VCindiana's Confusion

[vcindiana]

Namaste Atanu ji.

Now that is a surprise from you! A true Advaitin that you are, I understand your sincere and sympathetic search for the same Advaitic Truth in the Bible as you find in the Hindu scriptures.


The Christian Bible, comprising the books and gospels in the Old and New Testaments, seems to me prima facie, to be a hotchpotch of stories, history, mythology, theology, dogma and contradictions. Whatever way one might interpretet it, the Bible in my view, cannot hold a candle to the plain-spoken, point-blank, unambiguous and loftiest truths proclaimed in the Upanishads and Vedas.

Hindu scriptures are neatly classified into Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas, Agamas and other works with layers of progressive worldliness projected over an Ultimate, Absolute Truth. Hindu Dharma is also neatly classified into four pursuits: dharma, arta, kama, moksha. In the absence of such clarity of thought, philosophy and arrangement, the Bible or the Quran or any other religious scripture for that matter in my view can only be wishfully--not justtifiably--thought to proclaim the same Truth in the same clear manner.


It is good thing you said "in my View". Hope you agree there are different views.

Hinduism cannot have all the truth, it can be different from other religions in its dogma, theology, and philosophy etc but it cannot claim that it has the ultimate truth or whatever. I am not a religious person but I do believe that each one has to find truth on his or her own and that is the truth which can set us free. I do agree fundamental Christians have literally taken the words of Jesus "I am the way, the truth and the life'. I wondered how you interpret this. I think there is a hidden and profound meaning like in many of the scriptures.

[vcindiana]

Namaste Atanu ji.

Advaita as may be interpreted in the Christian scriptures is at best only NON-DUALITY between man and God, not the Advaita of universal oneness of life and consciousness.

Again you compare another religion and try to estabilsh your version of superiority like the fundamental christians do. Fundies love to demean any thing other than their own version of Bible.

[saidevo]

Namaste vcindiana.



Advaita as may be interpreted in the Christian scriptures is at best only NON-DUALITY between man and God, not the Advaita of universal oneness of life and consciousness.




Again you compare another religion and try to estabilsh your version of superiority like the fundamental christians do. Fundies love to demean any thing other than their own version of Bible.


You are under the impression that Advaita is a concept that belongs only to Hinduism because Hinduism first propounded it. It is not so. Advaita is a universal concept that says that there is one Supreme God whose Consciousness or Life lives in and rules every atom of the universe. Thus man, beast, trees and the mountains are all ONE, which is the same God at their innermost.

The discussion here is to what extent this universal truth is highlighted and taught in the Hindu and Christian scriptures, and the superiority (which means depth and universality here) of one scripture over the other solely rests on this point.



I am not a religious person but I do believe that each one has to find truth on his or her own and that is the truth which can set us free.


You have hit the nail on the head! This is what precisely Hinduism exhorts each and every soul to do.



Hinduism cannot have all the truth,...


Truth is only one, ekam sat, as the Rig Veda says. Hinduism is the first religion in the world to have unequivocally proclaimed it. Every religion that proclaims this truth universally has all truths which are included in this one Truth.



I do agree fundamental Christians have literally taken the words of Jesus "I am the way, the truth and the life'. I wondered how you interpret this.


John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

I wonder how you would interpret the second part of this statement of Jesus--"no man cometh unto the Father, but by me"--as anything other than being fundamental?

And here is a statement in 1 John 5 that says only Christians "are of God", everyone else is wicked:

John 5:19
And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.

How can a religion that teaches that all God's creations such as the animals, plants and mountains are only for the use of man and even women are subservient to men and that even among men only the Christians "are of God" be said to teach Advaita?

[vcindiana]

From Jove we have Jew and Jehovah or YhVh.


Hinduism does indeed have the whole Truth, but we should not deny that there is some truth remaining in the Judeo-Christian heritage.

Again, you assert that your religion knows the best, like the fundies.

After all what is truth?

I cannot comprehend a doctrine of truth and morality that is absolute and not relative. Relativism asserts that what is accepted as truth is relative to a person's situation or standpoint, and denies that any standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.</SPAN>
If truth is relative, then absolute right and absolute wrong become doubtful and obscure but it does open the mind for the most amazing , never-ending search and growth. We continuously evolve and become better. All these forums become meaning less if someone asserts that ‘There is only one Absolute truth’

Going back to your religious philosophy, you have your own people with two diverse concepts, one about Dwita and another about Advaita. Even more, someone about V- Dwita. Every one has to find his or her own truth and the truth is the one that gives us the free thinking.

[vcindiana]

Namaste All,

As above, I find a major fundamental difference between Advaita and all others dualistc thoughts. There is no evil or devil in Avaita only Vidya and Avidya, which are vidyaAvidya in Brahman.

Om

Questions: 1. what is the difference between evil and Avidya?

2. Please explain to me then, why many Hindus believe in Dvaita philosophy and worship God/s?

Thank you.

[sarabhanga]

VC

I have NOT claimed that Hinduism knows best, only that Sanatana Dharma knows all Dharmas.

Absolute Truth is unborn and eternal.

And there is NO morality in absolute Truth.

Relative truths are born and will die, and from the perspective of absolute Truth all such petty truths are dissolved ~ just as the individual spokes of a spinning wheel merge when the whole vortex is observed ~ and just as all paths become equal when one is standing at the hub or on the summit.

If you are happy with morality based on relative truths, then that is fine for you in your relative and moralistic world; but please don’t expect this to have bearing on the ultimate nature of absolute Truth.

And by all means continue your never-ending search ~ most Hindus are satisfied that they are already blessed with many well-proven paths to absolute God-head.



