Advaita Viewpoint On Spiritual Worlds.

[Spirit Seeker]

Hi Namaste All.

As someone who comes from a Spiritualist Background its difficult for me to understand the Advaitian viewpoint as it relates to the spiritual worlds. From my impression on the mainstream Advaita, it treats "Everything" as "God".. As "all is Brahma."

I can agree that all Brahman is All, but not all is Brahman.

For instance, in my spiritualist traditions which is mainly derived from indegiouness practices stemming from the Carribean to Brazil, our gods are not seen as "imaginary" constructs of a subjective mind. To their followers, the gods are as real and interactive towards us, as your neighbor next door, or that grocer from down the block. These Gods communicate directly via Divination, or Possession.(Altered State of consciousness) And they can share many amazing and profound things, assisting us with our lives directly.

Many people who practice these traditions happens to be spiritualist mediums. So they are gifted with spiritual sight(clairvoyance, 3rd eye, divine eye etc.). Many of these spiritualist who are gifted with the Spiritual Sight, Change Many Peoples lives, even skeptical people, when they communicate with a persons loved who who's passed, or who can spot out and verify someones spiritual or assisting spirit guides hanging around that individual.They interact and commune directly with the deceased, ancestors, Nature Spirits, Elementals etc.

I've never been to India, but India being a 'mystical' spiritual land as well I would presume that they have similiar practices to these in certain areas. Having experienced and directly validated my metaphycisal experiences conerning the objectivity of Metaphysical Entitys, and Gods etc. It has changed my life profoundly, and has lead me to Seek God, as where My Life was before God, I was highly skeptical materialist Agnostic.

Here is my Belief. Since Brahman pervades all, At this level, and at THEIR personal, individual consciousness level, spirits exist as we do, as uniquely separate individiuals, having, as I said, personal consciousnesses.

However, eventually, as you follow the layers of the bodies upwards, you get to a place where everything is one being... something so huge, so vast, it's incomprehensable. At that level, everything that exists, here, there, everywhere, every choice ever made that created a new reality, every entity on every part of astral, every world here or there, every spirit, every soul, is the same entity.

Take a leaf off of any tree... The leaf is a leaf. It looks and IS different from every other leaf. At the same time... when you really look at the structure of the leaf, it is an EXACT MIRROR IMAGE of the way the treee grows. The branches in the leaf are like the branches in the tree. A perfect copy.

THAT is what we are ALL like, humans and spirits alike... at one level, we're all leaves, separate and completely ourselves... but even down here, at our core, we're copies of the All, which is everything that is, everything that could be, and everything that isn't... and if you follow our stems far enough upwards, you find the tree itself.

Now the reason I ask for the Advaitan Viewpoint, is for clarifaction rather than Misunderstanding. For Example, If I communicate or Venerate an Ancestor Spirit, as per my tradition, I really trust it is the Spirit/Jeeva of that particular individual. Not some Formless Imaginary Construct. Even the energy signature of the particular spirit/entity/jeeva is peculiar and unique.

According to the Advaitan viewpoint, The perceived jeeva is Brahman taking the form of an ancestor, as "Brahman is formless, and Brahman is All."

I hope this doesnt turn into a heated debate, as I dont want to compare spirituality's realizing that this is a Hindu forum, and the content will mainly be hindu, but im just inquiring as I dont want to misunderstand anything. I've gotten into a lot of debates with New Agers and Neo-Mystics, about whether these beings exist Subjectively or Objectively. But I have my answer already.

So I just ask ,Is this really how it's seen through the Advaitan viewpoint or am I missing anything?

Blessings, and Thank you.

[devotee]

Namaste Spirit Seeker,

Advaita is a difficult subject to understand and this has to be kept in mind before trying to give one's own explanation on "What Advaita should be". I will give you some examples :

a) You take a piece of diamond and a piece of iron. Are they two or same ? Diamond is diamond and iron is iron. So, at this level, these are certainly two things. Now let's go at a level where you can't find a difference between a particle and a wave ... i.e. let's go at lowest of sub-atomic level ... even below quarks and anti-quarks, if possible. It has been proved that matter can be converted into energy. As all types of energies are basically the same, we can safely conclude that at the lowest level, all matter whether Iron or diamond must have the same essence from which it should be made up of. Otherwise too, if go reverse i.e. converting energy into matter, theoretically it is possible to create any matter from the same energy. Even if stop at energy and say that it is the substratum of everything around us ... we end up seeing everything in this world as essentially the same energy.

