Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

Thread: Genuine Questions on Advaita

  1. #11

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    PraNAm Amrutji

    Thank you for your help. I understand the part about jiva-bhava, that must be destroyed (if the desire is sayujja), so that Parameshwar can shine through. (A quick point aside from this: Radha does not have jiva-bhav, Lakshmi, PArvati do not have jiva bhav as long as She says I am Radha. Radha can be formless, all-pervading and with form).

    I do not have a lot of time to address everything right now, and I shall be back to continue, however, what is this?
    Quote Originally Posted by Indiaspirituality Amrut View Post
    OP's posts marked with Purple

    1. AtmA inside body of a creature is consciousness - distinct from mind, intellect, ego

    Jiva and Atman are different. Atman is not inside body.
    Hello? AtmA is not inside body? Then how can He be all-pervading?

    BG 10.20
    aham AtmA gudAkesha
    sarva bhUtAshayasthita
    aham adischa madhyam cha
    bhUtAnAm anta eva cha
    I am the AtmA, O GuDAkesha, pervading all creatures (bhUta). I am their beginning, middle, and also the end.


    More later.

    _/\_

    om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya
    Last edited by smaranam; 27 July 2013 at 12:02 AM. Reason: their
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  2. #12

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    (...Continued from previous post/page 1. )

    So some conclusions and clarifications.

    [Before proceeding, I think you meant 'vidyA-mAyA' and not vidhA-mAyA ]

    1. By pure functional ahaMkAr I meant the functional potency. What you call ego is really false-ego which includes vikAr. When Ishwar knows He is Ishwar, it may be called purest of the pure functional/existential ahaMkAr.
    aham AtmA gudAkesha... says aham. Aham BramhAsmi also has aham in it.

    2. Your explanation verifies the premise that Bramhan-Realization can potentially be a step towards BhagvAn-realization OR It can be the end-destination for those who so desire (sAyujja).

    3. To explain this further, what the various siddhAnta call jIva, need not be called jIva as in an embodied/transmigrating being. Losing jIva-bhAva in Shankara-vedanta language is anartha-nivRtti where jnAna begins, or losing the false-ego that is the root cause of ignorance (avidyA), vikAr, vices, entanglement in the tri-guNa.

    4. We all agree as sanAtani that anartha nivRtti is the first, the foundation and this is jnAna. (This means ALL, including the VaishNav bhakta (at least the Gaudiya Vaishnav) may give up this jiva-bhAva to be in the state of either Goloka VRndAvan or Bramha-jyoti. There is no jIva-bhAv in Goloka VRndAvan either, but there are multiple entities for the purpose of Leela.)

    5. The road forks from there on. The sAyujja mumukshu gives up the existential ego, gives up all and any sankalpa (resolution - tendency for motive, motivation) and is deeply immersed in samAdhi - no thought. The bhakta retains pure existential ego and really has no individual sankalpa, but maintains the localized desire to serve Bhagvan and what follows is involuntary, although they see themselves as a participating entity. It is a samAdhi in its own way.
    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...53&postcount=8

    6. When HLK says sAlokya sAmIpya saRshti sArUpya mukti in VaikuNTha is being in mAyA, he is not realizing that the entities there have lost all individual sankalpa-tendencies, individual desire, and of course false-ego.
    So if at all it is mAyA, it is based on vidyA and not avidyA, and technically it is LeelA. Otherwise he will have to accuse Bhagvan of the same.
    Despite HanumAn's jnAna He is in dAsya-bhAva with RAm-SitA, acts as IshTa-Dev to zillion bhakta, and goes wherever there is Ram-kathA or yajna. However HanumAn is truly all-pervading.

    7. The Bramhan-sAyujja mumukshu says "Jiva-bhAva has to be destroyed"
    The bhakta who does not desire sAyujja says "Bramhan-bhAva has to be cultivated"
    It is anartha-nivRtti approached differently. To them BrAmhi-sthiti is a bhAv (eshA brAmhi sthiti pArtha - KRshNa in BG chapter 2) just as "KRshNa is my friend" is a pure bhAv when real (not just a short-cut statement).

    What stands out, is that
    a. the VaishNav cannot really bypass Bramhan-realization although it appears that they are interacting with Bhagvan directly.
    b. JnAna dawns at the fork.
    c. Ontologically or existentially speaking the one in that (whichever) bhAv, does not [necessarily] turn out to be all-pervading, but dovetails with the all-pervading VAsudeva.

    Thanks for your explanation.

    _/\_
    Last edited by smaranam; 27 July 2013 at 01:33 AM. Reason: added Hanuman
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  3. #13
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1353

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Pranam Smaranam ji,

    Quote Originally Posted by smaranam View Post

    Hello? AtmA is not inside body? Then how can He be all-pervading?
    I apologize. I forgot to add the word ‘Just’

    AtmA is not ‘just’ inside body?

