nirgun brahman maya and sagun brahman

[jopmala]

Namaste Indiaspirituality Amrutji

To continue my discussion with you I have shifted my post from " you are God part I" to this new thread.

If you don’t mind, I want to have some more discussion with you. if you interested you can respond my to doubts. I will be happy
1. If maya is power of Brahman and since jiva is Brahman then why not maya be regarded as power of jiva ?
2. If we consider that there is no other entity besides nirgun Brahman and this creation is just like a dream ,actually no creation exists it is a projection etc and so my question is for which creation nirgun Brahman by taking adhar of maya becomes sagun
3. If maya is ajnan and if maya can be crossed by jnan then how can this concept of jnan and ajnan be regarded as a power. can any creative power be crossed over by just knowing it in scriptures ? Is it not indirect jnan ?
4. Acoording to you mAyA is beginning less, hence it cannot be said that it was created by Brahman or Ishvara. mAyA cannot stay without Brahman. My question is if it is so then can Brahman remain whole or becomes dual here. Further when Brahman exists independently that is when Brahman is nirgun and before Brahman takes adhar of maya where does maya stay in between so that adhar of it can be taken by Brahman ?
5. According to you Maya is projector and Brahman is screen. who is the operator here ? again projector means having the power of projection of its own but maya is the power of Brahman. can any power act without its holder’s will ? the concept is shakti and shaktiman and one can not be separated from other. how can shakti operate or maya project without shaktiman or without Brahman. projector and screen are two different independent equipment for picturisation but you can not separate maya from Brahman
6. On the one hand you are saying mAyA is dependent upon Ishvara but actually what is happening . There is nirguna Brahman and nothing else then maya comes ( from where ? ) Brahman becomes sagun that means without maya Brahman can not become sagun then who is dependent on whom. next ,according to you though Brahman become sagun but everything that is creation or projection is done by maya and not by sagun Brahman. how this can happen. how can power act independently. why don’t you say sagun Brahman is creating or projecting everything not maya
7. Since maya can not stay without Brahman then we have to consider that both nirgun Brahman and sagun Brahman are co existing otherwise if there is only one Brahman that is nirgun where will maya stay without Brahman ? brahman without maya that is nirgun and brahman with maya that is sagun exists together in the same state. Is it ?
8. Is this maya ( which you are talking) the same which is also found in Gita ? in BG chapter 7 verses 4, 5 and 6 bhagavan says this is my eight fold divided nature which is insentient. I am the origin and also the dissolution of the whole world. then again in chapter 14 verse 3 says that prakriti is my womb on that I cast my seed whence spring all beings. suprsingly advatin says this world is nothing but dream. Is their dream world and world created by bhagavan according to Gita matching . above all everything is done by sri Krishna whom you reagard as iswara or sagun Brahman but you say creation or projection is done by maya .
9. You say this maya can be crossed over only through jnan ( in jnan maya ends) but Gita says only bhakti can help to cross this maya and nothing else ( chapter 7 verse 14
10. If we make a sequence we find first nirgun Brahman next maya and then third one nirgun Brahman + maya that is sagun Brahman. Now if maya can not exist without Brahman ( definitely nirgun Brahman) then which is correct 1) there is no nirgun Brahman because maya is always with Brahman 2) maya is independent because nirgun brahman can have no power. 3) nirgun Brahman and sagun brahamn exists in the same state at the same level otherwise we shall not get maya since nirgun brahman can not have it.

[Amrut]

Namaste Jopmala ji,

You can call me Amrut. I will try my best to answer your doubts. Replying back may take time because of busy schedule.

1. If maya is power of Brahman and since jiva is Brahman then why not maya be regarded as power of jiva ?

We will explain 'I am Brahman' in different way.

Lets say 'I is Brahman'. Shall I extend this statement further by saying 'I is not jiva'

Advaita is about searching 'I'. Is 'I' associated with jiva or is 'I' something else. Search ends when 'I' is realized as pUrNa vastu (Brahman).

If we think, I am Jiva, then after some meditational . yogic practice, Jiva gets transformed into Brahman, then what we generally think that 'How can I be Brahman, a Jiva cannot never be Brahman' will be right.

Here there is a priori (presumption) that 'I' is Jiva i.e. 'I am Jiva'.

