PDA

View Full Version : What is Atman/Brahman?



Anicca
03 July 2009, 03:29 PM
Greetings friends


From what I understand Atman/Brahman is the true self, the eternal I


However i feel this is missing something and perhaps getting it wrong


What is Atman/Brahman?

what is the definition of Atman/Brahman?


Namaste and Metta

atanu
03 July 2009, 03:49 PM
Greetings friends
From what I understand Atman/Brahman is the true self, the eternal I
However i feel this is missing something and perhaps getting it wrong
What is Atman/Brahman?
what is the definition of Atman/Brahman?
Namaste and Metta

Namaste Anicca,

In another thread, I suggested Mandukya Upanishad, because that indicates Atman's characteristics in a single paragraph, first declaring it to be 'indescribable'.

Brihadarayanaka Upanishad indicates it by pointing out 'Neti-Neti'. Whatever you can identify/perceive/know of yourself and of the Universe is not Atman-Brahman. Since, the Upanishad declares "How will the knower be known?"

Kena Upanishad indicates it by saying that it is that by which Mind is Known.

Brahma Sutras define Brahman as that from which proceed the acts of creation, maintenance and destruction -- meaning it is source of everything and every process.

Atman is surely not Pancha Kosha. I suggest the following post:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4033

Best Wishes

Om Namah Shivaya

Ekanta
03 July 2009, 06:12 PM
Greetings friends

From what I understand Atman/Brahman is the true self, the eternal I
However i feel this is missing something

Namaste and Metta

Hi! Look at your own Signature...

"Not to do evil, to cultivate the good, and to purify the mind. This is the teaching of all the Buddha's"

There's the "missing" thing. Enlightenment is said to be a "loss", not "gain". Loss of what? Its in your signature. Nirvana: nir (without) vana (movement)

TatTvamAsi
08 July 2009, 08:00 PM
Namaste,

The answer to your question is unanswerable.

Since time immemorial, the rishis of India have stated what Tat (Atma/Brahman) is NOT, not what it is! This is because trying to describe the infinite in finite terms is simply impossible; it is something that cannot be understood, explained, described, or seen. It is that which has to be experienced.

If you read the BrihadAranyaka Upanishad, the philosophy of "neti-neti" sums it up in a nutshell. We, as unawakened ones, cannot even attempt to describe Tat. This is what I believe Buddha emphasized. He insisted that trying to describe the infinite is futile and will only lead to attachment and consequently confusion. He never stated that Brahman/Atman is non-existent. Anyway, that is another argument for the other thread you have "participated" in.

To experience Atman/Brahman, the little-self or AhamkArA (ego) has to cease to exist. Along with this, all the sheaths of subtle differentiation also cease to exist and all that is left, according to the Veda, is Atman/Brahman. Trying to describe this, which is neither that nor this, is simply an exercise in mental and sometimes verbal obfuscation.

Namaskar.


Greetings friends


From what I understand Atman/Brahman is the true self, the eternal I


However i feel this is missing something and perhaps getting it wrong


What is Atman/Brahman?

what is the definition of Atman/Brahman?


Namaste and Metta

Spiritualseeker
09 July 2009, 06:06 PM
"neti neti" is a very interesting technique. Sometimes I will say this in my mind when meditating or having a very "aware" moment.

Penumbra
24 July 2009, 08:49 PM
Are the atman of different people all identical, or do people have unique atman?

When one destroys their false self, the thing that they are left with: is that a blank, identical template that everyone has, or does everyone have a unique atman with personality and specific characteristics unique to them?

-Lyn

Eastern Mind
24 July 2009, 09:12 PM
This unique atman has a person attached to it, yes.

Aum Namasivaya

saidevo
24 July 2009, 09:30 PM
Namaste Lyn.



Are the atman of different people all identical, or do people have unique atman?

When one destroys their false self, the thing that they are left with: is that a blank, identical template that everyone has, or does everyone have a unique atman with personality and specific characteristics unique to them?


Let us explore it this way: suppose everyone of us has individual atmas on which our false self of bodily personality is superimposed, and then this false personality is destroyed, what would remain? Countless sparks of unique atmans accommodated in space, which would leave vacant space between them. But Brahman as one universal Atman occupies this space too so our supposition of individual unique atmans cannot be true, specially when the life force is immanent in every atom and unit of space of the universe.