    Atman is both inside and outside, basically has same qualities as that of Brahman.

    I understand that it is difficult to read such a long post. Even I would not bother to read such a long response if it does not directly concerns to me. I myself wonder how I type so much, that too without thinking or planning anything !!!

    Since this has been very civil conversation and a genuine one, this time, I will summarize what I have typed down that runs upto 3 pages

    We will have to take into account the definition and description of Brahman, as per Adi Shankara’s Advaita

    Brahman is NirguNa, eternal, unchanging, undivided, indescribable, without beginning or end and real. It is the only reality.

    Maya is defined as one which is not satya and not asatya. Since maya is not satya, it cannot create anything that is satya i.e. real.

    Everything is created with the help of maya and nothing can be created without the help of maya, be it vaikuntha. Hence staying in Vaikuntha eternally is not final state according to advaita.

    Anything that is experienced comes within the realm of maya. Maya has 3 guna-s. Hence be it pure, impure, gross, sutble, any kind of creation is created from these guna-s. Guna-s are dosha-s that need to be removed or one has to transcend them.

    Since maya is not real, hence anything and everything created by maya or through maya cannot be real. Unreal cannot create real.

    Now lets see the theories of creation and some a priori that you or vaishnava-s have with definition and description of Brahman

    Jiva, jagat, Ishvara, it’s guna-s i..e qualities (upAdhi-s) are described. Hence they cannot be truth, as Brahman, which is only truth, is indescribable.

    If Ishwara really creates something, then there is transformation like milk changing to curd. Hence it violates shruti that Brahman is unchanging.

    If Ishwara is above Brahman, than again it violates shruti, as it also says that Brahman is supreme. Ishwara is Brahman + mAyA, but it is a controller of maya.

    If Brahman divides itself into countless jiva, it violates shruti which says Brahman is indivisible. Hence this division cannot be real. Hence it is said that even jiva though it is said to be a particular size, it has to be experienced as infinite.

    If jiva, jagat and maya are eternal and real, then it again violates shruti. As truth is only one.

    Anything can be described is described on the basis of relative reality and not absolute reality. Maya is defined with relation to Ishwara or Brahman or jagat. It cannot have independent existence, hence cannot be defined independently. Hence with relation to practical reality it is truth, as we al lexperience it, but from absolute reality, it is not real either.

    Why this approach is needed?

    If we keep thinking of karma, karma and karma and if we keep thinking about retaining our individual identity as jiva, then how can we attain nirvikalp Samadhi, which is the final destination according to advaita?

    Hence at times, the attributes are negated by saying that Brahman is not being and non-being, etc.

    Now, the lengthy part in which I have attempted to explain some basic terms.

    mAyA

    As explained earlier, unreal mAyA cannot create anything that is real.

    Anything created by mAyA has 3 guNa-s.

    There is no separate creation of ‘Real’ mAyA and be it vidya or avidya or vidha or avidhA mAyA, whatever, but nothing can be permanent and real, according to Advaita.

    mAyA is called beginning-less, hence it can be said than creation is also beginning-less. But if it stays eternal, then it becomes real. In Jnana sthiti, there is no mAyA, not jiva or jagat.

    Advaita

    Advaita is called advaita because except NirguNa Brahman, nothing is eternal, unchanging, undivided, indescribable, without beginning or end and real. If jiva, mAyA and jagat are eternal then it violates shruti. Hence in Brahma sutra Bhasya (if I remember correctly), Adi Shankara says that those who wish to associate with any form of God, are born or ascend to Brahma loka, where they are directly initiated by Sri Brahmadev and get keval Jnana.

    Ego, Mind and Jiva.

    Without ego, there is no mind, without mind, there is no ego says Sri Ramana Maharshi. To experience anything mind is needed. Be it Vaikuntha.

    Description of jiva is given. Who is the one who sees jiva (with or without ego)? If you meditate, you will realize that you can detach yourself from thoughts, images and body / bodies. Mind is nothing but continuous flow of thoughts says Sri Ramana Maharshi and Adi Shankara in Tatva Bodh defines mind as the one which does sankalp and vikalp.

    The one who is defining or seeing mind, ego, body, jiva HAS TO BE DIFFERENT from it.

    Brahman is indescribable

    Only Brahman is said to be indescribable. Hence the only method to know is to remove ignorance. Hence mukti is called as prAptasya prApti meaning to achieve which is already achieved.

