Guest guest Posted February 4, 2000 Report Share Posted February 4, 2000 ____ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2000 Report Share Posted April 27, 2000 My apologies for reposting the message of Jay. This is an inadvertant mistake and I was trying to send to few youngsters in our family and by mistake send it to advaitin list. Ram Chandran --- Ram Chandran <chandran wrote: > Greetings: > > Here is an interesting site for all youngsters of > the family to conduct 'Virtual Pooja.' The Virtual > pooja will take less than 5 minutes and you can get Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2001 Report Share Posted September 19, 2001 Dear Anurag, For some actions, there are no reasons. And some people think that for some questions there are no answers (Your question is very similar to "why did God create this world?", which has been asked by several people, most of them athiests and agnostics.) It has got no apt answers, but some elders in our dharma have been explaining thus = in a simple way. However if you analyse the simple explanations, you will find a great truth within, for which you have to take the help of Upanishads. = there was never a time when there was no creation. Everything had existed in potential form. = at certain periods in the history of time, the potential manifests itself as matter and spirit. Definitely, there must be certain cosmic laws which govern when and how creation should begin. I don't know whether there is any mention of these in our scriptures or not. Another simple way to look at creation - imagine a small child playing with some toys. He is in an imaginary setting, playing with small cars, aeroplanes, soldiers etc. playing "hijack and crash". He plays for a period of time, if there are no interruptions. Suddenly he stops playing, winds up all the paraphernalia, and says "OK war over! everybody got killed". What makes him start playing in the first place? and what made him stop? no explanations here here! isn't it? similarly - no explanations for the creation process. Members - please correct me if there are any mistakes in my understanding. I am just a beginner in this field. Feel that I have to study a lot before I can even manage to get a smell of the rich knowledge contained in our scriptures. But I am determined to study our scriptures as much as possible. Jai Bharat Mata Hari Om narayanan --- A Kumar <ites30 wrote: > If the belief that Brahm and Jiv are the same, > advaita, then why are the > poor Jivatmas sent to this world. What is the need > for Brahm to send part of > himself > > I am a keen student of Shankara's philosophy, and > would love to get this > question answered > > > Anurag Lohia > > _______________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > ===== Thanks and Best Regards Narayanan.K.G. Spansa Chennai Tel/Fax: (44) 4925805 Home : (44) 4925807 Mobile : 98410-39894 e-mail : spansa_chennai Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? Donate cash, emergency relief information http://dailynews./fc/US/Emergency_Information/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2001 Report Share Posted September 19, 2001 >If the belief that Brahm and Jiv are the same, advaita, then why are the >poor Jivatmas sent to this world. What is the need for Brahm to send part of >himself > >I am a keen student of Shankara's philosophy, and would love to get this >question answered > >Anurag Lohia > Shree Anurag lohia - A some what similar question related to jiiva and brahman was asked in bhakti list - I just mailed a response and you may find an answer to your question in that. Copy is being posted to this list. Hari Om! Sadananda damodara svarup <damodarsvarup wrote: Shree damodara I will try to explain to the best I can without going overboard. I would not mind Shree Mani stepping in to close the discussion whenever he feels that the discussion is beyond the scope of this list. I would strongly recommend those who are interested the reference I gave in Brahmasutra notes particularly the adhyaasa Bhaasya where these aspects are extensively discussed in the IIIrd chapter. One should also read the second chapter that discusses the difference between loukika anumaana and shaastriiya anumaana. ------------- I have some doubts which arise from the Sadanada's explanation. -Perception of this world, as well as one who perceives and that which is perceived is only due to illusion ----------------- Unfortunately illusion is the incorrect translation of vyavyahaarika satya and the concept of maaya in advaita. I do not have any better word either. Is bangle or ring - at the various names and forms of golden ornaments - are the real or illusion? From the transactional purposes, they are indeed real - bangle is different from ring and ring from chain. What one does with a ring is different from what one does with bangle. Name is to a form and form is an attribute - utility is for those names and forms. They are real in their relative sphere of reference - this is vyavahaara or transactional purpose. But in through the form the essence is nothing but gold. Hence what is relatively real is different from absolutely real -The definition that is given in advaita - trikaala abhaaditam satyam - that which remains non-negatable in three periods of time is the absolute real. In your above statement, world is perceived by perceiver. But perceiver is not illusion. He is the conscious entity that remains eternal as the essential conscious entity- this is true even in VishishhTa advaita. The conscious entity cannot be negated (abhaadhitam) at any time since 'he' has to be to there even to do the negation process. Hence Krishna's declaration - na enam chindanti shastraaNi .. etc- Even in VishishhTaadvaita - in fact I should say in all Vedic religions adhyaasa or error is accepted to some degree - the fundamental error is I am the body or mind or intellect - the equipments that I possess. The whole teaching of Giita starts because Arjuna has this fundamental problem identifying one self which is a chaitanya vastu with the jada vastu - matter, the body, mind and intellect as I am this - this being an object and I being a conscious entity. Once one identifies I am this body and the other body belongs to my teacher or pitaamaha etc all the attachments and associated sufferings result - that was Arjuana's problem and our problem too. The cause for this error in both philosophies is again attributed to 'aj~naana' or ignorance. The ignorance is anaadi or beginningless, as it has to be. The liberation therefore is removal of this ignorance. Up to this is common in both. The nature of the ignorance is perceived differently in each system. Bhagavaan Ramanuja emphasizes the 'bhakti ruupaka j~naana' while Shankara emphasizes 'swa swaruupa j~naana' or aatma swaruupa j~naana as all in all, which according Ramanuja that is only one part while the other part involves the 'paramaatma swaruupa j~naana' - understanding of shesha-sheshii - or organic relation between jiiva and paramaatma. In the paramaatma j~naana, aatma swaruupa j~naana is inclusive since He is all pervading as antaryaami - that is the organic relation or a-dvaita aspect in the vishishhTa a-dvaita. ------------------- -Individuality of the jiva, as well as of Iswara is also only perceived due to the covering of illusion -------------------- One has to be very careful here. Illusion is does not give true import of the word maaya used in advaita- let us use instead the word maaya - it does not really cover anything. - it is 'as though covering' - it is an explanation to explain the currently perceived 'vyavahaara satya'. From the absolute level even this explanation falls flat since there is no need to explain anything where there is only Brahman. Let us pose a question to ourselves - Why and how does a conscious entity- I or you damodara, anyone mistake ourselves as I am this body - I am so and so born on such a data etc. We know that the body is matter or jadam and we are not the body and we are chaitanya vastu- How does this identification of chaitanya vastu with achaitanya vastu takes place? - avidya is accepted by both philosophies - avidya in advaita involves not knowing our true nature -When I do not know who I am, I take myself as what I am not - That this happens is our experience and our fundamental problem - how this aj~naana leads to vikshepa - or projection or taking myself what I am not is considered as part of the 'adhyaasa' or error. - Shankara defines adhyaasa as - satya asatya mithuniikaraNam - mixing up of real and unreal - 'I am this" - this being body (sthuula or suukshma etc)- 'I am' part is real and 'this' part is unreal and mixing up these two as one entity is the fundamental error for all of us. - concepts of 'aarvaraNa' and 'vikshepa' associated with avidya are based on - shaastriiya anumaana - logical deductions based on shaastra statement as ' aham brahma asmi' to 'aham jiiva asmi' notion. ------------------ If Brahman is One without a second, what is the shelter and origin of illusion? -------------------- Please understand even this maaya itself in the realm of 'maaya' - it is a concept brought in to account the apparent disparity between what is the absolute truth to what is our day to day experience. Please note that avidya or ignorance is anaadi in both philosophies. If something real one can talk about 'shelter' and origin etc. - trikaaala abhaaditam satyam is how advaita defines as absolutely real - if the illusion gets dissolved in moksha then it is bhaaditam. One can either accept this as it is as product of anaadi avidya or resort to another explanation as paramaatma liila - either way - the buck stops there. If you are comfortable with the later explanation that is fine, but the fact remains that these are only trying to account what is in the state of ignorance to that which is beyond the ignorance. ------------- How illusion which is nonintelligeble concept in eternity can have any influence on Brahman which is the ultimate Reality? -------------------- You are absolutely right here - In fact you are essentially presenting Bhagavaan Ramanuja's puurvapaksha - particularly the seven untenables of avidya as discussed in advaita. This requires an exhaustive analysis which I am planning to present when I am done studying Shree Bhaashya. I must say - Shree Madhusuudana saraswati addresses many of these as well as objections raised by post-Shankara philosophers in