Advaita, finds the root cause or truth behind this very statement that 'I am Jiva'. According to Sri Ramana Maharshi, you will have to ask the question, 'Who am I'. Search ends into you realizing yourself as Brahman.

Kindly note that no transformation has taken place.

If I assume that I am Jiva, it would mean that earlier I was not Brahman, which according to advaita is not correct as Atman / Brahman was already Brahman. Under wrong notion, it wrongly associated itself with Body and assumed itself as body. Ego means a sense of individuality. When Ego is destroyed, mind too is destroyed. With no sense in individual existence, naturally 'I" as ego is destroyed and the real 'I' (first person - Brahman) is revealed.

Lets take the question again

1. If maya is power of Brahman and since jiva is Brahman then why not maya be regarded as power of jiva ?

The difference between jiva and Brahman is that, Brhaman is not deluded by mAyA, while Jiva, which is under ignorance is deluded by wrong association with what is non-self.

Only after dis-associating with non-self, by being a witness, and realizing one's true nature, one can say from direct experience that 'I am Brahman', not before.

Saying before would be like, seeing a snake, as saying that 'I am seeing a rope'. This is not correct.

-----

Apart from this, I would like to share a few points.

There are different ways of explaining.
Explanation is given keeping in mind mental make-up of questioner
Explanation depends upon current mental status of question (and that of answerer, if he is not realized)
One question can have 2 answers and both are correct, but for person with different mindset.
Answer is given by keeping in mind the ability of questioner to put solution provided into action or practice.


There may be more factors, but these are what I can remember now.

Remember that certain updesha-s or statements are updeshaka, they are like a destination to be reached e.g. thou art that.

I humbly request you to please read my other posts in threads

Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational
Krishna never used ' Vaikuntha ' word
You are GOD - part 1

This will reduce my typing a lot.

Let us understand basic terms:

Reality, Truth, satya

That which is eternal, unchanging, present at all times, immutable, undivided, infinite, knowledge is called as as real.

e.g. Brahman

Unreal, False, asatya

That which do not exist at any time.

e.g. rabbit horn

MithyA

That which is neither real nor unreal. This means that it is in between real and unreal.

mithYA is that which is not totally unreal, but is not even real (eternal).

In other words, mithyA is that which is not present at all times. But it can be experienced in any one state.

mAyA is called as anAdi. This means that it is without beginning. but it ends in Jnana. mAyA is triguNAtmikA - that which has 3 guNa-s. Brahman is beyond guNa-s.

Since mAyA ends in Jnana, Brahma sthiti, it cannot be real. We all know that truth is one. Hence there cannot be two things that can be true.

In this sense, mAyA, though experienced in waking state, as real, ends in Jnana.

Experience in waking state are not experienced in dream state and vice versa.

2. If we consider that there is no other entity besides nirgun Brahman and this creation is just like a dream ,actually no creation exists it is a projection etc and so my question is for which creation nirgun Brahman by taking adhar of maya becomes sagun

As I have earlier said, certain statements are our benchmarks. We will have to realize the truth.

If we take ajAta vAda, then there is no creation. But ajAta vAda is for only those who abide in Self.

When we actually experience duality, this world, thinking of it as mere mental projection or as an illusion is not acceptable. This does not mean that the above statement that this world is illusion is fallacy. We are not in a position to understand the reality behind this statement.

As e.g. to explain would be

in presence of Sun, the whole ecosystem runs. Sun does not do anything. Sun is a shakshi. Rest everything happens.

Brahman and mAyA are inseparable. To do anything, you will have to take AdhAra of guNa-s i.e. mAyA, without mAyA, there can be no work. When Brahman is resting, it is called as nirguNa, when acting, it is called as sa-guNa.

If we take all guNa-s or say 6 upAdhi-s from Ishvara (SaguNa Brahman), then what is left is nirguNa Brahman.

I will requote your question.

2. If we consider that there is no other entity besides nirgun Brahman and this creation is just like a dream ,actually no creation exists it is a projection etc and so my question is for which creation nirgun Brahman by taking adhar of maya becomes sagun

Does this seem contradictory?

First you say that there is no creation. But at the same time you accept that there is a creation. This is because we all experience this world, hence it is hard to think of it as mental projection.

