Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

  1. #1
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Quote Originally Posted by ShivaFan View Post
    Namaste Omkara

    Perhaps due to my English construct here, I am being misunderstood. All I am saying is, even though I am a dualist (dvaita), I am seeing that those sects which emphasize duality seem to often engage in these types of threads, pitting one Devata against another over wasteful jalpa instead of just praising their Lord. Fixations such as this on a single quote of some commentator (though renown) really takes the cake, it becomes almost laughable, and so I now wonder if I have made a mistake in sort of ignoring the Advaita aspects of the Saiva Siddhanta tradition in my zeal for devotion (which, devotion is not discounted in Advaita either, I am refering to dualists). Simply said, it seems among Avaitans that they are more kind, more respectful to all the Family within Hinduism, especially within a public forum (while reserving the right to be sectarian in some aspects among themselves), and this being said from someone as me who obviously has dualistic nature. Not all dvaitans are raw on the edges, especially those who love devotees as next to God, it's just some who are makes one reconsider Advaita as a house that has many respectful and tempered Hindus, level headed, not like those who have chips on their shoulders and walk around with "machine gun minds".

    Jai Ganapati.

    I am finished with this thread.

    Om Namah Sivaya





    Dear ShivaFan,

    I find this post, its contents and the messages it convey are worth considering and therefore feel no objection in sharing my views, of course, within the limited understanding, that too only on certain issues, out of the many pointed out here.

    I do not know whether I am an authority or not on topics on arguments about something that is very important related to religious matters as such, yet, being a person trying to sincerely comprehend the lessons pertaining to the Dharma, I would conclude my opinion, within my limited understanding, perhaps in this manner: there is no single philosophy on Indian soil that would deny the truth of existence of everyday life and the multiple events occurring in human life; blanket terminologies like Maya, Duality, Non- Duality, etc. which were exclusively relevant in the perfect domain of Indian metaphysics were inappropriately made fit into common language and initiated into public misuse was actually started by some ingenuous modern seminarist refuters of Indian Philosophy.

    Members of Hindu religion, as you mentioned, had already identified variously with many efficient sects prescribed in their scriptures, all the same performing their religious duties in a rather harmonious manner, are now further divided mercilessly into two. In other words, the above wicked vernacularism has only helped us in dividing our already existing spiritual families again and again into two different classes viz. Dualist and Non-Dualist, within their sects. This discrimination is even more dangerous than the ones already existing, that is the racial, spatial and the sectarian.

    And, since this separation is not based on any observable phenomena, this will prevent people from objective considerations, which will only lead to a bitter divorce between religion and philosophy. West is already a victim of this trait and still suffering from it and now we are on the threshold of, or even already into this terrible havoc.


    ==========

    Blanket term: A word or phrase that is used to describe multiple groups of related things. The degree of relation may vary. Blanket terms often trade specificity for ease-of-use; in other words, a blanket term by itself gives little detail about the things that it describes or the relationships between them, but is easy to say and remember. Blanket terms often originate as slang, and eventually become integrated into the general vocabulary.


    Example: Māyā really is a blanket term commonly advised by Vedanta philosophers to signify our ignorance on how the world originates from Brahman. Using such a term helps to create the impression that some explanation is given, where as no such removal of obstacles to clear understanding takes place.


    This is the paradox implicit in enigmatic vernacular.

    Perhaps this is the only possible clarification I could ever afford to present to a certain problem you have presented here.


    ==========

    so I now wonder if I have made a mistake in sort of ignoring the Advaita aspects of the Saiva Siddhanta tradition in my zeal for devotion (which, devotion is not discounted in Advaita either, I am refering to dualists).

    You must have already by hearted this text by now, even then, with great devotion and love for Lord Shiva we recommend Ozhivil Odukkam for your kind perusal.

    Love
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

  2. #2
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Age
    59
    Posts
    639
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Namaste.

    I have read that quote and the post over 4 times and I still don't understand any of it. I would like to try to understand it.

    Okay, so what happens when Duality and Unity merge? I mean Unity cannot merge with Duality because Unity already is and of itself, no?

    You can all judge people by their beliefs on whether they are 'dualist' or 'non-dualist' while I just sit here, still trying to work out how that concept applies to my own Devata, Ardharnarishwar.

    At what point does Shiva + Shakti become ShivaShakti - or was it always like that?

    Where is that point in existence where Creator is thus separated from Creation? The Prana from the Life?

