PDA

View Full Version : Aham Brahmasmi



devotee
16 November 2009, 04:33 AM
Namaste,

“Om pUrNamadah pUrNamidaM pUrNAt pUrNamudacyate
PUrNasya pUrNamAdAya pUrNamEvAvashiSyate”

Om ! That (Brahman) is Infinite/Whole/Complete, and this (universe) is Infinite/Whole/Complete. The Infinite/Whole/Complete proceeds from the Infinite/Whole/Complete . (Then) taking the infinitude of the Infinite/Whole/Complete (universe), It remains as the Infinite/Whole/Complete (Brahman) alone.

I intend to dedicate this thread to posting of excerpts of Advaita Teachings in various scriptures (BG, Upanishads, any other Hindu or scriptures of other religions) & also as taught by Advaita teachers. I don't claim to be the expert here, I expect to expand my horizon of understanding through thread.

What can be a better way to start this thread than the Mahavakyas ? :

1. Brahma Satyam Jagan Mithya, Jivo Brahmaiva naparah.

==> Brhaman is real, the world is unreal. Jivatma is Brahman alone & none else.

2. Ekam Evadvitiyam Brahma

==> Brahman is one without a second

3. Prajnanam Brahma

==> Consciousness is Brahman

4. Tat Tvam Asi

==> That (Brahman) thou art !

5. Ayam Atma Brahma

==> This Self is Brahman

6. Aham Brahmasmi

==> I am Brahman

7. Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma

==> This all is Brahman

---------------------------------------------
That said, What exactly is this Brahman ?

The following text tries to explain this term :


The word brahman comes from the root brha or brhi, which means knowledge, expansion, and all-pervasiveness. It is that existence which alone exists, and in which there is the appearance of the entire universe. This is a Sanskrit word that denotes that oneness, the non-dual reality, the substratum underneath all of the many names and forms of the universe.

Brahman is not a name of God. These contemplations neither promote nor oppose any particular religious concept of God. Brahman is often described as indescribable. For convenience sake, it is said that brahman is the nature of existence, consciousness, and bliss, though admitting that these words, too, are inadequate.

The real meaning comes only in direct experience resulting from contemplation and yoga meditation.

OM

devotee
17 November 2009, 08:00 AM
Namaste,

What is this SELF ?

The SELF is called so because it is none else but our own Self i.e. what projects the ( feeling of) “I” in me. Then how come it can be One only ? I have my Self, you have your Self & every being has apparently a different Self. Then how can it be stated that Self is just One ?

There are two words used in Scriptures in such discussions :

a) JIvAtmA = This JIvAtmA or the Jiva is the ( apparent) individual self in me, you & everyone which sees this world different from itself. It sees ” many” in this world & not “One”. This is also called the deluded “self” (normally written with lower letters to distinguish from the universal Self).

b) Atma  This is the One Universal Self which within its first two states of waking & dreaming appears as many “self”s. This Self is the essence of all & is One without a second. Therefore, JIvAtmA has no independent existence … in fact, it has no real existence at all … there is Only One Self.

What are the Waking & Dreaming States ?

Let’s take the help of MAndukya Upanishad to understand these terms & their relationship with Self.

One of the MahavAkyas (great statements) comes from this Upanishad. It proclaims :

Ayam Atma Brahma : This Self is Brahman.

This Upanishad says that Self comprises of 4 quarters/states :
i) The waking state : The first quarter (pada) is called Vaisvanara, whose sphere of activity is the waking state, who is conscious of external objects, who has seven limbs and nineteen mouths, and who is the experiencer of gross objects.

The words, “conscious of external objects” indicate that Self in this state is not conscious of itself. It is experience of gross objects with 7 limbs & 19 mouths. This state is when we are alive & awake in this world. The Self is not only unaware of its True Nature in this state but also perceives unreal as real because it sees duality where there is none.
ii) The dream state : The second quarter (pada) is Taijasa, whose sphere of activity is the dream state, who is conscious of internal objects, who is endowed with seven limbs and nineteen mouths, and who is the experiencer of subtle objects.
There are no gross objects to experience in dream state. Let us note that the impressions of waking experiences are reproduced in the form of dream objects. From the empirical standpoint there is a causal relationship between the waking state and the dream state. This state is experienced in our dreams when we are alive & we are in this state when we die.

What are the other two states ?

The third state of Self is Deep Sleep state. This is called Prajna. There are two verses in this Upanishad which describe this state.

“That is the state of deep sleep wherein one asleep neither desires any object nor sees any dream. The third quarter is Prajna, whose sphere is deep sleep, unified, who is, verily, a mass of consciousness, who is full of bliss and experiences bliss, and who is the door leading to the knowledge of dreaming and waking. “

Let’s try to understand various terms used in this verse :

“No dream” --- it means it doesn’t see the unreality.
"Unified" (ekibhUtah) - undifferentiated
“Mass of Consciousness” ---- It is not conscious of the waking & the dreaming states. It is Consciousness itself.
“Door leading to the knowledge of dreaming & waking” --- It is the causal state of the first two states.
“neither desires any object” ---- No desire to enjoy any gross or subtle object. So, the seeker must not have any desires left for arriving at this state.
“Full of bliss” ---- This state is full of bliss.

The next verse further describes this state as :

“He is the Lord of all. He is the knower of all. He is the inner controller. He is the source of all; for from Him all beings originate and in Him they finally disappear.”

So, all beings in both the waking state & the dreaming state originate from & disappear into this state. This is God-state off the Self. He is omniscient & omnipotent (lord of all).

The Fourth State :

It is not considered a separate state. It is the untainted canvas on which the first three states originate & disappear. This state is the cessation of all sounds & activities of the three states. The Mandukya Upanishad describes this state in following verse :’

“Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable, and indescribable. The essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self (in the three states), It (Turiya) is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss, and non-dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman (Self), and this has to be realised.”

So, it is nothing which we have known so far in the first three states. So, this state is not describable at all because all descriptions arise from our experiences in the first three states. Yet, it is the essence of consciousness which manifests itself as self in the three states. This is all peace, all bliss & non-dual. This has to be known.

Ekanta
17 November 2009, 03:22 PM
This is what I can ad
You can view the 4 main Mahavakyas as the 4 stages.

Prajnanam Brahma (Consciousness is Brahman) / Salokya (Presence of God)
Experiencing your own consciousness as the base of the world, the unity in diversity. At this stage the material nature of the world fades away. This is the first stage…

Ayam Atma Brahma (This Self is Brahman) / Samipya (Nearness to God)
Experiencing the divine in your own center, or finding the “inner Guru”.

Tat Tvam Asi (That you are) / Sarupya (Same as God)
Being same as God, knowing you are same. But there are still some Vasanas or Ahamkara left so there is reflection of Jivahood.

Aham Brahma Asmi (I am Brahman) / Sayujya (Merging with Godhead)
This would be the total loss of reflections in the mind (of Jivahood) and thus “I” (Aham) is no other than Brahman.

All in all, in Aham Brahma Asmi “I” is Brahman, in the others it’s something else, like consciousness, this or that.

Recommended link:
http://www.eaisai.com/baba/docs/mahavakya.html

yajvan
17 November 2009, 07:05 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté devotee (et.al)

Thank you for your posts on this subject - I look forward to reading your insights and the conversations that ( I hope ) will follow.

Do you think there is a significance from where each mahāvākya came from i.e. ṛg ved, sāma ved, etc. ?

praṇām

kd gupta
17 November 2009, 10:29 PM
Very good topic devoteeji

But as you know Krsn says..gyane parisamapyate , so I shall request you to continue this up to the end of knowledge i.e. to your name , or to the tail of devotion .

devotee
17 November 2009, 10:50 PM
Namasate Ekanta,

I had, so far, not seen these main Mahavakyas in this manner. But that is really beautiful.

Thanks. :)

.....................

Namaste Yajvan ji,

I think you are indicating towards something hidden which can be of great help. :)

I do feel that it is no coincidence that the four MahavAkyas are from four different Vedas, One from each Veda :

i) Prajanam Brahma - "Consciousness is Brahman" :

This comes in Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda.

ii) Ayam Atma Brahma - This Self (Atman) is Brahman :

This has been taken from Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda.

iii) Tat Tvam Asi - "That Thou Art" :

This has been taken from Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda.

iv) Aham Brahmasmi - "I AM Brahman" :

This has been taken from the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda.

I think you may tell us the signification of association of these Mahavakyas with the respective Vedas.

...................................

Namaste Gupta ji,

Certainly ! Let's move on this path together to discover what is hidden ! :)


OM

saidevo
18 November 2009, 08:07 AM
namaste everyone.

Thanks to Devotee for starting this thread that can enlighten us and clarify doubts when there is active participation of members who know; and thanks to Ekanta for giving the relation of the four mahAvAkyas to the four pAdas--quarters, of mokSha.

Let us try to study the mahAvAkyas relating one to the other in context:

• MAtA amRtAnandamayI enlightens us here as to the purport of the two terms satyam and mithya in the mahAvAkya "brahma satyam jagan mithya": http://archives.amritapuri.org/matruvani/vol-02/sep02/02mv09reality.php

• Sarabhanga has given in this thread in HDF the Sanskrit quotes of the mahAvAkyas and their meanings:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=4365&highlight=mahavakya#post4365

• Atanu has given SvAmi KRShNAnanda's explanation of the mahAvAkyas in this post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=19577&postcount=31

• Here is shrI AtmAnanda's explanation of the stages of realization through the four mahAvAkyas that Atanu quoted in the above post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=19579&postcount=32

Based on the explanation of AtmAnanda and the post of Ekanta, how can we proceed to relate the other three mahAvAkyas? Is it possible to arrange them all in a ladder of graduating steps to Self-Realization? Surely, the vAkyas give us different layers of meaning, without reference to the context of their utterances in the upanishads. Can we relate them as parts to a whole?

devotee
18 November 2009, 09:30 AM
Namaste,

Saidevo ji has provided very useful links in his post above. I am still awaiting Yajvan ji to throw some light on significance of association of the MahAvAkyas with their respective Vedas & may be more as has been pointed out by Saidevo ji in his post.

In the mean time, I will proceed with inputs from my understanding in the next post.

OM

devotee
18 November 2009, 09:45 AM
Namaste all,

Now we shall see how "One" can manifest as "Many".

Though we have discussed many things & defined several terms, these questions are still unanswered :

How come this Self can be One only ? I have my Self, you have your Self & every being has apparently a different Self. Then how can it be stated that Self is just One ? Can One appear as many ? And I don’t find it just “appearance” … it is as true as I am ?

Gaupdapada explained this with the example of infinite Space covering all & the space inside vessels. Let’s see what this says & whether it is logical :

There can be no doubt that Infinite Space is just One. However, when we see inside a vessel, the space within the vessel looks separated from the Infinite Space around. If there are many vessels, the space inside one vessels looks different in size, shape, location etc. from spaces in the other vessels & also quite different from the space outside (i.e. each space enclosed by a separate vessel has apparently its own unique identity). The outside space appears completely different as that is Infinite & the space inside the vessel appears finite. Now, can we say that there are many space(s) or different space(s) ? No. Because the difference among the different space(s) in the different vessels & the Infinite Space around is due to the vessels. Once the Vessels are broken, the illusion of separateness of spaces goes. It is the same One & Only One space. Now, let’s go back to the space in the vessel again. Was the space in the vessel a product of the Infinite Space ? No. Was this space inside the vessel created by the outer space ? No. There was no creation ... never. The Space was always one only & no differentiation can be in quality of the space within the Vessels & the Outside Infinite Space. The Vessel is the illusion which has to be removed to realize that there was no difference at all to begin with.

Objection : That is well explained but to explain the model of Self, you brought vessel in the above example & because vessel is materially different from space, the illusion came into being. But it is stated that there is none but Brahman alone … so how come this different material fits in there i.e. what happens if vessel is not of different material ?

Answer : To understand the answer to the above objection, let’s assume that the space is replaced with water & the vessels are replaced with vessels made of Ice. In that case, though materially there is no difference between the water inside the vessels, the Vessels themselves & the Infinite Water covering all … the arrangement does again create the illusion of separateness & duality. What is the difference here ? Science tells us that it is due to difference in the vibrations of molecules of Water & the Ice. That vibration creates the illusion of duality (i.e. the ice is different from water) here otherwise there simply no difference & no duality.

The difference between individual apparent self & the One Self is only that much. Due to varying vibrations (which produces sound & activity ) in different states of Self, duality apparently comes into being. Once all vibrations die out (& thus leads to cessation of all sounds & activities), the total peace only prevails … the untainted Turiya only remains.

-------------------------------------------------
I am tempted to give another example here too which I gave somewhere in one of my posts in this forum :

We can see this phenomenon of “One” appearing as “Many” when we are dreaming. Let’s take an example again :

I am dreaming that I, along with one of my friends, am going to a village fair where there are thousands of people. I sees that my friend brushes with a man due to heavy rush. That man gets angry with my friend. My friend & that man start fighting. I try to stop them & during that fight that man stabs me !

Now, let’s analyse the above dream. There is actually one “I” who is dreaming the dream, the “I” of the dreamer. The same “I” creates another “I” of the dream which goes to the village fair with his friend. The friend, the angry man & thousands of men in the fair have their own “I” in the dream & they all act on their own. The “I” of the angry man even acts against the wishes of the mother “I” & stabs it ! Now, where from these “I” have come ? We cannot say that it is simply a story written by our mind which is being played out in the dream. If that is true then the dreaming “I” should have known what is going to happen next in the dream (& would never have written something to get stabbed itself !) & who is going to behave in what way in the dream. But that doesn’t happen.

