Pointless debate about advaita

[tatvam]

hi, just an FYI, I have not seen vedant for months and same for arjuna...not sure where they are...
hopefully they will answer soon...in the mean time, maybe you can ask these questions on another advaita forums on the net if you want or google it...

Hi Satay,
Thanks for your kind information..
Can you suggest me some name who can clarify my doubts regarding Advaita?
Thank you.

[TruthSeeker]

Can you explain why man is under ignorance?

By God's will. Any questions?

what is impersonal absolute? is it a matter? or energy? or some thing else?

Impersonal Absolute is the concept of God without name. form and any limiting definitions.

The absolute could be considered as as static potential like a battery, that is not connected to a circuit.

When a circuit is formed (jagat), the storage potential(charge) of the battery is now experienced in the form of the current through the circuit - that is Shakti or Maya. The battery viewed in this mode is called Isvara or Personal God.

[tatvam]

By God's will. Any questions?



Impersonal Absolute is the concept of God without name. form and any limiting definitions.

The absolute could be considered as as static potential like a battery, that is not connected to a circuit.

When a circuit is formed (jagat), the storage potential(charge) of the battery is now experienced in the form of the current through the circuit - that is Shakti or Maya. The battery viewed in this mode is called Isvara or Personal God.

Namaste truth seeker,

If it is god's will what is the Vedant's first line "No doubt the goal of Vedanta is to realise that there is no duality"
you said man is under ignorance because of God's will , please clarify me the first sentence also.
The example here you given is very good..but here the battery is not the owner of circuit and circuit is completely different from battery.
I don't think God and his jagat are never ever seperately exists.

Thank you.

[TruthSeeker]

Namaste truth seeker,

If it is god's will what is the Vedant's first line "No doubt the goal of Vedanta is to realise that there is no duality"
you said man is under ignorance because of God's will , please clarify me the first sentence also.

Yes, from the point of view of the Absolute, only the battery is there - that is what is non dualty. When God alone existed , what could happen without the will of God? Any alternate explanations could only be subsets of this. The will itself is only an explanation, and a true reason could only be stated as unknown.

The example here you given is very good..but here the battery is not the owner of circuit and circuit is completely different from battery.
I don't think God and his jagat are never ever seperately exists.

That is just an example, but its intended meaning is clear isn't it? The circuit itself is formed of God's Maya, and Maya itself is a manifestation of God himself - hence nothing really exists apart from God.(only transformation of his Shakti, which is himself)

Battery is the owner of the circuit. It you turn it off, the circuit is dead.

[tatvam]

That is just an example, but its intended meaning is clear isn't it? The circuit itself is formed of God's Maya, and Maya itself is a manifestation of God himself - hence nothing really exists apart from God.(only transformation of his Shakti, which is himself)

Battery is the owner of the circuit. It you turn it off, the circuit is dead.

Thanks truthseeker,
This is what exactly I wanted..I am completely accepting your statement.

But I think Advaita says "Jagat midhya" , I don't know exact meaning of midhya and if midhya means illusion..then as per you jagat is also god's manifestation..which couldn't be mere illusion but should e satyam..as God is satyam.

Thank you.

[satay]

Hi Satay,
Thanks for your kind information..
Can you suggest me some name who can clarify my doubts regarding Advaita?
Thank you.

I am sorry...I can't suggest any such person...most advaitins will laugh at your childish posts and the only reason why I am allowing your posts to continue here is to give you a chance to prove me wrong and convince me that I should not ban your id because I am really convinced that you are not here to learn anything about advaita you and I both know that...so you can stop insulting yourself and my intelligence.

If you really want to learn about advaita why not you google the word and browse some of the sites from the thousands available on the net?

advaitin motto: ignore the ignorants!

Admin Note begins here:
I will give you another day...to prove me wrong...

At the moment I don't see any difference between you and a maleccha missionary of an adharmic propaganda who comes to this site for the sole purpose of attacking advaita and to promote his own dogma and in the process shows his ignorance...

[TruthSeeker]

Thanks truthseeker,
This is what exactly I wanted..I am completely accepting your statement.

But I think Advaita says "Jagat midhya" , I don't know exact meaning of midhya and if midhya means illusion..then as per you jagat is also god's manifestation..which couldn't be mere illusion but should e satyam..as God is satyam.

Thank you.

Brahman is the material and instrumental cause of jagat. But is that what you see now? You are seeing the Jagat - but where is Brahman?

That is why it is called an illusion, as it is seen apart from the Brahman. When one knows the Brahman, the jagat is no longer seen in the way as seen by ajnanins, but only as the undivided Atman. To this jnani, the jagat you see with your senses is just an illusion.(and really does not exist)

[tatvam]

Brahman is the material and instrumental cause of jagat. But is that what you see now? You are seeing the Jagat - but where is Brahman?

