Maya Dreamer Analogy

[sanathan]

Thanks to moderators for creating new thread.

I find that people don't listen at all to what the Advaitins say .... they themselves (Non-Advaitins) don't understand how it works and they keep finding their own arguments and their own wrong inferences. In the above discussion, Sanathan doesn't know how the Consciousness works or mind works and what exactly Mithya means but starts applying his logic in without respecting the frameworks of the Axioms in the context of Advaitic discussion. So, it doesn't reach anywhere, as it is bound to be.

Pranamams!

Dear Devotee,

I have listened all your words, but you didn't answer any of my questions with proper logic, but just put assumptions and asked me to believe them.

Yes, I don't know how consciousness works and what mithya is..do you know it?..is there any knower at all to know how consciousness works? that disproves your theory of pure-cosnciosuness.

I don't know why you can not see a simple logic .

You are iterating same things..that there are some mind waves in consciousness , but how do you know that man? then you have given answer that "self-realizaed" person knows it..so there is a knower of that state..that disproves your statement that "it is pure consciosuness without a knower of it".

And there are many statements made by you are just assumptions or imaginations of your own, not advaitic..one such I pointed out was "after every sleep a new "i" is created .." ..please first read sastras and also use logic , mere imaginations can't help you or me.

For your information..all these discussions are happening between you and me ..who are subjects, but you are denying the very subject as illusion ..but you forget one fact that..to declare such fact.."you" are required who is again a knower of that fact..otherwise that fact itself can not be declared.

If you are really searching TRUTH or already found the TRUTH..then you should not have any fear to think on each and every point I have raised here should be able to answer it..
If you just want to stick to your pre decided thoughts or convictions, then ofcourse you won't dare to try to think on my points .

[sanathan]

Krishna's MAyA is the same as the Advaitin's MAyA. Krishna Himself says that MAyA is very powerful, "Mama MAyA durtyayA".

Is it? then whom does Krishna refer as "can't overcome it".. is there anyone else other than Krishna and Maya?
You have one cosnciousness , one maya..now tell me who is that can not overcome "maya"..
I know your answer ..it goes like this.. an illusory being created by the maya in consciosuness can not overcome it..do you see any logic there?

Does the illosry being achieve any thing fruiteful by do sadhana..as per your theory..the "i" vanishes after every sleep..so why do "i" need to try to overcome this maya at all..anyway it will get vanished after sleep..if itself vanishes what is there to get liberated? Think on..

[sanathan]

If you read Bhagwad Gita Chapter 2 and chapter 13 carefully, you will understand that there is only one Truth which manifests as both Jiva and Ishvara and that is Brahman.

Is it so..? so you don't want to read other chapters "carefully"..is this not the play of ahankara? since the theory of yours can be establsihed by you with 2,13 chapters..you will put more stress on them..and ignore others as "secondary".. Very well.. don't we want TRUTH as it is? do we go behind them where our ego satisfies with out pre-decided notions ?

[sanathan]

You have no idea what "i" means or in what context it has been used. The first characteristic of presence of "i" i.e. ahamkAr is that it should be able to distinguish itself for other things around it. In deep sleep, there is no such differentiation ... how can there be an "i" ? Please remember that existence of an "i" means presence of Consciousness but the reverse of it is not true.

I don't know what "I" means? funny..you are finally trying to deny my experiences also
Let us first talk about our current state..

I perceive the outer world using my senses..my mind is used to think..so all the while "I" know myself doing as such and , yes I can also distinguish myself from whatever is "known as world" to me..

So in waking state or current state.. "I" am there, "world" is there..and I am experiencing/perceiving this world using my knowledge..when my knowledge is in contact with world through the senses and mind. Do you agree on this interpretation ? This is every one's general experience..if you oppose your general experience..then we have no chance to discuss.because with this view only I am discussing with you , or with this view only anyone in this world will interact with others.

First conclude your stand on "your" current experience.

[devotee]

Namaste Sanathan,

My guess that you are here for playing a game 'I win -you lose" has been proved by your posts. So, please forgive me ... I don't intend to play this game as I had told earlier.

You may brush aside all whatever I stated ... it really doesn't matter. Yes, just for your kind information, I should point out here to you that there is no Upanishad or the Vedas (Samhita parts) that I have not read ... so, please rest assured about my knowledge of the Sastras. And there is hardly anyone prominent Advaitic Guru which I have not read extensively. I have also read extensively on MahAyAna Buddhism and Sufism which have many things in common to Advaita. ... and if you are interested to know ... I am a practising Advaitin. Still you want to teach me Advaita !