All these forums become meaning less if someone asserts that ‘There is only one Absolute truth’

Well, if you consider that all monistic religion, which asserts that there is only one absolute Truth (i.e. only one God), is meaningless, then there is very little scope for agreement. Why are you bothering to post messages on a forum principally intended for the discussion of monistic religion?

I have no interest in such pointless debate with internet trolls.

[atanu]

Questions: 1. what is the difference between evil and Avidya?

2. Please explain to me then, why many Hindus believe in Dvaita philosophy and worship God/s?

Thank you.

Namskar VC,

If you cannot differentiate between Evil and Ignorance, then how will you transcend evil?

Evil is not fundamental, since only vidyaAvidya, sprouting from the ONE substratum, which is God, is fundamental. From the ignorance of Ego (the devil), evil takes birth.

There is no problem in Dvaita or Christian thought except that the emphasis that God who is ONE and All, cannot have anything to do with evil, is missing. But knowing that also is part of the path.

Om

[Madhavan]

It is good thing you said "in my View". Hope you agree there are different views.

Hinduism cannot have all the truth, it can be different from other religions in its dogma, theology, and philosophy etc but it cannot claim that it has the ultimate truth or whatever. I am not a religious person but I do believe that each one has to find truth on his or her own and that is the truth which can set us free. I do agree fundamental Christians have literally taken the words of Jesus "I am the way, the truth and the life'. I wondered how you interpret this. I think there is a hidden and profound meaning like in many of the scriptures.

As I have remarked somewhere else, that there is either one monistic faith or one of the several dualistic faiths. Either one of these is the truth. If truth is dualism, which one? Is it Christianity, Islam or some vedic tradition?

If you really think there is some Absolute truth, it must be monistic. For the rest, there is even no way to know which one and you can keep fighting.

If you claim your dualistic Christianity as Absolute Truth you have automatically called all other religions as false. The same problem does not exist in monsim, which can really accomodate everything else as "not the Absolute truth" but still true from the phenomenal perspective.

[vcindiana]

As I have remarked somewhere else, that there is either one monistic faith or one of the several dualistic faiths. Either one of these is the truth. If truth is dualism, which one? Is it Christianity, Islam or some vedic tradition?

If you really think there is some Absolute truth, it must be monistic. For the rest, there is even no way to know which one and you can keep fighting.

If you claim your dualistic Christianity as Absolute Truth you have automatically called all other religions as false. The same problem does not exist in monsim, which can really accomodate everything else as "not the Absolute truth" but still true from the phenomenal perspective.


Let me please make it clear that I am not a Christian, nor I belong to any other religion.

I am confused with your explanation.
Are there two truths, one dualistic and another nondualistic? What is Hinduism ? How can it include equally opposing philosophy? If there are two truths then there is no such thing as one absolute truth. Am I wrong in my thinking?

[atanu]

[left]


If there are two truths then there is no such thing as one absolute truth. Am I wrong in my thinking?

The conflicting thoughts are not the truths. The one who has the thoughts rests upon the truth.

Om

[Znanna]

Namaste,

The notion of "absolute truth" is somewhat a contradiction in terms, IMO.

Truth cannot be knowm, only experienced, I think .. the notion of "knowing" interprets what is into what is not! So, I propose that "absolute truth" is an abject fallacy, that "truth" if perceived is false, and that only that which is imperceptible may be true :)



ZN
/twisted like DNA

[saidevo]

Namaste vcindiana.



Are there two truths, one dualistic and another nondualistic? What is Hinduism ? How can it include equally opposing philosophy? If there are two truths then there is no such thing as one absolute truth. Am I wrong in my thinking?


Yes, there are two truths, one dualistic (which is relative, conditional and not eternal) and another nondualistic (which is absolute and eternal).

brahma satyam jagan mitya as Sankara said. The absolute truth is Brahman; all the other perceptions as relative truths are only projections over that Brahman. Once there is creation, these two kinds of the one truth need to be accommodated, because creation is nothing but eternal projection of the universe on the substratum that is Brahman. The objects thus projected are matter immanent with the spirit of Brahman, which is pure energy. And matter, ultimately, as Sarabhanga has pointed out, is a vibrating pattern composed of photons, which is constantly changing, so the related truths are not the reality they seem to be at the moment.

Ultimately, it is a case of perception and experience. We as normal humans can only perceive the relative truths which are are more readily seen, known, felt and experienced than the absolute truth that lurks behind them. And this constitutes the hurdle in Self-Realization.

Let us try an analogy: As I type this message, I look at my computer screen. What do I see on the screen as I go about running various text and graphics programs? I see letters of text and images, listen to the music and watch a video on the screen. They are real because everyone sees, knows and experiences it the same way. This is the objective reality of the things in the world.

But then I know that everything that appears on the computer screen--the text, image and video--are all nothing but glowing pixels of phosphor hit by electrons from three electron guns from behind.

So what is the reality here, the electrons that weave the vibrational patterns or the patterns themselves? And what is behind those electrons and other particles of matter that form the world and change it every monent? What is the big picture of it all?

Again, you can see the electron guns but not the electrons themselves. How do you know they are there? Because the scientists tell you and you choose to believe it. Thus, the deeper truths can only be known by the mind and intellect, not sensed by the five human senses.

Scientists are unable to agree within themselves on the big picture. Their speculations are always changing and erroneous because they limit their researches to physical means. Whereas the yogis as spiritual scientists see and realize the big picture in their deepest meditation and tell us that it is nothing but the life and consciousness of Brahman that lurks behind all things in this universe.

