counter-argument to nithya-videhamukthi

[Guest guest]

hariH OM!

namaste.

 

i have elaborated on my previous post, presenting,

as best i could, the basis for my counter-argument

to the popular idea that the individual, after

Self-realization, remains eternally discarnate,

never to return. i maintain that *both* arguments

[for and against] can never break the barrier of

theory, for the simple reason that the nature of

Being Itself is primarily an unfathomable Mystery.

 

i have included the first paragraphs from my last

post, which are essential to the presentation of

the whole of the argument. unfortunately, i had

failed to carry the argument to any cogent

conclusion on my last attempt. hopefully i will

have succeeded this time.

 

the reason i feel this is so pertinent and important

to come to terms with, is simply to enable one's

capacity to effectively release the very dependence

on the Reality-destroying reasoning process wielded

by the mind, that represents therefore the single

greatest and most formidable obstacle the sadhaka

will encounter at the threshold of Enlightenment.

 

OM TAT SAT OM

 

_______________

 

the vedas [and shankara emphasized] that maya is

beginningless and endless. therefore we have to

consider that the projection or manifestation of

brahman into the expression of Life via maya, is

an eternal one.

 

this is due to the fundamental nature of brahman

Itself (i.e. desiring the experience of Itself).

to consider therefore that the world exists merely

for the purpose of suffering and evolving through it,

with the attending purpose of eventually transcending

it (commonly understood as the liberation from the

wheel of samsara), and therefore never experiencing

Life again in manifestation, is tantamount to saying

that the purpose of Life itself is intrinsically

groundless.

 

the means to investigate this and getting a handle

on coming to terms with its implication is available

to us in the first chapter of the rg veda.

 

the following may seem unrelated, but bear with me

for a moment:

we have to consider here, as an auxiliary matter,

a certain inescapable line of reasoning, that will

in fact serve to expose the whole fallacy of our

protracted attempt(s) to discover what we believe

is the underlying truth to the nature of the world,

its entities and their manifest Godhead, as well as

the Absolute Being who is their substantial and

energetic cause:

who or what is liberated when a single jiva is

re-absorbed into brahman? the idea of there being

a *substantial* jiva in existence is false to begin

with...as is the idea that neither is there an

eternal entity as a soul (jivatman). it follows

that no-one and no-thing is or can get liberated.

so what's left? brahman itself. yet brahman

continues to project Itself into manifestation!

therefore, neither does brahman or any portion

thereof, get liberated when a jiva is reabsorbed

into its source. metaphysically, nothing changes!

 

this reveals a circular farcical calamity inherent

in the Mind itself. it reveals there can be no

graspable understanding of what's really happening,

within or beyond [causal to] the phenomenon of Life.

 

the only plausible conclusion is that in fact we

are immersed in an unfathomable mystery. indeed

the Self itself is an unfathomable Mystery.

 

therefore to rigidly adhere to a given

interpretation of the destination of the nature

of brahman's projection (including the continuance

or not of the ego or soul in Manifestation) is

really a philosophical mistake.

 

it's important, in the context of what is being

discussed here, that the distinction is maintained

that the matter of Self-realization has nothing to

do with the philosophical construct of a viable

world conception/destination. the two are apples

and oranges. moreover, if the former is had, is

no guarantee at all that the latter is resolved.

quite the contrary, and as i'm here unreservedly

claiming, it is a paradox without any possible

resolution. a Mystery. (in fact, i contend that

the very nature of Existence Itself--referred to

as parabrahman, the Absolute Cause of our Being--

intrinsically defies availing Itself to relative

comprehension. if it somehow could, i contend,

the wonder and beauty of Life and Its cause in the

brahman Self would be existentially compromised.

in other words, if we could crack the mystery of

Life, the inevitable result would be boredom,

bondage and limitation.)

 

now, the popular vedantic idea that follows

the attainment of Self-realization, is that

the individual is released from the wheel of

rebirth [samsara], entailing his permanent

re-absorption into the attributeless Source in

nirguna brahman, i must take exception to since

it's clearly a violation of what is otherwise

regarded as an unsolvable Mystery (re the

destination of the soul). in light of what

i alluded a few minutes ago, concerning what

would otherwise represent either a divine

infliction or practical joke, that we're

required to suffer through numerous lifetimes

for the purpose of ultimately transcending

the projection of brahman into manifestation,

is tantamount to saying that Life itself has

had no real purpose. this is philosophically

and existentially absurd, and equivalent to

the endorsement of pragmatic nihilism.

