Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 hariH OM! murthyji- sri ramana explains it, especially re the second half of your observation, in *exactly* the same way, interpreting the third part of sankara's triune advaitic formula as more than the traditional idea "atman is brahman" [as the popular interpretation of the literal words sankara spoke as technically "jiva is not different from brahman"], but as rather how you just observed and stated: "brahman is jagat." and ramana goes on further to explain that jagat is a product of the Mind of the jiva, which is in turn part of the mahamahat or universal Mind projected out of brahman, which is technically responsible for the relative existence of jagat as well as isvara. namaste, frank ______________ Gummuluru Murthy wrote: > > namaste. > > There is a subtle but very important difference in the two > outlooks stated above in the title. I think these two outlooks > are sequential stages in recognizing brahman in us; or alternately > in recognizing what we know now as us in the vyavahArika are not > really there and all is brahman. > > jagat is brahman: > > At this stage of understanding ourselvess, we are still bogged in > the jagat of names and forms. The name and form is still the subject. > We see brahman in them, but name and form is still the subject. > > brahman is jagat: > > A more 'advanced' stage in our understanding ourselves is: brahman > is jagat. Brahman manifests itself as jagat. Here, brahman is the > subject and the names and forms are all objects. In this outlook, > we see brahman only everywhere, de-emphasizing the names and forms. > The names and forms arise out of brahman and dissolve back into > brahman. > > The above arose out of my contemplation of bhagavadgItA 4.24 over > the weekend and I would be grateful for any comments/corrections > which the List members may have. > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 namaste. There is a subtle but very important difference in the two outlooks stated above in the title. I think these two outlooks are sequential stages in recognizing brahman in us; or alternately in recognizing what we know now as us in the vyavahArika are not really there and all is brahman. jagat is brahman: At this stage of understanding ourselvess, we are still bogged in the jagat of names and forms. The name and form is still the subject. We see brahman in them, but name and form is still the subject. brahman is jagat: A more 'advanced' stage in our understanding ourselves is: brahman is jagat. Brahman manifests itself as jagat. Here, brahman is the subject and the names and forms are all objects. In this outlook, we see brahman only everywhere, de-emphasizing the names and forms. The names and forms arise out of brahman and dissolve back into brahman. The above arose out of my contemplation of bhagavadgItA 4.24 over the weekend and I would be grateful for any comments/corrections which the List members may have. Regards Gummuluru Murthy -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, sunder hattangadi wrote: > Namaste Murthy-garu, > > Message #5635 gives the translation of Shankara Bhashya for > this particular verse, and forcefully distinguishes the first > perspective as a 'karma kaaNDa', and the second as the 'jnaana kaaNDa' > one. It further connects this verse with the preceding and succeeding > verses. The differnce then would be found to be less than subtle! > > Regards, > > s. > namaste shri sunder, When you say message #5635, are you referring to advaitin message m5635 i.e. http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m5635.html ? I clicked on that and got a message giving link to shri Jaishanker's homepage, but the homepage itself is inaccessible. Can you please clarify #5635 which you referred above? Regards Gummuluru Murthy ------ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Namaste Murthy-garu, Message #5635 gives the translation of Shankara Bhashya for this particular verse, and forcefully distinguishes the first perspective as a 'karma kaaNDa', and the second as the 'jnaana kaaNDa' one. It further connects this verse with the preceding and succeeding verses. The differnce then would be found to be less than subtle! Regards, s. advaitin , Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy@m...