Is this truth verifiable like the scientific truths? There is intense irony in this question. Not everyone verifies the truths presented by the scientists. We simply believe them as we see their action in a broad way and we don't bother to verify because the process is sophisticated and everyone can't afford it.

The irony is that the spiritual truths and the absolute truth behind are also verifiable and every human being is endowed with the apparatus needed for the purpose, with constant practice it is not as difficult for the common man as taking up a scientific research (that requires textbook knowledge of the subject), yet most of us neither believe what the spiritual scientists say nor take the initiative to go about realizing the truths, one by one, ourselves. Yet the truths do have their action in the external and internal worlds because they are driven by the theory of cause and effect, which is the universal law of karma. When we experience some the effects ourselves we don't still realize that we have been the cause of the good and bad that happen to us.

The path to Self-Realization lies in realizing and rejecting these relative, dualistic truths as 'neti neti' (not me, not me) so we can get to their root and find the absolute truth. It can be done by any human being because everyone of us has the internal apparatus needed. Since the level of spiritual inclination differs among humans, Hinduism has provided three paths of karma, bhakti and jnana yogas.

The one question that leads to Self-Realization is 'Who am I?'. The answer lies within ourselves and each one of us has to search and realize it individually. It is the ultimate way to liberation.

[Madhavan]

Namaste,

The notion of "absolute truth" is somewhat a contradiction in terms, IMO.

Truth cannot be knowm, only experienced, I think .. the notion of "knowing" interprets what is into what is not! So, I propose that "absolute truth" is an abject fallacy, that "truth" if perceived is false, and that only that which is imperceptible may be true :)



ZN
/twisted like DNA

'Truth cannot be known but only experienced' - is not a vedantic perspective because that makes the scriptures obsolete. Absolute Truth is defined as the one that does not change under any circumstance. Something that does not undergo change when viewed from the past, present and future is said to be the Absolute truth - this is Brahman. This is where vedantins have objections with respect to Buddha Dharma where there is nothing such as an Absolute unchanging substratum on which the changing reality depends on. Similarly religions depending on specific people, avatars, places and time are not Absolute truth because it assumes that truth can be 'localized'.

[sarabhanga]

Are there two truths, one dualistic and another nondualistic? What is Hinduism ? How can it include equally opposing philosophy? If there are two truths then there is no such thing as one absolute truth. Am I wrong in my thinking?



How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?


http://in.geocities.com/sarabhanga/sharabha.jpg

[vcindiana]

The path to Self-Realization lies in realizing and rejecting these relative, dualistic truths as 'neti neti' (not me, not me) so we can get to their root and find the absolute truth. It can be done by any human being because everyone of us has the internal apparatus needed. Since the level of spiritual inclination differs among humans, Hinduism has provided three paths of karma, bhakti and jnana yogas.



Thank you for your explanation. I wonder what pure dualistic people say about your perception?

[vcindiana]

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?





Did dualistic guy like Madwacharya agree what Sankara said?, Please do not take me wrong, I have no idea about this duality and nonduality stuffs.

[Madhavan]

Thank you for your explanation. I wonder what pure dualistic people say about your perception?

All people including advaitins are blind beleivers in what they beleive eh?;)

Yeah, dualists reject the idea of 'neti neti' and interpret these passages entirely differently. No one can say with certainty who is correct though one could subscribe to one particular faith. But all Hindu traditions agree that knowing oneself, one knows the truth(God). People may beleive whatever they what, but there is ultimately only one way - know who you are....are you this body or mind or something else? Without knowing that it is futile to argue. The key is Yoga, without which we do not transcend ordinary spheres of experience. It is in yoga and samAdhi that one can be sure what scripture is really talking about.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

All people including advaitins are blind believers in what they believe eh?;)

Namaste Madhavan,

there are 2 ways of viewing this...

Number 1
The Upanishads simply say sa kratum kurvita or, ‘he should make the resolve’. This is said after the rishi states “all is Brahman” – pointing to the notion of one making the ‘resolve’ to enjoy this state.

Yet the word ‘kratu’ in English i.e. resolve , is less then adequate to describe what the rishi is trying to instruct/communicate. So we look to Adi Shankara for his words, as ‘ a firm will with a fixed idea and sense of certainty that this is so, not otherwise’ . This is summed up in one sanskrit word called Adhyavasaya or conviction or affirmation.

So a 'blind beliver' as you mention could be one that made the resolve of Brahman, satyam , in fact, and none other. And why do they (me) believe this to be true? Because many a sadhu stand on the shoulders of those that have realized this Being - so confidence is strong to be a 'blind beliver' as to make the resolve.


Number 2
A blind believer with no rudder , like in a boat.... goes from shore to shore, with no bearings, no map. Then any stop he or she makes is good enough as there was never a course or direction given. This blind believer is cast to the wind , and cannot explain their direction or even what they are choosing to do.


I choose Number 1.

pranams,

[Madhavan]

I was not referring to this kind of 'blind faith', but only to the blind faith that vc was referring to...

Ask any religeous person in the world what he thinks of his beleifs - he will say that his is the absolute truth { this includes advaitins is what I intended}. When asked for reason , he will either produce some books, and some quotes with his interpretations for them as proof. It will often turn out that the same books and same quotes are used by others to justify their own position which are different from you.

Now, you mentioned about 'Brahman is sarvam' as a proof of your beleifs. If such were really the case and the statement can be taken for granted on its own, then how is it that people like Madhavan and vajvan are in ignorance of this truth? So it stands to reason that such statements are certainly capable of being interpreted in alternate ways.