So, in the above dream, the dreamer “I” is creating so many “I”s where there is only One. It is also creating a whole world in the dream & that world is acting as if it had a free will ! This is illusion, the powerful Maya of the Self.
-------------------------------------------------------

Above, I have also added something from my understanding. Any positive inputs are welcome. :)

There can be next objection : Yes, with the above examples, it is clear that “One” can create the illusion of “Many”. But how can we be sure that it is really so ?

We shall take up this issue in the next post.




OM

yajvan
18 November 2009, 10:50 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté devotee (et.al)


Namaste,

Saidevo ji has provided very useful links in his post above. I am still awaiting Yajvan ji to throw some light on significance of association of the MahAvAkyas with their respective Vedas & may be more as has been pointed out by Saidevo ji in his post.

I wrote

Do you think there is a significance from where each mahāvākya came from i.e. ṛg ved, sāma ved, etc. ?

The significance of each mahāvākya is that of essence. The mahāvākya is the rasa¹ of that veda that is being offered/studied/read. By being aware of this rasa one gets the overall appreciation ( flavor) of what is being offered macroscopically by that veda.
Just as you potentially hold a 100 ft. tree in your hands by holding the seed, you hold all of the veda in seed form in each mahāvākya.

Its as if you are talking to your child and you tell them an overall truth ( or a story that offers truth) - we first give them a full picture, very simply, of the total story that will be offered.

If you listen to some of the great teachers they are excellent at doing this e.g. a vision is offered, then the dive into the knowledge , then end with that vision at the end, to enclose the thought or idea.

These mahāvākya-s do the same.

praṇām


words
rasa रस- taste, flavor; yet this rasa is also defined as the best or finest or prime part of anything i.e. essence.

Ekanta
18 November 2009, 11:06 AM
Ok here we go… I’ll just throw this out and have it done [with reservation that its of course an interpretation].

As you said Saidevo, the Mahavakyas give us different layers of meaning. Interpreted they give one meaning, non-interpreted they keep all their meanings.

However… If we look at the Ayam Atma Brahma, Tat Tvam Asi and Aham Brahma Asmi they each have 3 words. It can be interpreted as the 3 levels, body, mind, Atma (which is a common team in Upanishads etc, like Vak, Manas, Prana …). So if we put them in the scheme (mind here is the subtle body):

Body...........Mind.........Atma
Ayam..........Atma........Brahma
Tvam..........Asi...........Tat
Aham..........Asmi.........Brahma

One of the words in each Mahavakya is the connection of heaven and earth (Purusha/Prakriti). This connection is always the mind (or subtle body /Antahkarana etc).
• In Ayam Atma Brahma [3rd person], Atma (self) is Mind/heart which connects since inside mind/heart is the indweller of the heart, Hridaya-Vasi).
• In Tat Tvam Asi [2nd person], Asi (are) is Mind which connects as a clear image of Ishvara.
• In Aham Brahma Asmi [1st person], Asmi (am) is Mind which connects. It would indicate the barriers of mind broken down. Aham is “I” but also the witness (saksi) or Atma.

Prajnanam Brahma [3rd person impersonal] is not 3-fold… It’s non-personal (the other 3 are personal). It’s about Spirit/Matter or Purusha/Prakriti. It simply says: Matter is consciousness or consciousness is matter. What is here is there, what is inside is outside etc… It’s also interesting to add a vers from Katha Upanishad (1, 3, 10-11):
“Beyond the senses (Indriyas) are the objects [artha] “
The objects are more subtle than the senses themselves indicating that there is no external separated from consciousness itself. The objects exist in the mind as consciousness itself... And consciousness is Brahman so objects/physical is Brahman.

Body..........Mind..........Atma
Prajnanam..................Brahma

---

Devotee: (hope I don’t answer something you intended to do later)… anyway, you said:
“But how can we be sure that it is really so?”
When I began meditation 21 years ago, I thought I was going a bit mad after a few weeks time. What happened was the consciousness expanded and the barriers between my own mind and the physical world broke down. This and that exists, but at the same time its one substance and that’s consciousness. Alternating between those two aspects was quite fun I remember. But my ability to Alternate has long been lost to consciousness only [and name/form]. Today I can understand it as an experience of Prajnanam Brahma. Back then I was Buddhist and thought of it in terms of emptiness/form.
Even modern Science can prove this if I figured it out right. Where are the objects if there is no observer? The error of modern science is that they begin with the physical and take it for granted. Then begin to explain mind… Without observer however there can be no physical. Without observer there is no science at all. This gets even more interesting when studying quantum physics. At that level the observer is directly affecting the outcome of the experiment. My intuition tells me this is Prajnanam Brahma right in the face of science; matter and consciousness are not separated.

sunyata07
18 November 2009, 04:47 PM
Namaste everyone,



Where are the objects if there is no observer? The error of modern science is that they begin with the physical and take it for granted. Then begin to explain mind… Without observer however there can be no physical. Without observer there is no science at all.


This is a very similar idea to that famous Zen koan that asks "If a tree falls in the woods and there is no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?" Physicists and scientists have believed for years there is a physical explanation again, arguing that yes it makes a sound because it will produce sound waves regardless of ears to perceive it. However, in their usual quest for rational logic and physical proof, scientifically-minded answers completely fail to understand that the question is in fact asking about the nature of observation and subjective reality, and not the nature of sound waves in themselves. If we're allowed touch upon quantum physics for a second, you could consider the Schrodinger's Cat experiment - whereby the mere act of observation can affect the outcome of a situation by becoming an outcome itself. It's a paradox scientists will still debate about from time to time. I think it shows something very similar to the sunyata concept in Buddhism, that nothing exists inherently or intrinsically of itself in the universe.

saidevo
19 November 2009, 01:41 AM
Thanks to Ekanta for the new light on the four mahAvAkyas, relating them to the three states of awareness (body, mind and Atman) and to the four pronouns of I, you, this and others. I find that this view also agrees with the four stages of moKSha he related them in his earlier post, #3 of this thread.

So, in the top-down approach, a Self-Realized guru might teach his disciple:

• ahaM brahmAsmi--I am Brahman, tat tvam asi--you are That (too), ayam AtmA brahman--this soul (any soul) is Brahman, and prajnAnam brahma--everything (matter, energy and beings of this universe) is (nothing but) the consciousness of Brahman.

• Therfore, sarvaM khalvidaM brahma--everything here, verily, is Brahman; and that Brahman in the ultimate state of existence, is ekam evAdvitIyam--one without a second (that is, an Absolute Unity without any divisions of two or more in it).

But then to the disciple, the reality of this world is too concrete to dissolve into the Absolute Unity and Reality of Brahman. So Adi Shankara sums up the upanishad mahAvAkyas and asserts:

• shlokardhena pravakshyami yadyuktam granthakotibhiH |
brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva napara ||

"With half a shloka (stanza) I will declare what has been said in thousands of volumes: Brahman is real, the world is false, the atomic individual self is only Brahman, nothing else."

**********

It is significant that of the seven mahAvAkyas that Devotee has given, as many as three are from the ChAndogya upanishad:

sarvaM khalidaM brahma
--ChAndogya upanishad 3.14.1

ekam evAdvitIyam (brahma)
--ChAndogya upanishad 6.2.1

tat tvam asi
--ChAndogya upanishad 6.8.7

The other three are from three other upanishads:

prajnAnam brahma
--aitareya upanishad

ahaM brahmAsmi
--bRuhadAranyaka upanishad 1.4.10

ayam AtmA brahman
--mANDUkya upanishad 1.2

I was nonplussed to see that the google search for Shankara's most famous quote threw up over 5,000 links, yet not one of them gave the source of his quote! After searching fervently for over an hour, I could find the source:

shlokardhena pravakshyami yadyuktam granthakotibhiH |
brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva napara ||
--bAlabodhinI, a compendium of vedAnta in 47 stanzas, attributed to Adi Shankara.

"With half a shloka (stanza) I will declare what has been said in thousands of volumes: Brahman is real, the world is false, the atomic individual self is only Brahman, nothing else."

Links:
http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/i_es/i_es_denic_self_frameset.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=3-XlzLL1--AC&pg=RA1-PA526&lpg=RA1-PA526&dq=Balabodhini+sankara&source=bl&ots=g8Xln_VnUR&sig=EyT5dtDWKCLpzngb-Qug2izddNQ&hl=en&ei=cNQES5-vBaOG6AON8b3ACg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CBgQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Balabodhini%20sankara&f=false

atanu
19 November 2009, 08:39 AM
-----
I was nonplussed to see that the google search for Shankara's most famous quote threw up over 5,000 links, yet not one of them gave the source of his quote! After searching fervently for over an hour, I could find the source:

shlokardhena pravakshyami yadyuktam granthakotibhiH |
brahma satyam jagan mithya jivo brahmaiva napara ||
--bAlabodhinI, a compendium of vedAnta in 47 stanzas, attributed to Adi Shankara.

"With half a shloka (stanza) I will declare what has been said in thousands of volumes: Brahman is real, the world is false, the atomic individual self is only Brahman, nothing else."

Links:
http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/i_es/i_es_denic_self_frameset.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=3-XlzLL1--AC&pg=RA1-PA526&lpg=RA1-PA526&dq=Balabodhini+sankara&source=bl&ots=g8Xln_VnUR&sig=EyT5dtDWKCLpzngb-Qug2izddNQ&hl=en&ei=cNQES5-vBaOG6AON8b3ACg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CBgQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Balabodhini%20sankara&f=false (http://books.google.com/books?id=3-XlzLL1--AC&pg=RA1-PA526&lpg=RA1-PA526&dq=Balabodhini+sankara&source=bl&ots=g8Xln_VnUR&sig=EyT5dtDWKCLpzngb-Qug2izddNQ&hl=en&ei=cNQES5-vBaOG6AON8b3ACg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CBgQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Balabodhini%20sankara&f=false)

Namaste Saideoji,

vivekachuDAmani in the 20th verse states as below:

brahma satyaM jaganmithyetyevaMruupo vinish{}chayaH .
so.ayaM nityaanityavastuvivekaH samudaahR^itaH .. 20..

Which teaches to keep up the discrimination of the real from the unreal. Further, the exact verse is found in brahmajnAnAvalee again in the 20th verse.

brahma satya.n jaganmithyaa jiivo brahmaiva naaparaH .
anena vedya.n sachchhaastramiti vedaantaDiNDimaH .. 20..

The link to the pdf doc is given below: http://svbf.org/journal/vol4no1/brahma.pdf

Shankara also begins brahma sutra bhasya with "jIvo brahmaiva, nA parah"

---------------------
Shri Ramana quotes: brahma satyam jagan mithya brahma jagan.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
19 November 2009, 09:04 AM
Jivo Brahmaiva Na Parah of Sri Shankaracharya is sometimes translated : God alone is real. The world is illusory. The individual is none other than .....

:)

There, IMO, begins the misunderstandings and fireworks.

devotee
19 November 2009, 10:38 PM
Namaste,

Ekanta, your explanation of the MahavAkyas is wonderful. That shows how much meaning is hidden in those small sentences which needs our contemplation to uncover the Truth.

Saidevo ji has given very good links in his posts. During my investigation of those links I found a very good book Advaita SAdhna by Kanchi Maha Swamigal (a compilation of his discourses).

Atanu has correctly pointed out that, "Brahma Satyam Jagan Mithya" appears at other places too in addition to Balbodhini.

These MahavAkyas need more discussion, as they are not mere statements. They are not to be given to everyone. Initiation with any one of the MahavAkyas needs some pre-qualification on the part of the disciple & can be given only by a Self-realised saint.

If someone can throw more light on this aspect of the MahavAkyas, it would be beneficial.

OM

devotee
19 November 2009, 10:53 PM
Namaste,

One question asked in one of the last posts is still awaiting detail answer :

"Yes, with the above examples, it is clear that “One” can create the illusion of “Many”. But how can we be sure that it is really so ?"

Ekanta has already tried to prove the authenticity of the Advaita which is based on his experience. I will try to explain it in more detail as below :

There can be no doubt that it is so :

a) Because the Shruti (Upanishads) say so --- Sabda PramANa (The proof of Word)
b) Because it has been experienced so, by many saints in the past – Pratyaksha PramANa (The proof by direct experience)
c) Because logically & scientifically it can be proved that it is so --- AnumANa (The proof by inference)

As we have seen above in the MahavAkyas, the Upanishads declare in no uncertain terms that Self is the Brahman, the One without a second. So, that is Sabda PramAna, (the proof of Word).

There have been thousands of Rishis in the past who have realized this Truth (Non-Duality) & many Self-realised saints are still alive & many are on the way to Self-Realisation. Some of the historical figures are : Gautam Buddha, Mahaveer, Aadi Guru Shankaracharya, Sri Guru Nanak, Sri Totapuri, Ramkrishna Paramhansa, Swami Vivekananda, Lahiri Mahashaya, Sri Yuketswara Giri, Sri Paramhansa Yogananda, Sri Ramana Maharishi, Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj etc. … and must say that this list cannot be even called a sample, as it is so small. As Ekanta has mentioned in his earlier post how he felt unified with the Infinity, the one without a second …. the same may be true for quite a few here on this board itself, I am sure (though, imho, it is not really being established in Advaitam but a flash of the Reality. I am not sure but I consider my experience like that alone). …. So, that is Pratyaksha PramAna or Proof by direct experience. Let’s remember that it is not accidental, anyone who follows the right path can have this experience. So, it can be repeated & same results can be obtained & thus it has a scientific validity.