    As said earlier, first one is taught to be separate from objects by being witness. To explain that ‘I’ is not objects, false attributes are added that describe Jiva, Atman, Brahman and Bhagavan. This is done so because, mind needs something to hang on to. If I am not this, not this, then the natural question arises. ‘Who Am I?’. Hence it is said, Atman is like space, all pervading. So now mind has something to hold onto, something to get itself associate with.

    If this is not done, then how can you separate yourself from Objects, mind, body and intellect?. One has to look somewhere else. I think, this is the only reason for describing Jiva, Jagat, Atman and Brahman. Ishwara stuti helps on to purify mind and increase sattva. Sattvik person has capacity to let go and renounce.

    Later on, these false attributes are negated by saying that Brahman is either being or not being. What is left is pure consciousness.

    This is called as adhyAropa apavAda: FAlse attribution followed by retraction.

    To sum up, First separate ‘I’ from associating itself with anAtmA (not Self) by being a witness. Later on rise beyond duality by dissolving triad of observer, object of observation and process of observation. No witness is left as there is nothing to see or experience.

    So anything that is describable is not truth, as ‘truth is one’ according to Advaita. So if you find description of any loka, then it cannot be truth. Even glorifying God with attributes, according to advaita is superimposition on Brahman, which is technically NirguNa. Hence 6 qualities are called as upAdhi-s

    Brahman and mAyA are inseparable. Brahman when works through mAyA is called Ishwara.

    Swami Sacchidanandendra Saraswati in his work 'Method of Vedanta' quotes from moksha dharma that, ' Bhagavan showed virATa svarUpa to nArada, but said this is not my true nature.' I will give exact quote later.

    Pure or impure, bhava is bhava, ahamkAra is ahamkAra, whether sthuLa or sukshma. Without ego, individuality cannot be retained, hence there is no duality.

    Bhagavan is Ishwara when acting. SaguNa is separated from NirguNa else if it would have been said that nirguNa creates jiva and jagat, then it violates shruti.

    Advaita only talks about Keval mukti i.e. about nirvikalp samadhi and not about vaikuntha or any other type of mukti nor did I find the word 'Leela' in Upanishad. However, my memory is not sharp so may be I have missed it.

    As earlier said, that a priori (pre-assumption) that Jiva and Jagat are real and eternal has to be dropped. Hence being with Ishwara with false ego / ripe ego, etc has to be dropped.

    Ego = individuality.
    Desire is desire, whether it is being with Ishwara or vaikuntha or want moksha. Hence lastly these desire – ‘I want moksha’ also has to be dropped.

    But with the help of this desire – ‘I want Moksha’, sAdhaka has uprootedall other desires and vAsanA-s.

    guNa-s are dosha. Even sattva Guna is a dosha as sattva preserves.

    This is advaita. Hence though Adviata indirectly supports sAkAra upasanA, it does not consider it as final destination.

    Advaita covers all paths and approaches, but does not consider it as final destination.

    If advaita accepted vaikuntha as final destination, then Adi Shankara must have mentioned it in his prakaraNa granth-s. This does not agree with final destination of revered philosophy of Vaishnav panth

    Aum

    Amrut
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  4. #14
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    111
    Rep Power
    218

    Thumbs Up Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Quote Originally Posted by Indiaspirituality Amrut View Post
    The attachment of body and the feeling that 'I' am body is the one that produces bondage. Such a bound soul is called Jiva-atman or simply Jiva.

    Jiva is defined by Adi Shankara in Tatva Bodh and other prakaraNa granths as the one who associates itself with karma and fruits of karma, experiences pleasure and pain by associating with mind, body, intellect and ego. Jiva travels from one body to another and is trapped in the cycle of birth and death.

    Atman is Sat-Chit-Ananda same as Brahman.

    If you look at Sv Up. verse 5.8 just the verse before you quoted i.. 5.9, irt says

    Of the size of a thumb, but effulgent like the Sun, the Jiva possesses both volition and individuality. It is endowed with the qualities of the mind and heart (Atman). Therefore it is seen as another entity, small as the point of a goad. 5.8

    The individual soul (Jiva) is extremely subtle like the point of a hair divided and subdivided many times. Yet it has the potential for infinity. He is to be realised (as none other than the paramatman). 5.9

    Same is said in Shiva Gita 10.26 (as in Sv. Up. 5.9)

    Later in 10.37 and 10.38 it says that without Knowledge or before merging with Brahman, Jiva is not destroyed.

    After merging with Brahman, jiva is destroyed.
    Namaste,

    Thank you for the clear and illuminating explanation of jivatman and paramatman, which I have been seeking. So Jiva describes the extraverted binding of the soul through false identification. Atman describes how the immanent effulgence of the soul can unbind it. Is this right?