For eg, sarvam also means pUrNa or complete, or perfect: so that becomes 'Brahman is perfect or full' ( has got nothing to do with advaita in this interp) which can be eastablished from other parts of the sruti. Another way to look at it is like someone saying 'Bill Gates is all of Microsoft' - which means that he is all in all - the controller. Likewise, many interpretations are possible for all srutis and taking one over the other ( in the absence of jnAna) is a predilection - I was referring to this as 'blind faith'.

The kind of 'blind faith' you have mentioned is a must for everybody. There is no question for anyone to accept one and all beleifs and simultaneously practise all religions. Looking for the truth ultimately is like really like going from one shore to another only until you arrive at the destination. (Chandogya 6.14) Or is it really so? It seems only vedas accept this 'search' option, some other religions without the concept of reincarnations dont seem to agree.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

I was not referring to this kind of 'blind faith', but only to the blind faith that vc was referring to...


Namaste Madhavan,
My post was one of perspective, not of a challange... a different view, that is all.
your points make sense.


pranams,

[Madhavan]

Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste Madhavan,
My post was one of perspective, not of a challange... a different view, that is all.
your points make sense.


pranams,

I understood that. :)

[atanu]

---
---Ask any religeous person in the world what he thinks of his beleifs - he will say that his is the absolute truth { this includes advaitins is what I intended}. ------ It will often turn out that the same books and same quotes are used by others to justify their own position which are different from you.
----

Namskar Madhavan,

You are very correct. Concepts are not the absolute truths -- they are always subject to alternate interpretations. That is what I also feel and I strongly support you in this.

But then when you go beneath. Go to the mind, go to the intellect, go to the "i" that says "i believe so", and look for the source of that "i". What happens? Involution to the deepest being, increases the commonalities. And when the substratum of silence is seen -- there remains ----?

I will put it in another way, which has been oft repeated (and you might have encountered it already). Mandukya Upanishad says the Self is advaitaatama and it must be known. I see a very tricky beauty in it. How will one know both advaita and atma together? Can one ever know IT as another?

And this brings me to what an advaitin like Ramana Maharshi says: The boundaries are true since the consciousness is true. The differences are true since the consciousness is true. The Self Realized sees all differences and all spendours within ONE consciousness as ONE consciousness.

All this is not for you or Yajvan Ji, since you are already beyond this. I just record these, since I have some time and may be VC may find something of interest?


Does the Bible contain some passage that requires/directs a seeker to know advaitaatma?

Om

[vcindiana]

Namskar Madhavan,

You are very correct. Concepts are not the absolute truths -- they are always subject to alternate interpretations. That is what I also feel and I strongly support you in this.

But then when you go beneath. Go to the mind, go to the intellect, go to the "i" that says "i believe so", and look for the source of that "i". What happens? Involution to the deepest being, increases the commonalities. And when the substratum of silence is seen -- there remains ----?

I will put it in another way, which has been oft repeated (and you might have encountered it already). Mandukya Upanishad says the Self is advaitaatama and it must be known. I see a very tricky beauty in it. How will one know both advaita and atma together? Can one ever know IT as another?

And this brings me to what an advaitin like Ramana Maharshi says: The boundaries are true since the consciousness is true. The differences are true since the consciousness is true. The Self Realized sees all differences and all spendours within ONE consciousness as ONE consciousness.

All this is not for you or Yajvan Ji, since you are already beyond this. I just record these, since I have some time and may be VC may find something of interest?


Does the Bible contain some passage that requires/directs a seeker to know advaitaatma?

Om

Thank you, people. As I understand as human beings including Ramana Maharishi or some dualistic religious person there is no end in finding Truth. Best thing we can do is to build a religion or an idea or a concept. As you can see in these discussions each one has his own idea which can be very contradictory to other's idea. I do not think there is any thing wrong with that. Once human beings come to know the so called Absolute truth then there is no Growth? There is no movement and without movement what is life then?
Question is does it matter whether we need to have dualistic or non dualistic thinking?

[saidevo]

Namaste vcindiana.



Once human beings come to know the so called Absolute truth then there is no Growth? There is no movement and without movement what is life then?


At the level of the Absolute Truth, it is said, that there is pure movement of the Consciousness itself. This is not the outward movement in space and time that we see in manifest reality, but the kind of movement we experience in deep sleep, which brings peace and the knowledge 'I slept well.' The Absolute Truth is pure Existence (sat), Consciousness (chit), Bliss (Ananda), the gurus tells us. How can there be Ananda without inner movement?



Question is does it matter whether we need to have dualistic or non dualistic thinking?


I would say that we need to have dualistic thinking with an idea of non-dualistism ever behind it. You have a personal notion of yourself which is always true and real for you, whatever external forms you take and roles you play. Ultimately, only you know who you really are.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~


I would say that we need to have dualistic thinking with an idea of non-dualistism ever behind it. You have a personal notion of yourself which is always true and real for you, whatever external forms you take and roles you play. Ultimately, only you know who you really are.

Namste Saidevo,
this is a very good point. We have no other choice while grounded in avidya... that is of duality. We can have the notion of non-dual and study it as this evolves our appreciation of Being and assists in our progress.

IMHO and observations we as humans tend to look for the answer in one package. Yet the answer comes in different approaches and visions of the truth (satyam). This I believe is why the rishis and munis and sages gave us the 6 systems of Indian philosophy. So we can look at Reality from 6 different perspectives. They [ the principles ]work with each other vs. challange each other. Nothing beats comparing and contrasting when learning.

