Swami Vivekananda's teachings...

[Guest guest]

I came across an article by Sister Gayatriprana in the

Sri Sarada Society Notes.

 

Sister Gayatriprana's observation regarding the

unique teachings of Swami Vivekananda comes across as

 

Quoting from the article:

 

"All this is verily Brahman, Ramakrishna - Vivekananda Vedanta

has brought a new approach, applying the core truth of Vedanta

not only to spiritual (i.e. subjective) realms, but also to the objective

facts of experience, what we have thus far called the world of science"

 

End of quote.

 

This observation goes to the heart of the matter.

Very few devotees of Sri Ramakrishna or Swami Vivekananda

can spot this aspect of his teachings. There is a very

'old fashioned idea' that what we call external world is somehow

'secondary'. What nonsense!

There stands Brahman in all its glory - but we do not want that!!

We want some ' - mystical - magical - speculative, debating -

Brahman... hiding in a subtle manner in some ancient scriptures..

 

This century will replace these old ideas with a more direct

approach through science. An approach that will benefit

mankind in the grandest manner. Spirituality is not something

that just belonged to some ancient golden Vedic age... It is alive

and kicking and will continue to manifest itself in a more vibrant

and unusual manner in the days to come.

 

 

jay

Vivekananda Centre London

[Guest guest]

Vivekananda Centre wrote:

>

> Sister Gayatriprana's observation regarding the

> unique teachings of Swami Vivekananda comes across as

>

> Quoting from the article:

>

> "All this is verily Brahman, Ramakrishna - Vivekananda Vedanta

> has brought a new approach, applying the core truth of Vedanta

> not only to spiritual (i.e. subjective) realms, but also to the objective

> facts of experience, what we have thus far called the world of science"

>

> End of quote.

>

> This observation goes to the heart of the matter.

> Very few devotees of Sri Ramakrishna or Swami Vivekananda

> can spot this aspect of his teachings. There is a very

> 'old fashioned idea' that what we call external world is somehow

> 'secondary'. What nonsense!

> There stands Brahman in all its glory - but we do not want that!!

> We want some ' - mystical - magical - speculative, debating -

> Brahman... hiding in a subtle manner in some ancient scriptures..

 

___________________

 

hariH OM! jayji-

 

*this* is what i've been waiting to hear!!

 

*this* is what i've been trying to say for over 4 years on this

and our prior advaita-L list! and evidently failing miserably!!

 

except for a few people in a few instances, no-one really wanted

to openly, *elaborately directly* discuss this point (with the

noted exception of colette-ji)! this most ancient and entrenched

misconception in what i will refer to as the orthodox approach to

the vedas.

 

sri ramana repeatedly referred to this very point, and capsulized

it in a single statement THAT CANNOT POSSIBLY BE MISINTERPRETED!!

 

sorry about raising my voice. :-)

 

i had posted the statement i'm referring to, if not once, i'll bet

almost a dozen times over the years.. it made no difference.

the idea that the world is maya, which is *interpreted* as being

thus a point-blank illusion on every conceivable level, sticks

deep in the psyche of the common vedantin--if i am permitted to

phrase it so.

 

although other statements made by the maharshi reinforce the popular

idea that the world is, indeed, merely an illusion. i believe he

had said that under conditions appropriate to *most* listeners, who's

developed mindset needed to have that reinforced. there's also the

matter of economy in transmitting given insights/teachings.

 

however and interestingly enough, the compellingly powerful factor

in the subjectmatter here is, as far as i see it, that one can

literally be a jnani and still somehow fail to see this point.

then why am i speaking so strongly about it? i can explain this,

but it would in itself take an elaborate dissertation.

 

below is what i had wrote just last week, in response to someone's

post, but decided to not send it, because at that point i felt the

futility in doing so. i'll post it now, because it tackles the

the matter from yet another and hopefully more comprehensive angle.

 

____________

 

 

sri ramana stated clearly, with the all important distinction

[paraphrasing]: "upon Self-realization, the world disappears as

the world *as such*.

