PDA

View Full Version : How can maya lead to knowledge of brahman



jopmala
23 December 2016, 09:51 AM
Namaste

Taittiriya upanishad sloka 1 of chapter I part III ( Bhrigu valli) (translated by swami Gambhirananda)

First part of the verse says that when Bhrigu approached his father Varuna to know about Brahman, Varuna says “ food( annam) ,pranam,the eyes,ear, mind, speech are the aids to the knowledge of Brahman. These are the doors to the realization of Brahman.

Second part says that varuna says ‘ crave to know well that from which all these beings take birth, that by which they live after being born ,that towards which they move and into which they merge. That is brahman’.

Advaitik view says that, liberation from samsara, which is called moksha or mukti, is obtained only through knowledge of identity with Brahman .The moment one gains the knowledge, “I am Brahman”, one discovers one’s true eternal nature.

My question is since the doors to the realization of Brahman i.e. eyes, ear, mind, speech are part of maya which either projects false object ( viksepa shakti) or conceals the original object ( avarana shakti) how can jiva attain knowledge with the help of maya ? will maya not lead to illusion ? can we depend on maya for getting true knowledge ?

Second part of the verse says three important points to indicate what brahman is (i) from which all these beings take birth ,(ii) by which they live after being born, (iii) towards which they move and into which they merge. That is Brahman.

I want to know, is this Brahman nirakar nirvishesh ,nirguna or is this Brahman sagun sakar savishesh ? at least advaitik view will not accept that we move towards and merge into sagun sakar Brahman. Rather advaitik view will accept that Sagun sakar Brahman itself merge into nirgun nirakar brahman . will maya or ignorance bring knowledge ? will dark bring light ?

markandeya 108 dasa
23 December 2016, 01:00 PM
Namaste Jopmala Ji,

Its great question and I certainly have not figured that one out. Recently a friend who is very learned in Advaita said

quote "Our Consciousness which is part of the problem cannot bring about a solution to the fundamental questions about life."

Seems obvious at first and there is great truth in this, but then again how can we start to evolve into that state which is beyond all of this when we are in a conditioned cycle.

For some reason this has caused some dilemma in my approach and has had me thinking for a while. If all energies are shakti and shakti is always in union with Shiva~ Brahman, how can they not open an understanding about Him or Brahman or the totality. It seems impossible to jump from being embodied to full realization of the disembodied state.

Mind, sense and intellect or the factors of compound consciousness are not equipped in and of themself to understand that which is beyond them, unless there is realization of that which is working beyond them, in the cosmic reality these forces of the working senses are under the direction of the devas, and beyond the devas is the total full being who is fully aware of all and not disturbed or moved by them.

Recently I have been listening to some talks on Kena Upanishad and one of the questions in Kena is to ask what deva set motion of the eye, the hearing and other working senses, so perhaps what is being spoken is to gradually open in stages to finally arrive at full realization, gradually peel back the layers of what is beyond or behind the working senses, then the cosmos with devatta beings who still are to different degrees covered or under the direction of maya and do not have full knowledge ( if thats the correct way of saying ), so there is a further peeling back to reach the source or Brahman.

So perhaps through practice sadhana/meditation we search first to know what is the force behind the working senses, then we reach the deva realms, then we keep seeking to know what is behind the devas as they have universal duties and are not fully complete in and of them self, there is still something beyond all of this, until finally we reach the unlimited uncompounded eternally liberated realization of Brahman.

In some of my findings I have seen that the means of travel from one level of understanding to another is samadhi, dharma is contained in the body and mind, so these dharma's in body and mind will reveal something within nama and rupa but will then automatically or instinctively push one to seek further or what lies behind these and so the journey goes on.

Its also a consideration that when the mind and senses are purified by what is behind them, if one does become jivanmukta in this life then the ordinary working senses will become divine and can help in the liberation of other beings, or one enters divine life in full union with Brahman.

Its a high goal for the embodied, jivanmukta seems almost impossible.

Thats probably not the type of response your looking for, but this is how your question resonates at this time with me.

Pranam

Soul of Light
23 December 2016, 01:55 PM
Namaste Jopmala ji,
The question you asked is from Upanishad and I am not a learned person to answer.. but I always like to put my personal point of view arising from what I know and mostly from my inner (you can say instincts)

I also don't know about your 2nd question so I will try to answer 1st one..
You are right here that Maya is creating illusions and how can she be the door of realisation.. let consider some points here

-if Maya is started showing the direct path towards realisation then no one will left here without realised and self realisation will become so valueless..
You have to do much efforts for self realisation, gold have to burn for more sparkle, and seed have to dug himself to sprout..
Maya take tests again and again, and if you passed the test then you realised and get near to the goal

second important thing is
- mind, eyes, ears are part of Maya but let's understand their relation with our supreme goal.
Actually these are the mediums which are must for realisation and that's why in taitriya Upanishad it is said that this are door to realisation..

Let's take example if your meditating suppose on Nada or any visual meditations in spiritual practices then ear, mind, budhhi involves.. if you don't have mind, budhhi then you can't meditate or do your sadhna, I heard that for Atmā it is not possible to do any karma or do any progress without body (prakriti)

So without purusha (consciousness) and prakriti (senses, mind, buddhi etc) it's impossible to do spiritual progress..

Now if we simplify more then you have to control them, Maya will create illusions but with power of your will, discrimination, devotion you have to control mind, budhhi and have to direct it towards God.. this controlling is difficult, it is the test and once you do then this mediums become doors of realisation..

Now if you want to get out of the room (Samsara) you have to open the closed door (of Maya) and go outside. So in short Maya is not darkness but closed door but with your efforts when you will open the door light will come out and you will know at that time what you have to do..

Thanks for reading
Pranam

Soul of Light
23 December 2016, 02:00 PM
Namaste Jopmala Ji,

Its great question and I certainly have not figured that one out. Recently a friend who is very learned in Advaita said

quote "Our Consciousness which is part of the problem cannot bring about a solution to the fundamental questions about life."

Seems obvious at first and there is great truth in this, but then again how can we start to evolve into that state which is beyond all of this when we are in a conditioned cycle.

For some reason this has caused some dilemma in my approach and has had me thinking for a while. If all energies are shakti and shakti is always in union with Shiva~ Brahman, how can they not open an understanding about Him or Brahman or the totality. It seems impossible to jump from being embodied to full realization of the disembodied state.

Mind, sense and intellect or the factors of compound consciousness are not equipped in and of themself to understand that which is beyond them, unless there is realization of that which is working beyond them, in the cosmic reality these forces of the working senses are under the direction of the devas, and beyond the devas is the total full being who is fully aware of all and not disturbed or moved by them.

Recently I have been listening to some talks on Kena Upanishad and one of the questions in Kena is to ask what deva set motion of the eye, the hearing and other working senses, so perhaps what is being spoken is to gradually open in stages to finally arrive at full realization, gradually peel back the layers of what is beyond or behind the working senses, then the cosmos with devatta beings who still are to different degrees covered or under the direction of maya and do not have full knowledge ( if thats the correct way of saying ), so there is a further peeling back to reach the source or Brahman.

So perhaps through practice sadhana/meditation we search first to know what is the force behind the working senses, then we reach the deva realms, then we keep seeking to know what is behind the devas as they have universal duties and are not fully complete in and of them self, there is still something beyond all of this, until finally we reach the unlimited uncompounded eternally liberated realization of Brahman.

In some of my findings I have seen that the means of travel from one level of understanding to another is samadhi, dharma is contained in the body and mind, so these dharma's in body and mind will reveal something within nama and rupa but will then automatically or instinctively push one to seek further or what lies behind these and so the journey goes on.

Its also a consideration that when the mind and senses are purified by what is behind them, if one does become jivanmukta in this life then the ordinary working senses will become divine and can help in the liberation of other beings, or one enters divine life in full union with Brahman.

Its a high goal for the embodied, jivanmukta seems almost impossible.

Thats probably not the type of response your looking for, but this is how your question resonates at this time with me.

Pranam

Namaste..
I agree with you and thanks for refrenses.. I was typing so didn't read your post..

:)
Pranam

yajvan
23 December 2016, 06:43 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté & hello,

Some doubts ( me thinks) come from zooming into one particular place and perhaps missing the notion that this upanisad is a whole... like zooming in on one area of a painting and missing the total artwork offered.