Let's take the word 'mithyA' into account. Please go back and read the explanation of terms mithyA, that I gave.

3. If maya is ajnan and if maya can be crossed by jnan then how can this concept of jnan and ajnan be regarded as a power. can any creative power be crossed over by just knowing it in scriptures ? Is it not indirect jnan ?

This question is also not clear.

Just by mere reading nothing is going to happen. Hence this truth or transcending mAyA has to be done by nidhidhAsana or simply say meditation.

How to transcend or cross over mAyA - by dis-associating with it. How? By being a witness and doing self enquiry or chant OM and merge in it's source (here the word 'merge' is said for explanatory purpose.

4. Acoording to you mAyA is beginning less, hence it cannot be said that it was created by Brahman or Ishvara. mAyA cannot stay without Brahman. My question is if it is so then can Brahman remain whole or becomes dual here. Further when Brahman exists independently that is when Brahman is nirgun and before Brahman takes adhar of maya where does maya stay in between so that adhar of it can be taken by Brahman ?

Brahman and mAyA are inseparable. Brahman can stay alone.

By saying that there is no mAyA, means, mAyA is not experienced by a Jnani in nirvikalp samadhi.

It is called nirguNa Brahman when it does not do any work. Advaita focusses on this Brahman, hence you will find statements giving importance to NirguNa Brahman.

To explain in different words

Advaitin associates with NirguNa Brahman and a bhakta associates himself with mAyA or experiences saguNa Brahman with the help of mAyA.

Brahman and mAyA are both there. Is it necessary that Brahman has to do some work? Is activity compulsory?

I said when Brahman takes AdhAra.

More later.

Aum

[Amrut]

Namaste,

You can take AdhAra as association, if the word is a misnomer.

You must be aware of manifested universes. I think everything is latent.

By Definition, NirguNa Brahman is said so when he is not doing anything.

When you say, 'will', then it may be taken as saguNa Brahman. This word 'will' creation' etc is also for explanatory purpose. Else we cannot take it as illusion.

If we take creation as real, then it should not end in Jnana, which, according to Advaita, is not true.

I humbly request you to please reconsider all questions.

To understand properly, we will have to study a sampradAya in systematic manner.

Also the traditional teaching of adhyAropa apavAda has to be learned to understand those Gita verses.

Aum

[jopmala]

Namaste Amrutji
I must thank you for your kind response but I am sorry I am not convinced. I am just puzzled due to so many contradictions in your reply

first I find there are four entities that is nirgun Brahman ,maya , sagun Brahman and jiva. out of that, nirgun Brahman is only truth, sagun Brahman is apparent since it melts into nirgun by shading maya and jiva also ultimately becomes Brahman. But maya is different from these three entities because maya is not Brahman and also anadi or beginningless.

Now see the contradictions are :

1) (i) maya is anadi that is beginningless but it ends in jnan which means not starting point but has ending point (ii) Maya is the power of nirgun Brahman but nirgun Brahman is not the source of maya that is maya does not originate in nirgun Brahman (iii) though Brahman is nirgun but it can take the association of maya ( iv) Brahman can stay alone but Brahman and maya are inseparable (v) maya is the power of Brahman, it is inseparable from Brahman and maya is dependent on Brahman but Brahman has to take the association of maya to act (vi) maya can not act of its own because it is dependent on Brahman still it is said that projection imposition or delusion etc are done by maya. To me , all these are done by Brahman not maya since without Brahman maya can not act. (vii) though maya is beginningless not part of brahman but maya is not a separate entity . it depends on Brahman

(viii) what is manifested universe. do you want to say there are manifestations of Brahman or delusion by maya. please confirm otherwise there will be another contradiction

2) you say jiva is deluded by maya. I think you should say jive is deluded by Brahman since maya is the power of Brahman and not independent to act that is ultimately it is brhaman who is doing all these acts of projection imposition of delusion by taking the association of maya. If you agree that maya is independent and can act then your statement is correct.

3) I understand your argument that ‘I’ is not associated with jiva but at the end of search ‘I’ is Brahman . please tell me whom do you call jiva I mean what constitutes the ‘jiva’.