    At what point do the two become one, and what is gained/lost in the 'becoming'?

    I am probably just missing the whole point, but I am at a loss to see what the point is - maybe that's because my whole approach is totally different.

    Aum Namah Shivaya

  3. #3
    Join Date
    June 2010
    Location
    Kolkata
    Posts
    834
    Rep Power
    491

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    How does it matter whether I am a lawyer, engineer, doctor, business man, etc till I am able to feed my family, be happy, etc. ?

    How does it matter if I am having different opinion of God till I am able to live in peace with others and myself ?

    But it starts mattering when I start comparing my area / knowledge with others. It hurts one - either me or the other.

    In duality it is possible. That is what happens in other religions also.

    However that said duality has lots of advantages also. It has a direct connection with revered lord. They are also more into bhakti. They are more into discipline in life. They are also more ritualistic. These when used properly give proper direction to mind and there by the body.

    Neither we can prevent dualism. This is most natural phenomenon which occurs first. That is why all temples, churches, etc.

    Even the initial vedas are based on this dualism.

    However it would be good to share goodness but not to compare. Dualism is more personal than non-dualism. So it is better to keep it very close to heart.
    Love and best wishes:hug:

  4. #4
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Age
    59
    Posts
    639
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Quote Originally Posted by kallol View Post
    How does it matter whether I am a lawyer, engineer, doctor, business man, etc till I am able to feed my family, be happy, etc. ?

    How does it matter if I am having different opinion of God till I am able to live in peace with others and myself ?

    But it starts mattering when I start comparing my area / knowledge with others. It hurts one - either me or the other.

    In duality it is possible. That is what happens in other religions also.

    However that said duality has lots of advantages also. It has a direct connection with revered lord. They are also more into bhakti. They are more into discipline in life. They are also more ritualistic. These when used properly give proper direction to mind and there by the body.

    Neither we can prevent dualism. This is most natural phenomenon which occurs first. That is why all temples, churches, etc.

    Even the initial vedas are based on this dualism.

    However it would be good to share goodness but not to compare. Dualism is more personal than non-dualism. So it is better to keep it very close to heart.
    Namaste.

    I guess I must also class myself as a 'dualist' (if it really has to be that way).

    Yeah, I know all the personal representations of Siva (Lingam included) only serve to represent the Impersonal Brahman - but try and focus your mind, your heart and daily worship on that which is essentially and for all intents and purposes...nothing!

    I am also an Advaitin, which makes this process just a tad more difficult than it already needs to be: "I love Siva, therefore I am Siva, therefore I love Siva'.

    Having a background in Agama and Tantra doesn't help much either - You go to Bali and see all the Murthis wrapped up in checkerboard cloth there...

    The black/white squares represent the Yin and Yang...the male/female - the polarity, but also the unity - see how the squares are arranged upon the cloth to form a nice pattern? This is the Dvaita/Advaita. The Unity in Duality. It is used for protection.

    See the Yin/Yang symbol there? Have you ever wondered why there'a a little bit of 'Yin in the Yang' and 'Yang in the Yin'? that's to remind us that it's all not so 'black and white' and there are just certain beards that Occam's Razor just cannot shave.

    So, in the end, I tend to be a bit of both and/or either/neither Nihilist or Universalist as the mood takes me.

    Aum Namah Shivaya

  5. #5
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Quote Originally Posted by Necromancer View Post

    At what point does Shiva + Shakti become ShivaShakti - or was it always like that?

    Where is that point in existence where Creator is thus separated from Creation? The Prana from the Life?

    Aum Namah Shivaya
    Namaste,

    The truth is that Shiva and Shakti are always one. But we know this truth when we realize it i.e. experience it.

    It is a journey from ignorance to knowledge. Only in state of Jnana one can experience and hence authentically say that Shiv and Shakti are one.

    Unless the duality is removed, we have to make attempts with the faith that non-duality or union of shiva and shakti is the last stage.

    Aum Namah Shivaya
    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

  6. #6
    Join Date
    June 2012
    Location
    Mumbai
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,210
    Rep Power
    1364

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Namaste,

    There are two approaches

    Bottom-up and top down

    In bottom-up perspective, we are asked to rise above, merge, transcend, while in top-down, the approach is 'neti-neti' meaning 'naa-iti, naa-iti', 'not this, not this'. here anything that is separate from Self i.e. everything that is non-self is discarded. In top-down perspective, detachment is pre-requisite. Only if you are detached than you can separate what is not. Whatever can be described is not you, is not Brahman, as that which is describable becomes an object of observation and description.