Apart from the two types of proofs given above, can we have some idea how it can be inferred logically ? Let’s see the logical analysis below :

We perceive three different things (not counting consciousness at this moment) in this universe :

a) The Space which encompasses everything
b) The Matter in various forms
c) The Energy in various forms

( There is consciousness too which appears different from the three above, but that we shall discuss some other time.)

All those three appear completely different from each other. However, we know that :

a) All matters are basically same at the atomic & sub-atomic level i.e. it is just a game of combination of same fundamental particles & fields. Science agrees that theoretically, anything can be changed into anything.
b) The Matter & Energy are not different. The Matter can be converted into energy & vice-versa. This is as per Einstein’s famous theory on which all fission & fusion phenomena are based.
c) All energy are basically same & can be converted into each other.
The above is scientifically true. So, basically, there is no difference between the stone & the flowing water, our skin, flesh & bones, the fire, the electricity, wood, sound etc. etc., So, the one-ness of all matter & all energy is proved scientifically.

Now, are the space & matter/energy different ? Let’s see :

I see a solid wall of Iron in front of me. There is no hole, no space in the wall … apparently nothing can pass through it. I can touch it, feel it … it is solid & totally different from space which cannot be touched or felt by our sense organs. However, science tells us that the iron wall in front of me is made up of innumerable very tiny Iron molecules which are joined together by inter-molecular forces between them but the distances between the molecules is many times the size of each molecule. So, there is a lot of space in the Iron Wall due to these distances between the molecules but we don’t see those distance & resulting space within … it all appears as matter. Now, we further know that the molecules are made of iron atoms which are held together within inter-atomic forces between them & the space between any two atom is much larger than the size of the atom(s). Again that space is not visible to us & that space too looks as matter only. When we go inside the atom, we find that the atom is 99.999 % space only, except some sub-atomic particles inside. It has not been possible due to our scientific limitations to go beyond it, but we have known that 99.999 % of space in the wall in front of me, looks as solid matter & not space. Science agrees that space actually is not truly empty but filled with dark matter & dark energy, which we don’t see or feel but scientists have come up with some idea of its measure in this universe. So, that proves that space & matter & also energy are basically not different.

So, we can say that whatever we see as matter, whatever we feel as energy & whatever we perceive as space is actually One which alone manifests itself as three different things in this manifested universe. Now, can we say that, that One is matter ? Can we say that, that One is energy ? Can we say that, that One is Space ? No ! We must give it a different name …. to be able to put it in a different category …. but is there any category left ? It is matter & yet it is not matter, it is energy & yet it is not energy, it is space & yet it is not space.

So, that is AnumAna … proof by inference. It is not complete, as we have yet to discuss Consciousness. Is Consciousness different from matter/energy/space, or is it another form of the same Reality ? Can anyone throw some light ?

OM

kd gupta
20 November 2009, 09:25 AM
Krsn says...
Tasmaad ajnaanasambhootam hritstham jnaanaasinaatmanah;
Cchittwainam samshayam yogam aatishthottishtha bhaarata.
This is the last shloka of gita in fourth chapter named as Gyan-Karm Sanyasyoga or the chapter comprising of transcendental knowledge or in other words we can say that there is one thing which is beyond the Karm and Gyan .
Beyond the Karm...
Krsn says Arjun to perform duty as Vigatajwarah or without any sorrow . What happens when Arjun could not kill Jayadrath and goes to pyre , Krsn shows the illuminating sun .
Beyond the Gyan..
Krsn sent Uddhav to tell his Gyan to Gopies at Gokul . What happens when Uddhav salutes gopies for their love to Krsn , gyan goes waste .
So there is one thing and that is devotion which compells Arjun to say , Karishye Vachanam Tava and this Bhakti is Transcedental knowedge and Transcedental duty.

kd gupta
20 November 2009, 09:48 AM
As Atanuji , hints...for translation , God alone is real . I find this in line as....Dwau suparna sakhayau...yaj.

atanu
20 November 2009, 09:57 AM
Krsn says...
Tasmaad ajnaanasambhootam hritstham jnaanaasinaatmanah;
Cchittwainam samshayam yogam aatishthottishtha bhaarata.
This is the last shloka of gita in fourth chapter named as Gyan-Karm Sanyasyoga or the chapter comprising of transcendental knowledge or in other words we can say that there is one thing which is beyond the Karm and Gyan .
Beyond the Karm...
Krsn says Arjun to perform duty as Vigatajwarah or without any sorrow . What happens when Arjun could not kill Jayadrath and goes to pyre , Krsn shows the illuminating sun .
Beyond the Gyan..
Krsn sent Uddhav to tell his Gyan to Gopies at Gokul . What happens when Uddhav salutes gopies for their love to Krsn , gyan goes waste .
So there is one thing and that is devotion which compells Arjun to say , Karishye Vachanam Tava and this Bhakti is Transcedental knowedge and Transcedental duty.

Namaste Guptaji,

5.4. Children, not the wise, speak of knowledge and the Yoga of action or the performance of action as though they are distinct and different; he who is truly established in one obtains the fruits of both.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
20 November 2009, 10:09 AM
As Atanuji , hints...for translation , God alone is real . I find this in line as....Dwau suparna sakhayau...yaj.

Namaste Guptaji,

It goes further. To see and know the 'Dwau suparna sakhayau', a Seer is required. Brahman is not the object. It is the subject under all states and beyond states. If one truly surrenders and follows up the teaching of Shri Krishna, one joins the Seer.

“Noble indeed are all these; but I deem the wise man as My very Self; for, steadfast in mind, he is established in Me alone as the supreme goal”—VII.18.

Good is ego less Dvaita worship but not so ego worship, since such worshippers make Brahman into an object, which is actually ignorance (edited from original pApa), especially after being told by Lord repeatedly that Brahman is the sole Seer, Knower, Doer. Worshipping Ganga with Ganga water is good but it may not be good to feel superior to one who says "mA, how can i offer to you that which is yours to begin with?"

I hope that you will agree to some extent at least.

Om Namah Shivaya

satay
20 November 2009, 11:00 AM
namaskar,



Good is ego less Dvaita worship but not so ego worship, since such worshippers make Brahman into an object, which is actually pApa, especially after being told by Lord repeatedly that Brahman is the sole Seer, Knower, Doer. Worshipping Ganga with Ganga water is good but it may not be good to feel superior to one who says "mA, how can i offer to you that which is yours to begin with?"

I hope that you will agree to some extent at least.

Om Namah Shivaya

Most of India is worshipping the ultimate in one shape or the other. Are you saying most hindus are committing pApa by doing this?

Hmmm...

atanu
20 November 2009, 11:21 AM
namaskar,

Most of India is worshipping the ultimate in one shape or the other. Are you saying most hindus are committing pApa by doing this?

Hmmm...

Namaste Satay,

Taken to its extreme, yes -- as seen of Religious extremism and conversion efforts of so-called superior men of christian God. Else how can a person kill in the name of God?

God made into an object of mind and then trying to impose that image is pApa born of ignorance.

Hindus do not impose. You said: Most of India is worshipping the ultimate in one shape or the other. That contains answer.

PS: However, thank you for pointing out the extreme of me. I have modified the post in question.

Om

satay
20 November 2009, 12:01 PM
namaste,


Namaste Satay,

Taken to its extreme, yes -- as seen of Religious extremism and conversion efforts of so-called superior men of christian God. Else how can a person kill in the name of God?


Hmm...okay.



God made into an object of mind and then trying to impose that image is pApa born of ignorance.


Sorry, I am not comprehending this. Even according to sankaracarya the world is real to those who are in ignorance i.e. the vyvaharic (sp?) world exists for those who believe that it does exist. So how can we say that it is pApa? Perhaps you are saying that 'trying to impose one's worldview on others is pApa'? Is that what you are saying?

Sorry, not trying to derail the thread but just trying to understand.

atanu
20 November 2009, 12:35 PM
namaste,
Hmm...okay.

Sorry, I am not comprehending this. Even according to sankaracarya the world is real to those who are in ignorance i.e. the vyvaharic (sp?) world exists for those who believe that it does exist. So how can we say that it is pApa? Perhaps you are saying that 'trying to impose one's worldview on others is pApa'? Is that what you are saying?

Sorry, not trying to derail the thread but just trying to understand.

Namaste Satay,

I am sorry for using an inappropriate word pApa, which I have replaced with ignorance (ajnaanam). pApa is not an irreducible aspect as ignorance is. In other words, at least advaitins do not recognise pApa. It is ignorance of Dvaita, carried to extreme, that leads to intoleration, coertion, and killing of others not alligned to one's belief.

Declaration of such bhakti as 'Enjoying rasa at Lord's feet' as superior to other aims is of course a faith of only a mild nature. Yet it is ignorance. Since Brahman is not the object but the subject itself, as taught through Aham Brahmasmi, realised by following up:

BG 13.12 Adhyaatma jnaana nityatwam tattwa jnaanaartha darshanam;
Etajjnaanamiti proktam ajnaanam yadato’nyathaa.

BG 13.13 Jneyam yattat pravakshyaami yajjnaatwaa’mritamashnute;
Anaadimatparam brahma na sattannaasaduchyate.
-----------------------
Lord Krishna does say that not abiding in Adhyaatma jnaana is ajnaanam.

Om Namah Shivaya

Ekanta
20 November 2009, 02:07 PM
... we have yet to discuss Consciousness. Is Consciousness different from matter/energy/space, or is it another form of the same Reality ? Can anyone throw some light ?
OM

Some food for thought...

"All this is guided by Consciousness, is supported by Consciousness. The basis is Consciousness. Consciousness is Brahman [Prajnanam Brahma]."

“This whole world is prevaded by Me in My unmanifest form. All beings exist in Me, but I am not contained in them!” (Bhagavad Gita 9.4)

I read a nice explanation of this that goes as follows:
“All beings exist in Me” = there is gold in ornaments
“but I am not contained in them” = there are no ornaments in gold

Gold is permanent, ornament is impermanent.


When seeing only name/form of the ornament it’s different from gold… Dvaita
When seeing both name/form and the fact its gold… Visishta Advaita
When seeing only gold… Advaita


Is one view truer than the other? ^^ If so how?

Ganeshprasad
20 November 2009, 05:28 PM
Pranam Atanu ji

not wishing to derail this thread, but i could not help my self.


Namaste Satay,

I am sorry for using an inappropriate word pApa, which I have replaced with ignorance (ajnaanam). pApa is not an irreducible aspect as ignorance is. In other words, at least advaitins do not recognise pApa. It is ignorance of Dvaita, carried to extreme, that leads to intoleration, coertion, and killing of others not alligned to one's belief.


you should read up on qualities of a bhakta chapter 12 Bhagvat Gita. the world would be a better place, if everyone cultivate that path

as desired by Krishna, contrary to as you might say would lead someone to be as quoted that leads to intoleration, coertion, and killing of others not aligned to one's belief, .




Declaration of such bhakti as 'Enjoying rasa at Lord's feet' as superior to other aims is of course a faith of only a mild nature. Yet it is ignorance.

Om Namah Shivaya Hmm, lets see what Lord Krishna says regarding ignorance

sankhya-yogau prthag balah
pravadanti na panditah
ekam apy asthitah samyag
ubhayor vindate phalam

Only the ignorant speak of karma-yoga and devotional service as being different from the analytical study of the material world [sankhya]. Those who are actually learned say that he who applies himself well to one of these paths achieves the results of both.

But then he also says this

Neither by study of the Vedas, nor by austerity, nor by charity, nor by ritual, can I be seen in this form as you have seen Me. (11.53)


bhaktya tv ananyaya sakya
aham evam-vidho 'rjuna
jnatum drastum ca tattvena
pravestum ca parantapa


However, only by undivided devotional service, I can be seen in this form, can be known in essence, and also can be reached, O Arjuna. (11.54)

Let us not defame either path, they both have their place in Hindu Dharma.

Jai Shree Krishna

devotee
20 November 2009, 08:45 PM
Namaste Atanu, Satay, Gupta ji & all,

Whenever we discuss Advaita, there are some suggestions as if Advaita doesn't believe in Bhakti ! That is a gross misunderstanding. If that was true then Sankaracharya would have not composed Bhaj Govindam. Then the Advaitins would have not suggested that Grace of God is necessary for success on this path etc.

Let's see this verse from Bhagwad Gita :

Sanyaasah karmayogashcha nihshreyaskaravubau l
Nirdwando hi mahaabaaho sukham bandhatpramuchyate ll BG 5.2 ll

In the above verse Lord speaks of only two paths : Sannyaas & Karmayoga. He doesn't talk about Bhakti Yoga separately. Why ? Because Bhakti is common to both the paths.

What is Bhakti ? This term has been misunderstood like nothing else. If I see Lord Krishna in human form wearing certain types of clothes, with a cow beside him & a flute in his hands ... then I am a Bhakta & if I see the same Lord Krishna in all beings & in everything, as infinite Brahman which pervades everything ("Aham "Aatma gudaakesha Sarvabhootaashaya sthitah" ... is it wrong ?) .... then my Bhakti is under question ? If I offer some flowers, incense-sticks-fragrance, sound of ringing bells, singing bhajans, then I am a great Bhakta & if I constantly meditate on Him & feel one-ness with him, then I am not a Bhakta ?