Note that this taittirīyopaniṣat ( some spell taittiṝya upaniṣad) is in 3 sections (vallī):

śikṣā vallī
brahmānanda vallī
bhṛgu vallī


The core of the śikṣā vallī even though one may think it is all about teaching proper pronunciation & the science which teaches proper articulation and pronunciation of vedic texts it comes to land on mahaḥ (section 5 of this chapter) which is none other than brahman, wholeness, fullness. If one goes to the 8th section in the śikṣā vallī we are given the absolute/ultimate truth:
omiti brahma |
omitīdam sarvaṁ |

om is brahman |
om is ‘this’ all |

This sets the stage.
Now what occurs in the brahmānanda vallī ? There are many offers, but the key is the 3rd verse of section 6:
let me become many |

It is how this (brahman) wholeness, by choice became many and entered into it. It is how perfect wholeness chose multiplicity to express Itself. And the key here? He entered into it. In fact, it is none other than Himself all the time. This is key. Why so? It is because it never is fragmented, it is never diversity, but to us it seems so. This is māyā. It is by His choice, and it is Never not whole but to us, it seems so. He never needs to go outside of Himself - all occurs within Him. This is confirmed in the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā, chapter 9 , 8th śloka:

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).

Now we can go to the bhṛgu vallī... we could not go there without visiting the first 2 vallī’s. And what is key here? Well in the 1st vallī everything is this brahman; the 2nd vallī is how this wholeness chose to become seemingly diverse ( unity in diversity); and the 3rd vallī ? It is how to bring diversity back to unity ( which it has always been and cannot be otherwise). It is all about reversal. It is the inverse process. The term pratiprasava is used by śeṣa patañjali in his yogadarśana. It is defined as ‘counter order’ or ‘returning to the original state’. The logic is simple, if all ‘this’ came from brahman, if we backtrack ( counter order) it should point us to ‘It’ once again.

In chapter 2 it was the decent of brahman into diversity; in chapter 3 it is the ascent to Reality. Yet the problem comes in for many that they think there is 2. There is ‘me’ and the Supreme. Well, if all this is brahman ( chapter 1) that must include me also, no? Therefore:


food = the physical existence of ‘this’
prana is the animating priciple of ~ life~
Sight, hearing, all that are the inner faculties
etc.etc.


It is varuṇa asks his son bhṛgu to see this, the entire world as brahman: That from which everything is born, because of which everything lives and in which all will merge back, that is brahman.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

jopmala
25 December 2016, 09:07 AM
Namaste Markandeya dasaji


I appreciate you for your straight forward approach to the issue. But maya acts like a magician so far advaita philosophy is concerned. Magician creates confusion and mislead us .so also maya . Even the realm of devas also not free from maya . Gita verse 16 of chapter 8 says “ from the domain of brahma down to this world are subject to cycles of birth” . A Jivanmukta is also not free from maya since he is in the domain of maya. sadhana or meditation can not be practiced without involving body mind intellect. Have you read about any jivanmukta ? did they not breath did they not eat drink talk think walk ? shri Krishna says in gita that maya is surely difficult to overcome. Nirgun Brahman can not help anyway. That is why shri Krishna says to arjuna in verse 5 of chapter 12 “ those who set their thoughts on the unmanifested have to face a harder task for the goal of the unmanifested is difficult to attain by the embodied souls”.. This is my understanding.

jopmala
25 December 2016, 09:10 AM
Namaste soul of light


I respect your thoughts but the basic point is you can not control maya in the form of budhhi or mind. Maya does not hear you.

jopmala
25 December 2016, 09:15 AM
Namaste Yajvanji

You have explained the teaching of taittiriyopanishad and I think all our scriptures try to explain the relationship of Brahman jiva jagat and maya. My point was if the doors i.e. body mind intellect etc to the realization of Brahman are part of maya which is clearly mentioned in this verse how can we achieve mukthi by practicing something which involves body mind intellect ? As we know maya is responsible either for projecting the false or concealing the real . therefore my point has no relation with how Brahman becomes many and then many become Brahman. However , you did not make comment on my question. with your permission I would like to put some points based on your explanation. You have mentioned only ‘ brahman’ but there are two Brahman in advaita philosophy. You may say both are same but I would like to know if both nirgun and sagun Brahman are same why nirgun Brahman is considered as ultimate only and why the state of sagun Brahman is not turiya. When you say by choice Brahman become many and entered into it. I suppose this is definitely sagun Brahman. if Brahman become many by choice and entered into it , why then the diversity for us “seems so”. You quoted verse from Gita chapter 9. This verse has clearly stated that he creates again and again still we have to make his creation “ seems so”. First you say Brahman by choice became many and entered into it then you say Brahman never became many or entered into it . the diversity is due to projection of maya. You call it ‘ seemingly diverse’. I am confused. Why don’t you accept that Brahman became many and he entered into it so it is real. There is no projection done by maya.

When there is question of creation it is sagun Brahman, but when the question is for merging into or union it is nirgun Brahman because sagun Brahman is not ultimate entity. If there is no ‘ Brahman becoming many’ and everything is seemingly diverse due to maya then why does the question of returning of many to its original state arise ?

Lastly why Brahman made a choice to become many and enter into it and then many to return to its original state ?

yajvan
25 December 2016, 01:47 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~

namasté jopmala,

your questions show a sharp intellect - this is a good thing. So as to not boil the ocean I have divided your post into 5 questions. With your permission this will allow you and the HDF reader to consider several offers and points of view. I may jump around from one question to another, but allow me that liberty to do so and I think perhaps you will see why. Also, I think it's best not to answer all the questions all at once as that will be like trying to take a drink out of a fire hose... just too much at one time and nothing really gets digested. Let's start with Question1 and then procede to the others, in the next few posts.




Question 1
You have explained the teaching of taittiriyopanishad and I think all our scriptures try to explain the relationship of Brahman jiva jagat and maya. My point was if the doors i.e. body mind intellect etc to the realization of Brahman are part of maya which is clearly mentioned in this verse how can we achieve mukthi by practicing something which involves body mind intellect ?


Question 2
As we know maya is responsible either for projecting the false or concealing the real . therefore my point has no relation with how Brahman becomes many and then many become Brahman. However , you did not make comment on my question. with your permission I would like to put some points based on your explanation. You have mentioned only ‘ brahman’ but there are two Brahman in advaita philosophy. You may say both are same but I would like to know if both nirgun and sagun Brahman are same why nirgun Brahman is considered as ultimate only and why the state of sagun Brahman is not turiya.

Question 3
When you say by choice Brahman become many and entered into it. I suppose this is definitely sagun Brahman. if Brahman become many by choice and entered into it , why then the diversity for us “seems so”. You quoted verse from Gita chapter 9. This verse has clearly stated that he creates again and again still we have to make his creation “ seems so”. First you say Brahman by choice became many and entered into it then you say Brahman never became many or entered into it . the diversity is due to projection of maya. You call it ‘ seemingly diverse’. I am confused. Why don’t you accept that Brahman became many and he entered into it so it is real. There is no projection done by maya.


Question 4
When there is question of creation it is sagun Brahman, but when the question is for merging into or union it is nirgun Brahman because sagun Brahman is not ultimate entity. If there is no ‘ Brahman becoming many’ and everything is seemingly diverse due to maya then why does the question of returning of many to its original state arise ?


Question 5
Lastly why Brahman made a choice to become many and enter into it and then many to return to its original state ?

Question 1 - how can we achieve mukthi by practicing something which involves body mind intellect ?
I look to the muṇḍaka upaniṣad ( some spell muṇḍkopaniṣad ) 1st chapter ( or khaṇḍa) 2nd section, 12th śloka ( verse) as it informs us , nāsti akṛtaḥ kṛtena. I am only using this for now to support what you have said, and then we will culture and expand the answer with more knowledge.

nāsti akṛtaḥ kṛtena


nāsti= na + asti = not + existent
akṛtaḥ = a + kṛtaḥ = not + made
kṛtena = obtained , gained , acquired


What does this say? the not-made is not obtained by made-up means. Well, that certainly did not bring much clarity to the conversation now does it? It is telling us, that Reality that one is looking for (established Reality in one's consciousness = liberation = mukti) is eternal; the not-made is ajāta, unborn and stainless, pure Being. Its attainment (kṛtena) is not possible through made-up means.This Reality never came to Being as the result of any action.