So, though the reality is that everything is Consciousness ... in absence of any valid instrument to prove it, we agree to the assertion that "Everything is nothing but energy" and proceed with this. So, what do we get ?

"All Matter and energy are essentially same thing."

However, it doesn't mean that the distinction has disappeared at the gross level. Diamond, Iron and Energy have their own characteristics at the gross level.

b) For understanding Advaita, the above example is barely sufficient due to its severe limitations as we are unable to deal with Consciousness directly. Advaita says that Everything is Consciousness. Consciousness is Brahman. Now, that said, it is not that Consciousness has partly converted into humans, partly into stones, partly into trees etc. No, the conversion has been Only apparently. What does it mean ?

For understanding this let's first have a look on this invocation verse of IsAvAsya Upanishad :

"Om purnam-adah purnam-idam purnaat purnam-udacyate. purnasya purnam-aadaaya, purnam-eva-avashishyate "

===> That is infinite, this is infinite; From That infinite this infinite comes. From That infinite, (when) this infinite is taken out; balance remains as infinite.

"That" in the above verse is used for Brahman and "This" is used for this universe. So, the verse says that Brahman is limitless and from it is born this universe which again is limitless. After this Infinite Universe comes out from the Infinite Brahman, the Infinite Brahman remains.

So, everything is Brahman and "Nothing" has really converted into anything else i.e. there was Brahman to begin with and Brahman alone remains at the end. How is it possible ? Are we able to understand what it says ? It is difficult. Why ? We are going to deal with how Consciousness behaves and we have hardly any idea of how consciousness acts. The verse says something which seems impossibility but this is only due of our lack of knowledge on how Consciousness behaves.

c) The Dream analogy :

By analysing our dreams, we can understand the above verse though it won't by what actually happens. However, our purpose will be served by analysing the Dream-phenomenon.

In the phenomenon of dreaming :

a) There is only One Consciousness i.e. of the Dreamer. There is no other consciousness taking part in the dreaming process.

b) While dreaming many characters are created and a story line too is created which runs the dream. The various characters acting in the dream i.e. all the persons whether friends or foes, girls or boys, men or women, stones or pearls, tress or birds ... everything is creation of Dreamer's consciousness. There is no other material which changes into the characters of the dream and there is no other cause, so we can safely say that Dreamer is the material and efficient cause of the whole dream world.

Please note here that every character in the dream acts on his/her/its own. The dreamer has its separate entity in the dream which may not be exactly as he really is and he or even the dreamer don't know how a dream character is going to behave the next moment (that shows that the actions of the dream characters are not pre-decided by the dreamer). There may be some characters created in the dream which could not be friends of the dreamer (so, creation can act against its own creator apparently) and yet those characters are created and act on their own. Anything cannot act on its own independently unless it has a consciousness of its own. Therefore, every character in the dream must have its own Consciousness otherwise their actions should have been known to the dreamer in advance who is the Consciousness behind the whole set of characters in the dream. But we all know that the dreamer doesn't how one dream character is going to do the next moment in the dream.

Now, let's analyse the dream phenomenon :
**********
i) There can be no doubt that there is Actually only one Consciousness i.e. that of the Dreamer. There is no consciousness which is added to or subtracted from teh Dreamer's Consciousness i.e. before dream, during the dream, the Consciousness of the dreamer remains the same.

However, though it was One Consciousness alone to begin with and one alone remained during the dreaming session and also after the dream ended, there were many separate consciousnesses perceived during the dream. This gives us an idea of unique characteristic of Consciousness i.e. Without being actually divided into many, one Consciousness can give rise to perception of many consciousness apparently. . This is called ChidAbhAsa (phenomenon of reflected consciousness) characteristic of Consciousness or Brahman.

Now, armed with this knowledge, we can answer all your questions on Spiritual world :

a)

Now the reason I ask for the Advaitan Viewpoint, is for clarifaction rather than Misunderstanding. For Example, If I communicate or Venerate an Ancestor Spirit, as per my tradition, I really trust it is the Spirit/Jeeva of that particular individual. Not some Formless Imaginary Construct. Even the energy signature of the particular spirit/entity/jeeva is peculiar and unique.