    That I can understand, but not paramatman or Brahma, or, ultimately, principles of union and division. This is because there are no such ultimate principles. Perhaps the real knowledge is simple. There is a way. Walk upon it.

    Pranam.
    "Be the change you wish to see in other people." ~Gandhi

  5. #15

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Thanks AmrutJi. If you wrote that nice post for advaita students in general, I think that was just great to have on this thread.

    Please note that I am aware of the advaita stand regarding Ishwar and entites. I am not contesting the final destination of Advaita, although the OP asked what being Bramhan implies to a varied group of jnana-yogis and raja-yogis. There were reasons why that was asked, and I think the answer is here or perhaps always was, but it is always good to know how different yogis look at it.

    If you look at my last post closely, it was an observational post only, and again nothing absolutely new. It says there is a FORK in the path. The post says that ALL sAdhaks have to give up jIva-bhAv eventually in terms of the infinitesimalness at least, whether functional ahaMkAr is retained or not (but of course no short-cuts, sahaj-tendencies, watering things down, or hollow grandiosity - this is applicable to all across the board).
    e.g. The Gopa-Gopis think KRshNa is their sakhA, child, little brother etc. They don't think He is infinite and I am infinitesimal - becs they are Bramhan in the background, not a jIva.

    Advaita wants to call this VidyA-mAyA or Ishwari MAyA or YogamAyA. It hardly matters to the VaishNav as long as the tattva-jnAna is there - active or passive. Hanuman will agree. (In fact some VaishNav give up this jnana after attaining it, for the sake of pure bhakti - I know you know this already).

    You may have figured by now that I am not on any one side

    Regarding the tone being "civil", yes, it is good that the thread remains that way. Just some irrelevant FYI: On that Vivekananda thread, my second post was a reply to JefferyJi as clarification, and not to bring up a sensitive issue again

    Thank you, for all the jnAna.

    _/\_

    om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya
    om namo nArAyaNAya
    jai jai Shri Shri VyenkaTesha VAsudeva Govinda GopAl Radha-VRndAvanaChandra Radha-KunjabihAri KauMsAri MurAri YashodAnandanA S S ~
    jai jai Shri VRndAvana dhAm
    jai jai Shri Shri RukmiNi DwArakAnAyakA
    jai jai Shri DwArakA dhAm
    jai jai Shri PanDharpURa
    Jai BadrinArAyaNa BadrivishAl
    Jai Jai Shri BadrinAth dhAm
    Jai Jai BholenAth Shambho Gaurihara PArvati-pataye
    Jai Jai Shri KedArnAth dhAm
    Jai Jai JagannAtha sacchidAnandA
    Jai Jai JagannAtha-Puri dhAm...

    JagannAtha SwAmi, nayana patha gAmi bhuvatu me ~

    _/\_
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  6. #16
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1353

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Quote Originally Posted by smaranam View Post
    Thanks AmrutJi. If you wrote that nice post for advaita students in general, I think that was just great to have on this thread.

    Please note that I am aware of the advaita stand regarding Ishwar and entites. I am not contesting the final destination of Advaita, although the OP asked what being Bramhan implies to a varied group of jnana-yogis and raja-yogis. There were reasons why that was asked, and I think the answer is here or perhaps always was, but it is always good to know how different yogis look at it.

    If you look at my last post closely, it was an observational post only, and again nothing absolutely new. It says there is a FORK in the path. The post says that ALL sAdhaks have to give up jIva-bhAv eventually in terms of the infinitesimalness at least, whether functional ahaMkAr is retained or not (but of course no short-cuts, sahaj-tendencies, watering things down, or hollow grandiosity - this is applicable to all across the board).
    e.g. The Gopa-Gopis think KRshNa is their sakhA, child, little brother etc. They don't think He is infinite and I am infinitesimal - becs they are Bramhan in the background, not a jIva.

    Advaita wants to call this VidyA-mAyA or Ishwari MAyA or YogamAyA. It hardly matters to the VaishNav as long as the tattva-jnAna is there - active or passive. Hanuman will agree. (In fact some VaishNav give up this jnana after attaining it, for the sake of pure bhakti - I know you know this already).

    You may have figured by now that I am not on any one side

    Regarding the tone being "civil", yes, it is good that the thread remains that way. Just some irrelevant FYI: On that Vivekananda thread, my second post was a reply to JefferyJi as clarification, and not to bring up a sensitive issue again

    Thank you, for all the jnAna.
    My pleasure Smaranam ji

    I will re-read the post. Right now I am not feeling well. Though I can meditate, I cannot sit for PC for a long time.