This Bhakti doesn't mean only ritualistic worshipping & Lord Krishna also keeps ritualistic worship at a much lower place in this verse :

"Shreyo hi jnaanam abhyaasaat jnaanaat dhyaanam vishishyate l" ( BG 12.12)

===> "Abhyaas" or Practice is ritualistic worship
===> "Jnaan" or Knowledge is understanding of scriptures ... this is kept higher than Abhyaas
===> "Dhyaan" is meditation

Let's not forget that this chapter is not dedicated to Jnaan Yoga but to Bhakti Yoga & yet Lord places meditation much above the "practice' in that verse.

In the same chapter, Lord Krishna says in verse 12.2 : " I consider devotee of Me in sagunrupa as shreshtha yogi". In verse 12.3 he says about the devotee meditating on of niraakaar Brahman as : " Te praapnuvanti maameva" ( He attains me)!

The Jnana has always been accorded a high status by Lord Krishna. Let's see these verses :

Shreyaadravyamyaadyajnajnanyajnah parantapa l
sarvam karmaakhilam paartha jnaane parisamaapyate ll 4.33 ll

In the above verse, Lord Krishna says in unequivocal terms that Jnaan yajna is much better than Dravya-yajna (materialistic & ritualistic). The verses 4.33 to 4.39 establishes the higher status accorded to Jnaan.

Again in verses 7.16 to 7.18 of BG, Lord Krishna again shows his preference to Jnaani than the other three types of Bhaktas.

How do the Advaita teachers see Bhakti & Jnaan yoga :



It is Brahman that, in association with MAyA – even the words ‘in association with’ are wrong; for Brahman does no work and so does not ‘associate’ itself with anything; so we should more precisely say ‘appearing to be in association with’ – is the Ishvara that monitors and manages both the universe and the JIvas. It is in His control all this world of JIvas rolls about. When that is so, for us to transcend this curtain of MAyA, and to get out also of His control so that we may realise the Brahman that is the core of Him as well as us, is not possible without the sanction of that power, namely Ishvara. In other words only by the Grace of Ishvara can our mind be overcome and Brahman-realisation can happen.

---- from Advaita Saadhanaa

Again :


It is for these twin tasks of purification of mind and of making it one-pointed that the Acharya (Sankaracharya) has prescribed karma and bhakti as preliminary to jnAna yoga. The prerequisite to starting jnAna yoga are karma yoga and bhakti yoga.
The barren land of the mind has to be tilled through karma yoga and then watered through bhakti yoga. Without this tilling and watering, nothing can be made to grow in that barren land of the mind.

------ from Advaita Saadhanaa

I hope it removes some doubts over devotion and Jnaan Yoga {which is being discussed here}.

OM

atanu
20 November 2009, 11:23 PM
Pranam Atanu ji
But then he also says this
Neither by study of the Vedas, nor by austerity, nor by charity, nor by ritual, can I be seen in this form as you have seen Me. (11.53)

bhaktya tv ananyaya sakya
aham evam-vidho 'rjuna
jnatum drastum ca tattvena
pravestum ca parantapa
However, only by undivided devotional service, I can be seen in this form, can be known in essence, and also can be reached, O Arjuna. (11.54)

Let us not defame either path, they both have their place in Hindu Dharma.
Jai Shree Krishna

Namaste Ganeshprasadji,

I do not know how the 'Undivided Devotion' in the verse 11.54 becomes 'Devotional Service'? Undivided Devotion means loving attachment/attention to one thing only, which is Dhyana. I am not defaming Bhakti. Without love, the ways of Jnana will be tasteless and indeed impossible to traverse. My teacher warns in sternest way not to differentiate Bhakti (loving application of mind to one alone) from Jnana, which in one word is Dhyana.

In the above verse quoted by you also, the undivided devotion leads to the attention concentrated only on the object of devotion, leading to exclusion of all other diversions, and eventually absorption. And this is absorption in Self, which is the SUBJECT and LORD. On the other hand, the lack of undivided devotion (scattered attention and lack of love) does not lead to centering of mind in Self. Else why would one constantly compare and assert: My way is superior? 'Undivided Bhakti' and 'Stitha Pragnya' are two words signifying the same thing. Else, Ghana Shyam (Pragnya Ghana Sarvesvara) would not teach:

“Noble indeed are all these; but I deem the wise man as My very Self; for, steadfast in mind, he is established in Me alone as the supreme goal”—VII.18.

------------------------
Undivided devotion and being Pragnya Stitha to me are the same. Both states cannot give rise to any scope for comparisons of superiority or inferiority. I am not trying to defame LOVE of Bhakti. I am trying to bring to attention that Brahman/Atman/Lord is the subject, which initiate bhaktas hung on 'SUPERIORITY' theme ignore or do not know.

The Lord is the very heart of everone. One may teach a particular group of a particular way. But to oppose that 'The Lord is the very heart of everyone', is to contradict Hindu Shashtra.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
20 November 2009, 11:39 PM
Namaste Ganeshprasadji,

By the teaching of Shankara in Vivekachudamani, Bhakti is the first requirement.

31. Among things conducive to Liberation, devotion (Bhakti) holds the supreme place. The seeking after one’s real nature is designated as devotion.

46. Faith (Shraddha), devotion and the Yoga of meditation – these are mentioned by the Shruti as the immediate factors of Liberation in the case of a seeker; whoever abides in these gets Liberation from the bondage of the body, which is the conjuring of Ignorance.
-------------------------------------------

Frankly speaking, to me, Shankara encompasses all shruti, treating the object of devotion not as a mere object but as the subject, as the very heart of the bhakta. I am sure that Dvaita Gurus do not treat God as the mere object, but many devotees do so. We often have seen very severe attacks against Shankara's teachings. In contrast what is said here is only loving devotion. :)


Om Namah Shivaya

devotee
21 November 2009, 01:27 AM
Namaste Atanu,



By the teaching of Shankara in Vivekachudamani, Bhakti is the first requirement.

31. Among things conducive to Liberation, devotion (Bhakti) holds the supreme place. The seeking after one’s real nature is designated as devotion.


And how can we forget that the very first verse is dedicated to God (Lord Krishna) as the Guru in Vivekachudamani ?

"Sarvavedantasiddhantagocharam tam agocharam l
Govindam parmaanandam sadgurum praNatosmyaham ll" VC.1 ll

I prostrate myself before Govinda, the true Guru & ultimate Bliss, who is unattainable resort of all scriptures and Vedanta.

OM

kd gupta
21 November 2009, 04:30 AM
Namaste Guptaji,

It goes further. To see and know the 'Dwau suparna sakhayau', a Seer is required. Brahman is not the object. It is the subject under all states and beyond states. If one truly surrenders and follows up the teaching of Shri Krishna, one joins the Seer.

“Noble indeed are all these; but I deem the wise man as My very Self; for, steadfast in mind, he is established in Me alone as the supreme goal”—VII.18.

Good is ego less Dvaita worship but not so ego worship, since such worshippers make Brahman into an object, which is actually ignorance (edited from original pApa), especially after being told by Lord repeatedly that Brahman is the sole Seer, Knower, Doer. Worshipping Ganga with Ganga water is good but it may not be good to feel superior to one who says "mA, how can i offer to you that which is yours to begin with?"

I hope that you will agree to some extent at least.

Om Namah Shivaya

Namaste Atanuji
I am oblized that you provided two good thoughts 1. Offering ganga water to ganga 2.brahma is a subject and not the object . Certainly these two points add the discussion of Bhakti to current thread
and not derail the thread .
1. Offering ganga water to ganga is just offering water to sun , to brahma....patram pushpam phalam Toyam. Neither it is Paap nor Ignorance and is purely spiritual as well as scientific , and it is just like
feeding soil [ food ] to soil [ body ] . If a patient does not want to take the medicine it is injected , similarly Gyan and Karm when are obsolete and are covered with Maya , here I say hallucination , the
Hunger or Bhakti plays the role of injection . see what Krsn says..
Daivee hyeshaa gunamayee mama maayaa duratyayaa;
Maameva ye prapadyante maayaametaam taranti te.
Here prapadyante means only Bhakti .
2. How Shruti illustrate Brahma being an Object and surrounded by bhakti [ also to refer Snipji that vedas contain Bhakti ]
Arhan vibharshi saykani dhanvarhan nishkam yajtam vishwarupam, arrhanidam dayase vishwamabhyam na va ojivo rudra twadasti...rig 2/33/10
O brahma , o Rudra , [ object ] you take bow . Here I shall like to insist that shruti says for Sakar [ Idol worship ] also .

atanu
21 November 2009, 08:17 AM
Namaste Atanuji
I am oblized that you provided two good thoughts 1. Offering ganga water to ganga 2.brahma is a subject and not the object . Certainly these two points add the discussion of Bhakti to current thread
and not derail the thread .
1. Offering ganga water to ganga is just offering water to sun , to brahma....patram pushpam phalam Toyam. Neither it is Paap nor Ignorance and is purely spiritual as well as scientific , and it is just like
feeding soil [ food ] to soil [ body ] . If a patient does not want to take the medicine it is injected , similarly Gyan and Karm when are obsolete and are covered with Maya , here I say hallucination , the
Hunger or Bhakti plays the role of injection . see what Krsn says..
Daivee hyeshaa gunamayee mama maayaa duratyayaa;
Maameva ye prapadyante maayaametaam taranti te.
Here prapadyante means only Bhakti .

namaste guptaji,

The issue with bhakti is already discussed in above few posts. When the the object of bhakti is nearest in the heart, to worship anyadevata can just be an intermediate step to purify mind and improve concentration..

BG 13.12 Adhyaatma jnaana nityatwam tattwa jnaanaartha darshanam;
Etajjnaanamiti proktam ajnaanam yadato’nyathaa.

12. Constancy in Self-knowledge, perception of the end of true knowledge—this is declared to be knowledge, and what is opposed to it is ignorance.

Guptaji I am not denigrating Bhakti. Just the opposite. I am trying to constantly defend against denigration and remind attackers of passages as above. Lord has said that anything opposed to Atma Jnana is ignorance.


2. How Shruti illustrate Brahma being an Object and surrounded by bhakti [ also to refer Snipji that vedas contain Bhakti ]
Arhan vibharshi saykani dhanvarhan nishkam yajtam vishwarupam, arrhanidam dayase vishwamabhyam na va ojivo rudra twadasti...rig 2/33/10
O brahma , o Rudra , [ object ] you take bow . Here I shall like to insist that shruti says for Sakar [ Idol worship ] also .

Are you referring to brahmA or to brahman?

Om

kd gupta
21 November 2009, 08:54 AM
I just want to refer the following vedmantra
Agnirasmi janmana jatveda ghratam me chakshurmratam ma aasana .
Let the gyani have the bhakti ganga and bhakt have illuminating sun of gyan in their Heart .

Ganeshprasad
21 November 2009, 10:09 AM
Pranam Atanu ji

As I said before I have no desire to derail this thread, we can play with words as much as we want and it is very easy to get mislead or misread what is intended, that is the power of vak. I know there was no service in the verse I quoted yet service is not devoid in a bhakta.

I only intervened because of what I perceived to be an attack on bhakti, that the followers are in ignorance. Which you have since qualified as not the case. Bhakti and gyan are not mutually exclusive, we will always stress either, depending on what colour glass we are wearing.

For a gyani bhakti is a stepping stone where else for a bhakta merging is not an option, gaining bhakti is the final emancipation.

mac-citta mad-gata-prana
bodhayantah parasparam
kathayantas ca mam nityam
tusyanti ca ramanti ca

yoginam api sarvesam
mad-gatenantar-atmana
sraddhavan bhajate yo mam
sa me yuktatamo matah.
I offer no translation bg 10.9 and 6.47

atanu
21 November 2009, 10:13 AM
I just want to refer the following vedmantra
Agnirasmi janmana jatveda ghratam me chakshurmratam ma aasana .
Let the gyani have the bhakti ganga and bhakt have illuminating sun of gyan in their Heart .

Namaste Guptaji,

That is good. Faith, Devotion are said the be jnAnA mAtA and these go together in sadhakas of good intent. I did not say that worshipping Ganga with Ganga water is ajnanam (ignorance) but not knowing "I am worshipping Ganga with Ganga water" is ignorance. Similarly, not knowing the subject (the Seer, The Buddhi, the Knower, the Doer) and yet asserting "I am a superior bhakta" or "my way is better", IMO suggests unripe bhakta, who usually are very harsh and very easily say "Shankara taught to misguide", without knowing what Shri Krishna teaches. Shri Krishna teaches:

4.24. Brahman is the oblation; Brahman is the melted butter (ghee); by Brahman is the oblation poured into the fire of Brahman; Brahman verily shall be reached by him who always sees Brahman in action.

and also:

BG, 4th Chapter

Api chedasi paapebhyah sarvebhyah paapakrittamah;
Sarvam jnaanaplavenaiva vrijinam santarishyasi.
36. Even if thou art the most sinful of all sinners, yet thou shalt verily cross all sins by the raft of knowledge.

Yathaidhaamsi samiddho’gnir bhasmasaat kurute’rjuna;
Jnaanaagnih sarvakarmaani bhasmasaat kurute tathaa.
37. As the blazing fire reduces fuel to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge reduce all actions to ashes!

Na hi jnaanena sadrisham pavitram iha vidyate;
Tat swayam yogasamsiddhah kaalenaatmani vindati.
38. Verily there is no purifier in this world like knowledge. He who is perfected in Yoga finds it in the Self in time.