The ocean is full of daredevil waves and humble froth comprising tiny, trivial bubbles. If the waves subside and the bubbles pop, what would remain? Our JIvAtmas are like bubbles floating on Brahman, the Universal Atman, also known as ParamAtman.

Every individual as a JIvAtma has this inherent fear in his/her 'sAdhana' towards Self-Realization: after the Self is realized, what would happen to 'me'?

Penumbra
26 July 2009, 08:01 PM
This unique atman has a person attached to it, yes.

Aum Namasivaya
What gives it its uniqueness?

Is each atman formed a certain way and then remains static, or is the personal uniqueness on each atman based on their karma imprints through their lives?


Namaste Lyn.

Let us explore it this way: suppose everyone of us has individual atmas on which our false self of bodily personality is superimposed, and then this false personality is destroyed, what would remain? Countless sparks of unique atmans accommodated in space, which would leave vacant space between them. But Brahman as one universal Atman occupies this space too so our supposition of individual unique atmans cannot be true, specially when the life force is immanent in every atom and unit of space of the universe.

The ocean is full of daredevil waves and humble froth comprising tiny, trivial bubbles. If the waves subside and the bubbles pop, what would remain? Our JIvAtmas are like bubbles floating on Brahman, the Universal Atman, also known as ParamAtman.
Thanks. It seems that from discussing this with people, there are two main camps. Some believe that upon achieving Moksha, they retain individuality but are united with God. Others believe that their individuality dissolves in God upon the realization that there is but one. For instance, the person responding above you seems to feel that atman are unique. Some people I've talked to outside of this forum have been rather strong-willed when it comes to this issue, going so far to say that it is an ouright lie that atman = brahman. It admittedly confuses me when approaching this religion.


Every individual as a JIvAtma has this inherent fear in his/her 'sAdhana' towards Self-Realization: after the Self is realized, what would happen to 'me'?
What do you personally feel occurs upon self-realization. Does every notion of a "self" or "me" dissolve into all that is?

-Lyn

yajvan
26 July 2009, 08:19 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

ātman आत्मन्- derived from an , to breathe ; at , to move ; vā , to blow i.e. the breath .

We also know this ātman as essence , or one's fundamental nature.
If this is true, the ātman as essence - can there be (then) more the one essence to the person or the collection of people?


Just as the 'essence' of a gold ring, and or gold earring, a gold coin is gold, can there be more then one gold essence?


If there is more then one essence where then does unity spring from?

praṇām

saidevo
27 July 2009, 07:46 AM
Namaste Lyn.



It admittedly confuses me when approaching this religion.


Yes, as you have rightly observed, there are two distinct--even mutually exclusive--camps:

• Advaita, which says that the individual jIvAtman on realization of its Self as identical with Brahman, no longer remains an individual entity but gets indistinguishably merged as a water drop in the ocean.

• VishiShTadvaita, which says that the individual jIvAtman on realization of its real nature, merges with Brahman, wihout losing its identity and remains as a biological cell in human body that has its own individual consciousness albeit within the framework of the larger consciousness of the body.

The confusion is easily dispelled perhaps by the analogy of suShupti (deep sleep). What do you think happens to the 'I' in you in deep sleep? Is it lost in the larger consciousness of Brahman or does it remain an individual consciousness still?

In deep sleep, there is neither mind nor any external senses. All that remains is only the Self. However the individual self is unaware of its identity with the universal Self while still being in deep sleep; this identity is realized as the peace and bliss of a good sleep when consciousness returns to jIvAtma.

Are we afraid of deep sleep? I don't think anybody will be; in fact, we prefer it. Sages say that on Self-Realization, the individual self, so long as it is required to retain its human form, is aware of the peace and bliss of suShupti, while still in deep sleep and more so in the stage beyond it--turiya, the fourth stage of existence.



What do you personally feel occurs upon self-realization. Does every notion of a "self" or "me" dissolve into all that is?


My personal feeling about MokSha is one of Advaita--complete dissolution--, although I should admit that VishiShTadvaita seems a happy proposition. Still, I think that the analogy of what happens to a water drop merging with the ocean is unassailable: although it seems to us--outsiders--that the dissolution is absolute, what does the water drop know about it--before, and after the realization of its essential nature?

Evidences of the great Truths are strewn all around us. In things and events that pass by our everyday life.