    Your posts are always civil and unbiased. There was nothing wrong on Vivekananda post, and it is a natural reaction of a bhakta. Wrong and un-necessary are different. Honestly I even forgot the Vivekananda Thread. I do not remember what I have said yesterday. Next day, after meditation everything is wiped off. That was not in my mind when I remarked 'civil'. Even that post was civil Be assured it's all empty here Frankly if someone asks about that general post I would not be able to recollect it. I have to force to think and I do not like that. I remain blank most of the time.

    I remember those days when the name of Rama and Hanuman would vibrate my heart and fill me with ecstasy, with eyes getting wet. The effect of this name was so much that I could not even sleep or think of anything, as if my will, my thoughts have no power. Japa would continue for 12.00 am, or sometimes upto 2.00 am at night. The image of Hanuman ji sitting in samadhi would keep floating in front of me and I could not get rid of it even if I wanted to. I could not think or sleep.

    I didn't cared about any of the advaita Jnana at that time and this bhava was nourished by reading Sri Ramakrishna.

    Do not worry about your quality of posts. They are always good.

    I know you are unbiased and you are just trying to evaluate and observe.

    All is fine here.

    Since this is a very good thread, I stepped ahead to go and right some basic concept of advaita, of course without any hidden objectives.

    Your questions are natural.

    Just a quick note that as one progress on spiritual path, bhakta and Advaitin develop same qualities like 4 sadhana-s and 6 qualities, vivek, vairagya

    1. Vivek because only god is given importance, when selecting world or God, it's always God

    2. Vairagya is absence of bhogya padartha (worldly desire) in mind. As mind is attracted towards God, worldly thoughts and desires fade away.

    3 Shatsampatti:
    3.1 Sham: mind control comes when one learns to choose bhagavan over world
    3.2 Dam: Senses are directed towards God and hence they do not dwell in worldly objects
    3.3 Uparati: It is a natural state after Sham and Dama. When both are there, Uparati comes naturally. Mind is saturated and wants to go away from worldly objects in search of bhagavan, there is vivek vairagya, sham and dam, which induces uparati
    3.4 Matured sadhaka do not care about this world. Meera and Gopis did not think of their society and husband, but thought only of God. The force of attraction of bhagavan is so much that they are unconcerned with worldly activities and comments of society and hence remain neutral or indeferent to them
    3.5 Shraddha: needless to explain
    3.6 Samadhan: staying focused on bhagavan, one-pointedness comes in natural.

    4. Mumukshtva: a devotee wants moksha or to stay with Bhagavan forever.

    All these qualities naturally develop without being specially focused on. This is the edge bhakti has.

    Regarding Jnani-s, after mind is completely empty, it can grasp subtle things.

    Sri Ramakrishna sais that mahabhava is experienced only by avatars or dev-ansha.

    Upon being asked if can a person experience both Jnana and bhakti. Sri Ramakrishna replied, generally it is not possible, but if God wishes he can make him experience.

    Jivan mukta-s can be considered as perfect disciples or uttam bhakta as they follow command of bhagavan without any resistance, as there is total surrender, complete surrender. But the bhava is dasa bhava. I guess it's not prem bhava or sakhya or vatsayla bhava.

    I think that is why Hanuman ji is chiranjevi, as he represents bhakti with dasa bhava.

    Bhakti has it's own advantage that Advaita does not have. A genuine bhakta is also a uttam adhikari, as observed in case of Ramakrishna. All thoughts except 'I want to be with God' are uprooted by nama japa. In case of Advaitin the desire of 'moksha' remains.

    For some years I was with Yog, though practicing in non-traditional way, had some kundalini experiences. So I could answer about power to perform miracles on that basis.

    More later.

    Aum

    Amrut
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  7. #17

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    I think I realize what happened here. In the OP I was using the word AtmA as the all-pervading AtmA, (aham AtmA guDAkesha). I did not state the obvious that AtmA is ONE, all-pervading, hence Bramhan. I was not bringing the jivatma-parmatma pair here at all, this is the Advaita forum, remember?

    Due to not stating this - in blue above, as the 5th premise,
    1. jthomasz wrote what he wrote, and mainly,
    2. it gave rise to IS-Amrutji's Advaita lessons also because he assumed I am speaking from the VaishNav plane - although I honestly wasn't speaking from any "plane", I was speaking ontologically. Of course it is not his fault after reading my earlier posts - mainly VaishNav in content.

    This is why it seems the advaitic defN of jIva was brought in and spoken about for so long (not by me ).

    It is not a bad idea to have advaita lessons on the thread - it is good for readers not familiar with it, but
    I hope the intent of this thread is clearer with this post so as to not confuse other readers - which I also tried to pinpoint in the last post:

    "the OP asked what being Bramhan implies to a varied group of jnana-yogis and raja-yogis."

    Moral of the story: State the obvious.