Shraddhaavaan labhate jnaanam tatparah samyatendriyah;
Jnaanam labdhvaa paraam shaantim achirenaadhigacchati.
39. The man who is full of faith, who is devoted to it, and who has subdued all the senses, obtains (this) knowledge; and, having obtained the knowledge, he goes at once to the supreme peace.

--------------------------


Devotee,

Sorry for the diversion. I suppose diversions are also useful. Please continue.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
21 November 2009, 10:32 AM
Pranam Atanu ji
I only intervened because of what I perceived to be an attack on bhakti, that the followers are in ignorance.

Namaste Ganeshprasadji,

Has any jnAnA upasaka been agressive? If you see all threads, you will find only defence. I have no cause to divide jnana, bhakti, and karma. Explanation is given in the previous post.

Further, I respectifully remind that Turiyam is actionless as per Shruti. To know Turiyam (which the shruti enjoins) and yet have a feeling of doing a service do not go together. So, when a bhakta asserts that we wish to serve only, they must also acknowledge that their goal is not to know the Turiyam. That would be honest and perfectly OK.

But to try to show that jnAnA upasakas are pursuing a false and lower goal (as a bhaktajan attempted and as christians also do) will surely be opposed, at least by me. Let this be an egoistic assertion of me.


Om Namah Shivaya

satay
21 November 2009, 02:01 PM
Pranam atanu




But to try to show that jnAnA upasakas are pursuing a false and lower goal (as a bhaktajan attempted and as christians also do) will surely be opposed, at least by me. Let this be an egoistic assertion of me.


Om Namah Shivaya

There is neither bhaktajan nor any christians on this thread, so I am not sure what you are defeding against since there was no attack on this thread to begin with. No one here on this thread has tried to show that Gyan upasakas are pursuing a false and lower goal.



Further, I respectifully remind that Turiyam is actionless as per Shruti. To know Turiyam (which the shruti enjoins) and yet have a feeling of doing a service do not go together. So, when a bhakta asserts that we wish to serve only, they must also acknowledge that their goal is not to know the Turiyam. That would be honest and perfectly OK.


We must all be honest. In the final thesis of advaita there is no 'other' thus a relationship, devotion or service is not possible as two are needed for such. There is only one actionless brahman; none other; no jiva, no isvara, no vedas, no smriti, no material thus no relationship and no bhakti. This in itself is perfectly OK.




as seen of Religious extremism and conversion efforts of so-called superior men of christian God. Else how can a person kill in the name of God?


With respect to your comments on 'bakthas feel superior' and the above. Could I quote to you your own quotation, 'physician heal thyself' ? Please forgive me for doing this. But isn't it true that if all humanity followed one worldview (pick one) that there would be peace. By saying that bakthas feel superior, please take care that you yourself don't have the same feeling while expounding your worldview. However, I digress and wish not to continue on this subtopic in this thread.

You corrected your orginal post, thanks for that.

Take care.

atanu
21 November 2009, 11:17 PM
Pranam atanu
We must all be honest. In the final thesis of advaita there is no 'other' thus a relationship, ------

With respect to your comments on 'bakthas feel superior' and the above. Could I quote to you your own quotation, 'physician heal thyself' ? Please forgive me for doing this. But isn't it true that if all humanity followed one worldview (pick one) that there would be peace. By saying that bakthas feel superior, please take care that you yourself don't have the same feeling while expounding your worldview. However, I digress and wish not to continue on this subtopic in this thread.


Namaste satay

I agree we must be honest. Regarding Advaita darshana, that is not the understanding here. Advaita Turiyam and Advaita Darshana are not the same; the former is the goal and the latter the path. Vivekachudamani in its 16th verse favours refuting counter arguments with reason. In this very thread two specific mentions were made by Shri Gupta as below:



beyond the Karm and Gyan .
Beyond the Karm...
Krsn says Arjun to perform duty as Vigatajwarah or without any sorrow . What happens when Arjun could not kill Jayadrath and goes to pyre , Krsn shows the illuminating sun .
Beyond the Gyan

Shri Gupta also cited my name. Guptaji is respected and his views are of wisdom. But I do not know whether in this case it is wrong to exchange views civily and show from Gita that beyond knowledge is Param Shanti and not another third path:

4.39. The man who is full of faith, who is devoted to it, and who has subdued all the senses, obtains (this) knowledge; and, having obtained the knowledge, he goes at once to the supreme peace.

Similarly, it was pointed out to Shri Ganeshprasadji that in BG verse 11.54 the reference is to 'Undivided Devotion' and not to 'Devotional Service'?" Only in this context, the reference to Turiyam, wherein service would be untenable, came up. There was no dis-respect intended to either Ganeshprasadji or Guptaji. I may be wrong, however, in my perception.



Take care.

I will. Thanks.

Om Namah Shivaya

saidevo
22 November 2009, 12:57 AM
Let us get back to the discussion of the four mantras of the mANDukya upaniShad that describe the four pAdas--quarters of Atman who is Brahman. It is significant that the word pAda--quarter applies to the description in all its senses:

• The four pAdas of Atman are like four successive, compartmental quarters (sections, rooms) of a house. The ingress and egress to the house is necessarily successive--not random, so to reach Atman the antaryAmi--indweller, the sAdhaka has to pass through the three levels of existence: waking, dreaming and deep sleep into the inner core at the turIya level.

• The four pAdas of Atman are like the four legs of dharma personified as a cow--pashu. Atman in its manifestation as jIvAtmA moves about the world using these four legs.

• Viewed as the four quardrants of the circle of life, the four pAdas stand distinct and separate to the Atman who is the witness. The fourth pAda--turIya is not only distinct on its own but serves to pervade and connect the other three as the immanent base of the circle--the movie screen.

mAnDukya upanishad establishes the relationship between the Atman and Brahman, proving that they are identical, by a process of analysis and synthesis. It establishes that just like the Atman projected as an individual jIvAtmA, Brahman is projected in four pAdas in manifest creation as vaishvAnara--vishva nara--the universal man, virAT--the first manifestation through BrahmA.

The waking state of vaishvAnara and virAT-puruSha

Verse 3 of the mANDukya upaniShad states:

jAgarita-sthAno bahiShpraj~jaH saptA~gga ekonaviMShati-mukhaH
sthUlabhug-vaishvAnaraH pratama pAdaH ||3||

• In the jAgrita-sthAna--waking state, Atman is manifest in the the waking consciousness of vaishvAnara, as jIvAtmA--the Individual Person; Brahman as the Universal Consciousness is manifest as virAT--Universal Person.

• While jIvAtmA has the biological body of a living human, virAT has the entire universe for his body.

• Both the jIvAtmA and virAT have saptAngga--seven limbs, which are enumerated in the muNDaka upanishad thus:

agnirmUrdhA chakShuShI chandrasUryau
dishaH shrotre vAgvivRutAshcha vedAH |
vAyuH prANo hRudayaM vishvamasya
padbhyAM pRuthivI hyeSha sarvabhUtAntarAtmA || 4||

This seven limbs of Brahman and the Atman are:
head
virAT: shining regions of heaven; jIva: the sahasrAra region of brain.

eyes
v: moon and sun; j: eyes reflect external light and shine with own internal light.

ears
v: the four directions; j: the sound input from the four directions.

speech
v: the Vedas; j: knowledge revealed by the Vedas.

breath
v: the air of the cosmos; j: prANA manifest as oxygen.

heart
v; the entire universe; j: physical heart with potential universal love.

feet
v: the earth; j: the feet are grounded on the earth.

• Both jIvAtmA and virAT 'eat' or consume--bhuk, and enjoy life in the waking state using ekonaviMShati-mukhaH--nineteen 'mouths'. While the jIvAtmA's 'mouths' are embedded in its physical and subtle bodies, virAT's 'mouths' are the collective manifestation of jIvas' organs.

the five jnAnendriyas--senses of knowledge:
shrotra--ears, tvak--skin, chakShus--eyes, jihva--tongue, and ghrANa--nose.

the five karmendriyas--senses of action:
vAk--speech, pANi--hand, pAda-feet, upastha--genitals, pAyu--anus.

the pancha prANAs--'vital airs' involved in body functions:
prANa--inhaled and exhaled breath, apAna--excretion of faeces and urine,
vyAna--circulation of blood, udAna--swallowing and digestion, udAna--faculty of thought absorption.

the antaHkaraNa chatuShTaya--fourfold psychological organ:
manas--mind, which thinks and deliberates
buddhi--intellect, which ratiocinates, understands and decides
ahaMkAra--ego, which arrogates and appropriates things to itself
chitta--memory, recollection and retention of past impressions.

• The consciousness of the waking state is bahiShprajna--outward consciousness. In the jIvAtmA it is the aham asmi--I am, of the ahaMkAra--ego, which is under the spell of six vairi(s)--enemies: kAma--desire/passion, krodha--anger, lobha--greed, moha--infatuation/delution, mada--pride/arrogance, and mAtsarya--envy/jealousy; they arise from the jIvAtmA's vAsanas--impressions of past life, steep the jIva in mAya--delusion and avidya--ignorance and bind it to the saMsAra--course of wordly life and cyclic birth and death.

The bahiShprajna of virAT as the Cosmic ahaMkAra is different from the limited outward consciousness of the jIvAtmA. Inasmuch everything is comprehended in the consciousness of the virAT, there are no likes and dislikes--rather they are balanced in the totality of virAT's simultaneous, universal, outward existence.

• The knowledge of the jIvAtmA in the waking state is by sensual perception and mental cognition; virAT's knowledge is by insight and intuition. Since it is desireless, its bahiShprajna is liberated, making the virAT sarvajna, sarvagata, sarvashaktimata--omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent.

More on the other three verses in the following posts, as this post is already too large to read, contemplate and discuss further.

**********

As a tailpiece, the very term 'vaishvAnara' is indicative of the three states of existence. A jIvAtmA is nara--human in its waking state; vAnara--monkey in the dream state, restless and jumping; and vishva--universal, whole, collective mass in the deep sleep state.

saidevo
22 November 2009, 02:28 AM
namaste Atanu.

Thank you for listing out the many references to Adi Shankara's famous quote "brahma satyam jagan mithya".

IMHO, an advaitin does not need to make a distinction between bhakti as devotion and bhakti as service, since both Adi Shankara and RamaNa maharshi were as much devotees as jnAnis.

Legend has it that in the famous TiruviDaimarudUr temple in Tamilnadu, Shiva worshipped himself, in order to demonstrate the shaivite Agama protocol.

Adi Shankara visited this temple and engaged the brAhmaNa pandits there who were steeped in the Vedic karma kANDa rituals, in a debate on the superiority of Advaita. The brAhmaNas after listening to his discourses told him that their rituals and prayers were daily observed by Shiva who presided over the temple as MahAlingeshvara and that if Shiva endorses the correctness of Advaita they would follow the path. Thereupon Shankara prayed to Shiva, "O Lord of MadhyArjuna, you indeed are the essence of all Upanishads. It is your glory that is proclaimed in the Vedas. You are the Lord of all Gods, you are All-knowing. Please reveal before all the truth that Advaita which is the main point of the Vedas is true and thus remove the doubts of all".

Even as the Acharya's prayers were over, a miraculous incident astonished everyone. The inside of the temple was bathed in a divine light and with it there was a voice from the heavens, deep and grave as the running clouds, proclaiming thrice, "satyam advaitam, satyam advaitam, satyam advaitam". (ref: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/advaitin/message/14085)

Such is the power of bhakti that a true jnAni has in the repertoire of his sAdhana.

On a trivial and lighter note, we have the term 'Self Service' in some restaurants. An advaitin's sAdhana until he becomes a jIvanmukta is only that--'Self service'; thereafter he seeks to serve people by trying to liberate them, and that again is 'Self Service'!

SANT
22 November 2009, 05:03 AM
On a trivial and lighter note, we have the term 'Self Service' in some restaurants. An advaitin's sAdhana until he becomes a jIvanmukta is only that--'Self service'; thereafter he seeks to serve people by trying to liberate them, and that again is 'Self Service'!
If a jivan mukta decides to serve people deosnt it mean that he is under satto guna.
Please can you explain?

saidevo
22 November 2009, 05:51 AM
namaste Sant.

By the term 'Self Service' I meant serving the Self that is Atman/Brahman, not the ego-ruled personal self of the jIvAtmA. A jIvanmukta who has realized the Self is essentially nirguNa, but he still has his physical and mental selves, and sattva guNa predominates them. He might choose to serve people by remaining at his place like RamaNa maharshi or wandering about the world like the ShankarAchAryas. A jIvanmukta might also have his disciples whose karma and guNa are bound to accrue to him, but since he is Self-Realized they get balanced in his nature as with the virAT, the Cosmic Consciousness.

Human thoughts and the action of guNas always have their effects of vibrations in the ocean of subtle matter. A jIvanmukta who wades through them is never affected by them; nor does he just steer clear of them; instead, he cleans his surroundings of impurities in the thoughts, words and actions of those around him by shining the light of Atman and the heat of his own tapas. This is perhaps the reason that people around a jIvanmukta forget their worries for the time being, and benefit by the sattvic vibrations emanating from him.