And like good humans we tend to say or pick one philosophy over the other and suggest its superiority. Yet , in essence, they have been designed to move ones thinking and experience closer to the truth (satyam) the right (ritam) and the vast (brhat). This unfolds our full potential as humans and brings alignment with the Universal Self.

So this duality , over time , erodes its hold on us, with the infusion of knowledge. Pure knowledge = pure consciousness and hence duality is gone in an instant in this state; as knowledge wins over avidya each time.

just a thought...
pranams

[atanu]

Thank you, people. As I understand as human beings including Ramana Maharishi or some dualistic religious person there is no end in finding Truth. Best thing we can do is to build a religion or an idea or a concept. As you can see in these discussions each one has his own idea which can be very contradictory to other's idea. I do not think there is any thing wrong with that. Once human beings come to know the so called Absolute truth then there is no Growth? There is no movement and without movement what is life then?
Question is does it matter whether we need to have dualistic or non dualistic thinking?

Namaste VC

The question is not whether we need to have dualistic or non dualistic thinking. The question you must ask yourself is what motivates you one way or another?

I find your ideas fantastic. Ramana Maharshi indeed stopped so-called growing when He was 17-18. After that He neither grew nor diminished. He was full; radiating peace. There are records to show that some people who approached Him with sarcasm (a few missionaries), did not benefit from the peace. But all others did benefit and are still benefitting.

There is an end in finding the truth when inwards search is made. There is no end of delusion when one goes after objects or concepts (which I think you are equating with growth). Regarding growth being stalled on finding the truth, whose growth you are talking about? If it is yours then what is your objective of growth?

Why do you think that the growth would have to stop? If that was true then how all this growth came about from the absolute God? There should have been no growth since I suppose God must be absolute?

Om

[sarabhanga]

Namaste VC,

I support the comments of Yajvan and Atanu.

In Dvaita there is no end in seeking the ultimate Truth, but in Advaita the Truth is already found!

Dvaitins are always on the move, progressing towards an unattainable goal (ultimate satisfaction and final rest in perfect Unity of Self ~ i.e. Advaita). And so, societies with a generally dualistic understanding have always been striving for perceived progress, development, and expansion.

On the other hand, a society or culture that is governed by an essentially monistic view will generally have a much more relaxed attitude progress and growth, which are subtle interior matters requiring no particular effort or action.

Indeed, Advaita and Dvaita are quite divergent paths, with the latter leading to endless conflict and suffering and environmental destruction, and the former leading only to eternal blissful existence and peace, in complete harmony with nature and ultimate reality.

The perfection of Advaita is unborn and immortal, whereas Dvaita is born of division and fatally flawed!

[vcindiana]

Namaste VC,

I support the comments of Yajvan and Atanu.

In Dvaita there is no end in seeking the ultimate Truth, but in Advaita the Truth is already found!

Indeed, Advaita and Dvaita are quite divergent paths, with the latter leading to endless conflict and suffering and environmental destruction, and the former leading only to eternal blissful existence and peace, in complete harmony with nature and ultimate reality.

The perfection of Advaita is unborn and immortal, whereas Dvaita is born of division and fatally flawed!

Thank you.

So, you think dualistic people like madwacharya were wrong ?

Where do rituals and idol worshipping stand in Advaitic philosophy?

[atanu]

Thank you.

So, you think dualistic people like madwacharya were wrong ?

Where do rituals and idol worshipping stand in Advaitic philosophy?

VC,

Your questions are always tainted. Why are you asking about Madhavacharya? Ask only about your view.

And the post is about message of Bible. If you can contribute something please do so, instead of trying to find out who among the Hindu gurus is faulty.

Om

[vcindiana]

VC,

Your questions are always tainted. Why are you asking about Madhavacharya? Ask only about your view.

And the post is about message of Bible. If you can contribute something please do so, instead of trying to find out who among the Hindu gurus is faulty.

Om

I am sorry u feel that way.

Previous post by SG said "Dvaitins are always on the move, progressing .........have always been striving for perceived progress, development, and expansion.
Indeed, Advaita and Dvaita are quite divergent paths, with the latter leading to endless conflict and suffering and environmental destruction, and the former leading only to eternal blissful existence and peace, in complete harmony with nature and ultimate reality."

I am just trying to understand , I am not judging any of you, I do not have any fixed idea or concept.

[sarabhanga]

VC

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?

When you have made some attempt to answer this question, the answers to all of your questions on the nature of dvaita and advaita should be clear.

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?

What is your opinion, and why are other opinions wrong?

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?

So far you have only responded with “I have no idea about this duality and nonduality stuffs”.

Well, can you count up to two? And do you know the difference between one and two? Do you consider that God is eternally one, or is God eternally two? If two is the lowest common denominator, then does one not even exist? Or, if one is the fundamental unit, then how does two come about? Do one and two coexist for eternity? And if so, surely there must actually be three eternal verities!?

Where should we draw the line? Or does any fixed line even exist? And if there are two, divided by an eternal line, then the line itself becomes part of the equation!

The first step in “trying to understand” would be to consider:

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?

But if you make no effort, this conversation will never progress.

Those who see division are then prone to deciding which side is highest and which is lowest, which is right or correct and which is left or sinister ~ and all of these judgments depend entirely upon one’s own perspective, so there will never be peace among the dueling dualists until one side has completely extinguished the other and their desired unity is superficially attained (although in truth this oneness will be only one half).

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?

[vcindiana]

VC

How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?

When you have made some attempt to answer this question, the answers to all of your questions on the nature of dvaita and advaita should be clear.




Perhaps this whole topic should come on a new thread.