    Hare KRshNa
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  8. #18
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1353

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Namaste,

    I did think that you were saying from Vaishnav POV, which was either misinterpretation or a priori

    I will re-read all posts. Please allow me to recover from my sickness. It may take a few days.

    Feels good when someone points my mistakes.

    Aum

    Amrut
    Only God Is Truth, Everything Else Is Illusion - Ramakrishna
    Total Surrender of Ego to SELF is Real Bhakti - Ramana Maharshi

    Silence is the study of the scruptures. Meditation is the continuous thinking of Brahman which is to be meditated upon. The complete negation of both by knowledge is the vision of truth – sadAcAra-14 of Adi SankarAcArya

    namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76

    Sanskrit Dict | MW Dict | Gita Super Site | Hindu Dharma

  9. #19

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Like I said earlier, I should have been more explicit in the OP - for the premises.
    Get well soon, but take plenty of rest, and don't come to HDF in the meanwhile

    --------------

    This (following) is ALL I was looking for :

    (A few comments on these good points. , but Amrutji is not allowed to reply till he gets better. Others may want to comment, though.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Indiaspirituality Amrut View Post
    Regarding Siddhis, it is said that all Jnani-s are purNa or full of shakti. Some exhibit some not, all according to divine plan. I do not know if they have all asTasiddhi.
    Notice the slight contradiction. Jnani is pUrNa, full of shakti, but may not have ashTa-siddhi? Also, it implies removal of ignorance brings Brahman back to being Brahman, hence 100% purity makes shakti walk up to Him, but it is not so simple or black-and-white - as seen next.

    But Jnani's can cast off their bodies and take avatar like Ishwara and can perform great miraculous deeds, as in case of Sai Baba. Some say he was an avatar of a siddha, some say an avatar of Dattatraya.
    THIS, is really the focal point - That when adnyAna (ignorance) is removed, Brahman is Brahman, yet "He" can "take" avatAr. So, it is this prior jnAni who is the token ID for "taking" avatAr - indicates free will, plus, so much for losing individuality. If we can pinpoint the previous births of "this" avatAr
    ****************it implies individuality was not lost, but the entity has lost individual consciousness, or jIva-bhAva***********. aha!

    All this while, NArAyaNa remains NArAyaNa and Brahman remains Brahman.
    pUrNam idam pUrNam adam ...... (IshavAsya 1)

    However, note this : "avatAr of a siddha" or "avatAr of DattAtreya" shows evolution! Previous birth = a siddha. Next = avatAr (with a fraction of NArAyaNa's 16 kalAs) because the number of kalAs depends on the siddhi of that siddha.
    Same with avatAr of an avatAr of VishNu. If there is no scriptural support but mere observation of devotees, then it tells that the characteristics of that avatAr are shining in this living entity irrespective of the shakti aspect.

    NArAyaNa can descent on earthly plane with purest of all 5 bodies, while a Jnani is born as a ajnani and so Jnani's body cannot sustain strong pure energy that is necessary to perform miracles.
    fair enough. Makes all sense.

    So by Yogic Process, anything can be achieved. Mind is capable of doing anything. Adept Yogis are masters of their body and mind and hence masters of 5 tatva-s.
    However we distinguish between them and the Original NArAyaNa - Adi Purush - Govinda.

    aMsha avatars are not the direct descent of Ishwara. Ishwara instead chooses a body and then enters into it, e.g. Parashurama.

    It is said that Mind is the cause of body i.e. Mind creates body. Here the mind of Ishwara is all powerful and purest.

    Hence the cosmic mind, which is all powerful and purest of the pure, can create any body and can take any of the 16 kala-s.

    e.g. Narayana was born as Krishna with full 16 kalA-s. Rama was born of 12 kalA-s and parashurama of 6-7 kala-s (please give correct figures).
    Thanks. This was the treasure.

    In case of bound jiva, it cannot have all 16 kalA-s, hence it cannot possess all 16 kalA-s
    Of course it can't - even 1 kalA would be a wonder. Let us not think of baddha jivas in terms of kalAs.

    Miracles of saints like Raghvendra Swami, Sai Baba, Ranchoddas ji Maharaj, etc are unknown after their leaving of their physical body.
    Says who? Unless you mean that there are none like these today,
    Sai Baba of Shirdi does His miracles till date. He gave me darshan in in 1999, and zillions have experienced miracles and they continue to - you may read any current Sai magazines.
    RamaN Maharshi has healed patients after leaving body. Shrila PrabhupAd has visited people who chant the Mahamantra nicely
    I saw him when I was reading his KRshna-The Supreme Personality of Godhead, and had conversations at other times.

    Brahman is like electricity. Bodies are like bulbs of different volts.
    Sure. Thanks!


