PDA

View Full Version : Realization of TRUTH: Not through the denial of World’s actuality



brahman
11 December 2010, 06:16 AM
Loved seekers

Inconceivable and ineffable reality cannot be subjected to critical enquiry. Transcendent, without form, invisible to all senses, it cannot be picked up or weighed and measured. It is possible, however, to examine the two conditioned views of it from two opposing perspectives. As it is possible to know the existence of the positive pole of a magnet by knowing its negative pole, so by knowing the conditioned, asat, the world, one may gain awareness of the unconditioned, sat, the worlds Reality.

The question, “is the world existent or nonexistent” may be answered in two ways. We know it to be an emanation of the self and know that the self it is only existent substance. In that sense, it is real. We know it to have no existence of its own, apart from the self. In that sense, it is unreal.

The Upanishad (Taittiriya II 6) tell us:
**Having created it, into it indeed he entered**

The creation of the world and the entry of the self into it does not take place in a temporal and sequential sense but simultaneously.

The Sri. Narayanu Guru expresses this view when in his ‘brahmavidya panchakam(4)’ he says:
**Having created this world thru prakriti, that which enters it and by which the created world is sustained from within**


Ontologically, the self alone exists. Therefore the world, having no existence of its won, is considered unreal, asat. Yet although one may question the world’s existence once own existence is irrefutable. It is in fact the questioner’s undeniable existence that the questioning arises. He seeks to know reality by knowing what is real in himself and realizes that what is real in himself is the same reality in all entities. In that sense the perceived world is considered Real, sat.

Even when understood in a philosophical sense to be illusory, the world’s existence is undeniable in actual experience. Like a sailors understanding that waves have no existence apart from the ocean does not lessen their force in a sea-storm. Even with the understanding that the world has no existence of its own, it continues to be perceived with all its actuality.

The Sri. Narayanu Guru emphasizes this in his ‘advaitha deepika(9, 10)’ in the following verses.

** Even when, by the dawning of discriminating awareness, it is reduced to having no existence of its own, the world will still be perceived by the senses. As when the confusion about directions is clarified, the perceiver continues to see directions erroneously. **


The world does not exist really, still all gleams as before even when destroyed by the clarity of discrimination. Even with the certainty that there is no water in a mirage; it continue to gleam as before.

It is not through denial of the world’s actuality that the truth of existence is comprehended, but through a vision of those actualities as the natural expression of existence.


My pranams to Sri. Gurdevan. (Vedanta Sutras- Swami Muni Naryana)

For pondering alone . Love:)


ॐ सत् एव तत्

Maya3
11 December 2010, 08:00 AM
:)

Maya

anatman
10 January 2011, 12:43 AM
Brahma Satya, Jagat Mithya, and Jivo Brahmaiva naparah...

Only Brahman is the Truth, the world is False....
This statement will be proved correct, only when you are self-realized.

Self-realized- When you destroy the conditions of Maya, and realize that "you are that". You are none other than Brahman.

So, as long as you are still under the conditions of Maya, this world will exist to you. It will appear to be True.

Just like, the Dream state and the Waking state..

When you are dreaming--You, the incidents that take place in your dream appear to be true. But, when you wake up, you realize that it was just a Dream, an illusion.

In the same way, in the waking state- the sense of You, all the incidents, transactions appear to be True.
But, when you attain self-realization, this world will also prove to be a dream, an illusion.

brahman
20 January 2011, 05:41 AM
anatman
Self-realized- When you destroy the conditions of Maya, and realize that "you are that". You are none other than Brahman.

So, as long as you are still under the conditions of Maya, this world will exist to you. It will appear to be True.







Dear anatman,
Some schools of Vedanta view soul as a reflection of Brahman, the original. Such a view can only be relevant when it is considered that the Ultimate reality (Brahman) and apparent reality (jagat) are separate and distinct. A reflection implies a separately reflecting original; but being a form assumed by the original, the world and its original are not separate. The world though illusory while appearing to self-contained and distinct is not removed from reality and is not real. It is neither the reflection of an original nor is it itself an original.

That is the existence of Brahman, as the watery ocean does not remain without waves, so the ocean of the Unconditioned Consciousness does not remain inactive. Its potential for activity is unbounded and so immense and potent it is that it manifests itself in infinite expressions, as everything (sarvam), like the all this physical elements, all qualities, and the totality we call the world.

It is the ceaseless flux of the Self’s reality, it is the endless Maya in Consciousness.