4) To me, as per your version of advaita, i) there is no nirgun Brahman since it takes association of maya which can not be separated from Brahman (ii) maya is independent since it is beginningless and is able to delude jiva (iii) Brahman has no qualities , all the qualities belong to maya since brahman by associating with maya become qualified that is sagun Brahman ( iv) brahman is not the controller of maya because maya is beginning less and not created by Brahman. even with the end of maya sagun Brahman also loses its identity (v) Brahman is not beginingless since it ends in jnan. ending point is also starting point. (vi) brahman is deluded by maya since jiva being Brahman fights hard to shade maya only to know its true identity that is brahman

5) I think advaitavada or mayavada still unable to give a clear conception of maya and therefore conception of non dual entity of Brahman is not free from ambiguity . if you say being a member of particular sampradaya and for the sake of that sampradaya some conceptions though not clear have to be accepted without questioning, I respect that mindset and promise not to disturb you further. Thank you once again.

[Amrut]

Namaste Jopmala ji,

It is not that concepts cannot be questions, but some things are better not questioned, or say, I never thought about them, as I am more concerned of my own spiritual progress, let the world be created 1 day before my date of birth . I am a meditative creature and hence you may find me connecting with meditation and practical application.

Also note that my own study is very limited and I have a weak memory. Only that which is required for my personal spiritual progress is important. Rest all I forget

Let me try to answer your queries.

If I say that Jiva or mAyA were created by Ishvara (be it saguna or niguna, let us ignore distinction between the two for time being), then it would mean that there was a time when there was no mAyA, no jiva and no samsAra.

I have read somewhere in Shankara Bhashya (or may be in panchdasi) that mAyA and samsAra are beginningless. Hence I cannot say that there was a time when there was just NarAyaNa and then he created mAyA. Sometimes it is said form OM came mAyA. I will explain your first question later on about how Brahman GOT associated.

Again, the problem may be due to the way in which a concept is explained.

First we say it is illusion, then we say, Brahman 'Getting' deluded, we say Brahman 'associated' with mAyA (which means an action - to associate), then Brhaman 'became' saguNa, then Brahman 'created' the world. All these indicate actions - to associate, to get deluded, to create, etc.

then there is another vAda - ajAta vAda, which says there is no creation

Why is so much fuss about it?

The answer is that the answers are given on adhekAra bheda. There is manda adhikAri, Madhya and uttam adhikAri.

For manda adhikAri: aarambh vAda or pariNAma vAda are explained. E.g. milk gets changed into curd, etc, hence the creation is explained.

For madhyam adhikAri, we can g ofurther and say this world is illusion

For uttama adhikAri (who experiencesSaamdhi, but cannot stay in it for ever), ajAta vAda is explained.

To one student we can say that - though a person becomes Jnani, he still has to enjoy / suffer his praArabhdha. Then to another we say, that there is no prArabhdha is also destroyed and that a Jivan mukta can quit body at will.

Which one is correct?

The answer is both, because of adhikAra bheda.

Not all can digest when we say this world is an illusion or just a mental projection, hence for them, creation, delusion, etc theories are created. In the same way, laymen will not believe when he sees a Jnani suffering from a disease and hence we will have to explain them the concept of prArabhdha.

So, the answer depends upon mental make-up and 2 answers can be quite contrary.

So when I try to explain the process of creation, then it will definitely contradict -Brahma satya jagat mithyA and vice versa.

Some explains of Adi Shankara emphasizing bhakti and karma kand.

For example, in the Bhashya for the Ishavasyopanishad 9, at the end Shankara says: न हि शास्त्रविहितं किञ्चिदकर्तव्यतामियात् [Nothing enjoined by the scriptures can be unworthy of performance.] Of course, it is another matter that the Mundakopanishad Chapter I - Section 2, for example, has extensively criticized the karma portions of the Veda.
The Bhashya in the Brihadaranyka Upanishad 4.4.22 where the mantra: तमेतं वेदानुवचनेन ब्राह्मणा विविदिषन्ति यज्ञेन दानेन तपसा अनाशकेन itself speaks volumes on Shankara's respect, regard and devotion to the veda pUrva bhAga. He concludes the discussion thus: एवं कर्मकाण्डेन अस्य एकवाक्यतावगतिः [In this manner, that is, the relevance of the Veda PUrva-prescribed nitya karma that are meant for acquiring chitta shuddhi, the Moksha-teaching Jnana KANda becomes aligned as one 'complete shAstra'.] Thus, for Shankara, the Veda pUrva bhAga is an indispensable element in the attaining of the goal of the Upanishads.

