"Dharmic emotions"

[TheOne]

It's rather easy for most people here to say that emotions such as "hatred, jealousy, lust, etc." are not Dharmic and are because of Maya.

But what about emotions that people commonly refer to as "Romance, comradeship, humility" while these are certainly Dharmic because they don't cause suffering the real question is are these of Maya?

In my opinion the obvious answer is yes, all emotions are of Maya because they are subject to change and they don't have any instrinsic "truth" to them. Now I may realize this sounds rather Nihilistic but please don't take it as such, I'm merely asking because I hear many people saying 'the only reason we hate others is because of Maya' but that could be substituted for any other emotion because in the scientific sense emotions are chemical reactions that take place in the brain. I'm not denying the "actuality" of emotions but I'm asking are these or are these not of Maya, and why or why not?

[Adhvagat]

Aren't you attaching a slightly negative notion to wordly experience?

Recently my notion of the world is shifting away from illution, misery, which are of course inherent parts, and more towards a place that offers everything needed for self-realization.

[TheOne]

That's a rather arbitrary way of looking at it. I'm not attaching a negative notion to worldly experiences I'm merely explaining the facts and some of the philosophical consequences associated with it.

If we are to rid ourselves of hatred for others, are we not also to rid ourselves of love? Both of these "emotions" are a strong attachment to something...or someone except one raises the blood pressure and the other one lowers blood pressure.

This may be a rather "Buddhist" view of reality but it explains itself to me nontheless. To get rid of our preconcieved notions of the Divine is in my opinion one of the "quick" paths to realization. To live a life of wu-wei-wu or action through inaction is (in my opinion) the clearing of preconceived notions about the 'self' and the 'divine' and just "living(but not bound) by Maya"


I certainly hope I'm not confusing anyone by using Daoist terminology but I believe it is the best explanation of my view on Maya because there isn't really a parallel in SD.

[Adhvagat]

Well, actually I remember discussing this with a friend a while back. After I read his views on duality I hurt my forehead in the bathroom and I tried to witness my pain very closely, how my pain pulsed in equally separated waves and then I noticed how pleasured functioned through the very same waves, however, with a different pulsation, a different frequency (similar discussion on this thread: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=7136).

He was talking about how Ramanuja considers pain and pleasure to be two avasthas (states) of jnana, and therefore only different ways to witness the one.

The only experience that I classify as purely transcendental manifested to me through emotions, and my main way to perceive the world is mainly through introverted feeling, so I'm a little biased whenever we're reaching a concept close to nirguna brahman, I get really reluctant to accept it, for me saguna brahman sounds way more interesting, but well, i'm biased! :p

But perhaps you were trying to illustrate how real transcendence does not involve nor love, nor hate, but equanimity. However, what about the infinite bliss, ananda? How can ananda and equanimity coexist in the spiritual level? I'm confused.

Om Tat Sat

[Onkara]

It's rather easy for most people here to say that emotions such as "hatred, jealousy, lust, etc." are not Dharmic and are because of Maya.

But what about emotions that people commonly refer to as "Romance, comradeship, humility" while these are certainly Dharmic because they don't cause suffering the real question is are these of Maya? (cut for space)

Namasté TheOne & Pietro
I feel this touches on the paradox that all that exists is the Self yet to arrive at knowing the Self we are told to negate what it is not (with neti neti etc).

It is my observation the method does not define the goal. The method too can be 'sacrificed' when the divine goal is reached (the moment will be known). Once the Self is known through negation, then everything returns to be known (by You) as that which is, was and will always be the Self - no duality.

So māyā is not the emotion or concept itself: love is still real, as is comradeship, humility, spontaneous acts etc. The list is endless because that which exists now still may exist when the Self is known. The difference is that one knows the experience (such as love/comradeship) to be the same as the experiencer (Self/bráhman) and as such they do not have the same hold over the Self (the divine You). They serve bráhman rather than the jIva (or antahkarana, the four parts of mind). Māyā is then impotent (practically one may need to practice neti neti when doubt arise).

Māyā too is of bráhman, but bráhman is not of māyā in a hierarchical perspective. So once one abides in their true Self, then there is no turning back, no further place to go.

[anirvan]

love,hatred ,attachment,detached all are emotions which will stay till death as life itself is the causation of maya. even with brahmavetta this apparent maya will sustain till the body dies.

important thing is we should encourage those emotions that are not detrimental to spiritual growth and discourage and avoid those detrimental to it.

one example....if we get angry and kill somebody who is attacking our Gurudev is dharma,but mere silent is sin.

when we became emotionally sad and cry with the sorrow of a sufferer its not detrimental to growth,but if we cry for materialistic things,its un-spiritual.