Inasmuch as jIvanmukta is always immersed in the Self, whatever he does is a service and worship to the Self, as Adi Shankara has prayed in his saundaryalaharI, verse 27:

Let my every word be a prayer to Thee,
Every movement of my hands a ritual gesture to Thee,
Every step I take a circumambulation of Thy image,
Every morsel I eat a rite of sacrifice to Thee,
Every time I lay down a prostration at Thy feet;
Every act of personal pleasure and all else that I do,
Let it all be a form of worshiping Thee."

SANT
22 November 2009, 06:12 AM
Yes thanks that was foolish
A jivan mukta(mahapurush) decides to help someone then it is his grace and his own decision and not that he is attached to satto guna and has to do it.
Just like when god graces us.
This applies to their other actions also which may appear rajo guni or tamo guni.

atanu
22 November 2009, 06:20 AM
Yes thanks that was foolish
A jivan mukta(mahapurush) decides to help someone then it is his grace and his own decision and not that he is attached to satto guna and has to do it.
Just like when god graces us.
This applies to their other actions also which may appear rajo guni or tamo guni.


Namaste Sant,

But you were correct and you are correct. Say, a jeevan mukta continues to live in a body. He indeed lives as Sattwik-transparent mind --acting as an empty pipe transmitting the grace of Lord. But not as a bound. There are two types of karmas; one type binds and another does not. He does whatever is necessary.

This is what is told of Jivanmuktas.

Om

Om Namah Shivaya

SANT
22 November 2009, 06:40 AM
Namaste Sant,

But you were correct and you are correct. Say, a jeevan mukta continues to live in a body. He indeed lives as Sattwik-transparent mind --acting as an empty pipe transmitting the grace of Lord. But not as a bound. There are two types of karmas; one type binds and another does not. He does whatever is necessary.

This is what is told of Jivanmuktas.

Om

Om Namah Shivaya
This is what is told of Jivanmuktas.
No its not about that.
I just wanted to attack the postion that one can be a jivan mukta.
I just dont find the idea of a person being a hundred percent jivan mukt real.
Look at the story of bharat.
Wasnt he also a jivan mukta?
But he got attached to the deer and had to be reborn.
Upto brahm loka there is maya.

atanu
22 November 2009, 08:21 AM
No its not about that.
I just wanted to attack the postion that one can be a jivan mukta.
I just dont find the idea of a person being a hundred percent jivan mukt real.
Look at the story of bharat.
Wasnt he also a jivan mukta?
But he got attached to the deer and had to be reborn.
Upto brahm loka there is maya.

Namaste Sant,

Then you should have told directly. Nevertheless, i believe similarly but not exactly. One who has not experienced something cannot say either this way or that way. Brahm loka (the Hiranyagarbha world and below) is the mental realm. Every night everyone escapes this sargo, without knowing, and dwells in Shushupti, in Sarvesvara. In deep sleep is anyone bound? Though it is rare but it is true that Jivan Mukti is a truth, as per shruti and smriti both. Lord Krishna himself teaches as below:

5.19 Ihaiva tairjitah sargo yeshaam saamye sthitam manah;
Nirdosham hi samam brahma tasmaad brahmani te sthitaah.

5.19. Even here, in this world the created world is overcome by those whose minds rest in equality; Brahman is taintless indeed and equal; therefore, they are established in Brahman.

5.28 Yatendriya manobuddhir munir mokshaparaayanah;
Vigatecchaabhaya krodho yah sadaa mukta eva sah.

5.28. With the senses, the mind and the intellect always controlled, having liberation as his supreme goal, free from desire, fear and anger—the sage is verily liberated for ever.
------------------------

If something appears absolutely impossible to me that does not mean universal impossibilty.

Om Namah Shivaya

SANT
22 November 2009, 09:07 AM
12.05 Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman, because the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult.

7.13
Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth
7.14
This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.

atanu
22 November 2009, 10:44 AM
12.05 Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman, because the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult.

7.13
Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth
7.14
This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.

Namaste Sant,

Without surrendering doership it is not possible to attain yoga. But that was not the subject. The subject was JEEVAN MUKTI, which the following verses support without doubt,

5.19 Ihaiva tairjitah sargo yeshaam saamye sthitam manah;
Nirdosham hi samam brahma tasmaad brahmani te sthitaah.

5.19. Even here, in this world the created world is overcome by those whose minds rest in equality; Brahman is taintless indeed and equal; therefore, they are established in Brahman.

5.28 Yatendriya manobuddhir munir mokshaparaayanah;
Vigatecchaabhaya krodho yah sadaa mukta eva sah.

5.28. With the senses, the mind and the intellect always controlled, having liberation as his supreme goal, free from desire, fear and anger—the sage is verily liberated for ever.

Om

devotee
22 November 2009, 09:53 PM
Namaste All,

Discussions help us in understanding the Truth in much better way. However, these discussions must be constructive i.e. to find the Truth.


What are the Rules for Dharmic Debates ?

It has been a matter of great debate between the followers of path of ritual worshipping & those who tread the path of knowledge. I am not going to add any fuel to the fire here & create trouble for Satay. This post is intended to tell the history to relatively new entrants to Sanatan Dharma & also let them know the rules for a Dharmic debate.

For any fair & civilized debate, it is important to lay down some rules for debate. It is also important to avoid personal attacks & use of foul language. All of us, including me, here on this board cannot claim to be more knowledgeable than either Sankara (promoter of Advaita Vedanta, also known as Maaya Vaad or Vivarta Vaad) or Madhavaacharya (Promoter of Dwaita Vaada). So, what should be the rules to follow in case of a dispute to be resolved ? The rules have been decided by the great Saints of the above Paths & they are based on Pramaana or proof which is acceptable to that school.

There are six Vedic Darshanas of philosophy (schools) in Hinduism. They are Nyaaya, Vaiseshika, Saankhya, Yoga, Purva Mimansa (or Karma Mimansa, believers of ritual parts of Vedas) & Uttar Mimansa(or Vedanta Darshana). All these schools accept the Vedas as unquestionable & the highest authority. However, they differ in interpretation of the Vedas & therefore the dispute. Uttar Mimansa is also known as Vedanta Darshana. This school has various branches. However, the most important among them are : Advaita Vedanta, Dwaita, Vishishta Adwaita. The Vaishnva Sampradayas belong either to Dwaita or Vishishta Advaita School.

The Pramaana accepted by all Vedic Darshanas are all or some of these :
Sabda Pramaana (i.e. The Vedas), Pratyaksha Pramaana, Anumana, Upamana, Ardhapatti & Anupalabdi.

Advaita Vedanta accepts all the six Pramanas mentioned above. Dwaita & Vishishta Advaita accept three of the six & they are : Sabda pramaana (the Vedas), Pratyaksha Pramaan (experiential) & Anumaana (by logical inference).

The problem starts when we don’t follow the rules of a debate & start setting our own rules as per our convenience. So, as the three Pramaana i.e. Sabda pramaana (the Vedas), Pratyaksha Pramaan (experiential) & Anumaana (by logical inference) are common to both Advaita Vedanta & Dwaita/Vishishta Advaita, we must confine our debate to these pramaanas alone.

My suggestion is that we should avoid these :

a) Saying that Shankara was sent by God to misguide people & take them away from the path of Dharma in Kaliyuga. I simply don’t know what the basis of this canard is.
b) The Advaitins are against devotion to God/Krishna. The reality is that Devotion to God & Karma Yoga is the primary requirement for being eligible to be accepted in Advaita Saadhana.
c) The use of uncivilized words e.g. dim witted (mandabuddhi), rascals etc. for Advaitins as has been done on this forum in earlier debates by some followers of ISKCON which must be avoided. It doesn't help a healthy discussion.
d) Refuting Advaita Darshana by (mis)quoting Puraanas (e.g. Bhagwat Purana etc.) or Smriti (e.g. Bhagwad Gita). The Smritis & Puranas must conform to the Vedas … this is the primary requirement of Sabda Pramaana & that has been accepted by the scholars of both schools. A lower court cannot pass a judgement against the High Court/Supreme Court's ruling !
e) Not accepting Upanishadic quotes … this is akin to refuting Sabda Pramaana & against the accepted rules of debate. It is like not accepting the verdict of the Supreme Court in a matter of dispute in interpretation of law !

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact is that supremacy of Advaita Vedanta over other schools in Hinduism was settled by Aadi Guru Sankaracharya nearly 1200 years ago. In his time, the Sanatan Dharma was going through a very difficult phase. There were nearly 72 branches within Sanatan Dharma at that time & Vedic teachings were badly clouded due to misinterpretation of the scriptures. To establish the supremacy of Vedanta teachings, Sankaracharya travelled the whole of India & debated with the heads of different schools & defeated all of them. Prominent among those who were defeated, were Bhatta Bhaskar (author of fallacious commentary on Vedanta Sutras), Dandi, Maurya, Harsha (author of Khandana Khanda Kadya), Abhinavagupta, Murari Misra, Udayanacharya, Dharmagupta, Kumarila Bhatta (great teacher of Mimansa Darshana who is credited with defeating Buddhism in India, Prabhakar (a realist who believed that sense perceptions were true), learned couple Mandan Misra & his wife Bharati. The effect of this universal (among various thoughts within sanatan Dharma) victory of Sankaracharya was so great that most of the schools simply closed down & there is no trace of them today.

And how they debated ? I am tempted to tell you about the debate that took place between Sankara & Mandan Misra. Mandan Misra was one of the strongest believers in Purva Mimansa. He almost hated Advaita teachings. However, when the debate started between the two scholars, Bharati, the wife of Mandan Misra was made the judge. We must give due credit to their fair way of debating ! Sankara was not afraid that Bharati who herself was a believer of Purva Mimansa before this debate & also wife of the opponent could be biased ! This debate went on for full seventeen days & at last Mandan Misra accepted his defeat. After his defeat, Bharati entered into this debate with Sankara saying that she was “ardhaangini” (other half of his husband) of Mandan Misir & unless she was also defeated, this was only half victory for Sankara. This debate too went on for another seventeen days & she accepted her defeat in all Shastras but said that she must be defeated in Kaama Shastra before she should accept final defeat at the hands of Sankara in debate. That is again another story & the end result was that after these debates, both Mandan Misir & his wife, Bharati accepted their defeat in front of Sankara, donated all their wealth & became his disciple. Mandan Misir got a new name after initiation into Sannyaas as Sureswara Acharya. Both of them went to Sringeri & Sureswar Acharya became the head of Sringeri Mutt.

So, if we have to debate, why not debate like the above example ? I am not saying this to only “others” but to myself too.

OM

atanu
22 November 2009, 11:27 PM
12.05 Self-realization is more difficult for those who fix their mind on the formless Brahman, because the comprehension of the unmanifest Brahman by the average embodied human being is very difficult.

7.13
Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth
7.14
This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.

Namaste Sant,

I find purity in your posts, so I dare to point out something. Please do not consider this as argument (and as final) but the following is only for your thinking. Compare the above verses of Gita (namely:7.13, 7.14, and 12.05) with the verses 5.19 and 5.28 which i posted. Do you not see the difference in context?

The verses from the 5th chapter speak of an accomplished sage/yogi, whose seeking has already come to an end and who is situated in Pragnya without doubt and break and who has thus become the very heart of Lord. Lord also enjoins upon Arjuna "Be a yogi".

Whereas, the verses 7.13 and 7.14 are for the seekers (like me).

Om Namah Shivaya

devotee
24 November 2009, 04:26 AM
Namaste,


Let’s Know Adi Guru Shankaracharya a little better

Though, principally, Advaita Vedanta history is as old as the Upanishads themselves, Adi Guru Shankaracharya is credited with promoting this philosophy in its present incarnation. So, it is important that we know this one of the greatest Gurus of all times more appropriately.

Somehow, post-ISKCON movement has seen a lot of bad-mouthing against this great saint. This great saint has been charged to be influenced by Tamo-Guna who incarnated to create confusion in the minds of people in Kaliyuga. It has been tried to show as if this Saint misinterpreted the Vedas & created a theory of Advaita Vedanta out of nowhere ! I have tried below to throw some light on this great Saint & I invite posts from our fellow members here on this forum to broaden our knowledge-base about him.

Some Key Information :

Birth : 788 AD
Birth Place : Kaladi, Kerala
Father : Sivaguru, temple priest, a Namboodari Brahmin, died when Sankara was only 7.
Mother : Aryamba

Extraordinary Intelligence : Sankara was an extraordinary brilliant child. At the age of sixteen itself he started writing Bhasyas (commentaries) on Bhagwad Gita, the Upanishads & Brahma Sutras.

Initiated into Sannyaas : Earlier his mother was against his taking to Sannyaas, but she reluctantly consented to it when Sankara was caught by a crocodile and Sankara pleaded to her at that time. He was initiated into Sannyaas by Swami Govinda in Badrinath, a disciple of the great Advaita teacher, Gaudapad.

Was he anti-Bhakti as depicted by some people ? :

This is simply a canard which is completely baseless. He was an ardent devotee of God & he worshipped God in almost all forms revered within Hinduism. His Stotras are proof of his devotion. He composed various Stotras showing his devotion to Lord Shiva, Lord Krishna/Vishnu, Hanuman, Mother Goddess Laxmi, Lord Ganesha, Kaal Bhairava, Dakshinamurty etc. People who have gone to Rameshwaram must have witnessed Sphatik Linga worshipping early in the morning in the shrine. This Lingam was presented to the temple by Sankara.