> wrote: > > namaste. > > There is a subtle but very important difference in the two > outlooks stated above in the title. I think these two outlooks > are sequential stages in recognizing brahman in us; or alternately > in recognizing what we know now as us in the vyavahArika are not > really there and all is brahman. > > jagat is brahman: > > At this stage of understanding ourselvess, we are still bogged in > the jagat of names and forms. The name and form is still the subject. > We see brahman in them, but name and form is still the subject. > > brahman is jagat: > > A more 'advanced' stage in our understanding ourselves is: brahman > is jagat. Brahman manifests itself as jagat. Here, brahman is the > subject and the names and forms are all objects. In this outlook, > we see brahman only everywhere, de-emphasizing the names and forms. > The names and forms arise out of brahman and dissolve back into > brahman. > > The above arose out of my contemplation of bhagavadgItA 4.24 over > the weekend and I would be grateful for any comments/corrections > which the List members may have. > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 When we come to the analysis of the second suutra of Brahmasuutra, which is only couple of weeks away, we will learn that brahman is defined as jagat kaaraNam - There we will see that it is the tatasta lakshaNa of brahman and not swaruupa lakshaNa. This will be dealt eloberately in the notes. Hari Om! Sadananda >namaste. > >There is a subtle but very important difference in the two >outlooks stated above in the title. I think these two outlooks >are sequential stages in recognizing brahman in us; or alternately >in recognizing what we know now as us in the vyavahArika are not >really there and all is brahman. > >jagat is brahman: > >At this stage of understanding ourselvess, we are still bogged in >the jagat of names and forms. The name and form is still the subject. >We see brahman in them, but name and form is still the subject. > >brahman is jagat: > >A more 'advanced' stage in our understanding ourselves is: brahman >is jagat. Brahman manifests itself as jagat. Here, brahman is the >subject and the names and forms are all objects. In this outlook, >we see brahman only everywhere, de-emphasizing the names and forms. >The names and forms arise out of brahman and dissolve back into >brahman. > >The above arose out of my contemplation of bhagavadgItA 4.24 over >the weekend and I would be grateful for any comments/corrections >which the List members may have. > >Regards >Gummuluru Murthy >-- > > > > > > > >Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity >of Atman and Brahman. >Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ >For Temporary stoppage of your Email, send a blank email to ><advaitin-nomail > >To resume normal delivery of Email, send a blank email to ><advaitin-normal > >To receive email digest (one per day) send a blank email to ><advaitin-digest > >To to advaitin list, send a blank email to ><advaitin-> -- 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 December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Namaste, Sorry for the mix-up. The URL is: /message/advaitin/5635 Regards, s. advaitin , Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy@m...> wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, sunder hattangadi wrote: > > > Namaste Murthy-garu, > > > > Message #5635 gives the translation of Shankara Bhashya for > > this particular verse, and forcefully distinguishes the first > > perspective as a 'karma kaaNDa', and the second as the 'jnaana kaaNDa' > > one. It further connects this verse with the preceding and succeeding > > verses. The differnce then would be found to be less than subtle! > > > > Regards, > > > > s. > > > > namaste shri sunder, > > When you say message #5635, are you referring to advaitin message m5635 > > i.e. http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m5635.html ? > > I clicked on that and got a message giving link to shri Jaishanker's > homepage, but the homepage itself is inaccessible. > > Can you please clarify #5635 which you referred above? > > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > -- ---- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 If I may add to Shree Sadananda's and Sri Frank's wonderful answers to a beautiful question, we have in Gita[9:4] and [9:5]: All this universe is pervaded by Me in My unmanifested form; all beings exist in Me; but I do not abide in them. Nor do the beings dwell in Me, behold My divine yoga! Bringing forth and supporting the beings, My Self does not dwell in them. 12:1-9 - Those devotees who worship Me and those who worship the Unmanifest -- verily all come unto Me. Regarding the sequential nature, I too am mathematically inclined to believe that it is sequential, although we may not rule out a non- sequential nature entirely. With Love, Raghava --------------------- advaitin , Shree "K. Sadananda" <sada@a...