===> You are right. However, from Absolute point of view, everything including you is just like a dream-character which has the Consciousness of the Dreamer as the substratum. The Spirt is as real as you are. At the Absolute level, both you and the spirit are unreal. Only Brahman exists.

b)

According to the Advaitan viewpoint, The perceived jeeva is Brahman taking the form of an ancestor, as "Brahman is formless, and Brahman is All."

===> True. Not because Brahman is formless … Brahman is neither formless nor with form … it is beyond all mental constructs. The Perceived Jeeva is Brahman in absolute sense and the perceiver i.e. you too are Brahman. This is possible due to special power of Consciousness to see multitude within itself (as in dreaming state) and still remaining the same. This unique power of Brahman is called MAyA. Brahman can be with this power and also without power i.e. this power can be manifest and also unmanifest. When this power is unmanifest i.e. lies within Brahman, it is Brahman's Absolute state which alone is the sole reality and is called the "Fourth State" of Brahman. When this power is manifest … three entities apparently comes into being : God (the third state of Brahman), The Waking state (i.e. this manifest world), the Dreaming state or the Subtle world which is the world of all of us before birth and after death.

You question is whether the spirit to whom you are talking is real or unreal and just a mental construct. In this question, you have assumed that "You are real". Now, that means (by taking that assumption) that you are speaking from the Waking state (Gross world state) and from that state you are real and also the spirit is real. If you say that "I am Brahman" and the "Spirit is Brahman" … these statements are from the Absolute state. Both the statements are correct as long as you keep seeing from one state. However, you will be in serious difficulty to understand things when you mix up the phenomena of two different states. From the Absolute state, the spirit to whom you are interacting is a mental construct (of Brahman and not yours as an individual) but so you are. You cannot say : "I am real" and "the spirit to whom I am talking is unreal".

OM

[Amrut]

Namaste,

In simple words, from practical standpoint (vyaharic satya), everything has own existence. From standpoint of supreme reality, there is only one thing - Brahman.

So if there is some ritual or a kind of process, there is duality - karma kand
But if you are meditating advaita way, then you follow it's principles during meditation and even in day-2-day life.

But one is not free from duality, so you tend to be neutral and do not practice such process like communication with other worlds, spirits, though they may be true and real and not just a concept, as in Advaita, it is not given importance. Only thing that is important is Brahman.

I am Brahman are All is Brahman is a statement and not a process or way of life. It is mental state (mansic dasha and not disha). You will have to reach it or know it.

Aum

[Spirit Seeker]

Namaste Devotee and India. Apology's for the late response as I'm just seeing this.( I also wish my posts can go through moderation faster so they don't sink in the background of peoples attention hahaha!)

Thanks For the time you put in for a lengthy well-put response I appreciate both your input.

Devotee I understand the gist of what you are saying, but perhaps I used the wrong words to convey my message. I Post on a lot on religious and metaphysical websites for varying viewpoints, most of them have different terminology that is essentially describing almost the same thing. What I would like to call an Archetypal Symbology.

It's just the context of those explanations, the "How" is what is different. So being that this is a Religious forum and not a "New Age" forum, me calling them "Constructs" probably wouldn't be true to the 'spirit' of what the advaita philosophy actually is, rather than Idealist new age concepts(What I seen called "Neo-Advaita) twist to their own pseudo-mystical bias.

From an Advaitic standpoint to see "Everything is God" Brahman, seems like watering reality down. Isnt it not a simple explanation to a complex vast incomprehensible universe, let-alone the perceptual limitations we have as humans, the wiring of our physical brains relative to how the mind works? Like I said, I can agree with advaita that at the deepest most fundamental underlying level of reality, Brahman Is All, but what I'm bringing up is kind of missing the point as to why I asked.

The problem I have with this mindset is basically, everyone's relationship with God is personal, whether God is internal, external, a Separate entity, Or the Self etc Can depend whether it's even relevant or not. But One wouldn't approach a Living Breathing Human Being as "God". Why would one approach a Spirit this way? From a Lot of the "New Age" Ideals, which is why I used the word "Construct", people tend to forget that these beings carry their own mind, conscious, feelings, religious beliefs, opinions, emotions etc. Everything we go through and experience, in this life, and in this world, they experience too in their world, Both the good AND the bad, but yet they are mistreated as subjective projects of the subconsious mind.