That which is made of actions (house, job, car, family, friends, money, the body) is attainable by actions (work, ritual, pūja, trying, taking, etc). Hence to strive after It ( Being/Brahman) with 'made-up means' i.e. actions, will not produce the result one is looking for as they remain in the field of action.

So if we arrange the words just a bit differently we can say the following: akṛtaḥ na asti kṛtena kim ( I added kim) - this now says, the not-made (Being/brahman) is not made as the result of action, why then (kim) yet another action ?

See the beauty and the profound insight here - and at the same time the dilemmia? What does one do? Are we stuck forever in the situation we are faced with. That of establishing Being (once again) as our full frame of reference or are we stuck as this paśúnā¹ ? One could quickly argue if this is the case how did the sages, yogi's, and seers (ṛṣi’s) find their way? We then know it must be possible.

First we need to eliminate one notion of doing nothing. The logic is, 'if actions are at fault here, then I will do nothing!' We are guided by the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā , 3rd chapter where we are informed:
· no one can exist even for an instant without performing action - 5th śloka
· not by abstaining from action does a man achieve non-action (naiṣkarmya) - 4th śloka
· action is superior to inaction - 8th śloka
· actions in every case are performed by the 3 guṇa-s - 27th śloka
· by action alone did Janaka and others gain perfection - 20th śloka

So , what is one to do? One needs to learn and comprehend 'skill in action'. In my terms ( and my terms only) It is learning to do nothing perfectly. Using the terms of the bhāgavad gītā (chapter 2, 48th śloka) yogasthaḥ kuru karmānī- established (or steadfast) in yoga ( union) perform actions (karma). This union is with SELF as one's reference point for everything. Being established in yoga = being established in the SELF. This is not a concept or philosophical notion some choose to believe. It is a real, actual level of existence (sattā) one can experience.
What occurs in this state? Nirodha निरोध - stillness, silence of the mind, established in Being. And what is experienced ? Nirvikalpa निर्विकल्प - free from change or differences (the not-made or akṛtaḥ); not wavering. Completely possessed of this universal status of SELF. Its also called kevala केवल conclusion, entirely , wholly , absolutely i.e. liberation from birth-after-birth.

How is this possible ? Because of the following just mentioned above:

actions in every case are performed by the 3 guṇa-s - 27th śloka ( the field of the made, of doing)



You see, you leave the made ( field of actions, the field of the 'made') and experience the 'not made'. To say you 'experience it' is more of words for one's comprehension. You are it, you become it again without distractions of the 'made', the 3 guṇa-s. Let the 3 guṇa-s do what they wish, "I" am not that. You see there is nothing to be gained here. If it is something that is 'gained', it is still in the field of action ( this takes some getting used to ). And to say you experience it, suggests there must be 2 , the object of experience and the experiencer. This also cannot be, because the final experiencer is pure awareness , Being, brahman, it is the final subject.
As our upaniṣad-s inform us, It is the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear, etc. It is that consciousness that provides awareness to all the senses, intellect, mind, etc. So when some one says they 'experience it' it is really becoming it, because there is nothing finer, more subtler than that to experience 'it' as an object. It is never the object.

Said from a different point of view and a different school ( kaśmir śaivism and our trika śāstra-s); in the 20th kārikā, bhairava informs us that :tatdāsauśivarūpī sayāt śaivī mukhamihocyate ||20
In laymen's terms, śivaḥ is known through śaivī (śakti).

We will not purse this statement now, but is is also quite profound and on the same foundation as yogasthaḥ kuru karmānī.

So, 'how can we achieve mukthi by practicing something which involves body mind intellect ?' --> Skill in action.


On to another question a bit later...

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

terms



paśu or paśúnā - any tethered animal, singularly or collectively

'a herd '; 5 kinds are enumerated , " men , kine , horses , goats and sheep "

paśutā - the state of an animal

paśutva - (with māheśvara-s and pāśupata-s) being the individual soul

paśavya - belonging to a herd; a drove of cattle

yajvan
26 December 2016, 10:18 AM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté

Question 3 & 4
saguṇa and nirguṇa brahman


saguṇa – with qualities; the world of things, diversity, differentiated things.
nirguṇa – without qualities; pure whole, stainless, undifferentiated

These terms are for our use. For those that need to compare and contrast ideas. There is no 2. It ‘seems’ so, because we use the two terms. Think of an iceberg in the water. There is that portion that is above the water and that which is below. Yet it is one , but we use terms above and below to get to know some of its properties or characteristics.
Brahman above the waterline is all of diversity, of things. Yet it is still brahman. And below, it is undifferentiated. Yet all-and-all it is in total brahman. There is no two.

you mention

if Brahman become many by choice and entered into it , why then the diversity for us “seems so”. You quoted verse from Gita chapter 9. This verse has clearly stated that he creates again and again still we have to make his creation “ seems so”. First you say Brahman by choice became many and entered into it then you say Brahman never became many or entered into it .
Note that when we say brahman becomes ‘many’ He is not used up, He in total is not converted to many and loses His status of wholeness, fullness , this would be an incorrect view. Within our upaniṣads they have a particular voice, approach, method. I need to go outside the upaniṣads to explain this so allow me this indulgence.

Within the non-dual kaśmir śaivism view of Reality we are told keenly and simply within the śiva sūtra-s , 1st chapter :
caitanyamātmā | 1.1

This first sūtra offers that ātmā is the reality (the essence) of everything i.e. Supreme consciousness, as the Truth of one's status and the essence of all creation. This ātman at its root can be viewed as ātan. This ātan आतन् is defined as that which extends, stretches over. It is all and everything, without pause... there’s no above or below like the iceberg.

Now this ātmā = Supreme consciousness = paramaśivaḥ. I mention this because the term ‘śiva’ is rooted (√) in śī which is defined as ‘in whom all things lie’. Nothing is outside of paramaśivaḥ. It is without break or pause. So even creation occurs within this fullness and wholeness of Being. This is the notion of curving back (leaning, resting-upon or avaṣṭabhya) onto my SELF (svām) I create (visṛjāmi) again and again (punaḥ punaḥ) – totally Self-sufficient.

So, there is more. The śivasūtra-s are so profound (as they were offered by śivaḥ himself to vasugupata-ji); they are offered in 3 chapters. The 1st chapter is of the highest knowledge and truth. It is śāmbhavopāya; then comes the 2nd chapter and it is śaktopāya, and then the 3rd chapter which is āṇavopāya. Why mention this?

śāmbhavopāya = śāmbhava upāya , the first and Supreme means to this Divine Reality
śaktopāya = śakti upāya, the next approach engaging śakti methods (upāya) to this Divine Reality
āṇavopāya = āṇava upāya is the next approach and engages all the methods (upāya) to this Divine Reality for the āṇava = ‘small’ or the person in boundaries.


You see, some are ready for this Reality and just a nudge is needed. Others need more work to be done. It is how ‘ripe’ the student is to falling of the tree (of doing, chasing, acquiring, wanting, needing).

Now why bother with this? Here is the brilliance. In the 1st chapter ātman at its root can be viewed as ātan and as I have mentioned it suggests stretching over, covering all. Yet in chapter 3 the term ātan means sātatya gamane - or who comes and goes, always in movement. How does this apply ? It is the ātman that goes (gama) uninterrupted (sātatya) from birth-to-birth i.e. the āṇava or ‘small’ ,the person in boundaries It is that chapter for the one that needs more support within the field of doing.
In both cases the SELF is there but in two conditions - one as completely independent, svātantrya, full, without boundaries, the other is 'shrunk on all sides' ( svāmī lakṣman-jū's words) and goes from birth-to-birth.

But who is śivaḥ and who is the individual ? Both. One is expressed in an unbounded full and whole condition; the other in a bound condition, but still śivaḥ.

It is this constrained condition that many wish to throw off and come back to the unbounded condition. One does not become something else, or ‘gain’ something as if it was an acquisition. It is one’s return back his/her original status. To even say ‘return’ is a misnomer. Can anyone exist for one second without Being ? It is just the firm re-recognition of Being as your Self which becomes now and always your referral point in wake-dream-sleep . It never subsides.