I am sorry; my little brain did not get it !!. It would be nice if you try to come down from your super high "Conscious" level to my kindergarten level and explain your perspective.

I did not get your logic about the conjoined twins. I see each one as a separate individual with its own way of thinking. I am almost sure each one has its own unique fingerprint.

[atanu]

Perhaps this whole topic should come on a new thread.

----
I am almost sure each one has its own unique fingerprint.


Namaste,

If you are sure then you must be having some proof. Tell us about the proof.

Where is the individuality signature residing. The full body with all its parts therein, including brain, genes, nerves all will turn to dust. Where does the individuality go then?

If you can explain to us the creation/maintenance/destruction of the individuality with adequate evidence, then at least I am open to change my views.

Om

[saidevo]

Namaste Atanu.

[QUOTE=atanu;15426]
If you are sure then you must be having some proof. Tell us about the proof.

Where is the individuality signature residing. The full body with all its parts therein, including brain, genes, nerves all will turn to dust. Where does the individuality go then?

If you can explain to us the creation/maintenance/destruction of the individuality with adequate evidence, then at least I am open to change my views.
/QUOTE]

Speaking of Individuality (please correct me where I go wrong), the Atman is identical to Brahman with or without Avidya, yet with Avidya the Atman is an Individual Entity in manifest creation until its ultimate liberation. In between rebirths the Atmic individuality is preserved in the Sutratma with its persistent karmic seeds. At Pralaya the Sutratmas reside inside Brahman, perhaps as the equivalent of human thoughts, ready to be put into action at the next creation.

Whether it is Maya or Avidya, this status of duality and multiplicity is preserved for almost all souls, except for such of them as having attained Mukti. In this scenario, do we have any explanation in Advaita as to the how the liberated souls reside at all times inside Brahman and how they, if at all, express themselves?

[satay]

Admin Note
Namaskar Vcindiana,
You have successfully trolled yet another thread with your irrelevant blabber that had nothing to do with the original topic of 'advaitic messages in the bible'. So, therefore, I had no choice but to move the irrelevant posts to this canteen forum and issue you a warning.

Why is it so hard for you to comprehend the simple rule that 'trolling discussions is against the rules of HDF.' (rhetoric question, please do not answer, I already know why)

Why do you dwell in HDFpuri? What is your purpose here? Please try to be sincere with yourself. Please, I beg you...

[atanu]

Namaste Atanu.

-----
Speaking of Individuality (please correct me where I go wrong), the Atman is identical to Brahman with or without Avidya, yet with Avidya the Atman is an Individual Entity in manifest creation until its ultimate liberation. In between rebirths the Atmic individuality is preserved in the Sutratma with its persistent karmic seeds. ---

Namaste Saidevoji,

But the question remains "Whose karmic seed?" If all these have root in one atma or Lord, then karma goes and ultimately attaches with Lord, who has but no such thing.

Ramana and our scriptures such as Yoga Vasishta, Tripura Rahasya, Ashtavakra Gita and others teach us to enquire and enquire: Whos is this individual. Whence he is? Whence the karma?

Shri Krishna has very clearly said "Arjuna know that you are not the doer".

The enquiry is aided by upanishadic shrutis that it is atman alone who experiences himself in different stations.

On persistent enquiry, the karmas and the notion of individuality is found to be some conditioning, the very basis of which is "I am this body" notion. Since the body cannot be I, since a dead body does not say "I", this notion is very easily broken with persistent enquiry of "Who Am I?"

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Namaste Atanu.

---- In this scenario, do we have any explanation in Advaita as to the how the liberated souls reside at all times inside Brahman and how they, if at all, express themselves?

Namaste,

Ishwara is known as sarvasya yoni and the analogy is of a 'spider sreading out its web and taking it back' or 'sparks from a great fire ball'.

But all together these must reside in consciousness or these will not be known. Pure consciosness that the Self must be the container of these seeds.


Om

[vcindiana]

Namaste,

If you are sure then you must be having some proof. Tell us about the proof.

Om

For your info: Yes, No two fingerprints have ever been found identical in many billions of human and automated computer comparisons. Fingerprints are the very basis for criminal history foundation at every police agency.Even identical twins do not have the same fingerprints.
(Ref:Wikipedia about fingerprints ) I am not making this.


Your Quote "The full body with all its parts therein, including brain, genes, nerves all will turn to dust. Where does the individuality go then?"

I did not understand you. What is this got to do with your explanation about conjoined twins ?


Your quote "If you can explain to us the creation/maintenance/destruction of the individuality with adequate evidence, then at least I am open to change my views"

I never claimed that I have the answer. But you claim you have the answer in a conjoined twins, that I cannot understand.

[vcindiana]

Admin Note
Namaskar Vcindiana,
You have successfully trolled yet another thread with your irrelevant blabber that had nothing to do with the original topic of 'advaitic messages in the bible'. So, therefore, I had no choice but to move the irrelevant posts to this canteen forum and issue you a warning.



As you realize some threads do go into topics of different things but somehow these may be connected to each other.
I did indicate about this in my last post before you sent me a threatening mail. I do not understand why other 'learned' people did keep answering my deviated posts.

I am not surprised that you have found me as an "odd ball". It is OK.


Your quote "What is your purpose here? Please try to be sincere with yourself. Please, I beg you..."

I already mentioned to you, I do not claim to belong to any religion, I was born to a "high caste" Hindu family, I am very familiar with temples, rituals, customs, laws etc. I do love my family but personally I find these repulsive and add nothing to my life.
Coming to your forum I am learning about Advaita and dualistic thoughts. But I am surprised some of your clan including yourself are becoming hostile towards me. Please let me know where I personally attacked or offended any of you.