his 'advaita siddhi' But to answer in brief - there is none. Brahman is absolute reality - one without a second. All the explanations are not at paaramaarthika level but only valid at vyavahaarika level. The fact remains that I, a chaitanya vastu, taking myself as achaitanya vastu and you can pose yourself a question how is this non-intelligible jadam having influence on the ultimately real - me the chaitanya vastu. The influence is only as long as I take myself or identify myself with the jada padaartham - If I stop identifying it what influence it will have in my real nature. In eternity there is only one - and there is nothing else to raise the issue of any influence. Most of the questions and ambiguity arises when one tries to have one leg in vyavahaara and the other leg in the paaramaarthika level and get mixed up in these two references where one is in the realm of ignorance and the other is knowledge. ------------------ Even if illusion has any influence on Brahman, still in order to appear as this universe, Brahman needs either to divide, becomes variegated or transform which is not possible? --------------------- True - Hence Brahman does not divide or transform or become variegated. Brahman remains as Brahman even pure and untransformed. - That is advaita. Now you are asking creation - how does that occur. Since I and you are seeing this creation we are asking how did this come into existence. Hence creation is there for those are who are perceiving - the perception involves - perceiver, perceived and perceiving - before we start questioning the validity of the perceived, which is the universe and the cause for it - one needs to enquire the validity of perceiver and perceiving. - That is why all Vedantic achaarya-s address first the epistemological issues before they discuss the ontological issues. This is very involved topic - not that I do not want to discuss this but I have written on these topics extensively on advaitin list. I would recommend those interested to study these from achieves - particularly my discussion with Shree Nanda Chandran posted a month ago. If anyone has any problem in identifying or down loading it, feel free to write to me and I will mail the relevant discussions. --------------------------- Is there any scriptural proof which says that individuality of consciousness, either of the jiva (infinitesimal) or Iswara (unlimited) is just due to covering of illusion and not its eternal intrinsic characteristic? ---------------------- The four mahavaakya-s that advaita emphasizes are from scriptures only. Let me address this briefly - There are pure advaitic statements and dvaitic statements in upanishats. Shankara takes the advaitic statements are primary and dvaitic statements secondary. Madhva takes the other way around. Bhagavaan Ramanuja unifies these two as self-consistent organic relation of unity in diversity. One should study all and choose what appeals to one heart. If you do not like any one of the explanation - you can present your own. Remember we are not reinventing the wheel. We are blessed by many great achaarya-s who have addressed these issues from various angles and many of these questions were asked and answered in the past. There is nothing wrong to ask again for ones understanding but it helps a lot to study what or how other achaarya-s have addresses these questions. ---------------- Also I am not able to understand the example given by Sadananda about the gold and ornamets, which implies substance and form to be reality and illusion. Both substance and form are real concepts and I do not understand this comparison were form is identified with illusion. ------------------- Let us look at this way. Gold is real Bangle made of gold is also real. Is there a difference between these two realities? - Is bangle same as gold or different from gold? Bangle is only a form for that gold for which I give a name 'bangle' - Bangle can be destroyed and can be made into a ring - then bangle is gone and it is ring now. But gold is not destroyed in this transformation - gold remained as gold - only form and name changed- as bangle it is gold and as a ring it is only gold - gold remained as gold in all these transformations. Hence we already have to degrees of realities. One that changes and one that does not in these transformations. Or more correctly one that remains the same untrasferable, eternally remaining the same - absolutely non-transferable - while the other appears and disappears as forms with names associated with forms. Even though we may call both gold and bangle are real - one can appreciate the difference in the degrees of realities - one that does not undergo any transformation and the other that keeps changing. Yet in all these transformation if there are two separate entities - bangle and gold - In that case you can have the bangle and I will take the gold anytime. It is the glory of gold to be able to exist in many forms yet still remains as just one entity 'gold'. By the by these example are from Ch. Up only - teaching of Uddalaka to his son Swetaketu. A word about illusion and delusion (moha)- illusion is seeing the plurality and delusion is taking the perceived plurality as reality. The problem