Guest guest Posted June 13, 2003 Report Share Posted June 13, 2003 Hello Greg, Good site, http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/creation.html the transliteration is a puzzle. I feel that those who understand it don't need it and those who need it can't understand it. Here's something I came across today which has a similar trajectory to srishti drishti to ajati Tell all the truth but tell it slant Success in circuit lies Too bright for our infirm delight The truth's superb surprise As lightening to the children eased With explanation kind The truth must dazzle gradually Or every man be blind. Emily Dickenson Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2003 Report Share Posted June 13, 2003 advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > > Namaste Greg! > > >This is one, just one, of the advaitin theories of > >creation, namely sRshTi-dRshTi vAda (what has been > >created is perceived). But there are also two other > >main theories that deal with the relation between > >observation and objects. Namely, dRshTi-sRshTi vAda > >(perception is simultaneous with creation), and ajAti > >vAda (creation is not an absolute, real event). Namaste Benji, Speculation ends up in using only more paper. IMO the most important thing to do is to enhance one's vijnanamayakosa. This will lead one to understand that creation didn't happen at all really, or at least to perceiving it as it arises. Philosophical discussion is well but it uses a lot of ordinary logic and lower mind stuff. Spiritual intelligence or a higher level of awareness is what is needed, which has nothing to do with IQ. For look at all the high IQs that follow a religion and believe all its dogma's and tenets etc. As the uneducated Ko-San Bushmen of the Kalahari say; 'Somewhere there is a dream dreaming us'. Now what great philosopher taught these illiterate hunter gatherers this?.........ONS....Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2003 Report Share Posted June 13, 2003 Hey Greg! You should have mentioned that your recommended link: http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/creation.html is from the excellent and scholarly website on Indian Philosophy by our longtime friend and list member Nanda Chandran. Let's give credit where credit is due! (Actually, this message will probably annoy him, as he is a self-effacing person as a true seeker is supposed to be!) Anyhow, this entire website is highly recommended ... a labor of love. (By the way, he does NOT accept subjective idealism!) Regards Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2003 Report Share Posted June 13, 2003 advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > Hey Greg! > > You should have mentioned that your recommended link: > > http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/creation.html > > is from the excellent and scholarly website on Indian Philosophy by > our longtime friend and list member Nanda Chandran. Let's give > credit where credit is due! Namaste, The site is a creation of Vidyasankar Sundaresan! http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/ " Maintained by S. Vidyasankar " Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2003 Report Share Posted June 13, 2003 Well, I thought of it actually, but also think many people knew that his connection. He doesn't accept subjective idealism. No big deal. It's a Western category, a consequence of classical Western metaphysical dualism. A Western solution to a Western problem. Om! --Greg At 06:52 PM 6/13/2003 -0400, Benjamin Root wrote: >Hey Greg! > >You should have mentioned that your recommended link: > ><http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/creation.html>http://www.advaita-vedanta.o\ rg/avhp/creation.html > >is from the excellent and scholarly website on Indian Philosophy by >our longtime friend and list member Nanda Chandran. Let's give >credit where credit is due! (Actually, this message will probably >annoy him, as he is a self-effacing person as a true seeker is >supposed to be!) > >Anyhow, this entire website is highly recommended ... a labor of >love. (By the way, he does NOT accept subjective idealism!) > >Regards >Benjamin > > Sponsor > ><http://rd./M=247865.3425083.4707139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705075991:\ HM/A=1482387/R=0/SIG=16npeteia/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1055544777\ %3eM=247865.3425083.4707139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705075991:HM/A=1482387/R=1=10\ 55544777%3eM=247865.3425083.4707139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705075991:HM/A=148238\ 7/R=2>213d3a5.jpg >213dfe3.jpg > >Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. >Advaitin List Archives available at: <http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/>http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaiti\ n/ >To Post a message send an email to : advaitin >Messages Archived at: <advaitin/messages>a\ dvaitin/messages > > > >Your use of is subject to the <> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2003 Report Share Posted June 14, 2003 Namaste! Greg said: >He doesn't accept subjective idealism. No big deal. >It's a Western category, a consequence of classical >Western metaphysical dualism. A Western solution to >a Western problem. Well, I guess I wade back into this subject at my peril. Anyhow, I have a (somewhat) new idea that is directly related to Advaita. So the non-Greg moderators should be happy. First, let me say that if the Truth is One, then any valid answer to an important question has something important to tell us. I can't quite agree that the Truth is separated into