If someone is a Materialist or Atheist, then that is one thing, But I would ask for the believer, if People really believed that God exists and there is a metaphysical world, why do they do this? Do they not realize that in doing so that it is disrespectful to THEM?

I would say people only adapt and embrace this mindset, because they not only lacked experience, but also verification(Indisputable Certainty) over their own experiences, of an existence far beyond their physical sight. So most resort to an "Everything is subjectivly one thing mindset) taking the good out of Materialism And Idealism, mixing it into their own spiritual pot. From this exact standpoint, there are many many atheists that do claim to be spiritual and even go as far to accept an afterlife. But it is mostly of a Subjective Idealists Philosophy.(I am my own God, Creator of my Reality) etc.

Now what I brought may or may not click with True Followers of Advaita Philosophy, everyone is an individual after all, but Im just bringing up viewpoints that are similar to Advaita, but is not actually advaita... Which is why I have Inquired on what Advaita ACTUALLY is.

I hope i'm not stepping on anyone's toes here! =/

These unseen subtle energies can as well influence the daily lives of people, whether we see, believe, lack of belief, or even realize it or not, being that their world co-exists with our world.

One cant just treat A spirit like it is "God" just because it's taken for granted, the experience is being mediated by our consciousness(Where else would it take place?). People Who put energy and awareness into the wrong spiritual entity's, get dragged back into the material world more often then not. They are not all looking to aid in one's spiritual progress, but rather, some are eager to feed your ego if a person puts energy into them. So one can be mistakened, in treating a "X" Spirit who is just passing through or lives and resides in "X" area/environment as THE God(Brahman). This is a HUGE mistake.


-So where I was getting at, as I brought up the Ancestral Example. Is the Jeeva of an Ancestor, really an ancestor carrying all it's past life memories, experiences, mood and personality along with it, from where it has once walked this earth outside the experiencer, or is it Brahman Manifesting as an ancestor, the same as Brahman can Manifest as anything in one's own mind. (Since the gods are treated as all the same too)


-From an Advaitic standpoint I ask, where does one draw the line between Subjective And Objective?

-From the Original Post and my Religious/Spiritual Background, which school or branch of Hinduism would relate closest to how I see or approach things?


Thank you for your time both!

Blessings.

[Omkara]

You seem rather confused about the basics of advaita and other philosophies of hinduism. Your viewpoint is closer to vishishtadvaita than advaita.

I suggest you read http://www.bergen.edu/phr/121/ShankaraGC.pdf which contains Shankara's own exposition of advaita in his commentary on the vedanta sutras and http://www.bergen.edu/phr/121/ramanujagc.pdf ramanuja's arguments for vishishtadvaita philosophy.

[devotee]

Namaste SS,

From an Advaitic standpoint to see "Everything is God" Brahman, seems like watering reality down. Isnt it not a simple explanation to a complex vast incomprehensible universe, let-alone the perceptual limitations we have as humans, the wiring of our physical brains relative to how the mind works? Like I said, I can agree with advaita that at the deepest most fundamental underlying level of reality, Brahman Is All, but what I'm bringing up is kind of missing the point as to why I asked.

I am amazed if you find it so simple ! My dear friend, if it was that simple to understand, Bheda-abheda Achintya swaroop and Vishishta Advaita would have no place in VedAnta schools ! I am a practising Advaitin and I find it a difficult model to explain and you say that it is easy ! That is something highly surprising.

But One wouldn't approach a Living Breathing Human Being as "God". Why would one approach a Spirit this way? From a Lot of the "New Age" Ideals, which is why I used the word "Construct", people tend to forget that these beings carry their own mind, conscious, feelings, religious beliefs, opinions, emotions etc. Everything we go through and experience, in this life, and in this world, they experience too in their world, Both the good AND the bad, but yet they are mistreated as subjective projects of the subconsious mind.

You have not read my post carefully. From any person's position, the disembodied beings are as real as the person is.

These unseen subtle energies can as well influence the daily lives of people, whether we see, believe, lack of belief, or even realize it or not, being that their world co-exists with our world.

The more you believe in them, the more they affect you. Also, these disembodied souls are not very high spiritual beings otherwise they won't disturb people. So, if you are at a lower spiritual status, they may affect you more.