In the Bhashya to the Brahmasutra 2.3.41 - तदनुग्रहहेतुकेनैव हि ज्ञानेन मोक्षसिद्धिर्भवितुमर्हति [ The attainment of Moksha is possible indeed through the Knowledge owing ONLY to the grace of Ishwara.

Source

If we take above explanation as authentic and correct theory, then what about the verses in which Adi Shankara has said that the world is mithyA? And what about GauDapadAcArya’s KArikA?

I think this is creating confusion. It also makes one think that Adi Shankara’s theory is inconsistent.

Let us take e.g. of Sun. This e.g. may not be a perfect e.g., but will help us understand some concepts.

Sun and it’s warmth (hence the rays) are not separable from Sun. You cannot expect Sun to emit cool waves. Sun can only give light, not darkness. The whole eco system of our earth works because of Sun (sun rays), climate change, day and night, motion of earth around Sun (earth’s orbit) etc everything happens because of Sun. What what doe sun himself do? It just happens.

Rose attracts honey bees. It is the nature of Rose flower to naturally emit rose fragrance. There is no extra effort. Honey bees are attracted towards rose flower getting attracted by fragrance.

This explanation can give rise to another set of questions. The answer is that this answer convinces the mind of questioner and he can proceed spiritually. Later new doubts may arise and appropriate answer can be given.

If I give explanation totally from pArmAthika saya, then eventhough I may convince you or win an argument or emerge victorious in a debate, it is not going to help you or me. It I the win of intellect and ego. What I am interested is how can a person progress spiritually.

Hence there are PrakaraNA grahta-s, when Gita, then Upanishad-s and lastly Brahma Sutra-s are to be studied in this order. Then there are other texts like ASTAvakra gItA, Yog VasisTa, etc are to be studied. This is step by step rising of disciple higher and higher.

As one progresses higher, old concepts are replaced by newer subtler one, often contradicting earlier concepts, only with the intention to raise disciple to the next level or say further increase purity.

From Br. Up. Bhashya given above and fomr Tai. Up. 1/11 bhashya, we can see that Adi Shankara did supported Karma Kand and also bhakti. For both, you cannot do karma kand by thinking that this world is just an illusion. Hence the theory of advaita is to be applied only when a person gets inwardly pure enough to renounce the very karma that gave him inner purity and become qualified to walk the path of 4th ashram, the path of renunciation.

--
Answers

(i) (ii) and (iii) are already explained

(v) mAyA is dependent upon Brahman for it’ existence. Brahman can exist without mAyA, but not vice versa. Dependecy is explained in relation to existence and not ceation. Again mAyA is Brahman’s power, hence it is his very own.

While acting, he is called as sa0guNa Brahmana. While resting, it is called as nirguNa Brahman. Both as aspects of same Brahman.

(vi) is explained in e.g. of Sun

(vii) answer given in (v)

(viii) Brahman is substratum. Again the definition of Real has to be counted. Since this world ends, it is not real. Hence we have to take it as delusion of mAyA and not actual creation. Brahman appears to be manifested as this world – this is said from pAramArthika satya

More later. Short of time

Aum

[Amrut]

Namaste Jopmala ji,

My apologies for delay in response. I am involved in another thread.

What is jiva?

Before answering the above question, please understand that answer is given from adhikAra bheda. You will have to consider vyavahArika satya and pArmArthika satya. Answers are different for person with different levels of consciousness.

Also note that Advaita covers everything from Charvaka to Non-duality. charvaka can be made a good human being.

Ok. So Adi Shankara has explained jiva in Tatva Bodh as

The reflection of Brahman, which identifies itself with gross physical body due to ego is called as jiva.

In my version of advaita , both nirguNa Brahman and saguNa Brahman exits. The definitions are based on 'activity'.

How can they be both?

Let's take an example of a married doctor - general practitioner.

A doctor is the one who is checks patient and gives medicine. In short a doctor heals patients. In other words when a person is doing the 'job' or 'activity' of healing people, he is called as doctor.