It is like a gold becoming an ear-ring, then a finger ring, then a broach. Taking on all these shapes; then the gold finally says
‘I just want to be gold again’.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/dd/14/55/dd145542a94397ee3beb78cd1d4287c9.jpg


इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

yajvan
29 December 2016, 04:01 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté


Question 2
more on this māyā here: http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?14760-getting-the-whole-story&p=129549#post129549


इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

jopmala
06 January 2017, 12:09 PM
Namaste yajvanji

have you finished your reply or will you answer question No 5 which is left so far

yajvan
06 January 2017, 06:34 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté


Namaste yajvanji

have you finished your reply or will you answer question No 5 which is left so far

I will answer, yet halted to see if there were any questions before proceeding.

Question 5 Lastly why Brahman made a choice to become many and enter into it and then many to return to its original state ?

There are many answers to this... and for me to say for certain why the Supreme does this or that shows only my ignorance.
Yet I will offer a few notions given by some of the luminaries I have read and also what I was given by my teacher for consumption.

The wording of 'made and entered into it' is the fashion of this upaniṣad; it is the style for communicating some very big ideas for our understanding. From another school of thought we are told that this Being, by its own nature is creative. My teacher referred to it as creative intelligence tendency. Yet to suggest it makes something then enters into it is not the notion of the school I now am referring to. It is not like I make a pie then jump into the pie!

The very fabric of creation is also this Being. There is nothing outside of it. There is no lumber-yard the Supreme goes to for wood to build a home ( code for universe) then jumps-in and lives in the home. The very fabric of the universe is none other than this Being too. Yet the beauty of this is, He (it) never gets used up. All of ~this~ happens within Him ( Being); nothing can be out side of it.
But why does He/Being do this? Many say for the sport of it. Think of a very joyful Being that is eternal, there is no time that limits this Being. Because it/He/the Supreme is full of joy , why then not have sport? IN this school of thinking He is not lacking, He is not with a desire, He just likes to express wholeness and fullness even in diversity!

One view is he plays hide-and-seek with himself. He creates all of this - you, me, society. He hides Himself but still plants a desire within us of this feeling that we're not full ( the He is not full/whole while in the human form). This was āṇava = ‘small’ or the person in boundaries previously mentioned. It is none other than Him in this 'small' condition, but still Him. Ask the wise of their experience when they realize or re-member who they are. They will say I was this all along! It is Him finding Himself again.

This is one view , and I can see how it applies and makes perfect sense.

I offer this one view, but there are others. I will add one or two more as they're more esoteric but still a delight to write about.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

yajvan
07 January 2017, 08:10 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté


There are many answers to this... and for me to say for certain why the Supreme does this or that shows only my ignorance. Yet I will offer a few notions given by some of the luminaries I have read and also what I was given by my teacher for consumption.
continuing...
This post goes to answer question 5 from a very profound point of view. For some reading this , they will not ~ get it ~ and that is fine. It takes some time to sink-in and needs to be read several times.

Question 5 - Lastly why Brahman made a choice to become many and enter into it and then many to return to its original state ?
I look to one of the greatest luminaries of advaita ( non-dual) vedānta, gauḍapādacharya1. He offers a commentary on the māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad (māṇḍūkyopaniṣat). The māṇḍūkya upaniṣad is one of the 10 principle upaniṣad-s that are recognized, yet it is only 12 śloka-s (verses) and deals with the ultimate reality: sarvam̐ hyetad brahma (all this is brahman), which is the 2nd verse of this upaniṣad2. Gauḍapādacharya’s work is called a kārikā3 hence māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā, also known as gauḍapādiyakārikā, done in 215 verses , 4 chapters.

If you recall from post 9 above I mentioned Being as eternal - the ‘not-made’ , ajāta, unborn and stainless, pure Being. The knowledge offered by gauḍapādacharya goes deep-and-wide into this, and is often called ajātivāda or the discussion/knowledge/speaking about that which is unborn (ajāta). So this post will extend the notion of eternal, not-made, ajāta, and tie-in māyā from another point of view, along with a few other ideas.

The one verse that will be reviewed is from chapter 2. It is fairly important to know the 4 chapters and their names to best understand where this one verse we’re reviewing fits in:
• chapter 1 (29 verses) — āgama prakaraṇa - the traditional doctrine (āgama) chapter or book (prakaraṇa) which contains the 12 verses of the māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad
• chapter 2 (38 verses) — vaitathya prakaraṇa – unreality or falseness, ‘māyā’ chapter
• chapter 3 (48 verses) — adavaita prakaraṇa – nondual chapter
• chapter 4 (100 verses) — alātaśānti prakaraṇa – the firebrand of peace

The verse
We go to gauḍapādacharya’s commentary (kārikā) on 2nd chapter , 32nd verse. Let me offer several translations of the same verse, then we will take the time to comprehend what is profoundly offered.
न निरोधो न चोत्पत्तिर्न बद्धो न च साधकः ।
न मुमुक्षुर्न वै मुक्त इत्येषा परमार्थता ॥ ३२ ॥
na nirodho na cotpattirna baddho na ca sādhakaḥ |
na mumukṣurna vai mukta ityeṣā paramārthatā || 32 ||

version 1
There is no dissolution, no birth, none in bondage, none aspiring for wisdom, no seeker of liberation and none liberated. This is the absolute truth.

version 2
There is no cessation, no coming-to-be, none in bondage, no seeker after liberation and no-one liberated. This is paramārthā ( or the highest/whole truth)

version 3
Neither destruction nor again origination, neither one bound down (to this saṁsāra​4) nor again an aspirant (or one working) for salvation; neither one desirous of salvation nor one emancipated; thus (is) the highest truth (paramārthā ).

version 4 - by rāmaṇa mahaṛṣi
There is no creation, no destruction, no bondage, no longing to be freed from bondage, no striving to be free (from bondage), nor anyone who has attained (freedom from bondage). Know that this is the ultimate truth (paramārtha).

The insight and explanation
Now we can consider the meaning of this verse which is the core of the 2nd chapter gauḍapādiyakārikā. We will start this in the next post.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

terms
1.Gauḍapāda-ji was the guru of govinda bhagavatpāda who, in turn was the guru of ādi śaṅkara (śaṅkara bhagavatpāda); hence
gauḍapāda-ji is the teacher’s teacher of ādi śaṅkara, sometimes referred to as one’s grand-master. It is these masters
that formed and shaped the knowledge of advaita ( non-dual) vedānta.
2. सर्वं ह्येतद् ब्रह्मायमात्मा ब्रह्म सोऽयमात्मा चतुष्पात् ॥ २ ॥
sarvaṁ hyetad brahmāyamātmā brahma so 'yamātmā catuṣpāt || 2 ||
All this is verily Brahman. This ātman is Brahman. This ātman has four quarters.
3. kārikā – doctrine, but also a concise statement; precision in offering knowledge is how I look at it.
4. saṁsāra - passing through a succession of states , circuit of mundane existence; going from birth-to-birth

yajvan
08 January 2017, 07:33 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté


The insight and explanation
Now we can consider the meaning of this verse which is the core of the 2nd chapter gauḍapādiyakārikā.
32​nd kārikā
There is no dissolution, no birth, none in bondage, none aspiring for wisdom, no seeker of liberation and none liberated. This is the absolute truth.

Now why is there no birth or dissolution? It is from the standpoint that brahman, the supreme is eternal - the ‘not-made’ , ajāta, unborn and stainless, pure Being. It has no birth and therefore can have no demise. We are also told again and again sarvam̐ hyetad brahma (all this is brahman)1. This now sets the stage for the discussion.

Let’s offer a point of view that is extracted from verse 32 and supported by 6th and 12 verses of the 2nd chapter of the gauḍapādiyakārikā we’re involved with. If there is no birth nor death anything that occurs in the middle of these two assumptions must also not be, must not occur, must be unreal.

birth _____living/actions_____death

Another view of this: Let’s say just for arguments sake that there is birth, and with that death must follow, as all that is born must perish. So what occurs in the middle?

birth ___transition___death.

Things born are on the path to death and this ‘change’ that occurs is not stable, it is constantly changing as it is approaching its dissolution, its destruction, death. So, this change too cannot be absolute, or ~real~ because it is not constant and unchanging. Said another way: If an entity lacks permanent existence it is therefore ultimately unreal due to having a beginning and an end, it must also therefore be unreal in the present or middle.