One cant just treat A spirit like it is "God" just because it's taken for granted, the experience is being mediated by our consciousness(Where else would it take place?). People Who put energy and awareness into the wrong spiritual entity's, get dragged back into the material world more often then not. They are not all looking to aid in one's spiritual progress, but rather, some are eager to feed your ego if a person puts energy into them. So one can be mistakened, in treating a "X" Spirit who is just passing through or lives and resides in "X" area/environment as THE God(Brahman). This is a HUGE mistake.

Did you understand when I used the terms, "From Absolute point of view" and "speaking from the waking state" ? You will get your answer once you understand these terms.

-So where I was getting at, as I brought up the Ancestral Example. Is the Jeeva of an Ancestor, really an ancestor carrying all it's past life memories, experiences, mood and personality along with it, from where it has once walked this earth outside the experiencer, or is it Brahman Manifesting as an ancestor, the same as Brahman can Manifest as anything in one's own mind. (Since the gods are treated as all the same too)

The disembodied soul is just like you and me except that it has no physical body but has subtle body. It may be your ancestor who is still not liberated from the cycles of life and death and also that it has not taken birth.

From an Advaitic standpoint I ask, where does one draw the line between Subjective And Objective?

-From the Original Post and my Religious/Spiritual Background, which school or branch of Hinduism would relate closest to how I see or approach things?

The terms "Real" or "Unreal", and sayings like "I am Brahman", "Everything is Brahman" ... have different meanings in different states of existence. Whatever is "Real" in waking state may be "unreal" from the "Absolute" point of view. Everything is Brahman ... if you take it literally and approach a "Tiger Brahman" or "Cobra Brahman" who is hungry/angry then you are in serious trouble.

Both Coal and diamond are carbon i.e. they are essentially same. So, will you sell your diamonds at the price of coal ?

OM

[Necromancer]

Hi Namaste All.

As someone who comes from a Spiritualist Background its difficult for me to understand the Advaitian viewpoint as it relates to the spiritual worlds. From my impression on the mainstream Advaita, it treats "Everything" as "God".. As "all is Brahma."

I can agree that all Brahman is All, but not all is Brahman.

For instance, in my spiritualist traditions which is mainly derived from indegiouness practices stemming from the Carribean to Brazil, our gods are not seen as "imaginary" constructs of a subjective mind. To their followers, the gods are as real and interactive towards us, as your neighbor next door, or that grocer from down the block. These Gods communicate directly via Divination, or Possession.(Altered State of consciousness) And they can share many amazing and profound things, assisting us with our lives directly.

Many people who practice these traditions happens to be spiritualist mediums. So they are gifted with spiritual sight(clairvoyance, 3rd eye, divine eye etc.). Many of these spiritualist who are gifted with the Spiritual Sight, Change Many Peoples lives, even skeptical people, when they communicate with a persons loved who who's passed, or who can spot out and verify someones spiritual or assisting spirit guides hanging around that individual.They interact and commune directly with the deceased, ancestors, Nature Spirits, Elementals etc.

I've never been to India, but India being a 'mystical' spiritual land as well I would presume that they have similiar practices to these in certain areas. Having experienced and directly validated my metaphycisal experiences conerning the objectivity of Metaphysical Entitys, and Gods etc. It has changed my life profoundly, and has lead me to Seek God, as where My Life was before God, I was highly skeptical materialist Agnostic.

Here is my Belief. Since Brahman pervades all, At this level, and at THEIR personal, individual consciousness level, spirits exist as we do, as uniquely separate individiuals, having, as I said, personal consciousnesses.

However, eventually, as you follow the layers of the bodies upwards, you get to a place where everything is one being... something so huge, so vast, it's incomprehensable. At that level, everything that exists, here, there, everywhere, every choice ever made that created a new reality, every entity on every part of astral, every world here or there, every spirit, every soul, is the same entity.

Take a leaf off of any tree... The leaf is a leaf. It looks and IS different from every other leaf. At the same time... when you really look at the structure of the leaf, it is an EXACT MIRROR IMAGE of the way the treee grows. The branches in the leaf are like the branches in the tree. A perfect copy.

THAT is what we are ALL like, humans and spirits alike... at one level, we're all leaves, separate and completely ourselves... but even down here, at our core, we're copies of the All, which is everything that is, everything that could be, and everything that isn't... and if you follow our stems far enough upwards, you find the tree itself.