The above information is given to you to assure you that I am not assuming things when I talk on Advaita. As far as your logic is concerned, you can easily find lots of chinks in your logic, if you don't use the axioms of one state into other state. You are fast moving from one state i.e. waking state to Turiya in discussion without taking care that all the axioms that you are using are valid only in Waking state from where you are speaking and if you carry them to Turiya, it is violated. Again, the axioms that that you have chosen for the common people don't apply to people who are Self-realised. So, you will keep getting illogical inferences because logic used is absurd. Moreover, you are assuming wrongly on Deep-sleep state ( cannot have an 'i' as it is a state of undifferentiated Consciousness) , "waht happens in Turiya or what should happen in Turiya state", "How should self-realised feel/act", "'i' is Jeeva" etc. etc. ... which are all absurd from Advaitic point of view. This has to be corrected first if you want to learn Advaitic teachings properly.

But that is purely dependent upon you want. You actually don't want to learn but you want to teach me a subject about which you have no idea.

Forgive me for discussing the subject with you. I should not have entered into a discussion with you at all in the first place. It was my mistake ... but I am a human being and prone to committing mistakes.

OM

[jopmala]

Dear Devotee

With all respect I like to say that there is no question of any kind of fighting with you rather would like to learn from you or sharing my own thoughts etc. Since HDF is a open forum ( if I am not wrong ), I think you should welcome everybody in any section so that proper discussion take place. I agree that I am not as intellectual as you are . You are doing the job of a teacher and preacher for advaita in HDF . I have great respect for you. I am non dualist and at the same time dualist also. To me both the aspect of Brahma (nirgun nirakan and sagun sakar) is absolute. The same brahma is nirgun in tatta and sagun in Lila as we see same person in a family plays different role of daughter sister mother grandmother . I believe that Brahma , Atma , Bhagavan is same tatta. He is murta and amurta , karta and akarta ,nirgun and gunpalak , bhut dharak but not bhutastha , all pervading and aja but take birth with the help atma maya. I have not read Upanishad so much as you have but within that little scope I find that Brahma is both murta and amurta ( Briha. Upa-2/3/1 ) sagun sakar ( Swet upa- 3/16),” He desired , May I be many , may I go forth “- (Taitti upa 2/6) , “ tadatmanang swayam kuruta” – (Taitti-2/7), “from a blazing fire countless sparks of various kinds but similar form are shot forth similarly from the imperishable being various kinds of beings emerge forth and return to it later on” – (Mun upa-2/1/1) , Taitti 3/6 says “ bliss is bramha. From bliss these creatures are verily born , having been born by bliss they live and having departed into bliss again they enter”. Chhando upa 1/1/2-3 says “ sa aba rasanang rasatama” Taitti 2/7 says : “raso baisa ……” he is rasaswarup.

I also refer to you to go through Gita - 4/13, 8/6, 9/4, 9/5 ,13/13 ,14/3,14/27 ,15/7,15/18 ,18/46 . I have not touched srimad bhagavat yet. By the way, May I know why you people do never quote from srimad bhagavat ? All these mantras will prove that jiva is part of brahma and jagat is not dream but real because brahma himself can be felt in every part of this real jagat . This is what “Aham Brahmasmi” or "sarbang khalidang brahma" is . In Gita 14/27 Sri Krishna says “ brahmonohi pratisthaham”.
The relation between Jiva and brahma or jiva atma and paramatma is veda and aveda( according to sri chaitanya charitamrita it is achintya ved-aveda ) justlike blazing fire and its sparks sparks are also fire but part of the big fire having qualities of fire. Brahma bivu and jiva anu..Jiva has come from Brahma ,going towards brahma and enter into brahma. Our love affection prem happiness desire to live jnan buddhi etc all comes from brahma itself. The attraction between them is natural. Bhagavan is dear to jiva and so also jiva are dear to bhagavan. Without children one can not become mother, without wife one can not become husband and so without jiva there can be no brahma. Nirgun nirakar nirvishes personality is unthinkable ( Ken upa -2/3) where there is no Lila no creation. Only personality. and tatta nothing else. We can not communicate with that. But when that personality becomes murta vyakta and creator of this rup rasamaya jagat, we can think of him. This is confirmed by sri Krishna in Gita -12/1-5 . Dehabhimani trigunadhin Jiva can not think of triganitita nirgun tatta. Therefore for the jiva bhagavan takes avatara with the help of maya to do lila ( Gita 4/6) so that jiva can establish relation of Das-pravu, father-son,sakha-sakhi,kanto-kanta with him and can reach him. This relation is full of honey ( madhur) “ madhu kharati tad bramha” It is right to say that brhamha is without second but he himself transforms into jagat-(taitt-2/7). So jagat is not mithya. It is asat in the sense that it is naswara . It is not apparent rather phenomenal.He is both sat and asat ( gita- 9/19-sadsachhamarjun). Gita 15/12-20 solve many problems. Therefore I find nothing wrong to say that I am non dualist since there is brahma everywhere and nothing else in this jagat but at the same I am dualist because nirgun nirakar brahma is beyond my reach so he is my sagun sakar brahma sri Krishna with whom I can establish a relationship of bhakta and bhagavan. Both the brahma is same personality and absolute but difference comes from which angle one looks at. Question can not be asked why same brahma becomes many because it is his desire. I think you are very much aware of this.