Did he promote inaction in the name of Advaita Vedanta ? :

Throughout his life, Sankara was a man of always-in-action. We must remember that all his works, all his debates with various sects within Hinduism at that time, setting up of four Mutts (the first of its kind in Sanatan Dharma) in four corners of India, preaching Vedanta Darshana & bringing all sects under one umbrella … was all accomplished by this great man only within a short life-span of 32 years. Who can call this man promoting inaction ?

What about his verse in Vivekachudamani that “liberation cannot be brought about by actions” (VC-7), “Abandoning all actions & breaking free from the bonds of achievement, the wise and intelligent should apply themselves to Self-knowledge (VC-10) ?

First of all, actions have to be abandoned mentally & not physically. The central idea is renouncing of the doer-ship than the deeds. Though a Sannyaasi himself, he chose action & not inaction. Moreover, this is the path of Self-realisation & he advocated this only for people who were fit to take Sannyaas & not for common man. Let’s see what he said to common people in Purushottam Ratna Malika :

PRM.12 : Q. Who is your enemy ?
A. Laziness is your enemy.

PRM.38. Q. For what should you take effort?
A. To learn, to be healthy and to give in charity needs great effort.

PRM. 45. Q. Whom will Gods worship?
A. Gods will worship those who have mercy.

PRM. 59. Q. What is Chathur pathram (the good four) which drives away the darkness of ignorance?

1. Charity coupled with sweet words.
2. Knowledge without pride.
3. Valour with patience.
4. Wealth with sacrifice.
These four rare things are called the good four.

PRM.75. Q. What should occupy your thought day and night?
A. The feet of God and not this life.

PRM. 79. Q. What should be spoken by men?
A. The name of Hari.
PRM. 81. Q. What should man earn?
A. Knowledge, wealth, strength, fame and Punya (result of good deeds)

PRM. 87. Q. What is like the ever perennial banyan tree?
A. Charity given to the proper people.
PRM.88. Q. What is the weapon for everybody?
A. The capability of proving with just deeds.
PRM.163.Q. Who is personification of all gods?
A. A wise man who does all his Karmas


Actually, he firmly believed that : Common householders should tread on Bhakti-Karma-yoga path & those who have graduated from the first step i.e Bhakti-Karma-Yoga should be considered for Jnana Yoga by initiating them into Sannyaas order.

I hope the above post helps a little in dispelling the wrong information being spread.

OM

atanu
26 November 2009, 08:39 AM
Some food for thought...

"All this is guided by Consciousness, is supported by Consciousness. The basis is Consciousness. Consciousness is Brahman [Prajnanam Brahma]."

“This whole world is prevaded by Me in My unmanifest form. All beings exist in Me, but I am not contained in them!” (Bhagavad Gita 9.4)

I read a nice explanation of this that goes as follows:
“All beings exist in Me” = there is gold in ornaments
“but I am not contained in them” = there are no ornaments in gold



Namaste Ekanta,

The metaphor clarifies a lot of things without many words. How do we understand the following in conjunction with the above verse?

BG 17.5. Those men who practise terrific austerities not enjoined by the scriptures, given to hypocrisy and egoism, impelled by the force of lust and attachment,
BG 17.6. Senseless, torturing all the elements in the body and Me also, who dwells in the body,—know thou these to be of demoniacal resolves.

Om Namaha Shivaya

kd gupta
26 November 2009, 10:43 AM
Bramhaji says in sribhagwatam...ye adhah patanti...
people who follow these ladders, never fall to ignorance as Krsn says in gita...
Ahankaaram balam darpam kaamam krodham parigraham;
Vimuchya nirmamah shaanto brahmabhooyaaya kalpate.
. Having abandoned egoism, strength, arrogance, anger, desire, and covetousness, free
from the notion of “mine” and peaceful,—he is fit for becoming Brahman.
Brahmabhootah prasannaatmaa na shochati na kaangkshati;
Samah sarveshu bhooteshu madbhaktim labhate paraam.
Becoming Brahman, serene in the Self, he neither grieves nor desires; the same to all
beings, he attains supreme devotion unto Me.
Bhaktyaa maamabhijaanaati yaavaanyashchaasmi tattwatah;
Tato maam tattwato jnaatwaa vishate tadanantaram.
By devotion he knows Me in truth, what and who I am; and knowing Me in truth, he
forthwith enters into the Supreme.

Ekanta
26 November 2009, 03:30 PM
Namaste Ekanta,

The metaphor clarifies a lot of things without many words. How do we understand the following in conjunction with the above verse?

BG 17.5. Those men who practise terrific austerities not enjoined by the scriptures, given to hypocrisy and egoism, impelled by the force of lust and attachment,
BG 17.6. Senseless, torturing all the elements in the body and Me also, who dwells in the body,—know thou these to be of demoniacal resolves.

Om Namaha Shivaya

Hi atanu, as usual... its only an interpretation...

BG 17.5. Those men who practise terrific austerities not enjoined by the scriptures, given to hypocrisy and egoism, impelled by the force of lust and attachment,
BG 17.6. Senseless, torturing all the elements in the body and Me also, who dwells in the body,—know thou these to be of demoniacal resolves.

There are four different qualities in man: humanness, animal nature, demonic nature, and divine nature.
1. Divine: When he is following the Atma, he is manifesting his divinity.
2. Demon: When he is subject to the vagaries of the mind, he becomes demonic.
3. Animal: When man follows the dictates of the body, he is a prey to his animal nature.
4. Human: When he is governed by all the three - the body, the mind and the Atma, he is human
(SS 92)

So… using the Buddhi for selfish/evil purposes instead of seeking divinity is the very definition of Demon. An animal cannot be a demon, it doesn’t know how… Only wanting sensual pleasure is basically animal behaviour.
-------------
About “torturing all the elements in the body and Me also”

I want to start out with another nice interpretation I found:
Sat is “I” or Prema (love).
Chit is Jnana (light/ knowledge).
Ananda is the union of Sat & Chit.
Nama/rupa [snake] is really Sat [rope], without Sat there’s no nama/rupa… [like ocean/ waves]

We cannot say that Sat (I/Prema) is here or there, in the elements or in the body. All is Sat right? It’s just a play of increasing or decreasing light (chit/ jnana).

Merit (Punya): increase Chit so we can notice all as Sat and get Ananda. [or rather decrease ignorance]
Sin (Papa): decrease Chit so we don’t notice all as Sat and don’t get Ananda. [or rather increase ignorance]

atanu
26 November 2009, 11:15 PM
Hi atanu, as usual... its only an interpretation...

BG 17.5. Those men who practise terrific austerities not enjoined by the scriptures, given to hypocrisy and egoism, impelled by the force of lust and attachment,
BG 17.6. Senseless, torturing all the elements in the body and Me also, who dwells in the body,—know thou these to be of demoniacal resolves.

There are four different qualities in man: humanness, animal nature, demonic nature, and divine nature.
1. Divine: When he is following the Atma, he is manifesting his divinity.
2. Demon: When he is subject to the vagaries of the mind, he becomes demonic.
3. Animal: When man follows the dictates of the body, he is a prey to his animal nature.
4. Human: When he is governed by all the three - the body, the mind and the Atma, he is human
(SS 92)

So… using the Buddhi for selfish/evil purposes instead of seeking divinity is the very definition of Demon. An animal cannot be a demon, it doesn’t know how… Only wanting sensual pleasure is basically animal behaviour.


Namaste Ekanta,

This again is very useful. True instinctive animals cannot be demons. (most times are not demons also so -- driven unknowingly towards cruelty etc.?)



About “torturing all the elements in the body and Me also”
(
I want to start out with another nice interpretation I found:
Sat is “I” or Prema (love).
Chit is Jnana (light/ knowledge).
Ananda is the union of Sat & Chit.
Nama/rupa [snake] is really Sat [rope], without Sat there’s no nama/rupa… [like ocean/ waves]

We cannot say that Sat (I/Prema) is here or there, in the elements or in the body. All is Sat right? It’s just a play of increasing or decreasing light (chit/ jnana).

Merit (Punya): increase Chit so we can notice all as Sat and get Ananda. [or rather decrease ignorance]
Sin (Papa): decrease Chit so we don’t notice all as Sat and don’t get Ananda. [or rather increase ignorance]


This is excellent. On first reading I was searching for the answer. Second time I got it. You have not separated the 'ME' from 'me'. That is bhakti, as per me. (yogis are in Me and I am in them).

Om

kd gupta
28 November 2009, 08:10 AM
Namaste,


Let’s Know Adi Guru Shankaracharya a little better

Though, principally, Advaita Vedanta history is as old as the Upanishads themselves, Adi Guru Shankaracharya is credited with promoting this philosophy in its present incarnation. So, it is important that we know this one of the greatest Gurus of all times more appropriately.

Somehow, post-ISKCON movement has seen a lot of bad-mouthing against this great saint. This great saint has been charged to be influenced by Tamo-Guna who incarnated to create confusion in the minds of people in Kaliyuga. It has been tried to show as if this Saint misinterpreted the Vedas & created a theory of Advaita Vedanta out of nowhere ! I have tried below to throw some light on this great Saint & I invite posts from our fellow members here on this forum to broaden our knowledge-base about him.

Some Key Information :

Birth : 788 AD
Birth Place : Kaladi, Kerala
Father : Sivaguru, temple priest, a Namboodari Brahmin, died when Sankara was only 7.
Mother : Aryamba

Extraordinary Intelligence : Sankara was an extraordinary brilliant child. At the age of sixteen itself he started writing Bhasyas (commentaries) on Bhagwad Gita, the Upanishads & Brahma Sutras.

Initiated into Sannyaas : Earlier his mother was against his taking to Sannyaas, but she reluctantly consented to it when Sankara was caught by a crocodile and Sankara pleaded to her at that time. He was initiated into Sannyaas by Swami Govinda in Badrinath, a disciple of the great Advaita teacher, Gaudapad.

Was he anti-Bhakti as depicted by some people ? :

This is simply a canard which is completely baseless. He was an ardent devotee of God & he worshipped God in almost all forms revered within Hinduism. His Stotras are proof of his devotion. He composed various Stotras showing his devotion to Lord Shiva, Lord Krishna/Vishnu, Hanuman, Mother Goddess Laxmi, Lord Ganesha, Kaal Bhairava, Dakshinamurty etc. People who have gone to Rameshwaram must have witnessed Sphatik Linga worshipping early in the morning in the shrine. This Lingam was presented to the temple by Sankara.

Did he promote inaction in the name of Advaita Vedanta ? :

Throughout his life, Sankara was a man of always-in-action. We must remember that all his works, all his debates with various sects within Hinduism at that time, setting up of four Mutts (the first of its kind in Sanatan Dharma) in four corners of India, preaching Vedanta Darshana & bringing all sects under one umbrella … was all accomplished by this great man only within a short life-span of 32 years. Who can call this man promoting inaction ?

What about his verse in Vivekachudamani that “liberation cannot be brought about by actions” (VC-7), “Abandoning all actions & breaking free from the bonds of achievement, the wise and intelligent should apply themselves to Self-knowledge (VC-10) ?

First of all, actions have to be abandoned mentally & not physically. The central idea is renouncing of the doer-ship than the deeds. Though a Sannyaasi himself, he chose action & not inaction. Moreover, this is the path of Self-realisation & he advocated this only for people who were fit to take Sannyaas & not for common man. Let’s see what he said to common people in Purushottam Ratna Malika :

PRM.12 : Q. Who is your enemy ?
A. Laziness is your enemy.

PRM.38. Q. For what should you take effort?
A. To learn, to be healthy and to give in charity needs great effort.

PRM. 45. Q. Whom will Gods worship?
A. Gods will worship those who have mercy.

PRM. 59. Q. What is Chathur pathram (the good four) which drives away the darkness of ignorance?

1. Charity coupled with sweet words.
2. Knowledge without pride.
3. Valour with patience.
4. Wealth with sacrifice.
These four rare things are called the good four.

PRM.75. Q. What should occupy your thought day and night?
A. The feet of God and not this life.

PRM. 79. Q. What should be spoken by men?
A. The name of Hari.
PRM. 81. Q. What should man earn?
A. Knowledge, wealth, strength, fame and Punya (result of good deeds)

PRM. 87. Q. What is like the ever perennial banyan tree?
A. Charity given to the proper people.
PRM.88. Q. What is the weapon for everybody?
A. The capability of proving with just deeds.
PRM.163.Q. Who is personification of all gods?
A. A wise man who does all his Karmas


Actually, he firmly believed that : Common householders should tread on Bhakti-Karma-yoga path & those who have graduated from the first step i.e Bhakti-Karma-Yoga should be considered for Jnana Yoga by initiating them into Sannyaas order.

I hope the above post helps a little in dispelling the wrong information being spread.

OM
Devoteeji
What was the role of aadiguru towards Buddhism ?

ranjeetmore
28 November 2009, 11:30 AM
That Brahm is inert and without any energies is refuted by sastras.


Paräsya çaktir vividhaiva
çrüyate
...
sva-bhäviki,jnana,bala kriya ca.
(Çvetäçvatara Upaniñad 6.8)


SVABHAVIKI means 'BY NATURE/svabhava'.
These energies are further explained in Vishnu purana.

There should be no doubt that these three energies: Sandhini,samvit and Hladini are endorsed time and again by the vedas and confirmed by sastras like Srimad- Bhagavatam.

ranjeetmore
28 November 2009, 11:44 AM
The Supreme Person is the basis of Nirguna Brahm

"Yada parsyam pashyate rukma varnam..." Mundaka upanishad.3.1.3

"When the seer sees the brilliant maker and lord (of the world) as the Person Who is the source of Brahm, then he is wise, and shaking off good and evil, he reaches the highest oneness, free from passions"


Lord Sri Krsna confirms this very clearly in the Geeta:

"Brahmano hi pratishtha ham...." -14.27 Bhagavad Geeta.