comes from the second. Giita addresses the second aspect - Arjuna in the end declares - nashhTo mohaH - now because of your teaching I lost the delusion - taking the nama and ruupa as absolutely real - there is my teacher and my pitaamaha and these are my kith and kin , how can I kill them etc. These names and forms have only relative reality. That is what vyavahaara satya is all about. ------------------- I can agree that advaita as a concept might be true, but in my heart i cannot accept this to be attributless onenness - but rather organic unity. ---------------- Damodar - I am very happy for you. I consider these as working hypotheses and one has to proceed using these to discover oneself what is the real truth. Shankara says so or Ramanuja says so etc does not mean much until I inquire what is the ultimately the truth - For that only nidhidhyaasana emphasized by both achaarya-s is essential. God bless you and proceed by all means in the direction that appeals to your heart - there lies what is good for you. If the truth is one - we all end up there. yo yo yaam yaam tanur bhaktaH shraddha archtum icchati| tasya tasya achalaam shraddham tam eva vidadhaami aham|| Whoever and whoever and in whatever and whatever form one worships me with devotion in that and that form I provide him unvagaring faith. This includes the path that one takes up towards Him. Hari OM! Sadananda > >Yours sincerely, >damodar -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2001 Report Share Posted November 2, 2001 Dear Sir, Please me from advatin, i enjoy the reading but cannot keep up with 20 new emails a day. Thank u Daniel >kerly kerly <kerly89 >advaitin >advaitin > (unknown) >Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:58:56 -0800 (PST) > > >Pls take me out from the group. I want to . > >Tq. > > > > > >Find a job, post your resume on Careers. > > > _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 2, 2001 Report Share Posted November 2, 2001 advaitin, "Daniel Jaworski" <alchemy2012@h...> wrote: > Dear Sir, > > Please me from advatin, i enjoy the reading but cannot keep up > with 20 new emails a day. Thank u > > Daniel > Dear Daniel, If multiple emails are the sole reason to , you will find that there other options for message delivery you can set (to avoid multiple emails) by selecting 'Edit My membership' from advaitin. You can set the option to no emails or daily digest (1 email per day). Maybe one of the moderators may want to explain this feature of egroup as well. regards Sundar Rajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 3, 2001 Report Share Posted November 3, 2001 On Sat, 3 Nov 2001, Sundar Rajan wrote: > advaitin, "Daniel Jaworski" <alchemy2012@h...> wrote: > > Dear Sir, > > > > Please me from advatin, i enjoy the reading but cannot > keep up > > with 20 new emails a day. Thank u > > > > Daniel > > > Dear Daniel, > > If multiple emails are the sole reason to , you will > find that there other options for message delivery you can set (to > avoid multiple emails) by selecting 'Edit My membership' from > advaitin. You can set the option to no > emails or daily digest (1 email per day). > > Maybe one of the moderators may want to explain this feature of > egroup as well. > > regards > Sundar Rajan > > namaste. echoing shri Sundar Rajan's advice, has a number of options available for members to avoid what they see as multiple e-mails. Members can opt for (i) all the posts in a digest form (a single e-mail), or (ii) for no e-mail, only web-reading. Please visit advaitin and set the desired membership option. A post to advaitin-List requesting , I am afraid, would probably not serve the purpose intended, because (i) it appears as a post on the advaitin-forum, and (ii) it requires one of the moderators to manually the member from the List. Thus, I would request the members to choose the appropriate membership option of their liking, or if they want to for whatever reason, write to -advaitin Regards Gummuluru Murthy --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2002 Report Share Posted April 1, 2002 On Sat, 30 Mar 2002, Swaminarayan T wrote: > > namaste. > > What I mean by kAlamAna is a measure of time. What I meant by the > above was: The jAgrat avastha has its own scale of time. The svapna > avastha has its own time-scale. A five-minute dream (in the wake-up > time scale) my span a full life-time during the dream time-scale. > The wake-up time scale disappears during the dream and the dream > time-scale disappears during the wake-up state. Thus, I would take > it that the kAla, the time, is included in the avastha. > > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > ------ > > Dear Murthyji, > > In your above post you are stating that the dreamtime scale dissappears > as soon as the waking state comes into being and that the waking time > scale dissappears as soon as the waking state ends. Granting this : > > How is it that the surroundings in each waking state is the same > every time and the surroundings are different in each dream state? > > Needs more vichara. Is it not? > > Hari Om! > > Swaminrayan > namaste. Yes, more vichAra is needed. But please keep in mind that this vichAra is taking place in the wake-up