PDA

View Full Version : Material Cause of the Universe



devotee
27 November 2012, 10:25 PM
Namaste,

The Brahman is unchanging and indivisible. Mandukya Upanishad talks of Brahman being "Chatushpaad" ... that which has four parts. Now, that said, how can Brahman remain unchanging and indivisible ? Kathopanishad says that "The Self came from nothing and nothing comes from It. It is unborn, eternal and most ancient. It is not killed when the body is killed." (Kath. 2.18). Now, if nothing ever came from It (i.e the Brahman, the Self) then Brahman can't be the material cause of this universe. Moreover, as before and after creation Brahman remains unchanged, then also, Brahman being indivisible and unchanging can't be material cause of this universe.

If we read MAndukya Upanishad carefully, it talks of all the four parts of Brahman/Self. However, when it talks of Turiya i.e. the fourth state, it says, "This is Self and this has to be known". If that is so, what happens to the three parts described earlier in the Upanishad ? Do they exist or they don't ? If they exist, why does MAndukya Upanishad says that Turiya is Self ignoring the first three states ?

Here we go into the shelter of Vivarta vaad i.e. this universe actually is like illusory images and it has no real existence. But if that is truly so, then how does it act with so much consistency and intelligently ? How can an illusory image act with individuality and with intelligence of its own ?

Before going further, I would like to hear the views of our esteemed friends on this forum who have inclination towards Advaita discussion.

OM

wundermonk
28 November 2012, 12:37 AM
Per Advaita and my understanding of it, the material cause of the universe is Prakriti/Maya/false cognition.

E.g. the material cause of a snake is the rope + our miscognition of rope as snake. In this example, rope is analogous to Brahman and snake, or more precisely our perception of the snake, is due to miscognition/maya/prakriti.

Nirguna
28 November 2012, 08:46 AM
Namaste devotee,

I'm not sure about the four parts of Brahman, so I will not be answering to avoid misconceptions.

Kathopanishad says that "The Self came from nothing and nothing comes from It. It is unborn, eternal and most ancient. It is not killed when the body is killed." (Kath. 2.18). Now, if nothing ever came from It (i.e the Brahman, the Self) then Brahman can't be the material cause of this universe. Moreover, as before and after creation Brahman remains unchanged, then also, Brahman being indivisible and unchanging can't be material cause of this universe.
As I understand it, Brahman cannot be the cause nor the effect of the material world, seeing as Brahman is eternal, all-perfect, changeless, etc. So an eternal/all-perfect Brahman cannot be the cause of the temporary, imperfect material world. Instead the world is superimposed on Brahman, while Brahman remains unaffected, changeless, etc.

Here we go into the shelter of Vivarta vaad i.e. this universe actually is like illusory images and it has no real existence. But if that is truly so, then how does it act with so much consistency and intelligently ? How can an illusory image act with individuality and with intelligence of its own ?
I think you are forgetting that Ishvara is the controller of MAyA, and he is the intelligent cause of the material world.

yajvan
28 November 2012, 08:08 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


Namaste,
The Brahman is unchanging and indivisible. Mandukya Upanishad talks of Brahman being "Chatushpaad" ... that which has four parts. Now, that said, how can Brahman remain unchanging and indivisible ?
Let me, if I may, offer the following for one's kind consideration.

This ~parts~ idea is a pickle... Parts suggest 4, and the beginning of part 1 ends and then part 2 begins, this is how most consider parts. This needs to be understood, as the īśāvāsyopaniṣad informs us within the 8th śloka that īśa (brahman) is all pervading. We find this to be true then whence comes the 'parts' ?


Within the māṇḍūkya upaniṣad (2nd śloka) it clearly states 'catuṣpāt' or 4 pāta. We know this pāta as ~feet~ or as quarters. Yet we have not considered the notion of pāt. This pāt is rooted in pat . This 'pat' is defined many ways :

own , possess
to be fit or serve for
to light or fall upon
to rush on , hasten
falling, some say fall forward
to set in motion Hence within the māṇdūkya upaniṣad we are offered several catuṣpāt ideas, yet this notion of 'pat' seen in its highest value of lakṣaṇārtha¹ (indirect or suggested meaning) is offered in the 9th through 12th śloka-s. It reviews the highest value of a + u + ṃ + _ .
This last part _ is called amātra¹ which is boundless, without measure and considered most auspicious.


With this in mind now the value of 'pat' reveals itself. It is via knowing catuṣpāt in full ( including the depth and breath of a + u + ṃ + _ ) one then sets in motion, falls forward , alights upon brahman.



praṇām

words

lakṣaṇārtha = lakṣaṇa + ārtha
lakṣaṇa - indicating , expressing indirectly ; a mark , sign , symbol , characteristic
artha - meaning; having to do with
amātra - without measure , boundless

devotee
28 November 2012, 10:08 PM
Namaste,


Per Advaita and my understanding of it, the material cause of the universe is Prakriti/Maya/false cognition.

E.g. the material cause of a snake is the rope + our miscognition of rope as snake. In this example, rope is analogous to Brahman and snake, or more precisely our perception of the snake, is due to miscognition/maya/prakriti.

Yes. However, if material cause is MAyA, and this world is completely (illusory) MAyic including its material cause , then I am illusory including the material from which I am made of i.e. the essence ... if that is so, how can an illusory thing can know Brahman and "become" Brahman. A Non-Brahman cannot become Brahman. But as I i.e. the Jeeva is capable of knowing Brahman and becoming That by knowing Brahman, it must be essentially Brahman. Therefore, we can't say that Brahman is not the material cause of Jeeva. ShankarachArya lays all doubts to rest by declaring that "Jeevo Brahmaiva nAparah" (Jeeva is Brahman itself and nothing else).

That makes a very difficult puzzle to solve. Now we start feeling the limitation of our mind and start remembering what the Upanishads say, " From where the words turn back" ! We must explore further to reconcile these two conflicting conclusions drawn with apparently valid arguments.

Let me make it clear that the efficient cause of Brahman is nothing but MAyA but here let's concentrate on the material cause of it.

*****************

As I understand it, Brahman cannot be the cause nor the effect of the material world, seeing as Brahman is eternal, all-perfect, changeless, etc. So an eternal/all-perfect Brahman cannot be the cause of the temporary, imperfect material world. Instead the world is superimposed on Brahman, while Brahman remains unaffected, changeless, etc.


Here we go into the shelter of Vivarta vaad i.e. this universe actually is like illusory images and it has no real existence. But if that is truly so, then how does it act with so much consistency and intelligently ? How can an illusory image act with individuality and with intelligence of its own ?
I think you are forgetting that Ishvara is the controller of MAyA, and he is the intelligent cause of the material world.

Yes, MAyA is the efficient cause i.e. which acts for making this universe manifest as Brahman without any effect of MAyA, doesn't act ... there can't be any creation, maintenance and destruction of the worlds without MAyA.

Regarding your confusion over "ChatuspAt", Yajvan has given a very beautiful explanation and we will see if we can add something more to it.


Hence within the māṇdūkya upaniṣad we are offered several catuṣpāt ideas, yet this notion of 'pat' seen in its highest value of lakṣaṇārtha¹ (indirect or suggested meaning) is offered in the 9th through 12th śloka-s. It reviews the highest value of a + u + ṃ + _ .
This last part _ is called amātra¹ which is boundless, without measure and considered most auspicious.
With this in mind now the value of 'pat' reveals itself. It is via knowing catuṣpāt in full ( including the depth and breath of a + u + ṃ + _ ) one then sets in motion, falls forward , alights upon brahman.

A very nice explanation indeed. However, I have a simple and yet effective model to explain the four "paat" of Brahman. A Rupee has four quarter within it and yet it is Rupee. The quarters in the Rupee don't divide the Rupee and yet they are perceived to be there. Carrying this idea a little further, let's remember that Fourth (amAtrA, Turiya) i.e. Nirguna Brahman is all. Then comes the third i.e. NirguNa Brahman ===> Nirguna Brahman + MAyA ===> SagunA Brahman (Ishvara) ===> This World (Waking state, Vishva, Gross world) + the world before birth and after after death (the Dreaming state, Subtle world, Taijasa).

So, Nirguna Brahman is without parts and yet under the influence of MAyA it acts as Saguna Brahman (Ishvara) and creates and maintains two worlds.

OM

brahman
29 November 2012, 05:33 AM
.







Dear Devotee,


IMHO


Namaste,

The Brahman is unchanging and indivisible. Mandukya Upanishad talks of Brahman being "Chatushpaad" ... that which has four parts. Now, that said, how can Brahman remain unchanging and indivisible ? Kathopanishad says that "The Self came from nothing and nothing comes from It. It is unborn, eternal and most ancient. It is not killed when the body is killed." (Kath. 2.18). Now, if nothing ever came from It (i.e the Brahman, the Self) then Brahman can't be the material cause of this universe. Moreover, as before and after creation Brahman remains unchanged, then also, Brahman being indivisible and unchanging can't be material cause of this universe.


OM



‘having created that entered into that’ - tat srishtva tadevanu pravisat (Taiterya 2:6)

‘then the self has entered into the body(up to the tip of the nail)- sa esha iha pravishtah (Brihadaranyaka 1:4:7)

‘having made an opening in the sutur of the skull itself, he entered through this door- sa ethameva seemanam vidaryiathaya dwara prapadyatha (Aitareya1:3:12)

... as expounds Shruti.

What should be the material cause for these noble creations?



Namaste,



If we read MAndukya Upanishad carefully, it talks of all the four parts of Brahman/Self. However, when it talks of Turiya i.e. the fourth state, it says, "This is Self and this has to be known". If that is so, what happens to the three parts described earlier in the Upanishad ? Do they exist or they don't ? If they exist, why does MAndukya Upanishad says that Turiya is Self ignoring the first three states ?



OM


We treat Mandukya Upanishad more methodologically, sectioning it into three distinct refer-ences.

Mantra 1 to 2 is equated with, ‘Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma’ (all indeed is Brahman).

Rest of the Upanishad depicts how this ‘Sarvam’ or everything is to be assimilated and how it is to be equated with the syllable Aum. That is from 3- 7 we analyze what does the syllable aum denotes and connotes or the abhidheya side of it and then, 8-12 we analyze aum as a word or name or abhidhana.

Finally the seeker transcends both abhdhana-abhidheya duality and realizing the inseperable oneness of the two as Brahman itself by dialectical reasoning, which is in full agreement with that of the ‘a priori’ , Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma’.

It’s too early for me to answer it in detail as I am still learning the structural methodology of this Upanishad.




Namaste,



Here we go into the shelter of Vivarta vaad i.e. this universe actually is like illusory images and it has no real existence. But if that is truly so, then how does it act with so much consistency and intelligently ? How can an illusory image act with individuality and with intelligence of its own ?



OM

Even if all these are illusory appearances like water seen in a mirage as Vedanta sees it, there should be reality, a substratum, that makes these appearances possible, like the requirement of a 'mother-of-pearl' for the silver to appear.

Because it is Vivarta in Vedanta( the theory that the effect is merely an apparent transformation of its cause, like illusion), so there should be a cause underlying the appearance .

The cause here is nothing other than Brahman itself, so much consistent and intelligent as you put it.

MHO
Love :)

charitra
29 November 2012, 09:21 AM
Aitareya upanishad offers insights into creation of material universe (as well as humans). As above said, after creating the human body with panchendriyas etc., Brhaman wonders as to how s/he/it can be present in and be part of the human body. IT makes a decision,and enters the human body through the ‘front end of parting of the hair (on the forehead). An indestructible Atman is thus created now. Aitareya also talks about creation of embryo from participation of both man and woman and again the entry of Atman into the embryo was described there as well (in the progeny).

On a sidenote, the sanskrutam word maya is inadequately and imperfectly translated as illusion in English language. This is a gross injustice to the concept of maya, IMO a new word ought to be coined in English or best simply quote it as maya as is, just like we left Sanskrit word mantra as is in English. Whereas Illusion denotes something perceived which is completely imaginary and non existent, maya is NOT nonexistent. It is coupled with lila or play. They both go hand in hand. Namaste.

yajvan
29 November 2012, 10:27 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


devotee writes,

So, Nirguna Brahman is without parts and yet under the influence of MAyA it acts as Saguna Brahman (Ishvara) and creates and maintains two worlds.
This always causes a bump in the road...If the īśāvāsyopaniṣad informs us within the 8th śloka that īśa (brahman) is all pervading, then this māyā cannot be outside of it. We always end up chasing this idea down the rabbit hole, and various members' temper flare.

My views however remain anchored in the non-dual view of Reality offered through the window of kaśmir śaivism. In this view māyā is not outside of the Supreme. Why so ? Because the Supreme (anuttara¹) is without break or pause ¹; the word that defines this is satatoditam.


This māyā then is not outside of the Supreme acting on it as a independent agent, but a ~tool~ the Supreme chooses to meter itSelf out from infinite to finite. When in ignornace this māyā is conflicting, yet when the dawn of fullness arises within an individual, this māyā is none-other then its play.


you mention,

I have a simple and yet effective model to explain the four "paat" of Brahman. A Rupee has four quarter within it and yet it is Rupee. The quarters in the Rupee don't divide the Rupee and yet they are perceived to be there.

Yes a good view on this matter.

praṇām

anuttara - chief, principle, that which cannot be surpassed.
an - a privative for 'a' = not.
uttara - the chief or prevalent result or characteristic ; superior
hence not + surpassable and therefore Supreme
'without break or pause' is some times called avicchinnātaparamārthaṁ, uninterrupted, yet the word I often use is satatoditam (satata + udita)
turyātīte bheda ekaḥ
satatodita ityam || tantrāloka 10.283

devotee
29 November 2012, 10:19 PM
Namaste,


.
‘having created that entered into that’ - tat srishtva tadevanu pravisat (Taiterya 2:6)
‘then the self has entered into the body(up to the tip of the nail)- sa esha iha pravishtah (Brihadaranyaka 1:4:7)
‘having made an opening in the sutur of the skull itself, he entered through this door- sa ethameva seemanam vidaryiathaya dwara prapadyatha (Aitareya1:3:12)
... as expounds Shruti.
What should be the material cause for these noble creations?

Very aptly quoted. However, some questions arise here :

a) "Creating something and then entering into it" makes us believe that the universe was created out of something which was not-Brahman as there was duality at the time of creation and while entering into It.

In my humble opinion, these sentences have been used figuratively by the Rishis to indicate that Brahman is the cause of creation and there is no duality between the universe and Brahman. This is because the NirguNa Brahman is avyavahArya and doesn't act. But I agree, here, that different schools of VedAnta see it differently.

b) Again "entering into human body through a skull", imho, has been used figuratively in poetic mood. In my opinion, it talks of SahsrAr as the suture which the gateway to attaining God.


Even if all these are illusory appearances like water seen in a mirage as Vedanta sees it, there should be reality, a substratum, that makes these appearances possible, like the requirement of a 'mother-of-pearl' for the silver to appear.

Because it is Vivarta in Vedanta( the theory that the effect is merely an apparent transformation of its cause, like illusion), so there should be a cause underlying the appearance .

The cause here is nothing other than Brahman itself, so much consistent and intelligent as you put it.

You are right. The MAyic appearance has substratum as the Brahman (as you want to indicate). The substratum is the Cause which is responsible for providing the material cause and also efficient cause of this universe. It is settled that both the causes must come from Brahman otherwise, non-duality of Brahman is violated.


The sanskrutam word maya is inadequately and imperfectly translated as illusion in English language. This is a gross injustice to the concept of maya, IMO a new word ought to be coined in English or best simply quote it as maya as is, just like we left Sanskrit word mantra as is in English. Whereas Illusion denotes something perceived which is completely imaginary and non existent, maya is NOT nonexistent. It is coupled with lila or play. They both go hand in hand.

I fully agree with you. MAyA is not exactly illusion and non-existent. So, it is better to refer to MAyA as MAyA and the effect of MAyA as MAyic.


This always causes a bump in the road...If the īśāvāsyopaniṣad informs us within the 8th śloka that īśa (brahman) is all pervading, then this māyā cannot be outside of it. We always end up chasing this idea down the rabbit hole, and various members' temper flare.

Oh, no ! My idea is not to show anyone's views supremacy here in this thread but to understand the delicate points on this subject from various angles with contributions from knowledgeable members here.

I agree and Advaita VedAnta Gurus also agree that MAyA has its root in Brahman. This has to be accepted otherwise the non-dual nature of Brahman gets violated. My observation should be seen keeping in Advaita VedAnta's view that Nirguna Brahman doesn't act to cause this creation. So, IsA Upanishad is well explained from Advaita VedAnta's perspective too. Isa means God which is non-different from Brahman except that Brahman acts as God only with its power of MAyA and Brahman exists even without any trace of MAyA. So, there is nothing incongruent in saying that All this is pervaded by Isa or God. Actually, MAndukya Upanishad makes it clear by the term used for God, "Undifferentiated Mass of Consciousness", "Origin and end of the entire creation" etc.


This māyā then is not outside of the Supreme acting on it as a independent agent, but a ~tool~ the Supreme chooses to meter itSelf out from infinite to finite. When in ignornace this māyā is conflicting, yet when the dawn of fullness arises within an individual, this māyā is none-other then its play.

Yes. This appears to be a better expression. :)

I would give my views in the next post.

OM

brahman
30 November 2012, 03:59 AM
.


Dear Devotee,



Namaste,


a) "Creating something and then entering into it" makes us believe that the universe was created out of something which was not-Brahman as there was duality at the time of creation and while entering into It.


OM


This argument does not hold good as the Shruti sees ‘Brahman is one without a second’ and ‘all this is Brahman’.




Namaste,



Moreover, as before and after creation Brahman remains unchanged, then also, Brahman being indivisible and unchanging can't be material cause of this universe.



The substratum is the Cause which is responsible for providing the material cause and also efficient cause of this universe. It is settled that both the causes must come from Brahman otherwise, non-duality of Brahman is violated.


OM


As a profound self seeker, how do you easily reconcile these two different statements implicit in the same thread?

Love:)

devotee
30 November 2012, 04:07 AM
Namaste Brahman,





.
As a profound self seeker, how do you easily reconcile these two different statements implicit in the same thread?


First of all, I would like us to confront these two arguments which appear valid simultaneously. Do you agree that both the arguments appear to be correct from their own perspective ?

Actually, many characteristics of Self are seemingly contradictory due to our limitation of mind to understand the Reality. This becomes quite clear while we read Isa Upanishad and other Upanishads. I am trying to reconcile with these arguments simultaneously and I need your/other members' help too.

OM

yajvan
30 November 2012, 11:46 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté



Oh, no ! My idea is not to show anyone's views supremacy here in this thread but to understand the delicate points on this subject from various angles with contributions from knowledgeable members here.

Yes, I viewed your posts in this manner, to bring out the more delicate points. I mentioned the māyā concern in general, as various members (excluding present company) tend to get hung-up on this simple but profound idea and we end up with the tribunal of trying to clearly define māyā for the satisfaction of many.

you write,


MAndukya Upanishad makes it clear by the term used for God, "Undifferentiated Mass of Consciousness",
We find this also in the mālinīvijayottara tantra:

Pracayaṁ rūpātītaṁ ca samyak turyamudāhṛtaṁ|
Mahāpracayamicchanti turyātītaṁ vicakṣaṇāḥ ||38||

Turya -the fourth state of consciousness-- (turyam) is said to be (udāhṛtam) truly (samyák) pracaya -lit. the Mass- (pracayam) and (ca) rūpātītam -the state beyond rūpastha or deep sleep- (rūpá-atītam). The wise (vicakṣaṇāḥ) wish (to attain) (icchanti) mahāpracaya -lit. the Great Mass, the great fullness, totality - (mahāpracayam) (also known as) turyātīta - lit. beyond the fourth - (turya-atītam)


praṇām

yajvan
30 November 2012, 11:56 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


'creating and entering into it.' The conversation in post 10 above...the bhāgavad gītā , chapter 9 , 8th śloka helps us with this matter:

prakṛtim svām avastabhya
visrjami punaḥ punaḥ |
bhūta-grāmam imaṁ kṛtsnam
avaśaṁ prakṛter vaśāt ||

This says curving back (leaning, resting-upon or avaṣṭabhya) onto my SELF (svām) I create (visṛjāmi) again and again (punaḥ punaḥ).
All this (kṛtsnam) which exists ( manifestation and variety bhūta-grāmam) , that comes into creation (prakṛti) is done by my authority or command (vaśāt).

That is, the Supreme never has to go outside itSelf to do any thing.

praṇām

brahman
01 December 2012, 03:23 AM
Namaste Brahman,



I am trying to reconcile with these arguments simultaneously and I need your/other members' help too.

OM







Dear Devotee,

I would be happy to lend a hand for such a noble stand.

Back to the topic again:

An add-on to the subject matter of the ‘frame of reference’ i.e. the ‘Material Cause of the Universe’

Now we see two different situations;

1. Brahman cannot be the material cause of the Universe

If not Brahman there should an alternative material cause?

2. Brahman is the material cause of the universe.

So how these two different material causes for a single situation are to be understood in deeper philosophy, which is an inevitable part of the Self-Realization, is to be discussed.

----------

A kind note:

Hope to see we go again and again to the bottom of our experience carefully avoiding all habitual chains of reasoning. I understand that these prejudices cannot easily be eradicated, but lasting peace will remain a far dream until we find adequate solution to transcend these poetic fancies and semantic verbosity.

Love:)

devotee
01 December 2012, 09:06 AM
Namaste,

The verse quoted by Yajvan ji is quite pertinent here. Lord Krishna says that he creates again and again by using his power of MAyA (prakriti) taking the support of the Self.

My dear Brahman, in my opinion, contemplation on the Advaitic thoughts does gives you deeper understanding of subject and makes you firm in your belief. Practice has to be there in the form of meditation etc. but discussion on Shruti also is a part of Advaitic SAdhana.

I would like to offer my way of understanding this :

a) The problem arises because mind can reason only within axioms known to it. Its reasoning becomes useless once you cross the boundaries of axioms applicable to the waking state to which we belong.

Now, let's see the issue of "Material Cause" :

The fact is that there is no material at all and therefore, there is no need to be a material cause at all. Now, if there is no material then what it is ? Now, let's see how Universe has been perceived in Advaita :

a) It is like superimposition of snake on a rope :

Now, can we say that rope is the material cause of the snake perceived ? No. Snake is only a thought conjured up by the ignorance caused by presence of darkness. So, if we need a material cause for the sake of our mental satisfaction, we must accept that ignorance alone is the material cause of the snake.

Now, the issue doesn't end here. In the analogy of snake over rope, the snake is non-existent and doesn't act, enjoys or suffers or realises that it is rope and not snake. It is non-existent and behaves like a non-existent. However, the universe doesn't exactly behave like non-existent. It acts logically and consistently, enjoys and suffers.

How does a non-existent thing act logically and consistently, enjoys, suffers and on removal of MAyA realises itself as Brahman ?

This is explained by the phenomenon of ChidAbhAsa which is unique characteristic of Consciousness and MAyA.

b) How does it work ?

As Yajvan ji has said, MAyA is not an external entity. It is the power of Brahman or Pure Consciousness. Brahman/Pure Consciousness can exist with MAyA or without it. To understand this we can think of the characteristics of our mind which is nothing but Conditioned Consciousness. Now, mind can exist with thought-waves or even without it. Whether it is with thought-waves or without it, it remains mind alone and doesn't undergo any change. Gaudapad has equated Brahman when apparently acting as Saguna Brahman or Universe as a firebrand in motion. He says that the "vibration" of consciousness conjures up this universe/multitude. Now, again this word, "vibration" must not be thought of as vibration of matter. It is Consciousness with mind-waves.

Let's go back to our snake over rope analogy again. In the material world, the snake conjured up by imagination doesn't act intelligently even apparently whereas this world does. However, in case of Brahman, the universe created by the power of thought-waves within Pure-Consciousness (Itself) is like snake on the rope but this snake acts intelligently due to special characteristic of Brahman. Brahman is not only an inert substratum like the rope of the snake, by its unique power it causes its own consciousness to reflect (though in conditioned way) through the conjured up snake i.e. the world and the world acts as conscious.

This property of consciousness is not very difficult to understand if we analyse our dreams. The one consciousness of the dreamer reflects through all dream characters in the dream and that is how, the one consciousness creates a multitude of characters in the dream which act intelligently and seemingly independently due to the power of reflected consciousness of the dreamer.

Now, the reflected Consciousness in essence is the Pure Consciousness alone. Therefore, on removal of MAyA it merges into the substratum i.e. the Pure Consciousness and the Self-realisation occurs.

So, how is the Universe created ?

It has three elements :

a) MAYA, the power of Brahman, which remains hidden within Brahman in NirguNa state. Brahman exists both with and without it.
b) Impressions of the past : Please remember that MAyA is AnAdi (beginningless) and therefore, the world is created as it was created "before". Stored in Chit of Pure Consciousness
c) ChidAbhAs i.e. reflection of Pure Consciousness through the Conjured up Universe by MAyA (Ref : Prakriti is the Mother and I am the father who sows the seed for creation of all these beings (Bhgawda Gita))

Note :

We must note that all elements of Creation have their roots only in Brahman as Brahman alone exists.

I have several commentaries of Sri Suresvara and Shankara on this issue and I owe quite a lot to those commentaries in understanding the concept. I would also like to say that in spite of whatever has been stated above, it is only a close approximation of the Reality. The Reality, as it really is, is not expressible in words.

I hope it helps.

OM

brahman
02 December 2012, 04:51 AM
Dear Devotee,

Super imposition of the universe has been explained.

But a proper philosophical study should take into account the concrete facts of life. It is easy to say that the world is a cosmic projection or superimposition, but it makes little sense if we do not follow an explanation of it from the standpoint of our experience.

Superimposition establishes the state of bondage, of which there is no doubt, while the systematic denial of the superimposed false hood alone brings one to the state of complete certitude is a fact.

As Vedanta is not mere spiritualism or materialism, it precedes its search for truth from two valid stand points viz. 1. Superimposition and 2.consistent refutation or negation.

We already have seen what superimposition is.

But, before the existence of something can be denied, refuted or negated, we must conceptualize the existence of it in order to do so.
What is here to be negated is our world experience, which can be scientifically termed here as ‘effect’.

And no effect can proceed except from a cause.

-----------



Namaste,

Snake is only a thought conjured up by the ignorance caused by presence of darkness.

OM



Then, if the element of darkness is removed the snake should vanish.
Here in this analogy, snake resembles the world.
So, upon realization the seeker should disappear and merged into the abstract consciousness.

How can we ever have Realized Gurus?

Love:)

kallol
02 December 2012, 09:34 AM
Devoteeji,

You had earlier replied in one of the threads, as we breakdown from system to subsystem to the final end it is only Brahman.

How do we see gross matter at different level ? Muons, protons, atoms, molecules, cells, organs, animals or trees ? All these are different level of energies. This I am saying about the inert part. Add to this the next dimension - Mind.

Mind at various level. Mind through which we perceive through the cells, organs or bodies. Even beyond - the societies, countries, world and beyond. The lower minds contribute to higher mind. The minds perceive at different level.

What if mind was not there ? The next level would have been absent. Maya is out of mind. The matter is out of mind. Karma is out of mind.

Again these 3 layers matter, subtle matter, consciousness constantly merge and unmerge into the adjacent layers, just like the protons and neutrons or the different layers of sea water of different densities. The outer most has the most turbulence and sometimes we see froth (visible matter ) also.

At the depth of it is calm turiya condition.

It is the same brahman throughout. However in different manifestation. Does it mean Brahman has characteristics, it can change ?

We need to answer this.

yajvan
02 December 2012, 02:07 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

What conclusions has the HDF authors and perhaps the readers of the above posts come to ? Is there an ahh-ha ! (?).

For me ( and perhaps me alone ) it is the perpetual notion that the Supreme is this mass of consciousness without break or pause. As mentioned in post #12 above the mālinīvijayottara tantra calls this out, the māṇḍūkya upaniṣad also calls this out. Is there another ? Yes... the paramārthasāra also calls this out. The very first śloka says the following:

cidghano'pi jaganmūrtyā śyāno yaḥ sa jayatyajaḥ|
svātmapracchādanakrīḍāvidagdhaḥ parameśvaraḥ |1|

this says,

Glory to the Supreme (parama-īśvaraḥ) the unborn one who is skillful in the art of playing to conceal His own Self (sva-ātma) who , though being a compact mass (ghana) of consciousness (cit), is coagulated (śyānaḥ) in the form (mūrtyā) of the world or universe (jagat) ||


But you say, o'yajvan, you are just talking from this kaśmir śaivism window once again...

I say, one must be aware that this paramārthasāra original composition is attributed to ādiśeṣa some call anantātha, others call ādhāra and still others call patañjali. This work is considered a vaiṣṇavite text , and the text teaches of a unified (monistic) view of Reality and therefore the essence of vedānta ( in full bloom) .
Yet, for my studies, once again abhinavagupta-ji has chosen to apply his intellectual vivṛti¹ to this śāstra viewing it as a purely monistic śaivite philosophy. His additions and extentions ( going form 85 śloka-s to 105 śloka-s) brings it into the realm of āgamic scriptures¹.


praṇām


words

vivṛti -making clear or manifest , explanation , exposition , gloss , comment , interpretation
additions and extentions and āgamic scriptures - so says yogarāja-ji, the commentor and value-aid ācārya (teacher, guide) who offers his insights on abhinavagupa-ji's work

devotee
02 December 2012, 10:16 PM
Namaste Kallol,



You had earlier replied in one of the threads, as we breakdown from system to subsystem to the final end it is only Brahman.

Right. When all forms and names (which is due to MAyA and MAyA alone) are stripped from anything, what remains is Brahman.


What if mind was not there ? The next level would have been absent. Maya is out of mind. The matter is out of mind. Karma is out of mind.

Yes, it can be said so. However, MAyA and mind cannot be separated. Mind is a product of MAyA and Brahman's chidAbhAsa.


It is the same Brahman throughout. However in different manifestation. Does it mean Brahman has characteristics, it can change ?

No, no. Brahman cannot change. Please go through this thread again. All forms, names and the laws of relationship between them is due to MAyA and is MAyA. In Bhagwad Gita Chapter 7, Lord Krishna explains various elements of MAyA/Prakriti : "Earth, water, fire, space and air with Manas (observer mind), Buddhi (intellect) and (Ahamkaar) is my eight-fold Prakriti. The substratum of it is my Supreme aspect." So, whatever changes occur, occur only due to MAyA. In Chapter 13, Kshetra has been explained by Lord Krishna which covers even more elements of MAyA. Then He has explianed the action of three Gunas which are also elements of MAyA.

The role of Brahman is that it is the locus of MAyA and It alone lends relative reality, intelligence and consistency to all projections borne out of MAyA by a phenomenon called ChidAbhAsa (reflecting Its "light" through MAyic objects).

OM

devotee
02 December 2012, 10:20 PM
Namaste Yajvan,



cidghano'pi jaganmūrtyā śyāno yaḥ sa jayatyajaḥ|
svātmapracchādanakrīḍāvidagdhaḥ parameśvaraḥ |1|

this says,

Glory to the Supreme (parama-īśvaraḥ) the unborn one who is skillful in the art of playing to conceal His own Self (sva-ātma) who , though being a compact mass (ghana) of consciousness (cit), is coagulated (śyānaḥ) in the form (mūrtyā) of the world or universe (jagat) ||

I don't see much difference between what is offered by Advaita VedAnta and Kashmir Shaivism except the choice of words and choice of way to explain the things. When I say that the creation is due to MAyA and that is again born out of Brahman and Brahman alone exists ... is as good as saying that it is basically nothing but expansion of Brahman.

OM

brahman
03 December 2012, 06:46 AM
Dear Deovotee,

To remind myself and others, the frame of reference under consideration is the material cause of the universe.

Devotee writes:


Brahman being indivisible and unchanging can't be material cause of this universe.

both the causes must come from Brahman otherwise, non-duality of Brahman is violated.

The fact is that there is no material at all and therefore, there is no need to be a material cause at all.

So, if we need a material cause for the sake of our mental satisfaction, we must accept that ignorance alone is the material cause of the snake.

There no disagreement to these apparently contradicting statements, provided, we fit these situation into the total structure of the entire universe.

From my earlier post

We already have seen what superimposition is.

But, before the existence of something can be denied, refuted or negated, we must conceptualize the existence of it in order to do so.
What is here to be negated is our world experience, which can be scientifically termed here as ‘effect’.

And no effect can proceed except from a cause.

Would like to hear more on this.

Devotee writes:

Now, can we say that rope is the material cause of the snake perceived? No. Snake is only a thought conjured up by the ignorance caused by presence of darkness. So, if we need a material cause for the sake of our mental satisfaction, we must accept that ignorance alone is the material cause of the snake.

I ask the same question again, if the element of darkness is removed the snake should vanish. If you agree to this, here in this analogy, snake resembles the world. On removal of ignorance, what happens to the world?

Love:)

yajvan
03 December 2012, 09:24 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté devotee

Namaste Yajvan,
I don't see much difference between what is offered by Advaita VedAnta and Kashmir Shaivism except the choice of words and choice of way to explain the things. When I say that the creation is due to MAyA and that is again born out of Brahman and Brahman alone exists ... is as good as saying that it is basically nothing but expansion of Brahman.

Yes, you would think this is true as both are monistic. Yet there are several ( 10 major ones I can think of) differences; These differences (nānātmapakṣa) if outlined will only derail your string and this is not needed. Perhaps a new string with this as the core subject matter at a later date will be of value.

The reader must also consider 'different' does not = better, nor does it mean 'less than'.


praṇām

devotee
03 December 2012, 06:28 PM
I ask the same question again, if the element of darkness is removed the snake should vanish. If you agree to this, here in this analogy, snake resembles the world. On removal of ignorance, what happens to the world?

I don't know why you didn't answer my question which would have helped you to understand your problem. Your question is not valid from Advaita point of view.

Let's first answer these questions :

Who is deluded and whose ignorance is removed ? Is it the snake ? The answer is no. The ignorance is imposed on the observer and for observer alone the snake would vanish. It won't vanish for any other deluded people which might be around during this phenomenon.

Your question is that once a seeker becomes enlightened, he should vanish ! How is it possible ? The real seeker is the reflection of Brahman shining within the intellect of the body-mind entity we refer to as the seeker. This is what is deluded and this is what would melt into Brahman without any distinction and for him the world around him will vanish. However, the enlightenment of individual Jeeva means removal of individual Avidya and not removal of Cosmic delusion. See, the individual ignorance (Avidya) is different from MAyA i.e. the Cosmic delusion. So, when Avidya of an individual is removed, the Cosmic delusion keeps acting for other beings.

The problem is that You are trying to see the Seeker's body vanish on his enlightenment when your ignorance has not been removed. How is that possible ? Yes, if you become enlightened, then the world around you would vanish (when you are one with the Cosmic Consciousness). However, when the enlightened being is back to waking state, he still sees the world but he doesn't see it as a common person sees it.

OM

Nondual
04 December 2012, 02:40 AM
Brahman (I am here referring to the user by this name),

You're trying to grasp turiya while still in the waking state, which is not possible. At best, we can infer it. So the question (why is the world still here?) is fundamentally flawed because you're asking this in the waking state. In turiya, where nothing other than Brahman exists, such questions won't arise.

brahman
04 December 2012, 06:37 AM
Dear Devotee,


I don't know why you didn't answer my question
OM


The question was



"Seeker should disappear" --- Lol !

What is a seeker ... the body ?

Answer to your question is within your post itself, it reads


The real seeker is the reflection of Brahman shining within the intellect of the body-mind entity we refer to as the seeker.

Admission of the existence of body mind entity is an admission of existence of the apparent world. But I comprehend this general agreement of existence belongs to a philosophical category as understood in Vedanta as ‘effect’.

In order to substantiate the belief(everything is consciousness in essence)and to ascertain the certitude, vedantic speculation resorts itself to the method of negation as an effective methodological tool.

So my question is

how do we philosophically negate what has been philosophically agreed as existence of the body-mind entity in terms of an efficient methodology to arrive at the truth Vedanta propounds.

Love:)

brahman
05 December 2012, 06:31 AM
Namaste Brahman,

I would call it as playing games, which I don't like.

So, I would like to know what answer you want to offer. This will also benefit me if there is any snag in my understanding. :)

OM




Dear Devotee,

Every game has its rules and these rules must be recognized as valid within the frame of reference of the game.
At the same there is no disagreement to the nature of certutiude that varies in different individuals. However, the demonstration of the certitude of the scrpitures remains the same.

An authority on this subject comments, excerpts of which reads,

“Even a child can de-pair a rare Rolex wrist watch and discover its dial, diamonds, digits and disc wheels in awe and wonder.
To re-pair it back to a running mechanism rendering right time, which is the purpose of the entire mechanism requires rigorous expertise.”

Seated here at this side is a novice watch mechanic with questions alone and no answers, but questions with nourishing notions of knowledge. Love:)