The great mystery of the world’s appearance and its ever changing form is expressed in the vedantic concept of Maya.
Please understand it as my pov alone.Love:)

kd gupta
20 January 2011, 11:24 PM
Thanks respected Brahmanji
Sah devah kah asti , if I have not seen him , so what , I feel him , therefore offering homage to him as it or in the form of KAH is Vedas instruction . I am not supposed to kill dogs who bark on each other . I am supposed to offer prayers to Indra who cut the throat of Dadhyang , but helped kill the brattasur with rishi’s horse head [ here Ashvamedha means killing the demons with the help of science ] . I am supposed to offer prayers to Ashwini krs who helped the king’s son by treating his eyes with the scientific method learned and which eyes were made blind by spiritual knowledge of king.
Everything is worshipped which is useful to mankind , to the soul , to the super soul and to that which enables know the supreme soul [ be it Vishnu or shiva ] , amongst us including Microsoft Internet J:) .

My dear friends this is a gesture worship , symbol worship and NOT idol [ kim tasya pratima sambhavah ] worship , see from Vedas and , if allowed I can quote .
Engage the mind help the all pious souls working with the help of science taking the spirituality in concern and not knowing only as man is man’s friend .

devotee
21 January 2011, 01:09 AM
Namaste Brahman,


That is the existence of Brahman, as the watery ocean does not remain without waves, so the ocean of the Unconditioned Consciousness does not remain inactive. Its potential for activity is unbounded and so immense and potent it is that it manifests itself in infinite expressions, as everything (sarvam), like the all this physical elements, all qualities, and the totality we call the world.It is the ceaseless flux of the Self’s reality, it is the endless Maya in Consciousness.The great mystery of the world’s appearance and its ever changing form is expressed in the vedantic concept of Maya.

That is a very good post ! :)

In the Anatman's quote :

"Brahma Satya, Jagat Mithya: Jivo Brahmaiva naaparah"

Jagat (World) is mithya (false) as world but not as Brahman because the world and the Brahman are not diferent in essence but only in appearance. Why ? Because, "Jivo Brahmaiva naaparah" ==> the individual soul is none but the Brahman itself ! ... and also because Upanishads says so. :)

OM

Sahasranama
21 January 2011, 04:31 AM
Yes, upanishads also say Ishavasyam idam sarvam and sarva khalvidam brahma.

sarangi dasi
03 March 2011, 08:00 AM
.......
Even when understood in a philosophical sense to be illusory, the world’s existence is undeniable in actual experience. Like a sailors understanding that waves have no existence apart from the ocean does not lessen their force in a sea-storm.
......

Yes, the waves are the same SUBSTANCE as the ocean and therefore SUBSTANTIALLY non different. If the ocean is accepted as real so must the waves be accepted as real.


.........
The world does not exist really, still all gleams as before even when destroyed by the clarity of discrimination.
.......

Yes, but the waves do really exist for they are really part of the real ocean. It would be illusory if one were to see the waves and then THINK of them as separate to the ocean because of their expression. But that would be an illusion not dependent upon any INNATE or ultimate illusoriness of the waves but on one's faulty perception. With insight one sees that the waves are, in fact, innately and ultimately non different to the ocean and are one of many expressions of it.

From this perspective it may be seen that MAYA is not a condition or trait or characteristic of things but rather a condition of perception about things.

anirvan
04 March 2011, 12:43 AM
gits a topic one can understand himself,but becomes argument when he assemble words to describe it :) .

it can be well understood through principle of relativity. when one reference point changes,simultaneously the view changes.

the truth is either is existing and truth. as brahman is eternel, the adi-vasna ,the eternal desire of brahman-(to create and hence the eternal drama-leela (maya) is truth and eternal.as long as the 3 feet of nirguna brahman is there.the 1 feet saguna brahman is there.

DENIAL (neti-neti) is not the sidhanta( the judgement of vedanat about creation), but a method of spiritual practice for a human to deny his past conditioned samskar and discriminate nirguna from saguna.

but once his sadhna complete,he no longer deny the creation.but he realizes both are truth and one.it is like, as a nail is used to remove a nail from foot and then both are thrown away.

Because when one attains samadhi and self realization,the world still remains for others and also for him when he descends from samadhi to sahaj-bhava,only his percption has been changed eternally.

in jnana marga,the way is vivek and bairagya. and how can we achieve the para-bairagya? by denying everything we can achieve. once para-bairagya is attained-- complete vivek( conscise) is attained.and samadhi is achieved. hence tattvagyana.

some quote AdiShankara as denying world.but they fail to understand the greatest saint of modern time.he simultaneously says both things. deny world when talking to sadhaka, and praising God"s leela and creation and saguna brahman with thousands of Hymn at Bhaktas and self-realized souls.