That is why it is called an illusion, as it is seen apart from the Brahman. When one knows the Brahman, the jagat is no longer seen in the way as seen by ajnanins, but only as the undivided Atman. To this jnani, the jagat you see with your senses is just an illusion.(and really does not exist)

Namste truthseeker,

I am not clear..can you elaborate the above statement?

you said..Brahman is material and instrumental cause..if he is the material cause..then why jagat is illusion..does it mean Bharman is illusion?
if Brahman is the material cause ..then why jagat is seen apart from the Brahman?
who is ajnani? advaita means one and only one without two (i.e Brahman) then who is ajnani? Brahman became ajnanai?

Please explain bit clear..

Thank you.

[TruthSeeker]

Namste truthseeker,

I am not clear..can you elaborate the above statement?

you said..Brahman is material and instrumental cause..if he is the material cause..then why jagat is illusion..does it mean Bharman is illusion?
if Brahman is the material cause ..then why jagat is seen apart from the Brahman?

OK, let us take the common man:

How does he see the world?

With his senses, and through the mind which sees through these senses. He sees the world composed of five gross elements and hence appears REAL to his mind.

To an advanced Yogi, or a higher being like a deva, the world of five elements has resolved into its subtle elements. If he sees this world though his senses, the appearance will be totally different from you, though he can still see you, in much more clarity and beauty.

What are the subtle elements composed of? The tAmasic ahamkara, which is infact evolved from Maya at the highest level. A very advanced Yogi sees everything only as Maya, and not like you. There is perfect uniformity in experience, and in state one is said to see the world as Brahman. This is the perspective of the personal God, where the world is seen as Isvara, or the Visva-rupa.

But Maya is itself Brahman only ultimately, so what could be seen from the absolute perspective? Even this perception of Jagat as Maya has to fall ultimately. When it does so, Jagat has no indepedent existance of any kind, even as Maya. From this perspective, Jagat you see now is called an illusion as it existed only as long as you were seeing with your senses and mind.

who is ajnani? advaita means one and only one without two (i.e Brahman) then who is ajnani? Brahman became ajnanai?

Please explain bit clear..

Thank you

Having classified the Jagat as an illusion from the ultimate perspective, why would an ajnanin exist from that perspective? They exist only for another ajnanin.

From your perspective, the ajnanin could only be Brahman, as no second to Brahman exists. Brahman exists as many - as the almighty Isvara, as the higher beings, as man, as animal and so forth, all born out of his own will and independence. How could one call him as ignorant? He exists as the all knowing all wise Isvara.

With their inability to understand this divine mystery, where the one Brahman appears as many, the ajnani frames many theories in accordance with his intellect- he calls man as sinner, he calls himself as ignorant, he wants a saviour, he created reward and punishment, he thinks God is in the sky and so forth. These questions and answers are only for satisfying the curiosity of the intellect which adds to the already existing ignorance -- they hardly matter to jnanins or Advaita.

The human intellect cannot reach out to God and his mysteries, and the very attempt to understand it with human logic is ignorance. The best way to dig into the mystery is through realizing one's self if you were really serious in seeking answers to your questions.

[tatvam]

OK, let us take the common man:

How does he see the world?

With his senses, and through the mind which sees through these senses. He sees the world composed of five gross elements and hence appears REAL to his mind.

To an advanced Yogi, or a higher being like a deva, the world of five elements has resolved into its subtle elements. If he sees this world though his senses, the appearance will be totally different from you, though he can still see you, in much more clarity and beauty.

What are the subtle elements composed of? The tAmasic ahamkara, which is infact evolved from Maya at the highest level. A very advanced Yogi sees everything only as Maya, and not like you. There is perfect uniformity in experience, and in state one is said to see the world as Brahman. This is the perspective of the personal God, where the world is seen as Isvara, or the Visva-rupa.

But Maya is itself Brahman only ultimately, so what could be seen from the absolute perspective? Even this perception of Jagat as Maya has to fall ultimately. When it does so, Jagat has no indepedent existance of any kind, even as Maya. From this perspective, Jagat you see now is called an illusion as it existed only as long as you were seeing with your senses and mind.

Thanks truthseeker,

I understood some points of you..but still some doubts.
Let me explain my doubts..
you said a common man can see this world with his sences and through mind..so..ultimately who is experiencing ?
are sences experiencing the world ?
or human being experiencing the world through his sences?
if a human being is experiencing the world , then who is this being ?
You said advanced yogi sees it in different view..that advanced yogi was previously a common man..so how he became Yogi? could all beings become like that?

Let me ask you my doubts conretely..

1. who is experiencing the world or illusion or Maya ? (is Ahamkara can feel its existence? )
2. why different human beings are in different state(some are Ajanis , some are Jnanis) ?
3. is the world exactly equal to Brahman ?
4. is the human being or any living being exactly equal to Brahman?

Thank you