Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

  1. #1

    True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    What does "being ONE with the Brahman" mean in fact?

    Are jivas already ONE with and the SAME as It is even while jivas have their physical bodies?

    Do jivas reach Oneness with it after enlighment?

    What does 'advaita' (=not two) mean in this jiva (atman) - Brahman relation mean?

    Is the following description true for the meaning of Oneness in advaita view:

    Brahman is the Sun and jivas are its rays. So their (jivas') essence is the same and one as that of Brahman, yet Brahman (Sun) is the source, It gives the power.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    69
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    218

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    hari o
    ~~~~~~

    namast & hello adevotee108


    Welcome to HDF. We will be happy to address your questions. Let me offer this ; it is our custom here to say hello and greet the reader... then upon leaving saying thank you or goodbye or what ever is appropriate. You will find this is a good way to engage the reader and stimulate positive responses.

    We are simple people and take some happiness in these easy practices .

    praām
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  3. #3

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    hari o
    ~~~~~~

    namast & hello adevotee108


    Welcome to HDF. We will be happy to address your questions. Let me offer this ; it is our custom here to say hello and greet the reader... then upon leaving saying thank you or goodbye or what ever is appropriate. You will find this is a good way to engage the reader and stimulate positive responses.

    We are simple people and take some happiness in these easy practices .

    praām
    Namaste,

    I'm really sorry for being impolite in my earlier post. You are just right and thank you for pointing this out so straightforward and simply. In fact, I am happy to see this kind of attitude here because this makes this online community more personal this way, right?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    69
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    218

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namast & hello adevotee108


    Quote Originally Posted by adevotee108 View Post
    Namaste,
    this makes this online community more personal this way, right?
    Yes, what you say is correct for HDF. Many spend time to make the site easy to be in; then the knowledge flows.

    So, with the next post let me offer an idea or two for your kind consideration.

    praām

    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  5. #5
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    69
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    218

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~~~~~~

    namasté adevotee108

    Let me offer a few ideas ... you have asked good questions and I ask others to contribute as they see fit.

    Note this is not considered entry level knowledge and takes some time getting used to it. So, let's start here:

    jīva - is a living being; some say a being that cycles through birth and death. It is para-brahman that makes a jīva possible yet is beyond this limit.
    Now within jīva ( this living being) is ātmavān and is equal to śrutipāramgataḥ meaning :
    resides (gataḥ) + farther than , beyond (pāram) + that which is heard or communicated (śruti). So within us we are this fullness of para-brahman aforementioned.

    When you say 'do jīva-s reach oneness with it after enlightenment ? ' - The answer is yes and no. It is 'no' because we are one with it already and there is no reaching... and it is 'yes' from the standpoint of our view now, as if there is another state. This is the hardest thing to get hold of in one's mind. We are IT ( tad-ekam) already.

    It is like the space we find in a jar. We break the jar and the space is now merged with all the other space.... Yet it has always been space, never contained. And more so ( here's the brain cramp part) - the space holds the jar, and not the other way around. If there was no space ( we call ākāśa ) where could a jar reside? Every atom , every particle of the jar is residing in space... yet we think the empty space is in the jar.

    We too are no different then the jar - permiated by the space ( in this analogy) brahman. There is no thing it is not. So if one says I am going from jīva to brahman, where is the traveling if both things are the same ?

    This whole thinking now becomes that of pratyabhijñāhṛdayaṁ - a very big word that means the re-recognition of ones Self. No one needs to go any where, but needs to just remember who we are (really).

    So let me stop here for a moment so you can collect your thoughts and others can respond. If this line of thinking is interesting we can take it a bit further in another post.

    praām
    Last edited by yajvan; 05 December 2011 at 07:16 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  6. #6
    Join Date
    April 2011
    Location
    Ohio, United States
    Age
    58
    Posts
    441
    Rep Power
    1388

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    Hari OM

    Namaste and welcome aDevotee108,

    I shall defer the knowledge portion to other Divine portions, aDevotee. I will not defer privilege to say most welcome. Hope you enjoy your stay here and will look forward to seeing you around.

    Om Shanti

    FFTW

  7. #7
    Join Date
    June 2010
    Location
    Kolkata
    Posts
    822
    Rep Power
    486

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    Welcome aDevotee108 to this forum.

    Your question will spark an excitement amongst the forum followers. Though similar questions have come up now and then but to delve on such topics are always a pleasure.

    However it may do you good if you can go through similar threads in Uttara or Advaita (under philosophy) sections.

    Please post the question in relevant section where lots of traffic is there.
    Love and best wishes:hug:

  8. #8
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Age
    33
    Posts
    53
    Rep Power
    276

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    Hello adevotee108,


    Welcome to the forum.


    There was a thread quite recently in which very similar questions were asked, perhaps you will find it helpful;

    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=8210


    Edit- I realized that you are the same author of the previous thread with the very similar questions! Were the answers given there not satisfactory? Is there some part in particular that you are struggling to understand and require clarification of? Do let us know!


    What does "being ONE with the Brahman" mean in fact?

    It means that one's own Self (atman) is identical in nature with Brahman- the two words relate to the same entity or reality.


    Are jivas already ONE with and the SAME as It is even while jivas have their physical bodies?
    The essence of the jiva, the atman, is in reality already Brahman, but it appears as all the jivas when through ignorance the qualities and attributes pertaining to individuality (egotism) ie the body\mind are superimposed onto it. There is only one atman, but it appears as many when it is not fully known. Everybody intuitively knows their own Self, but its actual nature is unclear to most because it is confused and identified with the body and such, so there is only a partial knowledge.


    Do jivas reach Oneness with it after enlighment?