    In this sense, Brahman cannot be defined. Hence the attributes of brahman whatsoever they may be are retracted by saying 'that which is both being and non-being' as in BG 13.13 (13.14 in some version like Ramanuja bhasya)

    This method is adhyAropa apavAda - False superimposition followed by it's retraction.

    First Self is asked to be a witness of what it is not. this separates self from non-self. But being a witness is an attribute, hence it is also discarded. Now nothing remains to be observed. hence the only thing left is observer. But an observer is called observer as he/she observes anything. when there is nothing to observe, what remains is pure consciousness. There is no other thing and hence no one else to describe Brahman. Brahman can only be explained in negative way - first false superimposition of being a witness (it is like separating milk from water), then retracting the superimposition of 'being a witness' (transcending trinity of observer, object of observation and process of observation)

    Hence it is said that duality, non-duality, maya, etc are concepts.

    In simple words of Sri Ramakrishna,

    A salt doll once decided to measure depth of ocean. Moment she stepped in ocean, she melted. Now who is going to tell the depth of ocean?

    But the path of Neti-Neti is difficult and not for all, hence OM is chanted. Even merging in Shiva means nothing else than Shiva remains.

    Whatever the path be, according to Advaita the final stage is non-duality. Even Jiva is described in Upanishads e.g. Sv Up. 5.9, hence one cannot be jiva also.

    Again jiva itself cannot experience anything, hence it enters into a body (which is already dead, body is never alive, it is jiva that makes it function). Hence to experience any of the 5 bodies are needed. To stay eternally with God means to retain any of the 5 bodies, which is not possible, as bodies are not eternal. Perhaps the size of Jiva is very small and can be roughly said that it is a point of light. I have not read anywhere that any saint has experience himself as point of light.

    It should also be noted that when one is witness, one is not kartA and when one is kartA, one cannot be a witness.

    Whatever maybe that path, be it dvaita or advaita, final stage is advaita, as per Adi Shankara. Adi shankara's approach is straight path.

    Other paths may have a different opinion for the final state.

    Aum
    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. #7
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Quote Originally Posted by Necromancer View Post
    Namaste.

    I have read that quote and the post over 4 times and I still don't understand any of it. I would like to try to understand it.

    Aum Namah Shivaya
    Dear Necromancer,


    Okay, so what happens when Duality and Unity merge?
    I mean Unity cannot merge with Duality because Unity already is and of itself, no?


    The whole idea of the thread was presented in the first paragraph of the post itself; and when it reads ‘; blanket terminologies like Maya, Duality, Non- Duality, etc. which were exclusively relevant in the perfect domain of Indian metaphysics’, it is clearly evident that these are philosophical terms only and irrelevant in earth to earthy things, however superior thinking it may be. To be precise, duality and non-duality are the two necessary ambivalent poles involved in higher contemplation, and the most interesting thing is that the meaning of these blanket terms cover the entire knowledge mentioned in Vedanta text books, and therefore, due to own space-time limitations, we are unable to tell more on this.


    You can all judge people by their beliefs on whether they are 'dualist' or 'non-dualist' while I just sit here, still trying to work out how that concept applies to my own Devata, Ardharnarishwar.

    Vedanta considers three kinds of Brahman: One is the experiential Brahman only reachable by the Yogis, then the hypostatic one or the Para aspect that is mentioned in the Vedanta text books, and the last one that is the transactional Brahman, the Apara of Vedanta.

    And, since Brahman is beyond the limits of names and forms, Vedantin doesn’t like to contemplate on any forms of deities, instead, they would prefer to stick to a high value that is construed in all respects in accordance with the laws of the scriptures, and precisely, this is done with the help of a teacher.

    Perhaps, a vedantin might love to equate Shri.Ardhanarishwar concept to the hypostatic God in Vedanta that is ‘Brahman’.


    At what point does Shiva + Shakti become ShivaShakti - or was it always like that?
    What we understand that it always stays together but seems, due to our own ignorance, to be different in appearance, provided, the shakti here is equated to maya or the non self and the siva to Brahman in the context of vedanta proper .


    Where is that point in existence where Creator is thus separated from Creation? The Prana from the Life?