state. Whatever analysis and conclusion we arrive at belong only to the wake-up state. Just like the dream feast does not fill the hungry stomach of the wake-up state, and just like the waters of the wake-up state do not quench the thirst of the dream-state, the analysis of the wake-up state does not do anything to the dream-state and vice-versa. What is required is the Knowledge that just as we disregard the dream state soon after we wake up ("afterall, it is just a dream"), similarly we disregard the wake-up state ("afterall, it is an avastha, just like a dream"). You mentioned the surroundings being the same in the wake-up state whereas they are not the same in the dream state. That is true. However, our thoughts are not the same from one wake-up state to the next. Surroundings are the same because of Ishwarakalpita mAyA. Our individual attachments and feelings we superpose on that Ishwarakalpita mAyA are just as different in the wake-up state as they are in a dream. Thus, can we attach any more importance to the wake-up state and the analysis we do than to a dream state? Regards Gummuluru Murthy - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2002 Report Share Posted April 1, 2002 Dear Shri Murthy, Interesting discussion indeed. However, I am unable to locate the origin of this thread. May I please have the reference number of the first message? Thanks. Madathil Nair ______________ advaitin, Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy@m...> wrote: > > namaste. > > Yes, more vichAra is needed. But please keep in mind that this > vichAra is taking place in the wake-up state. Whatever analysis > and conclusion we arrive at belong only to the wake-up state. > > Just like the dream feast does not fill the hungry stomach > of the wake-up state, and just like the waters of the wake-up > state do not quench the thirst of the dream-state, the analysis > of the wake-up state does not do anything to the dream-state > and vice-versa. What is required is the Knowledge that just > as we disregard the dream state soon after we wake up ("afterall, > it is just a dream"), similarly we disregard the wake-up state > ("afterall, it is an avastha, just like a dream"). > > You mentioned the surroundings being the same in the wake-up > state whereas they are not the same in the dream state. > That is true. However, our thoughts are not the same from > one wake-up state to the next. Surroundings are the same > because of Ishwarakalpita mAyA. Our individual attachments > and feelings we superpose on that Ishwarakalpita mAyA are > just as different in the wake-up state as they are in a > dream. > > Thus, can we attach any more importance to the wake-up state > and the analysis we do than to a dream state? > > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2002 Report Share Posted April 1, 2002 namaste shri madathilji, This thread has evolved out of a thread "manifestation as mAya" in the advaita-l List. I am including below the posts on this discussion of jAgrat and svapna avasthA-s. Regards Gummuluru Murthy -------- -------- On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Swaminarayan T wrote: > > In this context, a few days back, I had the opportunity to have satsang > with a shastriji who follows the tradition of Shankara and when I posed > this point to him, he responded with a question to me and asked me to do > vichara on the same. The question is as follows and I submit the same to > our members for their considered reactions which will be to my benefit > in my own pursuitof the same: > > The subject of discussion is about the "JAGRUT AVASTHAA" and the > "SWAPNA AVASTHAA" .The Question is: > >"Is Kaala (Time) included in any Avastha or is Avastha included in the > Kaala? > > Shall be grateful for your reactions. > > Hari Om! > > Swaminarayan. > > --\ ------------------------------- namaste. In my view, it is obvious that kAla is included in the avastha, rather than avastha is included in the kAla. Each avastha has its own kAlamAna and each kAlamAna is independent of the other avastha. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Prasad Balasubramanian wrote: > Kindly elaborate on the term kAlamAna. > > > namaste. > > In my view, it is obvious that kAla is included in the avastha, rather > than avastha is included in the kAla. > > Each avastha has its own kAlamAna and each kAlamAna is independent of > the other avastha. > namaste. What I mean by kAlamAna is a measure of time. What I meant by the above was: The jAgrat avastha has its own scale of time. The svapna avastha has its own time-scale. A five-minute dream (in the wake-up time scale) my span a full life-time during the dream time-scale. The wake-up time scale disappears during the dream and the dream time-scale disappears during the wake-up state. Thus, I would take it that the kAla, the time, is included in the avastha. Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ This is followed by shri Swaminarayan's post in our List advaitin/message/12916 and is followed by my post to which you were referring to. ------- On Mon, 1 Apr 2002, madathilnair wrote: > Dear Shri Murthy, > > Interesting discussion indeed. However, I am unable to locate the > origin of this thread. May I please have the reference number of the > first message? > > Thanks. > > Madathil Nair > ______________ > > advaitin, Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy@m...