Purna jnani can never deny the world.after all the world is his leela-place.

anirvan
04 March 2011, 12:54 AM
to explain the creation through science....

imagine a stone. when we see in naked eye it is rough stone.look in a spectroscope...it arrays of atoms,molecules,bonds.
look in electronic microscope,it is electron,proton. see through a imaginary advanced gadget,it is array of positrons,nutrons. see still microscopically its bundles of energy-photons. still microscopically...its brahman.

so what is it in real?stone? energy? brahman? its all at same time.reality is how we look at it?to see true picture,we have to be free from all pre-conditioned knowledge and pure from all senses.

so who is correct? everybody is correct. thats the purna-brahman-jnani"s vision. but who has seen the stone only through elecronic microscope,but not in naked eye will tell its not stone,but electrons,protons.

so at same time it is brahman as well as creation. its called BRAHMAN-VIBARTA-VILASHA....a philosophy well understood through parabhakti,its called Achintya-veda-aveda. (sri chaitanyadev).

at same time he is saguna and nirguna.just like electro-magnetic waves fluctuate between negative and positive poles and so fast that we can"t say which pole it is excactly..

jayaguru:)

brahman
05 March 2011, 06:00 AM
Dear seekers,

Really enjoyed reading these excellent contributions


The overall purpose is not to help us have a clear understanding of the unreal, but rather to describe the unreal in such a way that the very same unreal could be negated by the seekers in order to realize what really exists.


“That which does not exist is Maya”, it is paradoxical to describe something non-existent. The ocean has in it the infinite potential to give rise to waves from itself. Similar is the potential inherent in the one Reality, that which causes the emanation of all this creative appearance. That potential has no being of its own apart from the one ever-existing Reality.

Yet no Vedantic speculation can do away with the Maya concept either.:)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having defined Maya as “That which does not exist is Maya”, Sri. Narayanu Guru further expresses this view of Maya, when in his ‘Darsanamala 4:2’ he says

“Prior to the emerging of a pot its being is as non-existent in clay. So too, prior to the emergence of the world it has no being separate from Brahman, and is Brahman indeed. This beingness of the non-existent appearance of world in Brahman is what is called Maya.”

Love:)

brahman
14 March 2011, 05:52 AM
Loved Members, though comfortable describing the ‘unreal’ to the seeker, in such a way that the perception of what really exists could be possible by negating the same unreal, cannot ignore some very relevant posts that explains certain terminologies that connects these complex subjects to higher planes of knowledge.

Here I would like to refer to the excellent post (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=59782&postcount=8) by Sri. sarangi, that has wonderfully explained the “faulty perception”.It explains maya as a condition of perception than a condition or trait or characteristic of things.

Here is my POV on this:

This condition of perception is the Avidya form of Maya, one among the many forms of Maya, as the possibility of it(maya) manifesting variously is endless.

Sri. Narayana Guru explains Avidya as “That because of which Atman (self) is understood as unreal and anatman (non-self) as real, is what this avidya is, as in the case of wrongly seeing the rope as unreal and a snake as real”.

Sri. Guru also treats both Vidya and avidya as two apparent opposite facets of the functions of consciousness, and this multi-faceted functional manifestation of consciousness is caused by maya.

And Sri. Guru explains Vidya as “That because of which anatman (non-self) is understood as unreal and Atman (self) as real, is what this vidya is, as in the case of ascertaining that the snake is unreal and the rope alone is real.”

Consciousnesses could thus function in two extremely opposite ways, and this is caused by maya or this is maya and it happens in the same cit verily.

Our attempt, therefore, is to ascertain the nature and content of the casual reality, The Brahman, which is beyond the vidya-avidya duality.

In short, vidya , as we understood here does not mean the correct reality; on the other hand, it denotes the specific function of consciousness by which we gain a correct understanding of Reality. The correct reality is called ज्ञान Jnana, and Vidya is the mental function that leads us to ज्ञान Jnana. Love :)

sarangi dasi
16 March 2011, 07:27 AM
In light of my earlier post which you found agreable and the elucidation of vidya/avidya concepts I would suggest that:

Vidya is knowledge which promotes engagement of the consciousness with Maya whilst discerning its reality as sourced in Brahman and being substantially not different (as the waves are sourced in the ocean and substantially non different to it) and Jnana is the fruit of this.
Avidya is engagement of the consciousness with Maya without discerning its ultimate reality and suffering is the fruit of this.

This is my exegesis for elements in both posts. Is it useful?

khalidrawat
20 March 2011, 06:15 AM
Sat , or real is not Atman, Sat is the veil of atman, "tad etad amrtam satyena channam, prano va amrtam, nama-rupe satyam; tabhyam ayam pranas channah"(Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad).

Why then sat is searched for or valued in-itself, for everything is deer only for the Atman, and nothing is deer in-itself. Even sat is a hindrance in the path of Self realization.
For these I need some explanation.

My second question is if viewed in the manner described above , what will be meaning of Satyam , Shivam, Sundaram: Truth is Shiv and Shiv is Sunder, yet they are not to be desired in themselves, for everything is deer for the sake of Atman.

So even Satyam Shivam Sundram can be a veil for Atma?

What is the relationship between Shiv and Sat, Shiv and Maya, Shiv and Existence, What is the relationship between Shiv and Atma?

Kindly reply my questions.

brahman
22 March 2011, 06:08 AM
Sat , or real is not Atman, Sat is the veil of atman, "tad etad amrtam satyena channam, prano va amrtam, nama-rupe satyam; tabhyam ayam pranas channah"(Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad).