 

the distinction [or special circumstance] in the words 'as such'

being: that the appearance is STILL there, yet the witness sees

beneath its relative saguna [or phenomenal] Effect, the ineffable

nirguna [or noumenal] Cause.

 

to me, the prevailing ideology that manifestation is utterly an

illusion that will eventually disappear into thin air, never to

be apprehended again on *any* level by the jivatman, is preaching,

point-blank, the mayavada of *dvaitam*! this [popular] idea

associated with maya is really an exclusive sanctioning of nihilism

itself, and only serves to set up an antagonism, hence establishing

and/or maintaining an obstacle that the sadhaka is bound to trip

over again and again..

 

this idea is so entrenched in hindu thought, that the whole world

associates it with what they consider hinduism to represent: that

life is an illusion to be overcome, and the goal to achieve is

when you die to never be reborn again. this is *everyone's* view.

the librarian, the store clerk, the architect, the executive

secretary...from every walk *of western life*, people hold this

view about what hinduism is! if the common [and let's say, thus,

'profane'] ideology is this, then what is advaita--the very crown

of hindu metaphysics--*really* all about??

 

i say this is NOT what the sanatana dharma is all about! quite the

contrary, it's about coming to terms with the inherently permanent

and inescapable *necessity* of the cycles of brahma(m). which are,

in turn, the product of Desire.

 

Desire is the Creator.

Desire is the Sustainer.

Desire is the Destroyer.

 

Desire exists as a permanent seed of potentiality in brahman;

creating, sustaining and destroying Life.

 

none of *whatever this all is*, would be here at all, if this

weren't the truth.

 

consider this: is the so-called liberated jnani *above* brahman

Itself, where his/her jivatman is permanently liberated from ever

coming into manifestation again...yet brahman Itself remains NOT??!

no. brahman Itself will eternally project Itself into manifestation,

recapitulating waves of Itself in the form of jivatma-s [who are

nevertheless naught BUT That brahman Self]. this recapitulation

process is part of Its inherent mayashakthi. who can really deny

this eternal cycle? all the sastras from rg veda to the upanishads,

speak of it. to philosophically play the ostrich and bury the head

in the ground, pretending life doesn't manifest...is thus merely

some illusion to get over...is quite frankly ridiculous!

 

this Life is Itself the infinite beauty of brahman. manifest in

Relativity, which precludes positives and negatives (such comes

with the territory): it's the *only format possible* wherein Beauty

can be experienced: where its contrast in Ugly is inescapable!

**HOWEVER**, if we are trained/focused on its Substratum, we are

the master of maya, and not its victim. the point here is, though,

that maya is an *eternal* dynamic.

 

we (brahman) willed this World. its very substance is made out of

Desire. to deny this, is to deny our own Gift to our Self! can we

conceive all this to be here simply for the purpose of suffering for

eons of time in space, until we *get* it, to disappear forever??!

why this is so difficult for so many to even consider--especially

metaphysicians!--is, to me, the mystery of mysteries.

 

when i started out developing a working understanding of this, my

friend [singer] richie havens was very adamant about the fact that

this world *was* real. his idea kept playing on me for a number of

years, until it finally hit, and i was able to incorporate it into

the greater scheme of my understanding. i then set out to find it

explained in the way i was seeing it. when i conducted a more

thorough investigation into sri ramana's teachings, and discovered

that he held this same view, i leaped for joy...especially since it

was so observed by a jagatguru--who was and still is, to me, the

singlemost reliable source of all!

 

_______________

[Guest guest]

 

BTA SAGAR [btasagar]

Friday, January 19, 2001 11:21 AM

advaitin

Re: Swami Vivekananda's teachings...

 

The Sacred Vishnusahasranamam rightly starts with the opening :

 

Hari om Viswam =Lord You are all this Universe

 

The problem is not this universe.The problem is what my ignorant mind of

limited perception thinks what the universe is in daily experience and

interaction.______________

_________________________

Who knows what the problem is? Perhaps the problem is that one thinks there

is a problem. This makes one all uptight. And if one does think like that,

its still okay. No problem! :-).