> wrote: > > > > namaste. > > > > Yes, more vichAra is needed. But please keep in mind that this > > vichAra is taking place in the wake-up state. Whatever analysis > > and conclusion we arrive at belong only to the wake-up state. > > > > Just like the dream feast does not fill the hungry stomach > > of the wake-up state, and just like the waters of the wake-up > > state do not quench the thirst of the dream-state, the analysis > > of the wake-up state does not do anything to the dream-state > > and vice-versa. What is required is the Knowledge that just > > as we disregard the dream state soon after we wake up ("afterall, > > it is just a dream"), similarly we disregard the wake-up state > > ("afterall, it is an avastha, just like a dream"). > > > > You mentioned the surroundings being the same in the wake-up > > state whereas they are not the same in the dream state. > > That is true. However, our thoughts are not the same from > > one wake-up state to the next. Surroundings are the same > > because of Ishwarakalpita mAyA. Our individual attachments > > and feelings we superpose on that Ishwarakalpita mAyA are > > just as different in the wake-up state as they are in a > > dream. > > > > Thus, can we attach any more importance to the wake-up state > > and the analysis we do than to a dream state? > > > > > > Regards > > Gummuluru Murthy > > - > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 3, 2002 Report Share Posted April 3, 2002 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: w- >Yes, more vichAra is needed. But please keep in mind that this >vichAra is taking place in the wake-up state. Whatever analysis >and conclusion e arrive at belong only to the wake-up state. ------------------------------ Dear Murthiji, Granted ,any vichara has to take place in the wake up state only..And at the same time, we cannot forget that the vichaara is being done by the 'Mind' and it is this mind only which brushes aside the dream experience as 'false'.And again ,we cannot deny the fact that it is with the help of this mind only we will have to move from one Avastha to the other! ----- >Just like the dream feast does not fill the hungry stomach >of the wake-up state, and just like the waters of the wake-up >state do not quench the thirst of the dream-state, the analysis >of the wake-up state does not do anything to the dream-state >and vice-versa. What is required is the Knowledge that just >as we disregard the dream state soon after we wake >up ("afterall, >it is just a dream"), similarly we disregard the wake-up state >("afterall, it is an avastha, just like a dream"). ------------------------ In order to achieve the above state we have to appreciate what Gaudapaada has said: "Prabhodhe swapnavat sarvo vyavahaaro nivarthathe Etad tat uttamum satyam yatra kinchit na jaayate!" Gaudapada talks about enlightenment here.Does this enlightenment not come from Vichara and also through the Mind by transcending the mind? Does that not mean that enlightenment takes place in a TOTALLY DIFFERENT AVASTHAA than what 'three' we know? --------------- >they are not the same in the dream state. That is true. However, our thoughts are not the same from one wake-up state to the next. Surroundings are the same because of Ishwarakalpita mAyA. Our individual attachments and feelings we superpose on that Ishwarakalpita mAyA are just as different in the wake-up state as they are in a dream. ------------------------- Murthyji, what sort of difference do you advocate between the individual who thinks and the Iswarakalpitha maya? In my opinion, the individual is the Iswara here!And you cannot seperate the surroundings from the thoughts atall.Your statements need more elaborate exlplanation. Hari Om! Swaminarayan --- - Regards Gummuluru Murthy - Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 4, 2002 Report Share Posted April 4, 2002 On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Swaminarayan T wrote: > > Dear Murthiji, > > Granted ,any vichara has to take place in the wake up state only.. > And at the same time, we cannot forget that the vichaara is being > done by the 'Mind' and it is this mind only which brushes aside > the dream experience as 'false'.And again ,we cannot deny the fact > that it is with the help of this mind only we will have to move > from one Avastha to the other! > namaste. A question on this. When do we say we are in deep sleep? Is the mind an indicator or a dictator of the avasthA-s? It seems to me the mind is an indicator only and not a dictator whereas you seem to be saying that we are guided by the mind to move from one avasthA to the other. Based on GauDapAda kArika and mAnDUkya upanishad, may be we should define precisely when we are in deep sleep, when we are in dream and when we are in wake-up state and what the defining characteristics of the three avasthA-s are. I have not formulated that yet fully on paper. May be we both should do that and compare notes, which may lead to progress in our understanding. > > In order to achieve the above state we have to appreciate