    CONCLUSION: Bramhan is realized now, but it has trail-threads to trace back to prior births of jnanis and yogis. This means we can distinguish between Adi NArAyaNa / Adi Purush Govinda or nitya-NArAyaNa and a jnAni who went from baddha to siddha. For that matter, the Lord Himself tells us about His previous avatars (such as Nar-NArAyaN Rshi).

    BG 4.5: The Personality of Godhead said: Many, many births both you and I have passed. I can remember all of them, but you cannot, O subduer of the enemy!
    BG 2.12: Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.

    Bramha-saMhitA 5.46
    dīpārcir eva hi daśāntaram abhyupetya
    dīpāyate vivṛta-hetu-samāna-dharmā
    yas tādṛg eva hi ca viṣṇutayā vibhāti
    govindam ādi-puruṣaḿ tam ahaḿ bhajāmi
    The light of one candle being communicated to other candles, although it burns separately in them, is the same in its quality. I adore the primeval Lord Govinda who exhibits Himself equally in the same mobile manner in His various manifestations.

    _/\_

    om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

    vAsanAt vAsudevasya vAsitam bhuvana-trayam
    sarva-bhUta-nivAsosi vAsudeva namostute - post VishNu SahasranAma
    Last edited by smaranam; 31 July 2013 at 04:47 AM.
    || Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||

  10. #20

    Re: Genuine Questions on Advaita

    Quote Originally Posted by Indiaspirituality Amrut View Post
    Namaste Smaranamji,



    I will reply in detail later. Just a few quick points.

    According to Tatva Bodh, Jiva and Atman are different

    Jiva in plain words is the indwelling spirit

    the attachment of body and the feeling that 'I' am body is the one that produces bondage. Such a bound soul is called Jiva-atman or simply Jiva.

    Jiva is defined by Adi Shankara in Tatva Bodh and other prakaraNa granths as the one who associates itself with karma and fruits of karma, experiences pleasure and pain by associating with mind, body, intellect and ego. Jiva travels from one body to another and is trapped in the cycle of birth and death.

    Atman is Sat-Chit-Ananda same as Brahman.

    If you look at Sv Up. verse 5.8 just the verse before you quoted i.. 5.9, irt says

    Of the size of a thumb, but effulgent like the Sun, the Jiva possesses both volition and individuality. It is endowed with the qualities of the mind and heart (Atman). Therefore it is seen as another entity, small as the point of a goad. 5.8

    The individual soul (Jiva) is extremely subtle like the point of a hair divided and subdivided many times. Yet it has the potential for infinity. He is to be realised (as none other than the paramatman). 5.9

    Same is said in Shiva Gita 10.26 (as in Sv. Up. 5.9)

    Later in 10.37 and 10.38 it says that without Knowledge or before merging with Brahman, Jiva is not destroyed.

    After merging with Brahman, jiva is destroyed.

    Now the question is Jiva or Jiva-bhAva? It has to be found out

    According to Advaita, Brahman never really divides itself, as it voids it's definition
    It cannot transform into anything. Brahman is unchanging.

    So it is Brahman under to illusion of mAyA (the illusionary creative power) called Ishwara appears to create this universe. This is the theory of Advaita, as I have understood.

    So jiva-bhava is false superimposition upon Brahman under the false notion of Ego. 'I' associates with panch-mahabhuta.

    Ishwara has upAdhi-s. It takes AdhAra of vidha mAyA, but is mAyA's swami and so not bound by it.

    Jiva has upAdhi-s of a-vidhA mAyA i.e. panch mahAbhuta

    If you remove both upAdhi-s what remains is NirguNa Brahman.

    In your 1st point, there is a a priori i.e pre-assumption that jiva is separate, which in reality is not. Hence no question of merging. Only wrong notion is realized.

    Now regarding confusion of jiva, ishwara, Brahman.

    there are 3 types of shruti-s -

    bheda shruti-s: they describe jiva nad ishwara / Brahman as completely different
    a-bheda shruti-s: They talk about oneness of Jiva nad Shia i.e Brahman
    ghaTak shruti-s: They connect bheda nad abheda, like ishwara is antar yAmi.

    Now regarding the quote by H-L-K

    Please read it very slowly with cool mind.



    The only consistency according to GauDapAda, Adi Shankara and later on re-discovered by Swami Sacchidanandendra Saraswati is adhyAropa apavAda

    It is false Superimposition (adhyAropa) Followed by Retraction (apavAda)

    As HLK has said, first attributes are attached and then contradicted later on in the same shruti.

    e.g. Attribute of witness is added and then it is said that it cannot be reached through mind, eyes, speech, etc.