I am confused seeing the contradiction in your post.

1) Sri Krishna is both sagun and nirgun brahma , how this is accepted by you ? For you I think he is mere Isware like shiva and ganesh only third aspect of brahma ? Being sakar how can sri Krishna be nirgun brahma?
2) once you say advaitin accept both nirgun nirakan and sagun sakar brahma as same then you again say iswar ( sagun brahma) is not brahma raher third aspect of brahma .Nirgun nirkar brahma is important to know because it is the ultimate reality. Why ?
3) According to you there are four tatta brahma iswara maya and jiva . but so far I know it is brahm jiva and maya only three tatta.
4) Jiva has to know not only it is brahma itself but brahma is in everywhere also . Bijang mang sarbabhutanang – Gita 7/10 and many more mantras in Gita will show that.
5) How could nirgun brahma have a nature ( quality) like maya ?
6) Why nirgun nirakar brahma has come under the influence of maya to become iswara or what is the need on the part of nirgun nirakar brahma to have an powerful maya which in turn will project jagat which is mithya.Magician do magic to make audience delighted and also himself enjoy the foolishness of audience but can nirgun nirakar brahma have the same purpose or what else. In Gita shri Krishna says that by his kripa , smaranagata bhakta can overcome maya ( mameba je prapadante) but acquiring jnan how one can overcome maya because the ultimate nirgun nirakar brahma never say just like sri Krishna in gita “ mama maya durattaya” . In Gita maya is trigunamoyee ( satta raja tama ) but how advaitin claims to have any gun under a nirgun nirakar brahma ? Since there was no jagat before maya then how and why maya has projected jagat upon brahma or has brahma and maya come into existence at the same time?
7) I do not think that you are here in HDF to shift your own belief or trying to make other to shift their own belief system. HDF to me is such a platform where every one can share own belief system with other. Is it a crime?
I know very well you do have also many mantras to prove that brahma is nirgun nirakar and jagat is dream etc. Ultimately the conclusion is brhama is both nirgun nirakar and sagun sakar and why not both aspect is absolute.

[sanathan]

I should point out here to you that there is no Upanishad or the Vedas (Samhita parts) that I have not read ... so, please rest assured about my knowledge of the Sastras. And there is hardly anyone prominent Advaitic Guru which I have not read extensively. I have also read extensively on MahAyAna Buddhism and Sufism which have many things in common to Advaita. ... and if you are interested to know ... I am a practising Advaitin. Still you want to teach me Advaita !

It remembered me Kathopanishad vakya "yamevaisha vrinuthe thena labhya".

Dear Friend,

Whatever you may learn about Brahman , is not complete..and the way you are putting here as Brahman as known by you ..is not full and also shows your ahankara though you are trying to relegate the same thing as illusion.

It is like, whatever thoughts in your mind are the only TRUTHs , and remaining world is illusion.

I too don't want to discuss anymore with you..

[devotee]

Namaste Japmala,

To me both the aspect of Brahma (nirgun nirakan and sagun sakar) is absolute. The same brahma is nirgun in tatta and sagun in Lila as we see same person in a family plays different role of daughter sister mother grandmother . I believe that Brahma , Atma , Bhagavan is same tatta. He is murta and amurta , karta and akarta ,nirgun and gunpalak , bhut dharak but not bhutastha , all pervading and aja but take birth with the help atma maya. I have not read Upanishad so much as you have but within that little scope I find that Brahma is both murta and amurta ( Briha. Upa-2/3/1 ) sagun sakar ( Swet upa- 3/16),” He desired , May I be many , may I go forth “- (Taitti upa 2/6) , “ tadatmanang swayam kuruta” – (Taitti-2/7), “from a blazing fire countless sparks of various kinds but similar form are shot forth similarly from the imperishable being various kinds of beings emerge forth and return to it later on” – (Mun upa-2/1/1) , Taitti 3/6 says “ bliss is bramha. From bliss these creatures are verily born , having been born by bliss they live and having departed into bliss again they enter”. Chhando upa 1/1/2-3 says “ sa aba rasanang rasatama” Taitti 2/7 says : “raso baisa ……” he is rasaswarup.