Now the reason I ask for the Advaitan Viewpoint, is for clarifaction rather than Misunderstanding. For Example, If I communicate or Venerate an Ancestor Spirit, as per my tradition, I really trust it is the Spirit/Jeeva of that particular individual. Not some Formless Imaginary Construct. Even the energy signature of the particular spirit/entity/jeeva is peculiar and unique.

According to the Advaitan viewpoint, The perceived jeeva is Brahman taking the form of an ancestor, as "Brahman is formless, and Brahman is All."

I hope this doesnt turn into a heated debate, as I dont want to compare spirituality's realizing that this is a Hindu forum, and the content will mainly be hindu, but im just inquiring as I dont want to misunderstand anything. I've gotten into a lot of debates with New Agers and Neo-Mystics, about whether these beings exist Subjectively or Objectively. But I have my answer already.

So I just ask ,Is this really how it's seen through the Advaitan viewpoint or am I missing anything?

Blessings, and Thank you.

Namaste.

Growing up on the island of Bali, Indonesia, I had the chance to witness and be part of this Hindu tradition incorporating Animist beliefs.

Yes, of course Agama and Ancestor worship are a total dichotomy to even try and make any sense of...yet, here I was praying to 'nothing' for all those restless souls in purgatory.

I am a 'Spiritualist' in the sense of being a Theosophist and I'm a student of Advaita Vedanta.

If I wanted to get all hard core about it, I can say that in the Light of Ultimate Reality, everything is Maya/Illusion. This World, the Spirit World, Heaven, Hell...even illusion itself (that's a really big hurdle to jump). We can say 'neti neti' and becone nihilists of the known universe...OR

We can go 'Sarvam Iti' and yeah, everything is Brahman now, all the Worlds, Maya, God...

Do these Worlds/Souls exist? who knows?

Maybe souls exist on another 'World' or maybe they have been reborn onto this one in another form. We cannot begin to understand what Karma has in store for us...you may be praying for your dead uncle who is now a little girl in Poland.

Aum Namah Shivaya

[brahman]

Dear S.Seeker,

Thank you for your time both!

Blessings.

-From an Advaitic standpoint I ask, where does one draw the line between Subjective And Objective?

It finds its own distinction at the level of the normative notion of the Absolute.

Please Read>>

-From the Original Post and my Religious/Spiritual Background, which school or branch of Hinduism would relate closest to how I see or approach things?

It is not really clear from your posts. kindly include your philosophical view points on

• Reality
  
• The cosmic System
  
• Creation
  
• Souls
  
• Reason for Bondage of the souls
  
• Karma/ Action
  
• Spiritual practices if any
  
• Liberation etc..

Love

[Amrut]

Namaste Devotee and India. Apology's for the late response as I'm just seeing this.( I also wish my posts can go through moderation faster so they don't sink in the background of peoples attention hahaha!)

Thanks For the time you put in for a lengthy well-put response I appreciate both your input.

Devotee I understand the gist of what you are saying, but perhaps I used the wrong words to convey my message. I Post on a lot on religious and metaphysical websites for varying viewpoints, most of them have different terminology that is essentially describing almost the same thing. What I would like to call an Archetypal Symbology.

It's just the context of those explanations, the "How" is what is different. So being that this is a Religious forum and not a "New Age" forum, me calling them "Constructs" probably wouldn't be true to the 'spirit' of what the advaita philosophy actually is, rather than Idealist new age concepts(What I seen called "Neo-Advaita) twist to their own pseudo-mystical bias.

From an Advaitic standpoint to see "Everything is God" Brahman, seems like watering reality down. Isnt it not a simple explanation to a complex vast incomprehensible universe, let-alone the perceptual limitations we have as humans, the wiring of our physical brains relative to how the mind works? Like I said, I can agree with advaita that at the deepest most fundamental underlying level of reality, Brahman Is All, but what I'm bringing up is kind of missing the point as to why I asked.

The problem I have with this mindset is basically, everyone's relationship with God is personal, whether God is internal, external, a Separate entity, Or the Self etc Can depend whether it's even relevant or not. But One wouldn't approach a Living Breathing Human Being as "God". Why would one approach a Spirit this way? From a Lot of the "New Age" Ideals, which is why I used the word "Construct", people tend to forget that these beings carry their own mind, conscious, feelings, religious beliefs, opinions, emotions etc. Everything we go through and experience, in this life, and in this world, they experience too in their world, Both the good AND the bad, but yet they are mistreated as subjective projects of the subconsious mind.