Penumbra
27 July 2009, 07:16 PM
The confusion is easily dispelled perhaps by the analogy of suShupti (deep sleep). What do you think happens to the 'I' in you in deep sleep? Is it lost in the larger consciousness of Brahman or does it remain an individual consciousness still?

In deep sleep, there is neither mind nor any external senses. All that remains is only the Self. However the individual self is unaware of its identity with the universal Self while still being in deep sleep; this identity is realized as the peace and bliss of a good sleep when consciousness returns to jIvAtma.

Are we afraid of deep sleep? I don't think anybody will be; in fact, we prefer it. Sages say that on Self-Realization, the individual self, so long as it is required to retain its human form, is aware of the peace and bliss of suShupti, while still in deep sleep and more so in the stage beyond it--turiya, the fourth stage of existence.
I'm not sure I understand this analogy.

I agree that in deep sleep (assuming no dreams), there exists no mind or external senses. Our bodies and brains continue, but our "I" temporarily dissolves. Admittedly I've never died before, but from what I can tell, my temporary state of being in deep sleep does not differ from being deceased, as far as my mind is concerned. I think nothing, feel nothing, and if I were to die while in a deep sleep, I don't think I'd perceive any difference. (Because to perceive a difference, I'd require some thoughts or senses or a sense of "I" to do that, right?) I wouldn't say I'm blissful or peaceful while sleeping, because I have no senses or thoughts. I'm blissful and peaceful while lying down to sleep when I'm tired and as I'm falling asleep, but once asleep, I feel nothing. Upon waking up, I feel peaceful again because I'm still in bed and comfortable and hopefully rested physically and mentally, but do not remember anything from when I was asleep.


My personal feeling about MokSha is one of Advaita--complete dissolution--, although I should admit that VishiShTadvaita seems a happy proposition. Still, I think that the analogy of what happens to a water drop merging with the ocean is unassailable: although it seems to us--outsiders--that the dissolution is absolute, what does the water drop know about it--before, and after the realization of its essential nature?

Evidences of the great Truths are strewn all around us. In things and events that pass by our everyday life.
Thank you for your view. :)

saidevo
27 July 2009, 11:11 PM
Namaste Lyn.



I agree that in deep sleep (assuming no dreams), there exists no mind or external senses. Our bodies and brains continue, but our "I" temporarily dissolves.


The individual 'I' and the universal Self are best described as consciousness or awareness. As Bhagavan RamaNa Maharshi pointed out, a person says, "This is my hand, this my leg, but when it comes to an act of doing something, the same person says that 'I ran' or 'I did it' and not 'my legs ran' and 'my hands did it'. This feeling, or rather awarness, of the 'I', which is there right from our childhood--nobody taught it to us--although it seems individual to every soul, is due to the assertion of the universal Self as the essence behind every thought, word and action. The 'I'-s appear individual because they are nothing but illusory, individual projections bound to forms, over the Self. The progress from the feeling of 'I' to the realization of Self is thus a process of doing away with forms, in other words whatever that is only 'mine' and not 'I' ('neti, neti'), by learning to focus awarenss on the 'I' rather than the 'mine'.

When there is no 'I' in deep sleep (because it merges with the Self which is universal), what drives our body, its brain and other internal vital organs? Scince says that they function because of 'reflexes', but how do the reflexes arise and are maintained in their states of action? In other words, why does not a cell of a human body just dissipate when the 'I' it is associated with is itself temporarily dissolved?

The answer perhaps is that the Universal Consciousness of Brahman, the Self, pervades everything, asserts and binds them to their forms. If this Consciousness is switched off, the whole universe would vanish like a candle blown off or an electric lamp switched off.



Upon waking up, I feel peaceful again because I'm still in bed and comfortable and hopefully rested physically and mentally, but do not remember anything from when I was asleep.


Sages like Sri NisArgadatta MaharAj always have their awareness focussed on the Self, so they are able to be aware of the peace and bliss of deep sleep. They also urge us to progress towards such a state of awareness.

As ordinary souls, we do not as yet have the awareness while in deep sleep because we haven't progressed to that level. But then Self is always assertive, which is why it communicates the state of peace and bliss to us as a feeling upon our waking up.

It is not just in deep sleep that we experience peace and bliss. We experience them in the 'turIyac' moments of our life: the tiny intervals between two thoughts, two breaths and other actions that are systaltic and diastolic in nature. By focussing our awarness on these moments, we can slowly progress towards the state of awareness in deep sleep.