When a doctor, along with his wife is jogging on a beach in the morning, he is not a doctor, he is just a husband, as he is fulfilling his duty as a husband.

A same person can be

A husband to a wife
A son to a mother
A father to a child
A brother to a sister or brother

To all family members he will love, but the love for all is not same. A son wont look to his mother or sister or daughter with the same eye as he looks at his wife.

Brahman has 2 aspects.

NirguNa and SaguNA.

For rest of questions, I think a systematic study is required, else it will create confusion. Depending upon mental make-up and inner suprity, certain answers are given.

To one, I will say, Ishvara is the creator of this world.He created Om, from OM came mAyA and from mAyA came this world and us.

To other I will say, this world is not 'created', but 'appears'. This creation is not eternal, hence accordingly to shastra-s, it cannot be called as real. IT is also not unreal. Hence it lies somewhat in between, that which is experienced only in one state of consciousness (waking) and not in dream or in deep sleep. IT is also not experienced in turiya avastha

To uttam adhikAri - The world was never created, only Brahman exist.

Though the above answers appear contradictory, they are not. They are correct for different people who are on different plane of evolution.

It is perfectly right to say that it is saguNa Brahman to whom all prayers go, as to nirguNa Brahman it cannot reach. But the same NirguNa Brahman appears to us in the form of Guru and Ishvara as saguNa, for us to transcend us beyond guNa-s, beyond his mAyA and without their grace one cannot cross this terrible ocean of samsAra. All happens by the grace of Ishvara. Ishvara is the controller of mAyA, while nirguNa Brahman is the one one which mAyA rests, and saguNa Brahman is the one which has will to create, to help, to bless, to listen to our prayers.

In other words, SaguNA Brahman is always rooted in nirguNa Brahman or in knowledge of Self. He is both nirguNa at the same time saguNa. The definitions are based on 'action'.

For a uttam adhikAri, the thoughts or say questions of mAyA, creation, etc do not arise. Hence no need to explain all this. In every seach, in every action, he sees that there is someone who is questioning, who is the one who is questioning? Who is this 'I' ... and the search or say inner exploration begins. See he does not even think of the world. His mind is totally introvert. His consciousness is highly evolved.

Are you getting it? I am getting repetitive.

Aum

[sanathan]

If I assume that I am Jiva, it would mean that earlier I was not Brahman, which according to advaita is not correct as Atman / Brahman was already Brahman. Under wrong notion, it wrongly associated itself with Body and assumed itself as body.

Namasthe Amrut,

After going through yours' and devotee's posts about Advaita philosophy , only few basic questions are not understood by me. I have quoted one of them above , let me elaborate it in more detail.

1. Please explain me what is "it" in the above bold line .

I have been trying to understand it logically first (also looking for scriptural support),

2. I got to know 2 concepts from your posts 1.Brahman 2. Maya

Wanted to understand about the exact relation between these 2.

Brahman as per my limited knowledge is "consciousness-bliss-existence" , it can not act or think, it can not be diluted by anything, it can not be touched by maya.

Maya is sat-asath or anirvachaneeya tattva.

Now how the Brahman which can not be polluted or can not be touched by maya became substratum of maya (I am assuming that both some how combinely causing this universe to appear,let me know if it is wrong).

I mean, what is the exact relation between "Brahman" and "Maya" and how they are in contact with each other. (it would be great if you can show me some scriptural statements for this).

[jopmala]

Namaste

I am not sure there will be any satisfactory answer from them since so far my discussion is concerned with Amrutji, I have got only confusion.

While they talk of two levels of truth, in paramarthika level there is only brahman and rest that is jiva and jagat etc which are not actually true but appear to be true are in vyavaharika level. Sri krishna and self ( jiva according to them) are staying in vyavaharika level and jiva seeks his false grace ( according to me) here to upgrade him to paramarthika level. I say it false grace because sri krishna is not ultimately true but appear to be true . There is no sri krishna actually . when we say sri krishna it is a kind of bhrama/ illusion and nothing else. In fact 'we' are also a bhram or illusion. hence the grace from sri krishna is also a illusion. In vyavaharika level every thing is illusion ,untrue or appear to be true .