I believe that God is too big that one’s philosophy can explain everything in this world.

If you find me less worthy of your Consciousness, just kick me out.It is OK.
God does accept me the way I am.

[satay]

Namaste vcIndiana,



I am not surprised that you have found me as an "odd ball". It is OK.

HDF has seen many odd balls. We only ask the members to respect other members and follow the very simple rules neatly listed under the FAQ section. Any ‘ball’ be it odd or not is redirected out of HDF if forums rules keep getting ignored after repeated requests and warnings.

You will be redirected out HDF as well if you keep breaking the forum rules and keep ignoring the warnings. This is not a threat; this is just the way things are in HDFpuri. We do try to keep it clean and throw out the garbage.



Coming to your forum I am learning about Advaita and dualistic thoughts.

As long as you are learning and not breaking forum rules we are pleased to have you here.

I for one couldn’t care less if temples, priests, gurus, God or any other such things make you repulsive. :cool1:



But I am surprised some of your clan including yourself are becoming hostile towards me. Please let me know where I personally attacked or offended any of you.


Hmm…first, I do not have a ‘clan’. Secondly, I don’t see who is becoming hostile towards you. In fact, others have only used their best judgments in answering your blabber that had nothing to do with the original posts of many threads. And I have only tolerated more than once your derailing of nice threads.

I did not threaten you. I gave you a warning which I am posting here so that you can read it again. Please, this time try to comprehend it, read it slowly if you have to…



Dear vcindiana,

You have received a warning at Hindu Dharma Forums.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=15419 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=15419#post15419)

Reason:
-------
Breaking Forum Rules

Please do not troll discussion threads otherwise I will no choice but you redirect you out of HDF.
-------

Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum's rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

All the best,
Hindu Dharma Forums
__________________
satay




I believe that God is too big that one’s philosophy can explain everything in this world.


How is this relevant to me requesting you repeatedly to follow the forum rules?:dunno:



If you find me less worthy of your Consciousness, just kick me out.It is OK.
God does accept me the way I am.


I am unable to understand what you are saying here and in what context because I don’t know what God you are talking about.:doh:

Please I beg you again to follow the forum rules like the rest of the members do and not derail any threads. Okay vcindiana?

Best Wishes,

[Madhavan]

Whether it is Maya or Avidya, this status of duality and multiplicity is preserved for almost all souls, except for such of them as having attained Mukti. In this scenario, do we have any explanation in Advaita as to the how the liberated souls reside at all times inside Brahman and how they, if at all, express themselves?

Namaste Sai,
There is only liberated soul in advaita, i.e Brahman. It is not a right concept that liberated souls reside inside the brahman. Individuality being completely lost, how can the liberated 'soul' reside inside the brahman?

[saidevo]

I think we should accept vcindiana's explanation that it is not his intention to troll the thread. He has a point that his digressions are answered.

vcindiana seems to have taken the literal/physical meaning of Sarabhanga's question:

"How many individuals are there in an identical conjoined twin? And what is an individual?"

This is perhaps the reason he is thinking on the lines of fingerprints that establish unique physical identifies. Unique identifies at the Atmic level are also established by the Sutratmas for non-liberated souls, and therefore perennial duality does exist in creation which is subject to the cycle of time.

VCIndiana, I think you can ponder over Sarabhanga's question (which is metaphysical) thus:

Number one (1) is the first primary number that is unique. In all other numbers, this number one is immanent as a substratum. In other words you cannot make any other number without the number one being part of it.

Put it another way: any other number is nothing more than a collection of the number one. Thus the number two (2) is nothing more than two ones and so on. It is just that the number two appears different in writing and thinking while in actuality it is a collection of ones.

Another interesting point: If the number 2 is made of two ones, which is the whole and which is the part? If you say 2 is the whole and 1 is its part, what about 3,4 and other numbers? You might say that Infinity is the largest of all the numbers, but this Infinity again has Unity (the number one) as its substratum.

Thus, superficially, number one appears to be part of number two. In Reality, however, only the other numbers are part of the number One (unity) because they are nothing without the Unity.

What goes for the numbers, goes for the universe and its beings. Two people, even if they are formed as conjoined twins and are individual in their own way with distinct fingerprints, etc., at the ultimate Atmic level there is unity among them. This unity is the one God Brahman and the individuals are just His different appearances.

Thus, in any duality and multiplicity, there is inherent unity. The many are just multiple appearances of the one. To be more precise, it is the one that appears as the many. Any individuality in the many are conditional and temporary, and dissolve into the underlying unity ultimately.

[vcindiana]

I think we should accept vcindiana's explanation that it is not his intention to troll the thread. He has a point that his digressions are answered.

.

Thank you very much for your understanding.

[vcindiana]

Namaste vcIndiana,


HDF has seen many odd balls. We only ask the members to respect other members and follow the very simple rules neatly listed under the FAQ section. Any ‘ball’ be it odd or not is redirected out of HDF if forums rules keep getting ignored after repeated requests and warnings.

Please I beg you again to follow the forum rules like the rest of the members do and not derail any threads. Okay vcindiana?

Best Wishes,

Thank you. Hope you read the post by Mr Saidevo. As I said before let your conscience be the judge.

Hey, Thank you so much for giving me my own discussion thread. I like the title VCI's CONFUSION.

On a lighter side yes, I do troll. One of my hobbies is to fish. If you are interested in fishing let me know, I can almost guarantee a great time, we can go fishing together.
Love you.http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[atanu]

For your info: Yes, No two fingerprints have ever been found identical in many billions of human and automated computer comparisons. -------

I never claimed that I have the answer. But you claim you have the answer in a conjoined twins, that I cannot understand.