 

as i mentioned, the rg veda reveals a key that

emphatically provokes quite the contrary: that

speaks of a latent spark of desire inhering in

the unmanifest condition of brahman (pralaya);

a desire to experience Itself. which is the

first and primary cause for the outbreath of

Creation (which is also referred to as brahman's

leela or Play).

 

now, assuming the individual gets re-absorbed into

brahman, what's to prevent that physically and

metaphysically disembodied entity from redeveloping

that selfsame desire once again.

 

and here i claim, this is in fact the universal

archetype intrinsic to the very nature of brahman.

 

yet, it doesn't and cannot stop in the structure

of even this cosmology. even this can at best

represent only theory, simply because the first

and foremost principle: that all of Life, manifest

and unmanifest is in truth an unsolvable Mystery.

 

therefore what i propounded above, re the eternal

*reappearance* of the jiva or ego [in the form of

jivatman or soul] represents merely a counter

argument to the release from the wheel of rebirth.

 

the point is however, that *both* remain void of

any finality, because both are yet subservient to

the unchallengable/inviolable metaphysical fact

that the nature of Being (or brahman) is *by

definition* ineffable and inscrutable. (it's

popularly regarded that this is specifically

true of the nirguna aspect of brahman; however,

it *must* also apply to the saguna or sohamidam

[lit. God, souls, world as manifestations of the

mahamahat or Universal Mind] aspect.) i strongly

believe that it is misleading to consider that

the fundamental conception of advaita is the

non-duality between atman and brahman. although

this is quite true, it is only fragmentary and

compellingly *abstract*. it is far more accurate

to say that advaita is the non-duality between

brahman without attributes (nir-guna) and brahman

with attributes (sa-guna) *being the manifestation

of the whole of Life in spacetime*!

 

this is fully in accordance with sruti (upanishadic

revelation). again it must be borne in mind, the

clear assertion in sruti: "all this is brahman."

 

therefore, the only possible conclusion is that

we are immersed in an unfathomable Mystery...

that the truth of what we are is pure Mystery.

knowing this is all that *can* be known.

and that coexisting within it, in "the peace that

passeth understanding," is moksha.

[Guest guest]

Vidyasankar Sundaresan wrote:

>

> > believe that it is misleading to consider that

> > the fundamental conception of advaita is the

> > non-duality between atman and brahman. although

> > this is quite true, it is only fragmentary and

> > compellingly *abstract*. it is far more accurate

> > to say that advaita is the non-duality between

> > brahman without attributes (nir-guna) and brahman

> > with attributes (sa-guna) *being the manifestation

> > of the whole of Life in spacetime*!

>

> This characterizes the quality of being nir-guNa itself as a

> guNa, whereas the point of Advaita is that Brahman is never

> limited by guNas. That is what nirguNa means.

 

yes, of course. however, there is also the

manifestation of brahman in spacetime, which

is referred to as the leela or Play of brahman.

the idea that the sa-guna aspect of brahman [or

brahman with attributes] is unreal, is to my

understanding, erroneous. it is only unreal

if taken or considered as real *apart* from

its source in nirguna brahman--which is

obviously the common problem in practice.

or *appears* to be a problem! :-) this is

the classic trick of the mind.

 

so, yes, the point is the guna projections can

have no delimiting value or impact on one who

is based in nirguna, or free. the guna-based

manifestation is merely for entertainment.

which is why the word 'leela' is so perfect

in describing it. (at least alluding to it!)

> The above is an

> exercise in trying to logically understand an unfathomable

> mystery. There will always be an inherent logical contradiction

> involved in such attempts.

>

 

the purpose of the whole exercise was to show that

the mind's dependence on logic, to come to the

conclusion of 'nithya-videhamukti' (which to me

represents the popular notion of eternal disembodied

liberation via the idea of transcending the wheel

of samsara...i didn't know of any other way to

succinctly describe it), is as erroneous as my

counter-argument that [the jiva or jivatman, as

a projection into manifestation from brahman]

will eternally reincarnate. the conclusion was

that *neither* philosophical conception can be

relied on in the face of what must remain an

unfathomable mystery.

 

namaste,

frank

[Guest guest]

What exactly does nitya-videha-mukti mean? Who among Advaitins

uses such a term?