If someone is a Materialist or Atheist, then that is one thing, But I would ask for the believer, if People really believed that God exists and there is a metaphysical world, why do they do this? Do they not realize that in doing so that it is disrespectful to THEM?

I would say people only adapt and embrace this mindset, because they not only lacked experience, but also verification(Indisputable Certainty) over their own experiences, of an existence far beyond their physical sight. So most resort to an "Everything is subjectivly one thing mindset) taking the good out of Materialism And Idealism, mixing it into their own spiritual pot. From this exact standpoint, there are many many atheists that do claim to be spiritual and even go as far to accept an afterlife. But it is mostly of a Subjective Idealists Philosophy.(I am my own God, Creator of my Reality) etc.

Now what I brought may or may not click with True Followers of Advaita Philosophy, everyone is an individual after all, but Im just bringing up viewpoints that are similar to Advaita, but is not actually advaita... Which is why I have Inquired on what Advaita ACTUALLY is.

I hope i'm not stepping on anyone's toes here! =/

These unseen subtle energies can as well influence the daily lives of people, whether we see, believe, lack of belief, or even realize it or not, being that their world co-exists with our world.

One cant just treat A spirit like it is "God" just because it's taken for granted, the experience is being mediated by our consciousness(Where else would it take place?). People Who put energy and awareness into the wrong spiritual entity's, get dragged back into the material world more often then not. They are not all looking to aid in one's spiritual progress, but rather, some are eager to feed your ego if a person puts energy into them. So one can be mistakened, in treating a "X" Spirit who is just passing through or lives and resides in "X" area/environment as THE God(Brahman). This is a HUGE mistake.


-So where I was getting at, as I brought up the Ancestral Example. Is the Jeeva of an Ancestor, really an ancestor carrying all it's past life memories, experiences, mood and personality along with it, from where it has once walked this earth outside the experiencer, or is it Brahman Manifesting as an ancestor, the same as Brahman can Manifest as anything in one's own mind. (Since the gods are treated as all the same too)


-From an Advaitic standpoint I ask, where does one draw the line between Subjective And Objective?

-From the Original Post and my Religious/Spiritual Background, which school or branch of Hinduism would relate closest to how I see or approach things?


Thank you for your time both!

Blessings.

Brother, What Omkara says is true.

You are mixing many paths, including Yog, new-age like reiki and other energy based techniques, automatic writing, exploring higher worlds, Vishista Advaita and Advaita

Just to caution that Brahma sutras are not for beginners. When one is well versed in Upanishads and still find some doubts, Brahma sutras will solve them. I have not read them and none of Upanishads. They are not given to me.

Earlier I have been practicing Pranic Healing and was a clairvoyant, had intuitions, could smell divine aroma of spiritual energy or some spiritual being, higher being, etc. I have been a medium in healing people, in fact, not just people, just animals and plants woo. Plants are living and they do give a response.

So I understand you very well.

No path rejects any other path or it's philosophy. It neglects and does not give importance.

e.g. Advaita does not give importance to subtle bodies and I am not aware of any advaita text that describe chakras and their functions in details.

Vivekchudamani, Tatva Bodh, etc does say there are 5 bodies, but does not give importance them them and instructs one to go beyond them as you are none of them.

First let me share 4 paths I know in brief (Please correct if I am wrong.)

1. Yog: rising of kundalini from muladhara (root / basic) chakra to sahastra (crown) chakra. When kundalini reaches crown, meditator can experience vast inner sky, which looks similar to night. It has small stars, etc. When one goes beyond it, you see prakash (light), beyond it you are one with God (paramatman).

Yog gives importance to service also.

2. Bhakti: Chanting Gods name so that one day you can have divine vision of God and stay with him, enjoy his company, watch his lila, serve him.

2.a Dvaita: I and God are separate
2.b. Vishistadvaita: I and god are one, but still individuality of Jiva is retained.

3 Jnana / Advaita: I am Brahman.

4. karma: Thsi should have been first one, but karma, as I understand is for chitta-shuddhi.

After one achieves mental purity, one can shift in either bhakti or Jnana according to Prakruti.

New-age phenomenon is not traditional. In traditional teachings, first a disciple is realized and then send by Guru / God to preach / Teach. All avatars (except RAma and Krushna) first meditated, established themselves in Atma Sthiti and then began to spread the word. Even the great compassionate Buddha first meditated and then spread.