So , herein lies the brain cramp... we are told there is no birth no death and no change – yet here we are! We are here with birth and death and change! Someone is cognizing this phenomenon. Consciousness and Awareness exist, of this there is no doubt. The answer to this comes from gauḍapāda-ji’s 12th śloka of chapter 2:
कल्पयत्यात्मनाऽऽत्मानमात्मा देवः स्वमायया |
स एव बुध्यते भेदानिति वेदान्तनिश्चयः ॥ १२ ॥
kalpayatyātmanā''tmānamātmā devaḥ svamāyayā |
sa eva budhyate bhedāniti vedāntaniścayaḥ || 12 ||
this says,
ātman, the self-luminous, through the power of his own māyā, imagines in himself by himself (all the objects that the subject experiences within or without). He alone is the cognizer of the objects (so created). This is the decision of vedānta.

All that we cognize and see is none other than ātman and ātman = brahman. The cognizer (us) is also Him (ātman = brahman) , yet many do not believe this even when told by the wise, sarvam̐ hyetad brahma (all this is brahman). This does not mean oh, everything I view is brahman and ‘that’ outside of me too is brahman. This would be an incorrect assessment because the cognizer ( you, me, our population, all the animals, the universe, etc. etc.) with this awareness is consciousness which is brahman. This meets with verse twelve’s statement that ‘He alone is the cognizer of the objects so created’.

This answers question 5
How did He enter into creation ? He did this by becoming it, and did this all inside Himself without any need to leave Himself for anything. He did not need to enter it, as He is it!

The māyā that occurs is on His own Self by His (Its) choice, that allows Him to be (as if) measured out (mā) + restrained (yā) in a differentiated / variegated manner. This is the illusion (māyā) that the undifferentiated, wholeness of Being experiences Himself as differentiated. You ( who are reading this) are participating in this event! Because you cannot be outside of It!

This verse then makes perfect sense ( as I see it):
There is no creation, no destruction, no bondage, no longing to be freed from bondage, no striving to be free (from bondage), nor anyone who has attained (freedom from bondage). Know that this is the ultimate truth (paramārtha).

This verse is ultimate truth (paramārtha) when viewed that all-and-everything is none other than perfect , stainless, infinite Being. What freedom does Being need? Where can there be bondage? That suggests change. If there is change and transition that is not 'real' or absolute, and we know Being/brahman to be whole, pure full and eternal ( so say the wise and our scriptures).

As I mentioned early on this takes some pondering, some study...nidīdhyāsana2

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

1. māṇḍūkya upaniṣad - 2nd verse
2. nidīdhyāsana = nidī+dhyāna+āsana = bestowing by shining down + profound deep thought + abiding, dwelling.

Hence nidīdhyāsana = abiding in profound deep thought ( meditation) that bestows or yield insight (light).
Some write nītī+dhyāna+āsana nītī = bringing , guidance , management ; so this = bringing & managing, dwelling in deep thought ( on the subject at hand)

yajvan
10 January 2017, 05:34 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté

Within gauḍapādacharya’s kārikā-s the knowledge is regarding the ultimate truth (paramārtha); he sets the stage for the adivaita vedānta school.


adivaita vedānta - Total wholeness non-dual view; within (non dual) kaśmir śaivism it is called parā
viśiṣtādvaita vedānta - fullness and duality ( unity in diversity); within (non dual) kaśmir śaivism it is parāpara
dvaita vedānta – the world of duality; within (non dual) kaśmir śaivism it is āpara


So now one can ask this question: Are you in the world or is the world in you ? (This is an extension of question 5 above).

Well from the dual view ( differentiated awareness) the answer is, I am in the world.
From the parāpara view (viśiṣtādvaita vedānta) , the world is in me – as this is unity in diversity. There are many things in the world but it is all harmonized, an extension of me everywhere.
From the parā point of view there is only Being. There is not even the case of suggesting there is ‘world’ ( diversity) and is there ‘me’ – as there is not even one iota of any-thing that is non-different of Being... total homogeneous, stainless Being without time, space, cause. It is the continuum of Being ( pure awareness) without break or pause.


The next question: how can this experience( of parā) occur within the human condition? This is pointed out in gauḍapādacharya’s kārikā’s and I will let the reader pursue it.


इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

yajvan
15 January 2017, 07:16 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté

from post 15 above,

You ( who are reading this) are participating in this event! Because you cannot be outside of It!
It is gauḍapādacharya that helps us understand this notion a bit better... if we look to the 3rd chapter and 3rd kārikā of his māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā1, it says the following:
आत्मा ह्याकाशवज्जीवैर्घटाकाशैरिवोदितः ।
घटादिवच्च संघातैर्जातावेतन्निदर्शनम् ॥ ३ ॥
ātmā hyākāśavajjīvairghaṭākāśairivoditaḥ |
ghaṭādivacca saṃghātairjātāvetannidarśanam || 3 ||

This says in general that ātmā (ātman, Self) is similar to ākāśa ( pure space); jīva-s ( or embodied selves, people) can be compared to the space (ākāśa) enclosed in pots.

So, to better understand this example one must note the following:

ākāśa ( pure space) is infinite with no edges or boundaries. That is why it is ~like~ Self or ātman.
the space inside of a pot is non-different from the space outside the pot. How could it be different as pure space cannot be contained? Yet for humans we think that a pot ( or container) holds this space within it.
with further thought it is space that actually holds the pot in it! Pure space (ākāśa) provides the space for things to exist. You cannot have a thing (like a pot) without having space for it to exist in.
so , this ākāśa ( pure space) is the same within the pot or outside the pot as it cannot be differentiated.

yet for humans when Self is supposedly ‘inside’ the pot we think it is jīva or some individualized soul or a fractional form of Being.


This is what this kārikā points out.
This is why I said,

You ( who are reading this) are participating in this event! Because you cannot be outside of It!
You see , inside or outside the pot ( or the human condition) there is nothing but ātmā ; just like ākāśa (pure space) it cannot be contained. This is the māyā of post 15 above. It is the Supreme pretending to be contained.

That is why I offered the following in post 13,

Ask the wise of their experience when they realize or re-member who they are. They will say I was this all along! It is Him finding Himself again.
When one looks inside or outside the pot the space is non-different. This is the awakening.

... this takes some pondering...nidīdhyāsana2


https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/t/pots-sale-handmade-pottery-mandawa-market-57907334.jpg

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

terms
1. māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā – see post 14 above
2. nidīdhyāsana = nidī+dhyāna+āsana = bestowing by shining down + profound deep thought + abiding, dwelling.

riju
31 May 2017, 01:13 AM
Maya definately leads to the knowledge of Brahamana.
Millions of people are able to observe and confirm this TRUTH,

If you attend vipassana course of any buddhist guru, you will observe every moment that physical atom of your body (maya) disappears and emptiness replaces that atom. what remains behind in this emptiness is Brahma. As all our senses are below Brhama, Our senses fail to see the Brahma and take it as emptiness

yajvan
01 June 2017, 01:50 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté

Our senses fail to see the Brahma and take it as emptiness
Our senses are ~designed~ for the world of diversity. In fact if you look at the total tattva's ( Some say 24, others 25, 31, and still others 36) our senses are made of these. They function within this boundary . Yet brahma (ब्रह्म) is whole, full and beyond differentiated awareness ( of limits). Hence to comprehend this fullness, to really know it, one needs the same basis of brahma ( fullness), pure awareness.
Pure Awareness ( from my post above) is like ākāśa ( pure space) but with one condition ; it is filled with awareness. It is Self-aware. That is the difference.

Yet this wholeness of brahma (ब्रह्म) cannot be separate from the total, that must include the finite, that would infer that there is something out side of it, and it would not then be deemed whole, full ( bhūman). Hence this fullness must include the limited within it. In fact, we are told, it only 'seems' like the field of the limited due to the blemish (mala) of ignorance. AND , in fact, this mala must too be within this wholeness (bhūman). Hence, there is boundless and bounded wholeness.
We are told the one with ~true vision~ sees wholeness in a single blade of grass i.e. pūrnamadah pūrnamidam ( that is whole, this is whole - 'this' = the world we reside in).

This then is māyā. It is the wave thinking there are only waves, with no ocean underneath it. That the world is only differentiated and fractured. It misses the truth of its own foundation.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/49/f0/29/49f029eab01a93f84948bb315803ee58.jpg

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

markandeya 108 dasa
01 June 2017, 03:36 PM
Namase Riju Ji,

I agree with what you said. All phenomenon, matter, material energy, Maya, Divine Shakti’s if observed in the right way, vipassana ( insight knowledge ) being one, then knowledge of Brahma arises spontaneously.