> wrote: > we will learn that brahman is > defined as jagat kaaraNam - There we will see that it is the tatasta > lakshaNa of brahman and not swaruupa lakshaNa. This will be dealt > eloberately in the notes. > Hari Om! > Sadananda > ---------------------------- >Sri Frank Replied: >and ramana goes on further to explain that jagat is a product of >the Mind of the jiva, which is in turn part of the mahamahat or >universal Mind projected out of brahman, which is technically >responsible for the relative existence of jagat as well as isvara. >namaste, >frank -------------------------------- > >jagat is brahman: > > > >At this stage of understanding ourselvess, we are still bogged in > >the jagat of names and forms. The name and form is still the subject. > >We see brahman in them, but name and form is still the subject. > > > >brahman is jagat: > > > >A more 'advanced' stage in our understanding ourselves is: brahman > >is jagat. Brahman manifests itself as jagat. Here, brahman is the > >subject and the names and forms are all objects. In this outlook, > >we see brahman only everywhere, de-emphasizing the names and forms. > >The names and forms arise out of brahman and dissolve back into > >brahman. > >Regards > >Gummuluru Murthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Namaste I once heard Swami Dayananda mentioning the concept as follows: the jagat is brahman but brahman is NOT jagat. It is similar to the ornament being gold but gold is not the ornament. > > raghavakaluri [sMTP:raghavakaluri] > Tuesday, December 05, 2000 7:16 AM > advaitin > Re: jagat is brahman or brahman is jagat ? > > If I may add to Shree Sadananda's and Sri Frank's wonderful answers > to a beautiful question, we have in Gita[9:4] and [9:5]: > All this universe is pervaded by Me in My unmanifested form; all > beings exist in Me; but I do not abide in them. > Nor do the beings dwell in Me, behold My divine yoga! Bringing forth > and supporting the beings, My Self does not dwell in them. > > 12:1-9 - Those devotees who worship Me and those who worship the > Unmanifest -- verily all come unto Me. > > Regarding the sequential nature, I too am mathematically inclined to > believe that it is sequential, although we may not rule out a non- > sequential nature entirely. > > With Love, > Raghava > > --------------------- > advaitin , Shree "K. Sadananda" <sada@a...> wrote: > > we will learn that brahman is > > defined as jagat kaaraNam - There we will see that it is the > tatasta > > lakshaNa of brahman and not swaruupa lakshaNa. This will be dealt > > eloberately in the notes. > > Hari Om! > > Sadananda > > ---------------------------- > >Sri Frank Replied: > >and ramana goes on further to explain that jagat is a product of > >the Mind of the jiva, which is in turn part of the mahamahat or > >universal Mind projected out of brahman, which is technically > >responsible for the relative existence of jagat as well as isvara. > > >namaste, > >frank > -------------------------------- > > > >jagat is brahman: > > > > > >At this stage of understanding ourselvess, we are still bogged in > > >the jagat of names and forms. The name and form is still the > subject. > > >We see brahman in them, but name and form is still the subject. > > > > > >brahman is jagat: > > > > > >A more 'advanced' stage in our understanding ourselves is: brahman > > >is jagat. Brahman manifests itself as jagat. Here, brahman is the > > >subject and the names and forms are all objects. In this outlook, > > >we see brahman only everywhere, de-emphasizing the names and forms. > > >The names and forms arise out of brahman and dissolve back into > > >brahman. > > >Regards > > >Gummuluru Murthy > > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > For Temporary stoppage of your Email, send a blank email to > <advaitin-nomail > > To resume normal delivery of Email, send a blank email to > <advaitin-normal > > To receive email digest (one per day) send a blank email to > <advaitin-digest > > To to advaitin list, send a blank email to > <advaitin-> > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Namaste. Thank you and I found some more synonymous quotes. Gita 7.26 - I know, O Arjuna, the beings of the past, the present and the future, but no one knows Me. Gita 10:14 - I hold as true, all that You say to me, O Kesava. Neither the Devas nor the Danavas, O Lord, know verily Your manifestation. However, trying to comprehend from our domain(space-time), it is an irony that these