New-age theory / occult / theosophy, just trains one for some time and then they are told to spread. Their main aim is to spread (be it teacings or peace). It is like patient treating patient.

They twist the teachings:

I read a book intro and it said that following upanishad says there are 5 bodies. So he concluded that there are subtle bodies, they have chakras and they should be explored.

That upanishad ( I do not remember the name) did say that there are 5 bodies.

But when the disciple came to guru with experience that - ' I saw energy body - pranamaya kosha'. Guru simply said keep meditating. disiple got same answer till he realized Brahman. So Guru was not encouraging him to explore this energy body. He did not gave any importance to it and simply said, go and meditate.

After I was handed over to Advaita Guru, who follows traditional path, I was told not to give any kind of importance to any experiences, mostly like rising of Kundalini, visions that yogis have, seeing chakras, etc. My Guru even went on to say that it is not necessary that to realize Kundalini should be activated.. forget it. Later when I was having very few experiences of this kind, he told me that there everything exists, even kundalini, but our path does not give importance. So just neglect it.

Exploring subtle worlds, etc are not traditional Yog. Yog means just union of jiva with paramatman. In due course, a yogi may experience them, but to specifically meditate or do a secret process to achieve control and mastery over subtle powers of God is not taught. Powers may come, but you don to meditate to gain powers.

What new-age people do is to bring spiritual energy down and spread it. Advaita does not give importance to any of this process.

Regarding Neo-Vedanta. It was coined by Swami Vivekananda

It was a need for the hour. During his time, many young people were getting nastika (athiest). Indians have been ruled for more than 400 years and the rulers did their bast to break our backbone - religion and spirituality.

Britisher brought Christian religion. They lured and bribed people with basic necessities like food, clothing and shelter. When it comes to poor people, survival is prime important. So many people accepted christian faith. In the same way western philosophy was blindly accepted.

Swami Realized this and so developed a similar approach. He said that instead of just parroting our great shastras and not practicing better is to serve. Let Hindus first remain Hindus. So he started preaching service to humanity and opened many schools, hospitals, encouraged donations and service to poor. He said that the one who sees shiva is poor and serves him, is serving shiva himself.

It was the need of the hour. He laid the foundation of unity and brotherhood among people, first to be physically free (freedom struggle) so that we can practice our faith freely. Swamiji laid foundations of freedom struggle and introduced Hinduism to the west. We got recognized by the world and appreciated because of him. Swamiji had the steeping stone.

But people are wrongly quoting him and try to fit him in their own ideology, trying to get themselves attested of what they are doing.

Aum

Indiaspirituality

[Amrut]

continued ...

Now when it comes to subjective and objective - relative and absolute,

It is a long long discussion. You may have to study advaita.

Every seeker, no matter what paths he follows, in the beginning, he is practically in dvaita.

So one has to rise from this duality to advaita sthiti, by practicing and following what shastras say.

Now to practically apply it in life, the question comes 'HOW"

Describe of shat-sampatti, shama, dama, uparati, titiksha, shraddha, samadham

Now when it says shama and dama, mind control and control over 5 senses, it may or may not say - HOW

To apply, an e.g. is the best way to understand and get inspired.

So, when someone tries to insult you, you will have to tolerate it, do not fire back. Keep calm, have some deep breaths, surrender to God, make a firm decision, not to curse him or fire back. Do not think what others are thinking, just surrender to God, etc, etc.

This approach may or may not be given. So one needs a Guru, a guide who knows your nature, has passed through this phase, to guide you through this incident. not all things are found in shastras.

Only a Guru can guide you as to how you should stay in this subjective world, as he knows your mental status, you nature, ability and weakness. Simply following shastras may even backfire.

Many statements are references, to be taken as benchmark. But a way has to be found to reach that state.

So All is brahman and Brahman is all are both correct.

A snake-rope analogy can help one understand it. Entire advaita can be explained. some contradicting statements can also be explained.

you enter a dark room and see the snake

So either you try to run away or you try to catch it. There is activity, born our of fear, insecurity or any desire like earning or hunger, etc

But when you switch on light and in a flash, snake is gone, it's just rope.

Now the activity stops.

So, All is Brahman and Brahman is all

Wherever there is snake, there is rope and vice versa.

I guess you figured out that snake is prakruti / maya and rope is brahman

Aum
IS