 

Harsha

[Guest guest]

The Sacred Vishnusahasranamam rightly starts with the opening :

 

Hari om Viswam =Lord You are all this Universe

 

The problem is not this universe.The problem is what my ignorant mind of limited

perception thinks what the universe is in daily experience and interaction.This

creates Samsara or Samsriti which is the root cause of misery and fear etc.

 

 

f maiello <egodust wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Mail.

 

 

[Guest guest]

hariH OM! murthyji-

 

this is precisely what i've been trying to say, down

to the finest nuance and detail. truly definitive!

 

namaskaar,

frank

_________________

 

Gummuluru Murthy wrote:

>

> namaste.

>

> There are two aspects to the jagat. The one, of name and form,

> created by Ishwara. There is absolutely no problem with that

> jagat. In addition to that, we have the other one created by

> us, the one of pairs of opposites. This is the problem jagat,

> the problem being taking these pairs of opposites to be real.

> Even if we do not take them to be real, still swayed by them

> because of our avidyA.

>

> Now, coming to what shri Frank (and earlier Vivekananda Centre)

> was saying: Shri Frank and I had this discussion many times;

> the following is my understanding.

>

> Jagat as brahman is real; jagat as jagat (viewed in isolation

> apart from brahman) is one of names and forms and that is not

> real. Now, when we see jagat, how do we see it? Is it as jagat

> (of names and forms) or as brahman? Our immediate instinct is

> to see it as jagat only. Even when we constantly contemplate

> on brahman, even then, unless our ignorance is fully and

> permanently removed, our instinct is to see jagat as jagat

> only, and not as brahman. We have intellectual knowledge that

> it is brahman. But that knowledge is still not a digested

> Knowledge. There may be some blessed souls among us who see

> brahman when they see jagat. But such are exceptions.

>

> What shri shankara is saying when jagat is mithyA (as I understand)

> is jagat, apart from brahman, is mithyA. Jagat as brahman exists,

> because brahman exists. Brahman is homogeneous with no separations.

> So, names and forms do not exist in brahman. If we see jagat as

> without names and forms, yes, it is real. But if we see jagat as

> of names and forms, then it is mithyA.

>

> In spite of what shri Sadananda said earlier (in another thread)

> about re-incarnation of debates, I am sure he agrees this debate

> is the essence of advaita and is useful for clarifications.

>

> Regards

> Gummuluru Murthy

[Guest guest]

namaste.

 

There are two aspects to the jagat. The one, of name and form,

created by Ishwara. There is absolutely no problem with that

jagat. In addition to that, we have the other one created by

us, the one of pairs of opposites. This is the problem jagat,

the problem being taking these pairs of opposites to be real.

Even if we do not take them to be real, still swayed by them

because of our avidyA.

 

Now, coming to what shri Frank (and earlier Vivekananda Centre)

was saying: Shri Frank and I had this discussion many times;

the following is my understanding.

 

Jagat as brahman is real; jagat as jagat (viewed in isolation

apart from brahman) is one of names and forms and that is not

real. Now, when we see jagat, how do we see it? Is it as jagat

(of names and forms) or as brahman? Our immediate instinct is

to see it as jagat only. Even when we constantly contemplate

on brahman, even then, unless our ignorance is fully and

permanently removed, our instinct is to see jagat as jagat

only, and not as brahman. We have intellectual knowledge that

it is brahman. But that knowledge is still not a digested

Knowledge. There may be some blessed souls among us who see

brahman when they see jagat. But such are exceptions.

 

What shri shankara is saying when jagat is mithyA (as I understand)

is jagat, apart from brahman, is mithyA. Jagat as brahman exists,

because brahman exists. Brahman is homogeneous with no separations.

So, names and forms do not exist in brahman. If we see jagat as

without names and forms, yes, it is real. But if we see jagat as

of names and forms, then it is mithyA.

 

In spite of what shri Sadananda said earlier (in another thread)

about re-incarnation of debates, I am sure he agrees this debate

is the essence of advaita and is useful for clarifications.

 

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

---