The arbitrariness of constituent elements.
One thing crossed my mind...
After a first glance at the study of Samkhya and understanding the interactions of elements and how they originate, interact and affects us, in the end it all just seems very arbitrary to me, and by arbitrary I don't mean limiting, but clearly defined and focused.
Let's take the element manas for example. Couldn't it just don't exist? And perhaps another element take its place, with other implications and interactions?
Couldn't the whole existence we are aware of be completely different on planes where different elements, elements we can't even begin to grasp, act as a supporting medium?
So, can we conclude that there are universes (if we can even still use this word) that are completely different from ours from the ground up?
I'm not sure this speculation could lead us to something constructive, but it sure fascinates me!
:)
Om Tat Sat
Re: The arbitrariness of constituent elements.
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~
namasté PI,
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pietro Impagliazzo
One thing crossed my mind...
After a first glance at the study of Samkhya and understanding the interactions of elements and how they originate, interact and affects us, in the end it all just seems very arbitrary to me, and by arbitrary I don't mean limiting, but clearly defined and focused.
Let's take the element manas for example. Couldn't it just don't exist? And perhaps another element take its place, with other implications and interactions?
Couldn't the whole existence we are aware of be completely different on planes where different elements, elements we can't even begin to grasp, act as a supporting medium?
So, can we conclude that there are universes (if we can even still use this word) that are completely different from ours from the ground up?
Please offer your insights on the tattvas (~elements~).
you mention,
Quote:
interact and affects us
They are not outside of us, yes?
Regarding tattva-s
In the śāṁkhya view of Reality there are 25 tattva ( some say 24, others 26); In śaivism (I study trika¹ śaivism ) there are 36 tattva.
tattva is composed of tad and tvam , that (art) thou. What is tad? Brahman. It also means ~that-ness~. The notion here is brahman is the most subtle and most essential essence of all creation - seen and not seen. Hence tattva = the essence of anything; the most 'elemental'. So people have come to call it 'elements' which is close but not the best fit.
tattva also = tata-tva. This tata is defined as extended , stretched , covered over by. And the logic is all is brahman - all extended and covered by brahman. This tata can also be tāta meaning chief, superior. And we see how this applies to brahman.
But what of this tva ? This word is defined ( 3rd derivative) as 'thy' or' your'. Yet for me the interesting defintion is tvad, meaning one or several (many) . This then says brahman (tata) is one (tavd) or many (tvad). What does that infer? That brahman is both the fullness of the Supreme , the absolute level of Being, and the diversity ( the many) of creation.
praṇām
words
trika is a triad, a group of three divisions of kaśmir śaivism: āgama, spanda and pratyavbhijñā śāstra-s or āgama-s some say tantra-s.
Re: The arbitrariness of constituent elements.
Yajvan, I didn't respond perhaps in a pathetic attempt to hide my ignorance. :)
I'm not sure I have many insights regarding the tattvas, the main mind-boggle is this realization of arbitrariness. I don't know, perhaps I'm not exactly giving the due credit of freedom each element and sense store within themselves.
But is that all that is? Isn't there another creation that features different elements and ways of perceiving them? Or perhaps that's the ultimate and most cleverly elaborate way of dealing with prakrti?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
anirvan
Dear Devotee,Smaranam,Sarangidasi and Brahman.
Bhagban is very different for person to person,not because of difference in their view or faith.
It is purely because of their spiritual ascendent. how far one has gone in spiritual sky,has seen that far. thats the reason Madhwacharya has said we should respect other"s view.as spiritual knowledge is ever evolving with great saints.this is clearly demonstrated in development of Vedas. and if you look at different philosophy being preached by different Avtars with refining always with descending time scale.
If god has not a form,how come these billions of forms exist in creation. whatever is not there in brahman,it can"t exist in creation. he is called formless because all forms exist inside him.just like 7 colours mixed to form white. same is meaning oF NIRGUANA -- EXISTENCE OF ALL GUNAS IN ONE, when these gunas manifest we called him SAGUNA/MAHASHAKTI/MAYA.
saguna and nirguana are not different state,but like BUTTER IN MILK.
GOD CREATED HUMAN IN HIS SELF IMAGE. because this form is the best form hiddent in NIRGUNA BRAHMAN.
Anirvan posted this on another thread and that reminded me of this thread here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pietro Impagliazzo
Anirvan, that's exactly my problem with the notion that Bhagavan would be inferior (Brahman through Maya) than Brahman.
In fact I distanced myself a bit from ISKCON teachings exactly because I didn't agree that the realization of the impersonal aspect of God is an incomplete realization.
Currently I consider all three aspects of the divine complete and infinite in themselves. I mean, if God is infinite, even the realization of a tiny portion would reveal the infinity within, right?
What you say is also very interesting because I've always wondered the reason behind this human form and on a higher level the reason of why the elements organize themselves the way they do. There must be a great secret behind it all. I posted about this a while back:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=6761, if you could shed some light on that thread I'd be grateful.
Om Tat Sat
I'm not sure this doubt is of any validity to anyone else but I'm just trying to hunt down this doubt.
Re: The arbitrariness of constituent elements.
your question is very genuine and valid.when brahman is infinite,everything in it is infinite. so why not the primary constituent elements?
we are made up of 24 elements(tatta). again this 24 elements forms 5 shells.like physical body,areal ,mental,intellectual and blissful bodies or shells. inside which resides the self.
Again in lower animals,dumb humans,these intellectual and blissful body under or non-developed. in highest form of devotee there is another elemental body develops inside blissful shell....which is called Chinmaya body.it is again various types according to subtleties.
so there must be infinite planes existing with different elements,with altogether different creations,different drama.
but according to achintya-bheda-abheda tattva, the highest,ultimate ,purest and most blissfull state is bhavalok/bhagabat lok and chinmaya body.
ISCKON preaches this tattva.but there way is radical/fundamentalist type.
its because all the persons there are not developed soul. their whole philosophy is based upon Advita,still they deny advita.its their ignorance.
i will suggest you to read the life story of SRIMAT NIGAMANANDA SARASWATIDEV. one of greatest saints ,upon whose life ENTIRE SANATAN DHARMA has evolved like nowhere. just analyse his life,you can understand entire sanatan philosophy.i will give few site,if you can get 4 books by him and his life story, you dont have to study anything under earth.
http://www.siliconvalleychat.reociti....../ashram.htm
www.absmath.org , dssonline.in , nilachalsaraswatsangh.org, and swaminigamananda.weebly.com
i want to go through it because you can understand how sanatan dharam has lived upon a single person"s life.
