditation. When they are not even prepared to give up the limited self by understanding the nature of it, they have the audacity to claim they are the manifestation of Brahmam. I have no regrets at all for what I have said about Vinaire. On the contrary souls like Sri Bani and Dr.SSR will be swiftly swallowed up by the never to be understood Brahmam.

"somebody calls gulab a rose"
NO-somebody calls a Paper Datura as Gulab-that is the whole problem

"somebody calls gulab a rose"
NO-somebody calls a Paper Datura as Gulab-that is the whole problem

Mr. Murali,

I think Mr. Vinay is right. The Upanisads are also telling the same, 'Brahman is both personal and impersonal (saguna and nirguna). Please refer to my 1st postings, 1st paragraph as per the Mandukya Upanisad.

He is devoid of all attributes only in His impersonal aspect (Nirguna). When we talk about manifestations, then He is Saguna (personal) or may can be termed as Isvara (the sum total of all bodies in the universe.

Mr. Vinay,

Do any other religious organization talks about the 2 aspects of God as personal and impersonal?

Thandabani

Sri Bani,

Only a human being who has attained and is in the natural state of sahaja samadhi during all the states of waking,dreaming and sleeping has the authority to say that he is the manifesation Of Brahmam and not before. Samadhi must necessarily be experienced before attaining liberation. This is stated in the mandukyopanishad also. What is the point in saying that I am Brahman manifested, when a person is holding on to the spurious ego with all its limitations well intact? Are you saying that a serial killer or rapist is a manifestation of Brahmam? Please, one has to be very cautious before making fantastic claims about oneself.

Vinaire,

Are you the author of that stupid poem on God? Why don't you make a fool of yourself for the umpteenth time by making another silly poem on Brahmam?, the idiot that you are.

Dr. SSR,

You have studied the Hindu religion almost entirely in sanskrit. It is quite obvious that you are more knowledgeable than I. Is it correct on Vinaire's part to say that he is a manifestation of Brahmam without attaining the state of nirvikalpa or sahaja Samadhi, therby not having attained liberation? My confident feeling is that Vinaire is simply mouthing the teachings of scientology like a tape recorder. Since you are also an elder I would appreciate your independent view on this matter. I have already voiced my views on this issue. Vinaire is free to post whatever he likes but that does not mean we have to gobble up whatever he throws at us.

Mr. Murali,

The Mandukya Upanisads view as that of Swami Krishnananda of Divine Life Society:

1) OM!-This Imperishable Word is the whole of this visible universe. Its explanation is as follows; What has become,what is becoming, what will become,-verily, all of this is OM. And what is beyond these three states of the world of time,-that too, verily, is OM.

2) All this, verily, is Brahman. The Self is Brahman. This Self has four quarters.

3)The 1st quarter is Vaisvanara. Its field is the waking state. Its conciousness is outward-turned. It is seven-limbed and nineteen-mouthed. It enjoys gross objects.

4) The 2nd quater is Taijasa. Its field is the dream state. Its conciousness is inward-turned. It is seven-limbed and nineteen-mouthed. It enjoys subtle objects.

5) The 3rd quater is Prajna, where one asleep neither desires anything nor beholds any dream: that is deep sleep. In this field of dreamless sleep, one becomes undivided, an undifferenciated mass of conciousness, consisting of bliss and feeding on bliss. His mouth is conciousness.

6) This is the Lord of All; the omniscient; the Indwelling Controller; the source of All. This is the beginning and end of all beings.

No time, continue tomorrow, another 6 to go...

Thandabani

Samadhi consists of the processes through which the atman recovers more and more of its natural state. This recovery is in terms of greater and greater realizations about the nature of one’s attachments. As the atman makes these realizations it becomes less and less attached and more and more free. It start to move from the state of Jivatman towards the state of Parmatman.

The more is the atman involved with these processes, the deeper is the samadhi, and the more profound are the realizations. “Being in samadhi” means “being intensely involved in the processes of realization.” There is a lot of activity involved here. When one comes out of samadhi he is at a higher level of awareness, he is less attached, and he occupies a relatively higher position on the SCALE OF ATMAN.

Samadhi itself is NOT a state. Samadhi is the appearance when one is deeply involved with the processes of realization, and through which one arrives at a higher state of being.

sri.Murali,--By the time I carefully prepare a response, the messages go to some new corners-I have time to access the board only once a day---My contention is --it is Very difficult even to comprehend the concept of Brahmam-without the help of Classical Original Texts-any talk without reference to "Original Texts" is of NO USE-it is my "Firm Conviction"-I am prepared to listen to "Anybody" who can support their presentations from "Original Texts"---The Subject of "Brahmam " is discussed in Soooooooooooo many "Original Texts".Any how- let me say what I wish to say and for what it is worth.
__________________________________________________
Prologue:-Brahmam +Arpanam =Brahmaarpanam-in certain kinds of specific union(santhi) of two words (Sanskrit) the last letter like "m" would disappear-that is grammar-.here I am deliberately showing them as two separate words (such as Brahma Arpanam)to explain the meaning easily-Scholars might object -I take the risk) --------------------------------------------------

"Brahma Arpanam-Brahma Havir -Brahma Agnou- Brahman Aahutham- -Brahmaiva Thena Gandhavyam Brahma Karma Samaadhina"( Bhagavad gita 4-24-186)
--------------------------------------------------
Brahma Agnou =In the "Sacrificial Fire" of Brahmam{(actually there will be only one fire in the pit(Kundam) - -then why the term "Agnou ="Two Fires" is used by Lord sri.Krishna?--He could have used the term "Brahma Agni"-instead of "Brahma Agnou"---the fire is arbitrarily divided into 3 portions as shown---1-2-3>4 -- If 4 is the performer(Yagjaman) sitting facing East--the "flame" nearer to him(3-west) is called "Aahavaniyam". The flame away from him-farther end-(1-East)is known as "Gargaspathyam". The one on the Southern side(2-right hand side of performer) is "Dhakshinaagni"-----All the 3 portions of the "Sacrificial Fire" are used for different purposes.(This is in "Sanaadhana Dharmam"-I don’t know about "Arya Samaajam") ---here Lord sri.Krishna talks about the East(1) and West(3) and NOT about the South(2) portion--So He uses the word "Agnou"-in Bhagavad gita EVERY WORD has to be carefully understood-"In Two Line Translations one would "Miss" the Bus(Life/Spirit) ----Brahmana Aautham =the "Sacrifice" being performed by "Brahmam" itself(Performer =Yagjnaman)----Brahma Havir =the material (Havis =Cooked Rice/or Saamagri) offered (as oblation) in the Sacrificial Fire is also "Brahmam"-----Brahma Arpanam =The "Divinity" in the Fire accepting the oblation is also "Brahmam"----Brahma Karma Samaadhinaa =as a result of the entire "Brahmam Ritual"(Karma) final/eternal "serenity"/ "Tranquillity" is(here the Veda Mantram is "Brahma Karma Samaarabhe")---Brahmam Eva Gandhavyam=the "final goal achieved is also and only "Brahmam" -----------To Sum Up:-(1) The performer(Yagjnaman) of "Sacrificial Fire Ritual--(2) the Fire---(3)the oblation---(4)the receiver of the oblation ----(5)the Final goal of Srenity/tranquillity- (6)and the "achievement" all are "Brahmam" ONLY----"Sarvam Brahma Mayam". Exactly 100 % the same idea is conveyed in Vedas also (Purusha Suktham in Two Richas---(a)"Thasmaath Yagjnaath Sarva Huthaha---------Aaranyaan Graamyacchaye" (b)"Thasmaath Yagjnaath Sarvahuthaha-Rshas saamaani Jagjnire---yajus thasmaath Thachvaa ajaayantha"-- so one has to compare every saying in relation to Vedas-since sri.Vaisampaayana (sri.Veda Vyaasa) has given a clear/unequivocal dictum-that any saying not in consonance with Vedas should be "Outrightly Rejected".Even Lord sri Krishna who is the "nucleus" of Vedas (Go Bindu)from whom the vedas emnate(Go vidham)--who protects Vedas(Gopthre) who sees that all vedic sayings reach Him finally(Go Vindha)-conducive to Vedas (Go Hita) carefully worded the "Entire Bhagavad Gita " absolutely in consonance with Vedas.After all He is the Protector of Vedas.