Eastern and Western varieties, as you seem to suggest. But that's not my point. My point is that subjective idealism, or the strict uncompromising view that consciousness is indeed everything, and no type of matter or prakriti whatsoever exists 'outside' of consciousness, goes a long way towards explaining some of the key tenets of Advaita. Specifically, Advaita says things like: Brahman is Consciousness, Brahman is One, Brahman is All. We all agree on this. Now if there really were discrete material objects (i.e. a lump of something here and a lump of something there), then it becomes quite difficult to truly see how 'All is One'. We are reduced to mere metaphors like the gold and the ornaments or the ocean and the waves. These never totally satisfied me. For a materialist would still say that there are different discrete ornaments, with no connection between them, which merely happen to be made of the same element but are nevertheless utterly distinct. A glass of water here has nothing to do with a glass of water there. They are merely similar. However, if we deny the reality of material objects distinct from consciousness, then we are forced to admit that the Seer and the Seen are indeed the same. This is quite different from the usual scientific /materialistic dualism that says that discrete objects 'out there' produce images in our consciousness that somehow reflect that distinct external world. This is also 'common sense'. But if Seer and Seen are the same, then the Seen (the seemingly distinct objects) are just an illusion like a dream and do not exist as distinct self-sustaining entities. They are ultimately no different than the Seer. And no one can deny that the Seer is an undivided unity. Therefore the so-called objects are also an undivided unity, appearances notwithstanding. And this is in fact what Advaita says. The dream analogy really helps, which is basically subjective idealism in a nutshell. So an uncompromising subjective idealism goes a long way towards making Advaita logically and clearly comprehensible. This is far more satisfying to me than mere metaphors. Now I still do have trouble reconciling the Seer called Greg and the Seer called Benjamin, bit that is OK. I won't press my luck this time! I'll just keep plugging away at it, waiting patiently for divine inspiration. Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2003 Report Share Posted June 14, 2003 Hi Benjamin, Two things, I'll try to make it quick. One is, you have this theory which I'll call (Cb) "Consciousness a la Benjamin." (Cb) states that "consciousness is indeed everything," and no matter or prakriti exists outside of it. I agree that really believing something like (Cb) helps deconstruct the world of so-called material objects. It is a help along the advaita path. Two, (Cb) is not the same as subjective idealism. Close, but not the same thing. Classical idealism (Ic) was a way to explain physical entities in terms of mental entities. You don't want to say that (Cb) does the same thing, do you? To call idealism "subjective" is just to say that it's an individual or private thing, not relying on one great objective super-mind. See the helpful glossary at http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/index.htm. One notable difference between (Cb) and (Ic) is that (Ic) retains the Western dualism between mental and physical entities. (Cb), as stated above, does not retain this dualism. I suspect but don't know for sure, that if you think (Cb) and (Ic) are the same, then there's some subtle acceptance of the mental/physical dualism at play in (Cb). So that if we unpacked its terms, we'd find it entails a similar dualism. I better stop here. If you want to continue this, I'll be happy to proceed off-list. Don't forget October! Om! --Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2003 Report Share Posted June 14, 2003 advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > > Namaste! > > Greg said: > > >He doesn't accept subjective idealism. No big deal. > >It's a Western category, a consequence of classical > >Western metaphysical dualism. A Western solution to > >a Western problem. > > > Well, I guess I wade back into this subject at my peril. Anyhow, I > have a (somewhat) new idea that is directly related to Advaita. So > the non-Greg moderators should be happy. > > First, let me say that if the Truth is One, then any valid answer to > an important question has something important to tell us. I can't > quite agree that the Truth is separated into Eastern and Western > varieties, as you seem to suggest. Namaste Benji, The planet earth is reflected on the lower astrals. When people 'die', they go to that plane and meet family and people of like mind. They then draw on their subconscious and create a common world of houses streets etc etc, just like here in many cases. This indicates that all manifestation is a common dream whether gross or subtle. They even go fishing together, creating dream fish, which they think are real etc etc. It is all a matter of degree, this dream this unrealitly.........ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2003 Report Share Posted June 14, 2003 Responding to Benjamin offline. He's right, he coudldn't resist! --Greg At 12:56 PM 6/14/2003 -0400, Benjamin Root wrote: >Namaste Gregji! > >Your message is most stimulating! Yet you say some misleading things >that I must correct immediately (online not offline), so that list >members are not confused. This might prevent them from benefiting >from the correct, clear and important point that I was making about >Advaita. I won't take long. 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.