Why then sat is searched for or valued in-itself, for everything is deer only for the Atman, and nothing is deer in-itself. Even sat is a hindrance in the path of Self realization.
For these I need some explanation.

My second question is if viewed in the manner described above , what will be meaning of Satyam , Shivam, Sundaram: Truth is Shiv and Shiv is Sunder, yet they are not to be desired in themselves, for everything is deer for the sake of Atman.

So even Satyam Shivam Sundram can be a veil for Atma?

What is the relationship between Shiv and Sat, Shiv and Maya, Shiv and Existence, What is the relationship between Shiv and Atma?

Kindly reply my questions.






Dear khalidrawat, welcome to HDF!

How sweet the words rhyme “Sat, Atma, Satyam , Shiv(am), Sundaram, Maya”

These divine terminologies were beautifully coined in a complete realm of revelation, through divine intervention, by the Sages , and orally handed over down to generations. It’s their own (lone)privilege, as these are Inconceivable and ineffable experiences.

As humans, let us feel privileged to learn only the conceivable, the conceivable in the form of unreal, for the purpose of negation. To be clear, Advaitha Vedanta is a philosophy that systematically teaches us what Brahman is not, so that we gradually negate what not is, and develop a pure consciousness that leads to Jnana, the ultimate knowledge.

Dear Khalid, wish you are around with us and soon get answered in the form of knowledge.

Let us not labor these points here, but in a different thread, as this thread has already attempted much ahead.

Thanks for being with us, lots of Love:)

brahman
22 March 2011, 06:34 AM
Dear Seekers,

Another useful post (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=60530&postcount=13) from Sri. Sarangi; all the humble pursuits are respected.

The noteworthy reading made here is Vidya/Avidya as KNOWLEDGE, as a form of manifestation of Maya.

Knowing real as real and unreal as real is knowledge; this knowledge is the outcome of Maya. The rise to subjective and objective aspects of knowledge is no exception to this description.

Sri. Guru differentiates this effect of aspects of knowledge of Maya as Para and Apara, as a Knowledge is always associated with the knower and the known.

The same explanation - as manifestation of Maya -is attempted to these two aspects(knower and known) too.

where Para is “that, because of which the subtle aspects such as sense organs, mind and intellect, the five vital flows of energy and the like emanate from Atma, that is Cit in essence, is indeed Para”

Though Para-apara concepts are used in the in the sacred Mundaka, and in the Sri Sankara Vedanta, the usage differs in its conception when Guru refers it to Maya (not to Brahman)
(Also, we already learnt that the Maya on its part is non-existent, and undifferetiable from Barhman.)

“That by which this world that forms the objects of the senses emanates specifically is indeed maya, called Apara.” Thus says Sri. Guru.

Sri. Narayana Guru’s philosophy unravels systematically. In short, as is the function of mental faculties an effect of Maya, so too the appearance of the external objects is an effect of Maya.

------------------------------------------------------
Note: Also the Para maya, these subtlest aspects for part of our being, and the unsubtle with Apara may consider as universal as well, (Read: vyshti/samashti of Chandogya)

Love:)

anirvan
22 March 2011, 09:22 AM
I couldn"t agree with Brahman and sri..sarangi in their views about Maya.

because Maya is altogether a different concept which is illusion.and its concept comes only when we discuss mayabad of advita vedanta(neo-vedanat). since maya is illusion,it is not existing.its a perception,dead,inert and inconceivable.

when there is everything apart from brahman is illusion(maya) in mayavad,where is the question of vidya and avidya? the discussion stops then and there.
this mayavad is good for understanding the concept,but when practice comes,it has no meaning.

but when we keep mayavad concept aside,and assume this creation as true,then only the concepts of shaktis,vidya,avidya etc comes.

Avidya and vidya are active part,the shakti of brahman or we can say female counterpart of brahman.

Avidya is acting force/energy,same is also Vidya. this concept is never applicable in maya of mayabad.

Avidya is equal to Mahamaya/mahashakti which is centrifugal energy. it work continuously to keep the consciousness in INERTIA and illusion and Ignorance can be prevailed.so its primordial cause of the existence of creation.

Vidya which is called Yogamaya is centripetal force which continuously acts to break the Inertia and illusion and takes the consciousness towards brahman. or knowledge.so it gives moksha.

so God has infinite shaktis,depending upon his functions.
but we have to remind that everything is one God.he is siva when innert,shakti when active.

Para prakriti and apara prakriti are again different concept.
Apara prakriti is lower form of energy.like inert objects.the creation,5 elements.it is equivalent to avidya.

Para prakriti is the very subtle energy and very inner to God. it gives the human the highest form of devotion.basically it is related to service to bhagaban is form and name. these can be Antaranga,bahiranga etc.