what > Gaudapaada has said: > > "Prabhodhe swapnavat sarvo vyavahaaro nivarthathe > > Etad tat uttamum satyam yatra kinchit na jaayate!" > > Gaudapada talks about enlightenment here.Does this enlightenment > not come from Vichara and also through the Mind by transcending > the mind? > > Does that not mean that enlightenment takes place in a TOTALLY > DIFFERENT AVASTHAA than what 'three' we know? > > [...] My concept is: Enlightenment is knowing the three avasthA-s as avasthA-s only, and that none is more important than the other. If we understand the three avasthA-s well, that itself is Knowledge. It was told by shri RAma to HanumAn that understanding mAnDUkya upanishad is moksha itself. > Murthyji, what sort of difference do you advocate between the > individual who thinks and the Iswarakalpitha maya? In my opinion, > the individual is the Iswara here!And you cannot seperate the > surroundings from the thoughts atall.Your statements need more > elaborate exlplanation. > I was trying to differentiate between Ishwarakalpita mAya and superimposition of our thoughts on to it due to our ignorance. The original question was that there is duality and why is there duality in advaita. I was trying to respond to that question. We see duality all around, there is no doubt of that. But we superimpose our own preferences, likes and dislikes on that observed duality. And that is the problem and is the sign of ignorance. The duality that we see there is an animal, there is a human, that is Ishwarakalpita mAyA. We impose on that I like this, I hate that, I am better than X, Y is better than me, etc. Ishwarakalpita mAyA is not a problem. The problem is our impositions of likes and dislikes on that which is the problem. This problem remains both in the wake-up state and in the dream state when the mind is functioning. I am alluding to that in my post. > Hari Om! > > Swaminarayan > Regards Gummuluru Murthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2002 Report Share Posted April 20, 2002 Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy wrote: A question on this. When do we say we are in deep sleep? Is the mind an indicator or a dictator of the avasthA-s? It seems to me the mind is an indicator only and not a dictator whereas you seem to be saying that we are guided by the mind to move from one avasthA to the other. Based on GauDapAda kArika and mAnDUkya upanishad, may be we should define precisely when we are in deep sleep, when we are in dream and when we are in wake-up state and what the defining characteristics of the three avasthA-s are. I have not formulated that yet fully on paper. May be we both should do that and compare notes, which may lead to progress in our understanding. _______________ Dear Murtiji,and others who may be interested in this thread, It is agreed without any reservation that mind is not a dictator. I do not mean to say that we are guided by the mind but wish to mention that we have to make use of the mind in order to appreciate our being in jagrut or swapna awasthas.In deep sleep awastha,where the mind is actually non- mind,non functional and in basic ignorance, I should, in that awastha, transcend the mind and be aware that I exist as MYSELF,as SAT CHIT ANANDA - BRAHMAN . The defining characterestics of the three awasthaas with reference to the mind have been very nicely explained by Baba Narmade Har through his deciple Shri Venkatram as follows: All the three awasthas,jagrut,swapna and sushupti are in Brahman and the jivaatma is called awasthaavan and Brahman as Maayaavi.That means that jivatmas are made bhranta by maya and therefore they do not know the real and due to this, suffer.But such is not the case with Brahman.Brahman is always saawadhaan.Therefore Brahman never comes in the clutches of Maya.Maya is Brahman's Daasi and jivatma is daasa of Maya. One mahatma has said that Vidya and Avidya are both daasi of the same Brahman.Sheltering on the same Brahman there is enmity betweenVidya and Avidya.One covers the real and shows the manifested Universe of several varaities and generates kama , krodha etc.,by which jivatma gets into temptation and due to this gets into the 8400000 yonis. The other, Vidya,removes the covering and shows the real. In Real , there is no duality and owing to this , the sthula bodily ahamkara,gradually vanishes and gets sheltered in his own SELF. By the above statement we come to know that Pragyaanam is shudda Brahman.When it gets covered by Avidya,that avidya serves all the purposes.Brahman,Jiva,Maya,objects,lighter,organs, body etc etc. Really speaking Maya and all the other things are imagined. Therefore no self existance and no self -knowledge.Therefore it is called praateetika and when this pratitika is burnt by Vidya -fire it does not leave any sesha. Hai Om! SwaminarayanDiscussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To Post a message send an email to : advaitin Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Dear cdr bvnji: Thank you for posting this and the Hindu article as well. I will eat my anger for breakfast today :-) I will ponder the meaning of my life forever and a day. I will feel a smile upon my face as I think of you and pray... for peace, peace and perfect