 

> this is due to the fundamental nature of brahman

> Itself (i.e. desiring the experience of Itself).

> to consider therefore that the world exists merely

 

Even postulating that this desire is fundamental to Brahman is

a trick of the mind. Nothing can be said of Brahman, except to

affirm, asti, It exists. If Brahman desires the experience of

Itself, at some time it could get tired of it all, and go to

sleep. What happens to the manifestation of life then?

> believe that it is misleading to consider that

> the fundamental conception of advaita is the

> non-duality between atman and brahman. although

> this is quite true, it is only fragmentary and

> compellingly *abstract*. it is far more accurate

> to say that advaita is the non-duality between

> brahman without attributes (nir-guna) and brahman

> with attributes (sa-guna) *being the manifestation

> of the whole of Life in spacetime*!

 

This characterizes the quality of being nir-guNa itself as a

guNa, whereas the point of Advaita is that Brahman is never

limited by guNas. That is what nirguNa means. The above is an

exercise in trying to logically understand an unfathomable

mystery. There will always be an inherent logical contradiction

involved in such attempts.

 

Regards,

Vidyasankar

[Guest guest]

Hari Om Frankji:

 

Thanks for articulating the fact that 'Brahma-leela'

represents all our experiences. The leela begins when

we begin to classify our experiences as real and

unreal. The Brahman who started this 'game of life'

has to end this game and we are just play toys in His

hands.

To some extent, I have no quarell with Vidyasankarji's

statement: "There will always be an inherent logical

contradiction in involved in such attempts." The

question: 'Who is the contradictor and what is the

contradictions?" will always remain. Isn't true that

all such contradictions are also parts of the same

'Brahma-leela.'

 

I believe that all seekers (appear to) develop his/her

own frame-work to rationalize their own

beliefs/convictions to self-liberate from frame-works,

logic and beliefs! This again is an integral part of

'Brahma-leela.'

 

In appearance, all frameworks and all exercise will

be contradictory, and what we need is the

determination to dissolve them with conviction. When

will this Brahma-leela will end is the mystry and

Brahman only knows the solutions!

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

[Guest guest]

Interesting discussions.

 

Role of contradictions in language to uplift one to go beyond the

contradictions. This is most effectively applied in Advaita Vedanta.

 

Language is a communication tool and it is most effectively used in advaita

Vedanta particularly in terms of communicating that, which cannot be

communicated. A niguNa Brahman indicated by the words that are symbolic

conceptualization or saguNa, but by way of contradictions to take the mind

not to settle in the saguNa but to go beyond that is indescribable with

words. Limited words to take on beyond the limitations of the words. This

becomes effective only by a proper communication by a teacher who has an

understanding of the final state yet conscious of the limitations of the

students who is bogged by symbolism of the words that they stand for. The

scripture becomes a dynamic tool in the hands of knowledgeable teacher.

Otherwise it will become only a book of contradictions useless to a student.

 

Professor Grimes publised part of his Ph.D. thesis related to the topic of

language with reference to Advaita Vedanta. I don't remember the reference

but an interesting book to read.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

_______________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

 

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

In my frame of reference, the liilaa never ends! It is eternal,

without a beginning or an end. It is my own Nature, svaruupa. I am

its master. I can choose to play when I want to, where I want to.

 

As Trishanku says in the Taittiriya Upanashad: I am the mover of this

tree [world-tree of sa.nsaara], etc.

 

Gita says the same : Look at my Yoga Maya. I bring forth Myself from

age to age, &c.

 

Saint Tukarama [1608-1650 A.D]said:

 

hechi thora bhakti aavaDate devaa .

sa.nkalpaavii maayaa sa.nsaaraachii .

 

This indeed is great devotion that the Supreme enjoys, when I can

desire this world as Its power alone.

 

Regards,

 

s.

 

 

 

advaitin , Ram Chandran <ramvchandran> wrote:

 

 

When

> will this Brahma-leela will end is the mystery and

> Brahman only knows the solutions!

>

> regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

[Guest guest]

namaste Frank,

 

I congratulate you again for your original thinking

on the matter. I have some queries on your starting

points.

 

You say

> [...]

>

> the vedas [and shankara emphasized] that maya is

> beginningless and endless. therefore we have to

> consider that the projection or manifestation of

> brahman into the expression of Life via maya, is

> an eternal one.

>

 

My understanding is: mAyA is anAdi, without beginning.

