PDA

View Full Version : Advaita a beautiful and logical philosophy



Kumar_Das
13 July 2011, 12:51 PM
Shri Adi Shankara's theology is an extreme form of monotheism

Everything except God is something else, it is known as Maya, Maya is Unreal

God is Real

Maya is not the opposite of God, it is not Unreal in a sense that it is diametric to God, rather it is simply something else, something which God is not, it is devoid of the nature which is God, and unlike God, in its lackness of God lies its nature

from being blinded by Maya we go to God, upon reaching God we see the illusory nature of Maya, the nature of the two become clear only through realizing God

God is not realized through Maya, such is the deceiving nature of Maya, we are thoroughly blinded by it, we can only pierce Maya through the realization of God

and this reality, this realization of the real, also goes along with the fact that it(Maya) is the bewildering illusory power of God, and God controls it

Maya is hard to realize, it escapes us

we are used to accepting Maya, we do not even notice it, its deceptive nature escapes us and we start out that way before embarking the spiritual path that illuminates clearly

even the devout dualist Monotheists who staunchly adhere to the belief that God is entirely separate and outside of the individual and hold this principle of faith with undefilable sanctity should have to consider, why as they draw closeness to God, they momentarily become less conscious of the external world that physically surrounds them

the world that is perceived is established through perception via the senses, and God cannot be made aware directly, His presence never felt through anyone of the physical senses, yet the reality that is taken is one that is built through data entering via the senses. Such a reality becomes fragile and faulty when one realizes that a certain trait about an object becomes non-existent when the sense that allows us to perceive it gets cut off.

When a man sleeps, he still exists in the physical, yet the physical becomes temporarily shut off from him, his consciousness is still present, yet his mind projects another world to him, at times very much like the "real" world, yet less intense in its degree of sensation and less rigid. And he dubs this as completely illusory, a dream. Where then is the reality of the world that is sensed in the waking based from? The reality of the world thus collapses and is made unsteady when this question is put forth. For the dream world is deemed as entirely false and the attempt to prove this is done by drawing comparison to the "real world".

(two questions, why do we "realize" God? how come realization is an eventual, gradual process? this therefore has to be explained)

This Acharya Shankara says, for God exists, and yet there is this world, what this world does is blind us of the truth that is God, and takes His place

in his theology also the concept of soul, as per his definition, takes a central and important place, it lays out the whole of his theology and the end means of it

he says that the Soul essentially is non-different from God

this is an understanding that becomes fulfilled when considering Maya

for how do we reach God? a Being who is of nature that is Truth and Unsurpassable Brilliance, who Exists on His own accord, and relies on no other for anything, to whom we may credit everything ultimately yet whose nature remains untarnished in doing so?

there must be something within us that draws us close to God, what is that? what sets it apart?

this inquiry he holds as the start of spirituality

He says the individual looks outside to God, when there is a Self who is "I", the God that is understood then is one Who is restricted by His relation to the other, which is beneath Him in the quality of its nature, which is not His complete and pure nature, it is God who interacts and God seen beside something else, not God of His own nature exclusively

what is that by which "I" connect with to "God", a fundamental question arises, a question that needs to given more attention, a question that needs to be answered, a question that should be approached with an investigation

as "I" am investigated, as "I" am realized, the truth slowly is established, walls tear down, and not only on one side, for whenever "I" is involved, so does God appear in a certain way

then it becomes clear that layers conceal God, there is illusion that keeps both sides, so long as illusion persists, there is that which is taken under its guise, when truth becomes manifest, and veil of delusion dispersed, reality unfolds itself, there is no "He" nor "I" apart from Him, there is only One Truth and this truth is the Self, the Self that is Supreme, the Self which is the Core deeply embedded and muddled within all other individual indentification of "I"

Mana
13 July 2011, 02:46 PM
Thank you Kumar Das,

Your post is much appreciated. This Thick forest that is Vedanta is not easily explored, your illumination is most welcome.

Mana

grames
14 July 2011, 04:14 AM
MonoTheism and Monism? Are they same?

Kumar_Das
14 July 2011, 10:43 AM
MonoTheism and Monism? Are they same?

Monism isnt as simple as most think it to be.

Shankaracharya arrives at a Monistic conclusion taking Monotheistic routes, at an extreme level at that.

The whole post was intended to lay out that.

kallol
16 September 2011, 03:04 AM
Dear Kumar,

Thanks for your post. Maya and God, their relationship is quite important to understand and in that respect this is an important thread to be deliberated on.

My understanding as engineering scientist following the discourses of spirituality :

Wood, clay, etc are the basic substances for the furnitures, teracotta poterries, etc. Now the furnitures we have like chair, table, cupboard are the different shapes, forms and associated names by which we identify each of them.

Can we say that we have a material called chair ? NO. Though we can say that we have material called wood. Why ? It is because the wood is the is the reason behind the effects resulting in different furnitures. Wood is more permanent than furnitures. Cause is one effects can be many.

Now the problem is that, for transactional communications, we cannot use the term wood for different furnitures, then it will be totally confusing. So we have names. But unfortunately we get stuck to the shapes and forms which anyway are not permanent.