Antaranga shakti againg comprise SAMBIT,SANDHINI, HLADINI (Radha)

Bahiranga includes Yogamaya.
when Srikrishna took birth,he came with Yogamaya(paurnamasi) and Para shakti (radha).yogamaya"s one important role is to materialize the supreme lord"s wish.

another role of yogamaya is to take human"s mind towards god. she is the major Vidya shakti.

devotee
22 March 2011, 09:27 AM
Namaste Khalidrawat,


Sat , or real is not Atman, Sat is the veil of atman, "tad etad amrtam satyena channam, prano va amrtam, nama-rupe satyam; tabhyam ayam pranas channah"(Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad).

This is no way to study Upanishads. You can't take one sentence out of context and build your understanding on that ! This is what Zakir Naik does and gets ridiculously distorted meanings from Vedic verses !!
In the above sentence, "Tad etad amratam satyenachhannam" doesn't mean " the immortality is hidden by Truth !". This will be sheer distortion of the correct meaning of the statement. Let’s see what the context is :

Chapter VI

1. Verily this universe is a triad of name, form and work. Of those names which are in daily use, speech is the source for from it all names arise. It is their common feature for it is common to all names. It is their Brahman, for it supports all names.

=> Now, shall we conclude here that Speech is Brahman ? That will not be correct. As we can easily see that it is talking in relative sense only. The Speech is likened with Brahman as compared to all names. Speech is the substratum (essence) of all names … so for all names Speech is as good as Brahman … that is the meaning. That is why it says, “It is their Brahman” … it doesn’t say, “It is Brahman”. Can you notice the difference?
2. This passage says that in similar fashion, eye is the (essence) Brahman of all forms.
3. The first part of this passage says that the body is the source of all actions & therefore, it is Brahman for all actions.

The second part tells us that The Immortal is covered by truth. But just after that it says that name & form are truth & they cover the PraaNa which is the immortal. Now form and name cannot be absolute Truth. Therefore, the word truth used here is in relative sense i.e. in the same way as speech, eyes and body are likened with Brahman. Why should Shruti call form and name as truth at all ? When you see the infinitely complex gross world and take it is the Truth …. It breaks down this world into three basic elements i.e. name, form and action. So, they become the essence of the whole world around us. By this breaking down, the world disappears and only three basic elements remain which make this world.

But the Truth is not revealed here in the above statements. It is much deeper and we must read further to understand the true purport of the Upanishad.


Why then sat is searched for or valued in-itself, for everything is deer only for the Atman, and nothing is deer in-itself. Even sat is a hindrance in the path of Self realization.

I think you meant “dear” and not “deer” in the above sentences. As I told you that your understanding is flawed & actually this question is ridiculous.


My second question is if viewed in the manner described above , what will be meaning of Satyam , Shivam, Sundaram: Truth is Shiv and Shiv is Sunder, yet they are not to be desired in themselves, for everything is deer for the sake of Atman. So even Satyam Shivam Sundram can be a veil for Atma? What is the relationship between Shiv and Sat, Shiv and Maya, Shiv and Existence, What is the relationship between Shiv and Atma?


This question too is meaningless. The framing of question itself is wrong. First of all, what do you mean by Satyam ? What is Shivam ? We shall come to sundaram after this.

Satyam here means … the essence … the Unchanging Truth. Shivam is what is auspicious … what is benevolent. The Brahman is the essence of all … so it is Satyam. It is the source and end of all beings of the first two states of Self (the waking and the dreaming states), the sustainer of all beings, the Lord of all … It alone is the True Guide, the father and the loving mother & therefore it is called Shivam.

Why it is called Sundaram ? Sundar means attractive. It attracts all JIvas towards Itself … even the apparent separation of JIva from Brahman creates painful restlessness and sufferings. Brahman is our blissful abode where we all have to go … it attracts us and that is why it is called “Sundaram”.
Now you understand what it means & why I said that your question was meaningless. These are the attributes of the Saguna Brahman … & it is not that you have to desire for it or whatever. That “Satyam Shivam and Sundaram” can be veil for Atman” is another meaningless question. Let us remember that Atman and Brahman are one and the same thing. I have explained “Maya” in detail in another thread and I won’t repeat that again. You have tried to know a new word, “existence” …. this term is used for “sat” sometimes. Sat has different meanings in different contexts. In some places it can be used as “essence” … it can also mean, “existence” … it can also mean, “that which is not false”.

I hope it helps. :)

Note to Brahman : Sorry dear, I had to explain it here as the questions were distorting the real meanings of the message of Upanishad. I hope you won’t mind a little transgression.

OM

brahman
23 March 2011, 06:21 AM
I couldn"t agree with Brahman and sri..sarangi in their views about Maya.

because Maya is altogether a different concept which is illusion.and its concept comes only when we discuss mayabad of advita vedanta(neo-vedanat). since maya is illusion,it is not existing.its a perception,dead,inert and inconceivable.

when there is everything apart from brahman is illusion(maya) in mayavad,where is the question of vidya and avidya? the discussion stops then and there.
this mayavad is good for understanding the concept,but when practice comes,it has no meaning.

but when we keep mayavad concept aside,and assume this creation as true,then only the concepts of shaktis,vidya,avudya etec comes.

