[Advaita-l] tamoguna

[Pranipata]

Hari Om Shri Michaelji,  Pranaams!

The gunAs(sAttvic, rajasic & tAmasic) are considered the power of Ishvara 
hence called divine. -- eshA mama mAyA gunamayI daivI. (BG 7.14).

The sampad(daiva, Asura, rAkSasa) are nature of beings (more specifically 
human beings) having the nature of (sattva, rajas and & tAmasic in that 
order) and are the cause for adhering to or acting against 
dharma(worshipping and not worshipping the lord). -- (BG 9.11&12)

I do not think any other creature other than human beings are fit to be 
classified under above nature because they do not have any choice of 
adhering to or acting against dharma. (They do not have free-will).


In Shri Guru Smriti,
Br. Pranipata Chaitanya

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Michael Shepherd" <michael at shepherd87.fsnet.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 7:13 PM
To: "advaita vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: [Advaita-l] tamoguna

> I'd like to raise the question of tamoguna.
>
> Like most people, I guess, I at first accepted the standard dictionat
> definition that sattwa is the quality of goodness and knowledge; rajas, 
> the
> energy of action; and tamas, inertia and darkness.
>
> Then later I was introduced to the idea (and I'm asking for any source 
> texts
> here) that there were two aspects to each guna : divine and demonic. So 
> that
> 'demonic sattwa', kashaya,  is illusory goodness and knowledge (as anyone
> who has been to California will rcognise..); 'demonic rajas', vikshepa, is
> destructive agitation; and 'divine tamas' has something of Shiva : the
> divine measure of things which gives shape to all actions; and mal is the
> demonic 'inertia and darkness'' normally agttributed to tamas, without
> distinction.
>
> This seems to me to be an insult to tamas, if its divine aspect is not
> acknowledged..
>
> I hope for comments and source texts on this matter.
>
> Michael