I am the basis of Brahm.

ranjeetmore
28 November 2009, 12:14 PM
further,we find that the personal Form of God is more attractive even to the liberated gyanis for His form is the mainstay of Hladini sakti.

I don't want to sound offensive,but I dare say Personal form of God is much more blissful.This is subtly indicated in the vedas -

"dve vava brahmano rupe murtancaiva amurtanca" - Brhadaranyako up.

'murti'-the personal Form of God is given preference.

"Raso vai saha" - taiitereya up.

Saha indicates that "He(the Lord as a person) is Bliss."


further the following verses are very important.

"Mukta api leelaya vigrahan kritva Tvam bhajante."

-Shaankar bhasya (Nrsingha Tapani upanishad )

Even the muktas,who are liberated,come back to the universe and Worship You(Lord Nrsingha.)



"Mukta api henam upasate." Sauparna sruti.


Even the muktas come back and worship(upasate) the Supreme Lord.



This most astounding phenomenon is mentioned in the Bhagavatam where the gynanis who are already liberated from maya,perform bhakti of Sri KRsna becoz it is exceedingly more blissful than bhramananda.Case in point being Sukadeva paramhamsa,the four kumaras,etc.

brahman
30 November 2009, 05:19 AM
Namaste,

“So, we can say that whatever we see as matter, whatever we feel as energy & whatever we perceive as space is actually One which alone manifests itself as three different things in this manifested universe.

Now, can we say that, that One is matter ?

Can we say that,that One is energy ?

Can we say that, that One is Space ?

No ! We must give it a different name …. to be able to put it in a different category …. but is there any category left ?

It is matter & yet it is not matter, it is energy & yet it is not energy, it is space & yet it is not space. “



[size=3]OM


Once this question arises in one’s intellect, he may divert his attention in two different levels.

One is scientific and the other is spiritual.

scientific if infinite, so lets' have it spiritually.

Experiments based on equations like mahAvAkyAs will not be of help to any one.

The three practices which one attains complete knowledge of Mahavakyas are thru shravana, manana, and nidhidhyasana.

1) Listening to satras with proper dhwani(it not just hearing) is shravana

2) Recollectiong what has been taught with its full importance is manana,
it is basically ‘Anumāna(verdict of manas),

3) Mind seeks for fact which ends up in profound mediation, which is nidhidhyasana.


The truth gets revealed (heard) to the seeker as ‘agama’ and ‘sabda’.That remains the pramAna of Mahavkyas.



Repeated reading of the sastras (chanting with devotion) that mentions mahavakya is the first step for comprehending the pramAna of it.


Aham brahmasmi is the first mahavakya that is heard to a seeker; some have a habbit of even chanting it repeatedly during their meditation.
Thus you (physical body+ mind) start to be one with Brahman.

Prajnanam brahma is the command for unifying the intellect with Brahman

Ayamatma brahma is the command for unifying the (atman)self with Brahman

Tattvamasi is the command for complete freedom.




.

devotee
07 December 2009, 10:08 PM
Namaste Atanu, Ekanta, Brahman, Saideoji and all,

Thanks for making this thread more meaningful through you inputs. My intention is to make this ( or a series of such threads) to make a reference thread(s) for Advaita Darshana. I hope it comes out well as intended.

The topics which I intend to cover are :

a) General understanding of Advaita ( this thread so far deals with it)
b) Discussion on Scriptures from Advaita Vedanta point of view. This is intended to have deep analysis of the main Upanishadic teachings.
c) The Teachers of Advaita & their teachings
d) What do the Advaitins actually do to realise the Truth/Brahman/Self

So, I don't think I am competent to handle it all alone. Moreover, I intend to expand my understanding too while working/discussing together. So, inputs are required from all knowledgeable members here.

OM

devotee
07 December 2009, 10:42 PM
Namaste,

The theory of Advaita Saadhana is difficult to understand for common men. The practice of this Saadhanaa, naturally can’t be less difficult. So, when we are discussing Advaita, theories which are difficult to grasp & understand will be discussed. Why is it so difficult ? Because of our conditioned mind ! Why do we find Quantum Mechanics difficult to understand ? Why the concept of mass itself is so difficult to grasp & understand ?

Here let’s discuss Consciousness. The Vedas say, “Prajnanaam Brahma” i.e. “The Consciousness is Brahman”. So, what is this consciousness ? Do we understand it well enough ? Let us see.

Whatever is being offered below is based on my understanding of teachings of the Advaita teachers including that imparted by my Guruji & my understanding from a scientific viewpoint. So, it may have ample scope of improvement & I invite all knowledgeable fellow members of this forum to contribute constructively for a better understanding.

When we talk of consciousness, normally we keep the waking consciousness in mind. But the Consciousness, though essentially One & Unbroken, manifests itself in this world in three different layers of consciousness :

a) When we are awake (or dreaming in sleep), we are aware of the external things. We know the world around us through our sense perceptions. This is waking consciousness … the most visible & first layer of consciousness.

b) Now when a person loses this waking consciousness due to deep sleep, shock, disease, under the influence of poison or drugs, we say that he has lost consciousness. But then when he regains his consciousness, he is able to recall all his experience in the past again. So, if he is really devoid of consciousness in those states, who/what stores his past experiences safe & retrievable within him once he gains his consciousness back ? It has to be consciousness only. This consciousness is the second layer of consciousness known as Sub-Consciousness.

Understanding of this Sub-Consciousness is very critical here. The Sub-consciousness is a derivative of the waking consciousness. It works on a mass of impressions gathered from active waking consciousness. This sub-consciousness is responsible for keeping our heart & other organs working when we are unconscious or in sleep. It is also responsible for creating dreams in the REM stage of our sleep. This sub-consciousness is also responsible for keeping a complete record of all our actions, rebirths & samsakaars (tendencies) carried from one birth to the other. This sub-consciousness is the culprit which keeps us restless seeking something which can make us happy …. this sub-consciousness brings all stray images, sounds & thought waves & disturbs us when we try to meditate.

c) The third layer of consciousness which is the sub-stratum of the earlier two layers is all knower & omnipotent. It is ever pure & not tainted by any action or impressions. It is without any sense of individuality as it is One without a second which shines through many minds as different individual Jivas. This is called Super-consciousness. This is Self/Brahman of the Mahavakya, “Prajnanaam Brahma”.

Now, that was ok for the humans. What about the other less intelligent animals, trees, stone, water, earth, air, water & energy ? How this consciousness acts within them or through them ? Let’s see :

a) The animals behave on instinct. No one teaches them many things that they are able to do to live in this world. Where from they learn all this ? It comes from their sub-consciousness which carries instinct (seeds for action) based on impressions gathered in their past lives.
b) What about the inanimate objects, e.g. Stones, water, energy etc. ? What role does this consciousness play here ? Is there consciousness in a piece of stone or heat wave or electrons ? Let’s go back to elementary Physics again :
i) Let’s assume there are two pieces of stones of masses m1 & m2 separated by a distance d. Now as per Newton’s Law of universal gravitation, the force acting between them would be equal to (Gxm1xm2)/(dxd) ( where G is a universal constant), i.e. the force acting between the two pieces of stones would be directly proportional to the product of masses of the stones & inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the two. Now, for this force to act there must be consciousness somewhere ensuring that this law is followed. That consciousness must be aware that :
B1) There are two objects/stones in the space.
B2) That their masses are m1 & m2
B3) That the distance separating the two stones is d
B4) That there is a law (universal law of gravitation) which must be obeyed

Can’t it be possible without existence of Consciousness around ? When a man becomes unconscious he is not able to recognize who is even touching him then if there is no consciousness how the knowledge of information required from B1 to B4 is gathered & by whom ?

Let’s change the distance between the two stones from d to d1. Now, immediately the force is changed to (Gxm1xm2)/(d1xd1). Now, who adjusts this force ? Who knows that there has been a change in the position of the two stones ? It can’t happen if there is no one to notice that this change has ever taken place ! Some agency must be aware of the entire phenomenon & that is awareness or consciousness which pervades everything & witnesses everything!

c) Now is the consciousness within two stones in the above example two or one ? Let’s see.

Let’s imagine that each stone has a different consciousness. Let’s say that through that consciousness “it” is able to be aware of the presence of the other stone around, the distance between the two, their masses & the governing laws for the force of attraction. Now this consciousness must be One within one stone otherwise there will be multi-cognition & there can’t be One Stone Vs the Other & there can’t be individuality which can own the consciousness. So, let’s assume that it is One in one stone & another in another stone. Now let’s break the stone & make two pieces out of one piece of stone. Now what happens ? There is apparently a creation of two different individuality within two pieces of stones & two different consciousness from one consciousness ! That appears ridiculous ! The consciousness of the original stone was not a “thing” which can be broken in parts like this. It must be inherent property of the Stone as a whole ! But then it does give an impression of breaking up of one consciousness into two ! … and that is ridiculous. So our earlier assumption that each stone has a different consciousness having individuality must be wrong.

So, what other model can work ? IMHO, there can be only one explanation now that consciousness was One from the beginning which pervaded the One original stone earlier & reflected as individual consciousness when the Stone was unbroken & the same consciousness reflected from the two pieces of stones & gave a false impression of two divided consciousness when the stone was broken into two.

d) The consciousness doesn’t only reflect through matter and animate beings. It also works on energy. The electrons flow from higher potential to the lower potential. The heat flows from higher temperature to the lower temperature. Now, who is aware that there is a lower potential or a lower temperature around & that it (the energy/electrons) must flow in that direction ? This is all pervading consciousness which is aware of everything & acting through everything.

e) The above example applies to us all. The consciousness is not only within us … it is everywhere … within & without … unbroken & One. However, this one consciousness reflects through various beings & objects in this world ( One consciousness with different spiritual vibrations) & gives a false impression of multiple individual consciousness among us.

OM

devotee
13 December 2009, 12:34 AM
Namaste,

How does the above understanding help us ? It gives us a clue to break our cycles of death & birth. As it is mentioned above, the sub-consciousness stores the seeds of future environment we get into & the actions/reactions that follow & it thus decides our next birth etc., the way out of the cycles or births & deaths must have something to do with this layer of consciousness. If somehow, we are able to roast the seeds of our past impressions i.e. Karmas lying in the sub-consciousness & don’t allow the sub-consciousness to gather lasting impressions in waking consciousness, the root cause of the cycles of births & deaths can be broken … all our merits & sins roasted.

Accruing new Karmas i.e. gathering fresh impressions in waking consciousness can be stopped by Karma Yoga but that too is not easy. It is easier said than done without deep contemplation of Upanishadic teachings. Again, how to erase the past impressions collected within the sub-consciousness (Karmas) ? Advaita teachers say that all seeds of all karmas are roasted only on illumination i.e. on realization of Self. One of the means is through meditation in Samaadhi. It is also realized by deep contemplation on Upanishadic teachings. Sometimes, it is also possible by deep devotion to God. It is important to note that grace (of God/Self) is necessary in all cases to cross the final frontier.

OM

riju
05 July 2015, 06:57 AM
Namaste,

“Om pUrNamadah pUrNamidaM pUrNAt pUrNamudacyate
PUrNasya pUrNamAdAya pUrNamEvAvashiSyate”

Om ! That (Brahman) is Infinite/Whole/Complete, and this (universe) is Infinite/Whole/Complete. The Infinite/Whole/Complete proceeds from the Infinite/Whole/Complete . (Then) taking the infinitude of the Infinite/Whole/Complete (universe), It remains as the Infinite/Whole/Complete (Brahman) alone.

I intend to dedicate this thread to posting of excerpts of Advaita Teachings in various scriptures (BG, Upanishads, any other Hindu or scriptures of other religions) & also as taught by Advaita teachers. I don't claim to be the expert here, I expect to expand my horizon of understanding through thread.

What can be a better way to start this thread than the Mahavakyas ? :

1. Brahma Satyam Jagan Mithya, Jivo Brahmaiva naparah.

OM

Logically it cannot be JAGAN MITHYA,

BRAHMANA is infinite/complete/ whole.

JAGAN (world) came from BRAHMANA.
As BRAHMANA is satya then JAGAN came form HIM and hence should be satya.

hinduism♥krishna
07 July 2015, 11:06 AM
Logically it cannot be JAGAN MITHYA,

BRAHMANA is infinite/complete/ whole.

JAGAN (world) came from BRAHMANA.
As BRAHMANA is satya then JAGAN came form HIM and hence should be satya.

In the first place, Jagat never came from Brahman.

devotee
08 July 2015, 08:53 AM
Namaste,

HLK has put it correctly in very few words. :)

Actually, nothing came out of Brahman at any point of time. If that would have been the case, then logically, Brahman will become (Brahman - something which was created) and that violates the essential characteristic of Brahman of remaining unchanged.

Brahman and Creation are not two entities. This has to be carefully understood. It is Brahman which is perceived as this universe ... The perceiver is Brahman, the perceived is Brahman and the act of perceiving too is Brahman.

This Jagat is not Mithya as Brahman, it is Mithya as the world.

OM

follower12
08 July 2015, 03:30 PM
Namaste all,

I read some posts above. Whatever I have read and understood from the AtmaGyanis, I would like to share here. If I am permitted to take part in discussion?

Pranaam