    The concept of witness is introduced since the objective is to indicate that 'I' am not any object of observation. But later on, even the attribute of being a witness is removed, as to see something, there has to be another (an object that can be seen and oberver).

    Hence Brahman cannot be a witness also. So the false attribute of being a witness is also negated by saying that Brahman is beyond 5 senses and mind.

    It is not possible to describe Brahman, hence it cannot be taught positively. No attribute can be given to describe it. It shows that all attributes are also false and they also has to be negated. Hence the only method to explain Brahman is negative approach or false superimposition and retraction or negation of false super imposition.

    In gita same thing is observed in 13.13 and 13.14 (note in some version version 1 in chapter 13 is not found, and was not commented by Adi shankara. Hence the number in followers of Ramanuja might by 13.14 and 13.15)

    ज्ञेयं यत्तत्प्रवक्ष्यामि यज्ज्ञात्वाऽमृतमश्नुते।
    अनादिमत्परं ब्रह्म न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते।।13.13।।

    13.13 I shall speak of that which is to be known, by realizing which one attains Immortality. The supreme Brahman is without any beginning. That is called neither being nor non-being.

    सर्वतः पाणिपादं तत्सर्वतोऽक्षिशिरोमुखम्।
    सर्वतः श्रुतिमल्लोके सर्वमावृत्य तिष्ठति।।13.14।।

    13.14 That (Knowable), which has hands and feet everwhere, which has eyes, heads and mouths everywhere, which has ears everywhere, exists in creatures by pervading them all.


    सर्वेन्द्रियगुणाभासं सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जितम्।
    असक्तं सर्वभृच्चैव निर्गुणं गुणभोक्तृ च।।13.15।।

    13.15 Shining through the functions of all the organs, (yet) devoid of all the organs; unattached, and verily the supporter of all; without quality, and the perceiver of qualities;


    did you notice - neither being nor non-being. Then attributes of omnipresence -- then retraction of these qualities as devoid of all organs, without quality.

    Please refer to shankara bhasya from link in my signature 'Gita Super Site' in verse 13.14. Select both hindi commentary (Sri Harikrishandas Goenka ) and english commentary (Swami Gambhirananda)

    another e.g. to make things easy.

    न हि कश्चित्क्षणमपि जातु तिष्ठत्यकर्मकृत्।
    कार्यते ह्यवशः कर्म सर्वः प्रकृतिजैर्गुणैः।।3.5।।

    3.5 Because, no one ever remains even for a moment without doing work. For all are made to work under compulsion by the gunas born of Nature.

    यथैधांसि समिद्धोऽग्निर्भस्मसात्कुरुतेऽर्जुन।
    ज्ञानाग्निः सर्वकर्माणि भस्मसात्कुरुते तथा।।4.37।।

    4.37 Just as burning fire turns fuel to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge turn all Karma to ashes.

    Is this not contradictory? So first something is said, then it is retracted or negated.

    To a matured sadhaka, shastras say that all karmas are destroyed. All means prArabhdha, AgAmi and sanchit. So even prArabhdha is destroyed. Gita also says that one cannot be free from any karma and so one should practice nitya karmas.

    Upadeshas are said from adhikAra bheda.

    Now you got he point as why in Sv. Up. even though the size of jiva is given, it says, it has to be experienced as infinite.

    I hope the theory of Advaita is understood.


    Regarding bhakti, without bhakti, one cannot under Jnana. Bhakti is the foundation.

    If you notice the reason or incident of spontaneous composition of Bhaja Govindam, you will understand why it was created and why it is necessary to surrender to Ishwara (God with form)

    I will write about avatar and jnani later, but one word sums up, it is I am Brahman and not I am Ishwara.

    To sum up

    • Jiva and Atman are different in Adviata
    • bhakti is important for mental purification (bhakti not from Vaishnava POV)
    • Bhakti means an attitude of non-difference with Brahman
    • False Superimposition followed by Retraction is traditional teaching according to Swami Sacchidanandendra Saraswati.


    Aum

    Amrut



    Thank you for correcting me---instead of using the word soul or jiva I should have used the term universal soul -for atma.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Advaita is a separate philosophy from Shaiva path?
    By adevotee108 in forum Advaita
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 18 January 2012, 05:20 AM
  2. A few questions on Advaita and their answers
    By devotee in forum Advaita
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 08 March 2011, 04:06 AM
  3. The Bickerings/Complaints
    By sm78 in forum Feedback
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 08 January 2011, 12:13 PM
  4. Advaita Primer ...
    By yajvan in forum New to Sanatana Dharma
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 22 January 2010, 12:28 PM
  5. Tattvas
    By grames in forum Advaita
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 14 October 2009, 07:55 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •