Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
And with regard to the divinity the text says that 'he rests with his rays in him, i.e. the eye': this implies that the divine being may preside over the organ of sight although itself abiding in another place; it does not therefore abide in the eye. Moreover, non-conditioned immortality and similar qualities cannot belong to any of these three Selfs.
"Dear Meg," she said caressingly, "you're the noblest, and the sweetest, and the most beautiful girl at St. Benet's! Why can't you live up to your true self?" "There are two selfs in me," replied Maggie. "And if one even approaches the faintest semblance of angel-hood, the other is black as pitch. There, it only wastes time to talk the thing over. I'm in for the sort of scrape I hate most.
For in themselves, apart from bodies, the individual Selfs are not distinguished as men, gods, and so on. In the same way the story of the devas and Asuras approaching Prajapati with fuel in their hands, staying with him as pupils for thirty-two years, &c. Up. For we praise or glorify a thing by declaring its qualities; if such qualities do not exist all glorification lapses.
But as in the preceding sections the term Self is seen to be connected with what is not of the nature of the Self, such as the Self of breath, and so on, it is not possible to draw a valid conclusion from the subsequent passage! The term Self thus connects itself from the beginning with things which are not true Selfs, because the highest Self is as it were viewed in them.
He extracted from a drawer a bottle nearly full of spirits, tippling was not one of Enriquez's vices. "You shall say 'when. 'Ere's to our noble selfs!" When he had drunk, I picked up another fragment of his collection. It had the same label. "You are very rich in 'conglomerate sandstone," I said. "Where do you find it?" "In the street," said Enriquez, with great calmness. "In the street?"
As the text is thus seen to refer to the embodied soul coupled with some associate, we infer, on the ground of the two texts belonging to one section, that also the 'eater' described in the former text is none other than the individual soul. To this objection the next Sutra replies. The 'two entered into the cave' are the two Selfs; on account of this being seen.
"What brings yuh fellows inter thu tem'tations of thu meetropoliss? Don't yuh know thet this is thu home of the devourin' lion an' thu laih o' thu feroshus tigeh? Come an' look at yeh innercent selfs in thu bottom of a glass!" As they lined up at the bar Strang said quickly, in an undertone. "Six of us heah by dark. What's thu game?"
For there is no law and no justice of the peace, and no general within to put down the conflict of changeful, warring selfs, to suppress the mutiny of mutually opposing, mutually annihilating selfish dictates. In vain he seeks to make his will immutable; for the single passion has its hour, this 'would-do' changes.
The word 'para' there denotes a Self distinct from that of one's own Self, and the word 'anya' is introduced to negative a character different from that of pure intelligence: the sense of the passage thus is 'If there is some Self distinct from mine, and of a character different from mine which is pure knowledge, then it can be said that I am of such a character and he of a different character'; but this is not the case, because all Selfs are equal in as far as their nature consists of pure knowledge.
If the omnipresent Self, consisting of mere knowledge only, were the cause of all that actual consciousness and non-consciousness on the part of Selfs which takes place in the world, it might be conceived either as the cause of both i.e. consciousness and non-consciousness and this would mean that there is everywhere and at all times simultaneous consciousness and non-consciousness.
Word Of The Day