Dear Vishvesh: I am learning also! It is very difficult for Westerners to understand the Brahmanic vision. Many thanks for your encouraging words! Diana


From:  Vishvesh Obla <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  Re: Eliot and Divisions
Date:  Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:25:53 -0700
Diana,

Great going.  I am learning a lot from you.  I am not
sure if CR meant that Christian  and the Upanishadic
aspirations are basically the same, but your subtle
distinction in the passage ' No sane Christian nor any
Christian mystic would make the statement I am Christ
in the sense a Hindu who says "I am Brahman" means it'
is wonderful to read.  Yes, they are two unique paths
of salvation and it is only a mark of respect for
either we should not mix one with another.   The
neo-Vedantic (new age) Swamis do that mistake often
and I am glad you see the difference.

'Christ consciousness' as you call it appears to me as
of something 'external' while the Upanishadic and the
entire Indic spirituality hardly take that position.
I see the argument in this subject here in various
threads in that line too.

Keep writing more.  Thank You.

- vishvesh

--- Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


---------------------------------

CR I cannot agree, nor does More, with the view that
Christian aspiration is the same as that found in the
Vedas and Upanishads. Eliot and More both read and
commented on Paul Deussen's famous study titled The
Philosphy of the Upanishads and the System of the
Vedanta. Deussen describes the doctrine of Brahman as
a path to realizing Brahman as the Self within
themselves, not as a Godhead opposed to or exterior to
themselves requiring pious meditation. In the realm of
Brahman in the deep self, distinctions between God and
man are abolished.

Deussen further explains that in Vedanta philosophers
travel the lower or "exoteric" path because in Kearns'
words, "the necessity for them to express themselves
in words forced them constantly in the direction of
exoteric or mythic expressions for difficult and
esoteric truths."

Kearns writes: "Eliot found the distinction between
exoteric and esoteric religious perspectives
important, and he made use of it, in one form or
another, both before and after his own acceptance of
Christian faith. It can even be argued...that Eliot's
conversion itself was based on his recognition of
himself as a Devotee rather than as a Sage and that he
accepted an exoteric world of myth, allegory,
devotion, and religious observance instead of that
(inner) recognition." Reilly, in The Cocktail Party,
describes what amounts to these two paths to Celia."

Christianity has no equivalent to Tat Tvam Asi. No
sane Christian nor any Christian mystic would make the
statement I am Christ in the sense a Hindu who says "I
am Brahman" means it. "Christ consciousness" is not
the same, is it? If you see it as identical, I would
love to know. Diana





---------------------------------

From:  cr mittal <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  Eliot and Divisions
Date:  Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:54:18 -0700


>>Diana : More refers to "that viviid consciousness of

   >>a dualism felt in the daily habit of humanity."

   Diana, when the Vedas and the Upanishads speak of
   "That art thou", they speak of the "ultimate reality
of
   a human being", i.e. his/her true essence, which
   he/she should try to realize. That remains an object
of
   aspiration, as much as in Eliot's poetry, say
   in Four Quartets. In "the daily habit of humanity",
   man is as much divided from God in the Vedic
   philosophy as in any other.

   Best,
   CR


Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Carrol I was not attempting to present a thesis on
Christianity via the TSE list. I cited the book T.S.
Eliot and the Indic Traditions which outlines
differences between Christianity and the religion of
the Upanishads. Kearns quotes portions of Eliot's own
writing on the subject and texts by Paul Elmer More
whose view of religion Eliot said he supported which
state clearly that a Christian cannot "amalgamate" the
command Thou Shalt Love Thy Lord thy God with the
Indic belief I am Brahma. More refers to "that viviid
consciousness of a dualism felt in the daily habit of
humanity." Religion for Eliot, Kearns says, "was the
acceptance of this cleavage in our nature."
   For further explication of Eliot's view of exoteric
and esoteric religious perspectives, see Kearns,
chapter 2, "Hindu Traditions."  Best, Diana





---------------------------------

From:  Carrol Cox <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  English Vocabulary, was Re: Eliot and
Divisions
Date:  Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:03:05 -0500
Diana Manister wrote:
>
> Dear Carroll: Surely you are aware of the many
commentaries on Eliot's
> work that interpret his narrators as expressing not
only their divided
> selves, but severings and fragmentations in the
environment?

But nowhere does any commentary suggest that the
purpose of the poems is
to create enmity between God and humanity. As closely
related as the
words "division" and "devisive" are, you simply cannot
use the latter
word as you are using it and expect people to know
what the hell you are
talking about. Try using the term "fragmentation"
instead, and not by
itself but, for example, "fragmented experience,"
"fragmented responses
to experience," etc.

Carrol








---------------------------------
Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll
help. Yahoo! Small Business.






__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com