I agree though I would have stated similar things from Advaitic point of view.

I also refer to you to go through Gita - 4/13, 8/6, 9/4, 9/5 ,13/13 ,14/3,14/27 ,15/7,15/18 ,18/46 .

In BG 4.13, he talks about creating the four Varnas. I have no issues with that.
BG 8.6 talks of something different. I don't know why you selected this verse.

BG 9.4, 9.5, 13.13,14.13,15.17,15.18,18.46 : No issues.

I have not touched srimad bhagavat yet. By the way, May I know why you people do never quote from srimad bhagavat ?

Srimad Bhagwad is basically for Bhakti Yoga and our path is different. Moreover Upanishads and other parts of Vedas are the highest authority, so if we agree on that, it serves the purpose.

All these mantras will prove that jiva is part of brahma and jagat is not dream but real because brahma himself can be felt in every part of this real jagat . This is what “Aham Brahmasmi” or "sarbang khalidang brahma" is . In Gita 14/27 Sri Krishna says “ brahmonohi pratisthaham”.

Actually, Bhakti Yoga aims for reaching Ishvara through bhakti whereas Jnana yoga aims at going beyond that to the fourth state of Brahman. Now, Ishvara and both the waking and dreaming states are within the same realm i.e. Brahman with MAyA. So, imho, there is no harm to consider the world as real from a Bhakta's perspective.

The Jnana Yogi cannot stop here otherwise he cannot aim for attaining the fourth state.

Sri Krishna says, "Brahonohi pratishthaham" ... exactly ! By saying this here he discloses that He is the Nirguna Brahman too.

The relation between Jiva and brahma or jiva atma and paramatma is veda and aveda( according to sri chaitanya charitamrita it is achintya ved-aveda ) justlike blazing fire and its sparks sparks are also fire but part of the big fire having qualities of fire. Brahma bivu and jiva anu..Jiva has come from Brahma ,going towards brahma and enter into brahma. Our love affection prem happiness desire to live jnan buddhi etc all comes from brahma itself. The attraction between them is natural. Bhagavan is dear to jiva and so also jiva are dear to bhagavan. Without children one can not become mother, without wife one can not become husband and so without jiva there can be no brahma.

No issues. Ishavara and beings are related to each other as you say. All beings are created by Ishavara and they end up into Ishvara. Ishvara is the source and end of all beings.

Nirgun nirakar nirvishes personality is unthinkable ( Ken upa -2/3) where there is no Lila no creation. Only personality. and tatta nothing else. We can not communicate with that. But when that personality becomes murta vyakta and creator of this rup rasamaya jagat, we can think of him. This is confirmed by sri Krishna in Gita -12/1-5 . Dehabhimani trigunadhin Jiva can not think of triganitita nirgun tatta. Therefore for the jiva bhagavan takes avatara with the help of maya to do lila ( Gita 4/6)

Wait ! So, God takes the help of MAyA to come into being as Saguna Brahman. Right ?

so that jiva can establish relation of Das-pravu, father-son,sakha-sakhi,kanto-kanta with him and can reach him. This relation is full of honey ( madhur) “ madhu kharati tad bramha” It is right to say that brhamha is without second but he himself transforms into jagat-(taitt-2/7). So jagat is not mithya.

Wait ! Brahman has transformed itself into Jagat. Right ? Therefore, Jagat is actually Brahman which is being seen as Jagat. That is what Advaita says that seeing Jagat as Jagat is wrong as Brahman is behind the veil of this Jagat.

It is asat in the sense that it is naswara.

Agreed.

It is not apparent rather phenomenal.

As Jagat is actually Brahman, then appearance of Jagat is apparent only.

He is both sat and asat ( gita- 9/19-sadsachhamarjun). Gita 15/12-20 solve many problems. Therefore I find nothing wrong to say that I am non dualist since there is brahma everywhere and nothing else in this jagat but at the same I am dualist because nirgun nirakar brahma is beyond my reach so he is my sagun sakar brahma sri Krishna with whom I can establish a relationship of bhakta and bhagavan. Both the brahma is same personality and absolute but difference comes from which angle one looks at. Question can not be asked why same brahma becomes many because it is his desire. I think you are very much aware of this.

You are quite knowledgeable to talk like this. I agree that we can't be perfect dualist or non-dualist. To tell you the truth, the Advaitins too pray to God as father or mother (praying to Him/Her as master-slave is forbidden in Advaita). So, there is certain duality and it is required. How is one going to pray for His grace without accepting duality ?