Avidya and vidya are active part,the shakti of brahman or we can say female counterpart of brahman.

Avidya is acting force/energy,same is also Vidya. this concept is never applicable in maya of mayabad.

Avidya is equal to Mahamaya/mahashakti which is centrifugal energy. it work continuously to keep the consciousness in INERTIA and illusion and Ignorance can be prevailed.so its primordial cause of the existence of creation.

Vidya which is called Yogamaya is centripetal force which continuously acts to break the Inertia and illusion and takes the consciousness towards brahman. or knowledge.so it gives moksha.

so God has infinite shaktis,depending upon his functions.
but we have to remind that everything is one God.he is siva when innert,shakti when active.

Para prakriti and apara prakriti are again different concept.
Apara prakriti is lower form of energy.like inert objects.the creation,5 elements.it is equivalent to avidya.

Para prakriti is the very subtle energy and very inner to God. it gives the human the highest form of devotion.basically it is related to service to bhagaban is form and name. these can be Antaranga,bahiranga etc.

Antaranga shakti againg comprise SAMBIT,SANDHINI, HLADINI (Radha)

Bahiranga includes Yogamaya.
when Srikrishna took birth,he came with Yogamaya(paurnamasi) and Para shakti (radha).yogamaya"s one important role is to materialize the supreme lord"s wish.

another role of yogamaya is to take human"s mind towards god. she is the major Vidya shakti.









Dear Anirvan,

You own a philosophy, and you talk on that. I certainly appreciate you.

For a moment, concentrate on the title of the thread - “Realization of TRUTH: Not through the denial of World’s actuality”.


So, the actuality of the world/ creation is not been denied.

Secondly, examine this quote from the opening post (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=6767) “It is not through denial of the world’s actuality that the truth of existence is comprehended, but through a vision of those actualities as the natural expression of existence “

The entire thread is wrapped in so vast, deep thoughts on philosophy that it takes months and years to reach a solution with concrete answers. So, no wonder if you have overlooked the essence of it. If Brahma vidya is is the vidya of all vidya , the search has to keep going…

Dear Anirvan, looking forward to your full philosophical inputs on a separate thread please…


Dear Devotee, admitted :)


Dear Members,
Moreover, as obvious by now, I need manana/nidhidhyasana before I could reply/answer most of the contributions from fellow members of high intellectual competence.
It so requires that I read it as many times as I can, maybe for a week , in order to reply.
Please excuse me for that.

Love:)

anirvan
23 March 2011, 07:09 AM
Dear Brahman, i dont know what made you say so about me. i have not overlooked the main concept of the post. but you look in to your own post 12.

there it is clearly mentioned maya as perception. what does it mean? it clearly brings the Mayavad of neo-vedant of post Shankaracharya. but the post is about not denial of worlds reality.

only that part lead me to disagree, that Maya of mayavad is altogether from the all vidyas and shaktis which are reality if we look through mainstream of vedanta.i dont know if i had difficulty in understanding that and sri..sarangi"s post.anyway thanks a lot.

and certainly i dont own a philosophy. i am very little in front of all revered members here including you. may be i am little distracted from nididhyasan and sadhana for long period.

But i couldn"t understand when you say me write my input in separate threads please, i hope you have not been sarcastic.

brahman
25 March 2011, 05:17 AM
Dear Brahman, i dont know what made you say so about me. i have not overlooked the main concept of the post. but you look in to your own post 12.

there it is clearly mentioned maya as perception. what does it mean? it clearly brings the Mayavad of neo-vedant of post Shankaracharya. but the post is about not denial of worlds reality.

only that part lead me to disagree, that Maya of mayavad is altogether from the all vidyas and shaktis which are reality if we look through mainstream of vedanta.i dont know if i had difficulty in understanding that and sri..sarangi"s post.anyway thanks a lot.

and certainly i dont own a philosophy. i am very little in front of all revered members here including you. may be i am little distracted from nididhyasan and sadhana for long period.

But i couldn"t understand when you say me write my input in separate threads please, i hope you have not been sarcastic.






Dear Anirvan,
As you don’t own a philosophy, so am I too, and therefore, I follow the philosophic teaching of Sri. Narayana Guru, an advaithi who lived from 1855-1928. He has simply made his own finality of the transparent vision of ‘reality’ of upanishadic risis, and in his own style restated it in a way understandable and appreciable to an ordinary mind. In short, Sri. Guru was not an advaitha-vadin, but was an advaithin pure and simple. At the same time we do not see a trail of Sri. Guru to prove how superior is non-dualism to other schools thought.