peace. OM, shaantih, shaantih, shaantih Joyce ps I will also post this story on another list. Shukrya :-) - "cdr b vaidyanathan" <vaidyanathiyer <advaitin> Thursday, September 11, 2003 2:10 AM (unknown) > Pasupata > > In Mahabharata Arjuna as advised by Vyasa went to Himalayas to > practice austerities for the purpose of getting new weapons. After > passing through dense forests he reached the mountain Indrakila, > where he met an old brahmana. The ascetic smiled and spoke > affectionately to Arjuna: "child, you are clad in armour and carry > weapons. Who are you? Weapons are of no use here. What do you seek in > this garb of a Kshatriya in this abode of ascetics and saints who > have conquered anger and passion?" that was Indra, the king of > god's, who has come to have the pleasure of meeting his son. > > Arjuna bowed to his father and said: "I seek arms; bless me with > weapons." > > Indira replied: "O Dhananjaya, what is the use of weapons? Ask for > pleasures or seek to go to higher worlds for enjoyment." > > Arjuna answered: "O king of gods, I do not seek pleasures of higher > worlds. I have come here after leaving Panchali and my brothers in > the forest. I seek but weapons." > > Indira said: "if you be blessed by the vision of god Siva, the three > eyed god, and obtain his grace, you will receive divine weapons. Do > penance unto Siva." > > Arjuna went to the Himalayas and did penance to obtain the grace of > Siva. > > Siva under the guise of a hunter and accompanied by his divine spouse > Umadevi, entered the forest in pursuit of game. The chase grew fast > and furious, and presently a wild boar started charging Arjuna, who > shot an arrow into it with his Gandiva at the same moment that the > hunter Siva transfixed it with a shaft from Pinaka, his bow. > > Arjuna shouted in loud voice: "who are you? Why are you ranging in > this forest with your wife? How dare you shoot at the game I had > aimed at?" > The hunter replied as though in contempt: "this forest, full of game, > belongs to us, who live in it. You do not look tough enough to be a > forester; it is rather for me to ask what you are doing here." He > also added that it was his shaft that had killed the boar and that, > if Arjuna thought differently, he was welcome to fight about it. > > Nothing could please Arjuna better. He jumped up and showered snake > like arrows at Siva. To his amazement, they seemed to have no effect > on the hunter and fell back hurtles. When he had no arrows he started > to strike Siva with bow, but the hunter wrenched with ease the bow of > Arjuna's hand and burst into laughter. Arjuna who had been disarmed > with humiliating ease by one who seemed an ordinary hunter of the > forest, was struck with amazement, he drew his sword and continued > the combat. The sword was shivered to pieces on the hunter's > adamantine frame. There was now nothing to do but to grapple with the > formidable unknown; but here again he was outmatched. The hunter > caught him in an iron clasp so close that Arjuna was quite helpless. > > Worsted and overmatched, "Arjuna humbly sought divine aid and > meditated on Siva, and as he did so, a light broke on his troubled > mind and at once he knew who the hunter really was". > > He fell at the feet of the lord and, in a broken voice of repentance > and adoration, he prayed for forgiveness. "I forgive you," said Siva > smilingly and gave him back Gandiva, as well as other weapons, of > which he had been deprived. He also bestowed on Arjuna the marvelous > Pasupata weapon. > > Arjuna was overcome with joy and exclaimed: "Have I really seen the > Lord face and have I been blessed with his divine touch? What more do > I need?" > > Extracts from Mahabharata by Sri Rajaji. > > > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 Respectfully, I fail to understand the Advaitin message in this tale? Am I missing something? Ram cdr b vaidyanathan wrote: > Pasupata > > In Mahabharata Arjuna as advised by Vyasa went to Himalayas to > practice austerities for the purpose of getting new weapons. After Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 2, 2004 Report Share Posted January 2, 2004 --- Sunder Hattangadi <sunderh wrote: > > If any member would kindly step in to 'lead' another topic, we > all would be very grateful. > > The other options are: > > 1. Continue with Anandaji's topic. My opinion: I suggest that Shree Ananda Wood to continue the series until he completes the series. > 2. Focus on the series Soundarya lahari, or Advaita Manjari. I donot think we have any one who is ready to take up either of these texts. Anand Hudli has promissed lately in AdviataL that he will be starting the series. But that text is very difficult to handle. > 3. Members may post their questions or thoughts about Advaita > in general. This should go on irrespective of the first two. The list should cater to all members that vary from beginners to those who have studied extensively. Hari OM! Sadananda > 4. Any other suggestions would be welcome for consideration. > > Regards, > > Sunder > > > ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. Find out what made the Top Searches of 2003 http://search./top2003 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.