Just today I was making a translation of one Hindi Bhajan, and part of the Bhajan was every atom contains light, light in Bhajan and Shastra is synonymous with knowledge or knowing its cognitive and illuminating. Atom refers to Maya and light to awareness or an illuminating factor deva or devatta. Maya is only mundane and binding if our consciousness is covered by the gunas.

If we manage to get a glimpse or maintain the right level of awareness then everything in the phenomenal world will point to the Absolute Reality Brahma.

Pranam

jopmala
09 July 2017, 12:45 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~

namasté jopmala,

your questions show a sharp intellect - this is a good thing. So as to not boil the ocean I have divided your post into 5 questions. With your permission this will allow you and the HDF reader to consider several offers and points of view. I may jump around from one question to another, but allow me that liberty to do so and I think perhaps you will see why. Also, I think it's best not to answer all the questions all at once as that will be like trying to take a drink out of a fire hose... just too much at one time and nothing really gets digested. Let's start with Question1 and then procede to the others, in the next few posts.



Question 1 - how can we achieve mukthi by practicing something which involves body mind intellect ?
I look to the muṇḍaka upaniṣad ( some spell muṇḍkopaniṣad ) 1st chapter ( or khaṇḍa) 2nd section, 12th śloka ( verse) as it informs us , nāsti akṛtaḥ kṛtena. I am only using this for now to support what you have said, and then we will culture and expand the answer with more knowledge.

nāsti akṛtaḥ kṛtena


nāsti= na + asti = not + existent
akṛtaḥ = a + kṛtaḥ = not + made
kṛtena = obtained , gained , acquired


What does this say? the not-made is not obtained by made-up means. Well, that certainly did not bring much clarity to the conversation now does it? It is telling us, that Reality that one is looking for (established Reality in one's consciousness = liberation = mukti) is eternal; the not-made is ajāta, unborn and stainless, pure Being. Its attainment (kṛtena) is not possible through made-up means.This Reality never came to Being as the result of any action.

That which is made of actions (house, job, car, family, friends, money, the body) is attainable by actions (work, ritual, pūja, trying, taking, etc). Hence to strive after It ( Being/Brahman) with 'made-up means' i.e. actions, will not produce the result one is looking for as they remain in the field of action.

So if we arrange the words just a bit differently we can say the following: akṛtaḥ na asti kṛtena kim ( I added kim) - this now says, the not-made (Being/brahman) is not made as the result of action, why then (kim) yet another action ?

See the beauty and the profound insight here - and at the same time the dilemmia? What does one do? Are we stuck forever in the situation we are faced with. That of establishing Being (once again) as our full frame of reference or are we stuck as this paśúnā¹ ? One could quickly argue if this is the case how did the sages, yogi's, and seers (ṛṣi’s) find their way? We then know it must be possible.

First we need to eliminate one notion of doing nothing. The logic is, 'if actions are at fault here, then I will do nothing!' We are guided by the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā , 3rd chapter where we are informed:
· no one can exist even for an instant without performing action - 5th śloka
· not by abstaining from action does a man achieve non-action (naiṣkarmya) - 4th śloka
· action is superior to inaction - 8th śloka
· actions in every case are performed by the 3 guṇa-s - 27th śloka
· by action alone did Janaka and others gain perfection - 20th śloka

So , what is one to do? One needs to learn and comprehend 'skill in action'. In my terms ( and my terms only) It is learning to do nothing perfectly. Using the terms of the bhāgavad gītā (chapter 2, 48th śloka) yogasthaḥ kuru karmānī- established (or steadfast) in yoga ( union) perform actions (karma). This union is with SELF as one's reference point for everything. Being established in yoga = being established in the SELF. This is not a concept or philosophical notion some choose to believe. It is a real, actual level of existence (sattā) one can experience.
What occurs in this state? Nirodha निरोध - stillness, silence of the mind, established in Being. And what is experienced ? Nirvikalpa निर्विकल्प - free from change or differences (the not-made or akṛtaḥ); not wavering. Completely possessed of this universal status of SELF. Its also called kevala केवल conclusion, entirely , wholly , absolutely i.e. liberation from birth-after-birth.

How is this possible ? Because of the following just mentioned above:

actions in every case are performed by the 3 guṇa-s - 27th śloka ( the field of the made, of doing)



You see, you leave the made ( field of actions, the field of the 'made') and experience the 'not made'. To say you 'experience it' is more of words for one's comprehension. You are it, you become it again without distractions of the 'made', the 3 guṇa-s. Let the 3 guṇa-s do what they wish, "I" am not that. You see there is nothing to be gained here. If it is something that is 'gained', it is still in the field of action ( this takes some getting used to ). And to say you experience it, suggests there must be 2 , the object of experience and the experiencer. This also cannot be, because the final experiencer is pure awareness , Being, brahman, it is the final subject.
As our upaniṣad-s inform us, It is the eye of the eye, the ear of the ear, etc. It is that consciousness that provides awareness to all the senses, intellect, mind, etc. So when some one says they 'experience it' it is really becoming it, because there is nothing finer, more subtler than that to experience 'it' as an object. It is never the object.

Said from a different point of view and a different school ( kaśmir śaivism and our trika śāstra-s); in the 20th kārikā, bhairava informs us that :tatdāsauśivarūpī sayāt śaivī mukhamihocyate ||20
In laymen's terms, śivaḥ is known through śaivī (śakti).

We will not purse this statement now, but is is also quite profound and on the same foundation as yogasthaḥ kuru karmānī.

So, 'how can we achieve mukthi by practicing something which involves body mind intellect ?' --> Skill in action.


On to another question a bit later...

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

terms



paśu or paśúnā - any tethered animal, singularly or collectively

'a herd '; 5 kinds are enumerated , " men , kine , horses , goats and sheep "

paśutā - the state of an animal

paśutva - (with māheśvara-s and pāśupata-s) being the individual soul

paśavya - belonging to a herd; a drove of cattle





pranam


I am confused over your statement that ‘ not made’ can not be obtained by ‘made up’ means. If your ‘made up means’ indicate karma or actions , I do not agree with you at this statement. I think the back ground of the sloka 12th may be found in slokas 10 and 11 where it is clearly mentioned that ignorant men regards sacrificial acts ‘ istam’ karma enjoined by the srutis and charitable acts ‘ purtam’ karma enjoined by the smrtis ( digging of pools wells tanks etc) most important or ‘varistham’ and do not know any other help of bliss ; having enjoyed in the heights of heaven, the abode of pleasures, they enter again into this or even inferior world. ( Sloka 10). Gita verse 21 of chapter 9 states the same thing. It is very evident that the actions or karma here means “actions with desire” or sakama karma

But sloka 11 explains “ actions without desire” or niskama karma . sloka 11 says that those who perform tapas and sraddha in the forest ( like hermit) , having control over their senses, learned and living the life of a begger go through the orb of the sun their good and bad deeds consumed, to where the immortal and undecaying purusha is. Here very clearly mentioned that “ through the action without desire” one can reach to Brahman. My point is liberation can be attained through made up means that is if one performs actions without desires.

Now sloka 12 states that ‘ having examined the worlds attainable through karma ( of course actions with desire) a Brahmin should get dispassionate ( vairagya) towards them. To know that , he with sacrificial fuel in hand, must approach a guru who is well versed in Vedas and absolutely devoted to the realization of Brahman.’ Here my point is jnan can not be obtained without a guru but to follow the advice of the guru one must performs actions. So without actions jnan can not be attained. Therefore, “made up means” should not include actions without desire or niskama karma. In other words, through made up means i.e. action with desire , Brahman can not be attained. This is the trune explanation of the sloka, according to me.

Now come to what Srimad bhagavad Gita states. But before that , I must tell you that although the not made is not made by any action but the actions or ‘made up means’ is made by the ‘not made’ itself. Gita verse 15 of chapter 3 which says “ actions derive from the Vedas, the Vedas derive from the imperishable one” . further This creation is nothing but actions and sri krishna says that it is under his lead that nature brings forth all things both animate and inanimate. Therefore actions come from him alone. Thus your statement that through made up means the Brahman can not be attained may not be right if you go through the Gita verse 27-28 of chapter 9. Whereas, Verse 27 says “ what ever you do eat or give whatever you offer as sacrifice and whatever austerities you perform, do that as an offering unto me” and verse 28 says “ if you offer all actions unto me you shall free yourself from both the good and evil effects of your actions. With your mind firmly planted in renunciation, liberated you shall come unto me” . Therefore, I do not accept that through made up means one cannot attain not made . But yes one can not attain the not made through actions with desire or sakama karma.