Namaste VC,


First, My two fingers have different fingerprints -- so they are two permanently different individuals? First try to understand what Advaita considers as the truth.

Second, the conjoined twin example is not mine.

Om Namah Shivaya

[vcindiana]

Namaste VC,


First, My two fingers have different fingerprints -- so they are two permanently different individuals? First try to understand what Advaita considers as the truth.

Second, the conjoined twin example is not mine.

Om Namah Shivaya

Thank you, it is not my intent to argue with you. My only point is that each individual has a distinct character or feature.

Now coming back to Advaita philosophy this is what I found " Brahman (the Absolute) is alone real; this world is unreal; and the Jiva or the individual soul is non-different from Brahman." ( Sivananda)

Does that mean Brahman, God, Individual soul are all the same ? If this is a single entity then there is only one soul regardless of so many living creatures in this world? Or do you say there is a soul that is split into billions of parts?
Advaita claims God is real, Is Brahman a God? What is his purpose? If He is so real and understanding what is his explanation in creating humans in flesh with wicked? minds.
Please do not mistake me that I am here to bash any philosophy. I love to remain confused; it is a continuous learning and growing process for me.

[atanu]

--Now coming back to Advaita philosophy this is what I found " Brahman (the Absolute) is alone real; this world is unreal; and the Jiva or the individual soul is non-different from Brahman." ( Sivananda)

Does that mean Brahman, God, Individual soul are all the same ? If this is a single entity then there is only one soul regardless of so many living creatures in this world? Or do you say there is a soul that is split into billions of parts?
Advaita claims God is real, Is Brahman a God? What is his purpose? If He is so real and understanding what is his explanation in creating humans in flesh with wicked? minds.
Please do not mistake me that I am here to bash any philosophy. I love to remain confused; it is a continuous learning and growing process for me.

Namaste,

What do you understand by the statement "I am a soul"?

Different people understand it differently. Even a single individual will understand it differently at different times. Have you not seen the behavioural changes in individuals with change of status? For example, a worker on assuming a managerial position starts saying I was a worker but now I am a manager. And many such things.

Advaita queries the nature of I and reaches the conclusion, independent of scripture, that the Self is uncuttable, since it is awareness and not material.

Yes, Brahman is God, Jiva, and the world. The so-called wicked mind -- as per Advaita, is nothing but this ignorance of severally divided Self.

There is s question in Rig Veda: Ka? Who? Who am I? Rig Veda teaches that one who enquires so is able to dispel the ignorance.

If you are not sarcastic, then perhaps we may proceed slowly for mutual benefit.

Om

[vcindiana]

Namaste,

What do you understand by the statement "I am a soul"?

Different people understand it differently. Even a single individual will understand it differently at different times.
Om

Thank you.

If you permit me let me say how I understand soul. I do not know what happens to me after I die and neither does anyone else. But I do know there is something called soul. My physical body does change, gain or lose weight, change my hair style etc..but I will be still the same person. The real me is in fact not physical- my values, my memories, my habits, my personality etc.. And the combination of such qualities makes every one of us personal and unique as our fingerprints. This non physical part may be called personality or spirit or soul. Body can die but my personality or soul cannot die.
This "soul” thing as explained as nonphysical, is beyond the 3 dimensional imagination of a human being, but practically speaking it continues to reverberate. Often I think about my deceased parents, I can feel their presence, I cannot forget their act of love, they may not be present physically but I can still feel their unique personalities, warmth, affection and love. Words of comfort, gesture of caring such as wiping some one's tear or holding some one's hand and deeds of charity do not disappear in to thin air after they are done. I know religions talk about Eternity, Heaven and hell but these are beyond my understanding.

Does it really matter whether I understand Advaita or dwaita philosophies? I do not like to be blunt about these things but please let me know how do these differing philosphies help me in my day to day life ?

[Nuno Matos]

Namaste VCindiana

I am not an expert on Hindu thinking but for as much i have understood already and from my personnel experience, Dvaita as made me a fighter and advaita brings me a lot of peace and the end of Dvaita.

Heaven is a place were nothing ever happens and never the less is a place. Hell is the place were reality can be grabbed.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste VCindiana

I am not an expert on Hindu thinking but for as much i have understood already and from my personnel experience, Dvaita as made me a fighter and advaita brings me a lot of peace and the end of Dvaita.

Heaven is a place were nothing ever happens and never the less is a place. Hell is the place were reality can be grabbed.

Namaste Nuno,
Brilliant observation...

Advaita says all is right with the world.

pranams,

[atanu]

Thank you.

-------but I will be still the same person. The real me is in fact not physical- my values, my memories, my habits, my personality etc.. And the combination of such qualities makes every one of us personal and unique as our fingerprints. This non physical part may be called personality or spirit or soul. Body can die but my personality or soul cannot die.
-----
Does it really matter whether I understand Advaita or dwaita philosophies? I do not like to be blunt about these things but please let me know how do these differing philosphies help me in my day to day life ?

Namaste,

Analyse what you know as the truth. You say that "I will be the same person". You say that beneath the changing facade of body there is soul, which remains the same person. And you say that this soul can be called personality, spirit or soul.

Well, this personality itself is so changeable -- how can it be unique? Tommorow it may acquire body of a sage and the personality will not be the same. Do you remember ever having being the same personality in two moments?

If personality is so stable then you should be able to link it through eternity.
-----------------------

If it does not matter whether you understand Advaita or Dvaita, then why you ask?


Om Namah Shivaya