very quotes may be misinterpreted to refute Brahman. That is why, perhaps, Sri Krishna gives divine sight to Arjuna to behold His Supreme Being[Gita 9:8]. Gita 7:21- Whatever form any devotee with faith wishes to worship, I make that faith of his steady. With Love, Raghava advaitin , Shree K Kathirasan wrote: > Namaste > > I once heard Swami Dayananda mentioning the concept as follows: > > the jagat is brahman but brahman is NOT jagat. It is similar to the > ornament being gold but gold is not the ornament. > > > > > > raghavakaluri [sMTP:raghavakaluri] > > Tuesday, December 05, 2000 7:16 AM > > advaitin > > Re: jagat is brahman or brahman is jagat ? > > > > If I may add to Shree Sadananda's and Sri Frank's wonderful answers > > to a beautiful question, we have in Gita[9:4] and [9:5]: > > All this universe is pervaded by Me in My unmanifested form; all > > beings exist in Me; but I do not abide in them. > > Nor do the beings dwell in Me, behold My divine yoga! Bringing forth > > and supporting the beings, My Self does not dwell in them. > > > > 12:1-9 - Those devotees who worship Me and those who worship the > > Unmanifest -- verily all come unto Me. > > > > Regarding the sequential nature, I too am mathematically inclined to > > believe that it is sequential, although we may not rule out a non- > > sequential nature entirely. > > > > With Love, > > Raghava Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Namaste Thanks for those quotes. Those quotes in fact reinforce the idea that Brahman is not an object of perception right? Regards. > > raghavakaluri [sMTP:raghavakaluri] > Tuesday, December 05, 2000 11:29 AM > advaitin > Re: jagat is brahman or brahman is jagat ? > > Namaste. > > Thank you and I found some more synonymous quotes. > > Gita 7.26 - I know, O Arjuna, the beings of the past, the present and > the future, but no one knows Me. > > Gita 10:14 - I hold as true, all that You say to me, O Kesava. > Neither the Devas nor the Danavas, O Lord, know verily Your > manifestation. > > However, trying to comprehend from our domain(space-time), it is an > irony that these very quotes may be misinterpreted to refute Brahman. > > That is why, perhaps, Sri Krishna gives divine sight to Arjuna to > behold His Supreme Being[Gita 9:8]. > > Gita 7:21- Whatever form any devotee with faith wishes to worship, I > make that faith of his steady. > > With Love, > Raghava > > > advaitin , Shree K Kathirasan wrote: > > Namaste > > > > I once heard Swami Dayananda mentioning the concept as follows: > > > > the jagat is brahman but brahman is NOT jagat. It is similar to the > > ornament being gold but gold is not the ornament. > > > > > > > > > > raghavakaluri [sMTP:raghavakaluri] > > > Tuesday, December 05, 2000 7:16 AM > > > advaitin > > > Re: jagat is brahman or brahman is jagat > ? > > > > > > If I may add to Shree Sadananda's and Sri Frank's wonderful > answers > > > to a beautiful question, we have in Gita[9:4] and [9:5]: > > > All this universe is pervaded by Me in My unmanifested form; all > > > beings exist in Me; but I do not abide in them. > > > Nor do the beings dwell in Me, behold My divine yoga! Bringing > forth > > > and supporting the beings, My Self does not dwell in them. > > > > > > 12:1-9 - Those devotees who worship Me and those who worship the > > > Unmanifest -- verily all come unto Me. > > > > > > Regarding the sequential nature, I too am mathematically inclined > to > > > believe that it is sequential, although we may not rule out a non- > > > sequential nature entirely. > > > > > > With Love, > > > Raghava > > > > > Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of > Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > For Temporary stoppage of your Email, send a blank email to > <advaitin-nomail > > To resume normal delivery of Email, send a blank email to > <advaitin-normal > > To receive email digest (one per day) send a blank email to > <advaitin-digest > > To to advaitin list, send a blank email to > <advaitin-> > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 4, 2000 Report Share Posted December 4, 2000 Namaste. Sri Shankara's First stanza on Nirvana-Asthakam reinforces the idea: Om. I am neither the mind, intelligence, ego, nor citta, Neither the ears nor the tongue, nor the senses of smell and sight; Neither ether nor air nor fire nor water nor earth; Chidananda Rupah Sivoham! Sivoham ! Further, Gita[6:30] also says: He who sees Me everywhere and sees all in Me, never becomes lost to Me, nor do I become lost to him/her. Gita 7:21- Whatever form any devotee with faith wishes to