We fail to identify ourselves with wood or clay or gold or any basic materials. We always identify ourselves with the shapes, forms and names out of these. We get stuck to impermanence. Any change in these parameters bring all sorts of pains and upheals in mental state.

Now extrapolate all these further - we will find the one source cause for all creations (effects) is energy. That is the most permanent one in matter form. Any form, shapes and names out of it is impermanent. Some change in seconds and some in billions of years - but change or birth & death is the fact.

This attachment to the names, forms and shapes is termed also as maya is the main cause of trouble. Maya is that principle which is the substanceless shapes, forms and names which bind our mind. This binding illusion of shapes, colours, forms, names, etc eludes us from having the visibility of the base substance of all of these.

Taking it further - we find that it is only out of consciousness, the energy part if known. If consciousness is not there there is no energy. So the birth of energy is through the consciousness.

This consciousness is the nature (higher) of brahman or God. And energy is the lower nature of brahman. All creations have these two natures.

Advaita is the Science of God - it is present science + future science.

Once we understand this science, it looks all so natural that sometimes there is feeling of No God but only Knowledge.

That is why in advaita knowledge or jyana yoga is given more importance.

Love and best wishes

wundermonk
16 September 2011, 04:04 AM
An important question for an idealistic philosophy like Advaita is the ontological status of Avidya and Maya. There are slight differences between Avidya and Maya but for this discussion we may skip the hair splitting and consider them synonymous.

Where does Maya reside? Is it dependent on Brahman? Is it separate from Brahman? If Maya is eternal and unchanging can it be considered as real? Is Maya ITSELF illusionary?

kallol
16 September 2011, 04:57 AM
An important question for an idealistic philosophy like Advaita is the ontological status of Avidya and Maya. There are slight differences between Avidya and Maya but for this discussion we may skip the hair splitting and consider them synonymous.

Where does Maya reside? Is it dependent on Brahman? Is it separate from Brahman? If Maya is eternal and unchanging can it be considered as real? Is Maya ITSELF illusionary?

Maya being only in terms of forms, shapes and names and not the actual substance is unreal. Because of the limited capabilities of our external senses, we are stuck in these unreal world. This is a temporary phase of me or "I" which starts by birth and ends by death.

"I" belong to permanence and we are now in the dream (analogy) part of that "I".

The maya remains - sometimes manifested and sometimes unmanifested. It's attributes deluge us with ever changing illusions and cover the actual substance. "I" enter this phase and exit this phase.

Love and best wishes

rkpande
16 September 2011, 09:18 AM
]I bow to the intellect of shri Sankra.
I have some childish doubts, as you may call. J

God is beyond comprehension of any human being.
He is pure bliss and pure knowledge.

1. In that case, why should He/It imprison Himself/Itself as jiva in a dehi and then try through 84 lakhs yonies to become Him/Itself again?

2. We see that population is increasing, implying incarnation of new jivas. This jiva will cross from one specie to other and ultimately be born in a human form, fit enough to realise God. If there is a beginning and end of jiva then it cannot be eternal.

Obviously, there is something amiss. Will someone please clear my doubts.

Mana
16 September 2011, 10:09 AM
Namasté rkpande

If there are an infinite amount of now's you think that you occupy just one but in fact there are many; you occupy an infinite amount of them. Some have more and others less Jiva.

There are no jivas, jiva is a transient illusion born of Atman its self, froth and bubbles on the boundary of puruSa.

Why more Jiva now? Maybe the sea of puruSa is rough at the moment. As for the 84 lakhs yonies, I've never tried counting the waves of crested form, maybe others have and can thus be of help on this matter.

I sincerely hope that you resolve your feeling of doubt.

praNAma

mana

wundermonk
16 September 2011, 10:51 AM
1. In that case, why should He/It imprison Himself/Itself as jiva in a dehi and then try through 84 lakhs yonies to become Him/Itself again?

Brahman never imprisoned itself. The ocean is all that exists as a wave or as a foam.


2. We see that population is increasing, implying incarnation of new jivas. This jiva will cross from one specie to other and ultimately be born in a human form, fit enough to realise God. If there is a beginning and end of jiva then it cannot be eternal.

No, there is no creation out of nothing in Hinduism. Jiva doesnt arise afresh. Does a wave exist independent of an ocean?

Clearly Jiva perceived as Jiva is not eternal. But once you realize Jiva = Brahman, the Jiva attains eternality.

iamfact
13 November 2011, 10:39 PM
My understanding was that Advaita is purely non-dualistic / monistic and not monotheistic because monotheism comes from the Greek words: mono - one and theos - deity. Advaita, is more Atheistic than monotheistic since even Adi Shankaracharya said God is what appears when Nirguna Brahman is reflected upon the mirror of illusion. Also a deity almost always implies a personal God, and since Brahman is certainly not personal, it cannot be called monotheism. I also believe Maya, when taken in context with Brahman is non-different from Brahman. It is when human ignorance and avidya is brought into the picture does Maya appear different from Brahman, making humans believe that Maya is absolutely real.