But, it has an ending. My understanding is as follows:

please correct me if I am wrong.

 

mAyA is not the plurality we see. mAyA is the delusion

we are under that the plurality we see is real. We

cannot say when the delusion started [please see my

post on this re shri shankara's logic for why avidya

is anAdi in the archives

 

http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m1427.html

 

But the mAyA ends for the jIvA when he/she sees the

unreal nature of the plurality. That is when he/she

has a definite feel (dhruDha abhiprAyaH) of what

he/she really is. At that moment, mAyA vanishes.

 

Did shri shankara say anywhere that mAyA is endless?

> this is due to the fundamental nature of brahman

> Itself (i.e. desiring the experience of Itself).

> to consider therefore that the world exists merely

> for the purpose of suffering and evolving through it,

> with the attending purpose of eventually transcending

> it (commonly understood as the liberation from the

> wheel of samsara), and therefore never experiencing

> Life again in manifestation, is tantamount to saying

> that the purpose of Life itself is intrinsically

> groundless.

>

> the means to investigate this and getting a handle

> on coming to terms with its implication is available

> to us in the first chapter of the rg veda.

>

 

You say 'coming to terms with'. 'Coming to terms with'

is where the intellect bows to something higher; not

the other way where the mAyA is understood by the

intellect.

> the following may seem unrelated, but bear with me

> for a moment:

> we have to consider here, as an auxiliary matter,

> a certain inescapable line of reasoning, that will

> in fact serve to expose the whole fallacy of our

> protracted attempt(s) to discover what we believe

> is the underlying truth to the nature of the world,

> its entities and their manifest Godhead, as well as

> the Absolute Being who is their substantial and

> energetic cause:

> who or what is liberated when a single jiva is

> re-absorbed into brahman? the idea of there being

> a *substantial* jiva in existence is false to begin

> with...as is the idea that neither is there an

> eternal entity as a soul (jivatman). it follows

> that no-one and no-thing is or can get liberated.

> so what's left? brahman itself. yet brahman

> continues to project Itself into manifestation!

> therefore, neither does brahman or any portion

> thereof, get liberated when a jiva is reabsorbed

> into its source. metaphysically, nothing changes!

>

> this reveals a circular farcical calamity inherent

> in the Mind itself. it reveals there can be no

> graspable understanding of what's really happening,

> within or beyond [causal to] the phenomenon of Life.

>

> the only plausible conclusion is that in fact we

> are immersed in an unfathomable mystery. indeed

> the Self itself is an unfathomable Mystery.

>

> [...]

 

You say there is an unfathomable mystery. Unfathomable

by the intellect, yes; but that should be of no concern.

Sooner or later, the intellect has to yield and the sooner

it 'comes to terms', the smoother the evolution.

 

I would be grateful for your comments.

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

-----------------------------

[Guest guest]

Ram Chandran wrote:

>

> I believe that all seekers (appear to) develop his/her

> own frame-work to rationalize their own

> beliefs/convictions to self-liberate from frame-works,

> logic and beliefs! This again is an integral part of

> 'Brahma-leela.'

>

 

hariH OM! ramji-

 

well said. and a very important point. which is why

any criticism waged at a given approach in sadhana is

really unfounded...since each individual is doing

precisely what they must, given their unique position

on [their] path.

> In appearance, all frameworks and all exercise will

> be contradictory, and what we need is the

> determination to dissolve them with conviction. When

> will this Brahma-leela will end is the mystry and

> Brahman only knows the solutions!

 

 

to me, the highest purpose of advaita [or any

metaphysical philosophy], is to disable the

human mind's judgment-machine...to regain the

innocence of a child. this relates to what

jesus said, "unless ye have the mind of a

child ye cannot enter the kingdom of heaven."

the importance of this cannot be overstated!

 

yet even the above represents a judgment,

based on the assessment that we've in fact

lost our innocence! and here's the incredibly

subtle and awesome power of the deceit of

the Mind. so that, all judgments--*even the

judgment that we are prone to judgments*!--

needs to be released. thus the power implied

in the call to the destroyed mind state in

manonasa (ajatavada of the vedantins), or

the mu-shin (no-mind) of the zens, or the

cabalistic ayn-soph (no-thought) of the

hebrews, etc... (i mention these to show

the universality and hence the reliability

of this vital and pivotal factor!)

 

namaskaar,

frank