Namaskar,

I do not generally engage in the discussions on various topics. However, I would like to urge the participants of this forum to disagree with the other person, without being disagreeable. I.e., let us not call each other names, let us not call the other person fool or stupid. Attacking the idea is fine, but attacking an individual is not.

This will not only enhance the discussion experience for all, but also prove these forums to be good learning experience.

BTW, the new forums are now active. Please use them, so that we will not have the unpleasent experience of messages getting deleted etc.

thank you very much,

ajay

..........
7) That is known as the 4th quater: neither inward-turned nor outward-turned conciousness, nor the two together; not an indifferenciated mass of conciousness; neither knowing, nor unknowing; invisible, ineffable, intangible, devoid of characteristics, inconceivable, undefinable, its sole essence being the conciousness of its own Self; the coming to rest of all relative existence; utterly quiet; peaceful; blissful;without a 2nd: this is atman, the Self; this is to be realised.

8) This identical Atman, or Self, in the realm of sound is the syllable OM, the above described 4 quarters of the Self being identical with the components of the syllable, and the components of the syllable being identical with the 4 quaters of the Self. The components of the syllable are A,U,M.

9) Vaivanara, whose ield is the waking state, is the 1st sound, A, because this encompasses all, and because it is the 1st. He who knows thus, encompasses all desireble objects; he becomes the 1st.

10) Taijasa, whose field is the dream state, is the 2nd sound, U, because this is an excellence, and contains the qualities of the other two. He who knows thus, exalts the flow of knowledge and becomes equalised; in his family there will be born no one ignorant of Brahman.

11) Prajna, whose field is deep sleep, is 3rd sound, M, because this is the measure, and that into which all enters. He who knows thus, measures all and becomes all.

12) The 4th is soundless: unutterable, a queiting down of all relative manifestations, blissful, peaceful, non-dual. Thus, OM is the Atman, verily. He who knows thus, merges his self in the self;-yes, he who knows thus.

Om Santi, Santi, Santi!

The above 12 quotes are from Swami Krishnananda of The Divine Life Society, Rishikesh taken from his book "The Mandukya Upanisad, An Exposition."

Thandabani

From a lecture given in London by Swami Vivekananda in 1896

"All the gods are here, the prototypes of man. The gods did not create man after their type, but man created gods. We have been projecting our little doubles and we are the originals of these gods, we are the real, the only gods to be worshipped. This is the view of Vedanta and this its practicality. When we have become free, we need not go mad and throw up society and rush off to die in the forest or the cave; we shall remain where we were, only we shall understand the whole thing. We do not see what this world is yet, it is only through freedom that we see what it is."

This is exactly my point.

Vinaire said,

Samadhi itself is NOT a state. Samadhi is the appearance when one is deeply involved with the processes of realization, and through which one arrives at a higher state of learning.

WRONG.

Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi IS the natural state of the Jnani. It is not an appearance. It is the actual, real, effortless natural state of a Jnani who has finally and irrevocably eliminated the ego. sahaja=natural, nirvikalpa=no differences, samadhi= the most advanced state of meditation in which there is conscious experience of the atman (spirit) or an intense undisturbed absorbtion in the object of meditation. The jnani who has attained this kind of samadhi is actually living in the realm of absolute Brahman even though he/she may appear to inhabit a body.