Question is who is experiencing these illusion . it is self who is also illusion. if the experiencer is brahman then advaita would be violated since brahman can not be found in vyavaharika level ,although ultimately the experiencer will rediscover him as brahman, the ultimate truth but they can not accept brahman under ignorance in vyavaharika level. Though there is a equation brahman + maya = brahman with attributes but that does not mean that brahman is under ignorance. rather it means brahman is the controller of maya but the fact is that without maya brahman is not activated . I do not understand how maya is controlled by brahman when it has no power or qualities to act. This vyavaharika level of truth is totally a confusion and how the so called self takes him from vyavaharika level to paramarthika level even in present life ( jivam muktha) is another level of confusion.

Actually advaita beliver should clarify the conception of jiva and maya clearyly so that relation among these three tatta that is brahman, jiva and maya could be understood properly. they only talk of brahman satya even jiva is also ultimately brahman but they can not say what happens to maya. they can not say maya is also brahman since it would violate advaita. though brahman is nirguna nirvishes but maya is power of brahman , how ? no satisfactory answer. we can not assume that brahman and maya combine somehow to create universe. this ' some how' should be clarified. if some one say this is advaita and you have to accept it , then there will be no argument at all.

Now my question is in which level of truth our vedas /upanishad which they claim to be the source of advaita philosophy are considered. if they are in vyavaharika level then ultimately they are also untrue. veda upanashid means source of jnan or store house of jnan from where advaitavada itself is originated. Is jnan also untrue ? if veda upanishada also appear to be true( not actually true) then the advaita is also a philosophy of just appear to be ,actually there is nothing.

[devotee]

Namasthe Sanathan,

If I assume that I am Jiva, it would mean that earlier I was not Brahman, which according to advaita is not correct as Atman / Brahman was already Brahman. Under wrong notion, it wrongly associated itself with Body and assumed itself as body.

After going through yours' and devotee's posts about Advaita philosophy , only few basic questions are not understood by me. I have quoted one of them above , let me elaborate it in more detail.

1. Please explain me what is "it" in the above bold line .

I have been trying to understand it logically first (also looking for scriptural support),

“It” is conditioned consciousness. It is just a thought-wave on the infinite ocean of consciousness that is Ishvara which in association with MAyA assumes its separates existence i.e. a thought-wave acts as a separate conscious individual just like a dream-character assumes that it is different from the dreamer (when the dream-character is nothing but a thought-wave of the dreamer and there is only one consciousness of the dreamer which powers both the dreamer and the dream-character). This thought-wave is capable of accumulating other thought-waves (called samskaars or impressions which is the cause of various possibilities in he life-cycles of Jeeva) and can act as a separate entity called a Jeeva and can exist in different forms and names.

Scriptural support on how Jeeva is created by association of Prakriti with Brahman :

Sarasvati Rahasya Upanishad :

“Satyam bhaati chichhaayaa darpaNe prativimbavat, tena chitprativimbena trividhaa bhaati saa punah”

==> As reflected image is perceived as real in a mirror, in the same way reflection of consciousness in Prakriti is perceived as real. (47-48)

Shaktidvayam hi MAyaya vikshepaavriti rupkam, Vikshepshaktirlingaadi BrhamANantam jagat srijeta. Antardrigdrishyayorbhedam bahishcha Brahmansargayoh. AavriNotyapara shaktih saa sansaarasya kaaranam.


==> Vikshepa (powr of projection ) and aavarana (veiling power) are two powers of MAyA. The power of projection creates from lingadeha i.e. Jeeva’s body to the whole universe. The aavaraNa power covers (puts veil upon) the difference between seer and seen and also the difference between Brahman and the world.

Chitichchhaayaa samaaveshaat Jeevah syaat vyaavhaarikah. Asya .JeevatvamAropAt sAkshiNyapyabhvaasate. Aavritau tu vinashtaayaam bhede bhaatepyaati tat.


===> When the reflection of consciousness falls on Prakriti as the material cause, then in this world the vyaavhaarik Jeeva comes into being. Because it is imposed on consciousness, it is also perceived as the witness. When the aavarana (veiling power of MAyA) i.e. ignorance (state when reality is covered) is removed, the reality of difference is known and the state of Jeevahood is destroyed.