worship, I make that faith of his steady. Gita 7:22 - Endowed with that faith, he/she engages in the worship of that form, and from it he/she obtains his/her desires, which are being actually ordained by Me. With Love, Raghava advaitin , Shree K Kathirasan wrote: > Namaste > > Thanks for those quotes. Those quotes in fact reinforce the idea that > Brahman is not an object of perception right? Regards. > > > > > raghavakaluri [sMTP:raghavakaluri] > > Tuesday, December 05, 2000 11:29 AM > > advaitin > > Re: jagat is brahman or brahman is jagat ? > > > > Namaste. > > > > Thank you and I found some more synonymous quotes. > > > > Gita 7.26 - I know, O Arjuna, the beings of the past, the present and > > the future, but no one knows Me. > > > > Gita 10:14 - I hold as true, all that You say to me, O Kesava. > > Neither the Devas nor the Danavas, O Lord, know verily Your > > manifestation. > > > > However, trying to comprehend from our domain(space-time), it is an > > irony that these very quotes may be misinterpreted to refute Brahman. > > > > That is why, perhaps, Sri Krishna gives divine sight to Arjuna to > > Gita 7:21- Whatever form any devotee with faith wishes to worship, I > > make that faith of his steady. > > behold His Supreme Being[Gita 9:8]. > > > > > > With Love, > > Raghava Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 5, 2000 Report Share Posted December 5, 2000 Though this is a digression from Sri Murthy's original thread, nevertheless, the detour is probably of value. The contrddictions below are certainly confusing. However, Swami Vivekananda in his Lahore address on Advaita Vedanta states that when we try to interpret Advaitic teachings into Dualistic or Qualified- non-dualistic or vice-versa, this is a mistake committed by not a few. He adds that we need not go about trying to put our own ideas into texts which were never meant for them, but the work is plain and becomes easier, once we understand the marvellous doctrine of Adhikara-bheda. May be someone can explain more on Adhikara-bheda. It may be an interesting exercise to identify two stanzas each of Advaitic, qualified-non-dualistic, dualistic teachings from Gita. With Love, Raghava > Sri Shankara's First stanza on Nirvana-Asthakam reinforces the idea: > > Om. I am neither the mind, intelligence, ego, nor citta, > Neither the ears nor the tongue, nor the senses of smell and sight; > Neither ether nor air nor fire nor water nor earth; > Chidananda Rupah Sivoham! Sivoham ! > > Further, Gita[6:30] also says: > He who sees Me everywhere and sees all in Me, never becomes lost to > Me, nor do I become lost to him/her. > Gita 7:21- Whatever form any devotee with faith wishes to worship, I > make that faith of his steady. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 5, 2000 Report Share Posted December 5, 2000 Harih Aum: What do we perceive when we state the two questions: Is Jagat the Brahman? (or equivalantly, Is Jiva the Brahman?) Is the Brahman Jagat? (similarly, Is the Brahman the Jiva?) The first question can be rephrased as: Can I comprehend the 'Truth,' from what I already know? The second question can be reformulated as: Do I have sufficient evidence to support that what I already know is the 'Truth?' As Murthygaru rightly pointed out that there is subtle but profound difference between these two outlooks. Vedantins will totally agree that "Brahman is the Brahmin." Vedantins will also agree that "Brahman only knows the Brahman." Given this fact, the postulated questions and associated discussions are parts of Jiva's outlooks at different stages. Our fundamental enquiry should start from the question: Who is asking the questions that were addressed before and including this one? This is the familiar distinction between the consciousness (Brahman) and the objects which that consciousness observes. The entire chapter 13 of Bhagad Gita describes everything that we need to know on this topic - 'the field and the knower of the field.' Once again, the importance of Gita Satsang is reinforced here. All Vedantic questions including the two that we discussed here have been addressed in greater details in Bhagavad Gita. How do we conclude with respect to these questions? Intellectual questions such as the above are quite necessary to understand that the subject matter of consciousness go beyond intellect. But intellect is the tool that we need in order to go beyond intellect. The pole vault jumper needs the pole to jump over and beyond the height of the pole. warmest regards, Ram Chandran 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.