I do not see any dilemmia here . All we have to understand sakama karma and niskama karma that’s all. Niskama karma though ‘ made up means’ can take us to the Brahman. Gita verses 2 to 10 of chapter 5 very clearly discussed this issue. Sloka 12 of above mentioned in the Mundoka upnishad and Gita verses have no difference. Verse 48 of chapter 2 of Gita is nothing but Nismaka karmayoga. Here yoga is defined in simple way that the spirit of equivalence is yoga. I think second part of the verse explains the meaning of yoga which says “ siddhyasiddhyoh samo bhutva” is yoga . so No other meaning of yoga is required to explain this verse. Attaining such a state is called ‘Sthitaprajnasya’ as stated in the Gita. You may call it Nirvikalpa or state of kevala. Gita says to attain such a state, controlling of the senses plays the important role. Verse 61 of chapter 2 of Gita says “ He who worships me with single minded devotion can control his senses and rest with his mind centered in me”. I do not know if there is any other way out to attain the state of Sthitaprajnasya ?

Do you mean attaining the state of Sthitaprajnasya/kevala is becoming the imperishable Brahman ? whereas, even the brahma is also under the domain of maya. Sri Krishna says in verse 50 of chapter 18 of Gita that attaining brahmabhava is the ultimate goal of jnan ( jnanasya ya para). Verse 54 says after attaining brhamabhava the seeker attains supreme devotion unto me. Then verse 55 says through such devotion , he comes to know me and having known to me in truth, he forthwith enters into me. Therefore, attaining kevala is not the end of journey.

According to Gita“ skill in action’ consists in performing things being informed by a sense of equivalence ( ‘yogah karmasu kaushalam’ verse 50 of chapter 2 read with verse 57 of chapter 18).

Your assertion that by leaving the made one can become not made that is to say if one leaves action he can become Brahman. This is against the karma tattva of Gita which says that no one can leave karma ( verse 5 chap 3). If you say let the 3 gunas do what they like , I am not that. Then you have to remember Gita verse 19 of chapter 13 which says “ purusha being identified with prakriti enjoys the modes born of prakriti. His attachment to them is the cause of good and evil birth” and verse 22 of the same chapter says “ The supreme spirit dwelling in this body is said to be the witness, sanctioner. sustainer, experience, Lord of lords and supreme self”. More over, 3 gunas are not independent to act. They have to depend on purusha. If you believe it is the eye of the eye, ear of the ear then why don’t you believe it is the soul of the soul as well.

yajvan
10 July 2017, 10:27 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté

I am happy you took the time to respond in a meaningful way... There are so many things to respond to I think it will be a substantial task. For that, a discussion in length and breath is needed.

I stand by what I offered, nāsti akṛtaḥ kṛtena (really by what muṇḍkopaniṣad offers us) . Now does this suggest I think that actions ( right actions that is) are not important to one's development ( the term I think is proper is unfoldment) ? No they are, as they purifiy one's perception and ability to discriminate.

Yet to go deeper and wider is to stand on the shoulders of sureśvarācārya and his offer naiṣkarmyaṣiddhim2 (perfect non-doing) and to continue to refer back to gauḍapādacharya’s2​ work called the māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā.

So, the question is, do I have the stamina to pursue this? Not at this time.

Yet if one was eager to get to the bottom of this , which would quench one's thirst substantially, the I would recommend reading
gauḍapādacharya’s work, māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā , as the answers in full can be found there.

... do as you see fit.


इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ


1. naiṣkarmyaṣiddhim - It’s said ādi śaṅkara-ji wanted sureśvarācārya to write a vārttika onhis (śaṅkara’s) commentary
called a sūtra-bhāṣya of the brahma-sūtras. This naiṣkarmyaṣiddhi is that work.
2. gauḍapāda-ji was the guru of govinda bhagavatpāda who, in turn was the guru of ādi śaṅkara (śaṅkara bhagavatpāda); hence
gauḍapāda-ji is the teacher’s teacher of ādi śaṅkara, sometimes referred to as one’s grand-master. It is these masters that formed and shaped the knowledge of advaita ( non-dual) vedānta.

jopmala
16 July 2017, 07:21 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté

I am happy you took the time to respond in a meaningful way... There are so many things to respond to I think it will be a substantial task. For that, a discussion in length and breath is needed.

I stand by what I offered, nāsti akṛtaḥ kṛtena (really by what muṇḍkopaniṣad offers us) . Now does this suggest I think that actions ( right actions that is) are not important to one's development ( the term I think is proper is unfoldment) ? No they are, as they purifiy one's perception and ability to discriminate.

Yet to go deeper and wider is to stand on the shoulders of sureśvarācārya and his offer naiṣkarmyaṣiddhim2 (perfect non-doing) and to continue to refer back to gauḍapādacharya’s2​ work called the māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā.

So, the question is, do I have the stamina to pursue this? Not at this time.

Yet if one was eager to get to the bottom of this , which would quench one's thirst substantially, the I would recommend reading
gauḍapādacharya’s work, māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā , as the answers in full can be found there.

... do as you see fit.


इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ


1. naiṣkarmyaṣiddhim - It’s said ādi śaṅkara-ji wanted sureśvarācārya to write a vārttika onhis (śaṅkara’s) commentary
called a sūtra-bhāṣya of the brahma-sūtras. This naiṣkarmyaṣiddhi is that work.
2. gauḍapāda-ji was the guru of govinda bhagavatpāda who, in turn was the guru of ādi śaṅkara (śaṅkara bhagavatpāda); hence
gauḍapāda-ji is the teacher’s teacher of ādi śaṅkara, sometimes referred to as one’s grand-master. It is these masters that formed and shaped the knowledge of advaita ( non-dual) vedānta.

Pranam Yajvanji

I accept that I am too late to respond but that does not dilute my contention. if “actions ( right actions ) are important to one's development as they purifiy one's perception and ability to discriminate”. But actions are not possible without maya. Without body mind intellect , actions not possible. Therefore, how can action or maya purify one perception. According to advaita philosophy maya always projects false or conceals the truth. I think that’s why action or karma is not an important aspect of advaita philosophy. One more thing, if I conclude that the writings on advaita philosophy ( of course to write is an action) also guided by maya , shall I be wrong ? please dont take it otherwise. I think you are an open minded person.

yajvan
16 July 2017, 08:16 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté


Pranam Yajvanji

I accept that I am too late to respond but that does not dilute my contention. if “actions ( right actions ) are important to one's development as they purifiy one's perception and ability to discriminate”. But actions are not possible without maya. Without body mind intellect , actions not possible. Therefore, how can action or maya purify one perception. According to advaita philosophy maya always projects false or conceals the truth. I think that’s why action or karma is not an important aspect of advaita philosophy. One more thing, if I conclude that the writings on advaita philosophy ( of course to write is an action) also guided by maya , shall I be wrong ? please dont take it otherwise. I think you are an open minded person.

Here is my conundrum,
There are so many ideas and knowledge here that one is predicated upon another, and that then causes the conversation to expand. I am not opposed to this, but there are several things you have mentioned that infer an ~ absolute~ point of view, but pending the school of advaita one aligns to can be looked at differently - shall I dare say disputed. Hence for me to answer with a high level of insight it requires me to go deeper in those points. Examples:

1. Actions are not possible without māy​ā – yet what of that person that is śivatadātmyamāpannā i.e. united with śiva ( pure Being); then there is no māy​ā ( for him/her)
yet actions continue day and night. How to explain this?
2. māy​ā - from a trika point of view is none other than the Supreme’s śakti - if this māy​ā is false does that infer that the Supreme is false? No. It is
His śakti ( specifically a component of svāntantrya śakti, of which we recognize 3 for certain conversations).
3. there are 3 more things for a total of 5 rebuttals to the email – (rebuttal = response, not contentious, or jalpa). Yet these cannot be offered ( in depth) without the wisdom of naiṣkarmyaṣiddhim & māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā which brings the greatest light to this conversation. There are other books that I would like to suggest, yet that takes us down another path, ( albeit a most enlightened one) for now these are the ones. Why ? They are succinct, and have the weight of the realized (sūraḥ).