Rudra Hridayopanishad


Kalpitau parmau Jeevashivaroopena kalpitau. Tatvascha Shivah sAkashat chit jeevah cha svatah sadA. ChichchidAkArato bhinnaa na bhinnaa chitvahaanitah.Chitashchinna chidAkArAtbhidyate jadaroopatah. Bhidyate chejjajado bhedshidekaa sarvadA khalu. Tarkascha pramANAchcha chidektvavyavasththite. Chidekatvaparigyane na sochati na muhyati. Advaitam parmAnandam Shivam yAti tu kevalam. (42-45)


===> The difference between Jeeva and Ishvara (God) is imagined due to MAyA. In reality, the Jeeva made of Consciousness is none but Ishavra itself. The difference between Jeeva and Ishvara is perceived due to differences in names and forms. In reality, there is no difference between the two. If there were real difference between the two then consciousness forms of the both would get violated. The difference seen between one consciousness (Ishvara) and the other (Jeeva) is due to delusion. The non-difference of consciousness is a proven fact by logic and by (experiential) proof. Therefore, by knowing the non-difference in consciousness man becomes free from delusion and sufferings and is established as non-dual blissful Shiva alone.

There are many Upanishads (within accepted 108 main Upanishads) where you can find the same truth stated in different manners.

2. I got to know 2 concepts from your posts 1.Brahman 2. Maya

Wanted to understand about the exact relation between these 2.

Brahman as per my limited knowledge is "consciousness-bliss-existence" , it can not act or think, it can not be diluted by anything, it can not be touched by maya.

There is slight misunderstanding here. Actually, Consciousness-bliss-existence is Ishvara state of Brahman. So, it can create, sustain and annihilate in this state which is the third state of Brahman. The fourth state is avyAvahArik which is the Nirguna Brahman which is the substratum of everything and which alone is the reality.

Now how the Brahman which can not be polluted or can not be touched by maya became substratum of maya (I am assuming that both some how combinely causing this universe to appear,let me know if it is wrong).

Truly speaking, there is no explanation of “how”. The reality is as it is and there is no real “why” and “how” which can explain the reality. If it could be explained as it is, it could not have been beyond all mental concepts. I will try to explain to the best of my ability :

Let’s first differentiate between Nirguna Brahman (fourth state of Brahman) and Saguna Brahman (Ishvara, he third state). Nirguna Brahman doesn’t do anything as it is AvyAvhArik and which cannot be understood by any concepts known to mind. Now, Ishvara (which is also known as the saguna Brahman) and MAyA manifest together simultaneously on the substratum of Nirguna Brahman. Ishvara is the third state of Brahman. Ishvara too is born due to MAyA and therefore, Ishvara is not the cause of MAyA but the cause of both the MAyA and Ishvara is the Nirguna Brahman. MAyA and Ishvara together create this phenomenal world. Ishvara is the origin and end of the whole universe. Ishvara is created by the power of MAyA from the Nirguna Brahman but It is not deluded like the Jeeva and It is not bound by MAyA but is the master of MAyA. What is MAyA ? It is the power of Brahman in its third state which veils the reality and projects this phenomenal world. Now in the whole process Nirguna Brahman is unaffected … the whole prapancha (phenomenon) is like a dream played on the bosom of consciousness of the dreamer where dreamer is not affected.

I mean, what is the exact relation between "Brahman" and "Maya" and how they are in contact with each other. (it would be great if you can show me some scriptural statements for this).

It is already explained above.

OM

[sanathan]

“It” is conditioned consciousness. It is just a thought-wave on the infinite ocean of consciousness that is Ishvara which in association with MAyA assumes its separates existence

Namasthe !

Ok,
I was trying to understand about that "conditioned consciousness" , I mean how did it happen to became "conditioned" .

Scriptural support on how Jeeva is created by association of Prakriti with Brahman :

Sarasvati Rahasya Upanishad :



Rudra Hridayopanishad

Were these upanishad quotes used by Shankaraacharya or any of his direct disciples?

Truly speaking, there is no explanation of “how”. The reality is as it is and there is no real “why” and “how” which can explain the reality.

Ok, I was asking "how or why" because the nature of Brahman is explained in such a high esteem that it is beyond eyerything , but same time it acts as the substratum of Maya to cause the "conditioned-consciousness" , there I got confused about its dual nature.(i.e being beyond everything and same time being substratum of Maya).