    No. The identity of the Self and Brahman is an already established fact, it need not be brought about anew, nor can it be; it is only for lack of knowledge that any difference is perceived and believed in. When knowledge of the identity of one's Self and Brahman arises through the help of Vedanta then the ignorance of separateness is dispelled, and the previous apparent limitations are done away with, for all is seen to be but Brahman.


    What does 'advaita' (=not two) mean in this jiva (atman) - Brahman relation mean?

    There is no relation between atman and Brahman, for they are one and the same, and a relation is only possible between two distinct, different things. Advaita, not two, is the denial of relationships- there is only the one Self, Brahman, it is all that is, and it is you. Advaita means identity, going beyond all limitations resulting from relations, and the suffering that comes from those limitations.


    Brahman is the Sun and jivas are its rays. So their (jivas') essence is the same and one as that of Brahman, yet Brahman (Sun) is the source, It gives the power.
    This may be adequate at a certain point, but it is not a view representative of the higher standpoints expressed in advaita. To extend the analogy, let us say that the Sun is a name and form, and that the rays are name and form, also. The rays proceed from and are not independent of the Sun. What is the essence of both the Sun and its rays? Let us say, light and heat. The Sun is light and heat, the rays are light and heat. The reality of both is light and heat. Now, if we remove the name and the form 'Sun' and 'ray', what remains is light and heat, the reality of both- with nothing lost.

    To explain the analogy, the light and heat is Brahman. The Sun and its rays we can say are Ishwara and the jivas. Ishwara and jivas are Brahman seen from the standpoint of name and form. Brahman is the essence and identity of both Ishwara and the jivas. If we go beyond name and form, maayaa, what exists is the reality alone, Brahman, without the differentiation of name and form. You are it, I am it, there is only that. To go beyond the name and form, the superimposition, is to get the knowledge of the identity of the Self and Brahman, which is moksha.


    The common analogy of the ocean and the droplet which is often brought up to discuss the relationship of atman and Brahman was used in the thread I have linked above. I will quote the relevant part which I posted there since it is quite similar to the analogy you have introduced here in your thread.


    If we call ocean, droplet and streams name and form of water, then what is the advaita view here? The view is 'all is water only'. The whole charade of water from the ocean evaporating and being deposited as streams to merge with the ocean again is all maya- the viewpoint from name and form only. Water remains water, whether it be in the form of the ocean, the droplet or the streams. In this analogy, the water is brahman, all apparent transformations are maya, and therefore the atman 'droplet' is no droplet at all, it is simply water being discussed in terms name and form, in terms of maya. From the highest standpoint of the water here, there is no such thing as ocean, droplet or streams, there is just water. Translating this, there is no distinction within brahman by which an atman could separate and then merge back into it, the atman and brahman are forever identical.

    People like to use the ocean analogy so much, but I think it is rather misunderstood. An ocean, despite its vastness and greatness compared to a drop of water, is still in the realm of name and form. The nature or identity of the ocean and the droplet are completely identical because they are both water. The analogy does not represent a droplet merging with the ocean when understood correctly, it represents the identity of the ocean and the droplet through the negation of superimposed attributes (name and form) by the understanding 'all this is water only'. In the same way, there is no merging of a separate atman into a greater brahman, since any notions of size pertaining to either are mutually limiting for both of them, and brahman is by nature said to be without limitations!

    We might say that the droplet represents the jiva under bondage, and the ocean represents Isvara who rules over the jiva and is himself ever free. But this view is limited and relative to the domain of self-ignorance. Furthermore, since the jiva under bondage cannot be equivalent to the Isvara who is his ruler and who is not bound, objections in the form of 'both cease to exist' when there is a merger of the two are apt, and this is, no doubt, why so many people misunderstand the advaita view. The bound jiva will not merge into the Isvara- no, they are mutually exclusive from the relative standpoint. But what is the higher standpoint? It is that the jiva is not bound, it is not a droplet, but it is instead the atman whose nature is identical to brahman but appears otherwise for as long as the name and form is being superimposed on it. Then, what is the Isvara, the ocean? This too, is only water, brahman, again Isvara is sensible from the standpoint of superimposition only. If the Self is covered by name and form, then it appears limited like a droplet, and therefore logically it follows that there is an entity which is less limited, and which is the ruler, like the ocean.



    Hope I've helped.




    http://rajahamsah.blogspot.com/ Rāja Haṃsaḥ
    Unfolding the teachings of Advaita Vedānta- my Blog, Updated Daily.

  9. #9

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    Dear All,

    Thank You so much for your great help!
    I had begun another very similar thread, yeah, but that time I myself was simply unable to clarify the questions. So I needed to left it at that.

    BUT the replies I have received so far in this present thread are really more meaningful and more understandable to me, too.
    Of course, I am thankful for the answers in the earlier thread, too, I just was not able to really get the meaning and I needed to modify my own questions in the meantime as well.

    You have made certain points much more clearer this time. Thank you very much.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Age
    33
    Posts
    53
    Rep Power
    276

    Re: True meaning of Oneness according to advaita? Jiva (Atman)-Brahman relation.

    Hello adevotee108,



    I'm very glad we helped!


    Don't hesitate to post again if you want further clarification later down the line; advaita is very complex and rather intimidating at first glance.






    http://rajahamsah.blogspot.com/ Rāja Haṃsaḥ
    Unfolding the teachings of Advaita Vedānta- my Blog, Updated Daily.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07 January 2011, 05:09 AM
  2. Tattvas
    By grames in forum Advaita
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 14 October 2009, 08:55 AM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06 November 2007, 01:32 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06 June 2007, 10:40 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
  •