    We find no point as such, since we understand that the creator and the creation are not different; or in other words, it would be advisable to understand their interdependence, that is, the creation is sustained by the creator, and the creator is sustained by the creation; one doesn’t exist without the other. Verse 2:16 of the Bhagavad Gita emphasises this point.


    At what point do the two become one, and what is gained/lost in the 'becoming'?

    When we become totally fearless; well that said, the fear is of threefold ādhyātmika, ādhibhautika and ādhidaivika.

    Same time comes the gain, we see it as twofold, that is the loss of fear for ever, the Fearlessness, and the attainment of unbroken happiness that is the Bliss.

    I am probably just missing the whole point, but I am at a loss to see what the point is - maybe that's because my whole approach is totally different.
    Aum Namah Shivaya


    It does not make much difference whatever view others have in their mind, anyway it is all false according to Vedanta, therefore we think, our own personal conviction to be the most important.



    Actually, this thread was not opened to discuss any topics on Vedanta; instead, it was created as an answer and clarification to our own questions on some social issues in a running fashion. Love
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

  8. #8
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Age
    59
    Posts
    639
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Namaste.

    I won't quote ISA above, but I can understand it.

    For years I followed the path of 'neti neti'. Problem was, I am also a very strict adherent to the 'doctrine of Spock' - pure logic - that I just had to listen to all those who said to me: "by seeing the whole universe as Maya, you are also missing out on what Lord Shiva really is".

    Okay, so I could do the old; 'we rise by that which makes us fall' thing here.

    I just wondered if I could go straight from 'not this' to 'all this and more' ?

    Could I go from 'top down' to 'bottom up?'

    Again, I applied 'Spock Logic' = if I burned the candle at both ends, would it not burn brighter and quicker?

    Maybe I could meet Shiva somewhere in the middle here?

    So yeah, that meant having to reconcile the old 'Duality' vs 'Non-Duality' bit....and fast.

    All I can do now is just use something that defies logic - love, as a buffer.

    The self reveals the self.....eventually....

    I shall get to Brahman's reply tomorrow.

    Aum Namah Shivaya

  9. #9
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Sri. Valkalam, Kerala, SI
    Posts
    604
    Rep Power
    977

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Quote Originally Posted by Necromancer View Post
    Namaste.

    "by seeing the whole universe as Maya, you are also missing out on what Lord Shiva really is".


    Aum Namah Shivaya

    Exactly, this is one of the messages we precisely wanted to spread here.


    Here is a quote from our previous post to substantiate this notion:

    Example: Māyā really is a blanket term commonly advised by Vedanta philosophers to signify our ignorance on how the world originates from Brahman. Using such a term helps to create the impression that some explanation is given, where as no such removal of obstacles to clear understanding takes place.

    Blanket term: A word or phrase that is used to describe multiple groups of related things. The degree of relation may vary. Blanket terms often trade specificity for ease-of-use; in other words, a blanket term by itself gives little detail about the things that it describes or the relationships between them, but is easy to say and remember. Blanket terms often originate as slang, and eventually become integrated into the general vocabulary.

    This is the paradox implicit in enigmatic vernacular.
    Only an addon to our pevious messages.
    ॐ इदम् न मम
    be just l we happy

  10. #10
    Join Date
    July 2012
    Age
    59
    Posts
    639
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Duality,Non-Duality etc are mere Blanket Terms

    Namaste.

    So, I just asked myself: "if I continued 'neti neti' and saw the world as Maya, would I arrive the same place by seeing Lord Shiva in everything"?

    All I can say about that, is either practice, carried out to the nth degree will lead to exactly the same place.

    The 'final act' as it were, is performed by Goddess Shakti. Her dance can either hypnotise or awaken...

    So, I am okay with these being 'blanket terms' when one asks - what are they covering? Secularism? Bias? yeah okay - humans.

    People will latch on to anything different that makes them exactly the same as everybody else.

    Aum Namah Shivaya

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. do different paths of self realization go towards absolute truth?
    By hinduism♥krishna in forum Hare Krishna (ISKCON)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07 July 2013, 12:50 AM
  2. Vedanta Sutra - read this translation
    By Mohini Shakti Devi in forum Vedas & Brahmanas
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03 May 2010, 11:58 AM
  3. In the Service of SELF
    By devotee in forum Advaita
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07 June 2008, 08:38 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06 November 2007, 12:32 PM

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
  •