As previously mentioned

This then is māyā. It is the wave thinking there are only waves, with no ocean underneath it. That the world is only differentiated and fractured. It misses the truth of its own foundation

māyā is not the ‘bad guy’; yet over the years it has become so.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

jopmala
26 July 2017, 08:01 PM
hariḥ om̐
~~~~~~
namasté


Here is my conundrum,
There are so many ideas and knowledge here that one is predicated upon another, and that then causes the conversation to expand. I am not opposed to this, but there are several things you have mentioned that infer an ~ absolute~ point of view, but pending the school of advaita one aligns to can be looked at differently - shall I dare say disputed. Hence for me to answer with a high level of insight it requires me to go deeper in those points. Examples:

1. Actions are not possible without māy​ā – yet what of that person that is śivatadātmyamāpannā i.e. united with śiva ( pure Being); then there is no māy​ā ( for him/her)
yet actions continue day and night. How to explain this?
2. māy​ā - from a trika point of view is none other than the Supreme’s śakti - if this māy​ā is false does that infer that the Supreme is false? No. It is
His śakti ( specifically a component of svāntantrya śakti, of which we recognize 3 for certain conversations).
3. there are 3 more things for a total of 5 rebuttals to the email – (rebuttal = response, not contentious, or jalpa). Yet these cannot be offered ( in depth) without the wisdom of naiṣkarmyaṣiddhim & māṇḍūkyopaniṣatkārikā which brings the greatest light to this conversation. There are other books that I would like to suggest, yet that takes us down another path, ( albeit a most enlightened one) for now these are the ones. Why ? They are succinct, and have the weight of the realized (sūraḥ).

As previously mentioned


māyā is not the ‘bad guy’; yet over the years it has become so.

इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ



Pranam
Yajvanji, its ok you don't want to go deep in thos points. I think it is not wise to mingle different points of view against one point.
Now I want to know who is Shiva. Is Shiva nirguna nirakara Brahman. If jiva is required to unite with Shiva or Brahman that means jiva is not Shiva.
To overcome maya is very difficult on the part of jiva. You have said that maya is Shakti of Brahman therefore no one can get rid of Maya without his will or kripa. May I know what is the significance of will or kripa of nirguna nirakara Brahman.
Maya is his Shakti that is he is shaktiman. If he is shaktiman how can he be nirguna nirakara
At the end I would like to suggest that the whole literature of Advaita school is created to misguide the seeker by projecting false or concealing truth since the wtitters employed Maya in the form of man buddhi or body mind intellect.

Dutta
09 November 2018, 12:51 AM
Namaste

Taittiriya upanishad sloka 1 of chapter I part III ( Bhrigu valli) (translated by swami Gambhirananda)

First part of the verse says that when Bhrigu approached his father Varuna to know about Brahman, Varuna says “ food( annam) ,pranam,the eyes,ear, mind, speech are the aids to the knowledge of Brahman. These are the doors to the realization of Brahman.

Second part says that varuna says ‘ crave to know well that from which all these beings take birth, that by which they live after being born ,that towards which they move and into which they merge. That is brahman’.

Advaitik view says that, liberation from samsara, which is called moksha or mukti, is obtained only through knowledge of identity with Brahman .The moment one gains the knowledge, “I am Brahman”, one discovers one’s true eternal nature.

My question is since the doors to the realization of Brahman i.e. eyes, ear, mind, speech are part of maya which either projects false object ( viksepa shakti) or conceals the original object ( avarana shakti) how can jiva attain knowledge with the help of maya ? will maya not lead to illusion ? can we depend on maya for getting true knowledge ?

Second part of the verse says three important points to indicate what brahman is (i) from which all these beings take birth ,(ii) by which they live after being born, (iii) towards which they move and into which they merge. That is Brahman.

I want to know, is this Brahman nirakar nirvishesh ,nirguna or is this Brahman sagun sakar savishesh ? at least advaitik view will not accept that we move towards and merge into sagun sakar Brahman. Rather advaitik view will accept that Sagun sakar Brahman itself merge into nirgun nirakar brahman . will maya or ignorance bring knowledge ? will dark bring light ?
namaste
as bhagvadgita is being refered here let me understand that you mean to say how a physical entity explains non physical .
find in 2nd ch saying samudram apah pravishanti means rivers entering the ocean . but if i say that ocean and rivers are made for each other you can say not whether rivers make ocean or ocean gives birth to rivers .
so these make an equation which is supposed to be non physical but really works and so is the law of balancing nature which works .
again gita says for yagyashishta ashinah means enjoy only the remainder of the nature so the above equation is balanced with a constant in hand and therefore ashinah only the remainder .
here you can see that river ocean equation works while living or non living entities enjoy the water as well as remainder .
jai sri krsna

jopmala
24 November 2018, 01:52 AM
namaste
as bhagvadgita is being refered here let me understand that you mean to say how a physical entity explains non physical .
find in 2nd ch saying samudram apah pravishanti means rivers entering the ocean . but if i say that ocean and rivers are made for each other you can say not whether rivers make ocean or ocean gives birth to rivers .
so these make an equation which is supposed to be non physical but really works and so is the law of balancing nature which works .
again gita says for yagyashishta ashinah means enjoy only the remainder of the nature so the above equation is balanced with a constant in hand and therefore ashinah only the remainder .
here you can see that river ocean equation works while living or non living entities enjoy the water as well as remainder .
jai sri krsna

Namaste Dutta

What I mean is there in my post itself. Can you explain what is physical and what is non physical?

Ok, I can reiterate my point. We want to realize Brahma and for this purpose we have to employ our body and mind which are product of maya. We know very well that maya mislead us by way of projecting false object ( viksepa shakti) or conceals the original object ( avarna shakti). In such a situation, how can we achieve brahma with the help of maya that is our mind or body. Will not maya take us to her own lap or should we pray to maya instead of brahma for helping to achieve our goal.

Are you comparing maya with physical and brahma with non physical ? which school of thought classifies maya and brahma into physical and non physical ?

In 2 ch the subject matter of the verse is not whether ocean and river made for each other or not. You might have an equation how river water flows into ocean etc but the point here is that saints remains unaffected when desires enter into him like when water flows into the sea, it , though full, remains unruffled. Here there is no mention of river. The point of concern is desires not water. if you try to confuse whether rivers make ocean or ocean gives birth to river, the purpose of comparing desires with water and saints with ocean will become less important which is not desirable at all. So I am not going to mislead anyone. My point is how to get rid of maya to reach to brahma. Should I pray to maya or brahma ?

Dutta
25 November 2018, 09:44 PM
Namaste Dutta

What I mean is there in my post itself. Can you explain what is physical and what is non physical?

Ok, I can reiterate my point. We want to realize Brahma and for this purpose we have to employ our body and mind which are product of maya. We know very well that maya mislead us by way of projecting false object ( viksepa shakti) or conceals the original object ( avarna shakti). In such a situation, how can we achieve brahma with the help of maya that is our mind or body. Will not maya take us to her own lap or should we pray to maya instead of brahma for helping to achieve our goal.

Are you comparing maya with physical and brahma with non physical ? which school of thought classifies maya and brahma into physical and non physical ?

In 2 ch the subject matter of the verse is not whether ocean and river made for each other or not. You might have an equation how river water flows into ocean etc but the point here is that saints remains unaffected when desires enter into him like when water flows into the sea, it , though full, remains unruffled. Here there is no mention of river. The point of concern is desires not water. if you try to confuse whether rivers make ocean or ocean gives birth to river, the purpose of comparing desires with water and saints with ocean will become less important which is not desirable at all. So I am not going to mislead anyone. My point is how to get rid of maya to reach to brahma. Should I pray to maya or brahma ?


namaste jopmala
which brahma or maya ?
uddharet atmana atmanam ..6ch
liberate the soul by controlled mind in human life otherwise ... tan aham krurani naradhman asurim yonim kshipami ..ch 16
here aham is the self soul and neither brahma nor krsna .
again after leaving human here the soul goes to lower yonih and the balance of nature throws to hell later .
jai Sri Krsna