About this thread
This thread is based on Darsanamala(Sanskrit work containing 10 chapters of ten verses each), one of the principal works of Guru, in which he visualised the one ultimate Reality in ten different perspectives, describing how the vision appears from each point, and then leaving to the seeker the task of making use of the visions to arrive at a comprehensive experimental awareness of the otherwise ineffable Reality.

Among the 10 perspectives, Maya Darsan has been discussed here.

Your confusion
One all-underlying casual Reality, in the OP, was seen as Brahman
On the other hand, Maya is what is stated as the primal cause, in other posts and explained maya as “that which does not exist”
Are there two such different cause s of world? It cannot be so.

My POV on your confusion
The casual reality perceived in the OP was the ontological substance; Maya has no such ontological status.

Maya’s casualty on the other hand is, is of an epistemological order.
To clarify it: our mind malfunctions resulting in perceiving the real as the unreal world, just as in the case of seeing a piece of stone as a sivalinga.
This malfunction of mind, is common to all, is the domain of Maya. And because of it the real remains unseen and the unreal is seen. It is in this particular sense that Maya becomes casual to the world-appearance. Resulting in a delusion and consequent appearance of the world, this cause is not material one, but is of an epistemological order.
That is to say, it is related to something that happens within KNOWLEDGE.

Disclaimer
Discussions have to be minutely observed, as it might not result in comprehending the desired perception in one reading , also an initiation is necessary before one could get into the study of Advaitha –Vedantha, oresle advaitha-vedantha remains a literature full of controversies. This thread intentionally or non-intentionally is not related to any schools of thought other than of Sri. Narayana Guru’s philosophical thoughts and teachings.

Kind request
Hope you let me continue with my regular posts in this thread, the rest of the verses in the interesting ‘Maya Darsan’

A kind note to dear members and Anirvan:
Guru Vaani and interpretations of the top lineage of gurus Like Swami Muni Narayana, in the Narayana Vedanta traditions have been pored over into this thread and repeated reading, manana, nidhidhysana is recommended in order to intuitively perceive the ultimate Reality. God Bless you all.

Lots of Love:)

anirvan
26 March 2011, 03:04 AM
[QUOTE=brahman;61057]


[INDENT][INDENT][INDENT]

My POV on your confusion
The casual reality perceived in the OP was the ontological substance; Maya has no such ontological status.

Maya’s casualty on the other hand is, is of an epistemological order.
To clarify it: our mind malfunctions resulting in perceiving the real as the unreal world, just as in the case of seeing a piece of stone as a sivalinga.
This malfunction of mind, is common to all, is the domain of Maya. And because of it the real remains unseen and the unreal is seen. It is in this particular sense that Maya becomes casual to the world-appearance. Resulting in a delusion and consequent appearance of the world, this cause is not material one, but is of an epistemological order.
That is to say, it is related to something that happens within KNOWLEDGE.

Dear Brahman,I just want to know your view about following points.

1- this malfunction happens within whose KNOWLEDGE?

a-jeeva? brahman?

b- in Individual or collective knowledge?
if it is in collective knowledge then every person"s perception should be same related to everything we perceive through different senses and we dont dream common things.
it is definitely individual knowledge. prove is our dreams never transgress to other"s dream.

then who is individual self and who (brahman?) is collective knowledge?

2- does through one"s advita knowledge (gaining vision of real as real-advita vision) , the creation altogether dissapears?all individual gets Moksha?

even if every individual gets advita knowledge,this creation still remains and will continue. so in whose knowledge is this creation(unreal) is held?

Isn"t this theory of Advita is unidimensional ??? hence incomplete and inherently flawed.

thats what i wanted to tell in previous post.but you are not able to get my phlsophy. i just wanted to say one thing....

truth can"t be viewed through one angle. Dvait is as much truth as advita. only vedantic view of advita vedanta is very incomplete as the only dvaita view in devotion. only one who has ascended through analytical path(jnan path) and descended in Bhakti path(devitional ) can able to see both side of brahman and complete truth.

my philosophic view is based upon understanding of vedanta,tantra,bhakti and yoga.and i was taught by my Guru who is advita vedantin but Prema,jnan,yoga and tantra siddha universal guru.who is combined form of Shankara and Gauranga(Chaitanyadev).the union of JNAN AND PREM.His name is Paramhansa Nigamananda saraswatidev.

jayaguru

brahman
27 March 2011, 03:26 AM
[QUOTE=brahman;61057]



[INDENT][INDENT]

My POV on your confusion
The casual reality perceived in the OP was the ontological substance; Maya has no such ontological status.

Maya’s casualty on the other hand is, is of an epistemological order.
To clarify it: our mind malfunctions resulting in perceiving the real as the unreal world, just as in the case of seeing a piece of stone as a sivalinga.
This malfunction of mind, is common to all, is the domain of Maya. And because of it the real remains unseen and the unreal is seen. It is in this particular sense that Maya becomes casual to the world-appearance. Resulting in a delusion and consequent appearance of the world, this cause is not material one, but is of an epistemological order.
That is to say, it is related to something that happens within KNOWLEDGE.