I am confused seeing the contradiction in your post.

1) Sri Krishna is both sagun and nirgun brahma , how this is accepted by you ? For you I think he is mere Isware like shiva and ganesh only third aspect of brahma ? Being sakar how can sri Krishna be nirgun brahma?

I think you have already quoted quite a few verses which indicate this. Moreover, I would like you to refer these verses : 18.50 to 18.54, 12.3 to 12.4, 4.34 to 4.39, 5.24 to 5.28, 7.24, 7.17-18, 8.123-13 and 9.15. The sufficiently indicate that Lord Krishna alone is both Saguna and Nirguna Brahman.

Now, what we think about Lord Shiva and Ganesha ? Advaitins believe that all forms of God point towards only one Ishvara with slightly varying attributes and therefore, we don't differentiate between the different forms of God.

2) once you say advaitin accept both nirgun nirakan and sagun sakar brahma as same then you again say iswar ( sagun brahma) is not brahma raher third aspect of brahma .Nirgun nirkar brahma is important to know because it is the ultimate reality. Why ?

That is what VedAnta says. MAndukya Upanishad says that the fourth (Turiya) has to be known. Moreover, Nirguna NirAkAr Brahman is the Ultimate reality. So, it is better to know the ultimate reality. However, imho, Bhakti may also lead one to reach the ultimate because Krishna assures the Bhaktas in BG.

3) According to you there are four tatta brahma iswara maya and jiva . but so far I know it is brahm jiva and maya only three tatta.

This is because you are considering Brahman and Ishvara the same ... but there is a slight difference. Ishvara means and is the Lord of all beings and waking and dreaming states whereas the Brahman in its unconditioned state i.e. the fourth is not vyAvhArik.

4) Jiva has to know not only it is brahma itself but brahma is in everywhere also . Bijang mang sarbabhutanang – Gita 7/10 and many more mantras in Gita will show that.

No issues.

5) How could nirgun brahma have a nature ( quality) like maya ?

VedAs have simply state that within Nirguna Brahman arose desire which led to this creation ... why, how and when ... the scriptures are not unanimous on this. The Purush Sukta says it better ... perhaps even the gods don't know about it. Let's understand that by logic we cannot know Brahman. It is pointless. Brahman has Nirguna aspect as the scriptures say and we must accept that. MAyA is nature which projects the waking and dreaming states and veils the Reality. No one can say "how it is and why".

6) Why nirgun nirakar brahma has come under the influence of maya to become iswara or what is the need on the part of nirgun nirakar brahma to have an powerful maya which in turn will project jagat which is mithya.

I cannot tell you the motive behind there having MAyA and creation. The scriptures are not unanimous on this issue. The Advaitic Gurus say that this question arises from preconditioing of mind. There is no need to have any "why" behind either MAyA and the creation.

Magician do magic to make audience delighted and also himself enjoy the foolishness of audience but can nirgun nirakar brahma have the same purpose or what else.

I have answered this question above.

In Gita shri Krishna says that by his kripa , smaranagata bhakta can overcome maya ( mameba je prapadante) but acquiring jnan how one can overcome maya

Please read Bhagwad Gita verses where He praises Jnani over all other Bhaktas. He says, "Jnani Bhakta is most dear to me. He is of my swarupa alone". Then He also says, "There is nothing as purifying as Jnana. All Karmas are burnt in Jnana". So, actually, we believe that by His grace, the Bhakta also get Jnana and then becomes free. Advaita position is that it is Jnana alone which can get us overcome MAyA.

OM

[Omkara]

In the Brahma Sutras, `vaidharmyAchcha na svapnAdivat.h' states that the world is not akin to a dream, being of a different nature.

The mANDUkya Upanishad explicitly rejects the theory that this world s like a dream or a magical creation: svapnamAyAsarUpeti sR^iShTiH anyaiH vikalpitA.

In the Gita, Krishna rejects those who think that this world is not real, as demons: asatyaM apratiShThaM te jagat AhuH

[wundermonk]

In the Brahma Sutras, `vaidharmyAchcha na svapnAdivat.h' states that the world is not akin to a dream, being of a different nature.

The mANDUkya Upanishad explicitly rejects the theory that this world s like a dream or a magical creation: svapnamAyAsarUpeti sR^iShTiH anyaiH vikalpitA.

In the Gita, Krishna rejects those who think that this world is not real, as demons: asatyaM apratiShThaM te jagat AhuH

None of which contradicts the Advaitin position.

The BS sutra that you quoted is Shankara's response to Yogachara. The difference is subtle but it makes all the difference. I made a thread on this issue here.