Vinaire also said that during samadhi there is a lot of activity involved there. May one ask what kind of activity he is referring to? Probably he is referring to the Vinaire style samadhi taught by Hubbard.

Sri Vinaire,

Realization is sudden and instantaneous. It is like opening the windows in a dark room and the sunlight dispels the darkness all at once and not gradually in stages. I do not know what you were trying to convey in your message on samadhi. It certainly makes no sense. What are you trying to say or prove? You have misunderstood the meaning of realization, meditation and samadhi. There is no thought process involved whatsoever in any of the above. By what you have said above Samadhi involves time and space which are thought.

Swami Vivekanada was a stalwart in the relgious life. Any fool can pick up his book and quote him.
It does not reflect anything about the spiritual progress of the one who quotes the magnificent swami. Not everybody can understand what the swami actually meant, simple as he was. Sri Vinaire has misunderstood the heart and soul of Swami's teachings as well as the Gita and Upanishads. Some may feel I am harassing Vinaire but I am doing it in response to the quality of his messages.

On the last line under my post on Samadhi I stated the phrase "higher state of being" and not what Murali read as "higher state of learning."

Looks like some people have difficulty reading correctly. They insert their own meanings which then they criticize.

By the way, what did Swami Vivekananda mean in his quote above?

This discussion is moved to the New Hindu Forum.

Please go to NEW HINDU FORUM, LOG IN and select SCRIPTURES/VEDAS/BRAHMAN.

Namaskar ,

Thank you Shree Vinaire.

-ajay

I tried to post this in the new software but it declined saying it was an invalid password. This happened several times.

First of all it was an error on my part that I used the word learning instead of the word "being" in referring to Vinaire's erroneous understanding of the meaning "Samadhi". But still nothing has changed regarding Vinaire's ignorance, arrogance and show off. Whatever I have said about Vinaire is true and he will have to accept it inspite of his ego. He has produced volumes on the topic of Brahman. What of it? Has it brought about freedom and enlightenment? No. Then what is the use? Not knowing the nature of the ego or the self people talk big about Brahmam. All this is nothing but entertainment for the brain of such authors. It is does not deny the fact that such authors are as useful as fruit cakes. A "nutty" fruit cake is delicious but we all know the fate of it (and what it means), to what it ends up as. All discussion about Brahman is useless. To enjoy Brahman one has to enter the abode of SILENCE that sages like Bhagavan Ramana Maharishi and countless others did and are still doing, except for Vinaire.

Discovering one's true nature of "nobodyness" opens the door to awakening as beingness, and beyond that to the Source of all beingness which is Brahman. When one does that there won't be an ego surviving to talk nonsense about Brahman. Talking at lenghts about Brahmam does not mean the author has made any progress spiritually.

In the past Vinaire had made fun of DR.SSR, Vishal, Jha and others, saying that all their learning was nothing but book knowledge. Is Vinaire any different?, now that he is exposing his true nature like he has done in the past. At least DR.SSR, Vishal and Jha never pretended (inspite of their vast learning and study) to have been transformed or attained Self-Realisation like Vinaire has done and is still doing.

Moderators,

As I said earlier when I try posting in the new forum I keep getting the message Invalid user/password. Anyway I will miss this now redundant forum which I feel is more convinient to read as well as post messages with its white background and its charming blue and red color. It is also easy to find new messages and edit our posts. But I respect your wishes and hence forth refrain from posting messages in this now old forum as per your wishes.

Regards.

Please go to NEW HINDU FORUM, LOG IN and select
__________________________________________________I clicked the Hyper Link in "Blue"-I did go to the New Hindu Forum-but AOL says that I am Tresspassing "Domain Security" and inactivated all my communications to all websites.Then I have to restart accessing contact with AOl etc to interact in other websites.This has happened 4 times in 3 days.I tried to reach New Hindu Net Forum through "Go to Web site"-- I reached the New Hindu Forum-but again the same warning and inactivation. I sent one E-mail to Mr.Ajay Shah to help me to "sort Out" the difficulty