Dear Brahman,I just want to know your view about following points.

1- this malfunction happens within whose KNOWLEDGE?

a-jeeva? brahman?

b- in Individual or collective knowledge?
if it is in collective knowledge then every person"s perception should be same related to everything we perceive through different senses and we dont dream common things.
it is definitely individual knowledge. prove is our dreams never transgress to other"s dream.

then who is individual self and who (brahman?) is collective knowledge?

2- does through one"s advita knowledge (gaining vision of real as real-advita vision) , the creation altogether dissapears?all individual gets Moksha?

even if every individual gets advita knowledge,this creation still remains and will continue. so in whose knowledge is this creation(unreal) is held?

Isn"t this theory of Advita is unidimensional ??? hence incomplete and inherently flawed.

thats what i wanted to tell in previous post.but you are not able to get my phlsophy. i just wanted to say one thing....

truth can"t be viewed through one angle. Dvait is as much truth as advita. only vedantic view of advita vedanta is very incomplete as the only dvaita view in devotion. only one who has ascended through analytical path(jnan path) and descended in Bhakti path(devitional ) can able to see both side of brahman and complete truth.

my philosophic view is based upon understanding of vedanta,tantra,bhakti and yoga.and i was taught by my Guru who is advita vedantin but Prema,jnan,yoga and tantra siddha universal guru.who is combined form of Shankara and Gauranga(Chaitanyadev).the union of JNAN AND PREM.His name is Paramhansa Nigamananda saraswatidev.

jayaguru





[INDENT]Dear Anirvan,

You have asked many questions. We have already found answers, in an intellectual way. But, I do not believe that these could be answered in a logical way, as there is always an indefinability (anivacaniya factor), the Maya. By its very nature, it defies definition. It has place in every Vedanta philosophy of Indian origin (orthodox).Each philosophy perceives it in endless ways. They all have satisfactory terms to reveal it -as Brahman, Vishnu, Shiva, Shakti and so on.

To attempt to ascertain what is beyond the realm of human perception is a pointless exercise, in Sacred Brihadaaaranya Upanishad the limitations of logic and reasoning are illustrated as a dialogue between Mahamuni Yanjvalkya and Gargi

This section of the dialogue reveals the unknowability of Casual- Reality through ordinary ways of logical and analytical thought.

Also I quote the following satement of Muni Yanjvalkya from the same shruti “O Maitreyi, the self verily is to be visualised, to be heard of, to be reflected on, and to be mediated upon”

My thoughts on other schools as posted on 12 December 2010 says(click to view) (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=55229&postcount=3)

Guru taught both of us the language of love.

Let us endeavour in our pursuits through love and feel the bliss of it.
Good luck and god bless you.

Lots of love:)

anirvan
27 March 2011, 05:21 AM
Thank your Dear Brahman,

thats the only way to know brahman.:) with love.
i want to tell a great teachings of my beloved gurudev:

" SHANKARER MATH,GAURANGER PATH":

MEANS---PATH IS OF GAURANGA, AND DESTINATION OF SHANKARACHARYA.

destination is Advita brahman realisation,but through path of devotion. Gauranga is another name of greatest devoted saints chaitanyadev. this is kaliyug-dharma.
then path will be road of roses and destination will be also rose garden:)

jayaguru

khalidrawat
27 March 2011, 05:31 AM
Thankyou for your reply. First of all I cannot understand why you equated me with zakir naik?

Second thing that my question was niether out of context, nor it was so meaningless .

I have myself found the answer to my question. So if you are interested in knowing you can ask me to share it with you.

Khalidrawat

brahman
28 March 2011, 12:55 AM
Thankyou for your reply. First of all I cannot understand why you equated me with zakir naik?

Second thing that my question was niether out of context, nor it was so meaningless .

I have myself found the answer to my question. So if you are interested in knowing you can ask me to share it with you.

Khalidrawat




Dear Kahlid,

Great, finally you did it!

You kindly share it with us in a new thread please as this has another purpose of its own.

Repeated Quote
"About this thread
This thread is based on Darsanamala(Sanskrit work containing 10 chapters of ten verses each), one of the principal works of Guru, in which he visualised the one ultimate Reality in ten different perspectives, describing how the vision appears from each point, and then leaving to the seeker the task of making use of the visions to arrive at a comprehensive experimental awareness of the otherwise ineffable Reality.
Among the 10 perspectives, Maya Darsan has been discussed here."

Love:)

devotee
28 March 2011, 10:19 AM
Dear Khalid,

Please look at the response at http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=61344&posted=1#post61344

OM

astrostudent
29 March 2011, 01:40 PM
Sat means existence, so it is Brahman. I don't see how anyone can separate the two. Brahman is described as sat (existence), chit (knowledge), and ananda or bliss. But even this description is only a help, it must be given up; or we'll be stuck in forms. Brahman has no forms or attributes.